Loading...
boa_09 26 2011LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY OF MINUTES SEPTEMBER 26, 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 August 29, 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 SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 2:00 P.M. OLD BUSINESS: A. Z-8680 9921-9925 Lanehart Road NEW BUSINESS: 1. Z -7037-B 601 Main Street 2. Z-8702 5320 W. 12th Street 3. Z-8703 14211 St. Michael Drive 4. Z-8704 20 Stonecreek Court 5. Z-8705 3 Windsor Circle 6. Z-8706 1023 W. 7th Street 7. 2012 Board of Adjustment Calendar CD N LU _._ O 32 36�_-�--- ■ Oa SVWOHl NVCJ Q oRgVV 1 per. cc O I! 1 X - TERSTATE 53 • - OES 31b1Sa. W31N1 ' 1S yy a _ 2 VMO'OaS� °o OW > a3H O OaN 1S How S 1NOa/ � y �b rn IAIS Hatld aj Vd '� • I pALISa3nINnS ��� m •,ri �••"(•' � ¢ I z� Oa 5`JNlad a3A3E) •i 1S IddISSISSIW N yo (1 m � 0 U a .tet W J m Oa lOOIHO •, ti 3 � � I a a Moaava NHoq • •� Oa alona3s3a / ON WMOS S OE631b1Sa31Nl m ¢ paslpays � C 1 Z ON 3001a> LTA- 00 11n0J� 1 •� w W r J Z r • � ,;. ¢4-0 i � VJ NVAI-sins 2 ' . a IMVM31s \ V J f H%1V � Z OOE AVMH`JIH �•%,. 1° L.._..�, -1' • i 2"P� �� N� _ 70 •"'{�� I q 1 Oa SNWVdS 37VpNa3d % 2/ � / fyi U K O % / SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 ITEM NO.: 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 SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 i ITEM NO.: A (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. SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 ( ITEM NO.: A (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. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (SEPTEMBER 26, 2011) Stormy Cubb was present, representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the appeal request. Staff noted that Ms. Cubb had submitted an affidavit from Jeff Reed, whose business occupied the building ("Building 6") for the first three (3) months of 2011. Vice -chair Smith addressed the affidavit submitted by Ms. Cubb, noting that J.L. Reed construction occupied the building prior to the existing tenant. Ms. Cubb confirmed that the building was only vacant for three (3) months. This issue was briefly discussed. There was a motion to approve the requested appeal, and reestablish the nonconforming zoning status (1-2) for Building 6 at 9921 Lanehart Road. The motion passed by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent. The application was approved. Stormy Crabb 9925 Lanehart Rd Little Rock, AR 72204 501-407-0601 skcubb@aol.com June 27, 2011 Department of Planning & Development City of Little Rock 723 West Markham Street 1st 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 still be existent because the property was never vacant over 6 months, Histont 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 Treasury 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 thereafter, Jeff Peed 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. 5o 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 years. 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, Stormy Cu Enclosures SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 ITEM NO.: 1 File No.: Z -7037-B Owner: Arkansas Repertory Theatre Applicant: Nikki Sammons, Mangan Holcomb Partners Address: 601 Main Street Description: Southeast Corner of Main and E. 6th Streets Zoned: UU Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-557 to allow banner signs to exceed the maximum number allowed and to exceed the maximum display time allowed. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Theatre Proposed Use of Property: Theatre STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comment B. Staff Analysis: The UU zoned property at 601 S. Main Street is occupied by a three-story commercial building which houses the Arkansas Repertory Theatre. The property is located at the southeast corner of S. Main and E. 6th Streets. The first floor of the building contains three (3) sets of frames for banner signs on the west (Main Street) facade and two (2) sets of banner frames on the north (E. 6th Street) fagade. The second floor contains two (2) larger banner signs "The Rep" at the northwest corner of the building, one (1) oriented to Main Street and one (1) to E. 6th Street. All of the banner signs are located over the sidewalk along both street frontages. On May 21, 2001, the Board of Adjustment approved variances to allow the banner signs to be located on the Arkansas Repertory Theatre building and on a street light pole at 601 Main Street. Five (5) banner signs (3 feet by 5 feet) attached to just below the second level of the building, two (2) banner signs (4 feet by 12 feet) attached to the corner between the second and the third floors, and a banner SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 ( ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T.) attached to the street lamp pole outside the Rep's front door were approved. The banner signs were approved with the following conditions: 1. A franchise must be obtained to coincide with the Board's approval. 2. The banners must be maintained in good condition, otherwise they must be removed. 3. The banner signs are to contain no commercial message and are to only include the identification of the location as "The Rep, Share the Experience." The applicant is now before the Board to request three (3) additional small banner signs, as noted on the attached sketch plan. Two (2) of the signs will be located along the Main Street frontage and one (1) along the E. 6t" Street frontage. The smaller banner signs are proposed to be 40 inches by 60 inches in size and contain the name/logo of the specific plays/events during the current season. If there are fewer than eight (8) events during a specific season, the other small banners will only contain "The Rep". The two (2) larger banner signs will be 46 inches by 142 inches and read "The Rep Arkansas Repertory Theatre". Examples of the banner signs are attached for Board review. The banner previously approved for the street lamp pole has been removed. Section 36-557(d) of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a business one (1) banner sign per street frontage, with a maximum banner size of five (5) feet by twenty (20) feet. Banner signs are allowed through a special event permit for a maximum of 24 weeks per year. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards to allow an increased number of banner signs and permanent placement/display of the banners, with the smaller banners being changed out with each season's events. Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the request as reasonable. The Repertory Theatre is a cultural attraction, and not a commercial retail -type use, that has benefited from the increased visibility and enhanced visual atmosphere the banners have created over the past several years. The addition of three (3) smaller banner signs and change in concept to display the names/logos of specific plays/events will be of even greater benefit to the theatre. Staff views the use of banner signs by the Repertory Theatre as a unique situation in an area of downtown Little Rock in need of the type of stability the theatre provides. Staff believes use of the banner signs as proposed by the applicant will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the variances associated with the proposed banner signs, subject to the following conditions: 1. A franchise permit must be obtained for all banner signs. 2. If any of the banners become damaged/torn they must be removed promptly. SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 ( TEM NO.: 1 (CON'T BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (September 26, 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. mangan hoicomb Ipartners marketing advertising public relations City of Little Rock 2-7037-5 Planning & Development Attn.: Monte Moore Dear Sirs: Mangan Holcomb Partners on behalf of the Arkansas Repertory Theatre (The Rep) respectfully requests a renewal of the existing variance create for the hanging of five small [40" wide x 60" tall] and two large 146" wide x 142" tall] banners. We would also like to request another variance for the addition of two small banners at the corner of 6`h and Main Streets and 1 small banner on the side of the building closest to RAO Video. As you know, The Rep has been a longtime anchor for its section of Main Street. While the existing banners create an overall "exciting" look to that area, they are getting older and need to be replaced. Instead of continuing to use The Rep's logo for both the small and large banners, we are proposing an updated version of the large banners [please see enclosed contact sheet] and using the season shows for the smaller ones. If we are allowed to install the three new sets of poles, that would put a total of eight small banners along the front of the building starting at the side closest to RAO Video on Main, and following the corner down 6`h Street. The Rep has eight shows this season, so we are proposing one small banner per show [again, please see enclosed contact sheet]. Each banner would have the same art on front and back. The two large logo banners would remain up, but the smaller season banners would be replaced next year around this time with the new season's art. If for any reason, there were less than eight shows in a season, we would then install a smaller version of the logo banners [please see enclosed contact sheet]. We truly feel that this will create a more vibrant look particularly when coupled with the newly renovated theatre. These banners will be produced and installed by Big Impressions, and it is intended that these banners will last approximately 2-3 years. We would love to get these banners up as soon as possible to enhance the overall look of that area of Downtown. Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions pertaining to this request. Thank you or your consideration, Nikki Sammons Production Manager Mangan Holcomb Partners (on behalf of The Arkansas Repertory Theatre) 2300 Cottondale Lane, Suite 300 Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 501.376 * 0321 501 .376.6127(f) manganholcomb.com Member AAAA SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 ITEM NO.: 2 File No.: Z-8702 Owner: Gregory S. Mikos and Carl Johnson Applicant: Roy S. Cribb, RSC and Associates, Inc. Address: 5320 W. 12th Street Description: Northeast Corner of W. 12th and Tyler Streets Zoned: C-3 / 0-3 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 porte cochere addition with reduced front setback and which crosses a platted building line. A variance is also requested from the easement provisions of Section 36-11 to allow a building addition which encroaches into an easement. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Medical Clinic Proposed Use of Property: Dialysis Clinic STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Landscape and Buffer Issues: 1. An upgrade in landscaping will be required equal to the percentage of building expansion proposed. 2. The new parking area must comply with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances. C. Utility Comments: ■ Entergy — No objection to proposed building addition. ■ Centerpoint Energy — No objection to proposed building addition. ■ AT&T — No conflicts with the addition being built on existing slab. ■ Central Arkansas Water — No objection to proposed building addition. ■ Little Rock Wastewater — No objection. No sewer main located under the proposed building addition. SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 ( ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.) D. Staff Analysis: The C-3/0-3 zoned property located at 5320 W. 12th Street is occupied by a one- story office building which houses a medical clinic. The property is located at the northeast corner of W. 12th and Tyler Streets. There is existing paved parking on the south and west sides of the building. One (1) access drive from W. 12th Street and two (2) drives from Tyler Street serve the property. The paved row of parking on the west side of the building extends to near the north (W. 11th Street) property line. A small paved service area is located along the rear (north) portion of the building. The lot contains a 40 foot front platted building line along the W. 12th Street frontage. The applicant proposes to construct two (2) building additions and a parking lot expansion, as noted on the attached site plan. The additions are proposed in conjunction with converting the building to a dialysis clinic. The existing portion of the building will be completely renovated. A 32 foot by 25 foot building addition is proposed on the rear of the building, at the structure's northeast corner. The addition will be constructed on top of an existing concrete slab. It will be located five (5) feet back from the east side property line, and be located over an existing utility easement. The second addition will be a drive-thru canopy addition to the front, southwest corner of the building. The drive-thru canopy will be approximately 19 feet by 23 feet in area and unenclosed on its east, west and south sides. The canopy will be located approximately 16.8 feet back from the front (south) property line, extending across the lot's 40 foot front platted building line. The canopy addition will allow dialysis patients to be dropped -off and picked -up during inclement weather. The applicant is also proposing to construct a new paved parking area along the north side of the building. The new parking area will contain 21 paved parking spaces. A dumpster area will be located along the east side of the parking area. The new lot will be landscaped as per code requirements. The project will continue to maintain two (2) access points from Tyler Street and the existing driveway from W. 12th Street. Section 36-301(e)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front (south) setback of 25 feet for this C-3 zoned property. Section 31-12 (c ) of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that building line encroachments be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Section 36-11(f) also requires that encroachments into utility easements be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance requirements to allow the drive-thru canopy addition with a reduced front setback and which crosses the front platted building line, and the rear building addition which encroaches over a utility easement. Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff views the request as reasonable. The proposed canopy addition will aid in the drop-off and pick-up of patients during inclement weather and patients who are not mobile enough to get SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 ( ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.) to the areas of paved parking. The proposed front setback for the canopy addition will not be out of character with other existing structures in the area. Three (3) existing buildings which house clinic -type uses and are located within the two (2) blocks immediately to the east have similar front setbacks from W. 12th Street. Additionally, the clinic building to the south across W. 12th Street has a similar front setback. With respect to the easement variance, all of the public utilities have approved the proposed building addition which encroaches into the utility easement. Staff believes the proposed redevelopment of this site, with additions, will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the platted front building line for the addition. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. E. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the approval of the requested setback, building line and easement variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. Completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the front platted building line as approved by the Board. 2. Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer ordinances. 3. The canopy addition must remain unenclosed on its east, west and south sides. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (September 26, 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. Memo 8/29/11 To: Monte Moore City of Little Rock 723 W. Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 :Z: " --a-z- ,j� W -7 c -'2,, Re: 5320 W. 12`h Street, Little Rock, AR 72204 - Variance Application for Porte Cochere Mr. Moore, Thank you for your time on the phone and expediting this application for us. We really appreciate your help and assistance in obtaining the variance for the property listed above. Please note we are requesting a variance of the front setback and building line setback from West 12`h St. The Variance request is due to not having a patient drop off area which is covered during in climate weather and encroachment into the setback lines. The future use of the facility (Dialysis Clinic) requires a covered drop off for the facility. Lack of a porte cochere will cause a hardship to patients when being dropped off at the facility. Thanks again for your assistance in this matter. If there are any questions, do not hesitate to call. Sincerely na Roy S. Cribb, AIA Enclosures: Application 6 copies of Survey 6 copies of Bldg Elevations 6 copies of Site plan Application Fee ARCHITECTS, PLANNERS AND INTERIOR DESIGNERS Roy S. Cribb, AIA NCARB #67633 FL Reg #11311 LA Reg #6726 MS Reg #4257 NC Reg #8500 TNReg #103642 A Professional Corporation FL #C001995 @M�4� 9200 NW 39th AVE Suite 130-405 Gainesville, FL 32606 phone (352) 376 - 4642 fax (352) 377 - 3482 Office@RSCArchitecture.com SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 ITEM NO.: 3 File No.: Z-8703 Owner/Applicant: Keith Stone Address: 14211 St. Michael Drive Description: Lot 612, St. Charles Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the fence provisions of Section 36- 516 to allow an eight (8) foot high fence along the rear (south) property line of the property. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 14211 St. Michael Drive is occupied by a two-story brick and frame single family residence. There is a two -car wide driveway from St. Michael Drive at the northeast corner of the property. A wide power line easement is located immediately south of the property, along the rear property line. The Parkway Village retirement Center is located south of the easement. There is an existing six (6) foot high wood fence along the west side property line, within the rear yard area, which was installed by the neighbor to the west. The remainder of the rear yard area is not fenced. The applicant proposes to construct an eight (8) foot high wood fence along the rear (south) property line, as noted on the attached site plan. The applicant is proposing the fence to help buffer the single family property from the power line area and multifamily -type use to the south. Any fencing along the east side property line will not exceed six (6) feet in height. SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 ( ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T.) Section 36-516(e)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum fence height of six (6) feet in residential zoning. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow an eight (8) foot high fence only along the rear (south) property line. Staff is supportive of the requested fence height variance. Staff views the request as reasonable. The proposed eight (8) foot high fence will only be located along the rear (south) property line, adjacent to a wide utility easement, part of which is overgrown and somewhat unsightly. It will also buffer the residential lot from automobile noise and light from the parking lot on the Parkway Village property to the south. Staff believes the proposed eight (8) foot high fence will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested fence height variance, as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (September 26, 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. Keith R Stone -,. 43 14211 St Michael Drive ! (501) 228.5834 l Keithrstone@ Comcast.Net - Friday, August 26, 2011 —2 97c3 Members, Little Rock Board of Adjustment City of Little Rock Planning and Development Department (501) 371-6817 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Members, Little Rock Board of Adjustment: This variance request concerns my proposed fencing across the rear property line of lot 612, St. Charles, located at 14211 Saint Michael Drive in Little Rock. I am asking the board to approve the installation of an eight foot (8') high wood fence, instead of the standard six foot (6') high fence. Variance is requested only for fencing across the rear property line - all other fencing will adhere to the standard height. The rear of my property abuts Entergy's transmission and distribution right-of-way. Vegetation growth within the right of way is minimally maintained and quite often is very unsightly. The Baptist Retirement Community facility abuts the right-of-way on the opposite side. Recent expansion of this facility has resulted in an increase in the noise level emanating from the expanded parking lot and from additional air handling units installed at the rear of the facility. Late night shift changes at the facility have generated additional noise; automobile lights from the parking lot often reflect into our master bedroom at the rear of the house. Granting my variance request for an eight foot (8') high fence will somewhat abate these auditory and visual nuisances while significantly improving the ambience of our backyard. Granting this variance will not impact any other residential property, now or in the future. Enclosed are copies of: The original property survey of Lot 612, St Charles, City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas, annotated with existing and proposed fencing details. The recorded Plat and Bill of Assurance for lot 612 Google satellite image of property, right-of-way, and Baptist community facility If you have questions, please call me at (501) 228-5834. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, T� t Keith R Stene Enclosures Attachment to Little Rock Bop, a of Adjustment variance request from Keit,.., Stone, 8/26/2011 Google satellite map of Lot 612, St Charles, 14211 St. Michael Drive, Little Rock, AR Residence is located at point A on the map. SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 ITEM NO.: 4 File No.: Z-8704 Owner: Bosley Construction Applicant: Tim Daters, White-Daters and Associates Address: 20 Stonecreek Court Description: Lot 9, Stonecreek Village Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a covered patio which crosses a rear platted building line. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Undeveloped Lot Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comment B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 20 Stonecreek Court is currently undeveloped. Some site work has taken place in the past in preparation for new home construction. The lot is relatively shallow, ranging in depth from 75.92 feet to 94.15 feet. The lot contains a 15 foot platted front setback, five (5) foot platted side setbacks and a 20 foot platted rear setback. The applicant is proposing to construct a new single family residence on the lot, as noted on the attached site plan. The foot print of the house will fall within the platted buildable area, with the exception of a covered patio area. The applicant is proposing a 10 foot by 16 foot covered patio on the rear (west) of the residence. The covered patio will be located 10 feet back from the rear (west) property line. The patio area will be unenclosed on its north, south and west sides. 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 a variance from this ordinance standard to allow the covered patio which crosses a rear platted building line. SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 ( ITEM NO.: 4 (CON'T.) Staff is supportive of the requested building line variance. Staff views the request as reasonable. Although the lot was platted with reduced front and rear setbacks (from typical ordinance requirements), the relatively shallow lot depth greatly decreases the amount of buildable depth and area. The lot is located within the "bulb" of a cul-de-sac which reduces the lot depth to 75.92 feet (south property line). Typical single family residential lot depths are in the 140 to 150 foot range. As noted above, the main foot print of the proposed residence will comply with the platted building lines. Staff believes the proposed building line encroachment for the covered patio only will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the platted rear building line for the covered patio. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested building line variance, subject to the following conditions: 1. Completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the rear platted building line as approved by the Board. 2. The covered patio must remain unenclosed on its north, south and west sides. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (September 26, 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. © WHITE - DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, Arkansas 72223 0 Phone: 501-821-1667 Fax: 501-821-1668 August 30, 2011 Mr. Dana Carney City of Little Rock Planning & Development 723 W. Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Lot 9, Stonecreek Village Subdivision Residential Variance Dear Mr. Carney: White-Daters & Associates, Inc. is requesting for our client Bosley Construction, a residential variance for the above noted Lot 9, Stonecreek Village. This house is a pre -sold, and the owner would like a covered patio similar to the other. houses constructed in this area. Due to the shallow nature of this lot, it will be necessary for us to construct the patio in the rear yard. We have attached a survey and a sketch of a rear elevation showing the roof over the concrete patio. Please place this zoning variance request on the next available agenda. Feel free to contact me at the number above if you have any questions. Thank you fgx,your consideration. Timothy E: Daters, r CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT, SURVEYING SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 ITEM NO.: 5 File No.: Z-8705 Owner: Chlorine Treadwell Applicant: Andrew Williams Address: 3 Windsor Circle Description: Lot 505, Meadowcliff Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36- 156 and the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a storm shelter with reduced front and side setbacks, and which crosses a front platted building line. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 3 Windsor Circle is occupied by a one-story frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide driveway from Windsor Circle at the southwest corner of the lot. The lot contains a front platted building line which ranges in depth from 15 feet to 25 feet. The variation in building line depth is based on the fact that a portion of the front property line follows the curvature of the cul-de-sac. The owner recently installed a 6.5 foot by 8.5 foot in -ground storm shelter within the front yard area, along the south side of the driveway. The storm shelter is concrete construction, with a vent pipe and vent turbine on the roof. Approximately eight (8) to twelve (12) inches of the shelter is located above ground. The storm shelter is located 11.5 feet back from the front (west) property line and on (zero setback) the south side property line. The structure is located entirely between the front platted building line and the front property line. SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 ( ITEM NO.: 5 (CON'T.) Section 36-156(a)(2)c. of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front setback of 60 feet for accessory structures in residential zoning. Section 36- 156(a)(2)f. requires a minimum side setback of three (3) feet. 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 storm shelter/accessory structure with reduced front and side setbacks and which crosses a front platted building line. Staff is not supportive of the requested variances associated with the storm shelter. Staff believes the location of the storm shelter within the front yard area is out of character with the other properties in this neighborhood. Staff believes the storm shelter will have a negative visual impact on the adjacent properties and the other properties along Windsor Circle. In reviewing this issue, the Board may wish to consider discussing with the applicant the possibility of installing and maintaining landscaping around the shelter as a means to lessen the visual impact on surrounding properties. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the platted front building line for the storm shelter. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested setback and building line variances associated with the proposed storm shelter. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (SEPTEMBER 26, 2011) Chlorine Treadwell and Andrew Williams were present, representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the application with a recommendation of denial. Chlorine Treadwell addressed the Board in support of the application. She stated that grass sod would be planted around the storm shelter. Jeff Yates asked when the storm shelter was installed. Ms. Treadwell noted that it was installed in July, 2011. Mr. Yates asked if any neighbors had commented on the shelter. Ms. Treadwell stated that approximately seven (7) neighbors had given positive comments about the shelter. Vice -chair Smith asked about the installation of the shelter. Ms. Treadwell explained that she received approvals from all of the utility companies at the request of the company that installed the shelter. She and Mr. Williams explained that it was SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 ( ITEM NO.: 5 (CON'T.) impossible to place the shelter in the rear yard area because of existing utility lines and the lot's topography. Vice -chair Smith asked about the cost of the shelter. Ms. Treadwell noted that the shelter cost was $3,398.00. Vice -chair Smith explained that he typically did not support front setback variances of this type. He discussed the possibility of installing and maintaining landscaping to soften the visual impact of the shelter. He also discussed painting the vent pipe and turbine as an additional way to lessen the visual impact. Mr. Yates concurred with Vice -chair Smith's comments. He discussed requiring the landscaping and painting as conditions of approval. He further commented on structures in front yard areas. Rajesh Mehta asked if Ms. Treadwell had paid the contractor for the shelter. Ms. Treadwell stated that she had paid in full. There was a motion to approve the requested setback and building line variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. Evergreen shrubs must be planted and maintained along the west and south (with permission of adjacent property owner) sides of the storm shelter. The shrubs are to be a minimum of 36 inches tall at planting and planted every three (3) feet. The shrubs are to be maintained at a minimum height of 36 inches. 2. The vent pipe and vent turbine on top of the storm shelter must be painted and maintained as earth tone color. 3. The landscaping and painting must be completed within 30 days. The motion passed with a vote of 5 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent. The application was approved. To: hoard of Adjustment -2- 87v,5 From: Chlorine Treadwell RE: Storm Shelter Dear Board My name is, Chlorine Treadwell, currently residing at 3 Windsor Circle, Little Rock, Ar. 72209. 1 recently moved down here from Chicago, II., in November 2010. At which time I purchased the home. Due to the severe tornadoes that occurred this past spring, and the colossal damage that it caused in several states, I decided to purchase a storm shelter. I contacted a company, Tornado Tough and asked what was needed to purchase a shelter. I was told all that was required of me was to contact the utility companies, ie. Water, light, and gas, and to inform them that I was having a shelter built so they can come out and mark the ground, which they all complied. At no point was I ever told that I needed a building permit. Had I known that was required of me I would have taken the proper steps to follow everything accordingly I am 60 years old and due to glaucoma, I am legally blind. I would like to keep my shelter where the company placed it for safety reasons. I had it built big enough so if any of my immediate neighbors were to need shelter from any tornadoes they were more than welcomed to come in for safety. If the board can see it all possible for my shelter to stay it would be greatly appreciated due to my disability, and in case of a tornado, the shelter is in the best place for myself and my neighbors to make it inside in case of an emergency. Thank You Chlorine Treadwell SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 ITEM NO.: 6 File No.: Z-8706 Owner: K & M Capital, LLC Applicant: Scott Hailey and Kevin Holmes Address: 1023 W. 7th Street Description: Southeast Corner of W. 7th and Ringo Streets Zoned: UU Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-553 to allow a projecting sign with increased sign area and decreased setback from property line. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Cleaners Proposed Use of Property: Cleaners STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The UU zoned property at 1023 W. 7th Street is occupied by a two-story commercial building. The property is located at the southeast corner of W. 7th and Ringo Streets. Hangers Cleaners recently occupied the ground floor of the structure. An auto repair business is located within the rear (south) portion of the building. On -street parking is located along both sides of W. 7th Street and the east side of Ringo Street. The cleaners has wall signage on both the north (W. 7th Street) and west (Ringo Street) sides of the building. When Hangers Cleaners occupied the building an existing projecting sign for the previous occupant (Wooley Electric Supply Co.) was removed and replaced with a new projecting sign, as noted in attached photos. The new projecting sign is the same size and is located on the same spot on the building as the previous sign. The projecting sign is approximately 38 square feet in area and extends from the building, into the public right-of-way, approximately six (6) feet. The projecting sign is located 10 to 12 feet above the sidewalk area. SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 ( ITEM NO.: 6 (CON'T.) Section 36-553(a)(2)b. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows one (1) projecting sign per occupancy not to exceed 12 square feet in sign area. Section 36-553(b) requires that projecting signs be located at least five (5) feet back from any property line. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards to allow the projecting sign with increased area and to extend into the public right-of-way. Staff is supportive of the requested sign variances. Staff views the request as reasonable. The new projecting sign simply replaced a projecting sign which was a fixture on the front of this commercial building for a number of years. The new projecting sign is the same size and is located on the same point of the building as the previous sign for Wooley Electric Supply Company. There are other similar projecting signs throughout the downtown area. There is another existing projecting sign located on the building immediately to the east. Staff believes the proposed projecting sign will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested sign variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. A sign permit must be obtained. 2. A franchise permit must be obtained from the Public Works Department. 3. No projecting sign will be allowed on the west (Ringo Street) side of the building. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (September 26, 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. Hangers To Whom It May Concern: 08/30/2011 My name is Scott Hailey. I'm the General Manager of Hangers Cleaners. We started Hangers five years ago with the vision of growth and of providing Central Arkansas with quality, convenient, drycleaning and laundry services. Since day one, The Downtown area has been at the top of our list of areas to place a retail store. 1023 W 7th came available. Wooley Electric occupied the location for many years. Their large black sign has been a direction point in many conversations. We replaced the Wooley Electric sign with one of the exact same look and size, only new with our logo. I'm very embarrassed and apologetic that our sign company failed to apply for the necessary permits. We would have done whatever necessary to keep the existing signage. Without this current sign, we would lose a considerable investment along with the added expenses to replace the signage. The current sign is visible from all sides of the space, removing the need for lighted signs on both sides of the building. We hope to be good neighbors with the Downtown Community and respectfully ask that you find some way for us to keep our signage. Thank You. Sincerely, Scott Hailey Hangers Cleaners 501-551-3787 r SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 ITEM NO.: 7 ADOPTED: SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CALENDAR OF MEETING DATES 2012 FILING DATE NOTICE DEADLINE MEETING DATE 09-27-11 10-21-11 10-31-11 11-01-11 11-18-11 11-28-11 11-22-11 12-09-11 12-19-11 12-20-11 01-20-12 01-30-12 01-31-12 02-17-12 02-27-12 02-28-12 03-16-12 03-26-12 03-27-12 04-20-12 04-30-12 04-24-12 05-11-12 05-21-12 05-22-12 06-15-12 06-25-12 06-26-12 07-20-12 07-30-12 07-31-12 08-17-12 08-27-12 08-28-12 09-14-12 09-24-12 09-25-12 10-19-12 10-29-12 10-30-12 11-16-12 11-26-12 11-20-12 12-07-12 12-17-12 12-18-12 01-18-13 01-28-13 NOTE: (1) All Board meetings to be held at 2:00 P.M. unless otherwise changed by the Board. (2) Agenda meeting to be held at 1:30 P.M. in the Board Conference Room on meeting date. NOTICE: AN INTERPRETER WILL BE PROVIDED FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED UPON REQUEST. REQUEST SHOULD BE MADE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AT LEAST TWO WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED MEETING DATE. O U W W O h - z W I— C/) Q LL O a! 4 O m a N✓ F -- z w m Q w Q Z mo w Q f t F- NO r W Q m \14.N F - W�mm� o m0 Q Q LLI 0 �C) -J LLJ � z� Q (n CO W Q W -� W co Q it=—U0w H = LL (� Lij LU 2i z_z_F- � N✓ F -- z w m Q w Q Z mo w Q t F- W Q m F - W�mm� Q NryWLL LL O W -J LLJ � z� _LL W = H U zzF- Ci LLI t=�(ico w 2i � N✓ F -- z w m Q w Q Z mo w Q September 26, 2011 There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 2:31 p.m. Date: Chairman