boa_02 25 2013LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SUMMARY OF MINUTES
FEBRUARY 25, 2013
2:00 P.M.
Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being five (5) in number.
Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meetings
The Minutes of the January 28, 2013 meeting were
approved as revised by unanimous vote.
III. Members Present: Jeff Yates, Chairman
Scott Smith, Vice Chairman
Rajesh Mehta
Robert Winchester
Brad Wingfield
Members Absent: None
City Attorney Present: Debra Weldon
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
AGENDA
FEBRUARY 25, 2013
2:00 P.M.
OLD BUSINESS:
No Old Business
II. NEW BUSINESS:
1. Z -6638-B 2401 N. Pierce Street
2. Z-8843 2801 N. University Avenue
3. Z-8844 1323 S. Tyler Street
FEBRUARY 25, 2013
ITEM NO.: 1
File No.: Z -6638-B
Owner: Matthew and Melissa Katz
Applicant: Jim Yeary
Address: 2401 N. Pierce Street
Description: Lot 6 and the south Y2 of Lot 5, Block 31, Park View Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254
to allow a building addition with reduced side and rear setbacks.
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 Comment.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 2401 N. Pierce Street is occupied by a two-story frame
single family residence. The property is located at the northeast corner of N.
Pierce Street and W" Street. A two -car wide driveway from W" Street serves as
access to a carport on the east end of the residence. The carport portion of the
residence is one-story in height. The residence is located approximately 19 feet
back from the rear (east) property line and 5.5 feet back from the south side
property line.
The applicant proposes to convert the carport portion of the house to a garage with
a second floor and extend the addition approximately 12.5 feet further back toward
the rear (east) property line. The addition will have a rear setback of approximately
6.5 feet and maintain the existing 5.5 foot south side setback. Please see the
attached site plan and elevation sketches for additional information on the
proposed addition.
FEBRUARY 25, 2013
ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T.)
Section 36-254(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side
setback of seven (7) feet for this R-2 zoned lot. Section 36-254(d)(3) requires a
minimum rear setback of 25 feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances
from these ordinance standards to allow the building addition with reduced side
and rear setbacks. In 1999, the Board of Adjustment approved variances to allow
the carport/storage portion of the residence to be re -constructed as an accessory
building with reduced setback/separation. In 2003, the Board of Adjustment
approved variances to allow the accessory carport/storage structure to be attached
to the principal structure with reduced side and rear setbacks.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff views the request as
reasonable. The requested rear and side setbacks will not be out of character with
other houses in this immediate area. Most of the houses along Hawthorne Road
which back up to W" Street have reduced rear setbacks, many being similar to the
addition proposed by the applicant. Other residences scattered throughout the
neighborhood to the east, west and north have reduced rear and side setbacks,
some of which are nonconforming and some which were approved by the Board of
Adjustment. Additionally, the house in question is set back slightly over 39 feet
from the front (west) property line. Therefore, the house is located 14 feet further
back on the lot than required by ordinance (25 foot minimum front setback
required). This places more of a limit on the available rear yard building area. The
overall structure's footprint (with proposed additions) occupies only approximately
33 percent of the total lot area. Staff believes the proposed addition with reduced
setbacks will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general
area. The applicant is also proposing an addition on the north side of the
residence and a swimming pool in the rear yard area, both of which comply with
ordinance requirements.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested setback variances as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (February 25, 2013)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the application
with a recommendation of approval, with conditions.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved, as recommended by staff with a
vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent and 1 recusal (Smith).
Yeary Lindsey Architects -41
29 January, 2013
Dana Carney
Little Rock Board of Adjustments
Planning and Development
723 West Markham Road
Little Rock, AR
Re: Matthew & Melissa Katz - Variance Request
2401 N. Pierce Street
Little Rock, AR
Dana,
Please find attached our submittal to the Little Rock Board of Adjustments requesting a rear yard
variance for the property located at 2401 N. Pierce Street.
The Katz wish to make extensive improvements to the property which include a new addition to the
current structure. The new two story construction will include adding a third car to the existing carport
and converting it to an enclosed garage. A second level is planned to be added within the roof of the
garage.
The variance is requested due to the configuration of the existing home and the carport access from
V Street. Since the house is adjacent to the west side of the carport, the only option is to extend the
proposed garage addition to the east.
In an effort to blend the addition into its surroundings, similar materials and architectural features
have been incorporated in the design.
A swimming pool is also planned for the back yard. In an effort to save a mature tree, the majority of
the pool is presently located in the rear yard setback. As planned, the pool and garage would exceed
30% of the area of the rear yard setback.
If you have any questions or need further information, please feel free to contact me.
We appreciate your consideration of our request.
Sincerely,
Im Ye�,AIA
3416 Old Cantrell Road I Little Rock, AR 72202 1501-372-59401 FX: 501-663-0043
FEBRUARY 25, 2013
ITEM NO.: 2
File No.: Z-8843
Owner: Duda Properties
Applicant: Eugene P. Levy
Address: 2801 N. University Avenue
Description: Lot 6 Block 13, Park View Addition
Zoned: R-3
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-255
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: Vacant Single Family Residence
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comment.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-3 zoned property at 2801 N. University Avenue is occupied by a one-story
frame single family residence. The property is located at the northeast corner of N.
University Avenue and "Z" Street. The property slopes downward from front to
back (west to east). A driveway from "Z" Street has served as access to the
property. The rear portion of the house has been removed in conjunction with a
construction project.
The applicant has obtained a building permit to add a second level to the existing
house and extend the structure toward the rear (east) property line, as noted on
the attached site plan. As part of the construction project, the applicant proposes
to add a covered, unenclosed front porch to the structure, also noted on the
attached plan and elevations. The proposed porch will be seven (7) feet by 18 feet
in size and be located 22.5 feet back from the front (west) property line.
FEBRUARY 25, 2013
ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.)
Section 36-255(d)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front
setback of 25 feet for this R-3 zoned lot. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a
variance to allow the proposed front porch with a reduced front setback.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the request as
reasonable. The proposed 22.5 foot front setback for the proposed porch will not
be out of character with several other residences to the north and south, along the
east side of N. University Avenue. There are several other residences to the north
and south with front setbacks, to porches and front walls, of less than 25 feet. The
residence two (2) lots to the north of the subject property has a front porch with a
similar setback to the one proposed. Additionally, the proposed front setback
represents only a 10 percent encroachment into the required front setback. Also,
the proposed front porch will be unenclosed which will lessen any visual impact the
porch may have on surrounding properties. Staff believes the proposed porch with
reduced front setback 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
porch addition remaining unenclosed on its north, south and west sides.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (February 25, 2013)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the application
with a recommendation of approval, with conditions.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved, as recommended by staff with a
vote of 5 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent.
Department of Planning and Development�7--
Attn:
Attn: Mr. Monty Moore `{3
723 W. Markham
Little Rock, AR, 72201
Re: Board of Adjustment application for variance for 2801 N. University Ave
Dear Sir:
Regarding the residence at 2801 N University Ave, please consider this request for a Variance of the
Front Yard setback to allow the construction of a functional front porch. An enclosed drawing and
survey illustrates the proposed design.
This project is a major remodeling of an existing one story house by adding a 2"d floor, remodeling the
first floor, and removing the east wing of the house so a new garage can be added.. The final product
will be a fine 3000sq ft residence with 4 bedrooms, 2.75 baths, family room, etc. We envision a
craftsman style truss spanned front porch be added that will be neighborhood —friendly. It will be 7 ft
wide x 18 ft long, so it can have space for a swing, and seating, providing a traditional setting, where
people can sit and visit. The porch must be about 7 ft wide in order to accommodate this use; anything
less and it cannot accommodate seating. To accommodate the required depth, the new porch will
project 2.5 ft into the front yard setback. This will make the setback at the porch 22.5 ft, which is only a
10% encroachment of the ordnance setback Such encroachment should not be visually recognizable, as
the street curb is about 16 ft beyond the property line and there is a low rock wall which is 5 to 7 ft
outside the front property line . The justification for this waiver is to allow us to create a functional
"sitting type front porch' that is in character with porches in established neighborhoods throughout the
City, (as compared to just a canopy over the front door). This type porch will make the house more
friendly, and a nice porch should certainly improve the value of adjacent real estate.
The Owner has already discussed the proposed project with some of the immediate neighbors, and they
support the project, as the existing house is out of step with the quality of the area, and the work we
propose will be a positive aesthetic enhancement for University Avenue frontage.
Thank you for considering this waiver to the Ordnance.
Sincerely,
Eugene P. Levy, Agent for D da Properties
Cromwell Architects Engineers
101 S. Spring Street, Little Rock, AR, 72201
501-372-2900
FEBRUARY 25, 2013
ITEM NO.: 3 ;
File No.: Z-8844
Owner/Applicant: Kellye D. Neal
Address: 1323 S. Tyler Street
Description: Lot 7, Block 8, Oak Forest Addition
Zoned: R-3
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-255
to allow a deck 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 Comment.
B. Building Codes Issues:
The deck construction does not comply with the 2006 Building Codes
requirements. If approved, structural alterations must be completed to meet code
requirements. Contact Arnold Coleman at 371-4833 for details.
C. Staff Analysis:
The R-3 zoned property at 1323 S. Tyler Street is occupied by a one-story brick
and frame single family residence. The property is located at the northeast corner
of S. Tyler Street and W. 14th Street. An alley right-of-way is located along the
rear (east) property line. A small storage building is located at the southeast
corner of the lot. The property slopes downward from front to back (west to east).
A six (6) foot high wrought iron fence encloses the rear yard area.
The applicant recently constructed a wood deck along the north side of the
residence. The deck runs the entire length of the house with landings/stairs
leading down to the carport structure. A portion of the deck is covered, with the
uncovered portion extending to the north side property line. A six (6) foot high
fence is located on top of the deck structure. The front (west) edge of the deck is
FEBRUARY 25, 2013
ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T.)
approximately 14 inches above grade, with the northeast corner of the deck being
three (3) to 3.5 feet above grade. The fence on top of the deck has a height
ranging from six (6) feet at the northwest corner of the deck to approximately eight
(8) feet at the deck's northeast corner, as viewed from the neighboring property to
the north. The fence has a consistent height of six (6) feet as viewed from the
newly constructed deck. A building permit was obtained for only the covered deck
portion of the overall project. Please see attached site plan sketch and photos for
additional information.
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 the deck construction with a reduced side setback.
Staff is not supportive of the requested side setback variance. Staff cannot
support the deck construction extending to the north side property line. Staff feels
that the deck structure should be located at least 18 inches back from the north
side property line. This will allow a minimal area for the deck and yard to be
maintained without encroaching onto the adjacent property to the north.
Additionally, a portion of the deck framing outside the fenced portion is unfinished
and, in staffs opinion, creates an eyesore for the property owner immediately to
the north. Staff believes that the deck being moved back to at least 18 inches from
the north side property line, and finished to meet building codes requirements, is a
reasonable compromise in this situation.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the side setback variance, as requested.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (February 25, 2013)
Doyle Reeves and Kellye Neal were present, representing the application. There were no
objectors present. Staff presented the application with a recommendation, of denial.
Doyle Reeves addressed the Board in support of the application. He explained that the
retaining wall along the north property line created a water problem for Ms. Neal's property.
He explained that the deck construction was done to create a usable outdoor area due to the
water problem. He noted that the deck did not worsen the water issue.
Vice -Chairman Smith questioned how the deck related to the water issue. Mr. Reeves
explained that the deck created an outdoor space where the water problem existed. There
was a brief discussion of how the deck was constructed to its current size and the grade of
the property. Mr. Reeves noted that filling the low area would cause water damage to Ms.
Neal's house.
FEBRUARY 25, 2013
ITEM NO.: 3 (CONT)
Chairman Yates asked if a contractor was used for the deck construction. Ms. Neal stated
that a contractor was used. Chairman Yates asked if the deck was constructed to City code.
Mr. Reeves stated that he did not know. Chairman Yates explained staff's recommendation
and questioned if the deck could be reduced by 18 inches without taking the entire deck
down. This issue was briefly discussed. Mr. Reeves stated that cutting 18 inches off the
deck would be very expensive. Rajesh Mehta asked if the deck could be reduced in size.
Mr. Reeves noted that it could be done. The deck construction was discussed further.
Robert Winchester asked about the deck's foundation. Mr. Reeves stated that the deck was
supported by 4x4's and 6x6's in concrete. Brad Wingfield asked if there was enough
clearance under the deck to move the supports back 18 inches. This issue was briefly
discussed. Vice -Chairman Smith questioned staff about ordinance allowances with respect
to finished grade. The issue was briefly discussed.
Vice -Chairman Smith asked if the Board could support the deck construction if the north side
of the deck looked like a finished fence. This issue was discussed. The issue of deferring
the application was discussed.
Mr. Reeves amended the application stating that a finished fence face will be provided on the
north side of the fence on top of the deck and that the lower portion of the deck (below the
fence) would have a finished appearance to the ground. The Board did not ask staff's
opinion of the applicant's amendment and staff did not change its recommendation.
There was a motion to approve the side setback variance, as amended by the applicant. The
motion passed by a vote of 3 ayes, 2 nays and 0 absent. The amended application was
approved.
Staff noted for the record that the approved side setback variance did not endorse allowing
the applicant to encroach onto the adjacent property to the north to do the construction.
-T4 --43
Variance Request for Lot 7 Block 8; Oak Forest Addition �S L/ Ll
Kellye D. Neal
I'm requesting a variance for Lot 7 Block 8 in the Oak Forest Addition. The variance request is
regarding construction of a raised deck on the east side of an existing single dwelling home.
The code violation in question is regarding encroachment of the deck in the final 5 feet to the
property line. Code allows raised deck structures to be built to property line when less than 12
inches in height, decks over 12 inches in height must not come within 5 feet of property line.
In years past the adjacent property owner brought in fill dirt and added a retaining wall which
heightened the properties topology. The changes in property topology resulted in a change in
water shed on my side of the retaining wall causing my side to always be damp and an unusable
space for living or landscaping.
When considering creating a new outdoor living space my first choice was concrete, this would
have allowed me under code to extend to the property line. My contractor advised me that
due to the water shed issues using concrete would have resulted in possible flooding of my
homes crawl space in high rain situations, standing water resulting in mosquitoes and possible
mold. For this reason I chose to proceed with a raised wood deck which allows the watershed
to continue as it exists today. Where this doesn't correct the watershed issues caused by the
adjacent property owner, it does however allow this space to be usable for my family.
The complete structure is 16 x 52; the only portion of the structure in violation is a 5 x 32
section. The reason this section is in violation is that it exceeds 12 inches in height. This is due
to changes in the topology. The only way to be compliant is to drop the deck to 12 inches in
this section which would cause this portion of the deck to be unusable due to its irregular
shape.
I believe a variance is in order due to changes made to the topology which resulted in water
shed issues to my property. I believe that my structure as it stands is a reasonable design based
on topology and adjacent structures and in no way adversely affects the property owner
adjacent or otherwise.
0
W
W
0
W
a
U.
0
a
0
co
rqm
o
I�
February 25, 2013
There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 2:54 p.m.
oa,, s/a5laol3
(1W(1wh?z;- /I, L..'`'"
-I (- '%
Chairman Sec to