boa_08 29 2011LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SUMMARY OF MINUTES
AUGUST 29, 2011
2:00 P.M.
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 July 25, 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
AUGUST 29, 2011
2:00 P.M.
I. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Z-8673 9412 Crofton Drive
B. Z-8680 9921-9925 Lanehart Road
II. NEW BUSINESS:
1.
Z -4343-Y
8201 Ranch Blvd,
2.
Z -5885-C
7321 Cantrell Road
3.
Z -6115-A
213 Wedgewood Road
4.
Z -8578-A
6201 Colonel Glenn Road
5.
Z-8687
5014 Club Road
6.
Z-8688
525 W. Capitol Avenue
7.
Z-8689
7620 Baseline Road
8.
Z-8690
2012 W. 19th Street
9.
Z-8691
2114 N. Palm Street
-t
r
IS Iddissi
08 810Aa3934 2$
■
' A
v,
7,""
E
s.
a)
U
-t
r
IS Iddissi
08 810Aa3934 2$
3
MOaaV9 NHO
0a
oa
o � oa sl0ays i-�
a w Q �
7,""
s.
wu j
MrOOE
AVMHCJM `-A
3
MOaaV9 NHO
0a
oa
o � oa sl0ays i-�
a w Q �
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: A
File No.: Z-8673
Owner/Applicant: Diana Thomas
Address: 9412 Crofton Drive
Description: West side of Crofton Drive, South of Tedburn Drive
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-551
to allow a sign which exceeds the maximum sign area 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:
Public Works does not support the sign being located within the public right-of-
way in this residential neighborhood.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 9412 Crofton Drive is occupied by a one-story brick and
frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide driveway from Crofton
Drive at the southeast corner of the property. The applicant recently placed a
ground -mounted sign in the front yard of the residence advertising "Arkansas Real
Estate Professionals.Com". The sign is located within a landscaped area on the
north side of the driveway. The sign is 4 feet — 5 inches tall, with four (4) square
feet (two(2) feet by two (2) feet) of sign area. The sign is located approximately
seven (7) inches back from the curb edge of Crofton Drive. The applicant notes
that the sign is required by the Arkansas Real Estate Commission because she is
a licensed broker.
Section 36-551 of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum sign area of one
(1) square foot for signs in single family residential zones. This section also allows
said signs to only contain the name and address of the occupant; no commercial
message(s). Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the larger
sign at her residence.
Staff does not support the requested variance. Staff feels that the proposed sign is
too large for a residential lot, and does not meet the intent of the ordinance in
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: A (CON'T.)
allowing some signage in residential zones. This sign containing commercial
advertising is out of character with the neighborhood. The applicant notes that the
Arkansas Real Estate Commission requires a real estate broker to have a sign at
the place of business. Staff checked with the City Collector's office and found that
the applicant does not have a home occupation permit to operate a business from
this residence. Additionally, the sign is located entirely in the public right-of-way of
Crofton Drive, only seven (7) inches inside the edge of curb. Public Works does
not support the sign being located within the right-of-way. If the applicant were to
obtain a home occupation permit, staff could support a one (1) square foot sign
containing the name of her company, located on or next to the front door of the
residence. Staff believes the sign is too commercial in nature, and fails to maintain
the residential character of the single family property and the neighborhood in
general.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the requested sign variance.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JUNE 27, 2011)
Staff noted that the applicant submitted a letter to staff on June 16, 2011 requesting the
application be deferred to the July 25, 2011 agenda. The applicant was not able to
attend the June 27, 2011 meeting and had not completed notifications to surrounding
property owners. Staff supported the deferral request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the July 25, 2011 agenda
with a vote of 5 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JULY 25, 2011)
Staff informed the Board that the application needed to be deferred to the August 29,
2011 agenda based on the fact that the applicant failed to complete notifications to the
surrounding property owners. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and
deferred to the August 29, 2011 agenda with a vote of 5 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 29, 2011)
The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of denial. Staff noted that the applicant was
informed that the application might be discussed and voted on in her absence. Staff
briefly described the history of the application, noting that the application had been
deferred twice. This issue was discussed briefly.
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: A (CON'T )
There was a motion to approve the requested sign variance application.
Vice -Chairman Smith discussed the issue of another deferral of the application. This
issue was discussed further.
Chairman Winchester called for a vote on the previous motion. The motion failed by a
vote of 0 ayes, 5 nays and 0 absent. The application was denied.
Staff suggested the Board grant the applicant 30 days to remove the sign from the
property. A motion to that effect was made. The motion passed with a vote of 5 ayes, 0
nays and 0 absent, requiring the sign to be removed by September 29, 2011.
'May 23, 2011 ::1:4 QVIR 14
Board of Adjustment Members
Attn: Monty Moore
723 Nest Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
RE: 2'X 2' Realty Sign at 941.2 Crofton Drive, Little Rock, AR 72209
To whom it may concern:
My name is Diana Thomas and I have been a Southwest Little Rock property owner since 1997 and the
former elected Neighborhood Association President for the West Baseline Neighborhood Association.
I am respectfully submitting, this letter of request for my realty sign. to be approved by the Board of
Adjustments to permit my sign to continue to hang in my front yard. Please review the following .
precautions 1 have taken to ensure the sign is a benefit and not a nuisance of any kind for the
neighborhood:
3. I am an independent Broker. I do not have any realtors signed with my company. I still work a
job with Hewlett Packard in the Contracts department; therefore there is no traffic to my home or
the neighborhood.
2. It is a requirement by the state of Arkansas Real Estate Commission that a sign be placed at the
place of business in order to be a licensed Broker.
3, l had the sign professionally made by fast Signs to ensure it is appealing and professional.
(Please see attached photo)
4. 1 hired a landscaping company to construct flower beds with mulch and flowers to put around the
sign for curb appeal. and since I. am. an active participant in the community for city beautiful and
neighborhood clean. ups 1 tryto keep my yard manicured. (Please see attached photo)
'Che sign itself is 2' X 2' 1 was unaware that the zoning ordinance is P X 1' (my current sign is only an
increase of I'). The arm post that it hangs on is 4'5" tall.
Most of my long time neighbors love the sign and have complimented me on. it and one of my neighbors
actually helped to install it.Please allow my sign to continue to be displayed. 1 am an advocate for
neighborhood beautification and responsibility "one neighbor to another".
If you need any additip.rial-igformation or wish to speak with me please don't hesitate to contact me at
501.-960-73.3.�90. r
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: B
File No.: Z-8680
Owner/Applicant: Stormy Cubb
Address: 9921-9925 Lanehart Road
Description: Southeast corner of Lanehart Road and Honeysuckle Lane
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: An administrative appeal is requested regarding the nonconforming
use status of the buildings on the property.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter and
separate packet of supporting documents.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residence and non-residential buildings
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residence and commercial use for one (1) of
the non-residential buildings.
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 9921-9925 Lanehart Road is occupied by a two-story
brick, rock and frame single family residence and five (5) non-residential buildings.
The buildings on the property are described as follows (use attached sketch for
building number):
Building 1 — single family residence (9925 Lanehart Road)
Building 2 — one-story frame and metal structure
Building 3 — one-story frame structure
Building 4 — one-story metal structure (9923 Lanehart Road)
Building 5 — one-story frame structure
Building 6 — one-story metal structure (9921 Lanehart Road)
According to planning staff records, Building 2 previously had a nonconforming
zoning status of C-1, based on the fact that a ceramics shop (Ashmore Ceramics)
occupied this building and used Buildings 3 and 5 for storage. The nonconforming
status for these buildings was revoked, as the buildings have been vacant (no
business) since at least 2006. Building 6 had a nonconforming status of 1-2, based
on the fact that a pallet business occupied the building. The nonconforming status
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: B (CON'T.)
for this building was revoked on June 9, 2011, based on the fact that the building
had been vacant (no business) for at least six (6) months. Staff has no record of a
nonconforming status for Building 4. Sections 36-151 thru 36-153 of the City's
Zoning Ordinance provide criteria for the regulation of nonconforming uses. A
copy of these sections is provided for Board review as part of a separate packet of
information.
The property owner, Stormy Cubb, is appealing staff's determination that Building
6 (9921 Lanehart Road) has lost its nonconforming status. Ms. Cubb contends
that Building 6 was occupied by the pallet business (King of Pallets) when she
purchased the property in 2008/2009 until January, 2010. She notes that a
construction business (J.L. Reed Construction) occupied the building from March,
2010 to December, 2010, and that a countertop business has occupied the
building for all of 2011. Ms. Cubb has submitted supporting documents in an
attempt to prove that the nonconforming status of Building 6 should still exist. The
documents are provided for Board review as a separate packet of information. Ms.
Cubb notes that Buildings 2, 3,4 and 5 have no nonconforming zoning status,
based on the fact that no business has utilized the buildings for over six (6)
months, and in some cases for several years. Ms. Cubb occupies Building 1 (9925
Lanehart Road) as her personal residence. Ms. Cubb has informed staff that it is
her intention to file a PZD (Planned Zoning Development) rezoning for the entire
property in the near future.
The Board is asked to determine if the nonconforming zoning status of Building 6
(9921 Lanehart Road) should still be in effect, thereby allowing the countertop
business to continue to occupy the structure.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JULY 25, 2011)
Stormy Cubb was present, representing the application. There were no objectors
present. Staff presented the application.
Stormy Cubb addressed the Board in support of the application. She explained that she
had been unable to obtain statements from Entergy showing where past tenants had
occupied Building 6.
Vice -Chairman Smith asked about the 2011 date on the 2009 business license of "King
of Pallets". Ms. Cubb stated that it was the date when the copy of the license was
printed by the City. Jeff Yates noted that it was the reprint date.
Jeff Yates asked about the last tenant in the building prior to the current tenant. Ms.
Cubb noted that it was J.L. Reed Construction, who occupied the building until March
2011.
Vice -Chairman Smith asked about the lease agreement for the construction business.
He noted that more information was needed to prove the nonconforming status. In
response to a question, Ms. Cubb noted that Edwin Valencia was the current tenant.
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: B (CON'T)
There was additional discussion regarding the information submitted by Ms. Cubb. Mr.
Yates noted that more information was needed to determine the nonconforming status.
He asked if deferring the application would cause Ms. Cubb a hardship. She indicated
that it would not.
There was a general discussion regarding changing nonconforming uses from one (1)
to another. Chairman Winchester questioned staff on nonconforming procedural issues.
Mr. Yates noted that he could support continuation of the nonconforming status of
Building 6 if Ms. Cubb obtained a letter from the previous tenant stating the building was
occupied after December, 2010.
Rajesh Mehta asked Ms. Cubb when she planned on filing a PZD rezoning request for
the entire property. Ms. Cubb noted that she hoped to file it in four (4) to six (6) months.
There was a motion to defer the application to the August 29, 2011 Agenda. The
motion passed by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent. The application was deferred.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 29, 2011)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to the
September 26, 2011 agenda. Staff noted that the applicant needed additional time to
obtain documents to support her case. Staff supported the deferral request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the September 26, 2011
agenda, as recommended by staff, with a vote of 5 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent.
Storrny Cubic
9925 Lanehart Rd
Little Rock, AR 72204
501-407-0601
skcubb@aol.corn
June 27, 2011
Department of Planning & Development
City of Little Rock
723 West Markham Street
lsr Floor
Little Rock, AR 72201
To Whom It May Concern:
The Non -Conforming C-1 status on the property located at 9921 Lanehart Road
(a warehouse on the same parcel as 9925 Lanehart Rd) should stili be existent
because the property was never vacant over 6 months.
Histo
From 1998 to 2010 this property was classified and functioned under the R2 NC
C1 status.
From 1998 to 2006, the 9921 property operated.as Ashmore`s Ceramics Shop.
Then in 2006, it was just used for their storage.
During 2007 - 2009 GGRT LLC, the Arkansas Fence and Guardrail company, used
both the warehouse and small building on Lanehart (labeled 9921 and
9923). They ran an office out of the 9923 building and use. 9921 for warehousing
and staging inventory.
.Also in 2007 Loves Adult Day Care operated out of the property labeled 9923
after GGRT moved their office.
In May 2009 through September 2010 (dates given by the Treasure Management
Division), King of Pallets used the 9921 for staging and prep. A copy of the 2009
Business License is enclosed.
in January of 2011, less than 6 months therea-fter, Jeff Reed Construction, LLC
became a tenant and left in March, 2011.
Now I have a tenant that is using it for storage, but wants to run a Marble and
Granite design business if he can get a business license for it.
So I am making a formal request for you to allow the R2 NC C1 status to still be
in existence on the 9921 Lanehart property for which it has been functioning as
in the past year's. Although, there have been breaks in the business licensing at
this location, because of large companies not doing a change of address and
smaller companies not following though on renewal, there have been no breaks
in my leases larger than a 6 month timeframe to lose the R2 NC C1 status.
Thank you for your consideration,
�i
Stormy �Co
Enclosures
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 1
File No.: Z -4343-Y
Owner: Saddle Creek Center, LLC
Applicant: Minal Modi
Address: 8201 Ranch Blvd.
Description: East side of Ranch Blvd., between Cantrell Road and Ranch Drive
Zoned: C-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-557
to allow sign without street frontage.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Restaurant
Proposed Use of Property: Restaurant
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comment
B. Staff Analysis:
The C-2 zoned property at 8201 Ranch Blvd. is occupied by a one-story
commercial strip center and associated paved parking. The property is located on
the east side of Ranch Blvd. at Ranch Drive. The commercial building is part of a
multi -building development. Access drives from Ranch Blvd. and Ranch Drive
serve the property.
The applicant occupies the south end of the westernmost building and operates a
Subway restaurant. There is a drive-thru window on the south end of the building,
with paved parking on the east and west sides of the building. An access driveway
which serves the overall development is located on the south side of a drive which
accesses the drive-thru window. The Subway restaurant has one (1) wall sign
(approximately 20 square feet) on the west side of the building (facing Ranch
Blvd.) and a small sign (approximately 2 square feet) on the face of a canopy over
the drive-thru window.
The applicant proposes to install another "Subway" wall sign similar to the existing
sign which is located on the west wall of the building. The proposed sign will be
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T.)
approximately 20 square feet in area and located on the south wall of the building,
near the fagade's upper left corner. The applicant is also proposing two (2)
permanent sign frames to be located on the south wall, west of the drive-thru
window. Each frame will be 16.5 inches by 82 inches in area, and contain graphics
(photos, artwork, etc.) of the business' product. The graphics will be able to be
changed out periodically.
Section 36-557(a) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires that all on -premise wall
signs face required street frontage. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a
variance to allow the "Subway" wall sign, two (2) informational -type wall signs and
the small canopy sign on the south side of the building with no direct street
frontage.
Staff is not supportive of the variance to allow wall signs without street frontage, as
filed. Staff does not support the variance to allow the "Subway" wall sign at the
upper left corner of the building's south wall. The proposed sign will face Cantrell
Road. It has been staff's past policy to be very conservative in allowing additional
signs along the Highway 10 Design Overlay District. Staff strives to eliminate
potential sign clutter within the DOD, and therefore, cannot support the additional
store identification sign. Staff has no problem with the two (2) information -type
signs on the building's south wall and the very small canopy sign over the drive-
thru window. Those signs are lower on the building and designed to be utilized by
traffic within the development and in the drive-thru area. Staff believes these signs
will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the requested sign variance, as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 29, 2011)
Staff informed the Board that the application needed to be withdrawn, based on the fact
that staff determined the issue could be handled at the administrative level, with no
variance needed.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and withdrawn, as recommended by staff,
with a vote of 5 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent.
Minal G Modi
8201 Ranch Blvd —Suite B-7
Little Rock, AR -77223
August 15, 2011
City of Little Rock
Planning & Development Department
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
Subject: Applying for zoning variance for sign on the side of the building.
'-3
Dear Sir/Madam:
This is Minal G Modi, president of Niru, Inc (Subway Restaurant), requesting a
sign variance. The address of the property is located at 8201 Ranch Blvd -Suite B-7, Little
Rock, AR -72223 on Cantrell Road. The restaurant is located 200 to 300ft back of
Cantrell Rd. There is no visibility from the Cantrell Road due to trees and higher ground
landscape of the front empty lot. To get more visibility, we need some signage on the
Cantrell road side of the building. We will put the sign as per city code. It will be
installed professionally, neat and clean.
Thank you for considering my application.
Sincerely,
Minal G Modi
President of Niru Inc
DBA Subway Restaurant
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 2
File No.: Z -5885-C
Owner: Pharmasite, LLC
Applicant: Terry Burruss
Address: 7321 Cantrell Road
Description: South side of Cantrell Road, east of Georgia Avenue
Zoned: C-4
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-302
to allow a building addition with reduced side setback.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Drug Store with Compounding Lab
Proposed Use of Property: Drug Store with Compounding Lab and Storage Area
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
Measures to control the increase in stormwater runoff from the increased
impervious surface should be implemented to not damage adjacent property.
B. Landscape and Buffer Issues:
a. If the rehabilitation exceeds fifty percent (50%) of the replacement cost of
the building the landscaping must be upgraded accordingly.
b. Any new parking areas must be landscaped per Chapter 15, The
Landscape Ordinance and comply with the City of Little Rock Buffer
Ordinance.
c. The City Beautiful Commission recommends and appreciates saving
any/all on site existing trees.
C. Building 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.
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.)
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.
D. Staff Analysis:
The C-4 zoned property at 7321 Cantrell Road is occupied by a one-story metal
and stucco commercial building. There are two (2) access drives from Cantrell
Road and one (1) drive from Kentucky Avenue, which runs along the rear (south)
property line. Paved parking is located along the north and east sides of the
building, with paved vehicular use area along the south and west building sides. A
wood fence is located along the south and portions of the east and west property
lines. The building is occupied by Cantrell Drug, a drug store with compounding
lab.
On May 23, 2011 the Board of Adjustment approved a planned building addition at
the southwest corner of the existing building, as noted on the attached site plan.
The addition was approved with a west side setback of 4 to 6 feet, and a rear
setback ranging from 12 to 12.5 feet. The building addition is to be constructed
over an existing asphalt area, with a height not to exceed 30 feet.
After final design work on the project, the applicant is adding a 390 square foot
addition on the west side of the existing building, near the building's northwest
corner. In addition, a covered walkway/ramp is proposed to run between this
addition and the previously approved addition. The 390 square foot addition will be
located 11 feet -11.5 inches from the west side property line, with the covered
walkway/ramp being approximately two (2) feet back from the west property line.
The proposed covered walkway/ramp will be unenclosed on its north, west and
east (portion) sides.
Section 36-302(e)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side
setback of 15 feet for this C-4 zoned lot. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a
variance from this ordinance requirement to allow the building and covered
walkway/ramp additions with a reduced side setback.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff views the request as
reasonable. The adjacent properties to the east and west are zoned C-3, which
require no side yard setback. The proposed building addition with reduced setback
will not be out of character with other commercial buildings in this immediate area.
The existing commercial building (Backyard Burgers) on the property immediately
to the west has a driveway along the dividing side property line. Therefore, ample
separation will exist between the two (2) structures. Staff will require approval from
the City's Fire Marshall prior to a building permit being issued. The applicant
previously stated that fire wall(s) will be constructed as required. Otherwise, staff
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.)
believes the proposed building addition with reduced side setback will have no
adverse input on the adjacent properties or the general area.
E. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends the approval of the requested side setback variance, subject to
the following conditions:
a. Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances.
b. A letter of approval from the City's Fire Marshall must be submitted to staff
prior to a building permit being issued.
c. Parking must be provided to accommodate the building expansion as per
ordinance requirements.
d. The covered walkway/ramp must remain unenclosed on all sides not
abutting the existing building/building additions.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 29, 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.
614 �R ST.
171 LITTLE -,OCK, AR 72201 c"1
501-376-3676 FAX 376-3766
Ite
u t USs
Architect design, planning and interiors
July 26, 2011
Mr. Monte Moore
Zoning and Enforcement Administrator
Department of Planning & Development
City of Little Rock
723 W. Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
RE: Cantrell Drug
7321 Cantrell Road
Little Rock, Arkansas
Dear Mr. Moore:
Attached please find six (6) copies of the Site Plan and Survey on the above referenced project.
We are proposing to add approximately 400 square feet of storage to the West side of the
existing facility as well as a covered connection from the upper storage area to the front storage
area. The existing building with its previously approved addition is approximately 14,750
square feet. Currently there is 3,120 s.f. of retail, 3,245 s.f. of office, 3,375 s.f. of lab, 5,535 s.f.
of storage, and 1,125 s.f. of break, locker room, and toilet area. The addition would be used as
a storage area only. The building height would not exceed 18'. There are currently 36 parking
spaces shown on the site with the new re -striping plan.
We appreciate your consideration on this request. If there are any questions or additional
information is needed, please call. We can also be reached by email at
tbadesignplanning@sbcglobal.net.
Yours very truly,
Terry G. Burruss, AIA
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 3
File No.: Z -6115-A
Owner: Jerry and Faye Morgan
Applicant: Bryan Smith
Address: 213 Wedgewood Road
Description: Northeast corner of Wedgewood Road and Emerald Drive
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254
to allow a carport addition with 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. Building 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.
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T.)
C. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 213 Wedgewood Road is occupied by a one-story brick
and frame single family residence. The property is located at the northeast corner
of Wedgewood Road and Emerald Drive. There is a two -car wide driveway from
Wedgewood Road at the southwest corner of the lot. The single family home was
damaged during a storm earlier in the year when a large tree fell on the structure.
The house is in the process of being repaired. With the repair project, the existing
carport was enclosed for more living space and a one -car wide carport was
constructed on the south end of the residence. The new carport addition is
unenclosed on its south, east and west sides. It is located 3.5 feet to 12 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 six (6) feet for this R-2 zoned lot. Therefore, the applicant is requesting
a variance to allow the carport addition with a reduced side setback.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the request as
reasonable. Only approximately eight (8) square feet of the new carport addition is
within the required side setback. Therefore, the requested encroachment is very
minimal. With the carport addition being unenclosed, the visual impact on the
adjacent property will be minor. Ample separation will exist between the carport
addition and the residence immediately to the east, as the structures are separated
by a driveway. Staff believes the proposed carport addition 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. The carport addition must remain unenclosed on its south, east and west
sides.
2. Compliance with the Building Codes requirements, as noted in paragraph
B. of the staff report.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 29, 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.
eA
coonMEMBER fAMPANY
A Contractor Specializing in Wind, Fire, Water, Smoke and Flood Damage
To: Little Rock Board Of Ajustment
Dear, Sirs/Madams
This letter is a request for a zoning variance to the property located at 213 Wedgwood Rd.
The legal description is (lot 3 block 1 Wedgwood Addition)
The Morgan's had a tree fall through their house in the May storms and upon contracting the job for them
they asked about closing in the carport to give them more living space since their son has moved back
home with them. They have also requested an additional carport be, constructed on the side of the
original carport, in order to keep their vehicle out of the weather. There is no other place to put a carport
and not be an eyesore, and still be adjacent to the house. The framed addition will add value to the
property rather than a metal freestanding type. This would also allow them to enjoy evenings outside out
of the sun and rain.
The proposed encroachment would only involve 20 square feet or less and the utilities to this
property and the surrounding properties have already, been established years ago and are very unlikely
to ever have to change.
We respectfully request permission from the board of adjustment to grant this variance and allow
the construction of the new carport.
Sincerely,
Bryan Smith
Project manager
1419 Westpark Drive, Suite F, Little Rock, AR 72204
Toll Free: 1.877.796.9690 Office: 501.296.9690 Fax: 501.296.9424
innnnni rhnnalracfnrnfinn rnm
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 4
File No.:
Owner:
Applicant:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Z -8578-A
Van Dlay Industries, LLC
John Thatcher, Kum & Go
6201 Colonel Glenn Road
Southwest corner of Colonel Glenn Road and University Avenue
C-3
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-557
to allow wall signs without street frontage.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Undeveloped
Proposed Use of Property: Convenience Store with Gas Pumps
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comment
B. Staff Analysis:
The C-3 zoned property at 6201 Colonel Glenn Road is currently undeveloped and
grass covered. The property is located at the southwest corner of Colonel Glenn
Road and S. University Avenue. Other commercial buildings and paved parking
areas within this overall development are located to the west and south.
The applicant is planning to construct a new convenience store with gas pumps
facility on this property. The development will include a convenience store building
located within the south half of the property, with gas pumps and covered canopy
within the north half. Paved parking is proposed along the north, south and east
sides of the building. Access drives are proposed from Colonel Glenn Road and S.
University Avenue, at the northwest and southeast corners of the property.
As part of the development plan, the applicant is proposing wall signs on the north,
south and east elevations of the convenience store building, as noted on the
attached building elevations. Wall signs are also proposed on the north, east and
west elevations of the gas pump canopy. The applicant will also be installing two
(2) ground -mounted signs on the property, one (1) per street frontage. The wall
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 4 (CON'T.)
signs on the south elevation of the convenience store building and the west
elevation of the gas pump canopy do not have direct street frontage, face a street
right-of-way. The wall sign on the south elevation of the convenience store will be
39 square feet in area, with the sign on the west elevation of the canopy being 25
square feet.
Section 36-557(a) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires that all on -premise wall
signs face required street frontage. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a
variance to allow the wall sign on the south building elevation and west canopy
elevation.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the request as
reasonable. The signage as proposed is typical of that found in conjunction with
convenience store developments throughout the city. The proposed wall signs on
the south building and west canopy elevations will face interior parking and access
drives within this overall development. The proposed signs will aid in identifying
this business to traffic within this larger development, as well as to traffic
eastbound on Colonel Glenn Road and northbound on S. University Avenue. Staff
believes the proposed signage is consistent with that found in other similar
developments, and will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the
general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested sign variance, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Permits must be obtained for all signs.
2. The sign located on the gas pump canopy must not extend above the face
of the canopy.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 29, 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 4
July 25, 2011
City of Little Rock
723 W Markham
Little Rock, AR
To Whom It May Concern;
- s78 14
This letter is written requesting your support of Kum & Go's variance application for one additional
building and one additional canopy sign at our new location in Little Rock. Specifically, a variance
is requested from the section of the Little Rock Code of Ordinances which allows only one sign
per street frontage.
The reason for this variance request is to allow Kum & Go to place its signage in such a way that
it will catch the eye of drivers as they approach our store location. The first area where the Code
of Ordinances conflicts with this is on our gas canopy. Our future Kum & Go store will front
Colonel Glenn Rd, which means that our gas canopy runs parallel to east/west traffic, This means
that the ends of the canopy are perpendicular to that traffic and are therefore the ideal location to
place our Kum & Go logos. Our proposal is to place signage on the west facing end of the
canopy. While this side of the canopy is technically not on a "street frontage" is clearly in the best
location to face east -bound motorists on Colonel Glenn Rd. This signage configuration also
promotes safe access to our store as motorist will be aware of the location further in advance and
allowed more time to slow down and turn.
The second reason for this variance is the placement of a Kum & Go logo sign on the south side
(rear) of our store. The rationale for this is similar to that of the canopy sign stated above. The
south side of the building faces all north -bound traffic and is the ideal location to catch the eye of
those motorists. Also, our secondary entrance is located on the south side of the store and we
feel it is only reasonable to have our Kum & Go logo marking the entrance.
Based on the facts noted above, we feel it is imperative to display our Kum & Go logo in such a
way that it will catch the eye of east -bound and north -bound motorists as soon as possible. The
western face of the canopy and the southern face of our store grant us the height and visibility
necessary to accomplish this goal. Signage is essential, and is directly related, to the success of
our stores. Kum & Go is making a substantial investment redeveloping this property and as such
would appreciate the opportunity to make full use of its potential, We appreciate your taking the
time to review this application and are hopeful that you will consider this request for approval.
Please review the enclosed information and site plan. Do not hesitate to contact me at the
number listed below with any questions or concerns.
Since ,
John hatcher
Real Estate Coordinator
6400 Westown Parkway, West Des Moines, Iowa 50266-9857 1 515-457-6095 1 FAX 515-226-1595
jct@kumandgo.com
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 5 (CON'T )
Section 36-254(d)(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum 25 feet
rear setback. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow a reduced
setback from the rear (north) property line for the proposed residence.
Staff is supportive of the requested reduced rear setback. Staff views the request
as reasonable. Aside from the rear setback, the proposed residence meets or
exceeds all other building setback requirements. The house has been designed
and located on the lot as to avoid a very large oak tree which is located near the
northwest corner of the property. The overall structure will only occupy 30.3
percent of the entire residential lot. Therefore, the proposed lot massing/coverage
is relatively minor. Additionally, if the garage portion of the residence were
detached, it would comply with all setback and coverage requirements. Staff
believes the proposed residence with reduced rear setback will be compatible with
the neighborhood and have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested rear setback variance, subject to
compliance with the Public Works requirements as noted in paragraph A. of the
staff report.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 29, 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.
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 5
File No.:
Owner:
Applicant:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Michael and Dova Smith
Jim Yeary
5014 Club Road
North side of Club Road, between Van Buren and Jackson Streets
R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254
to allow construction of a new residence 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:
1. Measures to control the increase in stormwater runoff from the increased
impervious surface should be implemented to not damage adjacent property.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property located at 5014 Club Road is occupied by a one-story rock
and frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide driveway from Club
Road at the southwest corner of the lot. A one-story garage is located at the
northwest corner of the residence.
The applicants propose to remove the residence and accessory structure from the
property and construct a new single family home, as noted on the attached site
plan. The proposed residence will be a two-story masonry and frame structure. A
two -car wide garage will be located on the rear (north) of the residence. It will be
connected to the residence by a second floor heated/cooled connection within the
roof line of the structure. The lower level between the house and garage will be a
covered porch. The garage portion of the residence will be located 9.32 feet back
from the rear (north) property line. A side building elevation is provided, showing
the garage's relationship to the overall residential structure.
Yeary Lindsey Architects
July 26, 2011
Dana Carney
Little Rock Board of Adjustments
Planning and Development
723 West Markham
Little Rock, AR
Re: Michael and Dora Smith - Variance Request
5014 Club Road
Little Rock, AR
Dana,
Please find attached our submittal to the Little Rock Board of Adjustments requesting a rear
yard variance with regard to the property at 5014 Club Road.
The new property Owners wish to construct a new house on the property. While the garage is
planned to be detached on the lower level by a covered porch, the Smiths would like to connect
it at the second level with the house by a heated and cooled connection. This connection is
designed to be within the roof line.
In an effort to avoid a very mature tree on the northwest corner of the lot, the proposed plan is
aligned along the east building setback and the garage will need to encroach upon the 25 foot
rear yard building setback_
If you have any questions or need further information Please feel free to contact me.
We appreciate your consideration of our request.
Thank you,
Sincerely,
Jim Yeary, AIA
3416 Old Cantrell Road Little Rock, AR 72202 501-372-5940 FX: 501-663-0043
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 6
File No.: Z-8688
Owner: Capitol Place, LLC
Applicant: Preston McKay
Address: 525 W. Capitol Avenue
Description: Southeast corner of W. Capitol Avenue and Arch Street
Zoned: UU
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the development provisions of
Section 36-342.1 to allow addition of a third story to an existing building with reduced
setback.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Office Building
Proposed Use of Property: Office Building with Increased Height
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comment
B. Landscape and Buffer Issues:
a. If the rehabilitation exceeds fifty percent (50%) of the replacement cost of
the building the landscaping must be upgraded accordingly.
b. Street trees are required per the Urban Use (UU) district standards.
c. Specific trees are required to be planted along Capitol Avenue.
d. Any new parking areas must be landscaped per Chapter 15, The Landscape
Ordinance and comply with the City of Little Rock Buffer Ordinance.
e. The City Beautiful Commission recommends and appreciates saving any/all
on site existing trees.
C. Staff Analysis:
The UU zoned property at 525 W. Capitol Avenue is occupied by a two-story office
building. The property is located at the southeast corner of W. Capitol Avenue and
S. Arch Street. The existing office building occupies the entire site. Small portions
of the building's first floor are located on the north and west, street fronting
property lines. The majority of the building's first floor is located nine (9) feet to 25
feet back from the north property line, and nine (9) to ten (10) feet back from the
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 6 (CON'T )
west property line. The second floor of the building is located on/along the north
(Capitol Avenue) and west (S. Arch Street) property lines, extended over the
indented first floor entry area along Capitol Avenue. The existing building has a
height of 27 feet — 8 inches. The building is currently occupied by the Arkansas
Department of Rehabilitative Services.
The applicant proposes to construct a third floor/story to the existing building, as
noted on the attached building elevation sketches. The proposed third level will
follow the exact same footprint as the second floor. It will be located along the
north (Capitol Avenue) and west (S. Arch Street) property lines. With the third
story addition, the building's height will be 45 feet — 8 inches. This represents a
height increase of 18 feet. The third floor addition will be constructed to match the
lower floor fagade.
Section 36-342.1(f)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a 25 foot building
setback along Capitol Avenue, west of Broadway and east of Scott Street.
Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the third floor addition to
the existing building with a reduced setback from the north (W. Capitol Avenue)
property line.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the request as
reasonable. The proposed building height will be compatible with other structures
on adjacent and nearby properties which are located along Capitol Avenue, with
the 25 foot setback from the roadway. The intent of the required building setback
along Capitol Avenue is to maintain a visual corridor along the roadway for viewing
the State Capitol building from the east. Staff feels that the proposed building
height extension will not jeopardize the visual corridor, as the height of the building
immediately to the east is approximately nine (9) feet higher than the proposed
third floor expansion. That adjacent building is also located along the north
(Capitol Avenue) property line. Additionally, there are other taller structures to the
west along Capitol Avenue. Staff believes the proposed building expansion with
reduced setback from Capitol Avenue will have no adverse impact on the adjacent
properties or the general area.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested setback variance, subject to
compliance with the Landscape and Buffer requirements as noted in paragraph B.
of the staff report.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 29, 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.
IN)T'IGo a INSPR! QU017 VFRTO
IVA
ARC HITEf i (<i4E
Department of Planning and Deve Iopment,;i:::iv,.,
723 West Markham 14
Little Rock, Arkansas 371-4790
RE: Application for a Non Residential Zoning Variance
To Whom It May Concern
1 am writing this letter in regards to a Non Residential Zoning Variance application. I being the
authorized agent for the title holder Capitol Place, LLC of the subject property hereby present in this
letter and the attached supporting documents and applications our reasoning for requesting the
following variances for the subject property located at 525 West Capitol Street, Little Rock,
Arkansas. The subject property falls within the UU (Urban Use) Zoning District, and we are asking
for variances on the Application of Regulations requirements and the Area Regulations requirement.
We are planning a development of the existing property that will add an additional floor to the
existing two stories of the existing building that is located on the property. The original building
was constructed around the 1930's. It has since undergone exterior renovations in 1967, and some
minor interior renovations in the 1980's. The current square footage of the facility is approximately
21,000 square feet per floor, of leasable tenant space. The subject property is currently owned by
Capitol Place, LLC, and managed by Colliers International. The current tenant is the State of
Arkansas, for the Arkansas Department of Rehabilitative Services. With the growing capacity of the
services provided they have a need for expansion to an additional floor. Our development would
add an additional 21,000 square feet of leasable space that would continue to allow the tenant to
occupy the building.
Our justification and reasons for the zoning variance request are as follows:
Variance Request 1
Section 36-342.1.b
According to the Application of Regulations paragraph our project would be of significant
enough construction and expansion that we would be required to bring the existing
property within conformance regulations. It would be an undue hardship to bring the
subject property into conformance with the current area regulations as stated in Sub Section
f.1 for properties along Capitol Street, west of Broadway Street. This regulation calls for a
twenty five (25) foot setback from the property boundary on the Capitol Street side. As it
currently exist the building sits on the property line. To bring the subject property into
conformance would require excessive demolition and modification to the property and
reduce the leasable space significantly by approximately 4,000 square feet. The structure of
the existing building being cast in place concrete columns, beams and floors would be
weakened would be compromised. We are asking for a variance to allow the existing
building to remain as it site today.
Variance Request 2
Section 36-342.f.1
The Area Regulations section of the zoning ordinance requires a twenty five (25) foot
setback along the Capitol Street side for properties located west of Broadway Street. Our
third story addition will need to have the same frontfa�ade plain as the existing building in
M3A / McElroy & Associates, Architecture, PLLC
William L. McElroy, AIA, NCARB - Architect
4880 Mc,J'Jiliie Circle I Jackson, MS 39206 1 www.m3aarch.com
Tele: (601) 981-1227 1 Fax: (601) 983-4444
f
order to maintain the traditional urban form of the existing building. This will also allow for
the existing aesthetics of the building to remain intact. It is our intent to use materials for
the exterior veneer that will blend cohesively with the existing fagade and elevations. The
required setback would also reduce the proposed leasable square footage and would have
an economic impact that would affect the project negatively. The proposed end user of the
facility requires that the expansion incorporate a minimum of 21,000 square feet. The
setback requirement would also render the existing elevator and stairwells unusable for the
third floor addition. This would mean that in order to provide the required life safety
component for this third floor addition, we would have to reconfigure the entire stair well
and elevator component of the existing building. This would create and undue hardship.
We are requesting the zoning variance in order to maintain the integrity of the existing
building and components and the proposed project.
M3A Architecture, PLLC on behalf of the Owner in the variance request submit our above reasoning
for approval. We have provided all of the necessary paperwork, and will provide any further
information required of us in order to present the request to the board in a thorough manner.
Should you have any questions or request please contact our office at your convenience.
Thank you for consideration and we look forward to your response.
Respectfully,
Preston L. McKay
Project Manager
M3A Architecture, PLLC/Wi11iam L. McElroy AIA, NCARB
M3A / McElroy & Associates, Architecture, PLLC
William L. McElroy, ABA, NCARB - Architect
4880 MCWillie Circle I Jackson, �.AS 39206 l www.m3aarch.com
Tele: (601) 981-1227 1 Fax: (601) 983-4444
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 7
File No.: Z-8689
Owner: Dorothy Ussery/Harold Crye Living Trust
Applicant: John Thatcher, Kum & Go
Address: 7620 Baseline Road
Description: Northwest corner of Baseline Road and Chicot Road
Zoned: C-3 and C-4
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-557
to allow wall signs without street frontage.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Commercial Strip Center and Vacant Single -Family Residence
Proposed Use of Property: Convenience Store with Gas Pumps
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comment
B. Staff Analysis:
The C-3 /C-4 zoned property at 7620 Baseline Road is currently occupied by a
one-story commercial building located at the center of the property, with parking on
its south side. The southernmost portion of the property is undeveloped and
grass -covered. The north portion of the property contains an old, vacant single-
family structure. The property is located at the northwest corner of Baseline and
Chicot Roads. Access drives from Baseline and Chicot Roads serve the
development. The commercial building is part of a larger commercial development
extending to the west, with the drive from Baseline Road being a shared driveway.
The applicant is planning to construct a new convenience store with gas pumps
facility on this property. The development will include a convenience store building
located within the north portion of the property, with gas pumps and covered
canopy within the south half. Paved parking will be located on the north and south
sides of the convenience store building. Access drives will be located along the
Chicot and Baseline Road frontages. The driveway from Baseline Road will
continue to be a shared driveway.
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 7 (CON'T.)
As part of the development plan, the applicant is proposing wall signs on the north,
south and east elevations of the convenience store building, as noted on the
attached building elevations. Wall signs are also proposed on the south, east and
west elevations of the gas pump canopy. The applicant will also be installing one
(1) ground -mounted sign on the property, along the Baseline Road street frontage.
The wall signs on the north elevation of the convenience store building and the
west elevation of the gas pump canopy do not have direct street frontage, face a
street right-of-way. The wall sign on the north elevation of the convenience store
will be 39 square feet in area, with the sign on the west elevation of the canopy
being 25 square feet.
Section 36-557(a) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires that all on -premise wall
signs face required street frontage. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a
variance to allow the wall signs on the north building elevation and west canopy
elevation.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the request as
reasonable. The signage as proposed is typical of that found in conjunction with
convenience store developments throughout the city. The proposed wall signs on
the west canopy elevation will face interior parking and access drives within this
overall development. The proposed signs will aid in identifying this business to
traffic within this larger development, as well as to traffic eastbound on Baseline
Road and southbound on Chicot Road. The wall sign on the north building
elevation is proposed in -lieu of a ground -mounted sign along the Chicot Road
frontage. Staff believes the proposed signage is consistent with that found in other
similar developments, and will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties
or the general.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested sign variance, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Permits must be obtained for all signs.
2. The sign located on the gas pump canopy must not extend above the face
of the canopy.
3. No ground -mounted sign will be allowed along the Chicot Road frontage.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 29, 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, 1 recusal (Winchester) and 0 absent.
:� Inc
July 25, 2011
City of Little Rock
723 W Markham
Little Rock, AR
To Whom It May Concern;
7
This letter is written requesting your support of Kum & Go's variance application for one additional
building and one additional canopy sign at our new location in Little Rock. Specifically, a variance
is requested from the section of the Little Rock Code of Ordinances which allows only one sign
per street frontage.
The reason for this variance request is to allow Kum & Go to place its signage in such a way that
it will catch the eye of drivers as they approach our store location. The first area where the Code
of Ordinances conflicts with this is on our gas canopy. Our future Kum & Go store will front
Baseline Road, which means that our gas canopy runs parallel to east/west traffic. This means
that the ends of the canopy are perpendicular to that traffic and are therefore the ideal location to
place our Kum & Go logo signs. Our proposal is to place signage on the west facing end of the
canopy. While this side of the canopy is technically not on a "street frontage" is clearly in the best
location to face east -bound motorists on Baseline Road. This signage configuration also
promotes safe access to our store as motorist will be aware of the location further in advance and
allowed more time to slow down and turn.
The second reason for this variance is the placement of a Kum & Go logo sign on the north side
(rear) of our store. The rationale for this is similar to that of the canopy sign stated above. The
north side of the building faces all south -bound traffic and is the ideal location to catch the eye of
those motorists. Also, our secondary entrance is located on the north side of the store and we
feel it is only reasonable to have our Kum & Go logo sign marking the entrance.
Based on the facts noted above, we feel it is imperative to display our Kum & Go logo in such a
way that it will catch the eye of east -bound and south -bound motorists as soon as possible. The
western face of the canopy and the southern face of our store grant us the height and visibility
necessary to accomplish this goal. Signage is essential, and is directly related, to the success of
our stores. Kum & Go is making a substantial investment redeveloping this property and as such
would appreciate the opportunity to make full use of its potential. We appreciate your taking the
time to review this application and are hopeful that you will consider this request for approval.
Please review the enclosed information and site plan. Do not hesitate to contact me at the
number listed below with any questions or concerns.
Si ce ly,
John hatcher
Real Estate Coordinator
6400 Westown Parkway, West Des Moines, Iowa 50266-9857 1 515-457-6095 1 FAX 515-226-1595
jct@kumandgo.com
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 8
File No.: Z-8690
Owner: Glenn A. Hickman, Jr.
Applicant: Terry Burruss
Address: 2012 W. 19th Street
Description: North side of W. 19th Street, between Schiller and Summit Streets
Zoned: R-4
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-255
to allow construction of a new duplex with reduced front setback.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Undeveloped
Proposed Use of Property: Duplex Structure
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-4 zoned property located at 2012 W. 19th Street is currently undeveloped
and partly grass covered. A small asphalt parking pad exists near the northeast
corner of the lot. An alley right-of-way is located along the east property line. The
property is comprised of parts of Lots 8 through 11, Block 3, Moore and Penzel
Addition, and is considered a legal lot of record as it has existed in this
configuration for a number of years.
The applicant is proposing to construct a two-story duplex structure on the lot, as
noted on the attached site plan. The proposed duplex will have an upstairs and
downstairs unit. An enclosed stairway is located at the northwest corner of the
structure. A two-story unenclosed porch will be located on front of the residence.
The front porch portion of the structure will be located 5 feet- 7 inches back from
the front (south) property line, with the main front wall of the structure being 13
feet -7 inches back from the front property line. It will be located approximately five
(5) feet back from both the east and west side property lines. The stairway section
of the home will be located 26 feet back from the rear (north) property line, with the
main rear wall of the structure being 44 feet back from the rear property line. Four
(4) paved parking spaces are proposed at the northeast corner of the lot, with
access from the alley right-of-way.
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 8 (CON'T.)
Section 36-256(d)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front
setback of 25 feet for R-4 zoned lots. Therefore the applicant is requesting a
variance to allow a reduced front setback for the proposed duplex structure.
Staff is supportive of the requested front setback variance. Staff views the request
as reasonable. The combination of the lot having a relatively shallow depth of 87
feet and the fact that at least three (3) off-street parking spaces must be provided
for a duplex, creates the issue of reduced setback. The legal lot of record having a
front yard along W. 19th Street is in contrast with most of the other lots along W.
19th Street which have side yards along the roadway. Thus is the case with the
residence immediately to the west. Its setback from the W. 19th Street property
line is similar to the setback proposed. Additionally, other structures to the east
and west along W. 19th Street have similar setbacks. Staff feels that pulling the
structure toward the front property line with parking in the rear yard area
represents the best option for development of this lot. Staff believes the reduced
front setback as proposed is compatible with other structures in the area, and 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 portion remaining unenclosed on its south, east and west sides.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 29, 2011)
Terry Burruss was present, representing the application. There were three (3) objectors
present. Staff presented the application with a recommendation of approval.
Terry Burruss addressed the Board in support of the application. He explained the
reasons for requesting the front setback variance. He noted that the reduced front
setback was a better option than locating the parking in the front yard area.
Bonnie Jones, of 1872 Schiller Street, addressed the Board in opposition. She
explained that the lot was not very large, and that there was not enough room for the
duplex structure.
Sylvia Craig, of 2122 W. 19th Street, also spoke in opposition. She explained that there
was a problem with parking in the area. She noted that the lot owner also owned a
house in the 1800 block of Schiller Street. She questioned what the owner was going to
use the duplex for.
Barbara Jones, of 2119 W. 19th Street, also spoke in opposition. She also questioned
what the duplex structure would be used for. She also discussed parking in the area.
Jeff Yates noted that the issue before the board was a request for reduced front
setback, not a use issue. Staff noted that the property was zoned for a duplex and the
applicant was providing four (4) off-street parking spaces, one (1) more than required by
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 8 (CON'T.)
ordinance. Chairman Winchester noted that pulling the structure closer to the front
property line allowed the area for parking in the rear yard area.
Mr. Burruss explained how the duplex would be constructed. He noted that the property
owner would occupy the second floor as his personal residence.
There was a motion to approve the application, as recommended by staff. The motion
passed with a vote of 5 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent. The application was approved.
614 ( ER ST.
LITTLE 10CK, AR 72201
501-376-3676 FAX 376-3766 r2
euro S S
design, planning and interiors
July 26, 2011
Mr. Monte Moore
Zoning and Enforcement Administrator
Department of Planning & Development
City of Little Rock
723 W. Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
RE: Hickman House
2012 West 19th Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72202
Dear Mr. Moore
Attached please find six (6) copies of the Site Plan and Survey on the above referenced project.
The Owner is proposing to slide the front porch of the building closer to 19th Street to align with
the side yards of the adjoining properties. This will allow the new structure front elevation to
maintain a uniform frontage on the block as well as keep the parking area to the rear of the
duplex.
We appreciate your consideration on this request. If there are any questions or additional
information is needed, please call. We can also be reached by email at
tbadesignplanning@sbcglobal.net.
Yours very truly,
Terry G. Burruss, AIA
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 9
File No.:
Owner/Applicant:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Z-8691
Robert and Patricia Anderson
2114 N. Palm Street
West side of N. Palm Street, between Country Club Blvd. and
Stonewall Road
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-156
to allow a garage extension 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 REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comment
B. Building 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. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 2114 N. Palm Street is occupied by a two-story brick,
frame and stucco single family residence. A one -car wide driveway from N. Palm
Street is located at the northeast corner of the property. An alley right-of-way is
AUGUST 29, 2011
ITEM NO.: 9 (CON'T.)
located along the rear (West) property line. A detached frame garage structure is
located at the northwest corner of the property. The garage is one-story in height.
A driveway from the alley serves the garage structure.
The applicants are proposing to construct a new, larger detached garage at the
northwest corner of the lot, as noted on the attached site plan. The proposed
garage will be located 3.2 feet from the north side property line and five (5) feet
back from the rear (west) property line. The accessory garage will be one-story
construction, with a second floor room within the roof line area of the structure.
The proposed garage will occupy 41.6 percent of the required rear yard area (rear
25 feet of the lot). The garage will be separated from the home by approximately
12 feet.
Section 36-156(a)(2)c. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows accessory structures
in R-2 zoning with a maximum rear yard coverage of 30 percent. Therefore, the
applicant is requesting a variance to allow the accessory garage structure with a
41.6 percent rear yard coverage.
Staff is supportive of the requested rear yard coverage variance. Staff views the
request as reasonable. The proposed accessory garage structure will not be out of
character with other detached garages in the neighborhood. The proposed 41.6
percent coverage is a relatively minor increase to the 30 percent rear yard
coverage allowed. The overall lot coverage (house and garage) is proposed to
only be approximately 42 percent of the entire lot area. Staff believes the
proposed garage structure with increased rear yard coverage will have no adverse
impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow increased rear yard
coverage, subject to the following conditions:
1. The accessory structure must be constructed to match the principal
structure.
2. Compliance with the Building Codes requirements, as noted in paragraph
B. of the staff report.
3. No portion of the accessory structure may be used in conjunction with
business/commercial activities.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 29, 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.
Department of Planning and Development
723 West Markham
Little Rock, Arkansas
501.371.4790
July 26, 2011
Robert and Patricia Anderson
2114 N. Palm
Little Rock, AR 72207
RE: Request for a variance of rear yard coverage
To Whom It May Concern:
We are requesting a variance to our existing property located at 2114 N. Palm to
encroach into the 30% rear yard coverage code. Our existing garage is within the rear and
side yard setbacks, as well as under the 30% rear yard coverage. The garage is currently
not large enough to pull two cars in off the street for safety purposes. I travel a great deal
and often work from home, and I would like to create a home office outside of the house
but still at home.
Currently the 30% rear yard coverage is 416 sqft. We are only asking for an additional
100 sgft encroachment into the rear yard coverage, totaling 517 sgft. The garage would
still remain within the rear and side yard setbacks, as well as be constructed no more than
the 35'-0" height restriction.
Please consider our variance request to protect our vehicles and creating a home office
for us.
Sincerely,
- obert and/or Patricia Anderson
501.258.3075 / 501.258.6420
0
O
U
w
w
w
H
O
Z
2
O
Q
LL
O
Q
O
00
f --
ti
C
M
m
0
W
0)
z
w
m
w
<c
z
w
Q
,J
�
0
w
O
0
�=
m<
I
w
�.
�mw
LLJ
Q
o
w
o
�
=
m
0
m<
0
?
W
orM
=
U-
ui
oui
l
w
Z
co
=FCK
zU
LLW
z
F -
w
w
co
>Z
>
m
0
W
0)
z
w
m
w
<c
z
w
Q
,J
�
0
w
O
0
�=
m<
E -UJ
w
�.
�mw
LLJ
Q
o
w
o
�
?
�
=
U-
LLI
L:
Z
W
o
F-
2
co
>Z
>
m
0
W
0)
z
w
m
w
<c
z
w
Q
August 29, 2011
There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 2:34 p.m.
Date:
j7�� 1'/Lw�
Chairman Secretary