Loading...
boa_08 30 2010a LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY OF MINUTES AUGUST 30, 2010 a J� Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being four (4) in number. II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meetings The Minutes of the July 26, 2010 meeting were approved as mailed by unanimous vote. III. Members Present: Robert Winchester, Chairman Scott Smith, Vice Chairman Rajesh Mehta Brad Wingfield Open Position Members Absent: None City Attorney Present: Cindy Dawson LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA AUGUST 30, 2010 2:00 P.M. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum II. Approval of the Minutes of the July 26, 2010 meetings of the Board of Adjustment III. Presentation of Consent Agenda IV. Presentation of Hearing Items LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA AUGUST 30, 2010 2:00 P.M. I. OLD BUSINESS: A. Z-8566 II. NEW BUSINESS: 1. Z -3371 -EE 2. Z -4104-A 3. Z -4104-B 4. Z -8306-A 5. Z -8494-A 6. Z-8581 7. Z-8582 8. Z-8583 9. Z-8584 10. Z -4726-A 122 Rice Street 600 Colonel Glenn Plaza Loop 9911 Interstate 30 9911 Interstate 30 1617 N. Tyler Street 10923 Interstate 30 12 Powder Horn Court 5001 Hawthorne Street 1606 N. Polk Street 2210 Windsor Court 39 Beverly Place El zvad ,CD ny-,---IN7S •8/732 ` 0 is IddiSSISSIw N 4..i h � oa svwoHl Nva � W j ZI F w �...� h Ij 0 Mpacoo s3 NI -CDJ o LU U z y + � ; (la latlM31S ir w i OOE AtlMH9—IH . �� L �O oa sNavds U7 oa'd M SIOatlS N I E 4� 0 L M0 W ny-,---IN7S 3� r is IddiSSISSIw N h � W � a MOaabS NHO Oa NIOAN Sia cl Oz Oa wM as z ❑ t�� s -CDJ o LU U z y + � ; (la latlM31S ir w i OOE AtlMH9—IH . �� L �O oa sNavds U7 oa'd M SIOatlS N I E 4� 0 L M0 W AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: A File No.: Z-8566 Owner: Pearl, LLC Applicant: David Pearlstein Address: 122 Rice Street Description: Lot 8, Block 4, Capitol View Addition Zoned: R-4 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the fence provisions of Section 36- 516 to allow a fence which exceeds the maximum height allowed. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT Q L: Public Works Issues: No Comments Staff Analysis: The R-4 zoned property at 122 Rice Street contains a one-story frame single family residence. The property is located at the northwest corner of Rice Street and W. 2nd Street. There is a gravel driveway from W. 2nd Street which serves as access to the property. The property slopes downward from back to front (west to east). The front yard area of the lot is approximately four (4) to five (5) feet above the grade of Rice Street. The applicant recently constructed a wood fence along the front (east) and south side property lines, as noted on the attached site plan. The fence varies in height and steps down with the slope along the south property line. The portion of the fence which is in the front yard area is constructed of three (3) to four (4) feet of solid wood with approximately two (2) feet of lattice -type woodwork (non-opaque) on top. The fence along the south side property line is six (6) to eight (8) feet in height with similar construction to the portion in the front yard area. The vast majority of the fence along the south property line is six (6) to seven (7) feet in height. It only nears the eight (8) foot high mark near the southeast corner of the lot. AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: A (CON'T.) Section 36-516(e)(1)a. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum fence height of four (4) feet for fences located between a building setback line and street front or side property line, and six (6) feet elsewhere on a single family lot. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow those portions of the fence which are located between the building setback lines and the street side property lines to exceed the maximum height allowed. Staff is supportive of the requested fence height variance. Staff views the request as reasonable. The yard elevation along where the fence is located is several feet above the grade of the adjacent streets. This gives the fence the appearance that it is taller than it actually is. Additionally, the new fence is not out of character with other fences in the general area. The property immediately to the south across W. 2nd Street recently received a variance to allow an eight (8) foot high fence along the street side property line. Staff believes the new fence is a nice improvement to the property and 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, subject to a building permit being obtained for the fence construction. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JUNE 28, 2010) The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff noted that the applicant had not completed the required notifications to surrounding property owners. Staff recommended the application be deferred to the July 26, 2010 agenda. The item was placed on the consent agenda and deferred to the July 26, 2010 agenda. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JULY 26, 2010) The applicant was not present. There were no objectors present. Staff noted that the applicant had not completed the required notifications to surrounding property owners. Staff recommended the application be deferred to the August 30, 2010 agenda. The item was placed on the consent agenda and deferred to the August 30, 2010 agenda. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: A (CON'T.) BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 30, 2010) The applicant was not present. There were two (2) persons present with concerns. Staff recommended the application be deferred to the September 27, 2010 agenda based on the fact that the applicant was not present. There was a motion to defer the application to the September 27, 2010 agenda. The motion passed by a vote of 3 ayes, 1 nay, 0 absent and 1 open position. The application was deferred. "-/ -2 c)/z) Lt7 aV, �e-fie r -co/- Fe -0,1<7- be ✓r/a vl(Q- --(� I -I - lot Zlj�k 12oJ- 0 liv k f— ' ' ("/I A Al J 7-A eAl z, Cc /Ke J`/cwt' v /'l cl vlk t4 AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 1 File No.: Z -3371 -EE Owner: Glenn Ridge Crossing, LLC/Playtime Pizza Partnership, LLC Applicant: Robert D. Holloway, The Holloway Firm Address: 600 Colonel Glenn Plaza Loop Description: Lot 4, Glenn Ridge Crossing Addition Zoned: C-3 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-555 to allow a sign which exceeds the maximum height allowed. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Playtime Pizza Development Proposed Use of Property: Playtime Pizza Development STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: The C-3 zoned property at 600 Colonel Glenn Plaza Loop is occupied by a Playtime Pizza facility. The property is located near the south end of Colonel Glenn Plaza Loop, south of the Rave Theater. A two-story commercial building housing the pizza restaurant/arcade is located within the west half of the property. Paved parking is located on the north and east sides of the building. On February 25, 2008 the Board of Adjustment approved variances for increased sign height and area for a subdivision sign along the east property line (1-430 frontage) of 600 Colonel Glenn Plaza Loop. The sign was approved with a maximum height of 50 feet and an area of approximately 400 square feet. The sign has been installed and is internally lighted. The sign will contain the names of businesses within the Glenn Ridge Crossing Subdivision. The sign variances were approved with the following conditions: 1. A sign permit must be obtained for the sign. 2. There are to be no other ground -mounted signs within the Glenn Ridge Crossing Subdivision located along 1-430 frontage of the Subdivision. AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T.) Section 36-555(a)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum sign height of 36 feet and a maximum sign area of 160 square feet for signs in commercial zoning districts. The applicant is back before the Board requesting to increase the height of the previously approved subdivision sign from 50 feet to 75 feet. The sign area will remain the same. The applicant notes that the variance is requested due to the fact that the existing sign with a height of 50 feet is not visible from 1-430. Staff is not supportive of the requested sign height variance. Staff feels the previous approval of a 50 foot sign height was fairly generous. The requested sign height of 75 feet is over twice the height allowed for commercial signage, including billboards in commercial zones. Additionally, the sign is located along Interstate 430 which is designated as a scenic corridor and allows no billboard signs. Staff believes the existing sign height does allow some visibility from 1-430. Staff feels that increasing the sign height to 75 feet at this location would have a negative impact on 1-430's designation as a scenic corridor by triggering other businesses in the area to request similar sign heights. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested sign height variance. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 30, 2010) Robert Holloway and Mark Redder were present, representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the application with a recommendation of denial. Robert Holloway addressed the Board in support of the application. He discussed the requested increased sign height. Mark Redder also addressed the Board in support. He explained that the previous sign height variance was to have a sign visible from 1-430. He noted that the current requested sign height was to meet that intent. He noted that the proposed 75 foot tall sign would be just at the top of the existing trees along 1-430. He presented photos of the existing sign from various points along 1-430. Mr. Holloway explained that the existing sign could be a hazard as it has little visibility from 1-430. Brad Wingfield asked if the proposed sign would have visibility for south bound traffic on 1-430. Mr. Redder noted that the primary intent was to have the sign visible for north bound traffic. Vice -Chair Smith noted that the property was on a scenic corridor. He explained that thinning the existing trees, where allowed, and making the existing sign more visible was probably the best alternative. He stated that he did not support the height variance. AUGUST 30, 2010 ice► �Riait(K�P►� Mr. Redder made additional comments related to the requested sign height. The issue was further discussed. Chairman Winchester asked if the sign would be visible from Colonel Glenn Road. Mr. Redder explained that it was not. There was additional discussion related to the sign location. There was a motion to approve the requested sign height variance. The motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes, 4 nays, 0 absent and 1 open position. The application was denied. Te .Voffoway (Finn, Inco Civil and Environmental Design Robert D. Holloway Prof. Engineer Registration Arkansas Mississippi Louisiana Alabama Prof. Land Surveyor Registration Arkansas July 22, 2010 Monty Moore City of Little Rock Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Case no. Z -3371-W Dear Mr. Moore, 200 Casey Drive Maumelle, AR 72113 ♦ Telephone (501) 851-8806 (501) 851-3366 -EE Facsimile (501) 851-3368 E -Mail hollowayfinn@sbcglobal.net This letter shall serve as both as request and permission to have the Glenn Ridge Crossing, LLC Project sign referred to as Case no. Z-3371 -W to allow the sign to be raised to 75' above the adjacent ground. This sign is located at 600 Colonel Glenn Plaza Loop and owned by Playtime Pizza Partnership, LLC. We are asking for this variance due to the fact that, at the sign's current height, the sign cannot be seen from I-430 which was the intent of the height variance requested in Case No. Z -3371-W. All other conditions referenced in the variance approval shall remain the same. Respectfully, R s Robert D. Hol oway RDH/ba ENGINEERING ♦ DESIGN ♦ SURVEY/MAPPING AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 2 File No.: Z -4104-A Owner: Crain Investments, LP Applicant: Joe White, White-Daters and Associates Address: 9911 Interstate 30 Description: South side of Interstate 30, east of Baseline Road Zoned: 1-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the buffer provisions of Section 36- 522 to allow reduced street buffers. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Vacant Warehouse Proposed Use of Property: Auto Dealership STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Landscape and Buffer Issues: Site plan must comply with the City's landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. The zoning street buffer ordinance requires an average fifty foot (50') wide street buffer along both Interstate 30 and along Baseline Road and in no case shall be less than half, or twenty-five foot (25') wide. Currently, both of the streets are deficient in this amount. Approval has been granted for the reduced Interstate buffer width by the City Beautiful Commission for nine feet (9') on July 01, 2010. C. Staff Analysis: The 1-2 zoned property at 9911 Interstate 30 is occupied by a large one-story vacant warehouse building which is located near the center of the site. There are associated paved/concrete vehicular use and parking areas around the building. AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.) The property has frontage on 1-30 and Baseline Road. The applicant is in the process of redeveloping the site for relocation of the Crain Chevrolet dealership from S. University Avenue. The existing building will be remodeled for the dealership, with new areas of paved parking and auto display, as noted on the attached site plan. The site will be landscaped as required by ordinance. With the new area of pavement, the applicant is proposing nine (9) foot wide street buffers/landscaped areas along the 1-30 and Baseline Road frontages. Section 36- 522(b)(4)b. of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires minimum street buffers of 50 feet. Section 36-522(a)(3) requires a minimum interstate buffer width of 30 feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance from these ordinance standards to allow the reduced street buffers. On July 1, 2010 the City Beautiful Commission granted variances for the reduced street buffers/landscaped areas for this proposed project. The approval contained the following condition: • All required trees within landscaped areas shall have a minimum caliper of four (4) inches. Staff is supportive of the requested variance to allow reduced street buffers, supporting the City Beautiful Commission's approval of the site/landscape plan with reduced street buffers/landscape areas. This property has been a derelict property and an eyesore for the nearby residential neighborhoods for many years. The applicant is proposing a quality redevelopment plan for the property. The proposed reduced street buffers will not be out of character with many other properties in this general area, both along 1-30 and Baseline Road. There are a number of properties in this area which are non -conforming with respect to buffers and landscape areas that are deficient is size and do not conform to current ordinance standards. Staff believes the proposed redevelopment plan with reduced street buffers will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested buffer variance, as approved by the City Beautiful Commission, with the following condition: 1. All required trees within landscaped areas shall have a minimum caliper of four (4) inches. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 30, 2010) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval as noted in the "staff recommendation" above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was 4 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 open position. WHITE - DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, Arkansas 72223 imPhone: 501-821-1667 Fax: 501-821-1668 July 23, 2010 Mr. Monte Moore City of Little Rock Neighborhoods and Planning 723 W. Markham St. Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Crain Chevrolet Non -Residential Zoning Variance Mr. Moore, -Lki0- Please find attached six copies of the survey and site plan for the above referenced property along with an application for a non residential zoning variance. The owner of this property is currently trying to re -develop the vacated warehouse into a car dealership. The location of the existing building is dictating the parking lot configuration. The owner has already submitted and been approved by the City Beautiful Commission. Please place this item on the next Board of Adjustment Meeting. Do not hesitate to call if you have any questions or require additional information. Your help in this matter is greatly appreciated. Best regards, A�5��k Brian Dale CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT, SURVEYING AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 3 File No.: Z -4104-B Owner: Crain Investments, LP Applicant: Jamie Booe, Harco Constructors Address: 9911 Interstate 30 Description: South side of Interstate 30, east of Baseline Road Zoned: 1-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-554 to allow two (2) signs which exceed the maximum height and area allowed. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Vacant Warehouse Proposed Use of Property: Auto Dealership STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: The 1-2 zoned property at 9911 Interstate 30 is occupied by a large one-story vacant warehouse building which is located near the center of the site. There are associated paved/concrete vehicular use and parking areas around the building. The property has frontage on 1-30 and Baseline Road. The applicant is in the process of redeveloping the site for relocation of the Crain Chevrolet dealership from S. University Avenue. The existing building will be remodeled for the dealership, with new areas of paved parking and auto display, as noted on the attached site plan. The site will be landscaped as required by ordinance. As part of the redevelopment project the applicant proposes to relocate the two (2) existing ground -mounted signs to this site from the S. University location. The proposed sign locations are also noted on the attached site plan. One (1) of the existing signs is 35.99 feet in height and approximately 138 square feet in area. The second sign is 47 feet in height and approximately 235 square feet in area. The applicant notes that General Motors requires the signs and reuse of the signage will be a better option than constructing new signs. AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T.) Section 36-554(a)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum sign height of 30 feet and a maximum sign area of 72 square feet for signs in industrial zoning. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from this ordinance standard to allow the two (2) existing ground signs with increased height and area to be relocated to this 1-2 zoned site. Staff is supportive of the requested sign variances. Staff views the request as reasonable based on the fact that the signs will not be out of character with other signs in this general area along 1-30. The signs are more in line with commercial signs as allowed by ordinance (36 feet in height, 160 square feet in area), with a large amount of commercial zoned property being in this general area. There are other signs with similar height and area dimensions in this area along 1-30 to the east and west. Additionally, the taller of the two (2) signs will aid somewhat in identifying the property to eastbound traffic on the Baseline Road overpass. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested sign variances, subject to permits being obtained for the signs. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 30, 2010) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval as noted in the "staff recommendation" above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was 4 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 open position. -FARC constructors July 12, 2010 Mr. Monte Moore Zoning and Enforcement Administrator Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201-1334 Re: 9911 Interstate I-30 Dear Mr. Moore, Please allow this letter to serve as both a request and justification for additional signage on the above referenced address. This site has several disadvantages due to the natural terrain, elevation, and adjacent overpass that leave this site with limited visibility. In addition, to the above items we are requesting that the existing signage be allowed to be relocated from the current facility. These signs are required by General Motors and reuse of this signage would divert these materials from landfills. In addition to the above, we have a total of 656 linear feet of frontage. With this in mind, we are asking for a variance to allow only two signs along the I-30 frontage in lieu of four. The existing signs are shown in the attached application, which show a total 352 sf (two), when the allowed with respect to the frontage is 640 sf (four). Again, we propose and request a variance for relocation of existing signage. Thank you for your cooperation and consideration in the above matters. Sincerely, Jmile Booe S1 Pro anager PO Box 13267 • Maumelle, AR 72113 Phone: (501)791.-0055 • Fax: (501)791-0237 AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 4 File No.: Z -8306-A Owner: Chris and Lori Schaffhauser Applicant: Chris Schaffhauser Address: 1617 N. Tyler Street Description: Lot 18, Block 3, Englewood Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254 to allow a garage addition with a reduced rear setback. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: 1. Measures to control the increase in stormwater runoff from the increased impervious surface should be implemented to not damage adjacent property. B. Staff Anal The R-2 zoned property at 1617 N. Tyler Street is occupied by a two-story single family residence which was constructed approximately two (2) years ago. There is a paved alley along the rear (east) property line. A concrete parking pad exists at the northeast corner of the property. On January 28, 2008 the Board of Adjustment approved a rear setback variance to allow a garage/room addition to this single family residence. Due to economic reasons, the applicant was unable to complete the addition within two (2) years of the Board's action. As such, the initial approval has expired. The applicant is back before the Board to request re -approval of the original variance. AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 4 (CON'T.) The applicant is proposing to construct a 24 foot by 42 foot garage/room addition on the rear of the single family structure, as noted on the attached site plan. The proposed addition will be located five (5) feet from the north side property line and 21 feet from the south side property line. A 7.8 foot rear (east) setback is proposed for the addition. The first floor of the addition will allow for the parking of three (3) vehicles (stacked) and the second floor will contain a game room and bath. Section 36-254(d)(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear setback of 25 feet for R-2 zoned lots. Therefore, applicant is requesting a variance to allow a 7.8 foot rear setback for the proposed addition. Staff continues to be supportive of the requested rear setback variance. The circumstances surrounding the original variance request have not changed. The overall structural massing proposed for this lot will not be out of character with many other lots in this general area. A variance was granted for the lot to the south, at the northeast corner of N. Tyler and "O" Streets, for a similar garage addition. As noted on the attached site plan, a small rear porch will attach to the proposed addition. If the porch were not there, the garage structure could be constructed as an accessory building with no variances required. There are a number of large accessory structures, with similar lot massing, along the alley right-of-way within this block. Staff believes the proposed addition will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested rear setback variance, subject to the addition being constructed to match the existing residence (similar style and color). BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 30, 2010) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval as noted in the "staff recommendation" above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was 4 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 open position. Chris Schaff1hauser 1617 North Tyler Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72207 Monte Moore June 0, 2. 0 10 Departiment ot"Neighborhoods and Panning 723 West Mankhann Little Ro&, AR 72201 KE: Zoning Variance Appli. cat; onfor SchafRajser Residence, 161.7 N IFyIer St Dear 'lvlonte., We were original) -vaproved over 2 years ago for our zoning variance, lyirt were. upah-le to complete oar ho.rr.,e addition due to the economic recession at that tirne. We are now requestini,u-,, that our valiance be approved a second time as we wotfid Like to complete this addition to OUT VATe respectriffilly ask that vve are approved by 'the Cih-Y.Planning Board, N-1tradhed Vou will L e thad cRix original Ir apaest for a zoning variance. Thank you for yo-t.,r consideration in thds rnmttter. sinc ereiy.� Chris Sc.aafiiser 'Teary Lindsey Architects Mr. Monte Moore Department of Neighborhoods and Planning 723 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Zoning Variance Application for Schaff hauser Residence, 1617 N. Tyler St. Dear Monte, December 19, 2007 We are requesting a zoning variance at 1617 N. Tyler St. to allow an encroachment into the rear 25' setback of 17.2' for the purpose of constructing a 2 story addition housing a garage with a game room and bath above. The rear of the property abuts a 20' dedicated and fully functioning alley and the house fronts on the part of N. Tyler that is across from Forest Park Elementary and therefore has cars parked along the street most every weekday excepting school breaks. The addition respects the 5' side yard setback and has a gabled roof with gutters and downspouts. The exterior is constructed of siding at the first floor level to match the existing and stucco at the second floor level to break up the scale of the addition. The program required a 3 -car garage and our proposed addition double stacks one side to prevent the house from either being cut off from the back yard by a 3 -car garage or to prevent paving the entire back yard. This addition has an enclosed connection due to safety and security. The owners had an attempted break-in a few weeks ago and the alley leaves them very exposed to strangers with ill intent. In a typical rear yard situation with no alley you have two 25' rear yards back to back. In this instance we would have a 7.8' rear yard plus a 20' alley backing up to a 25' rear yard opposite. Also, the neighbors to the north and south both have accessory structures in the rear yard located very close to the property line. A rear yard coverage percentage variance was granted to the owners of the new house on the corner of N. Tyler and O Streets allowing for an enclosed garage connected with a breezeway. It should be noted that the breezeway part of that house is visible from O Street, which is a fairly busy street. Thank you for your time and consideration. . Sincerely, Carolyn A, U 6ey, AIA 319 President Clinton Ave., Suite 201 Little Rock, ;= R 72201 50I-372-5940 FX: 501-707-0118 AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 5 File No.: Z -8494-A Owner: Scott Equipment Company Applicant: Sam Light Address: 10923 Interstate 30 Description: Southeast corner of Interstate 30 and Sibley Hole Road Zoned: 1-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the paving provisions of Section 36- 508 to allow an unpaved (gravel) vehicular use area. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Heavy Equipment Sales Proposed Use of Property: Heavy Equipment Sales STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Landscape and Buffer Issues: Site plan must comply with the City's landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 5 (CON'T.) C. Staff Analysis: The 1-2 zoned property at 10923 1-30 is occupied by the Scott Equipment Company facilities. The property is located at the southeast corner of 1-30 and Sibley Hole Road. A one-story office and shop building is located within the west half of the property. There is also associated paved parking and heavy equipment display/storage. On October 20, 2009 the City Board of Directors passed Ordinance No. 20, 178 which rezoned the east portion of this property to 1-2. The rezoning was requested to allow equipment display within this area. The applicant is proposing to utilize this additional area as a gravel equipment display area, as noted on the attached site plan. Two (2) new paved driveways from the 1-30 frontage road will serve the area. The area will be fenced as noted. The applicant is also proposing to construct a new 100 foot by 120 foot (with 40 foot by 120 foot awning) shop building east of the existing office/shop building. Section 36-508 of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires that all vehicular use areas be paved. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance from this ordinance standard to allow the gravel area within the east portion of the property for heavy equipment display. There are no variances requested for the new building. Staff is supportive of the requested paving variance. Staff views the request as reasonable. The proposed unpaved vehicular use area will not be out of character with the general area. Many of the surrounding industrial properties have unpaved vehicular use/storage areas. The property immediately to the west (across Sibley Hole Road) was approved for a large gravel vehicular use area by the Board in 2008. The fence company immediately west of there has gravel parking areas. Additionally, the trucking company at the intersection of 1-30 and Otter Creek Road was approved for gravel parking. Many other businesses in other industrial areas of the city have non -paved areas for the parking, storage or display of heavy equipment. As long as the gravel area is maintained in a manner that does not result in the creation of dust, mud, silt or standing water, staff believes use of the gravel vehicular use area will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the genera area. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested paving variance, subject to the following conditions: 1. The gravel vehicular use area must be maintained in a manner that does not result in the creation of dust, mud, silt or standing water. 2. Compliance with the landscape and buffer requirements as noted in paragraph B. of the staff report. AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 5 (CON'T.) BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 30, 2010) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval as noted in the "staff recommendation" above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was 4 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 open position. July 22, 2010 SCOTT EQUIPMENT COMPANY, L.L.C. 10923 West Interstate 30 Little Rock, AR 72209-5838 P.O. Box 1036 Mabelvale, AR 72103-1036 �^ Application for a Non -Residential Zoning Variance Proposal Property Address: 10923 West Interstate 30, Little Rock Arkansas Scott Equipment Company is in need of expanding its facility at 10923 West Interstate 30. Several problems will have to be addressed to increase parking area, reduce traffic on Sibley Hole Road, and add a new service/shop facility. All proposed areas are zoned I-2. Over the past several years, heavy truck traffic has increased on Sibley Hole Road due to the increase of Scott Equipment Company's business, the installation of a truck driving training facility to our west, and a construction service company to our south. Sibley Hole Road has been repaired by Scott Equipment Company and the City of Little Rock Public Works, but is not holding up to the increase traffic. Scott Equipment Company is in need of more equipment parking, display area, and larger driveways to accommodate larger equipment. We propose to install two (2) 36' wide drive ways off of Interstate 30 service road. First proposed driveway will be 225' from center of existing driveway on site map and the second at 456' form center of existing driveway. Proposed driveways locations are due to existing coverts for interstate drainage, existing power poles, and east of the proposed fence has an excessive slope that will not allow passage of low clearance trailers. Width of proposed driveway and radius of opening to service road is in compliance with City of Little Rock Ordinances. This will dramatically reduce if not eliminate all of Scott Equipment Company's heavy traffic from Sibley Hole Road. Please see attached pictures of damages & recent repairs to Sibley Hole along with proposed drive area. We also request the existing fence be move to proposed location on the site map provided. Proposed site plan does have a 30' buffer area that will be used for landscaping/greenbelt in accordance with City of Little Rock Ordinance. We request that the existing gravel parking area be extended to include the proposed fenced in area. We are not able to use asphalt or concrete due to the weight of machinery being operated in this area. Most of the machinery are on tracks with cleats, weigh from 50,000 lbs to 150,000 lbs., and will destroy asphalt and concrete. Scott Equipment Company existing shop does not have the capacity for over head cranes to work on larger machinery and we are running out of work area needed for additional employees. We request a variance from existing site plan to build a 100'xl20' shop/service facility with a 40' awning parallel to the existing office and shop. Proposed facility will give us the ability to increase our capabilities to service larger equipment as well increase work area for future employees. The proposed shop area will take in part of the existing gravel parking area and will not be located on any utilities or in any floodway. Tel 501.455.5955 — Fax 501-455.5070 — www.scottcompanies.com SCOTT u`.1274•�•mx4'4M1W:&',tti�. s�i4C�vS�kk.`fi�tNc�ii?='.'. SCOTT EQUIPMENT COMPANY, L.L.C. 10923 West Interstate 30 Little Rock, AR 72209-5838 P.O. Box 1036 Mabelvale, AR 72103-1036 Scott Equipment Company and I thank you for your consideration. If you have questions, please contact me at your earliest convenience. �h, General ManagerN.P. Scott Equipment Company Tel 501.455.5955 — Fax 501-455.5070 — www.scotteompanies.com AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 6 File No.: Z-8581 Owner/Applicant: Denise J. Burrow Address: 12 Powder Horn Court Description: Lot 30, Pebble Beach Park Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36- 254 and the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a porch addition with a reduced front setback and which crosses a 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 0 Public Works Issues: No Comments Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 12 Powder Horn Court is occupied by a two-story brick singe family residence. There is a two -car wide driveway from Powder Horn Court, which serves as access to a two -car garage at the north end of the residence. The property slopes downward from Powder Horn Court from north to south and west to east. The lot contains a 25 foot platted building line along the north and west, street fronting, property lines. The front of the house faces west. The applicant is proposing to construct a one-story covered porch on the front (west) of the residence, as noted on the attached site plan. The porch will be 8 feet by 30 feet in area, and be unenclosed on its north, south and west sides. The proposed porch will cross the 25 foot front platted building line by two (2) feet to 5.5 feet, resulting in a front setback ranging from 19.5 feet to 23 feet. Section 36-254(d)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front setback of 25 feet for this R-2 zoned lot. 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 AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: these ordinance standards to allow the front porch addition with a reduced front setback and which crosses a front platted building line. Staff is supportive of the requested front setback variance. Staff views the request as reasonable. Because of the slope of the lot, the residence was located as near as possible to the north and west property lines. Therefore, the existing house has excess rear (east) and side (south) setbacks, and is located very near the platted building lines. The house was constructed with a small uncovered stoop at the front door. The new front porch will allow a covered entryway which should add street appeal to the structure. Additionally, because of the curvature of the cul-de- sac, the house with porch addition will not have the appearance of being out of alignment with other structures along the street. Staff believes the proposed porch addition 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 porch 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. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested setback and building line 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. The building addition must be constructed to match the existing residence (similar style and color). BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 30, 2010) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval as noted in the "staff recommendation" above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was 4 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 open position. Denise J Burrow 12 Powderhorn Court Little Rock, AR 72212 July 23, 2010 Board of Adjustment Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Variance Application Board Members, 6 2-P ITS-) Please find attached my application and supporting documentation requesting a variance for the construction of a porch on the front of my home, part of which would fall within the twenty-five foot building setback. Within the past two years I have had ten pine trees fall in the lot around the house and was forced to remove the only two that provided very limited shade and coverage in the front of the house. As can be seen on the attached survey, the house faces west and receives side and direct sunlight the majority of each day. With the addition of the front porch the lower floor of the house will be shielded from the sunlight, a weather bearer will be created and the front of the house will be more secure due to it not being as open and unprotected. In addition to the lack of coverage on the front, the lot slopes to the south and rear which causes drainage problems during periods of rain. Currently the rain water collects and drains against the foundation walls. By providing a bearer, the porch foundation, the rain water can be directed away from the house. My desire is to add a front porch, measuring thirty feet in length and eight feet deep, to the center section of the house. The brick exterior of the house is approximately three feet behind the set back line which would place approximately five feet of the front porch within the set back. The south portion of the front yard would be graded against a small retaining wall to provide the correction needed for rain water runoff. Construction of the porch will consist of a block foundation, fill and a concrete deck. The front will be bricked to match the house, with four or six columns supporting a hipped roof that will be attached to the existing house midway between the first and second floors. July 23, 2010 Board of Adjustment Re: Variance Application During the preliminary discussions regarding the addition of a porch, I have talked to each of the neighbors in the cul-de-sac who will have a sight view and each has been very supportive of the idea and believe that it will not only address the concerns that I have, but also add to the street appeal of the house and neighborhood. Each of these neighbors will be contacted and included in the required Notice of Public Hearing. I thank you in advance for your consideration of my application. Sincerely, Denise Burrow AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 7 File No.: Z-8582 Owner: Tommy and Shelly Rayburn Applicant: Carolyn Lindsey Address: 5001 Hawthorne Street Description: Lot 1, Block 13, Newton's Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36- 254 and 36-156 to allow a carport addition with a reduced rear setback and two (2) accessory structures with reduced separation from the principal structure. 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 at 5001 Hawthorne Street is occupied by a two-story frame single family residence. The property is located at the southwest corner of Hawthorne Street and N. Jackson Street. There is a two -car wide driveway/parking pad on the east side of the residence from N. Jackson Street. The applicant is proposing to construct a new two -car wide carport addition to the residence, as well as a pavilion structure and swimming pool (accessory structures), as noted on the attached site plan. The carport addition will be located 6.5 feet back from the east, street side property line and 10 feet from the rear (south) property line. The carport will be unenclosed on its east, west and south sides. A new 22 foot wide driveway will be constructed from N. Jackson Street to serve the new carport addition. The pavilion and swimming pool accessory structures will be located 3.5 to 4 feet back from the west side property line and AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 7 (CON'T.) four (4) feet from the principal structure. A covered walkway will connect the pavilion to the residence. Section 36-254(d)(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear setback of 25 feet for this R-2 zoned lot. Section 36-156(a)(2)b. requires a minimum separation of six (6) feet between accessory and principal structures. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards to allow the carport addition with a reduced rear yard setback and the accessory structures (pavilion and pool) with a reduced separation from the principal structure (residence). Staff is supportive of the requested variances. The requested carport addition and accessory structures will not be out of character with the neighborhood. The overall massing of structures on this lot will be similar to a number of other lots in this general area. Staff feels the visual impact on surrounding properties will be minimal, as the proposed carport addition and pavilion structure are unenclosed structures. Additionally, the pool will be below ground and not visible from the adjacent properties. Staff believes the proposed carport addition and accessory structures (pavilion and pool) will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. As noted previously, the carport addition project does include a new 22 foot wide driveway from N. Jackson Street, which would be allowed by ordinance. However, there is an existing 30 foot wide concrete parking pad immediately north of the proposed new driveway. Staff believes the old parking pad should be removed, or modified to not allow vehicular parking directly accessed from the street. The old parking pad is located almost entirely in the N. Jackson Street right-of-way. If the applicant decides to modify the parking pad for use as a patio -type area or for flagpole parking, a franchise permit must be obtained from the Public Works Department. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested rear setback and separation variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. The carport and pavilion structures must remain unenclosed. 2. The carport addition must be constructed to match the existing residence (similar style and color). 3. The existing concrete parking pad from N. Jackson Street must be removed or modified to not allow vehicular parking directly accessed from the street. If modified for patio -type use or for flagpole parking, a franchise permit must be obtained from the Public Works Department. AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 7 (CON'T.) BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 30, 2010) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval as noted in the "staff recommendation" above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was 4 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 open position. veary Lindsey Architects Mr. Monte Moore July 16, 2010 Department of Neighborhoods and Planning 723 West Markham J_ 7 Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Zoning Variance Application for Rayburn Residence at 5001 Hawthorne St. Dear Monte, We are requesting a zoning variance at 5001 Hawthorne St. to allow an encroachment of 15' into the 25' rear yard setback for the purpose of constructing a one-story carport addition and to allow for the reduction of the required 6' separation of accessory structures from the main house. We are also adding a covered front porch and front and side terraces (patios) as part of the exterior upgrade that will make the house feel in keeping with the other two story houses in the vicinity. The carport / storage addition is constructed of square perma-cast columns with a stucco gabled roof toward the east and west with gutters and downspouts along the south side and a lattice screen wall between the west columns to offer privacy to the back yard. It is being held 10' from.the rear property line to allow for ease in accessing the back yard. Although the carport is attached and not considered an accessory structure, it's footprint covers only 29% of the rear yard. A proposed open-air pavilion with an outdoor fireplace and a new 12'x 20' swimming pool will be centered between the house and the west property line allowing a 4' distance from each with the exception of the fireplace mass which is 3.5' from the property line. The pavilion is situated so as to allow a covered connection from the existing back door to the pavilion. The northern edge of the pool is 6' from the pavilion. The pool was sized as a small "Garden Pool" so as to project into the rear yard a minimal 5.33' for a total of 64 sq. ft. (or 5%) of the rear yard. The existing metal siding will be replaced with a natural stone first floor exterior and a stucco second floor. Most of the windows will be replaced with clad insulated windows or doors. The covered front porch is being added to provide needed protection from the elements at the front door. The clients are currently parking on a pad located mostly within the Jackson St. right of way and wanted to be able to get in and out of their cars under roof. Realizing a carport at the current location was not an option, we located it as close to the existing house as possible. We feel the addition of the carport to the back of the house is in keeping with the existing density of the neighborhood and note that no other accessory structures will be located on the property. Thank you for your time and consideration. 3416 Old Cantrell Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 501-372-5940 Fax: 501-663-0043 AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 8 File No.: Owner: Applicant: Address: Description: Zoned: Z-8583 Chris and Emily Morris Jacob White 1606 N. Polk Street Lot 4, Block 29, Mountain Park Addition R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-156 to allow an accessory building with an 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: 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 at 1606 N. Polk Street is occupied by a one-story brick and frame single family residence. There is a paved alley along the rear (west) property line. A concrete parking pad is located in the rear yard area and is accessed from the alley. The applicant is proposing to construct a one-story garage structure over a portion of the existing parking pad, as noted on the attached site plan. The enclosed garage structure will be 22 feet by 30 feet in area, with a 5 foot by 20 foot porch section on its east side. The proposed garage will be located three (3) feet from the north side property line and seven (7) feet from the rear (west) property line. AUGUST 30, 2010 ItOTA 9IM9z 1001W The proposed garage will cover approximately 43 percent of the required rear yard area (rear 25 feet of the lot). Section 36-156(a)(2)c. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows accessory structures in the R-2 zoning district to occupy up to 30 percent of the required rear yard area. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the proposed accessory garage to cover approximately 43 percent of the required rear yard area. Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the request as reasonable. The applicant is proposing to utilize an existing concrete slab located in the rear yard area as a foundation for the new garage. Otherwise, the structure could be shifted six (6) feet to the east and comply with all ordinance requirements. The proposed accessory garage structure will not be out of character with the neighborhood. There are similar sized accessory structures located along the alley within this block and other blocks throughout the neighborhood. Staff believes the proposed garage structure will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested rear yard coverage variance, subject to the accessory garage structure being constructed to match the existing residence (similar style and color). BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 30, 2010) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval as noted in the "staff recommendation" above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was 4 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 open position. July 22, 2010 To: Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham �y Little Rock, AR From: Jacob White Construction Company, 2400 N. Pierce Little Rock, AR 72207 To Whom It May Concern: I am writing this letter as a request for a residential zoning variance. I am a home builder and am representing the homeowners at 1606 North Polk. After completing an addition to their home, the homeowners would like to add a separate structured garage to the rear of their property. There is an existing slab that is in place for the garage. This was completed well before the current homeowners bought the property. Since the current slab it there, the homeowners would like to use it for a separate structured garage. The reason we are asking for a variance is that if we add the structure to the existing slab, it will not allow us to meet the rear setback requirement. The new structure will exceed the 30% of the rear 25' rear setback requirement. The allowed 30% of the rear setback on this 50' wide lot is 375 feet. We are requesting that we be allowed 540 feet which is 43% of the rear setback. The structure is approximately 30' wide by 22' deep, but only 30' x 18' (or 540 feet) is in the rear 25' setback area. This property has a rear alley and this new structure would be accessed through this alley way. The structure will be approximately 7' from the rear property line and not cause any issues for the use of the alley way for any of the neighbors. This rear parking structure is also needed because there is no parking in the front of the home. The street in front of the property is a "no parking" street and the property across the street if owned by Forest Park Elementary School. All of the parking spaces are reserved for faculty parking. I am requesting that a variance be allowed to allow the homeowner to construct a structure that would slightly exceed the rear setback requirement to allow for adequate parking. This structure will be one story, and will be constructed to fit in with the neighborhood. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me. My cell phone number is 501- 912-2444. Thanks, Jacob Whit AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 9 File No.: Z-8584 Owner: Ann Hedge -Carruthers Living Trust 2002 Applicant: Ann Hedge -Carruthers Address: 2210 Windsor Court Description: West side of Windsor court, South of Windsor Road Zoned: MF -6 Variance Requested: An administrative appeal is requested to allow a home occupation which does not meet ordinance criteria. 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 with Home Occupation STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: The MF -6 zoned property at 2210 Windsor Court is occupied by a one-story brick single family patio home. The front (south) of the residence faces an access drive which runs west from Windsor Court. The property is at the northwest corner of the access drive and Windsor Court. There is a two -car wide driveway from the access drive which accesses a two -car wide garage on the front (south) of the residence. The property owner, Ann Hedge -Carruthers, is a psychotherapist who has had a private practice in Little Rock. Dr. Hedge -Carruthers plans to semi -retire and continue to see a few select clients in an office (home study) located in her home at 2210 Windsor Court. Dr. Hedge -Carruthers applied for a Home Occupation License, but was denied on June 29, 2010 based on the fact that the home office would generate additional traffic into the neighborhood. Dr. Hedge -Carruthers notes that her insurance allows her to work only ten (10) hours per week, including hours spent on administrative work. Dr. Hedge -Carruthers is requesting to use her home study as a consulting room for a few hours each week. She notes that there AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 9 (CON'T.) will be no more than one (1) client at her residence at any one (1) time, and probably no more than one (1) client per day. Section 36-253(b)(6) of the City's Zoning Ordinance provides the following criteria for Home Occupations: 1. Home Occupation. a. Home occupations shall be permitted that will not: 1. Change the outside appearance of the dwelling or provide product display visible from the street. 2. Generate traffic, parking, sewage or water use in excess of what is normal in the residential neighborhood. 3. Create a hazard to persons or property, result in electric interference or become a nuisance. 4. Result in outside storage or display of any material or product. 5. Involve accessory buildings. 6. Result in signage beyond that which may be required by other government agencies. 7. Limited to five hundred (500) square feet in area, but in no case more than forty-nine (49) percent of the floor area in a dwelling. 8. Stock in trade shall not exceed ten (10) percent of the floor area of the accessory use. 9. Require the construction of, or the addition to, the residence of duplicate kitchens. 10. Requirement or cause the use or consumption on the premises of any food product produced thereon. 11. Provide medical treatment, therapeutic massage or similar activities. AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 9 (CON'T.) The Board is asked to determine if the applicant's plan to have a Home Occupation with clients coming to the residence is acceptable under the above listed Home Occupation criteria as found in Section 36-253. Dr. Hedge -Carruthers' Home Occupation application was denied based on Section 36-253(b)(6)a.2., generating additional traffic to the residence. It appears that Dr. Hedge -Carruthers' proposed Home Occupation will comply with all other ordinance standards. Issues the Board may wish to consider during review of this application are as follows: 1. Placing a limit on the number of clients which can come to the residence each day. 2. Prohibiting any signage. 3. Prohibiting parking on the street. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 30, 2010) Ann Hedge -Carruthers was present, representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the appeal application. Ann Hedge -Carruthers addressed the Board in support of the appeal application. She stated that she would have no more than six (6) clients per week visit her residence. She also stated that she would have no signage and the clients would not park on the street. There was a brief discussion regarding how the city could enforce conditions. In response to a question from the Board, Dr. Hedge -Carruthers noted that she was moving her practice to her home for financial reasons. There was additional discussion pertaining to Dr. Hedge -Carruthers' proposed home occupation. Staff described other uses which were allowed as home occupations. There was a motion to approve the requested appeal with the following conditions (offered by the applicant): 1. There will be no more than two (2) clients per day allowed at the residence. 2 There will be no signage associated with the home occupation. 3 There will be no on -street parking associated with the home occupation. The motion passed by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent and 1 open position. The appeal and proposed home occupation were approved. July 15, 2010 .ANN KEDGE-CARRUTHERS, PH.D. Jungian Psychotherapy "Heart -centered Therapy for Self & Soul" Board of Adjustment City Of Little Rock 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Gentlemen and Ladies: I am a psychotherapist with a private practice here in Little Rock. I am past the age of retirement; but I want to continue seeing a few of my patients for a while longer. My current professional liability insurance permits me to work only ten hours a week including the hours spent on administrative work. My current practice is limited to high functioning individuals, generally middle aged, who are coping with stress and manifesting mild symptoms of anxiety and depression. I no longer treat individuals with severe mental illnesses. PROPOSAL I am requesting of you that I be permitted to use my home study as a consulting room for a few hours each week. I would schedule patients at wide enough intervals that there would never be more than one car in my driveway at a time and, most probably, no more than one a day. The presence of this work in my home will not increase deliveries to my home or any other traffic beyond that of patients. The activity generated by this practice will be no more unusual than the arrival of a friend for a brief visit. There will be no need, nor reason for a sign other than our current street numbers. Neither the interior nor the exterior of my home will need to be altered in order to accommodate this move. This is, first and foremost, our home and I do not want to do anything that will make it less comfortable or attractive. REASONS FOR THE REQUEST I suppose that the reasons and causes for this request are intertwined. It has been difficult to maintain a full-time practice because of my husband's illnesses. Short of a miracle, these will not improve. He is not a complete invalid, but he has serious heart and mobility issues. Within the last year he has been diagnosed with dementia. When I 1008 SOUTH CUMBERLAND STREET • LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72202 • (501) 210-6000 am at home with him he is more at peace—and so am I, for that matter. With my reduced clinical hours, I can no longer afford the overhead of an office. However, if I am permitted by you to take what work I do have to my home, my income will not be sunk into the expense of maintaining commercial office space. At a time when our family expenses are going up, it is terrifying to think that I might be without income entirely. I would like to make this observation. My husband is a retired minister. When he was active and employed, the numbers of people who made their way to our home was greater by far than the numbers that I expect or want to see in my practice. So far as I know, the comings and goings of members of the congregations he served created no problem in our neighborhood. My husband and I live quietly and we seem to attract people who go about their lives quietly as well. Psychotherapy is a quiet sort of "business" as well— no one wants to attract attention to it, neither patient nor clinician. In closing let me say that no one could have a greater interest in the value of our home or the desirability of the neighborhood than I do. Our home is the most valuable thing that we own, and it is almost half paid for. I would not be making this appeal if I thought that I was jeopardizing that investment. I greatly appreciate your consideration of this matter and your service to our community. Yours truly, Ann Hedge -Carruthers, Ph.D. AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 10 File No.: Z -4726-A Owner: Alex and Conley Golden Applicant: Rodney Collins and Justin Stewart Address: 39 Beverly Place Description: Lot 12, Beverly Place Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36- 254 and the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a porch addition with a reduced front setback and which crosses a 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: 1. Measures to control the increase in stormwater runoff from the increased impervious surface should be implemented to not damage adjacent property. B. Staff Analvsis: The R-2 zoned property at 39 Beverly Place is occupied by a two-story frame single family residence. The lot contains a 30 foot front platted building line. There is a circular driveway from Beverly Place which serves as access to the property. The driveway runs along the north side of the house to a garage in the rear yard area. The applicant proposes to construct a one-story front porch addition, as noted on the attached site plan. The front porch addition will be ten (10) feet wide and unenclosed on its north, south and west sides. The proposed porch will be located AUGUST 30, 2010 ITEM NO.: 10 (CON'T.) 24 to 26.5 feet from the front (west) property line, extending 3.5 to 6 feet across the front platted building line. Section 36-254(d)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front setback of 25 feet for this R-2 zoned lot. 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 front porch .addition with a reduced front setback and which crosses the front platted building line. Staff is supportive of the requested front setback and building line variances. Staff views the request as reasonable. The Zoning Ordinance typically requires a minimum front setback of 25 feet for R-2 zoned lots. The proposed front porch addition is only one (1) foot off that requirement at one (1) corner. The front porch addition for this residence will not be out of character with other houses in the neighborhood. Given the curvature of the Beverly Place right-of-way, the residence with porch addition will not appear to be out of alignment with the other residences along Beverly Place to the north. Staff believes the proposed porch addition 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 porch 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. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested setback and building line 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. The porch addition must be constructed to match the existing residence (similar style and color). BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 30, 2010) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval as noted in the "staff recommendation" above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the consent agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was 4 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 open position. BcoHouse Architects 11GDennison St. Little Rock, AR722O5 SO1]O]4578 July 23, 2010 Little Rock Board of Adjustment Dear�,s, T4, ~7 _ L�—?7_/ My client, Alex and Conley Golden, wish to construct a single story open porch in the traditional Colonial style appropriate to the architecture oftheir house at 39 Beverly Place. This proposed porch would extend beyond the building line setback from the Beverly Place ROW. The building setback's diagonal configuration makes constructing any proportioned porch impossible. @/ekindly request avariance in the setback tomake adequate renovations. Sincerely, Architect • • O U W w W F- O F - z 5w ^3 a LL O 0 0 m N m ME m s CL ►PE W Q z n w J .p ® o O 1 LU p o 2 = m < u ~ w m o Q �V-) o Q � cnWw z ui z z W F= 2 U) S m O 0 = m � W F- 0 � m o � � LU as Qz=� ~ z z CL ►PE W Q z n w J .p O 1 LU p o 2 = m < u ~ w m o ov �V-) o Q � cnWw z ui z z W F= 2 U) S CL ►PE W Q z n w August 30, 2010 There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 2:42 p.m. Date: � — Z 7- M 1150M, Moioiozzl'ol *i'm# Chairman Secretary `