The URL can be used to link to this page

boa_11 28 2011LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY OF MINUTES NOVEMBER 28,2011 2:00 P.M. I.Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being five (5)in number. II.Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meetings The Minutes of the October 31,2011 meeting were approved as mailed by unanimous vote. III.Members Present:Robert Winchester,Chairman Scott Smith,Vice Chairman Rajesh Mehta Brad Wingfield Jeff Yates Members Absent:None City Attorney Present:Debra Weldon LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA NOVEMBER 28,2011 2:00 P.M. I.OLD BUSINESS: A.Z-8713 6213 Father Tribou Street 11.NEW BUSINESS: 1.Z-2324-A 7320 Cantrell Road 2.Z-4212-A 3023 N.University Avenue 3.Z-4783-A 5210 Sherwood Road 4.Z-8719 9319 Cloverhill Road 5.Z-8720 917 W.2nd Street 6.Z-8721 52 Edgehill Road 7.Z-8722 12501 Coulter Lake Road 8.Z-8723 5901 Pinnacle Valley Road NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:A File No.:Z-8713 Owner:Arthritis Foundation Applicant:John McMorran,Lewis Elliott McMorran Vaden Architects &Engineers Address:6213 Father Tribou Street Description:South side of Father Tribou Street,approximately 500 feet west of N.University Avenue Zoned:0-3 Variance Requested:A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-281 to allow a building addition with reduced front setback. 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.Landsca e and Bufferlssues: If the cost of remodeling the existing structure exceeds fifty (50)percent of the current replacement cost of the structure,a corresponding percent of the existing vehicular use area is to be brought into compliance with the City's Landscaping Ordinance. C.S~taff Anal ala: The 0-3 zoned property at 6213 Father Tribou Street is occupied by a two-story brick office building.Paved parking is located on the east and south sides of the building.Two (2)drives from Father Tribou Street serve the property.A paved access drive is located along the west side of the building.The building is one- story in height as viewed from the street,with a two-story height in the rear.The property slopes downward from front to back (north to south). The applicant proposes to construct a new front entry to the existing building.The new front entry area will include a porch area with steps and a wheelchair ramp at NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:A CON'T. the northeast corner of the building.The front porch area will be covered with a canopy roof with a narrow wing wall at the west side of the porch.The front edge of the canopy will be located nine (9)feet back from the front (north)property line. The front edge of the wheelchair ramp will be 13 feet back from the front property line.The front wall of the existing building is approximately 19 feet back from the front property line. Section 36-281(d)(1)of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front setback of 25 feet for 0-3 zoned property.Therefore,the applicant is requesting a variance from this ordinance requirement to allow the new covered entry area and wheelchair ramp with a reduced front setback. Staff is supportive of the requested front setback variance.Staff views the request as reasonable.The proposed entry area will be a much more functional entry than what exists currently on the northeast corner of the building.It will also add to the building's street appeal,as viewed from Father Tribou Street.The proposed new canopy area will approximately align with the front wall of the existing multifamily structure immediately to the west.Additionally,the front corner of the existing building immediately west of the multifamily structure has a front setback of less than 25 feet.Therefore,the reduced front setback will not be out of character with the area.Staff believes the proposed new covered entry area and wheelchair access ramp will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. D.Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested front setback variance,subject to compliance with the following conditions: 1.Compliance with the Landscape and Buffer requirements as noted in Paragraph B.of the staff report. 2.The covered entry area must remain unenclosed on its north,east and west sides. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:(October 31,2011) John McMorran and David Lewis were present,representing the application.There were no objectors present.There were three (3)Board members present.Jeff Yates announced that he would recuse on the issue,based on the fact his company was involved in the sale of the property.Staff noted that the application needed to be deferred to the November 28,2011 agenda because there were not enough members left to take action on the matter. There was a motion to defer the application to the November 28,2011 agenda.The motion passed by a vote of 3 ayes,0 nays and 2 absent.The application was deferred. NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:A CON'T. BOARD OF ADJLISTMENT:(November 28,2011) 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 (Yates). LEWIS ELLIQTT ~MCMQRRAN ~VAQEN ARCHITECTS RAGEDALE WOQOWARO ~INOCIRPQRATED ENGINEERS 501 223 9302 F93501 223.9909 WWW LEMVRW 00M September 27,2011 2-F7/5 Mr.Dana Camey City of Little Rock Dept of Neighborhoods &Planning 723 W.Markham Little Rock,AR 72201 Re:6213 Father Tribou Street Dear Mr.Carney, The potential buyers of the office building located at 6213 Father Tribou Street want to improve the overall functionality and aesthetics of the building.The existing building (see photo)is old and slightly worn.The site is very small and sloped which limits the space allowed to park and create viable parking for accessible needs.The intent for the building is to add an exterior entrance structure on the north facade that will allow the building to have a clear point of entry. The relocation of the front entrance will also allow more space to improve accessibility in both parking and travel path to the building.This design will also allow for a clear path of navel for pedestrians using the sidewalk along Father Tribou Street.We have a proposed plan and rendering included with this letter. The current building is setback from the street approximately 25'.Our request is for the Board of Adjustment to allow the construction of the proposed entrance structure to encroach into the 25'ront setback along Father Tribou Street, Should you have any questions concerning the proposed changes,please feel free to call me. Sincerely John cMorran,AIA LEED AP JM/ag Enclosures NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:1 File No.:Z-2324-A Owner:Arian Properties (Rahim Juma) Applicant:Sulaiman S.Hudda Address:7320 Cantrell Road Description:Northeast corner of Cantrell Road and Kingsrow Drive Zoned:C-3 Variance Requested:Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36- 301 and the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a building addition with reduced rear setback and which crosses a platted building line. Justification:The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property:Convenience Store with Gas Pumps Proposed Use of Property:Convenience Store with Gas Pumps STAFF REPORT A.Public Works Issues: No Comment B.Landsca e and Buffer Issues: If the proposed building expansion exceeds 10 percent of the existing gross floor area,a corresponding upgrade in landscaping will be required at time of building permit. C.S~taff Anal ala: The C-3 zoned property at 7320 Cantrell Road is occupied by a one-story commercial building which houses a convenience store.The property is located at the northeast corner of Cantrell Road and Kingsrow Drive.The convenience store use includes gas pumps with a canopy on the south side of the building.Access drives are located along both the Cantrell Road and Kingsrow Drive street frontages.Paved parking is located on the south and west sides of the building. The lot contains 40 foot platted setback lines from the south (Cantrell Road)and west (Kingsrow Drive)property lines. NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:1 CON'T. The applicant is proposing a small building addition on the west end of the building, as noted on the attached site plan.The proposed addition will be approximately 300 square feet in area and will "square-off"the angled west wall of the building. The proposed addition will be located 34 to 36 feet back from the west (Kingsrow Drive)property line,crossing the platted building line by four (4)to six (6)feet.The proposed addition will maintain the 11.2foot setback from the rear (north)property line. Section 36-301(e)(3)of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear setback of 15 feet for this C-3 zoned lot.Section 31-12(c )of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that building line encroachments be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment.Therefore,the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards to allow the building addition with reduced rear setback and which crosses a side platted building line. Staff is supportive of the requested variances.Staff views the request as reasonable.With respect to the building line variance,the property contains a 40 foot platted building setback from the west (Kingsrow Drive)property line.The Ordinance typically requires a 25 foot setback in this instance.The proposed addition will be 34 to 36 feet back from the west property line.In addition,the requested reduced rear setback of 11.2 feet represents a very minor encroachment into the required 15 foot rear setback.The rear of the building backs up to a wide access drive which serves the apartment complex immediately to the north.Staff believes the proposed building addition with reduced setbacks 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 side building line for the addition.The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk' office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. D.Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested setback and building line variances, subject to the following conditions: a.Completion of a one-lot replat reflecting the change in the side platted building line as approved by the Board. b.Compliance with the Landscape and Buffer requirements as noted in paragraph B.of the staff report. NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:1 CON'T. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:(November 28,2011) 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. UC7 /9''.OI I +I /u,z-zszg-4 SGRkQ GE RQ&u~fi7~ g N/V5k Qj ARgDiei8 LaC )084 ygb god~g,gage ./f 78~ CHMMLL U,Li~ilag gp~4g gz~g LBBCL DES&iM&+ l87 Q Kigb.GOOD Pc.ACE .8w 8DDifiorv'd KHZ Ci1Y 8+ L &&iE Rose,ARM~sezz vs~Yo sxPma AEh~i~i~+ MW S78~DEW „bS %HE Busiw~~x&v'SEYsc.oa. Udu'Lib Kiwis +P 9'Pu 8F'RodE Pl Y HPP~im&o~ ~f0 Exam&+HE 8 Vi&0 i'd., ~l~e~a Yoa, A U44i r~7R/3f ZM ~ NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:2 File No.:Z-4212-A Owner:James Patrick Matthews Applicant:James I.Lasley,III Address:3023 N University AVenue Description:Southeast Corner of N.University Avenue and Scenic Drive Zoned:R-3 Variance Requested:A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-255 to allow a building addition with a 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 Comment S.~Staff Anal afa: The R-3 zoned property at 3023 N.University Avenue is occupied by a two-story frame single family residence.The property is located at the southeast corner of N.University Avenue and Scenic Drive.There is a circular driveway within the front yard area with access from N.University Avenue and Scenic Drive.The house is located well back on the lot,approximately 58 feet back from the front (west)property line and 16 feet from the rear (east)property line.The house also maintains side setbacks of over seven (7)feet. The applicant is proposing a small building addition at the northeast corner of the residence,as noted on the attached site plan.The addition will be seven (7)feet by 17 feet in area,and constructed as a "safe room."The addition will be located 10 feet back from the rear (east)property line,and maintain the 9.5 foot setback from the north street-side property line. Section 36-255(d)(3)of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear setback of 25 feet for this R-3 zoned lot.Therefore,the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the proposed addition with a reduced rear setback. NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:2 CON'T. Staff is supportive of the requested variance.Staff views the request as reasonable.The home is located rather far back on the lot (approximately 58 feet back from the front property line)which reduces the amount of area available for any addition to the rear portion of the structure.The Ordinance calls for a minimum rear setback of 25 feet,with the main wall of the existing house being 16 feet back from the rear property line.Therefore,staff feels the proposed additional encroachment is a relatively minor issue.The house with addition will occupy a relatively small percentage of the overall lot area.Additionally,ample separation will exist between the building addition and the property to the east.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,subject to the addition being constructed to match the existing residence. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:(November 28,2011) 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. jjsLASLEYCjj, my~4z Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Little Rock,Ar 72201 Re:Request for Variance To Planning Staff and the Board of Adjustment, The applicant is requesting a variance from the required 25'ear yard building setback to allow construction of an attached safe room.The safe room's back wall will be 10'rom the rear property line.As the survey shows,the current home sits relatively deep on the lot as is,and the total footprint is well within the existing building requirements. If there are any questions concerning the proposed plan please contact me at (501)993-5874. Sincerely, James I.Lasley III 5110 Kavanangh Little Rock,Arkansas 72207 ~501-975-5550 ~Fax 501-975-5551 NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:3 File No.:Z-4783-A Owner/Applicant:Stewart and Debbie Noland Address:5210 Sherwood Road Description:Lot 73,Prospect Terrace 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 buildings 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. C.~fftaff Anal ala: The R-2 zoned property at 5210 Sherwood Road is occupied by a two-story masonry single family residence.The property is located on the north side of Sherwood Road,east of N.Harrison Street. NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:3 CON'T. There is a one-car wide driveway at the southwest corner of the lot.A brick patio is located within the front yard area.A frame garage structure is located within the rear yard area. The applicants propose to construct a two-story addition along the west and north sides of the structure,as noted on the attached site plan.The addition on the west side of the structure will consist of an unenclosed carport with living space above. The first level carport will be unenclosed on its north,south and west sides.A small balcony area will be located on the south end of the addition.The proposed addition will be located approximately three (3)feet back from the west side property line at its front corner and five (5)feet back from the west side property line at the rear corner.The addition on the back of the house,east of the carport portion,will be two-story construction. Section 36-254(d)(2)of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side setback of 6.7 feet for this R-2 zoned lot.Therefore,the applicants are requesting a variance to allow the proposed addition with a reduced side setback. Staff is supportive of the requested variance.Staff views the request as reasonable.The requested side setback for the proposed addition will not be out of character with the neighborhood.Numerous variances for this type of setback have been granted throughout this neighborhood over the past several years. Ample space will exist between the proposed addition and the west side property line to allow for maintenance of the area of addition and yard space.Staff feels that ample separation will exist between the proposed addition and the residence to the west.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:(November 28,2011) Debbie Noland was present,representing the application.There were three (3)persons present,representing the property immediately to the west,who were opposed to the application.Staff presented the application with a recommendation of support. Debbie Noland addressed the Board in support of the application.She explained that the proposed addition is typical of those found throughout the neighborhood.She explained that the proposed addition along the west end of the residence would only be constructed over the existing driveway. NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:3 CON'T. Andy Francis addressed the Board in opposition to the application.He explained that he did not think there was a hardship associated with the proposed side setback variance.He noted that there was ample room within the rear yard area to construct the addition.He stated that he was only opposed to the second floor over the carport and not just a carport with a flat roof.He explained that the second floor over the carport would loom over the property to the west.He noted that other variances granted within this neighborhood should have no bearing with respect to this case. Rajesh Mehta noted that a one-story carport would also require a side setback variance. Jeff Yates asked if the applicant had met with the next door neighbors to the west.Mr. Francis noted that the applicants had initially met with the neighbors and presented the proposed plans. Mr.Yates asked if the proposed addition could be located elsewhere on the lot.Mrs. Noland explained that other options had been explored,but the plan presented was the best option.This issue was discussed further.Mr.Yates noted that the applicants have appeared to have put much thought into the project. Vice-Chairman Smith asked about the function of the proposed addition.Mrs.Noland explained the proposed addition.Vice-Chairman Smith noted that the second floor addition over the carport could be incorporated into the addition on the rear of the house.He questioned the hardship with respect to the proposed second floor over the carport.This issue was discussed further.Vice-Chairman Smith noted that he would not support the application.Mr.Yates also noted that he would not support the application and explained.Mr.Francis noted that a previous variance had been granted for the existing accessory garage in the rear yard area.Staff noted that Mrs.Noland did have the option to revise the application. There was a motion to approve the application,as recommended by staff.The motion failed by a vote of 2 ayes,3 nays and 0 absent.The application was denied. Stewart W.Noland 5210 ~nerwood Road ~Little Rock,AR i s207 (501)666-2989 October 28,2011 Mr.Monte Moore Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Little Rock,AR 72201 Re:Zoning variance request for Stewart and Debbie Noland 5210 Sherwood Road,Prospect Terrace Lot 73,Little Rock,AR 72207 Dear Mr.Moore: This is to submit a zoning variance request for the above described property. Attached are the Application for Zoning Variance;six copies of a professional survey of the existing lot dimensions,with proposed improvements superimposed by our architect;and plans and pictures that may be useful. We are requesting a variance for our residence for approval to construct an attached second story over the existing driveway as a porte cochere.The proposed porte cochere is 12'ide (over the driveway east to west)and 34'eep (south to north),that includes a 4'eepbalconyonthefront.We are requesting this variance because it is an efficient use of space for our pie shaped,small lot.The entire project would update/improve original 1928 plumbing in a 4'x6'athroom on the back west side,and add space for laundry,retirement hobbies,computer office,and storage. The part of the construction that requires a variance request is not a ground story structure.The proposed second story structure over the existing driveway begins at a little over 3'rom the west property line,with the distance from that line increasing to 5',since the pie shaped lot widens toward the back.The structure of the neighbors'ouse on that side is such that the back of their residence moves away from the property line,further increasing the distance between that house and our proposed structure.Furthermore,that house has an 8'rivacy fence along the property line.A firewall on that side is in the proposed plans. We have made every effort with a licensed architect to design an addition that is compatible with the original character of the house,and that will honor the historical integrity of the neighborhood.Several over-the-driveway structures in place in our neighborhood at 5318 Sherwood Road,5200 Sherwood Road,and 5123 Edgewood are similar to what we propose.(Pictures are attached).We have lived at this residence for 25 years,and are aware of the historical significance of the homes in the Prospect Terrace neighborhood,and therefore have strived to propose an addition that will appropriately and favorably enhance our property and thus our neighbors'roperties. Should you have questions,please feel free to contact us at 501-666-2989.We appreciate your consideration of our zoning variance request. St art Noland NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:4 File No.:Z-8719 Owner:Henry and Lorene Wilborn Applicant:Henry Wilborn,Sr. Address:9319 Clover Hill Road Description:I ot17R,Clover Hill Place Addition Zoned:R-2 Variance Requested:A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-156 to allow construction of a detached garage with 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.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 buildings are five (5)feet or more from the property line,the requirement no longer applies tc 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. NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:4 CON'T. C.S~taff Anal ala: The R-2 zoned property at 9319 Clover Hill Road is occupied by a one-story brick single family residence.The property is located at the west end of Clover Hill Road,where the roadway terminates.There is a one-car wide driveway from Clover Hill Road,with a carport at the northeast corner of the house.The applicant recently purchased a triangular shaped parcel immediately west of his single-family lot from the State Highway Department.The property was excess 1-630 right-of- way.The applicant has platted that property and his original lot into one (1)single- family lot. The applicant is proposing to construct a 24 foot by 42 foot garage along the west property line of the replatted lot,as noted on the attached site plan.The proposed garage will be located approximately 20 feet back from the front (north)property line and three (3)feet from the west side property line.Access to the garage will be from the end of Clover Hill Road. Section 36-156 of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front setback of 60 feet for accessory buildings in R-2 zoning.Therefore,the applicant is requesting a variance from this Ordinance standard to allow the detached garage with a reduced front setback. Staff is supportive of the requested variance.Staff views the request as reasonable.The triangular shape of the recently purchased property,and the existing easement between it and the original single-family lot greatly limit where an accessory garage can be constructed on the site.Staff feels that the applicant has chosen the best location for the garage,as it backs up to 1-630 right-of-way. The interstate is at a considerably higher elevation than this single-family lot. Additionally,the garage structure will be set back farther from Clover Hill Road than the fronts of the single family residences along the roadway.Staff believes the proposed garage with reduced front 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 the following conditions: 1.Compliance with the Building Codes requirements as noted in Paragraph B.of the staff report. 2.The accessory garage structure must be constructed to match the existing residence. NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:4 CON'T. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:(November 28,2011) 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. NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:5 File No.:Z-8720 Owner:Josh E.and Becky A.McHughes Applicant:Becky McHughes Address:917 W.2nd Street Description:Lot 4,Block 254,Original City of Little Rock Zoned:UU Variance Requested:A variance is requested from the development provisions of Section 36-342.1 to allow a ground sign in the UU Zoning District. 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.S~taff Anal sls: The UU zoned property at 917 W.2nd Street is occupied by a two-story frame office building.The property is located on the south side of W.2"'treet,mid- block between Izard and Chest Streets.There is paved parking on the south side of the building,with access from a paved alley along the south property line.There is also on-street parking along W.2"~Street. The applicant is proposing to construct a small monument-type sign within the front yard area of the property,as noted on the attached site sketch.The proposed sign will be four (4)feet by five (5)feet in area and sit on a 6-inch base,for an overall height of 4.5 feet.The applicant notes that the sign will be located approximately 10 feet back form the sidewalk along W.2"'treet. NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:5 CON'T. Section 36-342.1(c)(11)of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires that ground- mounted signs within the UU zoning district be reviewed and approved as a variance by the Board of Adjustment.Therefore,the applicant is requesting a variance from the UU development standards to allow a ground-mounted sign at this location. Staff is supportive of the requested variance.Staff views the request as reasonable.The proposed sign is relatively small and well under the 64 square foot sign area as typically allowed in office zones.The proposed sign will not be out of character with the overall area.Other small monument-type signs exist, such as the one directly across W.2"Street,at the northeast corner of W.2"'nd Chester Streets.Staff believes the proposed sign will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C.Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow a ground-mounted sign,subject to compliance with the following conditions: 1.The sign must be located at least five (5)feet back from any property line. 2.A sign permit must be obtained. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:(November 28,2011) 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. 'I rie McHughes Law Firm,LLt. 917 W.Second St./P.O.Box 2180 Little Rock,AR 72203 g -f 72-~~ 1-800-441-1935 Ci~;i z i i»)501-376-9131 r'- Fax:501-374-9332 Josh E.McHughes Becky A.McHughes October 28,2011 Board of Adjustment 723 West Markham Street Little Rock,AR 72201-1334 Re:Application for Zoning Variance Dear Board: We are requesting a zoning variance for a monument sign to be located in the front of our building located at 917 W.Second Street. Our sign will be 4 feet high and 5 feet in length and made out of stone,similar to a monument type sign.It will sit on a 6'*concrete slab sitting on the ground.The wording is listed below: 917 W2"Street The McHughes Law Firm,LLC We have found that our clients have a hard time finding the firm.It is hard to read the name of the finn and address that is currently on the door.Our building does not have a good location for a sign on the structure and we feel that it looks more professional and will resemble the sign that is located in front of the other law firm across the street from our building. I have enclosed a copy of what we propose and a picture of the proposed location.We are aware that the sign is to be 5'rom the property line and as you can see from the picture,the proposed location is that where the girls are standing is approximately 10'rom the side walk. Sincerely, R4/k,*A1liu)~ Becky A cHughes Managing Partner Henry L.Wilborn,Sr. 9319 Clover Hill Rd. Little Rock,AR.72205 2 P7/)October 18,2011 Little Rock,Planning Committee Little Rock,AR. To Whom lt May Concern: I am requesting a variance in order to build an undetached garage to get these vehicles off the street,and to alleviate accidents because the neighbors across the street have hit my vehicles twice due to the hardship and inconvenience it is causing due to lack of adequate storage.I had a survey done to identify the area where I would like to have the garage located and built. The garage would be beneficial not only to me but to the neighborhood because it will improve the neighborhood and community.The variance would allow the vehicles to be taken off the street and allow traffic to be Ireer moving since the street is a dead end and people connnuously come and turnaround. Your consideration and evaluation regarding this matter is greatly appreciated.I hope you will see this as an improvement.Please feel free to contact me at (501)217-8025. Sincerely, /P~~j,j Henry L.Wilborn,Sr. Enclosures 4 'i ~, Proposed location of sign is where the ladies are standing Approximately 10 feet from side walk 4 4e~tA.. IBl I ~ Picture of sign across the street NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:6 File No.:Z-8721 Owner:Peartree,LLC (Katharine Adams) Applicant:Jack Hartsell Address:52 Edgehill Road Description:Lot 46,Edgehill Addition Zoned:R-2 Variance Requested:A variance is requested from the fence/wall provisions of Section 36-516 to allow construction of a masonry wall which exceeds the maximum height allowed.A variance is also requested from the area provisions of Section 36-156 to allow a pool 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:Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A.Public Works Issues: Public Works approves the proposed wall location,with the exception of the 42 inch section along the Cantrell Road frontage,because of sight distance issues. The 42-inch wall section needs to be located 10 feet in from the back of curb of Cantrell Road and along a portion of the radius at the west end of the property, tying into the southwest corner pin along Edgehill Road.Please contact Bill Henry at 371-1816 for details. S.~Staff Anal ata: The R-2 zoned property at 52 Edgehill Road is occupied by a one-story stucco single family residence.The property is located at the southeast corner of Edgehill Road and Cantrell Road.A circular driveway from Edgehill Road serves as access to the property.The drive extends along the east side of the house.The property slopes downward from east to west.The property is located six (6)to eight (8)feet above the grade of Cantrell Road.An eight (8)foot high wood fence is located along the rear (north)property line (along Cantrell Road)and ties into the northwest corner of the house. The applicant is proposing to remove the wood fence and construct a rock wall along the north,east and west property lines,as noted on the attached site plan. NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:6 CON'T. The wall will have a height of eight (8)feet along the north property line where the existing fence exists.From that point to the west the wall will be 42 inches in height.A six (6)foot high wall is proposed along the east side property line,with a 42 inch section between the front platted building line and the southeast corner of the property.The proposed eight (8)foot high wall will tie into the northwest corner of the house,as does the existing wood fence.The applicant is also proposing a 14 foot by 32 foot pool to be constructed in the rear yard area,also noted on the attached site plan.The pool will be located 10 feet to 20 feet back from the rear (north)property line. Section 36-516(e)(1)a.of the City's Zoning Ordinance allow a maximum fence/wall height of six (6)feet for interior fences/walls in residential zones,and four (4)feet for fences/walls located between street rights-of-way and building setback lines. Section 36-156(a)(2)c.requires a minimum setback of 60 feet for accessory structures along street side property lines.Therefore,the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance requirements to allow the eight (8)foot high wall along the north property line,and the eight (8)and six (6)foot wall sections located within the north 25 feet of the lot.The applicant is also requesting a variance to allow a reduced rear street side setback for the proposed pool. Staff is supportive of the requested variances,subject to the applicant revising the proposed location of the 42-inch wall section to conform with the Public Works requirement.The property is located several feet above the grade of Cantrell Road which has a high volume of traffic.The proposed wall will aid in reducing the noise level from Cantrell Road.The proposed wall height will not be out of character with other residential walls the Board has allowed in years past along Cantrell Road to reduce road noise level for the residences.Staff will attempt to meet with the applicant prior to the public hearing to work out the Public Works issues.With respect to the setback variance for the proposed pool,the pool will be located within the rear yard area which backs up to Cantrell Road.It will be an in- ground structure with little to no visibility from adjacent properties.It will not be out of character with other accessory structures in this neighborhood.Staff believes the proposed fence (if revised to Public Works standards)and pool will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C.Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested wall height and setback variances, subject to compliance with the Public Works requirements as noted in paragraph A.of the staff report. NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:6 CON'T. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:(November 28,2011) 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. 2-P7z-/ QH~w~~~S ~It 1 W~L~W jc&4~-'CXi ~(mx.P P @AM'~+g~~~5g pg~ W ~4.mt=~~~+a.~a ~m ~~ AM.~k +~~~~ ~~+c yce2 ~~4k-e WAg+ +~~ NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:7 File No.:Z-8722 Owner:David Wade Applicant:Jerry Victory Address:12501 Coulter Lake Road Description:Lot 1R,Castle Valley Subdivision Zoned:R-2 Variance Requested:Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36- 156 and the easement provisions of 36-11 to allow construction of accessory buildings with reduced front and rear setbacks and which encroach into a utility easement. 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 ~Central Arkansas Water —No objection to encroachment ~Little Rock Wastewater —No objection to encroachment ~Centerpoint Energy —No objection to encroachment ~Entergy —No objection to encroachment ~AT 8 T —No objection to encroachment C.~fftaff Anal ata: The R-2 zoned property at 12501 Coulter Lake Road is occupied by a one-story frame single family residence with basement.The property is located at the southeast corner of Coulter Lake Road and Bunch Road.A two-car wide driveway from Bunch Road serves as access to the property.A one-story frame (12 foot by 14.7 foot)accessory storage building is located along the rear (east)property line, near the southeast corner of the property.An in-ground pool (16 feet by 33 feet)is in the process of being constructed within the south half of the property. NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:7 C N'T. The recently constructed accessory storage building is located 1.9 feet to 2.1 feet back from the east (rear)property line.It extends/encroaches into an existing 10 foot wide utility easement which runs along the east property line.The storage building is located 38 feet back from the south side property line.The pool which is being constructed is located 52 feet back from the front (west)property line and 34 feet from the south side property line.A retaining wall with planter beds is located on the north,east and west sides of the pool area. Section 36-156(a)(2)c.of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front setback of 60 feet for accessory structures in R-2 zoning.Section 36-156(a)(2)f. requires a minimum rear setback of three (3)feet for accessory structures.In addition,Section 36-11(f)requires that easement encroachments be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment.Therefore,the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards to allow the proposed pool with a reduced front setback and the accessory storage building with a reduced rear setback and an encroachment into a utility easement. Staff is supportive of the requested variances.Staff views the request as reasonable.The property consists of two (2)single family lots which were replatted into one (1)lot.The overall lot massing is very minimal.The proposed 52 foot front setback for the pool represents only a slight encroachment into the required setback,as does the proposed rear setback for the storage building. Additionally,all of the public utility companies have approved the storage building's encroachment into the utility easement along the east property line.The property backs up to a wooded area to the east.Also,the storage building aligns with other similar size accessory buildings on the lots to the south.Staff believes the requested pool and storage building with reduced setbacks and easement encroachment will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. D.Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested variances,subject to a building permit being obtained for all construction. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:(November 28,2011) 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. David Wade 2-f7 2 w 12605 Coulter Lake Rd.Mabelvale,AR 72103 (501)888-1452 October 18,2011 Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Little Rock,AR 72201 Dear Board; I am requesting variances per the attached plat for two projects: 1.A small storage building that was built before I had the knowledge that a permit was required.I built part of it on an easement on the back side of my lot,next to the woods.Please see the attached survey.I have secured a release from all utilities and copies of same are attached. 2.Purposed pool also shown the survey needs to be located approximately as shown due to the retaining wall that was built to level the lot.The finished pool size is 16'x33'. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. David Wade NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:8 File No.:Z-8723 Owner/Applicant:Michael Akel Address:5901 Pinnacle Valley Road Description:East side of Pinnacle Valley Road,north of Cantrell Road 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: 1.The fence shall be placed 45 feet,half of the right-of-way,off of the centerline of Pinnacle Valley Road.Pinnacle Valley Road is designated as a minor arterial according to the City's Master Street Plan,and has a 90 foot right-of- way associated with it.New fences should not be located within street rights- of-way or future rights-of-way. S.~Staff Anal ala The R-2 zoned property at 5901 Pinnacle Valley Road is occupied by a single family residence which is located over 100 feet back from the roadway.An access drive from Pinnacle Valley Road serves as access to the residence.The property is comprised of 5.06 acres.The tract contains a 125 foot front plated building line. The applicant is proposing to construct a six (6)foot high wrought iron fence to enclose a portion of the property around the house,as noted on the attached site plan.The fence is proposed to be located three (3)feet inside the front property line.A six (6)foot high gate with columns will be located across the driveway area. The fence will be located approximately 25 feet back from the edge of the Pinnacle Valley Road pavement. 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 line and a street right-of-way.Therefore,the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the NOVEMBER 28,2011 ITEM NO.:8 CON'T. six (6)foot high fence between the 125 foot front platted building line and the Pinnacle Valley Road right-of-way. Staff is supportive of the requested fence height variance,subject to the fence being moved further back as required by Public Works.Pinnacle Valley Road has a future right-of-way requirement of 90 feet (45 feet from center line).Therefore, the applicant needs to locate the fence at least 45 feet back from the existing centerline of Pinnacle Valley Road in order to not be within the future right-of-way area.The survey submitted by the applicant does not show the centerline for the roadway,but staff estimates the fence will need to be moved back approximately 10 additional feet.Otherwise,staff believes the proposed fence will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or general area. C.Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested fence height variance,subject to compliance with the Public Works requirement as noted in paragraph A.of the staff report. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:(November 28,2011) Keith Wingfield was present,representing the application.There were no objectors present.Staff presented the application with a recommendation of approval.Brad Wingfield noted that he was recusing from this issue. Keith Wingfield addressed the Board in support of the application.He described the proposed fence.He discussed the setback of the fence from the centerline of Pinnacle Valley Road,and noted that the fence would comply with the Public Works requirement. Vice-Chairman Smith explained that he could not support six (6)foot high fences in front yard areas. Jeff Yates asked about the fence construction.Mr.Wingfield noted that the fence would be fabricated,painted steel with finials.He noted that there would be a single slide gate across the existing driveway. There was a motion to approve the application as recommended by staff.The motion passed by a vote of 3 ayes,1 nay,0 absent and 1 recusal (Wingfield).The application was approved. ! z'V~ +h'4 4!'fF~+g~'1~&7237'%&I' ~l&E ~oeW~++ /A~/oSieC 7e 8b'i'eg~~Ejr&~ NM&kT'/C~AJ I WC& 5'pffft'4i4d'Y +~ME, FoR S'be.&r"~t-/A'Fz~ez / @~%6ius.~~.NS....Q..~7.....~~de...2Mb /any .~~A.6...~.n Peg)P)h vi,9i „La ';~i~—(e.P ~s~i'~g ski'rA f J'lSo d r~Aeiylf, TAP ~~cF 4 /L L-/96 Zs'FAN pg~&mgE Vzc,(gy P~ fgvfF~TV'..l-i'..(5 ~PWk1~hpy .g2, Pievm~V&L.t6g 8 0, N i.RE. 5%/giniitlpc~pj's&~ l-.l.rN&/cv ..R4 v~zz.g Qo3~3V'Y-5Hz I 0 0 C LL ~o j ~o UJ KO LIe I-0 D U 03o 4 G3 0 mp0IuPQ2ZUJ& (0 I LI LU —g LU 0 -&+UJ -U-gPI Ciu «(P I 0 U- g LU UJ 0 g 4 LLIgUJLLI IJJ UJ &~Z U C Z Z IU gV5LJ6~r+ZZI—2 ZUJozxg00&-I-Z g 0 0 &- November 28,2011 There being no further business before the Board,the meeting was adjourned at 2:40 p.m. Date: Chairman Secretary