Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1961-04-14 Minutes140 1-2 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APRIL 142 1961, 4:0o P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER Present: Mr. John I. Smith, Chairman, Mr. George Bowen, Mr. James A. Pennington, - Mr. J. F. Robinson, Mr. Harold E. Lieberenz, City Building Inspector, and the following applicants: Mr. Chester Stephens, Mrs. Josephine Haight, and Dr. Walter Johnson, Mr. Paul Young, and Mr. Dale Bradford, representing University Baptist Church. Mr. and Mrs. T. E. Duncan appeared relative to the application of the church. They were accompanied by Mr. E. J. Ball, Attorney. Absent: Mr. Tom Schiewetz The meeting was called to order by Mr. John I. Smith, Chairman. The minutes were approved as mailed to the Board members prior to the meeting. The first application was that of Mr. Chester Stephens of 509 South Hill Avenue. Mr. Stephens wished to remodel his residence by constructing a carport and small storage room on the south side and rebuilding a front porch on the east side. This residence is in an I -1B Industrial Zone and must be approved by the Board before any building permit may be issued. The Board ascertained that the building was a one -family residence, and that the carport roof would be about seven (7) feet from the south property line. Mr. Lieberenz pointed out that the only .violation was that it was a residential building in an industrial zone. There was no further discussion, and the applicant was dismissed. _n - The next application was that of the University Baptist Church Corporation, represented • by Dr. Walter Johnson, Mr. Dale Bradford, and Mr. Paul Young. The church wished to erect a new building addition on their property at 315 West Maple Street, which is located in a R-4 Residential Zone of the City. This must be cleared for church use by the Board of Adjustment. The proposed building would be approximately seven (7) feet from the east property line, rather than the fifty (50) feet required by the Zoning Ordinance in this area. Mr. Lieberenz stated that the building would be a structure approximately 52 feet by 119 feet and would have a frame covered walkway about thirty (30) feet long to the other church building. There would be a steeple about fifty (50) feet high at the northwest end of the new addition. Mr. Lieberenz read the section of the Zoning Ordinance stating that buildings for public assembly must have at least one acre of land and must be fifty (50) feet from the property line in this zone before the Building Inspector could write a building permit unless approved by the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Young stated that, as a member of the Planning Commission, he believed several errors had been made because those three churches appealed to the Commission, stating that they planned construction in the near future. Mr. E. J. Ball, Attorney, representing Mr. and Mrs. T. E. Duncan, stated that his clients insisted that the fifty (50) feet requirement be met. He stated that he did not believe the convenience of the church should be the inconvenience of Mr. and Mrs. Duncan. Mrs. Duncan stated that this property had been offered to the church several years ago for $8,500 and they had refused to buy it. She stated that the church was now trying to • use property they had refused to buy. She stated that the church was taking away their privacy and ruining the value of their property. She said a basement entrance to the church building would be only about fifty-seven (57) feet from their house. 2-2 -2- Mr. Bradford stated that the sketch was incorrect in that there would not be a basement entrance facing the Duncan property. Mr. Young stated that he believed the point where the building was seven (7) feet from the property line would be north of, the Duncan's north property lane. Mr. Duncan stated that he did not see why the church should go out of its way to violate the ordinance and to destroy the privacy of an individual. He also stated that he,felt that the Board, the City, and the church mould be held responsible for any damages caused if the building were permitted. Mr. Ball stated that his clients would agree to compromise if the building could be adjusted to be twenty-five (25) feet from the property line rather than the proposed seven (7) feet. There was no further discussion, and the applicants were dismissed. - 0 - Mrs. Josephine Haight appeared to discuss her application of the last meeting with the Board. She applied on March 30, 1961, for permission to build a residence on Lots 114 and 102 on Skyline Drive. Mr. Lothar Krueger appeared at that time and objected to the proposed house because it was planned to be less than five (5) feet from his property line. Mrs. Haight, at this meeting, discussed with the Board the possibility of cutting the length of her proposed house about two (2) feet, thus making it 18 feet by 28 feet and moving it far enough to comply with the objection of Mr. Krueger. There was no further discussion, and the applicant was dismissed. • - 0 - After a lengthy discussion, Mr. Bowen made a motion that the University Baptist Church application be approved on condition that the building be moved twenty-five (25) feet from the property line of the Duncans, in compliance with the compromise to which the Duncans had agreed, with a written statement from the Duncans that it would be all right as far as they are concerned. Mr. Robinson seconded the motion. The Board voted unanimously to approve the application on this condition and instructed the Building Inspector to obtain the written statement. 0 - The Board unanimously approved the application of Mr. Cheater Stephens. - 0 - After a brief discussion, the Board decided that Mrs. Haight should make adjustments in her proposed building to comply with the objections of Mr. Krueger and file a. new application. APPROVED: r�lld720/!0, �.rYryl.t�Ofr7?9 ecretary DATE: 4� 4 q�lo f i%l (/ff r