boa_09 28 2015LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SUMMARY OF MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
2:00 P.M.
Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being four (4)in number.
II.Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meetings
The Minutes of the August 31,2015 meeting were
approved.
III.Members Present:Jeff Yates,Chairman
Carolyn Lindsey Polk
Rajesh Mehta
Robert Tucker
Members Absent:Brad Wingffeld,Vice Chairman
City Attorney Present:Debra Weldon
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
AGENDA
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
2:00 P.M.
OLD BUSINESS:
A.Z-9046 4308 Asher Avenue
B.Z-3371-AAA 600 Colonel Glenn Plaza
C.Z-8638-A 1606 Blair Street
D.Z-9066 1904 N.Jackson Street
NEW BUSINESS:
1.Z-5049-A 1900 Beechwood Street
2.2-8207-A 1605 Blair Street
3.Z-9079 6914 Lucea Court
4.Z-9080 23 Village Grove Road
5.Z-9081 3005 N.Taylor Street
6.Z-9082 SW Corner of W.6'"and Main Streets
7.Z-9083 1011 W.6'"Street
8.Z-9084 22 Valley Crest Estates
9.Z-9085 8 Diana Drive
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO A
File No.:Z-9046
Owner:Paul Eller
Applicant:Cody Sums
Address:4308 AsherAvenue
Description:North side of Asher Avenue,between Peyton and Lewis Streets
Zoned:C-3
Variance Requested:A variance is requested from the parking provisions of
Section 36-502 to allow a restaurant use within an existing
commercial building with a reduced number of parking
spaces.
Justification:The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Properly:Commercial Building
Proposed Use of Property:Restaurant with Bar Service
STAFF REPORT
A.Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B.H~tff A
The C-3 zoned property located at 4308 Asher Avenue is occupied by a one-story
commercial building.The property is located on the north side of Asher Avenue,
east of Peyton Street.The existing commercial building has an area of
approximately 2,327 square feet (25 feet by 93.1 feet).The commercial lot is 25
feet wide,with a depth of 146 feet,A small fenced asphalt area is located at the
rear (north)of the building.This area will allow for the parking of the two (2)
vehicles,with access from a paved alley which runs along the rear (north)property
line.The property has a history of general retail-type use,with a nonconforming
parking status.Past use of the property requires a minimum of seven (7)on-site
parking spaces.Therefore,the nonconforming parking status is for a shortage of
five (5)spaces.
The applicant is now proposing to occupy the existing building with a restaurant
use with bar service.As part of the proposal,the applicant has provided a written
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO'ON'T
agreement for use of the parking lot at 4203 Asher Avenue.The property at 4203
Asher Avenue is located across Asher Avenue to the southeast,at the southwest
comer of Asher Avenue and Lewis Street.The property contains a convenience
store with gas pumps.There is paved parking for 16 to 18 vehicles on the site.
There is no paved parking behind the building.
Section 36-502(b)(3)c.of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum of 23on-sits parking spaces for the proposed restaurant use.The property has a
nonconforming status/credit for five (5)parking spaces.Therefore,18 on-site
parking spaces are required.As noted previously,there are two (2)paved parkingspacesatthenorthendoftheexistingbuilding.Therefore,the applicant is
requesting a variance to utilize the existing building for a restaurant use with a
reduced number of on-site parking spaces.
Staff does not support the requested parking variance.Staff views the applicant's
proposed plan for parking as unreasonable.The applicant is proposing to utilize
the existing parking for the convenience store at 4203 Asher Avenue as the
primary parking for his restaurant use.The convenience store is open and
operating from 6:00 a.m.to 2:00 a.m,daily,and later on weekends (5:00 a.m.).
Staff estimates the parking requirement for the convenience store to be
approximately eight (8)spaces.Therefore,there are only eight (8)to ten (10)
available spaces for use by the proposed restaurant.However,staff has great
concern with the proposed plan to use the parking across Asher Avenue from the
proposed restaurant use.Staff feels that this will create a life-safety issue.Asher
Avenue is a major arterial roadway.Staff believes that it will be very unsafe for
pedestrians to cross back and forth across Asher Avenue between the proposed
restaurant and off-site parking area,especially at night after dark.Staff believes
that there is not enough available parking in this general area to allow the
commercial building at 4308 Asher Avenue to be converted to a restaurant-type
use.Staff believes that the best use for the building would be a retail-type use with
daytime hours.
C.Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the requested parking variance.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (June 29,2015)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested this application be deferred to the
July 27,2015 agenda in order to explore other parking options in the area.Staff
supported the deferral request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for deferral to the July 27,2015 agenda
as recommended by staff.The vote was 4 eyes,0 nays and 1 absent.The application
was deferred.
2
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO'CON'T
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (July 27,2015)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested this application be deferred to the
August 31,2015 agenda in order to explore other parking options in the area.Staff
supported the deferral request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for deferral to the August 31,2015
agenda as recommended by staff.The vote was 4 eyes,0 nays and 1 absent.The
application was deferred.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (August 31,2015)
The applicant was not present.The issue of deferral was discussed by the Board.Staff
recommended deferral to the September 28,2015 agenda.
There was a motion to defer the application to the September 28,2015,as the last
deferral to be granted for this application.The motion passed by a vote of 5 ayes,0
nays and 0 absent.The application was deferred.
STAFF UPDATE:
On August 31,2015 the applicant submitted two (2)additional parking agreements to
staff.The parking agreements are for 4305 and 4317 W.28a Street.These are
residential properties,zoned R-3,and will not allow for the parking of vehicles for this
commercial use.
Staff continues to recommend denial of the requested parking variance for the reasons
noted in the final paragraph of the "Staff Analysis"(paragraph B.).
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (September 28,2015)
The applicant was not present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of denial.
There was a motion to approve the application as filed.The vote was 4 eyes,o nays
and 1 absent.There was a second motion to rescend the previous vote.The vote was
4 eyes,0 nays and 1 absent.The first vote was rescinded.
There was a third motion to approve the parking variance as filed.The vote was 0
eyes,4 nays and 1 absent.The application was denied.
3
Cody Burns
50/50 Sports Den
430g Asher Avenue
Little Rock,AR 72204
May 5,2015
Little Rock Board of Adjustment
Department of Planning and Development
723 West Markham
Little Rock.AR
Little Rock Board of Adjustment:
The attached application is a proposal for a variance from the requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance.Due to a need for additional parking for 50/50 Sports Den located at 430B Asher
Avenue in Little Rock,I am requesting a variance from those requirements.
Currently,my business lot accommodates nine parking spaces;four directly at the street enuance
and Gve directly at back entrance of the building.The unusual configuration of the current lot
does not provide the necessary parking that will fully accommodate the business;therefore,I am
seeking a variance in order to acquire additional parking through other owners within boundaries
of the building.
With the approval of this application,I will be able to continue the acquisition of additional
permits and licenses needed to complete the opening of 50/50 Sports Den.I hope that this
variance may be approved based on the provided justifications.If you require any additional
information regarding this request,please let me know.
Sincerely,
Cody Burns
nclosure
rC
Susiness Parking Agreement
owner of property located at 4203 Asher Avenue,Little Rock,
Arkansas grant full access of my business parking lot to Cody Burns,SD/SO Sports Den located at 4308
Asher Avenue,Little Rock,Arkansas and its patrons.The parking may be used during and/or after normal
busmess hours.Parking may be utilized in the front and/or rear of said property.
Crr ig
Lessor Date
Lessee Date
zg-P
z-t 9&
Business Parking Agreement
,owner of property located at 43IT gf'a Little Rock,
Arkansas grant full access of my business parking lot to Cody sums.50/50 Sports Den located at 4308
Asher Avenue,Little Rock,Arkansas and its patrons.The parking msy be used dunng and/or alter nomial
business hours.Parking may be utilired In the front and/or reer of said property
a=f
Lessor Dais
Lessee Date
Q-'fogb
Business Parking Agreement
owner of property located at430020 street Little Rock,
Arkansas grant full access of my business parking lot to Cody Burns,50/50 Sports Den located at 4308
Asher Avenue,Little Rock,Arkansas and its patrons.The parking may be used during and/or afler normal
business hours.Parking may be utilized in the front and/or rear of said property.
3-/-9
Lessor Date
Lessee Date
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO'
File No.:Z-3371-AAA
Owner:Playtime Partnership,LLC
Applicant:Mark Redden,Holloway Engineering
Address:600 Colonel Glenn Plaza Loop
Description:South end of Colonel Glenn Plaza Loop
Zoned:C-3
Variance Requested:Variances are requested from the sign provisions of Section
36-555 to allow a ground-mounted sign with increased
height and area.
Justification:The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property:Restaurant with inside amusement
Proposed Use of Property:Restaurant with inside amusement
STAFF REPORT
A.Public Works Issues:
No Comments
6 ~6tttA
The C-3 zoned property at 600 Colonel Glenn Plaza Loop is occupied by a
Playtime Pizza facility.The property is located near the south end of Colonel
Glenn Plaza Loop,south of the Rave Theater.A two-story commercial building
housing the pizza restaurant/arcade is located within the west half of the property.
Paved parking is located on the north and east sides of the building.
On February 25,2001 the Board of Adjustment approved variances for increased
sign height and area for a subdivision sign along the east property line (1-430
frontage)of 600 Colonel Glenn Plaza Loop.The sign was approved with a
maximum height of 50 feet and an area of approximately 400 square feet.The
sign has been installed and is internally lighted.The sign is to contain the names
of businesses within the Glenn Ridge Crossing Subdivision.The sign variances
were approved with the following conditions:
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO 'CON'T
1.A sign permit must be obtained for the sign.
2.There are to be no other ground-mounted signs within the Glenn Ridge
Crossing Subdivision located along 1-430 frontage of the Subdivision.
On August 30,2010 the Board of Adjustment unanimously denied a request to
increase the height of the previously approved sign from 50 feet to 75 feet.The
sign area was to remain the same.The Planning Staff did not support the
increased height.
Section 36-555(a)(2)of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum sign height
of 36 feet and a maximum sign area of 160 square feet for signs in commercial
zoning districts.The applicant is back before the Board requesting to replace the
previously approved sign with a new electronic sign,as noted on the attached site
plan and sign graphics.The new proposed sign will be 320 square feet in area
and 75 feet in height.The applicant proposes that the new sign serve not only the
Glenn Ridge Crossing Subdivision,but also the businesses on the entire southeast
portion of the Colonel Glenn/1-430 intersection.See the applicant's attached cover
letter for a list of the businesses.The increased height is being proposed so that
the sign can be seen above the tree line by north and south bound I-430 traffic.
Staff is not supportive of the requested sign height variance.Staff feels the
previous approvai of a 50 foot sign height was fairly generous.The requested sign
height of 75 feet is over twice the height allowed for commercial signage,including
billboards in commercial zones.Additionally,the sign is located along interstate
430 which is designated as a scenic corridor and allows no billboard signs.
Although the proposed sign is not a billboard,staff believes that the sign violates
the spirit and intent of the scenic corridor designation.The City's Board of
Directors designates a roadway a scenic corridor because the roadway "exhibits
special aesthetic and visual characteristics worthy of protection".Staff believes the
existing sign height does allow some visibility from IX30.Staff feels that
increasing the sign height to 75 feet at this location would have a negative impact
on I%30's designation as a scenic corridor by triggering other businesses in the
area to request similar sign heights.
Additionally,the previous approval was for a subdivision multiple tenant
identification sign.Similar type signs have been approved for major shopping
center developments in the City.As prepared by the applicant,the sign is to
identify not just the businesses within Glenn Ridge Crossing Subdivision but also
the businesses on the entire southeast portion of the interchange.In staffs
opinion,this creates an off premises sign which is specifiically prohibited on the
scelllc cori'Idoi'.
2
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO 'CON'T
C.S ff Recomm nda'on:
Staff recommends denial of the requested sign height and area variances
associated with the new proposed subdivision sign.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (July 27,2015)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested this application be deferred to the
August 31,2015 agenda,based on the fact that the applicant would not be present.
Staff supported the deferred request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for deferral to the August 31,2015
agenda as recommended by staff.The vote was 4 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The
application was deferred.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (August 31,2015)
Steve Landers was present,representing the application.There were no objectors
present.Staff presented the application with a recommendation of denial.
Steve Landers addressed the Board in support of the application.He noted that there
would be few changes to the existing sign.He referred to the "Grain"sign which was
recently placed along Colonel Glenn Road and presented a photo to the Board.He
explained reasons for the proposed sign.
Chairman Yates explained that the proposed sign described by Mr.Landers was
nothing like the graphics submitted for the application and presented to the Board.Mr.
Landers noted that the graphics presented were not of the sign he wished to construct.
Mr.Landers asked to defer the application in order to provide a different sign design.
Staff supported a deferral to the September 28,2015 agenda.There was a brief
discussion of the deferral.
There was a motion to defer the application to the September 28,2015 agenda.The
motion passed by a vote of 5 ayes,0 nays and 0 absent.The application was deferred.
S~tff U de t:
On September 14,2015 the applicant submitted revised sign graphics to staff for the
proposed commercial sign at 800 Colonel Glenn Plaza Loop.As shown on the attached
graphics,the proposed sign will have backlit panels and will not be an electronic
message sign.The sign now has a more typical commercial sign design,and does not
have the appearance of a billboard.The area of the proposed sign has been increased
from 320 square feet to 800 square feet.The proposed sign height has increased from
75 feet to 85 feet.The applicant notes that 30 feet of the sign will be visible above the
3
SEPTEMBER 28,20t5
ITEM NO B CON'T
existing tree line along 1%30.The silhouette of the sign which will be visible above the
tree line will be 900 square feet in area.
Staff continues to recommend denial of the requested sign area and height variances
for the reasons noted in the "Staff Analysis"(paragraph B.).Staff continues to believe
that the proposed sign will have a negative impact on 1-430's designation as a scenic
corridor.With respect to other commercial subdivision signs,some mentioned at the
last meeting,following is what has been approved by the Board of Adjustment or
Planning Commission:
~Shackleford Crossing
Shackleford frontage:36 feet in height/380 square feet
1-430 frontage:36 feet in height/380 square feet
~Gateway Town Center
1-430 frontage:49.5 feet in height/740 square feet
Otter Creek Road frontage:25 feet in height/370 square feet
~Mabelvale Plaza
1-30 frontage;30 feet in height/266 square feet
Mabelvale Pike frontage:34 feet in height/310 square feet
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (September 28,201 5)
Mark Redder and Brian Carney were present,representing the application.There were
no objectors present.Staff presented the revised application with a recommendation of
denial.
Mark Redder addressed the Board in support of the application.He explained that the
previously approved sign was 50 feet in height,and that the current proposai met the
intent of the previous application.Brian Carney explained that the proposed sign height
and area was due to the topography of the site and the trees within the right-of-way of I-
430.Mr.Redder noted that the existing sign was visible for only a fraction of a second
from 1&30 traffic.Mr.Carney explained that the top 30 feet of the proposed sign would
be visible above the tree line.There was a brief discussion regarding the proposed sign
height.
Carolyn Lindsey-Polk asked if the Highway Department had been contacted regarding
tree cutting.Mr.Redder explained that the Highway Department would not allow tree
cutting for businesses.
Chairman Yates explained that he understood the issue of the proposal.He noted that
the scenic corridor was established by the Board of Directors,and that he would not
vote to approve something that would oppose the scenic corridor designation.There
was additional discussion regarding the proposed sign height and area.
4
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO'CON'T
There was additional discussion pertaining to the possibility of a different zoning
action/application to include the sign request.
Mr.Carney asked to defer the application to the October 26,2015 agenda to explore
the option of a different application.
There was a motion to defer the application to the October 26,2015 agenda.The vote
was 3 eyes,1 nay and 1 absent.The application was deferred.
5
y-Z&7 j-7j;kA
44I4ER$@TQYQTA scloI1
September 14,2015
City of Little Rock
Board of Adjustment
500 West Markham Street
Little Rock,AR 72201
RE:Item 2-3371-AAA —Sign Variance Request
Dear Board Members,
Please find attached a rendering of the proposed sign.The sign consists of two outside masts with a center
directory containing 10 equally spaced placards.These placards will consist of backlit acrygc panels.Busmesses
withm the subdivision will be able to use either one or two of these horizontal sections.As you will see,we are not
proposing an electronic message board.
We'e created the attached three-dimensional rendering in order to accurately depict how the sign will actually
look withm the existing topography.During this process of developing this drawing,it became clear that the sign
area and height would need to be increased if the individual placards were to be legible.We are requestrng that the
sign be 600sf in total area.For the entire sign to be legible with the proposed sign area,it will need to be 85'n
total height.At 85'all,only about 30'f the sign is actually visible.
We are requesting these variances because of the obstructing tree kne.The sign was approved at 50'o provide
some visibility in 2001.However,it was only constructed to 451 The trees have matured in the interim.We
understand that the requested 85'n height is taller than normally allowed,however other subdivision signs have
been granted variances due to obstructions.We believe the height of the sign relative to the adjacent obstru«tions
is in keeping with the intent of the ordinance.
We apologize for any confusion in this matter and appreciate you taking the time to review our revised design.We
look forward to meeting with you again on the 28'".
Steve Landers
10825 COLONEL GLENN ROAO LITTLE ROCK AR 52504 PHONE 505 568 5800 TOLL FREE art 955 5800
i909 Ai
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO'
File No.:Z-8638-A
Owner:Amanda Farrell
Applicant Tom Colford and Ellen Yeary
Address:1606 Blair Street
Description:Lot 2,Block 4,McGehee Addition
Zoned:R-2
Variance Requested:A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section
36-1 56 to allow an addition to an existing accessory building with increased rear yard
coverage.
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 UPDATE
Upon review of the application,staff found that an additional variance (easement
encroachment)is needed.Therefore,staff recommends this application be
deferred to the September 28,2015 agenda,so that the additional variance can
be published in a legal ad end letters from the utility companies can be obtained
by the applicant.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (August 31,2015)
Staff informed the Board that the application needed to be deferred to the September
28,2015 agenda,so that an additional variance could be reviewed.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for deferral to the September 28,2015
agenda as recommended by staff.The vote was 5 ayes,0 nays and 0 absent.The
application was deferred.
STAFF UPDATE
On September 14,2015 the applicant requested this application be withdrawn,
without prejudice.Staff supports the withdrawal request.
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO 'CON'T.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (September 28,2015)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested this application be withdrawn,
without prejudice.Staff supported the withdrawal request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for withdrawal,without prejudice.The
vote was 4 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The application was withdrawn.
2
Yssry Lindss Archltscts
July 27,2015 g -jr~zs-8
Dana Camey
Uttle Rock Board of Adjustments
Planning and Development
723 West Markhsm
LINe Rock,AR 72201
Re:Amends Farrell and E.W.Swan
1606 Blair Street
LINe Rock,AR 72207
Dana,
Please find attached our submittal to the LiNe Rock Board of Adjustments requesting a
variance with regard to the property at 1606 Blair Street.
The Owners wish to make improvements to the current property which will require the
Board's approval.The improvements consist of converting an exisbng carport into an
endosed 2 car garage.
The owners'esire is to nodose and enlarge the existing carport located to the west of
the main house.The existing accessory structure is located 3'rom the south property
line and the owners would like to enlarge the footprint to within 3'f the west property
line as well.The existing carport is 24'rom the rear of the house providing room for
access into the front of the garage.Because of these two factors this will necessitate a
variance from the 30%rear yard coverage requirement to coverage of 49%%d of the rear
yard.
If you have any questions or need further information please feel free to contact me or
their contractor Tom Colford (501 680-5961 ).
We appredate your consideration of our request.
Thank you,
7(e ~i
Ellen Yeaty,A
3416 Old Cantrell Road Little Rock,AR 72202 501-372-5940 FX:501-663-0043
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO'
File No.:Z-9066
Owner:Ronda LeAnn Sears
Applicant:Carolyn Lindsey
Address:1904 N.Jackson Street
Description:Lot 33,Shadowlawn Addition
Zoned:R-2
Variance Requested:A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section
36-254 to allow a building addition 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.
B.Buildin Codes Comments:
The required fire separation distance (building to property line)prescribed by the
building code terminates at five (5)feet.Buildings are allowed to be closer than
five (5)feet if they have properly constructed fire walls which provide the requisite
one (1)hour fire resistance rating.When building are five (5)feet or more from the
property line,the requirement no longer applies to the wall itself,only the
projections such as eaves or overhangs.
Openings such as doors and windows are limited when the exterior wall is three (3)
feet from the property line,and are prohibited when the exterior wall is less than
three (3)feet from the line.There is no restriction on openings when the exterior
wall is more than three (3)feet from the property line.
Contact the City of Little Rock Building Codes at 371-4832 for additional details.
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO'CON'T
C.SJftff Aria))%jai
The R-2 zoned property at 1904 N.Jackson Street is occupied by a one-story
brick and frame single family residence.The property is located on the west side
of N.Jackson Street,south of Club Road.There is a one-car wide driveway at
the northeast corner of the lot.The driveway leads to a one-car wide garage at
the northwest corner of the residence.The garage portion of the residence is
located three (3)feet back from the north side property line.
The applicant proposes to construct one-story brick and frame additions to the
rear (west end)of the existing residence,as noted on the attached site plan.The
project also includes enclosing the existing garage area for living space.The
proposed addition at the northwest corner of the residence will maintain the same
three (3)foot north side setback on the existing house.The additions will be
located 36 feet to 51 feet back from the rear (west)property line,and nine (9)
feet to 32 feet back from the south side property line.
Section 36-254(d)(2)of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side
setback of five (5)feet for this R-2 zoned lot.Therefore,the applicant is
requesting a variance to allow a portion of the proposed additions with a reduce
side (north)setback.All other setbacks conform with ordinance requirements.
Staff is supportive of the requested side setback variance.Staff views the
request as reasonable.The proposed addition at the northwest corner of the
residence will maintain the same three (3)foot side setback as the existing
structure.The proposed side setback for the addition will not be out of character
with other side setbacks in this neighborhood.Additionally,there will be no
separation issues,as there are no structures on the property to the north which
will be adjacent to the proposed addition.Staff believes the proposed addition
with reduced side setback will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties
or the general area.
D.Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested side setback variance,subject to
compliance with the Building Codes requirements as noted in paragraph B.of the
Staff Report.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (August 31,2015)
Staff informed the Board that the application needed to be deferred to the September
28,2015 agenda,based on the fact that the applicant failed to complete the required
notifications to surrounding property owners.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for deferral to the September 28,2015
agenda as recommended by staff.The vote was 4 ayes,0 nays,0 absent and 1
abstention (Lindsey-Polk),The application was deferred.
2
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO D CON'T
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (September 28,2015)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval.There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.
The vote was 3 ayes,0 nays,1 absent and 1 recusal (Lindsey-Polk).The application
was approved.
3
Yeary Lindsey Architects
7 ~
P-g dt'.f'uly
27,2015
Mr.Monte Moore
Department of Neighborhoods and Planning
723 West Markham
Little Rock,AR 72201
RE:Zoning Variance Application for 1904 N.Jackson St.
Dear Monte,
This project consists of the remodeling of an attached existing single car garage to become
Outside Storage,Master Closet and Bath,and the addition of a Master Bedroom,CtoseVSafe Room
and a Kitchen expansion.All of this will accomplish a simplification of the existing rear roof line of the
house as well.We are adding brick to the existing stucco garage and the addition will align with the
new brick of that existing garage.
We are requesting a zoning variance for the Master Suite addition to allow an encroachment
into the side setback,reducing it from 5 feet to 3 feet to align with the existing north side of the existing
garage with it's new brick exterior.The north side of the existing garage and of the Master Bedroom
addition will have no openings and will have a 12"deep 1 hr rated soffit.
We feel this addition is in keeping with others in the neighborhood and will not be any closer to
the neighbor on the north than the original structure.The addition to this side of the house preserves a
large tree in the south part of the back yard.Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
L
Carolyn A.Li d ey,AIA
3416 Old Cantrell Road Little Rock,Arkansas 72202 501-372-5940 Fax:501-663-0043
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO'
File No.:Z-5049-A
Owner:Evan Wade and Jennifer Gregory
Applicant:Paxton Singleton
Address:1900 Beechwood Street
Description:Lot 134R,Shadowlawn Addition
Zoned:R-2
Variance Requested:Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section
36-254 and 36-156 to allow a building addition with reduced
rear setback and a detached garage with 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:Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A.Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B.~fft BA
The R-2 zoned property at 1900 Beechwood Street is occupied by a two-story
brick and frame single family residence.The property is located at the northwest
corner of Beechwood Street and Echo Pass.A driveway from Echo Pass is
located at the southwest corner of the lot.
The applicant proposes to construct a two-story addition at the northwest corner of
the house and a detached garage at the southwest corner of the lot,as noted on
the attached site plan.The proposed addition will be located eight (8)feet to 10.5
feet back from the north side property line and 18 feet to 19.5feet back from the
rear (west)property line.The proposed garage will be located 8.5 feet to 11.5feet
from the south street side property line and five (5)feet to seven (7)feet back from
the rear (west)property line.The garage will be separated from the house by 6.5
feet.
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO 'CON'T
Section 38-254(d)(3)of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum reer
setback of 25 feet for the principal structure on this R-2 zoned lot.Section 38-
158(a)(2)c.requires a minimum street side setback of 15 feet for accessory
structures.Therefore,the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the building
addition with a reduced rear setback and the accessory garage structure with a
reduced street side setback.
Staff is supportive of the requested setback variances.Staff views the request as
reasonable.The requested setback variances are relatively minor in nature.The
proposed setbacks will not be out of character with the neighborhood.A number of
similar setback variances have been granted throughout this neighborhood.The
existing house is located approximately 32 feet to 45 feet back from the front
property line,instead of the 25 foot front setback as typically required.This greatly
reduces the amount of buildable area in the rear yard area.Additionally the overall
building massing proposed for the property will be compatible with the
neighborhood.Staff believes the proposed addition and garage with reduced
setbacks will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general
area.
C.Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested setback variances,as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (September 28,2015)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval.There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.
The vote was 4 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The application was approved.
2
+/r
g-sse're-6
Global Sun/e in Consultants Inc.
Professional toad Sonrerroo
6511 Hellman Court ~North Lisle Rock,AR 72118
Phone:501.455.4984 ~Fax;501.455.8158
September 1,2015
Monte Moore,Zoning Administrator
City of Little Rock Planning Department
723 West Markham
Little Rock,AR 72201
RE:Variance Application —1900 Beechwood St.,Little Rock,AR
Dear Mr.Moore:
Please accept this letter to serve as our application for the above referenced submittal.We wish for
this applicadon to be reviewed and accepted by the Planning Department and placed on the
September 28,2015 Board of Adjustment Meeting.
Our client is in the design process of adding on a master bath area at the northwesterly side of the
house and a garage in the area of the existing concrete pad on the southwesterly corner of the
property (as shown on the attached survey and site plan).The site is located at 1900 Beechwood
Street,Lot 134R,Shadowlawn Addition.The properly is currently zoned R-2 Single-Family.The site is
approximately 135-feet (+/-)by 85-feet (+/-)and is shown on the attached site plan with a 25-foot front
setback,8-foot exterior and interior side setbacks,and a 4-foot rear setback.We have been unable to
locate an exissng Bill of Assurance for the property.
Due to the fact that the existing building (constructed in 1940)is located approximately 44.6-feet off of
the front property line along Beechwood Street,this does not allow for enough room for an addition to
the rear.Therefore,we are requesting approval of the setbacks as shown on the proposed site plan.
Approval of this variance application to will allow our client to continue with their plans for the
proposed addition to their home.
We have enclosed (6)copies of the survey and proposed addition site plan.In addition,we will notify
all adjacent owners within 200 feet of our clients'roperty no less than 10 days prior to the meeting
date.We will also provide all documents for proof of notification to the city no less than 6 days prior to
the meeting date.If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact us.
Thanks,
Sabrina Ricks,Office Manager
Global Surveying Consultants,Inc.
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO'
File No.:Z-8207-A
Owner:Charles A.Hadden Revocable Trust
Applicant:Thomas Pownall,Thomas Engineering Co.
Address:1605 Blair Street
Description:Lot 7,Block 5,McGehee Addition
Zoned:R-2
Variance Requested:A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section
36-254 to allow a porch addition with a reduced front 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
B.~Sff A
The R-2 zoned property at 1605 Blair Street is occupied by a one-story bdick and
frame single family residence.The property is located on the east side of Blair
Street,between "0"and "P"Streets.There is a one-car wide driveway at the
northwest corner of the lot.The driveway extends along the north side of the
residence to a detached garage at the northeast corner of the lot.
The applicant proposes to construct a covered porch on the front (west)of the
residence,as noted on the attached site plan.The proposed porch will be eight (8)
feet by 15.8 feet in area.It will be unenclosed on its north,south and west sides.
The proposed porch will be located 15.25 feet to 19.2 feet back from the front
(west)property line.A new circular driveway will be constructed within the front
yard area as part of the project.
Section 36-254(d)(1)of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front
setback of 25 feet for this R-2 zoned lot.Therefore,the applicant is requesting a
variance to allow the porch addition with a reduced front setback.
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
N'T
Staff is supportive of the requested front setback variance.Staff views the request
as reasonable.Blair Street is a short,one (1)block roadway between "0"and "P"
Streets,with only four (4)residences on either side.The roadway runs at an angle
from north to south,with the residences being at an angle to the roadway (not
parallel).Given this situation,the proposed porch will not have the appearance of
being out of alignment with the fronts of the residences to the north and south.
The proposed porch will have a front setback similar to the porches on the
residences to the north and south.Staff believes the proposed unenclosed porch
will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
C.Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested front setback variance,subject to the
front porch remaining unenclosed on its north,south and west sides.
~St ~U d
On September 14,2015 the applicant submitted a letter to staff requesting this
application be withdrawn,without prejudice.Staff supports the withdrawal request.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (September 28,2015)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested this application be withdrawn,
without prejudice.Staff supported the withdrawal request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for withdrawal,without prejudice.The
vote was 4 eyes,0 nays and 1 absent.The application was withdrawn.
2
c4~+z.
g-zz.-v-H
THOMAS ENGINEERING COMPANY
-'"'~'chfilengineers"rwn 1"'~'F*,''"'-'-'-IEEMist32314EIBNEE~~
3810 LOOKOUT RO NORTH LITTLE ROCK.AR 72113 (501i 2334433 FAX i331)2334NI4
NATIONAL SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS
August 31,2015
Monte Moore
City of Little Rock Planning Department
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock,AR 72201
RE:Zoning Varaince Application
Lot 7,Block 5,MCGehee Addition
Dear Mr.Moore:
Included herewith are 6 copies of of the survey showing the proposed addition to the home.
The owner is handicapped and is requesting a variance of the front yard setback to construct a
covered parch and circular drive to facilitate his entrance into the home.
We would like to be placed on the September 28,2015 Board of Adjsutment agenda.
If you have any questions,please give me a call.
Sincerely,
Thomas R.Pownall,P.E.
Engineer
TRP/ab
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO'
File No.:Z-9079
Owner/Applicant New Water Systems,LLC (Mark Davis)
Address:6914 Lucea Court
Description:Lot 14R,Callaghan Creek Subdivision
Zoned:R-2
Variance Requested:A variance is requested from the building line provisions of
Section 31-12 to allow construction of a new residence
which crosses a side platted building line.
Justification:The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property:Vacant Lot
Proposed Use of Property:Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A.Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B.S~tff A
The R-2 zoned property at 6914 Lucea Court is currently an undeveloped
residential lot.The property is located at the northwestern corner of Lucea Court
and Lucea Road.The lot contains 50 foot platted setback lines along the front
(Lucea Road)and street side (Lucea Court)property lines.A large drainage ditch
is located within the north half of the lot.
The applicant proposes to construct a new residence on the property,as noted on
the attached site plan.The proposed residence will be located 97 feet to 110 feet
back from the front (Lucea Road)property line,59.5 feet to 68.6 feet back from the
rear (west)property line,30 feet to 38.1 feet back from the south (Lucea Court)
property line,and 66 feet to 108 feet back from the north side property line.The
main footprint of the home will cross the platted street side property line (Lucea
Court)by approximately 11.9feet.The covered porch will cross the platted street
side property line by 20 feet.
Section 31-12(c)of the City's Subdivision Ordinance requires that building line
encroachments be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment.Therefore,
the applicant is requesting a variance to allow a portion of the proposed residence
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
I EM NO 'CON'T
to cross the platted street side building line.All other setbacks conform to
ordinance standards.
Staff is supportive of the requested building line variance.Staff views the request
as reasonable.The setbacks from all property lines greatly exceed the typical
ordinance requirements.The street side setback along the south (Lucea Court)
property line would typically be 10 feet because of the utility easement.Because
of the curvature of Lucea Road and Lucea Court,the propose house will not have
the appearance of being out of alignment with the existing residences along these
roadways.Staff believes the proposed residence with a building line
encroachment 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 street side building line for the
proposed residence.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 building line variance,subject to the
completion of a one-lot replat reflecting the change in the street side platted
building line as approved by the Board.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (September 28,2015)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval.There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.
The vote was 4 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The application was approved.
2
P-PD71Moore,Monte
From:Andy Davis &ADavislnewwatersystems.corn&
Sent:Wednesday,September 02,2015 6:57 PM
To:Moore,Monte
Subject:Lot 4 Callaghan Creek Subdivision,6914 Lucea Ct Setback Variance
Mr.Moore,
Please accept this email as a cover letter for the variance application submitted for 6914 Lucea Ct.I am requesting this
vanance which would allow us to place the front edge of a new home 30 feet from the ROW line rather than the 50 feet
required by the platted setback line.The reason I am requesting this is that there is a large drainage ditch on the back of
the lot.We have used excavators to move the drainage ditch as far to the back of the lot as possible.We have also
worked diligently to maintain line of mature trees around the ditch.We still need to move the structure closer to the
street in order to give it sufficient separation form the drainage ditch.
I appreciate your time and consideration of this request.Please feel free to call me if you or the Board have any
questions.
Thank you,
Andy Davis,PE
New Water Systems,LLC
501 888.0500
501 888.0501 fax
10800 A ch st eet seee A
uttle Rock,AR 72206
90 89 193805
hule R ck,AR 72219
This email has been scanned for email related threats and delivered safely by Mimecast.
1
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO'
File No.:Z-9080
Owner/Applicant:Joseph and Theresa Chacko
Address:23 Village Grove Road
Description:Lot 11,Block 6,The Villages of Wellington
Zoned:R-2
Variance Requested:A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section
36-254 to allow a deck addition with reduced rear 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.
B.S~tff A
The R-2 zoned property at 23 Village Grove Road is occupied by a one-story brick
and frame single family residence.The property is located on the east side of
Village Grove Road.The residence is located at the center of the lot.The lot
contains a 25 foot front (west)platted building line,with a 10 foot wide utility
easement along the rear (east)property line and five (5)foot wide utility easements
along the south and west property lines.A deck with stairs and landing is located
on the rear (east)of the residence.
The applicant proposes to construct a hexagon shaped addition to the existing
deck/landing structure,as noted on the attached site plan.Each side of the
hexagon-shaped deck will be six (6)feet in length.The proposed deck addition will
be located approximately 12 feet back from the rear (east)property line.The
proposed deck addition will be uncovered and unenclosed.It will be approximately
4.5 feet above grade.
Section 36-254(d)(3)of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear
setback of 25 feet.Therefore,the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the
deck addition with a reduced rear setback.
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO 4 C N'T
Staff supports the requested rear setback variance.Staff views the request as
reasonable.The proposed deck addition represents only a very small building
footprint within the rear setback area.With the proposed deck addition being
uncovered and unenclosed,and only 4.5 feet above grade,it will not be very
visible from the surrounding properties.Additionally,the proposed rear setback for
the deck addition will not be out of character with the neighborhood.Other similar
rear setbacks exist throughout this area.Staff believes the proposed deck addition
will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
C.Staff Recommen ation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested rear setback variance,subject to the
deck addition remaining uncovered and unenclosed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (September 28,2015)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval.There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.
The vote was 4 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The application was approved.
2
c-grrFzs
Angus't 29,2015
Little Rock Board of Adjustment
Department of Planning and Development
723 West Markham
Little Rock,AR
To whom It may concern,
We reside in the Vglages of Wellington in West Little Rock.We are applying for a residential zoning
variance In order to build an addition to our existing wooden deck in our backyard.The reason we are
requesting the variance is due to the fact that the proposed deck addition would extend approximately
10 feet into the 25 foot setback.This seating area would be built off the landing of our stairs.The
landing sits approximately 4.5 feet off the ground.The backyard of our lot slopes downhill,and we
cannot use it for entertainment.This addition to our deck would allow us to more fully utigze our
backyard for entertainment and leisure.The shape of the addition would be hexagonal with built-in
benches.This addition to our deck would enhance the value of our home and add to our enjoyment of
our backyard.
Sincerely,
loe and Teny Chacko
23 Village Grove Rd.
Little Rock,AR 72211
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO'
File No.:Z-9081
Owner:Davis Dodson
Applicant:Sarah Dodson
Address:3005 N.Taylor Street
Description:Lot 17,Grandview Addition
Zoned:R-2
Variance Requested:A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section
36-254 to allow a building addition with a reduced rear
setback.
Justification:The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Properly:Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property:Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A.Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B.~fft ~A
The R-2 zoned property at 3005 N.Taylor Street is occupied by a one-story brick
and frame single family residence.The property is located on the east side of N.
Taylor Street,south of Scenic Drive.There is a one-car wide driveway at the
northwest corner of the property.The driveway extends along the north side of the
residence to a carport at the northeast corner of the residence.
The applicant proposes to construct a 16 foot —10 inch by 32 foot -9 inch addition
to the rear,southeast corner,of the residence,as noted on the attached site plan.
The proposed addition will be one-story in height and contain additional living
space.The proposed addition will be located seven (7)feet back from the south
side property line and 15.5 feet to 16 feet back from the rear (east)property line.
Section 36-254(d)(3)of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear
setback of 25 feet for this R-2 zoned lot.Therefore,the applicant is requesting a
variance to allow the proposed building addition with a reduced rear setback.
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO 'CON'T
Staff is supportive of the requested rear setback variance.Staff views the request
as reasonable.The proposed building addition with reduced rear setback will not
be out of character with the neighborhood.Similar rear building setbacks exist
throughout this area.The subject property backs up to an alley/access drive and
not the rear yard for a residential lot.Therefore,no separation issues will exist.
Staff believes the proposed building addition with reduced rear setback will have
no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
C.Staff Recommendation;
Staff recommends approval of the requested rear setback variance,as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (September 28,2015)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval.There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.
The vote was 4 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The application was approved.
2
z4~+5
g-for/
August 29+,2015
To Whom It May Concern:
We are writing in regards to a proposal to add an addition to the back of our house,
at the address of 3005 North Taylor,Little Rock AR 72207.Our proposal is to add 530
square feet to our house.We would like to extend our house leaving 12 feet from the back
of the new structure to our property line.This will be a one story structure and udll not
obstruct any of our neighbors'iews.The back of the addition will face the portion of our
neighbor's drive-way that is outside of their large privacy fence.We live on the side of a hill
and the positioning of the addition would make it diIIIcujt for neighbors or passers-by to
even see the structure.On the property to the east of ours that would be closest to the
addition,the house is down the hill from us and a good distance away.They would not be
able to see the addition from their house and it would barely be visible to them at the top of
their backyard.We were also hoping to save a very old and large oak tree in the middle of
our backyard.If we had to come back 13 feet,the tree would have to be cut down.
We have lived in this house for 7 years.We brought our first son home to this house.
We are having another baby in January and will need the extra space for our growing
family.The house is currently 1480 square feet and we are running out of room.We have
developed a relationship with our neighbors and enjoy living in this area.I grew up in the
neighborhood and would like to stay and raise my children here as well.
Please accept our proposal for the re-zoning request in our backyard.
Thank you,
Sarah &Davis Dodson
(501)993-5486
3005 North Taylor
Little Rock AR
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO'
File No.:Z-9082
Owner:Best Park
Applicant:Vera Chenault,Urban Garden Montessori School
Address;Southwest Corner of W.6'"Street and Main Street
Description:South side of W.6a Street,between Main and Louisiana
Streets.
Zoned:UU
Variance Requested:A variance is requested from the use provisions of Section
36-342.1 to allow an outdoor playground use in the UU zoning
district.
Justification:The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property:Playground
Proposed Use of Property:Playground
STAFF REPORT
A.Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B.~St ffA
The UU zoned property at the southwest corner of W.Sa Street and Main Street is
occupied by a paved parking lot.An access drive from W.6a Street serves as
access.A paved alley runs along the west side of the lot.Recently the west one-
third of the parking lot was fenced and converted to an outdoor playground for the
Urban Garden Montessori School located at 610 Main Street.The school is
located in the commercial building south of the playground.The playground
includes a canopy shade structure near the center of the playground area.Raised
planter beds and picnic tables are also located within the playground area.
Section 36-342.1(d)(1)of the City's Zoning Ordinance states that all uses within
the UU (Urban Use)zoning district must be inside or enclosed.Therefore,the
applicant is requesting a variance to allow a portion of the existing paved parking
lot to be used as an outdoor playground area for the Urban Garden Montessori
School which occupies the building to the south.
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
M NO 8 ON'T
Staff is supportive of the requested variance to allow the playground area as an
outdoor use at this location within the UU zoning district.Staff views the request
as reasonable.The property hase history of use as a partong lot which is also
considered an outdoor use.Additionally,the proposed outdoor use is not
commercial in nature,with the playground area to be used intermittently throughout
the day.Staff believes the proposed playground area will have no adverse impact
on the adjacent properties or the general area.
C.Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the variance to allow an outdoor use in the UU
zoning district,as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (September 28,2015)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval.There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.
The vote was 4 ayes,0 nays and 1 absent.The application was approved.
2
llRHAN GRROEN
g-cf rag&
August 28,2015
To Whom It May Concern:
I am the Head of School at Urban Garden Montessori,a new preschool and
elementary school in downtown Little Rock.We are hereby submitting a non-
residential zoning variance application,which would allow the school to use a
portion of the parking lot located at the corner of 6w Street and Main Street as a
playground.Our current plans include use of the space for raised bed
gardening as well as use of a wooden shade structure/deck on the lot.Even if
additional playground materials are added,they will be natural elements,such
as trees in containers,not traditional playground equipment.
Current UU zoning regulations for downtown Little Rock do not allow for the use
of outdoor commercial spaces for people other than exceptions made for
outdoor dining.For the health and wellbeing of our students,and to comply
with the Department of Human Services licensing regulations,the school
requires this space to allow our students the opportunity to play outdoors.With
the creation of a more livable,walkable downtown,the landscape of Main Street
is changing.Allowing for children playing and gardening in an area that was
previously only impermeable parking surface,would only improve and enhance
the neighborhood,and we respecffutly request that our application for zoning
variance be approved.
Should you have any questions or concerns,or if additional information is
needed,please do not hesitate to contact me.
Vera Chenault
Head of School
Urban Garden Montessorl
l501)712-3185
610 Main Street
Little Rock,AR 72201
www.ugmontessori.corn
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO 7
File No.:Z-9083
Owner:Mary Morton
Applicant:Deborah Thompson
Address:1011 W.6a Street
Description:South side of W.6a Street,between Chester and Ringo Streets.
Zoned:UU
Variance Requested:A variance is requested from the sign provisions of Section
36-342.1 to allow a ground-mounted sign in the UU zoning
dlstnct.
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:
No Comments
B.~St ffA
The UU zoned property at 1011 W.6a Street is occupied by a two-story brick office
building.The property is located on the south side of W.6a Street,between
Chester and Ringo Streets.There is a one-car wide driveway at the northeast
corner of the lot.The driveway extends along the east side of the building to a
small parking area within the rear yard,south of the building.
The applicant recently began construction of a ground-mounted sign in the front
yard area,as noted on the attached sketch/photo.The sign consists of three (3)
wood poles which are 6.5 feet tall.Multiple tenant names will be located between
the poles.The sign will have an area of approximately 40 square feet.The
building will contain up to eight (8)tenants.The sign is located five (5)feet back
from the front (north)property line.
Section 36-342.1(c)(11)of the City's Zoning Ordinance discourages ground-
mounted signs in the UU zoning district and states that ground-mounted signs may
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO 'CON'T
be approved by the Board of Adjustment.Therefore,the applicant is asking the
Board to approve a ground-mounted sign for this UU zoned property.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances to allow a ground-mounted sign in
the UU district Staff views the request as reasonable.The proposed sign will aid
in identrlying the businesses within this multi-tenant building.The proposed sign is
relatively small in nature,being 40 square feet in size.The maximum sign area in
office zones is 64 square feet.The proposed sign will also aid in identifying the
property to west-bound traffic along W.6e Street.Staff believes the proposed
ground-mounted sign will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the
general area.
C.Staff Recommendati n:
Staff recommends approval of the requested variances to allow a ground-mounted
sign in the UU zoning district,as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (September 28,2015)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval.There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.
The vote was 4 eyes,0 nays and 1 absent.The application was approved.
2
Moore,Monte
From:Deborah Thompson Bey &uajuajS4@gmaiicom&W7Sent:Tuesday,September 15,2015 2:21 PM
To:Moore,Monte y-yyoE3
Sept 15,2015
Cover Letter
Planning Ec Development
Mr Monte Moore
We are reguesting a ground sign for property 1011 W.6 th Little Rock,Ar 7220 k to identify multi tenant
businesses,for 8 suites with smaller panel 40 sq R ...for our advertisements on the signs
Thanks Very Much
Deborah Thompson
t
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO 8
File No.:Z-9084
Owner:Amends Smith
Applicant Susan Vaught
Address:22 Valley Crest Court
Description:East end of Valley Crest Court
Zoned;R-2
Variance Requested:A variance is requested from the fence 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:
No Comments
B.~st FA
The R-2 zoned property at 22 Valley Crest Court is occupied by a three-story
single family residence as noted on the attached site plan.The property is located
at the east end of Valley Crest Court.The property is comprised of approximately
2.5 acres.The applicant proposes to construct an eight (8)foot high wood fence
around the majority of the perimeter of the site,as noted on the attached site plan.
An eight (8)foot high fence is being proposed based on the slope of the property.
Section 36-516(e)(1)a.of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum fence
height of six (6)feet for residential zoning.Therefore,the applicant is requesting a
variance to allow eight (8)foot high fencing.
Staff is supportive of the requested fence height variance.Staff views the request
as reasonable.The proposed fence height will not be out of character with the
neighborhood.There are other eight (8)foot high fences throughout the
neighborhood.A variance was granted several years ago for an eight (8)foot high
fence around a portion of the perimeter of the subdivision.Staff believes the
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO 8 CON'T
proposed eight (8)foot high fence will have no adverse impact on the adjacent
property or the general area.
C.Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested fence height variance,as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (September 28,2015)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval.There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.
The vote was 4 eyes,0 nays and 1 absent.The application was approved.
2
Il ffLJCTE LE fY f=tff
September 2015
City Of Little Rock
Planning and Development
723 W.Markham St.
Little Rock,AR 72201-1334
We are asking for a fence variance from 6 ft to 8 ft.This height request is due to privacy reasons and the
slope of our property and the natural trees to be preserved would be best served if an gft fence is
allowed.There are several natural slopes and peaks and valleys in our property,and an 8 ft fence is the
best to ensure privacy and to maintain preservation of the natural trees and landscape surrounding our
property.
Thank you for your consideration.
Susan Vaught agent for
Amanda Smith owner of
22 Valley Crest Estates,
Little Rock,AR 72223
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO'
File Noz Z-9085
Owner/Applicant:Clydia Monroe
Address:8 Diana Drive
Description:West side of Diana Drive,south of Brierwood Drive
Zoned:R-2
Variance Requested:A variance is requested from the fence 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:
No Comments
H.~St tfA
The R-2 zoned property at 8 Diana Drive is occupied by a one-story brick and
frame single family residence.The property is located on the west side of Diana
Drive,south of Briarwood Drive.The property backs up to S.Mississippi Street.A
two-car wide driveway from Diana Drive serves as access to the property.The
rear yard is enclosed with a four (4)foot high chain-link fence.
The section of fencing which existed along the rear (west)property line was
recently damaged due to an auto accident.The shrubbery which existed along the
east side of the fence was also damaged.The applicant is requesting to replace
the four (4)foot high chain-link fence with a six (6)foot high wood fence along the
rear (west)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 street fronting property lines and
required building setback lines.Six (6)foot high fences are allowed elsewhere on
the property.Therefore,the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the six (6)
foot high wood fence along the rear (west)street fronting property line,within the
required 25 foot rear building setback.
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
ITEM NO g CON'T
Staff is supportive of the requested fence height variance.Staff views the request
as reasonable,The proposed fence height will not be out of character with the
neighborhood.There are other six (6)foot high fences to the north and south
along S.Mississippi Street.Staff believes the proposed six (6)foot high wood
fence will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
C.Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested fence height variance,as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (September 28,2015)
The applicant was present.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval.Staff informed the Board that the
application had been revised to include a six (6)foot high-wood fence down one (1)side
property line.There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.
The vote was 4 eyes,0 nays and 1 absent.The application was approved.
2
August 37,2015 -dj O jt'
Mr Monte Moore
Board ol Adjustment
City of Little Rock
723 West Markham Street
Ltttlc Rock,Arkansas 72202
REFERENCE:RESIDENTAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT,8 DIANA DR.LITTLE ROCK,
ARKANSAS 72205
Members of the Board
On August I,2015 at 5:05 A.M.there was an automobile accident on Mississippi St which boards on the
back of my property.The damage was so severe that tbe Chain Lmk fence and the mature shrubs along
that fence line was totaled destroyed,exposing my entire back yard to the tratyic and traffic noise on
Mississippi Street between Apache Street and West Markham I am unable to enjoy any privacy in my
back yard and this has leh me feeling very unsafe even in side my home.At 94 years of age and a tax
paying mtizen I want safety and security in and around my home and on my propeny.
It is my assessment that a woodeo fence may help restore my sense of &eadem and pnvacy as I move about
my property.Since this accident has robbed me of a portion of*'my quality of life*'ask that you permit
me to install the fence that I believe will be sansfactory to me.
I have made every effort to meet the regulations your records stipulate must be met before I can enter mto a
contract to acquire the fence of my choice.Included are the following:
Talk with neighbors to obtain their oblections or approval
Each neighbor has expressed their approval
Pay Filing Fees and meet filing deadlme by September 3,2015
Paid $85 Filing fee and submiucd this letter with copy of receipt
Present a Survey of the property showing the hne where the wooden fence will be placed
And obtain all zoning permits and pay fees for such permits.
It has been explained tome that your process may lake from 30 to 60 days before a final decision is
reached in this regard.I urge you to please consider my concerns carefully and renderyour decision
immediately as I am so desirous to get back to reduced noise and to enjoy the outside environment of my
home.
~M ~ae.
Clydia S.Monroe
BO
A
R
D
OF
AD
J
U
S
T
N
I
E
N
T
VO
T
E
RE
C
O
R
D
DA
T
E
-
2,
2S
2C
/
C
.t
„-
-
.
,
4
-
',
—
„.
H
ME
M
B
E
R
~b
LI
N
D
S
E
Y
PO
L
K
CA
R
O
L
Y
N
ME
H
T
A
,
RA
J
E
S
H
'/
'
TU
C
K
E
R
,
RO
B
E
R
T
WI
N
G
F
I
E
L
D
,
BR
A
D
YA
T
E
S
JE
F
F
8
bL
F
L
L
)[
s
t
~'
t
TI
M
E
IN
AN
D
TI
M
E
OU
T
LI
N
D
S
E
Y
PO
L
K
CA
R
O
L
Y
N
/
F
r/
gl
ME
H
T
A
,
RA
J
E
S
H
E
cn
e
v
TU
C
K
E
R
,
RO
B
E
R
T
WI
N
G
F
I
E
L
D
BR
A
D
S
--
II
A
YA
T
E
S
,
JE
F
F
v'
r
Me
e
t
i
n
g
Ad
j
o
u
r
n
e
d
2
~
P.
M
.
'M
/
/
AY
E
™NA
Y
E
~A
B
S
E
N
T
~A
B
S
T
A
I
N
4
ij
(
)
Ce
S
E
SEPTEMBER 28,2015
There being no further business before the Board,the meeting was adjourned at 2:30
p.m.
Date:0 Z.C
ju
I
Chairman Secretary