boa_07 13 1959MINUTES OF THE MEETING
OF THE
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUdTM2NT
July 139 1959
The Little Rock Board met in the Bohtd'of Directors Chambers
City Halls at 2:00 p. me on July 139 1959. The following members
were present:
Mr. William R. Meeks, Chairman
Mr. Bruce Anderson
Mr, Lloyd Pearce
Docket No. 32-59 - F. A. Lacefield, applicant; owner is
Gospel Center, SW corner of Rice and West 12th Streets,
described as north 48 ft, of lot 19 block 19 Park Addition
zoned "C""Two-family District, and a 12 ft. strip south of
12th Street, part of Capitol Hill Extension Addition@ re-
questing a variance from all applicable provisions of Sec-
tion 11 and off-street parking of Section 2-A of that ordi-
nance to permit extension of the church auditorium and a
new Sunday School Yoomv
Mr. Lacefield was present. Mr. Breckling explained the request
and proseated related 's:apse
Mr•e Lacefield explained that he was not asking that it be
rezoned nor was he requesting a yard waivers but only a waiver of
the off-street parking requirement. The off-street parking ordinance
was passed after he putchesed the property.
Mr. James We Hartleys 1209 Rice Streets said he'was not against
the organization, -but explained that the small building has been
at this location and at one time the neighbors thought it was conded-
med. It has been used for various things. The people in it now
have impeoved it. He oxpressed concern about the dhurch taking it
over, then growing and moving away and leaving it to run down.
Mr. Meehe asked Mr. Hartley if he objected to the parking
problem? He answered nob 9n1,y the enlargingr
Mr. Je Griffey and Mr. Pettifer said they represented a number
of the property owners* They felt if the variance was granted there
would not be ample space for off-street parking. They also felt that
If the request was granted the property would change ownership.
These property owners have lived here a long time and felt it
would be detrimentals and therefore, wished it, to remain residential.
They remembered other applications,that had bgVp denied for the same
basic reason.
Page 2 of 7
Mr. Lacefield thanked the people for being so kiad'in their object-
tions. He said they had opened a small churchg The people have ape*
$2,000 to help the looks of the neighborhood and plan to spend.more,
'Ile introduced the pastor of the church, Miriam Hook■ They felt they
would beautify the neighborhood and that parking would not be a problem.
Mr, Lacefield said the church would seat 70a
In executive session there was discussion of off-street
parking and the fact that if any enlarging was done the need would
Increase. Mrs Anderson said there was some available that he believed
could be bought for a reasonalbe price.
Mr. Anderson moved that it be approved if they were required to
provide off-street parking adcording to the ordinance or make pro-
visions foi it elsewhere, Mrs Pearce seconded and the motion carried
unanimously.
Docket Nv33-59 - G, D■ Denham dpplicant, St. Paul Methodist
Church, owner; 2223 Durwood, desdtibed as lots 5 and 69 Queen
Manor Addition$ zoned "C" Twos -family Districts requesting a
variance from the off-street parking pr6Visions of Section
2-A of that ordinance to permit construction of a church
sanctuary having 500 seats, on lots 5 and 6 of said addition..
Mr, -James A■ Stephesn was present to represent the church as
d member of the Building Commission. He explained that they were
asking for u vaiVor of the off-street parking requirements since the
ohurch,waS constructed before the ordinance wax passed. He said
there was at least 50 off-street parking spaces available at bugl#666
establishments in the vicinitya Mrs Anderson asked Mr. Stephens
If he had a written agreement about this, Mro Stephens answered
no, that he understood if such an agreement were made it would not be
necessary to ask ,for a waiver; the church chose to -ask for a waiver.
The Board of Adjustment for Queen Manor Zad been amended for
the Church.
No objectors were present at the meeting,
Page a of y
In executive session it was agreed that the church had plenty of
parking now$ but it could be taken away from theme The ordinance
states that if a property drawn Ideal instrument for joint use of
off-street parking, approved as to form by the City Attorneys a
building permit may be purchasdd.r Mr. Anderson said they should
this agreement because the "businesses codtd keep them from using
It and that they did not actually have the space available without
an agreement.
Mr. Pearce moved that it be held for 30 days until they could
get an agreement with some of the businesses for space for 50 cars#
then after discussion he.amended his motion at the suggestion of
Mr. Meeksi to approve if they can get a firm committment for
soace for 25 cars$ Mr. Anderson seconded and the motion carried
unanimously.
*e*
o k t 3 =58 - Dr. James Coates* applicant; Tyler Street Baptist
Church= owner) 2100 3. Tyler Streets described as lots 1y 21 38
d and 5l block 39, Cherry and Cox Addition, zoned "B" Residence*
requesting a variant from the side and rear yard provisions
of Section it of that ondinancp to pegalt construction of
an educational building.
Dr. Coates was present* He said the church owns all of the
lots°here except the one on the.extreme south end of the block*
They plan to tear down the 2 houses on the front of the lots wBan
the #geposed building is finished and use the space in front for off-
street parking• gventually* they will tear down the house evooss>hbe
street when the •space is needed for parking. The proposed wait will
be the first of a permanent building.
No objectors were present*
In executive session the members agreed that these.plans looked
good and were pleased that they were planning for off -Street parking.
Mrs DeNgblo said he could not see any objections.
Mr* Pearce moved that it be approved* Mr. Anderson seconded
and the motion carried unanimously.
Page 4 of 7
Docket No 33-59 - Ben Chambers, Chambers Construction Co,,,
58.Berkshire Drive, described as lot 8, Point O' Woods Addition,
zoned "Ae One -family District, requesting a variance from the
side yard provisions of Section 11 of that ordinance to permit
existing house to conform to zoning ordinance (house was
located and constructed too close to the west property line
through ,an error)..
Mr. Ben Chambers was present,,, He said the property owners did
not object* Mr. Reed McConnell had enough signatures on a petition
to amend the Board of Adjustment when the request is granted.
In executive session it was agread that the first thing which
should be done was to get the Board of Adjustment ammended. The
members had no objections to this ammendment-
Mr,, Pearce moved that it be approved and that it was up to
Mr, McConnell to take care of the Board of Adjustment, Mr. Anderson
Seconded and the motion carried unanimously,
Docket 36-59 - Capitol Building Investment Corp,, 7th and
Bishop Streets, described as lots 5 and 69 block 413, Comp-
ton=s Addition, zoned "F" Commercial Districts requesting a
variance from the height and area provisions of Section 1.3
of that ordinance to permit construction of a 7 story build-
ing 75 tt. In height..
Mr. Breckling reviewed the case as it had been previously
presented on two occasions, The Board had approved the request for
6 stories in a 75' building. Their request to construct a 100'
building was denied by the Board* The present request is to per-
mit a 7 story building 759 in height. The lot lines will be the
s*me as previously proposed for the 1000 #uilding. The off-street
*parking provision was satisfactorily resolved in a previous meeting.
The owners have an option on two lots across the street whisk will
be used for parking. Mr,, Wittenberg: the architect, was present:.
Se said, due to the type of ground at this location, it would be im-
possible to go underground and that they probably would have to
diminish the height of one or acre floors.
page 5 of 7
In executive sessions after review and discussion of the previous
presentations and actions: ?drs Pearce moved that the request be
granted# but that the off-street parking requirements not be relin-
quished and that po lots on Sth Street or to the south be considered
as part of the Ott -street parking requirements Mrs Anderson seconded
and the -motion darried unanimously,
ee*
Docket Not 37-59 - Rev* E. W. Daukinas applicant; St. Andrews
A. U. E. Cburchs 3301 State Streets described as lots is 2
and the north 8 ft, of lot 31 block 3# Calloway#s Additions and
30 ft. of Aiffel Street (closed) adJacent thereto described
as foliowat Begin at the SW Corner of the north 8 ft, of
said lot 3s thence west 37.6 feet to point on center line of
Eiffel Street thence northwesterly 135■5 ft, along said center
line to a point on the south right-of-way line of West 33rd
Streeti thence east 37.6 ft* along said south line to the
NW corner of lot is thence southwesterly 135,5 ft* along
west line of said lots lt 2 and 3 to the point of beginning*
zoned "Cn Two-family Districts requesting a variance from
all applicable provisions of Section 11 of that ordinance to
permit construction of an educational annex to the church
and to move an existing house to a more desirable location
on the lots owned by the church*
Mr. Daukinp# pastors was presents He wants to move a house$
wh4ch is near the rear of the lots further to the front in order
that the space could -be used for construction of the proposed educa-
tidnal building.
When Mr. Meeks asked if he had -any off-street parking# he said
there was 35 feet in front of the building where 12-15 cars could
park and that 33rd Street and State Streets are open. The'churoh will
seat 200s but only about_ 87 attend at the present. Mrs freckling
said he thought it would be alright to bring the house to the
front some# but not as much as the Church requests■ He said this
would not prevent them from making an addition later on, Mr■ Anderson
Bald he did not believe the parsonage should be placed in front of
the 4hurch.
In executive session Mr. Pearce moved that it be approved It
the house is moved in line with the church and 5# from the west
property lines Mr■ Anderson seconded and the motion carried unanimously#.
I
Page 6 of 7
]locket No 39-59 - Margaret C, Huger, 1712 North Beech Street,
described as north 10 fte of sJ of lot 5 and north 1/2 of
lot 5 and the south 41 1/4 feet of lot 4, Cliffwood Addition,
zoned "A" One -family District, requesting a variance from
the side yard provisions of Section 11 of that ordinance to
permit construction of an open oarport,
Mrs, Huger was present. 'She JLs making this request in order
to be able to park her car nearer to the house, To do this, the
proposed open carport will be 416 feet from the property lime instead
Of the required S'. She plans to use the existing garage for storage,
There is a maids room attached to the garage, but she said she would
not use this.
In executive session Mr. Pearce moved that it be approvedp
Mr. Anderson seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
Docket No. 39--59 - City of Little Rock, 4000 New Benton
Hi.gh►vay# described as a tract of land located :in the
1 B 1/2 SB 1/4 SE 1/4, Section 13; T-1-Ns R-13-W! 90 feet
x 120 feet, zoned "A" One -family District, requesting waiver
of front yard requirements and permission to locate a
fire station in a restricted district as a special exception
and also of Section 11 of that ordinance,
This property is inside the city limits and there was need of
a variances therefore, it was brought before the Board of Adjustment
for discussion and action, There were no objectors present*
in executive session after a brief discussion Mr, Pearce
moved that it be approved, Mro Anderson seconded the motion and
It carried unanimously.
**e
Docket NO 40-59 - City of Little Rock, NW corner of 9th and
Sherman -Streets, described as being the south 160 feet of
the east 139 feet of block 5, Johnson's Addition, zoned
"D" Apartment Districts requesting permission to locate a
._.fire station in a restricted district as a special exception.
Mr, Breekling explained that this station could be located
without a yard waiver, A gentleman represented a lady whose name
---� he did not gives but who lives in the first house north of the proposed
fire station.' Mr. Breckling explained the plans and there were
no objections,
Page 7 of 7
Father lames Foley of the phurch to the East# stated that the
Hlshop owns'the church property. They have no objections to the
pV&VOsed Fite station except as it conderned the"'parkiag for the
oliurch. He had talked with the Fire Chief. After discussion it
was believed that the church would have more parking after the
fare station plans are carried out than they noun have.
In executive session Mr, Pearce moved that it be approved,,
Mr. Anderson seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Meeks asked for a ruling that domisions by the Board of
Aglustment could be changedy alteredg or reversed only at a regular
or called meeting of the Board*
Mr. Anderson so movedg Mir.. Pearce seconded and the motion :ca-r-ried
utanimousiy4u-
The meeting adjourned,
Mrs. Melba Lawings Secretary
Approved=
Villiam Meeksy Chairman