boa_11 29 201014
0
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SUMMARY OF MINUTES
NOVEMBER 29, 2010
2:00 P.M.
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 October 25, 2010 meeting were
approved as mailed by unanimous vote.
III. Members Present: Robert Winchester, Chairman
Scott Smith, Vice Chairman
Brad Wingfield
Rajesh Mehta
Open Position
Members Absent: None
City Attorney Present: Debra Weldon
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
OLD BUSINESS:
A. Z-8602
NEW BUSINESS:
1.
Z -3344-B
2.
Z -8345-A
3.
Z-8608
4.
Z-8609
AGENDA
NOVEMBER 29, 2010
2:00 P.M.
5905 N. Country Club Blvd.
900 S. Shackleford Road
5604 Country Club Blvd.
3501 Old Cantrell Road
34 Edgehill Road
UOS AVMHSIH
M
1S
1S HOW S
S S
J
0 r
3 c
3 ♦ ARCH ST
A a000M S yl
S
9 MOUIM NHOf
E
rn
� M,
E2 ;
W
'.JI
oa sNavds
Oa
oa
ON IOOIH1
ON
j
(D
IV
Id
CD
.r
N
N
m�
W
ON SVWOHI NVO
>
al
1S HOW S
S S
J
0 r
3 c
3 ♦ ARCH ST
A a000M S yl
S
9 MOUIM NHOf
E
rn
� M,
E2 ;
W
'.JI
oa sNavds
Oa
oa
ON IOOIH1
ON
NOVEMBER 29, 2010
114TAKOWWWA
File No.: Z-8602
Owner: Brian L. Lasley
Applicant: Brian L. Lasley
Address: 5905 N. Country Club Blvd.
Description: Lot 73, Forest Heights Place Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254
to allow construction of a new residence with reduced rear setback.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Undeveloped Lot
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 5905 N. Country Club Blvd. is comprised of a 60 foot
wide vacant single family residential lot. The house which previously existed on
the site has been removed. Site work has taken place in preparation for new home
construction.
The applicant is proposing to construct a new two-story single family residence on
the site, as noted on the attached site plan. A one-story garage will be located in
the rear yard area, near the southeast corner of the lot. The garage will be
connected to the residence with a one-story veranda (covered patio area) which
will be unenclosed on its east and west sides. A one -car wide driveway at the
northwest corner of the lot will run along the west side of the residence and serve
the garage structure. Because the garage portion is attached to the main
(principal) structure, it is considered part of that structure and not an accessory
structure. The garage portion will be located five (5) feet back from the rear
(south) property line. The main portion of the residence will be located behind the
NOVEMBER 29, 2010 (
ITEM NO.: A (CON'T.)
25 foot front platted building line, with side setbacks ranging from 7.6 feet to 15.2
feet.
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. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a
variance to allow the garage portion of the residence with a rear setback of five (5)
feet. All other building setbacks conform with ordinance standards.
Staff is supportive of the requested rear setback variance. Staff views the request
as reasonable. If the garage were not connected to the principal structure by way
of the proposed veranda, all proposed setbacks would conform to ordinance
standards, with only a possible minor rear yard coverage variance. Therefore, the
overall building massing on the lot as proposed is just slightly over what could be
permitted by right. The proposed garage will have the appearance of being an
accessory structure. Additionally, the nearest structures (accessory structures) on
the lots immediately to the east and south will be located over nine (9) feet from
the proposed garage structure. Staff feels there will be no issues with building
separation. Staff believes the proposed residence, with reduced rear setback for
its garage portion, will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the
general area. The overall building massing as proposed is not out of character
with other properties in this neighborhood.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested rear setback variance, subject to the
following conditions:
1. The veranda portion of the residence must remain unenclosed on its east
and west sides.
2. There are to be no accessory buildings constructed on the site.
3. Compliance with the Public Works requirement as noted in paragraph A.
of the staff report.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (OCTOBER 25, 2010)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff noted that the
applicant had agreed to defer the application to the November 29, 2010 agenda, based
on the fact there were only three (3) Board members present. Staff supported deferral
of the application
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the November 29, 2010
agenda with a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position. The applicant left
the meeting prior to the Consent Agenda vote.
NOVEMBER 29, 2010 (
ITEM NO.: A (CON'T.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (NOVEMBER 29, 2010)
Brian Lasley was present, representing the application. There were no objectors
present. Staff presented the application, with a recommendation of approval, with
conditions. Staff explained that the proposed rear yard setback had been increased
from five (5) feet to seven (7) feet.
Vice -Chairman Smith discussed the issue of the veranda connection. He explained that
he had a problem with approving the requested variance with no unusual
circumstances/hardship.
There was a motion to approve the application, as recommended by staff. The motior
passed by a vote of 3 ayes, 1 noe, 0 absent and 1 open position. The application was
approved.
Department of Planning and Development
City of Little Rock
723 West Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
Dear Madam and Sirs:
9�02—
My name is Brian Lasley. I own property at 5905 North Country Club. My wife Jessica and I would like to
build a 3,260 two- story brick home on this lot. According to our survey, our lot has 60 of frontage on
the southern right of way of North Country Club. The depth of our lot is 135 feet. The lot is mostly level
but has a slight slope towards the rear. As you are aware, lots in Forest Heights Addition are small and
building a home with modern features while achieving an historic style is often difficult. Copies of the
survey are provided.
Robin Halbert -Petty, at Williams and Dean drew up plans for us for our house. According to her
measurements, the total area of the heated and cooled space is 3,260 square feet. On the back of the
house, we have plans for a 14.8" x 16.5" veranda that will link the house with the detached garage. The
veranda will serve two purposes.
• It will link the house and the detached garage
• It will serve as additional outdoor living space.
The plans were drawn this way to insure that we are able to see our 5 -year old daughter playing in the
backyard at all times. The detached garage sits within the 5 -foot setback requirement for the rear yard.
We are seeking a variance for the following item:
1. The Veranda connecting the house and the detached garage is 14.8' x 16.5'.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely:
Brian L. Lasley
enclosures
NOVEMBER 29, 2010
ITEM NO.: 1
File No.: Z-8602
Owner: Three Financial Centre, LLC
Applicant: Edward K. Willis/Gary Dean
Address: 900 S. Shackleford Road
Description: West side of S. Shackleford Road, south of Hermitage Road
Zoned: O-3
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-553
to allow a ground sign which exceeds the maximum height and area allowed.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Office Building
Proposed Use of Property: Office Building
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Staff Analysis:
The 0-3 zoned property at 900 S. Shackleford Road is occupied by an existing six -
story office building (Three Financial Centre). The building is approximately
130,000 square feet in size. There is existing paved parking on the east and west
sides of the building, with a two-level parking deck on building's west side. There
are two (2) driveways from S. Shackleford Road which serve as access to the
property. The drives are located at the northeast and southeast corners of the
property.
The applicant is proposing to construct a new monument type sign on the south
side of the northernmost driveway, as noted on the attached sketches. The
proposed sign will have a height of 12 feet and an area of 168 square feet. It will
have spaces to identify the various tenants within the existing office building.
There are currently no ground -mounted signs on the property.
Section 36-553(a)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum sign height
of six (6) feet and a maximum sign area of 64 square feet for signs in office zoning
NOVEMBER 29, 2010 (
ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T.)
regardless of the size of the property. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a
variance to allow the larger ground -mounted sign as described.
Staff is supportive of the proposed increased sign height and area. Staff views the
request as reasonable. The new sign is proposed to serve a large office
development with 130,000 square feet of office space and various tenants. The
overall development consists of 4.3 acres of property. Staff feels that it is
reasonable to allow a sign of this proposed size to serve a larger office
development like Three Financial Centre. There are other examples of similar
sized signs for office developments in this general area. Some of those are shown
on an attached sketch. Staff believes the proposed sign will be in keeping with the
character of the general area, and will have no adverse impact on the adjacent
properties.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested sign variances, subject to the
following conditions:
1. The proposed sign must be located at least five (5) feet back from the
front property line.
2. A permit must be obtained for the sign construction.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (NOVEMBER 29, 2010)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval, with conditions.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved, as recommended by staff,
with a vote of 4 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 open position.
I
bV I L L I N M 5 & D E A N A 5 5 0 C I 4 T E D N R C H I T E C T 5, I N C.
- 33-14-.g
October 20, 2010
Department of Planning and Development
723 West Markham
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
Re: Zoning Variance (Signs)
Board of Adjustment Members,
The owners of Three Financial Centre desire to construct a monument sign near the north
entry drive to their office building at 900 Shackleford. The eight story building, containing
130,000 sq. ft. is the largest of the four buildings that comprise the Financial Centre Office
Park. Several very significant tenants occupy the building and desire visible identification
from the adjacent streets. Due to the large 43 acre site, the very wide right of way at that
point along Shackleford and the extreme grade change up to the building, prominent
signage is required to inform clients and customers of their location.
We have attached graphic representations of the sign location on the site and how it will
actually look in place. Also, we have attached a few examples of signs that are all within a
few blocks of our site along with the square footage of each. Please keep in mind that
these signs are much closer to the streets than we are able to place ours due to much
smaller right-of-way setbacks.
We appreciate your time and consideration of this waiver request,
Sincerely,
Gary Dea , AIA
cc: Ed Willis
E I G H T E E N
CORPORATE HILL DRIVE
LITTLE ROCK, AR 72205
501.224.1900
FAX 501.224.0873
WWW.WILLIAMSDEAN. COM
NOVEMBER 29, 2010
ITEM NO.: 2
File No.: Z -8345-A
Owner/Applicant: Claudia and Gary Barone
Address: 5604 Country Club Blvd.
Description: Lot 58, Forest Heights Place Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254
to allow a carport/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. The space between the garage door and the Forest Heights Drive edge of
pavement shall be a minimum of 19 feet. This will allow appropriate back -out
space for the garage/carport structure.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 5604 Country Club Blvd. is occupied by a one-story
brick, rock and frame single family residence. The property is located at the
northeast corner of Country Club Blvd. and Forest Heights Drive. There is a two -
car wide driveway from Forest Heights Drive which leads to a detached garage
structure within the rear yard area. The single family lot contains a 25 foot platted
front building line along Country Club Blvd. which reduces to a 7.5 platted side
building line along Forest Heights Drive. The southwest corner of the existing
house encroaches across the platted building line, as noted on the attached site
plan. The front yard area is located approximately two (2) feet above the grade of
the streets. On May 19, 2008 the Board of Adjustment granted variances to allow
the new front porch area with a reduced front setback and building line
encroachment.
The applicant is proposing to remove the existing 20 foot by 20 foot accessory
garage structure and construct a garage/carport addition to the rear of the
residence, as noted on the attached site plan. The one-story addition will be
approximately 30 feet by 40 feet in size. The south 10 feet of the proposed
NOVEMBER 29, 2010 (
ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.)
addition will be a carport area which will be unenclosed on its east and west sides.
The north 20 feet of the addition will be a garage and storage area. The current
roof line of the residence will be extended for the proposed addition. The addition
will be located 7.5 feet back from the west (street side) property line, three (3) feet
back from the rear property line and 21 to 25 feet back from the east side property
line.
Section 36-254(d)(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum setback of
25 feet from the rear (north) property line for this R-2 zoned lot. Therefore, the
applicant is requesting a variance to allow the proposed addition with a reduced rear
setback.
Staff is supportive of the requested setback variance. Staff's support is based on
the irregular lot shape in combination with a rather large area of right-of-way at the
intersection of Country Club Blvd. and Forest Heights Drive. Because of the
intersection configuration, the lot's southwest corner has been rounded to follow
the curvature of the right-of-way. If the southwest corner of the lot were squared
off to match the southeast corner, the lot would contain considerably more
buildable area. The front porch area of the house is located approximately 38 feet
back from the front (southeast) corner property pin. Additionally, in staff's opinion
the proposed addition and overall lot massing will not be out of character with
many other properties in the Heights neighborhood. Staff believes the proposed
addition with reduced rear setback will have no adverse impact on the adjacent
properties or the general area. The garage/carport structure on the lot immediately
to the north is located approximately 10 to 12 feet back from the dividing rear
property line.
As noted in paragraph A. of the staff report, the Public Works Department is
requiring that the proposed garage structure be moved back to provide a 19 foot
setback from the Forest Heights Drive edge of pavement. Therefore, the addition
must be moved back from the west property line or the west portion of the addition
must be eliminated. This issue must be resolved prior to a building permit being
issued. If the proposed addition is moved back, adequate setback from the east
side property line will exist.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested setback variance, subject to the
following conditions:
1. The addition must be constructed to match the existing residence.
2. Compliance with the Public Works requirement as noted in paragraph A.
of the staff report.
NOVEMBER 29, 2010 (
ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.)
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (NOVEMBER 29, 2010)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval, with conditions.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved, as recommended by staff,
with a vote of 4 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 open position.
October 22, 2010
Little Rock Board of Adjustment
Department of Planning and Development
723 West Markham Street, First Floor
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
Dear Board Members:
This letter serves to request a zoning variance for 5604 Country Club Boulevard, Little
Rock, Arkansas 72207 also known as lot 58, Forest Heights Place.
This home has been completely renovated and the outward appearance of the home has
been improved in keeping with the neighborhood. The lot configuration is odd with the
curve of Forest Heights Drive to the west, which resulted in the original structures being
pushed to the rear. The recent remodeling included a front porch which was approved by
an earlier variance request. Currently the back yard of the home consists of a 20 x 20
garage and concrete driveway both of which are in very poor condition. Bill
Hearnsberger completed the recent remodeling and would be the contractor for this
project.
The plan would replace the garage with a new one located just east of the platted 7.5'
building line. We are requesting a reduction in the rear yard setback to 3'. Two water
meters presently in the rear yard setback to the north of the current garage structure, are
scheduled to be moved to the front of the property in November 2010. Letters
documenting this are attached.
We appreciate the opportunity to seek this variance.
Cordially,
0"6, & I &0'�
Claudia and Gary Barone
5604 Country Club Boulevard
501-350-1571
501-666-3183
NOVEMBER 29, 2010
ITEM NO.: 3
File No.: Z-8608
Owner: Wilson Brandt
Applicant: Ross McCain, Polk Stanley Wilcox
Address: 3501 Old Cantrell Road
Description: Southwest corner of Old Cantrell Road and Mart Drive
Zoned: C-3
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the buffer provisions of Section 36-
522 and the parking provisions of Section 36-507 to allow a parking lot with reduced
buffers and a reduced number of on-site parking spaces.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Vacant Commercial Building
Proposed Use of Property: Restaurant
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Landscape and Buffer Issues:
The landscape ordinance requires a six foot, nine inch wide perimeter landscaping
strip around the site's entirety. Currently, this site is deficient on this minimal
requirement on all four property lines. A variance from the City Beautiful
Commission will be required prior to the issuance of a building permit.
A small amount of building landscaping is required.
Currently the dumpsters are located within the required landscape perimeter;
revise.
C. Staff Analysis:
The C-3 zoned property at 3501 Old Cantrell Road is occupied by a one-story
commercial building which was originally constructed as a service station with gas
pumps. A canopy is located on the front (north side) of the building, over the area
where the gas pumps previously existed. Driveways from Old Cantrell Road serve
NOVEMBER 29, 2010 (
ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T.)
as access to the property. The northern portion of the property, between the
building and Old Cantrell Road, is covered in concrete and served as a vehicular
use area, accessing the old gas pump area and service bay doors on the front of
the building. The portions of the property along the east (Mart Drive side) and
south (rear) sides of the building are asphalt paved to the property lines and
previously served as vehicular parking. There is a small portion of the asphalt
along the east side of the building which was cut out, apparently to remove an
underground gas tank.
The applicant is proposing to remodel the existing building for use as a restaurant.
As part of the property redevelopment, a small 90 square foot building addition will
be constructed on the rear (south side) of the existing building. A 373 square foot
outdoor seating area will be provided at the rear of the building. The outdoor
seating area will be uncovered. The applicant has provided a parking plan for the
property. It includes a total of 12 parking spaces, with a new access drive (exit
only) from Mart Drive at the southeast corner of the property. The easternmost
driveway from Old Cantrell Road will be an entry only drive. Angled parking will be
provided along the east property line. Portions of the existing paving along the
east property line will be cut out for the planting of new trees. The small area of
gravel along the east side of the building will be re -paved as part of an access
drive/maneuvering area for the angled parking. New planter beds and a
landscaped island within the Old Cantrell Road right-of-way are proposed
landscape improvements. All described improvements are shown on an attached
site plan.
The applicant is requesting two (2) variances for the proposed property
redevelopment. The first variance requested is from the parking provisions of
Section 36-507(a) of the City's Zoning Ordinance which reads as follows:
"(a) All parking spaces provided pursuant to this article
shall be on the same lot with the building or within three
hundred (300) feet thereof. The distance to any parking
area as herein required shall be measured between the
nearest point of the off-street parking facility and the
nearest point of the building said parking area or facility
is to serve. Off-site parking shall not exceed twenty-five (25)
percent of the total number of spaces required by this article.
All off-site parking shall be noted on the official zoning map so
As to assure maintenance of the requirement."
The proposed building with addition and outdoor seating will have a total of 2,252
square feet. The ordinance requires 22 on-site parking spaces for the proposed
restaurant use. As noted previously, the applicant is proposing 12 on-site spaces.
The applicant is leasing up to 13 spaces from the office development immediately to
the north across Old Cantrell Road (Standard Abstract Building). The applicant is
providing 25 parking spaces for the proposed development. However, 45 percent of
the spaces are located off-site. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance
from Section 36-507(a) to have more than 25 percent of the parking requirement
NOVEMBER 29, 2010 (
ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T.)
located off-site. The proposed off-site parking is located within 300 feet of this
property.
The second variance requested is from the buffer provisions of Section 36-
522(b)(3)b. which requires six feet, nine inch wide street buffers along Old Cantrell
Road and Mart Drive. The street buffers are required as per Section 36-524(3)d.
because the redevelopment plan for the property includes a new access drive from
Mart Drive. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance from Section 36-
522(b)(3)b. to provide no street buffer along Old Cantrell Road and a reduced street
buffer along Mart Drive. As noted previously, portions of the existing asphalt along
the east (Mart Drive side) property line will be cut out, with new trees planted.
Additionally, the applicant is proposing a new landscaped island between the north
property line and Old Cantrell Road.
Staff is supportive of the requested parking and buffer variances, and the proposed
redevelopment plan for the property. Staff believes the plan as proposed will allow
for the property to adequately function as a restaurant use. As long as the
applicant continues to maintain a lease for the additional parking across Old
Cantrell Road to the north, parking should not be a problem for the proposed
restaurant. With respect to the buffer variance, it is only required because the
applicant is adding an access driveway from Mart Drive. The applicant is
proposing a landscape upgrade with the redevelopment plan to include planter
areas for trees along the east property line. The applicant will need to make one
(1) slight modification to the site to allow the angled parking along the east property
line to comply with code. The raised curbing along the east side of the building will
need to be removed to provide adequate maneuvering area for the angled parking.
Additionally, the applicant will need to submit an application to the City Beautiful
Commission for any variances from Landscape Ordinance requirements. Staff
believes the proposed redevelopment plan for the property and restaurant use will
have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested parking and buffer variances, subject
to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the Landscape and Buffer comments as noted in
paragraph B. of the staff report.
2. A franchise permit must be obtained for the proposed landscaped area
located in the Old Cantrell Road right-of-way.
3. Any variances from the City's Landscape Ordinance must be approved
prior to a building permit being issued.
4. The lease for at least 10 parking spaces on the property immediately to
the north across Old Cantrell Road must be maintained as long as the
restaurant use exists on the site. If the lease is ever broken, the parking
variance issue must be brought back to the Board of Adjustment for
review.
NOVEMBER 29, 2010 (
ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T.)
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (NOVEMBER 29, 2010)
Ross McCain and Wilson Brandt were present, representing the application. There was
one (1) person present in opposition. Staff presented the application with a
recommendation of approval, with conditions.
Ross McCain addressed the Board in support of the application. The Board had no
questions for Mr. McCain at the time.
Mark Abernathy addressed the Board in opposition. He presented a letter from a
nearby property owner to the Board. He noted that other property owners were
opposed. He discussed the parking situation in the general area, and explained that
there was not enough parking in the area to serve the existing uses.
Vice -Chairman Smith asked Mr. Abernathy how much of the parking for his nearby
restaurants was off-site. Mr. Abernathy responded that probably half was off-site. The
issue was discussed further between Vice -Chair Smith and Mr. Abernathy. Vice -Chair
Smith questioned why the other objectors were not present.
Brad Wingfield asked Mr. Abernathy how many total parking spaces he had in the area.
Mr. Abernathy responded that he had approximately 100 spaces.
The parking issue was discussed further.
Mr. McCain stated that he did not know of any other opposition to the application. He
explained that if the lease for off-site parking was ever broken, the restaurant would
close or the parking issue would be brought back to the Board of Adjustment.
Wilson Brandt addressed the Board in support of the application. He explained that he
had observed the parking situation in the area and had noticed no problem with the
availability of parking.
Staff explained that signage could be required on the subject property, directing
vehicles to the off-site parking. The parking issue was discussed further.
There was a motion to approve the application, as recommended by staff with the
following additional condition:
• A sign must be located on the site along the south property line, directing
overflow traffic to the off-site parking leased by the applicant.
The motion passed by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 open position. The
application was approved.
October 22, 2010
City of Little Rock
Department of Planning & Development
_ o
723 West Markham St.
a
Little Rock, AR 72201
Re: Application for zoning variance
Attached is our application for a zoning variance at 3501 Old Cantrell Road in Little Rock. Our firm has been authorized
by the property owner, Mr. Wilson Brandt, to act as his agent in this zoning variance in order for the redevelopment of a
vacant gas station property for his proposed new restaurant, the Bomba Taco Bar. Specifically the variance requested
involves two provisions of the zoning ordinance involving land buffers and off-street parking. Due to the small lot size the
existing structure and surrounding impervious paving leave no room for the land buffers required nor the total amount of
off-street parking required. To alleviate the parking issue the owner has entered into a lease agreement with the property
immediately across the street to the north. We have attached a copy of this agreement between Mr. Brandt of Greens
Investments LLC and Mr. Guy Maris of Old Cantrell Road Partnership.
Mr. Brandt feels that his proposed restaurant is a good fit for the area as there are several existing restaurants already in
the vicinity and we hope that the lack of land buffers is acceptable given that there do not appear to be such buffers on
the adjacent properties and that the proposed development will not alter the current conditions.
If I can be of any further information please call me at my office number below.
Sincerely,
�1
W. Ross McCain, AIA
Principal
YTT) EW U
B
N
0 1
4 U
C
a
0
"f7
Gl ry
U
iil t%
O_ L
4' Q :-f
C 0
Mn C^
Y
� � O
C L
fQn? O
� o �
c
M u cj
fe
CU
(Ci S
RS � C7i
y or L
�
t
F
+
�
�
� ....•yam,)...
iI
�
�
��`'�{L
"`�1{'
1
'
.\.i
'�4
CL
� J
'ate
10
i
F
IN
es
1
jjjj'-
Agta
I
Mark Abernathy
Loca Luna/Red Door Restaurant
3519 Old Cantrell
Little Rock, AR 72202
October 1, 2010
Dana Carney
Department of Planning and Development
723 W. Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
Dear Dana,
jj r7) lit -
It has come to our attention that there is a movement toward developing a 60 seat, full
service restaurant to occupy the vacant service station and small lot on Old Cantrell
two doors down from Loca Luna. This causes us great concern.
After allowing for setbacks, this property has room for 4-5 parking spots at best.
Eight years ago, we had to buy the building next to Loca Luna for $ 350,000 in order to
create 20-30 additional parking spots so we could comply with the city requirements
and expand the old Brave New Restaurant and create Bene Vita Restaurant. We were
told that while short term lease spaces and street parking could be considered, we
would still need to own a certain percentage of our parking requirement in order to
move forward. We trust that any new application will have to comply with the same
standards.
While there is usually enough parking in the area for our restaurants, at lunch and on
Friday and Saturday nights, parking is tight. It is especially tight in the corner where
Old Cantrell meets Cantrell. We want to be a good neighbor and cooperate, but we
can't risk losing two successful restaurants and jobs for 120 plus people because the
ancillary street parking is no longer available. Restaurants like ours operate on a small
profit margin (especially now) and the loss of 10% -15% of our customers can be
disastrous.
The Union restaurant is re -opening with @ 60 seats. If there is a new restaurant in the
service station with 50 - 60 seats that could add another 100 - 130 cars to an already
stressed parking situation. This would clearly overload the area. Their customers and
employees will park in the closest spots and many of those will end up in the parking
spaces we had to purchase, and on the streets in front of our restaurants. That would
basically seal off the corner and both restaurants from any convenient parkin. oq ther
than what we own. We are blocked in by Cantrell on our North side and limited street
parking. Our customer base includes a lot of older clientele and they will not walk
several blocks to dine, especially if it is raining. This is not a River Market bar crowd.
We depend on reasonably convenient parking to survive. This would cause real and
irreparable harm to our business.
Other concerns are:
Ben Comb's building is for sale. We currently lease that lot for our employees to park.
When it sells, a new owner will probably need all of those spaces for customers and
employees, certainly at lunch time. We have a fall back option with Standard Abstract
in case future owners don't allow us to park there. Options are limited and regardless
of where they go it will have an impact.
In regard to Standard Abstract's lot. The Union Restaurant has applied for a new liquor
license and plans to lease spaces from Standard Abstract's lot across the street. What
if Union or this proposed new restaurant stops making lease payments, changes in
ownership occur or Standard stops allowing the usage? Where do their patrons park?
In addition, we talked to Standard Abstract about parking for our employees if the
Comb's building sells. How can three restaurants all claim parking in the Standard
Abstract lot?
The Riviera Condos are almost vacant now and provide additional parking for our
restaurants. However, in a few years when their building is full, there is no guaranty
that any restaurant customers will be able to use their lot. They have made that clear.
The large Rainey Building (directly behind Loca Luna and the service station) was
recently foreclosed and is for sale. While this may offer some future solution to this
parking concern, at this point there is no guaranty that any of those spots will be
available.
While we appreciate that some parking cooperation and concessions have allowed me
to open and operate two successful restaurants. When we opened each restaurant we
had to buy enough property to create 60 - 70 parking spaces. We bought a large piece
of property at the corner of Woodrow and 7th for a proposed restaurant and
considerable demands were required of us in regard to parking and sight development.
It is hugely unfair for a new restaurant to come in with only the possibility of 4-5 spaces
and claim the rest from short term leases from other sources with no guaranty of future
parking. If a new area restaurant can lease spaces instead of using their land for
parking, can we turn our parking lot at Loca Luna into a giant patio and do away with
all of our parking, as long as we have a short term lease for parking nearby? Surely a
flimsy 30 -day -out lease cannot qualify for long term parking arrangements.
We are all for new restaurants moving into the area. We think it helps create a dining
destination. However, without a guaranty of parking, additional seats has the potential
to seriously jeopardize the success of ours and their restaurants. We hope the city
recognizes that this is a clear violation and that this proposed restaurant has made no
effort to create guaranteed parking arrangements adjacent to their proposed operation.
We hope this can be resolved without legal action, but we are prepared to do whatever
is needed to stop this violation.
They need to own and develop new parking like we had to do. Why should we, and
others, be punished for creating new parking for our businesses. Furthermore, this
would put us in an adversarial position of having to police our lots and the lots we
lease in order to protect our customer base. There has been a major battle raging for
years around the corner between the Faded Rose (who leases a lot) and the Cross
Eyed Pig (whose customers park there). Please help us avoid another parking "war
zone".
We will talk to the owners of the Union restaurant and this proposed new venture.
Hopefully we can work out a solution. There might be a possibility of purchasing (not
short term leasing) some of the area parking from the Rainey building or land nearby.
However, until this is resolved we have to say, we are strongly opposed to granting any
approval for a new restaurant in this area at this time.
Sincerely,
Mark Abernathy Owner/Operator
T. David I Wilkes Partner
NOVEMBER 29, 2010
ITEM NO.: 4
File No.: Z-8609
Owner: Black Sky, LLC
Applicant: James N. France
Address: 34 Edgehill Road
Description: Lot 9, Greenbrier Subdivision
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the fence provisions of Section 36-
516 to allow a fence which exceeds the maximum height allowed.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property located at 34 Edgehill Road is occupied by a two-story
brick and frame single family residence. There is a one-story garage structure on
the north side of the residence, with a pool and pool house building in the rear
yard, east of the residence. A drive from Edgehill Road serves as access to the
property, with a circular drive in front of the residence. A small area at the
northeast corner of the property is adjacent to Greenbrier Road right-of-way. The
overall property consists of approximately 2.57 acres.
The applicant proposes to remove an existing six (6) foot high wood fence which
encloses the rear yard area, and replace it with a new six (6) foot high wrought iron
fence. The proposed fence is shown on an attached site plan. There will be a
gate along the rear (east) property line for access from Greenbrier Road.
Additionally, the applicant is proposing to construct a new eight (8) foot high
wrought iron gate between two (2) existing brick columns on either side of the entry
drive from Edgehill Road. The brick columns tie into an existing brick wall along
the front (west) property line.
NOVEMBER 29, 2010
ITEM NO.: 4 (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 a street
right-of-way. Six (6) foot high fences are allowed elsewhere on a single family lot.
Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the six (6) foot high fence
section on the rear property line where adjacent to the Greenbrier Road property
line, and the eight (8) foot high gate between the two (2) existing brick columns near
the front property line.
Staff is supportive of the requested fence height (gate height) variance. Staff
views the request as reasonable. Only a short section of the fence within the rear
yard area requires a variance, as it is adjacent to a street right-of-way. The
proposed fence will not be out of character with other fences within this
neighborhood. With respect to the proposed gate at the front entry drive, it will be
located approximately 20 feet back from the front property line. If it were located
25 or more feet back from the front property line, no variance would be needed.
Additionally, the proposed gate will not be out of character with other entry gates
within this subdivision. Staff believes the proposed fence and gate 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: (NOVEMBER 29, 2010)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval, with conditions.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved, as recommended by staff,
with a vote of 4 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent and 1 open position.
BLACK
LLC
SKY,
1 1 1 Center Street, Suite 1616
Little Rock, AR 72201
(501) 375-0940
November 10, 2010
City of Little Rock
Board of Adjustment
723 West Markham St.
Little Rock, AR 72201
Re: Amended Variance Requests
To Whom It May Concern:
On October 22, 2010, the applicant filed its application for a variance for rear, side
and front gate construction of a decorative fence at 34 Edgehill Road. Our request is amended as a
result of a significantly scaled back design.
The fence along the rear and sides will, when completed, be 6 feet. As noted in the
original request, 1/3 of the rear property "backed" onto a publicly dedicated street Greenbrier Road,
and the other 2/3 of the road backed onto a shared private drive utilized by several residences in the
Greenbrier Subdivision. A variance is still needed for maintenance of a 6ft decorative fence along
the Greenbrier right-of-way, under the technical requirements of Section 36-516(e)(1)(A), since the
rear of the property "fronts" or rather "backs" onto street fight -of -way. The decorative fence, the
design of which was included in the original letter as an exhibit, replaces an existing 6ft wooded
fence, and the new rear and side fences will be in the approximate location of the existing fence.
Second, the front gate will now be located 25f3 from Edgehill.. An 8ft gate of a design
previously submitted will be attached to two aft decorative columns located behind existing
columns, which will remain at the present location slightly within the 25ft front setback. If the new
columns, being 8ft, are required to have a variance despite Section 36-516(f)(7), such a variance is
requested. Similarly, if a variance is needed under the Ordinances for the front gate to be the same
height as the columns, such a request is made.
Thank you very much for your consideration of our application.
Yours very truly,
auresN. France, Manager
0
U
W
W
F-
0 0
H
Z
cn
o
a
LL
0
o
�
a
o
m
-0
IL
O
Q
C
:«r
O
N
►o
ii
..
z
LLJW
coQ
W
z
Ll
W
J
Q
2
m
¢W
G
=
Q
m
Q
Q
QCl)
W
0
m
0
Q
W
M
Z
Q
Q
ce
LU
�W—
m
0
LLJ
�
C
Z
W
QLU
=
LL
w
c
co
-0
IL
O
Q
C
:«r
O
N
►o
ii
..
z
LLJW
coQ
W
z
Ll
W
J
Q
m
¢W
G
=
Q
m
Q
Q
QCl)
W
0
Q
W
Z
Q
3f
2
LL
LLJ
LU
C
Z
pco
>z_
-0
IL
O
Q
C
:«r
O
N
►o
ii
..
z
LLJW
coQ
W
z
Ll
W
J
November 29, 2010
There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 2:48
p.m.
Date: 12 — 2—()._�O
Chairman
� J
SecretAry