Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutboa_05 22 2006LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NO MEETING LACK OF QUORUM MAY 22, 2006 2:00 P.M. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was not present, with only two (2) members in attendance. II. Members Present: Members Absent: Terry Burruss, Vice Chairman David Wilbourn Andrew Francis, Chairman Fletcher Hanson Debra Harris City Attorney Present: Debra Weldon LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA MAY 22, 2006 2:00 P.M. I. OLD BUSINESS: ITEM NO.: FILE NO.: LOCATION: A. Z -2668-A 209 N. Pierce Street B. Z-8016 4015 West Markham Street C. Z -6615-A 1520 Rock Street D. Z-8024 124 North Woodrow Street II. NEW BUSINESS: ITEM NO.: FILE NO.: LOCATION: 1. Z -3386-A 923 S. Filmore Street 2. Z -4099-B 1118 West 3rd Street 3. Z -7079-D 8921 Fouche Dam Pike 4. Z-8046 2001 S. Harrison Street 5. Z-8047 41 Scenic Blvd. 6. Z-8048 2900 West Capitol Avenue 7. Z-8050 2 Cantrell Road 8. Z-8051 412 Midland Avenue 9. Z-8052 404 Hickory Creek Court — S.E. 10. Z-8053 11 Woodridge Drive O O 3AId a31ZVHj O nnaalHl co ^ ' - CV T U C o h W U04 �3 0oN° Nawa30 _ c • _ _ (o x � Q NIVW p U AaMaaoae HO2Ja Nplyp S3H0 o 63H380 ON l co m \PON`ON M08 3NId d3 to 3NId dao NOITNV 11005 N s SgN/�dS N o� Q Naad SIVA ,-, A11S8 IN v J � A11583AINn SONIadS i13A30 S3HOnH Idd155 IW b� . S Lnsb lOOIHO s 810Aa3S3a M086VO NHOP 3 �y b� V� 3NNI3H – 0a0A31110VHS o SIOatlS 08 31 Otl S _ m o" WVHaad k3N00M – _ S � Na oe .-J — S11WIl A110 ¢ o–Ypp3pb1s o w 3001a AWIh ORBS Pp o – • �� NVAMRS 121tlM3LS HSdy h O � VQ� S11WI1 Allo plp0co 3ltl0Na3A 0 MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: A Owner: Ron Miller Applicant: White-Daters and Associates Address: 209 N. Pierce Street Description: Lot 21, Strong and Waters Addition Zoned: O-3 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the development provisions of the Midtown Overlay District standards of Section 36-385 through 36-396 to allow construction of a new office building. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Office Proposed Use of Property: Office STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: A 5 foot wide sidewalk is required along the property frontage. B. Landscape and Buffer Issues: Site plan must comply with the City's minimal landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. A minimum six foot and nine inch (6'-9") perimeter landscaping strip is required along the northern, southern and western perimeters of the site. This area is to be located out of the public right-of-way. This is a requirement of both the landscape ordinance and the buffer ordinance. A variance from this requirement will require approval from the City Beautiful Commission. It appears the parking lot maneuvering area can be reduced; thus allowing for more green space along the perimeters of the property. MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: A A water source within seventy-five feet is required for all new landscaped areas. C. Staff Analysis: The 0-3 zoned property at 209 N. Pierce Street is occupied by a one-story brick and frame structure which is being used as an office. There is a one -car wide driveway from Pierce Street leading to a small parking area on the east side or rear of the building. The property is located with the Midtown Overlay District as established by the Board of Directors on December 2, 2003. The Midtown Overlay District provides specific design requirements for new development or redevelopment within the district boundaries. The applicant proposes to remove the existing structure from the property and construct a new 3,200 square foot (2 story) office building on the property, as noted on the attached site plan. The proposed building will be located approximately 94 feet back from the front (west) property line. A driveway at the northwest corner of the property is proposed to serve a small parking area (8 spaces) located between the proposed building and Pierce Street. The applicant is requesting several variances from the Midtown Overlay District design standards. The requested variances are as follows: • Section 36-389( c) of the City's Zoning Ordinance (Midtown DOD) allows no more than one (1) curb cut per block face. The proposed new driveway will be one (1) of several curb cuts along this block face from W. Markham Street to "B" Street. • Section 36-390( c) requires that all surface parking be located to the side and rear of buildings. As noted previously, the applicant is proposing an 8 -space parking lot between the proposed building and Pierce Street. • Section 36-392(a) requires that at least 60 percent of a building's ground floor front fagade be glass windows. The applicant has not provided building design information to staff, as of this writing. • Section 36-392(b) requires that front setbacks on streets other than arterial streets be zero (0) feet, but no more than 20 feet. As noted previously, the proposed building is set back approximately 94 feet from the front (west) property line. The applicant should also be aware that signage and site lighting must conform to the overlay district. Any ground -mounted sign must be monument style and conform to the height and area standards of the 0-3 zoning district. No wood, painted signs or pan -face -style signs are allowed in the district. Any 2 MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: A site lighting must conform to Section 36-395 of the ordinance. Additionally, any variances from the City's Landscape Ordinance must be reviewed and approved by the City Beautiful Commission. Staff does not support the requested variances from the Midtown Overlay District requirements. Staff believes the proposed development does not comply with the purpose and intent of the newly established Midtown Overlay District Ordinance. The site should be designed as to compliment and encourage pedestrian use. Staff believes there is space on the site to pull the building up to near the front property line with a different building footprint, and have a drive on one side of the building with the parking in the rear. This type of revised site design could eliminate all but one (1) of the requested variances. Staff feels the proposed site plan could have an adverse impact on future redevelopments in the Midtown Overlay area. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested variances from the Midtown Overlay District requirements. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (MARCH 27, 2006) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to the April 24, 2006 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the April 24, 2006 Agenda by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. Staff Update: The applicant contacted staff on April 10, 2006 and requested this application be deferred to the May 22, 2006 Agenda. The applicant is continuing to work on an alternative site design. Staff supports the deferral request. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 24, 2006) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to the May 22, 2006 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was places on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the May 22, 2006 Agenda by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: A Staff Update: The applicant contacted staff on May 9, 2006 and requested the application be deferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda. The applicant continues to work on a revised site plan for the property. Staff supports the deferral request. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: MAY 22, 2006) Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2) members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda. C! ® WHITE - DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 24 Rahling Circle ElLittle Rock, Arkansas 72223 Phone: 501-821-1667 Fax: 501-821-1668 February 24, 2006 Mr. Monte Moore, Zoning Administrator City of Little Rock Neighborhoods and Planning 723 W. Markham St. Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Arkansas School Pictures Mr. Moore, Please find attached three copies of the site plan for the above referenced project. Ron Miller with Arkansas School Pictures would like to redevelop his office building at this location. ASP currently operates from an office at this location. The existing office building would be razed and the new facility constructed towards the rear of the property to allow parking in the front. This property is zoned 0-3, but falls within the Midtown Overlay District. This property is small and with the existing development on either side, many of the fabulous ideas within this new Ordinance fail to apply. The developer is requesting a variance from the requirements of this district, but will develop under the 0-3 requirements. A side yard setback variance from the required 10 ft. is requested. The property is only 50 ft. in width and this requirement makes it difficult for redevelopment. Please place this item on the next available Board of Adjustments docket. Do not hesitate to call should you have any questions or require additional information. Your help in this matter is greatly appreciated Uc: Kon Miller — Arkansas School Pictures CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT, SURVEYING MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: B File No.: Owner: Applicant: Address: Description: Zoned: Allied Food Industries Mark Rickett 4015 West Markham Street Block 4, Plateau Addition LM Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the buffer provisions of Section 36-522 to allow redevelopment of property with reduced buffers. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Restaurant Proposed Use of Property: Restaurant STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: 1. Obtain a franchise agreement form Public Works (John Barr, 371-4646) for the improvements and parking located in the right-of-way. B. Landscape and Buffer Issues: Site plan must comply with the City's minimal landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. Eight percent (8%) of the paved surface area must be allocated for landscaped area, per the city landscape ordinance. These interior islands are to be evenly distributed throughout the site. A minimum six foot and nine inch (6'-9") perimeter landscaping strip is required along the northern, southern, eastern and western perimeters of the site. This area is to be located out of the public right-of-way. This is a requirement of both the landscape ordinance and the MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: B (CON'T.) buffer ordinance. A variance from this requirement will require approval from both the City Beautiful Commission and the Board of Adjustment. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. Staff Note - On March 14, 2006 the applicant contacted staff and requested the application be deferred to the April 24, 2006 Agenda. The applicant noted that a revised development plan for the property was being worked out and would be submitted to staff. Staff supports the deferral request. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (MARCH 27, 2006) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to the April 24, 2006 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the April 24, 2006 Agenda by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. Staff Update: The applicant contacted staff on April 10, 2006 and requested this application be deferred to the May 22, 2006 Agenda. The applicant is continuing to work on an alternative site design. Staff supports the deferral request. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 24, 2006) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to the May 22, 2006 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was places on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the May 22, 2006 Agenda by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. Staff Update: The applicant contacted staff on May 8, 2006 and requested the application be deferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda. The applicant is continuing to work on an alternative site plan. Staff supports the deferral request. PA MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: B (CONT) BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: MAY 22, 2006) Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2) members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda. WN,I February 23, 2006 Mr. Monte Moore City of Little Rock Planning Department 723 W. Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 RE: Burger King — 4015 W. Markham Request for Variances Dear Mr. Moore, Pleased find enclosed the following information: 1. Three (3) copies of proposed improvements to the Burger King site. 2. Application for Variances 3. Filing fee. �?_- '�- U i � To satisfy the master street plan requirements, the appropriate right of way will be dedicated along the abutting streets. The following is a brief description of the requested variances and justification for the requests: 1. Variance from the 6'9" landscape buffers along Markham and Cedar Streets. The required right of way dedication along these frontages encroaches into the existing parking lot. All proposed perimeter landscaping will be installed in the public right of way. 2. Variance from the 8% interior landscape requirement. Three additional islands will be added to increase the interior landscaping. The total interior landscaping is approximately 5%. 3. Variance to allow parking in the public right of way. This is necessary because of the additional dedication requirement. The existing parking will be in the public right of way after dedication. 4. A franchise agreement to allow parking and landscaping in the public right of way. The ownership of this Burger King store desires to simply raze the existing building and construct a new one in its place with very little work proposed on the site. The replacement of the existing facility will vastly improve the appearance of the site along with the proposed addition of landscape materials. Leaving the site as -is will allow Burger King to retain most of its existing parking and function of the site. The justification for these variance requests is simply that the proposed improvement to the site will substantially improve the site over the existing site conditions and improving the site to meet code will create a hardship for the Burger King ownership. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this project and the requested variances. Sincerely, Rickett Engineering, Inc. V4 Mark E.Rickett, PE Rickett Engineering, Inc. P.O. Box 242862 • Little Rock, Arkansas, 72223. 501.868.6302 . fax 501.868.6296 • mobile 501.690.6068 mark. rickett@rickettengineering.com MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: C File No.: Z -6615-A Owner: Paul Page Dwellings, LLC Applicant: William Page Wilson Address: 1520 Rock Street Description: Lot 7, Block 50, Original City of Little Rock Zoned: R-4 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the design provisions of Section 36-370 to allow construction of a new single family residence which does not conform to all CCRC design standards. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Vacant Lot Proposed Use of Property STAFF REPORT Single Family Residential A. Public Works Issues: 1. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are recommended to be installed in accordance with Sec. 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. Access ramps located at the intersection and at alley are suggested. B. Staff Analysis: The R-4 zoned property at 1520 Rock Street is currently undeveloped. The property is at the northwest corner of East 16th and Rock Streets. Some site work has taken place in preparation for construction of a new single family residence on this lot and the two (2) lots immediately to the north. The property is located within the Central City Redevelopment Corridor —Design Overlay District, which was adopted by the Board of Directors in 1999 after a MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: C (CON'T.) tornado struck the area. The Design Overlay District sets forth some design regulations which apply to all new construction in the district. The applicant proposes to construct a new one-story single family residence on the lot, as noted on the attached site plan. The proposed structure conforms to all of the area requirements of Section 36-256 of the City's Zoning Ordinance (minimum building setbacks, maximum height, etc.). The applicant is proposing the structure to have a flat roof, as noted on the attached building elevations. The majority of the exterior building finish will be brick, masonry construction, with a smaller portion of the exterior having corrugated metal siding, also shown on the elevations provided. Section 36-370(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires that roof pitches of less than 4:12 be prohibited in the CCRC Design Overlay District. Section 36- 370(2) requires the materials of the exterior building shell be wood, brick or a material that resembles wood. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards to allow the new single family residence to have a flat roof and a building exterior partially with corrugated metal siding. Staff does not support the requested variances. To staff's knowledge, this is the first variance application from the design standards of the Central City Re - Development Corridor -Design Review District. The standards were enacted to assure that any new structures in the area devastated by the 1999 tornado be constructed with design similar to a majority of the structures in the area. The vast majority of the structures within this area have sloped roofs, with exterior treatments of wood siding or brick. There are a few structures in the area which vary from these design standards. These structures are mostly non - single family residential structures and have existed for a number of years. Although staff typically supports infill development, staff feels that the building design as proposed could be detrimental to the area. Staff supports the efforts of this developer in providing new housing stock to the area, but feels a building design which conforms to the design overlay district would be most appropriate. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested variances from the Central City Re - Development corridor -Design Overlay District. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 24, 2006) William Page Wilson was present, representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the application with a recommendation of denial. 2 MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: C (CON'T.) BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 24, 2006 CON'T.) William Page Wilson addressed the Board in support of the application. He presented a packet of photos and other information to the Board and explained why his building design would be appropriate for the area. He sited examples of flat roof construction and metal roofing/siding in the area. He gave a detailed description of the proposed building design. It was noted that the masonry construction of the fagade would be Norman Brick. Chairman Francis noted that it was encouraging to see the applicant doing in -fill development in the area. He explained that he had no concerns with the partial metal exterior, but was concerned with the flat roof. In response to a question from vice-chairman Burruss, Mr. Wilson briefly described the design of the two (2) structures he was going to construct immediately to the north. There was additional discussion of the proposed building design. Mr. Wilson noted that the homes he constructed would be sold and not rented. He explained why he desired the flat roof construction. Chris Wilbourne noted that he could support the flat roof. Vice-Chiarman Burruss noted that he also supported the flat roof, noting that there are other flat roofs in the area. There was additional discussion of the variance issue. There was a motion to approve the application, as filed. The motion failed by a vote of 2 ayes, 1 nay and 2 absent. The application was automatically deferred to the May 22, 2006 Agenda due to a lack of three (3) votes on either side. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: MAY 22, 2006) Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2) members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda. PaulPage Dwellings, LLC proposes to build three single-family houses on Rock Street, an area devastated by the 1997 tornado. PaulPage Dwellings defines itself as an urban - infill company, which uses existing infrastructure to create and promote mixed income, mixed use, single and multi -family housing that builds upon the success of Downtown Little Rock. PaulPage Dwellings is asking for a variance to the Central City Redevelopment Corridor, for a flat roof and a strip of exterior along the top edge of one single-family home. We are asking for the roof variance, because of the three -lots we own, the topography of this first home, located in the southeastern corner, oriented to the sun at the lowest elevation, would allow light and air to filter into the next two lots, which will include outdoor areas like the corner lot The flat white -reflective roof combined with low -e glass windows, caulking, cellulose, energy-saving appliances, lighting fixtures, framing techniques and concrete floors will maximize energy savings to the city utilities and the homeowner and are a design element of PaulPage Dwellings. PaulPage Dwellings is also asking for a variance for an exterior product, galvalume or corrugated steel to a portion of the top edge, that blends in well with the look of the home and neighborhood where metal roofs and porches are used on existing homes. The product is a very durable and maintenance -free product that will out last vinyl or wood for the homeowner. The home's main exterior product is Norman brick, all other materials, orientation, entrances, parking and set backs will comply with the Central City Redevelopment Corridor. It's PaulPage Dwellings desire to help create a energized area between MacArthur Park and South Main Street. Respectively submitted, William Page Wilson PaulPage Dwellings, LLC I have reviewed paulpagedwelliiigs plans and,drawings and believe they will benefit the neighborhood. ,� 1-? - f�- R- Q "'Wus' MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: D File No.: Z-8024 Owner: Randall and Carolyn Prickett Applicant: Randall Prickett Address: 124 North Woodrow Street Description: Lot 8, Block 5, Midland Hills Addition Zoned: R-3 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36- 255 to allow a carport with a reduced side setback. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. Staff Update: The applicant contacted staff on April 7, 2006 and requested this application be deferred to the May 22, 2006 Agenda. Staff supports the deferral request. B. Staff Analysis: The R-3 zoned property at 124 N. Woodrow Street is occupied by a one-story frame single family residential structure. There is a one -car wide driveway from N. Woodrow Street which serves as access. There is an alley right-of- way along the rear (west) property line. MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: D (CON'T. The applicant proposes to construct a 24.1 foot by 10.9 foot unenclosed carport addition, a 10 foot by 15 foot unenclosed porch addition, and a 14.1 foot by 16.2 foot sunroom addition on the rear (west end) of the residential structure, as noted on the attached site plan. The carport will be at the northwest corner of the residence and set back approximately two (2) feet from the side (north) property line. The proposed sunroom addition at the southwest corner of the house will be located 7.5 feet from the south side property line. All of the additions will be located over 30 feet back from the rear (west) property line. A one -car wide driveway from the alley is proposed to access the new carport addition. Section 36-255(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side setback of five (5) feet for this R-3 zoned lot. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow a reduced side setback for the proposed carport addition. Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the request as relatively minor. The side setback is requested for the carport structure which will be an unenclosed addition. The fact that the carport will be unenclosed will lessen the visual impact on the adjacent property. Adequate separation will exist between the proposed carport addition and the single family residence immediately to the north. Staff believes the proposed addition will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested side setback variance, subject to the following conditions: 1. The additions must be constructed to match the existing residence. 2. The carport addition must remain unenclosed on all sides. 3. Guttering must be provided on the carport addition to prevent water run-off onto the adjacent property to the north. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 24, 2006) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to the May 22, 2006 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the May 22, 2006 Agenda by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 2 MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: D (CON'T.) BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: MAY 22, 2006) Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2) members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda. Department of Planning and Development February 14, 2006 723 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Request for Zoning Variance at 124 N. Woodrow Dear Sir:, Thank you in advance for your consideration of our zoning variance request. We have recently purchased the property at 124 North Woodrow in Hillcrest after residing a few blocks away at 321 Ridgeway for 28 years. It is our plan for this to be our retirement home. As such, we are proposing to add a sunroom and carport to the rear of the house, which will be handicap accessible. The driveway is proposed to enter from the paved alley at the rear of the property. It is our understanding that a zoning variance is required for construction within 5 feet of the property line on the side of the lot. We are requesting to be allowed to build the carport three feet into this five foot perimeter, to a point two feet from the property line. Per your request, we have tried to list some of the reasons for this zoning variance request below: 1) We are nearing retirement and want to have level access from the proposed carport to the house. The present driveway/carport at the front of the house is ten feet below house level, with access via steep front steps. Based on the slope of the back yard (from north to south), the location of the proposed carport (which will be attached to the house) needs to be as far north as possible, in order to provide level access to the house. The farther south the carport goes, the more it "falls off' from the level of the first floor of the house. 2) Along the same line as 1) above, both of our Mothers are on walkers and wheelchairs, so we would like to be able to provide them with level access to our house, 3) The present roof architecture prevents some challenges for adding on, while still maintaining the period architecture of the house. This is very important to us, as we have been avid supporters of the Hillcrest community for over thirty years and want to do whatever we can to minimize the architectural impact of these changes. If the carport is moved over to the five foot line, the roof eave of the carport would be three feet closer to the roof eave of the sunroom, creating an architectural imbalance to the design. In addition, this move would cause the roofline of the carport to intersect with the current roofline of the original house (above the dining room) at RANDY & CAROLYN PRICKETT i2- N. WOODROW STREET, LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72205 (501) 661-9039 HOME; (501) 240-9039 MOBILE (RANDY); (501) 240-9040 MOBILE (CAROLYN) the northwest corner of the house, thus causing more negative impact to the design (please refer to enclosed sketch). The northern wall of the sunroom cannot be moved any further south, because of the entrance door from the kitchen. 4) The proposed plan allows for a rear porch (between carport and sunroom) that is thirteen feet wide by eight feet deep. If the carport is moved over to the five foot line, it would reduce the width of the rear porch by 23% to ten feet, making it less ideal for use as an outdoor room. 5) The proposed design minimizes the impact of the carport on the present view from the dining room into the backyard. 6) The proposed driveway lies just outside the canopy of an oak tree that we wish to preserve. If the carport is moved over to the five foot line, the driveway would pass three feet under the canopy and could very likely harm the oak tree permanently. 7) The proposed plan centers the old oak tree in the landscaping area, presenting a more balanced landscape plan. 8) If the carport is moved over to the five foot line, it would reduce the size of the already small yard that would be available for landscaping. We hope that the above information is what you need. If you have any questions, please feel free to call Randy on his mobile phone anytime at 240-9039. Thanks for your consideration in this matter. Sincer y, C Randy and Carolyn Prickett Encl: Application for Zoning Variance Survey of 124 N. Woodrow (6) Check #7003480.00 Filing Fee Check #7004-$5.00 Sign Fee P. S. The nearest structure on the neighbor's property at the point of requested variance is approximately twenty-five feet from the nearest edge of the proposed carport. This is primarily due to the neighbor's property being a lot and a half (75 feet wide). RANDY & CAROLYN PRICKETT k= N. WOODROW STREET, LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72205 (SUI) 661-9039 HOME; (501) 240-9039 MOBILE (RANDY); (501) 240-9040 MOBILE (CAROLYN) MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 1 File No.: Z -3386-A Owner: Anne G. Moore Applicant: Mark Rickett Address: 923 S. Filmore Street Description: Lots 7-12, Block 5, Perry Heights Addition Zoned: 1-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the buffer provisions of Section 36-522 and the area provisions of Section 36-320, associated with a proposed addition to an existing commercial building. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Office-showroom/warehouse, with outside storage. Proposed Use of Property: Office-showroom/warehouse, with outside storage. STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Landscape and Buffer Issues: The proposal does not allow for the minimal 8 foot wide street buffer distance and to average 16 foot along the southern perimeter of the site. This is a requirement of the buffer ordinance; therefore, Board of Adjustment approval must be obtained. This approval must be obtained prior to the issuance of a building permit. Easements cannot count toward this requirement. The proposal does not allow for the minimal 6'-9" wide landscape strip along the southern perimeter of the site. This takes into consideration the site being MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 1 (CON' located within the City's designated mature area. A variance from this requirement will require approval from the City Beautiful Commission. The proposal does not allow for the minimal 12 foot wide landuse buffer strip along the northern perimeter of the site next to the residentially zoned properties. This takes into consideration the site being located within the Designated Mature Area of the city. The full width requirement is 16 foot. A variance from this minimum requirement would require Board of Adjustment approval. Due to the building expansion, a 31% upgrade in the landscaping will be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or evergreen plantings, is required along the northern perimeter of the site. C. Staff Analysis: The 1-2 zoned property at 923 S. Filmore Street is occupied by a one-story commercial building (plumbing supply -office with showroom and warehouse). The property is located at the northeast corner of S. Filmore Street and West 10th Street. There is paved parking (head -in) on the south side of the building along West 10th Street. There are two (2) metal shed structures at the rear (north side) of the commercial building. The rear yard portion of the property is partially paved and partially gravel, and used as an outdoor storage area and truck loading/unloading area. There are also two (2) metal temporary storage structures in the rear yard area. The rear yard area is accessed by way of a driveway from S. Filmore Street. The applicant proposes to construct a one-story 3,400 square foot building addition to the rear of the existing commercial building, as noted on the attached site plan. The addition will be located 10.93 feet to 12.48 feet from the side (east) property line. With the proposed building addition, the applicant proposes to redesign the parking area on the south side of the building. The redesigned parking area will consist of five (5) parking spaces (1 handicap space) and a one-way in/one-way out set of driveways from West 10th Street. The applicant also proposes to pave the rear yard area which is used for outdoor storage and truck loading/unloading. With the proposed building addition and parking upgrades, the applicant is requesting two (2) variances. The first variance is from the area provisions of Section 36-320 of the City's Zoning Ordinance. Section 36-320(e)(2) requires side setbacks of 15 feet. As noted previously, the proposed building addition 2 MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T. will be located 10.93 to 12.48 feet from the east side property line. All other proposed building setbacks conform to minimum ordinance standards. The second variance is from the buffer requirements of Section 36-522(b)(4)b. As noted in paragraph B. of this report, this section requires that the street buffer along West 10th Street (associated with the new parking design) have a minimum width of eight (8) feet and an average width of 16 feet. The street buffer as proposed falls significantly below the minimum required width. The applicant is proposing some landscaping within the right-of-way along West 10th Street. This landscaping will require a franchise permit from the Public Works Department. The proposed building addition will be used for warehouse space. Based on the size of the addition, one (1) additional off-street parking space will be required. The applicant has informed staff that at least one (1) parking space will be striped off and designated within the new asphalt area in the rear yard area of the property. The applicant has also noted that the land use buffer along the north property line will be increased to meet ordinance requirements, and that screening will be installed along the rear (north) property line as required. To staff's knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the proposed building addition and parking lot upgrades. Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff feels the building addition and parking/vehicular use area upgrades will be quality improvements to the property. The applicant has noted that the two (2) metal storage structures and the two (2) metal storage containers will be removed from the property in conjunction with the proposed improvements. There is an alley right-of-way which runs along the east property line which will basically make the proposed side setback for the proposed addition a non -issue. A portion of the existing building is located slightly closer to the east side property line. Staff believes the proposed building addition and parking improvements will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested setback and buffer variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the Public Works and Landscape/Buffer issues as noted in paragraphs A. and B. of the staff report. 2. The land use buffer strip along the north property line must be increased to a minimum width of 12 feet. 3. Screening must be provided along the north property line, as noted in paragraph B. of the staff report. N MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T. 4. At least one (1) parking space must be designated within the rear asphalt area. 5. Any landscape ordinance variances must be approved by the City Beautiful Commission prior to issuance of a building permit. 6. A franchise permit must be obtained for the landscaping within the West 10th Street right-of-way. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: MAY 22, 2006) Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2) members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda. n �a April 21, 2006 Mr. Monte Moore City of Little Rock Planning Department 723 W. Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 RE: Plumbing Warehouse, 10th & Filmore Request for Variances Dear Mr. Moore, Pleased find enclosed the following information: -2 -3386-A 1. Three (6) copies of proposed improvements to the Plumbing Warehouse site plan and survey. 2. Application for Variances 3. Filing fee. The following is a brief description of the requested variances and justification for the requests: 1. Variance from the 9' landscape buffers along 10th Street. Due to the close proximity of the existing building to the 1 oth Street right of way and the need to maintain some parking in front of the building, it is physically impossible to provide the required landscape strip and provide a functioning parking area. Additionally, the site improvements will be a significant improvement over the existing condition of head -in parking off of 10th Street. 2. Variance from the 8% interior landscape requirement for the paved area at the rear of the site. Due to the nature of the use of this area, there is no practical way to incorporate interior landscaping. 3. Variance to decrease the building setback requirement for the east and west sides of the site. The existing building is 25' to 27' of the existing right of way along Filmore and is 7.5' to 12.5' from the rear property line. With the new right of way dedication along Filmore as required by the Master Street Plan, the existing building will be 14' to 16' from the right of way. 4. Variance from the off-street parking requirement of 12 spaces. Only five are proposed due to the constraints of the property. 5. Additionally, with the required right of way dedication on Filmore, an existing fence will fall within the public right of way. A franchise agreement will be requested to allow that fence to remain around the outside material storage yard. This building has existing on this site for approximately forty years. The existing site does not meet many current code requirements. With the new building addition and renovation, the Ownership of this property will be significantly improving the site and eliminating safety hazards that currently exist in regard to traffic movements. The new parking, landscaping, and building facade will greatly improve the appearance and function of this facility. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this project and the requested variances. Sincerely, Rickett Engineering, Inc D Mark E. Rickett, PE Rickett Engineering, Inc. P.O. Box 242862 . Little Rock, Arkansas, 72223. 501.868.6302 • fax 501.868.6296 . mobile 501.690.6068 mark.rickett@rickettengineering.com MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 2 File No.: Z -4099-B Owner: Floors First By Hill's, Inc. Applicant: Jim Hill, Jr. Address: 1118 West 3rd Street Description: East % of Lots 4-6, Block 294, Original City Of Little Rock Zoned: UU Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the development provisions of Section 36-342.1 to allow an addition with a corrugated metal exterior. Also, a time extension is requested for previously approved variances. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Commercial Proposed Use of Property: Commercial STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: 1. The cross slope of the driveway at the sidewalk crossing does not comply with ADA requirements. With the expansion and improvements, the driveway apron should be constructed with a maximum cross slope of 1:50 at sidewalk crossings across a 3 foot path. Comment from Original Approval: 1. With building permit, repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. B. Landscape and Buffer Issues: Comment from Original Approval: Areas set aside for landscaping meet with Landscape Ordinance requirements with the reductions allowed within the designated mature area of the City. MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.) C. Staff Analysis: The UU zoned property at 1118 West 3rd Street is occupied by a one-story brick commercial building. The building is located within the west'/2 of the property, with a non conforming gravel parking lot located within the east 1/2 . A driveway from West 3rd Street serves as access. The applicant proposes to construct a one-story, 39 foot by 69 foot addition at the rear (north) of the existing building. The building addition will be located six (6) inches from the north and east property lines and five (5) feet from the west property line. The addition will have a 10 foot wide garage door and a standard walk through door on its south side, facing West 3rd Street. The building addition will allow for the use as an office with showroom and warehouse. As part of the proposed development, the applicant proposes to pave the existing gravel parking lot within the east Y2 of the lot. The new parking lot will contain 10 parking spaces. The applicant proposes to landscape the parking lot as per Landscape Ordinance requirements. On April 26, 2004, the Board of Adjustment approved variances from the UU (Urban Use District) development standards for the proposed building addition and parking lot. Variances were approved to allow less than 60 percent transparent or window display for the front of the proposed addition, location of the new parking lot and building setback for the addition. Please see the attached April 26, 2004 minute record for details on the approved variances. The front building setback is no longer an issue, as the ordinance has been changed to require no build -to line. The applicant is back before the Board of Adjustment requesting an additional variance for the proposed building addition, and to have the time for the previously approved variances extended for two (2) years to align with the newly requested variance. The previously approved variances expired on April 26, 2006. The new variance requested is also from the Development standards of Section 36-342.1 of the City's Zoning Ordinance. Section 36-342.1(c )(4) requires that fagade materials be any standard material, except corrugated or ribbed materials. The applicant is currently requesting to construct the addition with a corrugated metal exterior, and therefore is requesting a variance to allow use of this material. Staff is not supportive of the variance, as requested. Although staff would have no problem with the side and rear fagades being corrugated metal construction (north, east and west facades), staff feels the front, street facing, fagade should be constructed of a masonry brick to match the fagade of the 2 MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 2 (CON T.) existing commercial building. In addition, the trash receptacle area in front of the building addition must be screened with an eight (8) foot high masonry wall to match the front facade of the building addition. If the applicant were willing to make this change to the front fagade of the building addition, staff will support the variance for the other building sides, and the time extension for the other previously approved variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. The front (south) fagade of the building addition must be masonry construction to match the existing commercial building. 2. The trash receptacle area in front of the building addition must be screened with a eight (8) foot high masonry wall to match the fagade of the building addition. 3. Compliance with the Public Works and Landscape and Buffer comments as noted in paragraphs A and B of the staff report. 4. Compliance with all Building and Fire Codes. 5. A building permit must be obtained for all construction. 6. Compliance with all other Urban Use development standards. 7. The new variance and previously approved variances will expire on May 22, 2008. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested variance, as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: MAY 22, 2006) Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2) members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda. 3 P bIT IT2—,V-O os TmFLOORS FIRST by Hill's, Inc Jim Hill Jr. -President 1118 west 3b street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Phone(501)375-9300 Fax (501) 375-1630 floorsflrsMbcglobal.net April 21, 2006 Department of Planning & Development City of Little Rock 723 West Markham St. Little Rock, AR. 72201 RE: Zoning Variance Gentlemen, Two years ago I came before you requesting approval to build a warehouse on my property. At that time there were issues to overcome regarding: 1. the amount of windows required, 2. parking between the building and the street and, 3. the building is to be built with 0' setback. These items were approved at that time (see attachments) and I now wish to be granted an extension of time as I have not constructed this warehouse. Today, my primary request is to be allowed to fabricate this building as a corrugated metal structure. After the last meeting, cost were determined for building with various materials (namely concrete block as it was the least costly) which were cost prohibitive and visually unappealing from my standpoint. This metal building would be from colors that would be pleasing to the eye.... likely soft tans or grays with possibly a black or charcoal roof, and after the final color for the metal building is determined we would then paint the exterior of the existing building to match, and then, accent both buildings by painting the exposed clay tile roof (that shows) black/charcoal to match the awning. and perhaps have a black garage and regular entrance door to the warehouse or black awnings over the warehouse doors ... all of which would make this a visually appealing addition to the neighborhood in light of the previous additions (paved parking and landscaping). Please keep in mind that this structure will setback 110' from the front property line and that this property is on the outskirwhorder of Zone_ W. We strive to keep our property tidy and I'm reasonably sure my neighbors would welcome this addition as it could only enhance their property values. I do not want to move from this location... neighbors will not be sorry! cerely Jim ill Jr. President ...please, give this every possible consideration....you and my April 26, 20C* ITEM NO.: 1 _l File No.: Z -4099-A Owner: Floors First By Hills Address: 1118W. 3 d Street Description: East % of Lots 4, 5 and 6, Block 294, Original City of Little Rock Zoned: UU Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the development provisions of Section 36- 342.1 associated with building and parking lot additions. Justification: Present Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT a Public Works Issues: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Commercial with office Office/showroom with warehouse I. With building permit, repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. Landscape and Buffer Issues: Areas set aside for landscaping meet with Landscape Ordinance requirements with the reductions allowed within the designated mature area of the City. C. Staff Analysis: The UU zoned property at 1118 W. 3rd Street is occupied by a one-story brick commercial building. The building is located within the west % of the April 26, 200¢ ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) property, with a non conforming gravel parking lot located within the east %. A driveway from W. 3`d Street serves as access. The applicant proposes to construct a one-story, 39 foot by 69 foot addition at the rear (north) of the existing building. The building addition will be located six (6) inches from the north and east property lines and five (5) feet from the west property line. The addition will be located 110 feet back from the front property line. The addition will have a 10 foot wide garage door and a standard walk through door on its south side, facing W. 3rd Street. The building addition will allow for the use as an office with showroom and warehouse. As part of the proposed development, the applicant proposes to pave the existing gravel parking lot within the east % of the lot. The new parking lot will contain 10 parking spaces. The applicant proposes to landscape the parking lot as per Landscape Ordinance requirements. The applicant is requesting three (3) variances from the development standards of Section 36-342.1 (urban use development standards) for the proposed building addition and parking lot. Section 36-342.1(c)(8) requires that the ground -level (street fronting) floor of non residential structures have a minimum surface area of sixty (60) percent transparent on window display. As noted previously the south side of the building addition, facing W. 3rd Street, will have only a garage door and walk- through door and no windows. Section 36-342.1(c)(10)b. requires that surface parking lots be located behind or adjacent to a structure, never between the building and abutting street. Although the parking lot is located adjacent to the existing building, it will be located between the building addition and the street. Therefore, staff feels that a variance needs to be requested. Section 36-342.1(f)(1) requires that buildings within the UU zoning district be constructed to the front property line with a 0 foot setback. As noted earlier, the building addition will be located 110 feet back from the front (south) property line. Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff feels that the applicant's plan represents a quality redevelopment of the property. Staff feels that the new parking lot is needed, based on the fact that there is no on -street parking on W. 3rd Street. Given the narrowness of the lot, the building additions could not be constructed along the front property line with parking to the rear, because it would be impossible to gain vehicular access to the lot. Staff feels that with compliance to the landscape, 2 April 26, 2004 ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) buffer, building and fire codes, the proposed redevelopment of the site will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or general area. D. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the requested variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the Public Works and Landscape and Buffer comments as noted in paragraphs A & B of the staff report. 2. Compliance with all Building and Fire Codes. 3. A building permit must be obtained for all construction. 4. Compliance with all other Urban Use development standards. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: . (APRIL 26, 2004) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The .item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 3 File No.: Z -7079-D Owner: Crackerbox, LLc. Applicant: Jim Hill Address: 8921 Fourche Dam Pike Description: Part of Tract C, Area 203, Little Rock Port Authority Zoned: C-3 Variance Requested: A time extension is requested for a previously approved variance to allow a gravel parking area. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Commercial Proposed Use of Property: Commercial STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: 1. Comment from the original approval: Public Works supports a variance for the additional driveway, provided the new parking lot is paved within one year of construction. The width of driveway must not exceed 36 feet. B. Landscape and Buffer Issues: At such time that the gravel area is to be paved, then landscape and buffering requirements must be satisfied prior to obtaining a construction permit. MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T.) C. Staff Analysis: The C-3 zoned property at 8921 Fourche Dam Pike is occupied by a convenience store with gas and diesel pumps which was recently constructed. There are access drives from Lindsey Road and Fourche Dam Pike which serve as access to the site. On September 30, 2002, the Board of Adjustment granted a variance from Section 36-508 to allow overflow, gravel, truck parking on the 1-2 zoned strip (100 feet wide) immediately east of the convenience store site. The gravel parking variance was approved with the following conditions: No direct access to Lindsey Road from the gravel parking area will be allowed. All access must be through the convenience store development. 2. The front twenty-one (21) feet along Lindsey Road must be reserved for the street buffer landscaping area. This area will be required to be irrigated. 3. If, in staff's opinion, the overflow, gravel, truck parking area becomes a problem (dust, maintenance, etc.) the issue will be brought back to the Board of Adjustment for further consideration, and possible paving requirement. On April 28, 2003, the Board of Adjustment amended the previously approved variance to remove condition #1, and allow a concrete driveway from Lindsey Road. The amendment was approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. The driveway width must not exceed 36 feet. 2. The overflow truck parking area must be paved within 12 months after the driveway construction is completed. 3. Compliance with the landscape comment as noted above in paragraph B. of this report. 4. Compliance with previous conditions (#2 and #3) as noted above On April 25, 2005, the Board of Adjustment granted a one (1) year time extension on the previously approved parking variance. 2 MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T.) As of this date, the overflow gravel truck parking has not been constructed. The applicant notes in the attached letter that inclement weather has had their crews behind on other construction projects and they have not been able to get to this project yet. The applicant is requesting a 12 month extension to construct the overflow, gravel truck parking lot, as the previously approved extension expired on April 25, 2006. Staff supports the time extension as requested. Staff feels that the project represents an acceptable solution to internal traffic flow problems which have been experienced on the property. Letters of approval from the Little Rock Port Authority (gravel parking area and driveway location) were received with the previous approvals. The time extension of the previously approved variance should have no adverse impact on the adjacent property or the general area. Staff will suggest this be the last time extension for the previously approved gravel parking lot. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the 12 month time extension for the previously approved parking variance, subject to the following conditions: 1. The driveway width must not exceed 36 feet. 2. The overflow truck parking area must be paved within 12 months after the driveway construction is completed. 3. Compliance with the landscape comment as noted in paragraph B. of the staff report. 4. Compliance with previous conditions (#2 and #3) as noted in paragraph C. of the staff report (September 30, 2002 approval). BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: 2006) MAY 22, Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2) members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda. 3 Fred HUNT Company 5200 Highway 5 North, Suite 5 Bryant, Arkansas 72022 (501) 847-7575 BUSINESS COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL REALTORS Mr. Monte Moore City of Little Rock Dept. of Planning 8s Development 723 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201-1334 April 12, 2006 -Tile-1-43 ,�-- 7n7 5 ---b Re: 1-7079-D, 8921 Fourche Dam Pike, Part of the Tract C, Area 203, Little Rock, Port Authority. Dear Monte: April 28, 2003, Crackerbox, LLC was granted a variance to construct an additional driveway to Lindsey Road and approximately one acre of parking for trucks. April 27, 2005, we were given a one year extension to April 28, 2006 (copy of approval attached). Monte, we have had all of our construction crews building new stores and with the recent rains we have been unable to finish this project, therefore we are requesting a one year extension to April 28, 2007. Monte, if you need to talk to me, you can reach me anytime at 1-501-690- 4106. Please mail correspondence to me at PO Box 24862, Little Rock, AR, 72221. Thanks for your help. 5ific rely, Jim Hill, Agent Crackerbox, LLC MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 4 File No.: Owner/Applicant: Address: Description: Zoned: Williford Frazier 2001 S. Harrison Street Lot 6, Replat of the North '/z of Lot 4, Block 2, Hyde Park Addition R-3 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-255 and the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a garage addition with reduced side and rear setbacks, and to cross a platted building line. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The R-3 zoned property at 2001 S. Harrison Street is occupied by a one-story brick single family residence. There is a two -car wide drive at the northeast corner of the residential structure and a one -car wide drive located at the northeast corner of the lot. The property is located at the southeast corner of South Harrison Street and Charles Bussey Drive. There is also a small metal storage building at the southeast corner of the property. There are 25 foot platted building lines located along both street frontages. The applicant proposes to remove the existing metal storage building and construct a new garage addition at the east end of the residential structure, as noted on the attached site plan. The garage addition will be 24 feet by 33 feet in size. The addition will maintain the same four (4) foot side (south) setback MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 4 (CON'T.) as the existing house. The addition will also cross the 25 foot platted side building line by approximately four (4) feet, resulting in a street side setback of 21 feet. The proposed rear (east) setback is approximately 17 feet. The lot is platted front to back, west to east, even though the actual front door and porch are on the building's north side. A second two -car driveway will be constructed from Charles Bussey Drive. Section 36-255(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side setback of 5.8 feet for this R-3 zoned lot. Section 36-255(d)(3) requires a minimum rear setback of 25 feet. Additionally, Section 31-12(c ) of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that encroachments across platted building lines be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards to allow the garage addition with reduced side and rear setbacks and to cross a side platted building line. Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff feels the request is reasonable given the fact that the lot is only 58 feet wide and has 25 foot platted building lines along both street frontages, and the fact that the front of the house is orientated toward the north street side property line. The building lines greatly limit the amount of buildable area on the lot. Staff believes the proposed garage addition will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. Staff will recommend that the one -car wide drive at the northeast corner of the property be removed with the proposed conditions. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the platted side building line for the proposed addition. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested variances, associated with the proposed addition, subject to the following conditions: 1. Completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the side platted building line as approved by the Board. 2. The garage addition must be constructed to match the existing single family structure. 3. The single car wide driveway at the northeast corner of the property must be removed with the proposed construction. 2 MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 4 (CON'T.) BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: MAY 22, 2006) Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2) members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda. 3 Department of Planning and Development 723 W. Markham Little Rock, Arkansas Dear Sir: I am proposing to construct a garage as an addition to an existing dwelling at 2001 S. Harrison in Little Rock. I would like to request a variance from the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The variance is required due to the limited space behind and on one side of the existing structure. Originally the home was constructed by the builder facing Charles Bussey (20' Street). The home should have been facing Harrison. The proposed garage will be on the side of the existing structure which will place it in the back yard of the structure as shown on the property survey. The variance will allow me to construct the new structure behind the existing structure beyond the property line limit requirements. Also the garage will be .attached to the existing structure which will require a variance on the side of the property of about 1' 8". The existing structure was constructed about 4' from the side property line and I would like to construct the garage as an attachment to the existing structure with the same dimensions. This will allow for uniform internal and external construction and will enhance the features of the entire home. The garage will allow for better security when entering and leaving the home and will allow me to protect the vehicles that I own by providing a secure enclosure. It will also allow me to remove the vehicles from the street and side of the property and place them in an enclosure. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 5 File No.: Z-8047 Owner: Terry and Ginger White Applicant: Ron Keeling Address: 41 Scenic Blvd. Description: Lot 41A, Scenic Heights Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-156 to allow a carport with reduced front setback and separation. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property STAFF REPORT Single Family Residential A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 41 Scenic Blvd. is occupied by a one-story rock and frame single family residence with basement. There is a two -car wide driveway from Scenic Blvd. which serves as access. The drive leads to a concrete parking pad at the northeast corner of the residential structure. The property severely slopes downward from Scenic Blvd. The applicant proposes to construct a new concrete parking pad and unenclosed 20 foot by 20 foot carport structure (detached) at the northeast corner of the residence. The carport will be located 18 feet to 21.5 feet back from the front (south) property line and seven (7) feet from the rear (north) MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 5 (CON'T. property line. The proposed carport will be separated from the house by 4.5 to 5 feet. The carport structure will be located at the lower level of the house and below the grade of Scenic Blvd. Section 36-156(a)(2)c. of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum 60 foot front setback for accessory buildings in residential zoning. Section 36- 156(a)(2)b. requires that accessory buildings be separated from principal structures by at least six (6) feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances to allow the carport structure with reduced front setback and separation. Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff feels the request is reasonable given the very shallow lot depth. The lot depth ranges from 35.2 feet along the east property line to 72 feet along the west boundary. Combined with the drastic slope of the lot, no accessory structure of any size could be constructed on the lot and comply with all of the area requirements. The proposed carport will not be very visible from the street or adjacent property, as it will be located below the grade of the street. Staff believes the proposed carport structure will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested setback and separation variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. The carport structure must remain unenclosed on all sides. 2. The carport structure must be constructed to match the existing principal structure. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: MAY 22, 2006) Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2) members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda. K Davenport Contracting Incorporated Ken Davenport ph# 952-4207 Post Office Box 94107 500 Main Street, Suite B North Little Rock, Arkansas 72116 Re: New Covered Carport Terry & Ginger White Ph#681-4840 #41 Scenic Blvd. Little Rock, Ark. 72206 To Whom it may concern, This letter is in reference to a new covered carport parking area located on the East side of the existing residence. The new structure shall not extend no fizrther than 6'-0" away from adjoining residence, but will be encroaching on the required 25'-0" Setback of the property line. As of now the White's have a driveway entry and patio at this location, the new structure will be maintained within this existing parameters. The White's and Davenports Contracting shall be completing all proper city documents required for this new Structure. We ( The White's and Davenport Contracting Inc. ) shall be asking for a Setback and Adjoining Variance Wavier for this new structure. If any resident would like to meet or discuss.this issue with Terry or Ginger White, please feel free to call and make an appointment, or contact the Department of Planning and Development, 723 West Markham, Little Rock. (Ph# 371-4790 ) A representative of Davenport Contracting shall be at the Board of Adjustments meeting dated May 22, 2006, to discuss this issue. The White's Proposal shall try and alleviate some the street congestion by city trash pickup, mailman, and parking at their residence located on Scenic Blvd. Sincerely, Terry & Ginger White Davenport Contracting Inc. MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 6 File No.: Z-8048 Owner: Steven and Paula Imhoff Applicant: Steven Imhoff Address: 2900 W. Capitol Avenue Description: Lots 11 and 12, Block 4, Boone's Addition Zoned: R-3 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the fence/wall provisions of Section 36-516 to allow a fence which exceeds the maximum height allowed. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues - 1 . ssues: 1. In accordance with Section 32-8, no obstruction to visibility shall be located within a triangular area 50 ft. back from the intersecting right-of- way line at the intersection of Capitol Ave. with Woodrow Street. The location of the existing house does not allow adequate site distance for vehicles on Capitol Avenue. The proposed fence will worsen the condition. 2. If the fence were moved back at least five (5) feet from the back of curb of Woodrow Street, its location within the 50 foot triangular area would be acceptable. B. Staff Anal The R-3 zoned property at 2900 W. Capitol Avenue is occupied by a two-story frame single family residence. The property is located at the northwest corner MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 6 (CON'T.) of W. Capitol Avenue and S. Woodrow Street. There is a one-story frame carport/storage structure located in the rear yard. A one -car wide driveway from Capitol Avenue serves as access to the carport structure. The applicant proposes to construct a six (6) foot high wood fence along the east side (Woodrow Street) and rear (north) property lines, as noted on the attached site plan. The proposed fence will start approximately 26.4 feet back from the southeast corner of the property and run along the east property line to the northeast corner of the property, and along the rear property line. Section 36-516(e)(1)a. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum fence height of four (4) feet for fences located between a building setback and a street right-of-way. Fences elsewhere on the property, along property lines, can be constructed to a maximum height of six (6) feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the six (6) foot high fence between the five (5) foot side building setback line and the Woodrow Street right-of-way. Staff does not support the fence variance, as requested. As noted in paragraph A. of the staff report, the Public Works Department is of the opinion that the proposed fence will add to an existing sight -distance problem at the intersection of Woodrow and Capitol caused by the existing single family residence. Staff could support the fence variance if the fence were started 50 feet back from the southeast corner of the property. If the fence is moved back five (5) feet from the back of curb of Woodrow Street, Staff could also support the variance. This would mean moving the fence approximately two (2) feet inside the east property line. The fence height as proposed will not be out of character with other fences in the general area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested fence height variance, as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: MAY 22, 2006) Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2) members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda. 2 Mr. Monte Moore Zoning & Enforcement Administrator Department of Planning & Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 RE: Request for zoning variance at 2900 West Capitol Ave. Dear Mr. Moore: By this letter, I am requesting a variance from the zoning ordnance to allow the erection of a six foot tall wooden privacy fence along the Woodrow Street (east) side of my property. As you are probably aware, Woodrow Street carries a heavy traffic load and the resulting noise is very bothersome. I also have problems with people's loud car stereos, and objects are frequently thrown at my house by people driving down the street. A street side window recently was damaged by someone with a BB gun. I have tried vegetative screening to no avail and I believe that a four foot tall fence will not provide the noise reduction and protection from thrown objects that I need, as Woodrow Street is at a higher elevation than my property. I have contacted the City Traffic Engineer and he has no objection to the fence, as it will be no closer to the intersection of Woodrow and Capitol than my house and will, therefore, have no impact on the visibility of motorists. Thank you for your consideration, Steven M.off Encl: Survey plat of lots 11 & 12 dated 12/12/01 (6) MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 7 File No.: Z-8050 Owner: James E. Jackson Applicant: Blake Jackson Address: 2 Cantrell Road Description: North side of Cantrell Road, approximately 900 feet east of Beechwood Street. Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the fence/wall provisions of Section 36-516 to allow a masonry wall which exceeds the maximum height allowed. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Undeveloped Proposed Use of Property: Yard Area For Single Family Residence STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 2 Cantrell Road occupied by a brick single family residence. There is an access drive from Cantrell Road which serves the property. There is also a brick wall along the front (south) property line, with a wrought iron gate which controls vehicular access to the property. The existing wall is five (5) feet to eight (8) feet in height. The owner of 2 Cantrell Road also owns the two (2) vacant lots immediately to the east, as highlighted on the attached zoning map. MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 7 (CON'T. The applicant proposes to extend the existing brick wall along the front of the two (2) vacant lots, as noted on the attached site plan. The new masonry wall will be six (6) to seven (7) feet in height. The wall will also be located four (4) to six (6) feet back from the front property line and nine (9) feet back from the street curb. Section 36-516(e)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum fence/wall height of four (4) feet for fences/walls located between a building setback line and a street right-of-way. Six (6) foot high fences/walls are allowed elsewhere along property lines. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the masonry wall located between the 25 foot building setback and Cantrell Road to have a height of six (6) to seven (7) feet. Staff is supportive of the requested fence height variance. The proposed masonry wall will not be out of character with the taller fences/walls located along Cantrell Road in this general area. The proposed wall will aide in providing privacy to the residential yard located along the very busy arterial street. Additionally, the proposed wall will not create any sight -distance problems for the traffic on Cantrell Road. Staff believes the proposed masonry wall will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested fence/wall height variance, subject to a building permit being obtained for the wall construction. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: MAY 22, 2006) Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2) members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda. 2 To the Board of Adjustment, % r7 -2-k6'50 Included is a survey of the property on Cantrell Road that I would like to construct a 6' stone wall on. My house is on tract 15 or #2 Cantrell Road. There is an existing brick wall that is 5' to Tin height in front on the house. I would like to extend the existing wall east 400; approximately 10' behind the curb line. As indicated on the survey the property line is 2.5' behind the curb line. Attached is a survey of my existing house and wall; a survey of adjacent property (tracts 16 and 17), which I have owned for 30 years, but have been unable to use because of the noise and lack of privacy; a topography of Cantrell Road showing property and proposed wall; photos looking east and west. T you for ur at ntion, James E. Jackson, VAIIA MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 8 File No.: Z-8051 Owner: Timothy and Jeanie Hursley Applicant: Blake Jackson Address: 412 Midland Avenue Description: Lots 1 and 2, Block 13, Midland Hills Addition Zoned: R-3 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-156 to allow an accessory building with a reduced street side setback. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT Single Family Residential A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The R-3 zoned property at 412 Midland Avenue is occupied by a two-story rock and frame single family residence. The property is located at the southwest corner of Midland Avenue and Alpine court. There is a paved alley along the rear (west) property line. There is also a swimming pool in the rear yard, within the southwest portion of the property. The applicant proposes to construct a one-story frame accessory building (for personal storage) along the alley at the northwest corner of the property, as noted on the attached site plan. The proposed structure will be located 2.5 feet from the rear property line and 6 to 8 feet from the street side (Alpine MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 8 (CON'T. Court) property line. The overhang for the storage building will extend to the rear and street side property lines. The proposed accessory structure will occupy approximately 13 percent of the required rear yard (rear 25 feet of the lot). When added to the swimming pool the coverage is 19 percent. Section 36-156(a)(2)c. of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum 15 foot street side setback for accessory buildings in R-3 zoning. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the accessory storage building with a street side setback ranging from six (6) to eight (8) feet (overhang not included in setback calculations). Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the requested reduced street side setback as very reasonable. The proposed accessory building will not be out of character with other accessory buildings located along the paved alley to the north and south. The accessory structure will also have a similar setback from the Alpine court property line as the principal structures to the west, along the south side of Alpine Court. Staff believes the proposed accessory storage building will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested setback variance, as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: MAY 22, 2006) Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2) members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda. K To the Board of Adjustment, Included is a survey showing the location of the proposed storage shed, plans and elevations of the storage shed and photos of the existing site. Reasons we are requesting a variance is because locating the shed 15' off of the street would require excessive removal of trees and vegetation, and due to the location of the existing pool and the slope of the site, the corner is the most appropriate place for the new shed. The proposed shed will act as a privacy screen as well as a place for storage. The proposed design is in character with the rest of the neighborhood and will be an improvement to this corner of the property. Thank you for you attention, VL Blake Jackson MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 9 File No.: Z-8052 Owner: Ladley and Jesha Abraham Applicant: Jennifer Herron Address: 404 Hickory Creek Court - Southeast Description: Lot 41, Hickory Creek Addition, Phase I. Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254 and the building line provisions of Section 36-12 to allow a porte-cochere with a reduced front setback and which crosses a front platted building line. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Undeveloped Proposed Use of Property STAFF REPORT Single Family Residential A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 404 Hickory Creek Court -Southeast is currently undeveloped. The lot backs up to an adjacent subdivision to the east. Single family residences exist on the adjacent lots to the north and south. The lot has a 25 foot front platted building line. The applicant proposes to construct a new single family residence on the lot, as noted on the attached site plan. A circular drive is proposed from Hickory Creek Court -Southeast to serve as access. As part of the new home construction, a porte-cochere (attached) is proposed on front of the house, MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 9 (CON'T.) over the circular drive. The porte-cochere will extend across the front platted building line by six (6) feet to 7.5 feet. The resulting front setback will be 17.5 to 19 feet. Section 36-254(d)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front setback of 25 feet for R-2 zoned property. Section 31-12(c ) of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that encroachments across platted building lines be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance requirements to allow the proposed new residence with a reduced front setback and to cross the front platted building line. Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff views the request as relatively minor. The lot is located within the bulb of a cul-de-sac street, so the porte-cochere will not have the appearance of being out of alignment with adjacent structures. The property is located within the gated Hickory Creek Subdivision, and the architectural review committee for the subdivision has approved the proposed construction. Staff believes the proposed single family residence, with porte-cochere, will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the platted front building line for the residential structure. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested setback and building line variances, associated with the new residential structure, subject to the following conditions: 1. Completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the front platted building line as approved by the Board. 2. The porte-cochere structure must remain unenclosed on the north, south and west sides. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: MAY 22, 2006) Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2) members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda. E April 21, 2006 Mr. Monte Moore City of Little Rock Planning & Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201-1334 Dear Monte: On behalf of Ladley & Jesha Abraham, we are submitting a request for a variance of the front building line of 25'-0" for the property located at Lot 41, Hickory Creek Subdivision, Phase I. The existing lot is located at the end of a cul-de-sac and is a vacant lot. We propose a new single-family house with an attached open but covered porte-cochere. The north portion of the proposed porte-cochere encroaches within the 25'-0" building line approximately 6'-0" and the south portion of the porte-cochere encroaches within the 25'-0" building line approximately 8'-0". Due to the unusual shape of the lot and the client's desire to have a circular driveway, we propose this location for the porte-cochere. It is not uncommon to have a circular driveway in this subdivision. In the Bill of Assurance of Hickory Creek Subdivision, Little Rock, Arkansas, it states that no principal dwelling shall be located on any lot nearer than 25 feet from the rear lot line. The proposed single-family residence meets this guideline. The proposed plans and location of the porte-cochere have been reviewed and approved by the Hickory Creek Property Owner's Association. The attached documentation shows the signatures for approval dated October 4, 2005. If more information is needed, please contact me. If there are any questions, please give me a call at 975-0052. Sincerely, a Jennifer Herron, ALA cc: file H E _R R O N H 0 R T 0 N 300 S. Spring St. Ste. 720 Little Rock, AR 72201 hharchae-architect. com te1.501-975-0052 fax.50i-978-0078 ARCHITECTS 04/18/2006 21:38 FAX 5018683644 NSAS TOWN AND )RDANCE WITH SIC ROACH M ENTS :MENTS (RECORDED ;S OR ANY OTHER YEAR FLOOD pPPROVEu f�j 001/001 W Ac4 LU V) Ui co /A TES) INC* Date July 6, 2005 Job No, 05-560P MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 10 File No.: Z-8053 Owner: H L Land Development, LLC. Applicant: Pat McGetrick Address: 11 Woodridge Drive Description: Lot 6, Woodridge Addition. Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254 and the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a new residence with a reduced rear setback and which crosses a platted rear building line. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Undeveloped Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned lot at 11 Woodridge Drive is currently undeveloped and partially wooded. The lot is relatively flat. The lot backs up to Brodie Lane, which runs along the east property line. Recently constructed single family homes are located on the lots immediately north and south. The lot has 25 foot front and rear platted building lines. The applicant proposes to construct a new single family residence on the lot, as noted on the attached site plan. A two -car wide driveway at the northwest corner of the property will serve as access. The proposed home will cross the MAY 22, 2006 ITEM NO.: 10 (CON'T.) rear 25 foot platted building line by eight (8) feet at the northeast corner of the structure and six (6) feet at the structure's southeast corner. The resulting rear setbacks are 17 feet and 19 feet respectively. The rear patio will consist of an at -grade concrete slab only. Section 36-254(d)(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear setback of 25 feet for R-2 zoned property. Section 31-12(c ) of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that encroachments across platted building lines be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances to allow the proposed residence with a reduced rear setback (17 feet to 19 feet) and to cross the platted rear building line. Staff supports the requested variances. Staff views the request as reasonable, given the irregular lot shape and depth. The lot has a depth of only 89 feet, as measured along the north property line. Because of the curvature of the front building line (dictated by the curvature of the street), there is only 30 feet of buildable depth at the center of the lot. If the curve in the front building line did not exist, the proposed house would be able to be constructed with no variances. Staff believes the proposed single family residence will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the platted rear building line for the residential structure. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested setback and building line variances, associated with the new residential structure, subject to the completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the rear platted building line as approved by the Board. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: MAY 22, 2006) Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2) members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda. 2 MoOETRICK17McOETRICK ENGINEER5 - PLANNERS - 5URVEYOR5 APRIL 21, 2006 Monte Moore Department of Planning & Development 723 West Markham St. Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Board of Adjustment Application LOT 6 WOODRIDGE ADDITION Dear Mr. Moore, We are herewith submitting the above captioned project for review. The property is zoned R-2. The owner plan to built a single family house on this lot. The owner is requesting the following variances: 1) Building setback requirement from 25' to 17' along Brodie Lane, because of the buidable depth of the lot currently is only30'.We have a house plan shown on the submittal that we are planning to construct on the lot. This plan will require a 17' rear setback. If you have any questions regarding this submittal please advise. Sincerely, Mepeth& McGetrick, Inc. Patrick M. McGetrick, P.E. 10 01*m Creek Court, Suite A UtVe Rock, Arkansas 72210 501-455-8899 fax 501-455-8898