Loading...
boa_04 28 2008LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY OF MINUTES APRIL 28, 2008 2:00 P.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being five (5) in number. If. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meetings The Minutes of the March 31, 2008 meeting were approved as mailed by unanimous vote. III. Members Present: Members Absent: Terry Burruss, Chairman David Wilbourn, Vice Chairman Scott Smith James Van Dover Robert Winchester None City Attorney Present: Debra Weldon LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA APRIL 28, 2008 2:00 P.M. I. NEW BUSINESS: 1. Z -3520-D 7600 Cantrell Road 2. Z -7387-A #5 Bent Tree Court 3. Z -8167-A 3016 W. Markham Street 4. Z-8326 156 Hickory Creek Circle 5. Z-8327 5313 Hawthorne Road 6. Z-8328 #2 Butterfield Lane 7. Z-8329 61 Sherrill Road 8. Z-8330 13 Cimarron Valley Circle 9. Z-8331 56 Pinehurst Circle 10. Z-8332 323 S. Cross Street 11. Z-8333 1714 N. Spruce Street 12. Z-8334 1001 Fawnwood Drive 13. Z-8335 4211 Woodlawn Avenue 14. Z-8336 18 Normandy Road 15. Z-8340 1617 S. Fillmore Street CIO 3NId 832va3 lin 91141 v, IM 4 00 25 T o �yJd�7 O i h W NVMS30 0 ^ ' I NItlW^l/L �� AVMOtl088 HOBV SX) �1/✓p 83H380 UNIX lW — (` r g MOBOOOM iE 3NId 31116 HJbd NO1lIWV 11005 s 9ry�bdS AlIS83A n w 53H00H LO SONIddS 83430 � IddISS IW rLj i a6 1001H0 810483538 N MORY8 NHOf 3 yH i � 08033lNOVHS � i 08 3l OV w SIOBVS WVHBtld A3N 8 NV o 08 �N 00 30018 AWU �JylS o v cm w cn�S � Py � %Z V/ NVAIIIOS i ldVM3LS \ 4— S11WIl 41!3 � Jp O �� � 0JQ' 0�"PJ� i o 1pJ 31V8N83d O m W APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO. File No.: Z -3520-D Owner: Chris Albright Applicant: Ron Burns Address: 7600 Cantrell Road Description: Northwest Corner of Cantrell Road and Keightley Drive Zoned: C-4 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-302 and the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a gas pump canopy addition with reduced setbacks and which crosses a platted building line. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Service Station Proposed Use of Property: Service Station STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: The already congested site is located on the corner of a very busy intersection with long stack lengths. Traffic routinely stacks beyond the driveway on Keightley Drive. By the introduction of 2 additional fuel pumps and canopy, the site will be even more congested with very little maneuvering room for vehicles on site and for vehicle to enter and exit the adjacent streets. When you consider a 20 ft vehicle parked at the new northern fuel island there is approximately 10 ft of maneuver room between that vehicle and the back of sidewalk and only 30 ft from the right of way. This width will make it very difficult for a vehicle to access Keightley Drive and cause more vehicles to potentially cross 3 lanes of traffic on Cantrell Road eastbound. A 20 ft vehicle parked at the new southern fuel island will extend out into the Cantrell Road driveway by 10 ft making it more difficult for vehicles to enter the site from Cantrell Road. The addition of the 2 fuel island and canopy will increase the safety hazard of motorists trying to access the site from the adjacent streets. APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T.) B. Landscape and Buffer Issues: No Comments C. Staff Analysis: The C-4 zoned property at 7600 Cantrell Road is occupied by a one-story commercial building containing a convenience store and a gas pump area with canopy. The property is located at the northwest corner of Cantrell Road and Keightley Drive. The convenience store building is located within the north half of the property, with a small area for auto service on its east side. The gas pump canopy is located within the south half of the property and includes three (3) gas pumps and six (6) service lanes. There are access drives from Cantrell Road and Keightley Drive. There is paved parking on the north and south sides of the building. The C-4 zoned lot contains a 45 foot front platted building line along the Cantrell Road frontage. The applicant proposes to construct a 24 foot by 52 foot addition to the gas pump canopy, as noted on the attached site plan. The addition will include two (2) additional gas pumps. The addition will be located approximately 17 feet from the front (south) property line and 26 to 64 feet from the east, street side, property line. The 45 foot front platted building line has been reduced by 7 to 10 feet with additional right-of-way dedication for the recent construction of Cantrell Road. The proposed canopy addition is located approximately 24 feet back from the original front property line (prior to right-of-way dedication). The addition will maintain the same front setback as the existing canopy, extending across the front platted building line by 19 to 20 feet. Sections 36-302(e)(1) and (2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance require minimum front and street side setbacks of 45 feet for C-4 zoned lots. Section 31-12(c ) of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that encroachments across platted building lines be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances to allow the canopy addition with reduced front and street side setbacks, and to encroach across a platted building line. Staff does not support the requested setback and building line variances. Although staff has no specific objection to the proposed canopy addition maintaining essentially the same front and street side setbacks as existing buildings on the site, Public Works has raised vehicular safety issues associated with the addition. Public Works notes in paragraph A. of this agenda staff report that on-site vehicular circulation as well as vehicular maneuvering entering and exiting the site could be hazardous based on the proximity of the proposed canopy addition to the southeast corner of the property and the nearest driveways from Cantrell Road and Keightley Drive. Additionally, the proposed canopy addition will be located relatively close to the sidewalks along both street frontages. APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T.) If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the platted front building line for the addition. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested setback and building line variances. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 28, 2008) Chris Albright was present, representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the application with a recommendation of denial. Chris Albright addressed the Board in support of the application. He noted that the proposed canopy addition would not cause a traffic circulation problem. He explained that the canopy addition would not add to traffic congestion on the site because it would allow service of more vehicles on the site. Chairman Burruss asked if there had been any consideration to modifying or closing the two (2) drives nearest the intersection. Mr. Albright indicated that it would not work. He explained that all of the existing driveways were needed for interior traffic circulation. He noted that larger trucks (delivery trucks) used the drives to enter and exit the site. The issue of narrowing the two (2) drives nearest the intersection was discussed. Vince Floriani, of Public Works, noted that the site was currently a congested site. He explained that there would be little separation between the proposed canopy addition and the sidewalks along both streets. He explained traffic circulation issues associated with the proposed canopy and its proximity to the drives nearest the intersection. James Van Dover explained that he was not concerned with the interior congestion, but the possibility of congestion on the adjacent streets. Mr. Floriani explained that there was concern with interior traffic backing up to the drives and possibly onto the adjacent streets. The issue was discussed with relation to vehicle location on the site at the proposed canopy addition. Staff suggested that the two (2) driveways nearest the intersection be exit only/right turn only drives. This issue was discussed. Chairman Burruss explained that a deferral might be in order to allow the applicant time to work with Public Works and resolve the traffic circulation concern. The issue of deferral was discussed. Mr. Albright asked to defer the application. There was a motion to defer the application to the May 19, 2008 agenda. The motion passed with a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. The application was deferred. Department of Planning and Development February 25, 2008 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas RE: Zoning Variance for Kingwood Exxon Service Center To whom it may concern, In the last three years, three gasoline stations have closed down within a half mile of our location at Cantrell and Mississippi. The Highway Department found it necessary to widen the road in front of our store to handle the additional traffic due to the growing number of people in the area. I am proposing the addition of two more gasoline pumps, bringing the total to only five pumps. This will help accommodate our new customers and be better service to the neighborhood. Thank you for your coi i Chris Albright Ow Kingwood Exxon APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 2 File No.: Z -7387-A Owner: William and Susan Roehrenbeck Applicant: Bill Hearnsberger Address: #5 Bent Tree Court Description: Lot 35, Longlea Estates, Phase III -B Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the easement provisions of Section 36-11 to allow construction within an easement. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: ' Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: 1. Public Works has no comments since the proposed improvements are located outside of the 100 year floodplain on the existing concrete pool deck. B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at #5 Bent Tree Court is occupied by a two-story brick and frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide driveway from Bent Tree Court which serves as access to the residence which is located approximately 150 feet back from the roadway. An inground pool is located within the rear portion of the property, east of the residence. Taylor Loop Creek is located along the north property line within a 55 foot wide easement. There is a small drainage ditch which runs along the south property line, with a wood fence (7-8 feet tall) on the south line. A 15 foot wide drainage and utility easement is also located along the south property line. The applicant proposes to make two (2) additions to the property. The first is a 12 foot by 18 foot open-air pavilion with fire place to be located along the north APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO • 2 (CON'T.) side of the existing pool area, as noted on the attached site plan. The pavilion will be located within the existing drainage easement, outside the "high bank" line for Taylor Loop Creek. The majority of the existing pool is located within the drainage easement. The second addition to the property is a 22 foot by 24 foot detached garage located at the southeast corner of the residence. The east end of the garage will contain a 10 foot by 14 foot room for a bathroom and stairway. The stairway will lead to second floor storage. The proposed garage will be 1 1/2 stories in height and constructed to match the existing residence. It will be located five (5) feet form the south side property line and 10 feet from the residence. Approximately one-third of the proposed garage structure will be located within the 15 foot drainage and utility easement which runs along the south property line. Section 36-11(f) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires that variances to allow encroachments into easements (drainage, utility, access or use easements) be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the proposed pavilion to encroach into the Taylor Loop Creek drainage easement and the proposed garage to encroach into the 15 foot wide drainage and utility easement located along the south property line. Staff is supportive of the requested easement variance. Staff views the request as a very minor issue. The applicant has submitted sign -offs from all the public utility companies regarding the requested easement encroachments. Both proposed structures exceed the minimum setbacks from all property lines as required by the Zoning Ordinance. Staff believes the proposed pavilion and garage structures will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested easement variance, subject to the garage structure being constructed to match the existing residence. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 28, 2008) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. W.M. B. 'HEARNSBERGEk INC. ENGINEERING%CONSTRUCTION APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 3 File No.: Z -8167-A Owner: Stifft Station Partners, LLC Applicant: Donald Evans, WER Architects/Planners Address: 3016 W. Markham Street Description: Part of Lots 8-10, Block 6, Midland Hills Addition Zoned: C-3 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36- 301 to allow awning additions with reduced front setbacks. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Vacant Commercial Building Proposed Use of Property: Commercial STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: 1. Obtain a franchise agreement from Public Works (Bennie Nicolo, 371-4818) for the private improvements located in the right-of-way. B. Landscape and Buffer Issues: No Comments C. Staff Analysis: The C-3 zoned property at 3016 W. Markham Street contains a one-story brick commercial building which is currently vacant. The building is located on an irregular shaped lot, with the front fagade being less than one (1) foot back from the front property line along W. Markham Street. There is paved parking on the west end of the building which is shared parking with the commercial buildings immediately to the north and west. There are access drives to the parking area from W. Markham Street and Kavanaugh Blvd. There is a fenced area on the north side of the building which is a rear service access between this building and the commercial building immediately to the north. APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T The commercial building at 3016 W. Markham Street is in the process of being remodeled for a future commercial use. As part of the remodeling project, the applicant proposes to install four (4) canvas awnings and one (1) framed canopy on the south building fagade. The awnings and canopy will extend four (4) feet from the building fagade and into the W. Markham Street right-of-way by three (3) plus feet. The awnings and canopy will be located over the existing sidewalk area. The applicant has noted that the projecting structures will be located at least eight (8) feet above the sidewalk. Section 36-301(e)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front building setback of 25 feet for this C-3 zoned lot. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the awnings and canopy with no setback from the front, W. Markham Street, property line and to extend into the public right- of-way. Staff is supportive of the requested variance. According to the property survey there was a canopy (approximately 4.7 feet by 50 feet) on the south side of the building which extended over four (4) feet into the W. Markham Street right-of- way. Staff has reviewed the proposal with respect to the Hillcrest Design Overlay District Standards and found no issues that do not conform to the DOD. Staff feels the proposed awnings and canopy will add to the street appeal of the commercial building, being attractive accents to the masonry wall construction. Staff believes the proposed awnings and canopy will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or neighborhood. The applicant will have to obtain a franchise permit from the Public Works Department for the awning/canopy encroachment into the public right-of-way of W. Markham Street. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested setback variance, subject to a franchise being obtained for the encroachment into the W. Markham Street right-of-way. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 28, 2008) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. WITSELL EVANS RASCO 901 West Third Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Phone 501-374-5300 Fax 501-374-5247 www.WERarch.com Charles Witsell, Jr., FAIA Don Evans, AIA, APA H. Terry Rasco, FAIA Jay Brizzolara IV, AIA Eldon W. Bock, AIA David Sargent, AIA John Greer, Jr., AIA March 27, 2008 Board of Adjustment Planning and Development City of Little Rock 723 W. Markham Little Rock AR 72201 RE: Application for Building Improvements Gentlemen, The applicant is requesting approval of the installation of fabric awnings and canopies that will extend into the right of way of Markham Street along the south and west facade of the existing structure. These elements are to be applied to the existing structure and provide both sun screening and protection from the weather. No portion of any of the protruding structures will be lower than 8' from the grade directly below. Other improvements being made to the existing building are limited to general "shell" repairs including, new window systems, painting of exterior masonry, and floor framing repairs. Currently, there is no tenant identified and no work associated with any occupancy is contemplated. All building improvements, with the exception of limited exterior walks and stairs and the awnings and canopies are within the current building footprint. Included with this letter and application are six (6) copies of the Architect's plans which include the current survey of the property. Sincerely, WER rchi is/Planners 1 Don Evans Attachments APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 4 File No.: Z-8326 Owner: John Michael Smith and Nancy M. Smith Revocable Trust Applicant: John Michael Smith Address: 156 Hickory Creek Circle Description: Lot 38, Hickory Creek Subdivision, Phase I 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 at 156 Hickory Creek Circle contains a two-story brick and frame single family residence. There is a two -car wide driveway from Hickory Creek Circle which serves access. The property is located at the corner of Hickory Creek Circle and Hickory Creek Court S.E. The property slopes upward from both streets. There is an existing six (6) foot wood fence along the west property line within the rear yard area. The applicant proposes to construct a masonry wall to enclose the rear yard area, as noted on the attached site plan. The masonry wall will have a height of eight (8) feet along the west and east property lines, extending to approximately 12.5 feet at the northeast corner of the rear yard area. The wall will lower to a height of 10 feet as it ties into the southeast corner of the residence. The property immediately to the west is at a slightly higher APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 4 (CO elevation than this lot, with the property to the east being two (2) to three (3) feet lower. Therefore, the height of the wall will be eight (8) feet as viewed from the inside of the rear yard area, and eight (8) to 12.5 feet as viewed from the property immediately to the east. Section 36-516(e)(1)a. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum fence/wall height of six (6) feet for residential property. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the proposed wall to range in height from eight (8) feet to 12.5 feet. The majority of the wall will be at the eight (8) foot height level. Staff is supportive of the requested fence height variance. Staff views the request as reasonable. The proposed masonry wall is typical of walls and fences found throughout the Hickory Creek Subdivision for which variances have been granted in the past. Only a small portion of the proposed wall will exceed eight (8) feet in height due to the grade change between this property and the lot immediately to the east. Staff believes the proposed masonry wall will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested fence/wall height variance, as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 28, 2008) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. T74.'e'— 4 4 March 24. 2008 .2 -- i-' 2./ Department of Planning & Development 723 Markham Little Rock, Arkansas Re: Lot 38, Hickory Creek Subdivision, City of Little Rock, Arkansas The applicant proposes to construct a brick wall around the sides and rear of the referenced property. Due to the grading of the lot, a variance from the requirements of the zoning ordinance is requested to permit the wall heights as indicated on the survey. Walls of similar heights are common in this subdivision. APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 5 File No.: Z-8327 Owner/Applicant: Jamie L. Parham Address: 5313 Hawthorne Road Description: Lot 4, Block 10, Newton's Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36- 254 to allow a carport addition with reduced side setback. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: 1. Roof downspots should not be directed toward adjacent property. B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 5313 Hawthorne Road contains a one-story brick and frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide driveway at the northeast corner of the property. The driveway runs along the east side of the house to a carport on the rear of the residence. The applicant proposes to convert a portion of the existing carport to interior living space, with the remainder of the carport and a porch area converted to a screened porch area. With this conversion, the applicant proposes to construct a new carport addition to the southeast corner of the house. The proposed carport addition will be unenclosed. It will be located 85 feet back from the front property line, 38 feet from the rear property line and 1.5 feet from the east side property line. Section 36-254(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side setback of five (5) feet from this R-2 zoned lot. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the carport addition with a 1.5 foot side setback. APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 5 (CON'T.) All other setbacks associated with conversion of the existing carport and addition of the new carport exceed minimum ordinance standards. Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the request as reasonable, based on the fact that an open, unenclosed, carport addition is proposed. Staff typically will support minimum side setbacks of 1.5 feet for this type structure. Staff's support is conditioned on the carport addition being constructed to match the existing house and that guttering be provided, if needed, to prevent water run-off onto the adjacent property to the east. Staff believes the proposed carport addition will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested side setback variance, subject to the following conditions: 1. The carport addition must remain unenclosed on the north, south and east sides. 2. The carport addition must be constructed to match the existing residence. 3. Guttering must be provided to prevent water run-off onto the property immediately to the east, if the roof slopes toward that property, with downspouts directed away from adjacent property. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 28, 2008) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. March 24, 2008 To Whom It May Concern: T�e'n-s -,f32 -7 I respectfully request a side yard set back variance in order to erect a one car carport at the end of my drive as denoted in the architect's drawing. This would be in keeping with many of the bungalow houses in my neighborhood. I would like to make my existing carport into a screened in porch so that my backyard is more secure for my dog and I would have the ability to view and access this area more readily. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Jamie Parham APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 6 File No.: Z-8328 Owner/Applicant: Todd Mueller Address: #2 Butterfield Lane Description: Lot 6, Piedmont Subdivision Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a garage 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: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at #2 Butterfield Lane is occupied by a two-story brick and frame single family residence. There is a two -car wide driveway from Butterfield Lane which serves as access. The residential lot has three (3) street frontages; Butterfield Lane to the west, Sam Peck Road to the north and Summerdale Lane along the south property line. There is a 50 foot platted building line located along the Sam Peck Road and Summerdale Lane property lines and a 25 foot platted building line along the Butterfield Lane frontage. The property slopes downward from Butterfield Lane to a utility, drainage and access easement located along the east property line. There is a six (6) foot high wood fence which encloses the rear yard area. The applicant proposes to construct a 24 foot by 24 foot detached garage within the rear yard area, as noted on the attached site plan. The proposed garage will be located 25 feet back from the south (Summerdale Lane) property line and 61 feet from the residence. The garage will be located within the 50 foot wide platted building line along Summerdale Lane. The structure APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 6 (CON'T. will also be located 17 to 22.4 feet back from the utility, drainage and access easement which runs along the east property line. The applicant has noted that the proposed garage will be one-story in height and constructed to match the existing residence. Section 31-12(c) of the City's Subdivision Ordinance requires that encroachments across platted building lines be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the proposed garage structure to be located between the 50 foot platted building line and south property line along Summerdale Lane. Staff is supportive of the requested building line variance. Staff views the request as reasonable. As noted previously, the garage will be located 25 feet back from the south (Summerdale Lane) property line. The Ordinance typically allows a minimum street side setback of 15 feet for accessory buildings in R-2 zoning. The nearest structure is located over 100 feet from the proposed accessory garage structure. The only other structure within this block which fronts Summerdale Lane is the residence immediately east which is located well back from Summerdale Lane on a lot which has no street frontage on this street, only on Sam Peck Road. Staff believes the proposed accessory garage will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or general area. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the platted side building line for the new garage. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested building line variance, subject to completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the side platted building line as approved by the Board. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 28, 2008) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. April 8, 2008 Monte Moore Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Little Rock, AR Mr. Moore Todd Mueller #2 Butterfield Lane Little Rock, AR 72223 -;z-1'3ZY This letter is to request a variance to the building setback on my residential property. The mailing address of the property is #2 Butterfield in Little Rock, Arkansas. The property is legally described as Lot 6, Piedmont Subdivision to the City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas. The reason for this request of variance is to build a garage on the above mentioned property within the building setback. The building setback on the south side of the property is shown as 50 feet on the filed plat and recent survey. The proposed building would be setback approximately 25 feet from the south side lot line of the property. The main 'reason for the location of the garage is due to a large drainage feature that is located directly on the north side of the proposed garage location. The area is a low lying ditch and remains wet most of the time. The area would not be suitable for the construction of the garage. Summerdale is a low traffic subdivision street and will allow for backing a boat into the proposed garage. The Application For Zoning Variance provided by the City is attached for your review. Also attached is a survey of the property showing the proposed garage in relation to the existing setbacks, structures, and roads. Sincerely, 'f, r✓ Todd Mueller APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 7 File No.: Z-8329 Owner: Allison D. Holland Applicant: Tommy Jameson Address: 61 Sherrill Road Description: Lot 61, Sherrill Heights Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36- 254 to allow a building addition with reduced rear setback. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: . Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: 1. Controls should be installed to not cause damage to adjacent properties from stormwater from the additional impervious surfaces such as driveways and rooftops. B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property located at 61 Sherrill Road is occupied by a one-story brick and frame single family residence. There is a two -car wide driveway from Sherrill Road at the southwest corner of the lot. The driveway leads to a garage at the southwest corner of the residence. The R-2 zoned lot contains a 25 foot front platted building line and a five (5) foot utility easement along the rear (north) property line. The applicant proposes to enclose the existing garage area for additional living space and construct a new garage addition at the northwest corner of the residence, as noted on the attached site plan. The addition will be 23'-5" by 33'-7" in area and one (1) story in height. The proposed garage addition will be located five (5) feet back form the rear (north) property line and 19 feet from APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 7 (CON'T.) the west side property line. The existing driveway from Sherrill Road will be removed, with a new circular driveway constructed. The new driveway will extend along the east side of the residence and into the rear yard to access the proposed garage addition. 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 addition with a rear setback of five (5) feet. The applicant is also constructing an addition on the northeast corner of the residence. This addition exceeds the minimum setbacks from all property lines. Staff does not support the rear yard setback variance, as requested. Staff believes the proposed building addition is located too close to the rear (north) property line. The proposed five (5) foot setback represents an 80 percent encroachment into the required 25 foot rear setback. The residence immediately to the north is located approximately 20 to 25 feet back from the dividing rear property line. In this particular instance staff could support a rear setback of ten (10) feet. This is based on the fact that the proposed addition occupies a small percentage of the overall rear yard area. If the applicant were willing to revise the application to provide a rear setback of at least ten (10), staff could support the application. As filed, staff believes the proposed addition to the northwest corner of the residence will be located too close to the residence immediately to the north. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested rear yard setback variance, as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 28, 2008) Tommy Jameson and Allison Holland were present, representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the application with a recommendation of denial. Tommy Jameson addressed the Board in support of the application. He explained the history of the garage at the front corner of the house. He noted that the property owner was trying to save large trees within the front yard area. He also noted that the proposed garage addition represented only a small percentage of the rear 25 feet of the lot. He explained that he neighbors were in support of the application. Chairman Burruss asked if the proposed garage addition was for two (2) vehicles. Mr. Jameson indicated that it was. James Van Dover asked about the neighbor to the north. Mr. Jameson explained that they were in support of the application. Allison Holland explained that the property owner to the north was in support of the proposed garage addition. APRIL 28, 2008 i ITEM NO.: 7 (CON T.) Scott Smith noted that staff suggested a 10 foot rear setback. Mr. Jameson explained that a 10 foot rear setback had been considered but it would probably eliminate the use of the addition as a garage. The issues of driveway location and tree preservation were discussed. Ms. Holland explained that she was trying to save the large oak trees in the front yard and create a garage area which was more easily accessed. The issue of the proximity of the proposed addition to the rear property line and the house immediately to the north was discussed. The issue of revising the application was discussed. Staff noted that if the proposed addition were located 10 feet back from the rear property line the width of the addition was not an issue as long as it was located at least eight (8) feet back from the west side property line. Mr. Jameson revised the application to provide a minimum 10 foot rear yard setback and a minimum eight (8) foot side yard (west) setback. There was a motion to approve the revised application. The motion was passed with a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. The revised application was approved. ARCHITECTS P.A. March 25, 2007 Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: Request for Variance 61 Sherrill Road Little Rock, Arkansas To Whom It May Concern: The Owner of 61 Sherrill Road is seeking a variance to construct a 2 -car garage beyond the backyard setback. Six copies of the survey and proposed site plan are attached. The Owner is planning a major renovation to the house, including expanding the structure's living spaces and sleeping spaces. The area of the existing garage (SW corner) is desired to be reconfigured as living space due to the southern exposure to the street and attractive view of the wooded neighborhood. Rather than adding a new garage to the front and loosing a substantial tree, the concept of the rear garage was developed. The proposed garage, covering approximately 23% of the back yard setback area, would be accessed via a new driveway and gate around the east (right) side of the property with a new circle driveway in the front lawn for guest parking. An opaque wood fence is proposed to screen and enclose the backyard and block vehicular headlights. The existing concrete driveway to the former garage would be removed. We hope you find this description helpful. Should you have any questions or need any additional information, please call. Cordially, Tommy Jameson, AIA Enclosures 300 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 501-666-6600 FAX 501-666-5177 APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 8 File No.: Z-8330 Owner: William Copeland, Jr. and Sandra Copeland Applicant: Billy Copeland Address: 13 Cimarron Valley Drive Description: Lot 4, Block 34, Pleasant Valley Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the fence provisions of Section 36- 516 to allow a fence which exceeds the maximum height allowed. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: 1. If the easement in the rear is a dedicated drainage easement, the bottom of the fence should be constructed to allow stormwater to pass under the fence unobstructed. B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 13 Cimarron Valley Drive contains a one-story brick and frame single family residence. There is a two -car wide driveway from Cimarron Valley Drive which serves as access. An inground pool was recently constructed in the rear yard. The rear yard area is enclosed with a six (6) foot high wood fence. The applicant proposes to construct an eight (8) foot high wood fence along the east and west side property lines. The applicant notes that the increased fence height is for added privacy for the pool area. The properties immediately east and west of this lot are at slightly higher elevations (rear yard area). APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 8 (CON'T.) Section 36-516(e)(1)a. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allow a maximum fence height of six (6) feet for residential properties. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance from this ordinance standard to allow the eight (8) foot high wood fence along the east and west side property lines. Staff is supportive of the requested fence height variance. Staff views the request as reasonable. The properties on either side of this lot are located at slightly higher grades than this residential lot. The adjacent lots are approximately 1.5 to 2 feet higher in grade (rear yard area) than the property in question. The applicant has submitted letters from these property owners supporting the application for fence height variance. Staff believes the proposed increased fence height as proposed will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or general area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested fence height variance, as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 28, 2008) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. MARCH 25, 2008 Y33 0 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: WE ARE SEEKING A VARIANCE OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE IN REGARDS TO PRIVACY FENCES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. WE CURRENTLY HAVE A SIX- FOOT HEIGHT WOOD FENCE, WHICH SEPARATES OUR PROPERTY FROM BOTH NEIGHBORS TO THE EAST AND WEST. WE RECENTLY ADDED AN INGROUND POOL, AND ARE SEEKING ADDITIONAL PRIVACY. OUR LOT IS LOWER THAN BOTH NEIGHBORING LOTS AND A TYPICAL SIX-FOOT FENCE DOES NOT PROVIDE TOTAL PRIVACY. WE ARE REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE REPLACEMENT OF OUREXISTING SIX-FOOT FENCE WITH AN EIGHT -FOOT PRIVACY FENCE. WE APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION IN THIS MATTER. SINCERELY, / l� BI 'L AN SANDY CaOP�AND PROPERTY ADDRESS: 13 CIMARRON VALLEY CIRCLE LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 2008-04-14 Nancy Jo Lake 9 Cimarron Valley Circle Little Rock, AR 72212 501-225-8747 To Whom It May Concern: My next-door neighbors Billy and Sandy Copeland at 13 Cimarron Valley Circle are proposing to build a new back yard privacy fence to a height of 8 feet between our two respective parcels. I am perfectly content to allow them to proceed and have no objections to the project. Please feel free to contact me if you wish to discuss this further. Regards, Nancy Jo Lake 03/311"2008 RUN 1U. ZZ !'AA I March 28.2008 Mr. & Mrs. David Trice 17 Cimorron Volley Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 501-772-6289 RE: PRIVACY FENCE REQUEST To Whom It May Concern,. Y3? This tetter is For the purpose of e�ressing opinion regarding the fence profit recpwt for Silty and Sandy Copeland, of 13 Cimarron Valley. We dna not Have any Issues w4th the Copeland`s raising their backyard privacy fence fo 8 feet. This fence is located between Cour two properties. Please feet free to contact us for any additlonal information. Thanks. Sincerely, David Trice Kc T!e Trice 0.000/UUL APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 9 File No.: Z-8331 Owner: John and Susan Meador Applicant: Susan Meador Address: 56 Pinehurst Circle Description: Lot 8, Block 5, Pleasant Valley Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36- 254 to allow a carport addition with a reduced side setback. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: 1. Roof downspouts should not be directed toward adjacent property. B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 56 Pinehurst Circle is occupied by a two-story frame single family residence. There is a two -car wide circular driveway from Pinehurst Circle which serves as access and leads to a garage on the east end of the residence. The property slopes upward from Pinehurst Circle and contains a 40 foot front platted building line. The applicant proposes to enclose the existing garage area at the east end of the residence and construct a carport/storage addition. The proposed carport will be 22 feet by 23 feet in size and unenclosed on the north and east sides. There will be a six (6) foot by 14 foot enclosed storage area at the rear (south side) of the proposed carport. The southeast corner of the proposed carport will be located five (5) feet back from the east side property line, with the northeast corner having a setback of approximately 11 feet. The proposed addition will be constructed to match the existing residence. APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 9 (CON'T.) Section 36-254(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side setback of eight (8) feet for this R-2 zoned lot. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow a reduced setback of five (5) feet for one (1) corner of the proposed carport structure. Staff is supportive of the requested side setback variance. Staff views the request as relatively minor. The proposed carport addition will have an average side setback of eight (8) feet, with a minimum setback of five (5) feet at one corner only. The nearest structure to the proposed carport addition is the residence immediately to the east which is located over 30 feet back from the dividing side property line. Staff believes the proposed carport addition will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested side setback variance, subject to the following conditions: 1. The addition must be constructed to match the existing residence. 2. The carport must remain unenclosed on the north, east and portion of south sides. 3. Gutter downspouts must be directed away from adjacent property. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 28, 2008) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. _z_ ff33 J TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: As a condition of being in compliance with all local ordinances and laws relative to construction on the property located within the city of Little Rock's jurisdiction, we wish to inform you by way of this letter of our remodeling plans at our primary residence, 56 Pinehurst Circle, in the Pleasant Valley Subdivision of Little Rock. We plan to convert our existing closed -in garage to a kitchen and convert the existing kitchen into a library/study. Additionally we plan to add an attached carport to our existing home. The carport will be built over the existing driveway that enters our current garage. The back corner"of the carport will be approximately 7 feet from the property line between our house and the home belonging to Wendy and Todd Hickingbotham at 50 Pinehurst Circle. There will be approximately 40 feet between the proposed carport and the Hickingbotham home, with extensive landscaping and large trees separating the two homes. The design and construction of the carport will be consistent with the architecture of our existing home. The roofline of the existing house will extend over the new carport giving it a seamless look suggesting that the carport has always been there. Columns will be used in the front and at the sides and have been selected to enforce the present architecture of the house. We will be contracting with highly recommended design and construction professionals to build a structure that is in keeping with the good taste and unique ambiance of our neighborhood. We have discussed this project with our neighbors to the front, back and sides of our property lines and have received unanimous written approval and enthusiastic endorsement of our project. 1�4,Glso Susan and John Meado 56 Pinehurst Circle �� Little Rock, AR 72212 -2 --,Y.? 3 / TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: We approve of the 2 car carport that our neighbors, John and Susan Meador plan to build on their property at 56 Pinehurst Circle. We understand the carport will be built according to city code and will be less than 10 feet from the property line. APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 10 File No.: Z-8332 Owner: Demp and Paula Dempsy Applicant: David Bevans Address: 323 S. Cross Street Description: Lots 4-6 and part of Lot 3, Block 293, Original City of Little Rock Zoned: UU Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the development criteria of Section 36-342.1 to allow addition to a ground -mounted sign and open display in the Urban Use Zoning District. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Commercial Proposed Use of Property: Commercial STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The UU (Urban Use) zoned property at 323 S. Cross Street is occupied by a one-story masonry commercial build in�q. The property is located at the northeast corner of S. Cross and W. 4t Streets. There is vehicular access to the rear (east) of the building from W. 4t" Street. There is also vehicular access to the northwest corner of the building from S. Cross Street. There is a ground -mounted sign along the west property line which extends into the right- of-way and overhangs the sidewalk along S. Cross Street. Additionally, there is a rock -covered area along a portion of the west building frontage, between the sidewalk and the building. Electric Transportation of Arkansas (ETA) occupies the south portion of the commercial building, with Diamond Bear Brewing Company within the north portion of the building. APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 10 (CON'T.) The applicant, Electric Transportation of Arkansas, is requesting two (2) variances from the UU zoning district criteria. The first variance request is from Section 36-342.1(c)(11) of the City's Zoning Ordinance which requires ground -mounted signs within the UU zoning district to be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. The applicant is proposing to add to the existing nonconforming ground sign, above the "Diamond Bear" sign. The addition will be 35 square feet in area (7' x 5') with a height of 24 feet to the top of the sign addition. The overall height of the existing sign pole is 24.5 feet. The proposed sign addition will be affixed to the existing vertical and horizontal sign poles. The second variance is from Section 36-342.1(d)(1) which states that all uses within the UU district be "inside or enclosed". The applicant is proposing to display electric/solar products within two (2) "indentions" along the west side of the building on the rock covered areas between the building and the sidewalk along S. Cross Street. The applicant notes that the product display will not block, obstruct or hinder the use of the sidewalk. Staff is supportive of the requested variances from the UU zoning district criteria. Staff views the request as reasonable. Only a very small area will be used for the open display of electric/solar products, located between the west building fagade and the sidewalk along Cross Street. As long as the sidewalk along Cross Street is not obstructed in any manor, the proposed outdoor display should have no adverse impact on the area. With respect to the requested sign variance, the proposed addition to the existing sign is only 35 square feet in area, and will not exceed the overall height of the existing sign pole. The existing "Diamond Bear" portion of the sign is approximately 56 square feet in area. Staff also feels the proposed addition to the existing ground sign will have no impact on the neighborhood. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested UU zoning district variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. The open display is to be located only within the indented areas along the west building fagade, between the facade and sidewalk. 2. The open display is to in no way block, obstruct or hinder use of the sidewalk along Cross Street. 3. A permit must be obtained for the ground -mounted sign alteration. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 28, 2008) Staff informed the Board that the application needed to be deferred to the May 19, 2008 Agenda based on the fact that the applicant failed to complete the notifications to surrounding property owners as required. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the May 19, 2008 Agenda as recommended by staff with a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. January 22, 2008 Dear Zoning Commission, OF ARKANSAS We at Electric Transportation of Arkansas are happy to be opening our business in Downtown Little Rock. As residents of Downtown we see the need for small businesses in our community to help revitalize our urban settings, and to stimulate the overall State economy. Our personal efforts can be facilitated by allowing the following variances: 1. SIGNAGE - The existing sign pole currently has a variance allowing Diamond Bear Brewery use for their sign. We propose to add our sign above Diamond Bear's, for there is no room for hanging a sign beneath what is there. 2. OPEN DISPLAY - Our unique storefront has two indentions we would like to utilize for the display of our electric/solar products. This in no way blocks, obstructs, or hinders use of the side walk, and would help to educate the public on our products, and the availability of fully electric modes of transportation. We thank you for your time and consideration of our requests. Best regards, /David Bevans John Akins Owner Owner Electric Transportation of Arkansas Electric Transportation of Arkansas 323.5. CROSS" STREET, SUITE B LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 PHONE: (501) 376-4EfA FM: (501) 374-4204 EMAIL: SALES@ETARKANSAS-COM WEB: WWW.ETARKANSAS-COM APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 11 File No.: Z-8333 Owner: Lloyd Church and Kathy Henderson Applicant: Carolyn Lindsey Address: 1714 N. Spruce Street Description: Lot 47, Cliffewood Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36- 254 to allow a carport addition with a reduced side setback. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: 1. Roof downspouts should not be directed toward adjacent property. B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 1714 N. Spruce Street contains a two-story brick and frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide driveway at the south side of the residence. The lot contains a 25 foot front platted building line. There is a six (6) foot high wood fence which runs along the south side property line, enclosing the rear yard area. The applicant proposes to construct a carport addition on the south side of the residence, as noted on the attached site plan. The proposed carport addition will be located 32 feet back from the front property line, 55 feet from the rear property line and three (3) feet from the south side property line. The carport will be unenclosed on the east, west and south sides, and constructed to match the existing residence with a gabled roof. The addition will also include guttering and downspouts. The applicant will also be adding a front porch to the residence. APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 11 (CON'T.) Section 36-254(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side setback of seven (7) feet for this R-2 zoned lot. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the carport addition with a reduced south side setback of three (3) feet. The proposed porch addition conforms to ordinance standards. Staff is supportive of the requested side setback variance. Staff's support of the reduced side setback is based on the fact that the addition proposed is an unenclosed carport. The accessory structures located on the residential lots immediately to the south are located two (2) to three (3) feet back from the dividing side property line. Five (5) to six (6) feet of separation will exist between them and the proposed carport addition. Staff believes this separation will be adequate. With guttering being provided to prevent water run-off onto the property to the south, staff believes the proposed carport addition will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested side setback variance, subject to the following conditions: 1. The carport addition must be constructed to match the existing residence. 2. Guttering must be provided to prevent water run-off onto the adjacent property to the south, with downspouts directed away from adjacent property. 3. The carport must remain unenclosed on its east, west and south sides. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 28, 2008) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. 'V Bary Lindsey Architects March 19, 2008 Mr. Monte Moore Department of Neighborhoods and Planning 723 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Zoning Variance Application for Church Residence, 1714 N. Spruce St. Dear Monte, We are requesting a zoning variance at 1714 N. Spruce St. to allow an encroachment of 3.5' into the south side yard setback of 6.5' for the purpose of constructing a one-story carport addition. We are maintaining the existing 3' utility easement along the south side and the rear of the property. We are also adding a front porch within the buildable area created by the front and north side yard setbacks. The carport addition has a gabled roof toward the neighbor with gutters and downspouts at the front and rear. The exterior is constructed of stucco and round Permacast columns. The front porch has brick sides with a concrete and brick porch surface. The clients require covered parking to protect their car from falling walnuts of a nearby tree. The carport is located as such in response to the narrowing of the site from front to back and the desire to keep the carport from sticking forward beyond the front face of the house. We feel the addition of a carport to the side of the house is in keeping with the existing density of the neighborhood. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, v IJV Carolyn A. La dsey, AIA 319 President Clinton Ave., Suite 201 Little Rock, AR 72201 501-372-5940 FX: 501-707-0118 APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 12 File No.: Z-8334 Owner: John and Rose McKay Applicant: Robert D. Holloway Address: 1001 Fawnwood Drive Description: Lot 152 Leawood Heights Third Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a building addition 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: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 1001 Fawnwood Drive is occupied by a one-story brick and frame single family residence. The property is located at the northeast corner of Fawnwood Drive and Leawood Blvd. There is a three -car wide driveway from Leawood Blvd. which serves as access. The owner is in the process of doing some remodeling work on the residence. The lot contains a 25 foot platted building line along both street frontages (west and south). The applicant proposes to construct a four (4) foot extension to the garage area at the south end of the residence. The proposed extension will be four (4) feet by 32 feet in size and be located 21 feet to 30 feet back from the south street side property line (along Leawood Blvd.). The southwest corner of the proposed addition will extend across the street side platted building line by four (4) feet, with southeast corner of the addition being behind the building line. APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 12 (CON'T.) Approximately 34 square feet of the proposed garage addition will encroach across the side platted building line. Section 31-12(c) of the City's Subdivision Ordinance requires that encroachments across platted building lines be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the proposed garage addition to encroach across the platted street side building line (south property line) by four (4) feet at its southwest corner. Staff is supportive of the requested building line variance. Staff views the encroachments across the side platted building line as very minimal. Only 34 square feet of the proposed garage addition crosses the side platted building line. With the curvature of Leawood Blvd. in this area the four (4) foot extension of the garage should have no negative visual impact on the properties to the east and west along this street. The addition will not have the appearance of being out of alignment with these adjacent structures. Staff believes the proposed building line encroachment will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the neighborhood. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the platted side building line for the addition. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested building line variance, subject to completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the side paltted building line as approved by the board. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 28, 2008) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. The Yfoffoway Firm, Inc. Civil and Environmental Design Robert D. Holloway Prof. Engineer Registration Arkansas Mississippi Louisiana Alabama Prof. Land surveyor Registration Arkansas March 28, 2008 Monty Moore City of Little Rock Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 -_4 /Zt -z-OV3341- 200 Casey Drive Maumelle, AR 72113 ♦ Telephone (501) 851-8806 (501) 851-3366 Facsimile (501) 851-3368 E -Mail hollowayfirm@sbcglobal.net RE: Board of Adjustment Action on Lot 152, Leawood Addition Residence at the Corner of Fawnwood Road and Leawood Boulevard Building Line Issue, Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas Dear Mr. Moore, As you can see from the Survey, Mr. McKay wants to extend his garage across the side yard building line as shown. The part that would extend across the building line would be only a short distance according to the whole lot which would amount to 16 1/2' of it being extended towards Leawood Boulevard ranging from 0 to a maximum of 4 feet at the West side. Since the house has 2 streets fronting it sometimes relief is given on the side street by right and I'm not sure that approval is needed is this case here, but we are herewith submitted it to the Board of Adjustment in case that is needed. Sincerely, <� 3,1- — Robert D. Holloway Cc: John McKay ENGINEERING ♦ DESIGN ♦ SURVEY/MAPPING APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 1: File No.: Owner/Applicant Address: Description: Zoned: Z-8335 David Ivers 4211 Woodlawn Avenue Part of Lots 1-3, Block 5, Pulaski Heights Addition R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36- 254 to allow building additions with reduced side setbacks. 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. Controls should be installed to not cause damage to adjacent properties from the stormwater from the additional impervious surfaces such as rooftops. B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 4211 Woodlawn Avenue is occupied by a one-story brick and frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide driveway from Woodlawn Avenue at the northwest corner of the lot. There is also a one - car wide metal carport at the northwest corner of the residence over a portion of the driveway. The applicant proposes to remove the metal carport structure and construct three (3) additions to the residence. The first is a 10.1 foot by 20.7 foot addition to the front, northwest corner, of the house for a new garage area. This addition will be located 36 feet back from the front (north) property line and maintain the same 5.2 setback from the west side property line. The applicant is also proposing two (2) additions to the rear of the residence, at the southeast and southwest corners. Both additions will be approximately APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 13 (CON'T.) 600 square feet in area each, and be located approximately 43 feet back from the rear (south) property line. The proposed additions will maintain the same side setbacks on the existing residence (approximately five (5) feet). These additions are proposed for additional bedroom/living space. Section 36-254(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires minimum side setbacks of 7.5 feet for this R-2 zoned lot. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the three (3) additions with side setbacks of approximately five (5) feet. Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the request as reasonable. The proposed additions will maintain the same side setbacks as the existing residence. The removal of the existing metal carport structure from the northwest corner of the house with a permanent garage addition will be a quality improvement to the residence. There should be no separation issues with the adjacent structures to the east and west. Staff believes the proposed additions will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. The property is located within the Hillcrest Design Overlay District. The applicant must submit additional survey information to staff to determine that the proposal conforms to the DOD. In speaking with the applicant, staff believes that there will be no violations of the DOD. Staff will condition the application on there being no issuance of a building permit until all required survey information is submitted to staff and a determination made that there are no violations of the DOD. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested setback variance, subject to the following conditions: 1. The additions must be constructed to match the existing residence. 2. No building permit will be issued for the addition until the required survey information is submitted to staff and a determination made that there are no violations of the Hillcrest Design Overlay District. Anything that is determined not to comply with the Hillcrest DOD must be filed with the Planning Commission as a PZD rezoning. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 28, 2008) The applicant was present. There were -no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. 74-1- `4 13 -2-335 March 28, 2008 To: City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 W. Markham St. Little Rock, AR 72201 From: David Ivers 4211 Woodlawn Drive Little Rock, AR 72205 Dear Department of Planning: I am seeking a residential zoning variance for -my property located at 4211 Woodlawn Drive in Little Rock. I'm applying for this variance because of the lack of space for the side yard setback on each side of my house that I will be required to meet with the new improvements I plan to do. A new bedroom will be constructed on the south east corner. On the west side of the house I plan to remove the existing metal carport, single car garage, and sunroom and construct a new two car garage in their place on the front (north west) and new master bedroom/study on the rear (south west). The variance requested is in line with what already exists on the property. Should you have any questions concerning this proposal I may be contacted at: 501.519.2072. Sincerely, �f David Ivers l APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: File No.: Z-8336 Owner: Carrie and Ray Bell Applicant: Justin Stewart Address: 18 Normandy Road Description: Lots 15-16, Normandy 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 building addition with reduced setbacks 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: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 18 Normandy Road is occupied by a two-story brick and frame single family residence. The property is located at the northwest corner of Cantrell Road and Normandy Road. There is a two -car wide driveway from Normandy Road which serves as access. There is a six (6) foot platted alley/walkway along the north property line. The lot contains 35 foot front (south) and rear (north) platted building lines, and a 20 foot street side (east) platted building line. The existing building extends across the rear (north) platted building line. The applicant proposes to construct a one-story addition to the north end of the residence, as noted on the attached site plan. The addition is proposed for a new master bedroom with bath and closet space. The proposed addition will be located three (3) to six (6) feet back from the rear (north) property line and APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 14 (CON'T.) six (6) to seven (7) feet back from the west side property line. The addition is proposed to be located over 40 feet back from the east street side property line, and between the 35 foot platted rear building line and the rear (north) property line. Sections 36-254(d)(2) and (3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side setback of eight (8) feet and a minimum rear setback of eight (8) feet. Section 31-12(c ) of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that building line encroachments be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards to allow the building addition with reduced side and rear setbacks and which crosses a rear platted building line. Staff is supportive of the requested easement variances. Staff views the request as reasonable, based on the fact that the residence has excessive setbacks from both the front (south) and street side (east) property lines. The proposed addition is typical of those made in this general area in the past. With the addition, the overall massing of the residence on this lot is relatively minimal. There is a rather large yard space on both the south and east sides of the residence. As noted previously, there is a six (6) foot wide alley/walkway platted along the north property line. With this, there should be adequate separation between the proposed addition and the residence immediately to the north. The residence to the north is located approximately eight (8) from the dividing property line. Additionally, the residence to the west is located well back from the dividing side property line. Staff believes the proposed 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 rear building line for the addition. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. 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 replact reflecting the change in the rear platted building line as approved by the Board. 2. The building addition must be constructed to match the existing residence. APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 14 (CON'T.) BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 28, 2008) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. March 27, 2008 Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 501-371-4790 Dear Sir or Madam: Justin Stewart 5327 Southwood Rd. Little Rock, AR 72205 This letter is to request for variance to the property at 18 Normandy Rd., Little Rock, AR 72207. (Lots 15 and 16, Less and Except the South 5.0 feet thereof, NORMANDY, and addition to the City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas.) We are requesting to extend the North part of the house 12.2 feet, by East 35.2 ft. Due to the unusual lot configuration and orientation of the house, we have limited options for the addition location. This proposed addition brings us closer to the back of the lot line. There is an existing garage that will be removed and made into the master bedroom and bath. The North end of the lot backs up to an alley or right-of-way. The request is conducive to the style; and orientation of the already existing lot and house location. The addition will be an extension of the garage with an open carport that will minuc the style of the house. This lot has a unique orientation that limits the amount of space available to work with. In keeping with the charm of the neighborhood, we create a non -threatening, single level addition that will be a great improvement to the property and the neighborhood. Sincerely, Justin Stewart Contractor On Behalf of 1_2)e� Carrie an y Bell Owners APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 15 File No.: Z-8340 Owner/Applicant: James W. Miller Address: 1617 S. Fillmore Street Description: Lot 8, Block 4, Cherry and Cox Addition Zoned: R-3 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Sections 36-156 and 36-255 to allow a deck addition with reduced setbacks and separation. 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-3 zoned property at 1617 S. Fillmore Street contains a one-story brick and frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide driveway from S. Fillmore Street at the northwest corner of the property. There is a one-story stucco garage structure located at the northeast corner of the residence within the rear yard area. The rear yard area is fenced with a four (4) foot high chain- link fence. There is a 12 foot wide platted alley along the east property line. There is a deck addition to the rear (east) of the residence which is currently in the process of being constructed, as noted on the attached site plan. The proposed deck will attach to the northeast corner of the residence and abut the southwest corner of the detached garage structure. The deck is located two (2) to three (3) feet above grade. An arbor will be located over a portion of the deck. The proposed deck is located approximately three (3) feet from the south side property line and 18 feet from the rear (east) property line. APRIL 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: 15 (CON'T.) Section 36-255(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side setback of five (5) feet for this R-3 zoned lot. Section 36-255(d)(3) requires a minimum rear setback of 25 feet. Additionally, Section 36-156(a)(2)b. requires that principal structures be separated from accessory structures by at least six (6) feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances to allow the deck addition with reduced side and rear setbacks, and reduced separation from the accessory structure. The deck addition is considered part of the principal structure and, as noted previously, is butted up to the southwest corner of the accessory garage structure. The deck construction has ceased, pending the variance requests. Staff is supportive of the requested setback and separation variances. Staff views the request as reasonable. Staff feels that the proposed deck construction on the rear of the residence represents a quality improvement for this residence in the Oak Forest neighborhood. Adequate separation will exist between the proposed deck structure and the residences immediately north and south. With the deck structure remaining uncovered with no permanent roof structure and unenclosed, staff believes the deck will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the neighborhood. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested setback and separation variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. The deck must remain uncovered with no permanent roof structure. 2. The deck must remain unenclosed. 3. A building permit must be obtained for the deck construction. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 28, 2008) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. 10, March 2008 City of Little Rock Department of Zoning and Subdivision Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: Request to City of Little Rock for variance to code Dear Sirs: Please let me start with an apology. l specifically asked my deck contractor before this project was started if a permit was required. He assured me that no permit was required. 1 should have known better. 1 certainly know better now. After 1 learned that a permit was required, I have made every effort to comply with city regulations. 1 am requesting a code variance to build a deck with an arbor at the rear of my house. 1 also want to build a fish pond with a small fountain. When 1 bought my house in December of 2005 there was a very nice size pecan tree in the center of the back yard. 1 lost about half of the tree in` high winds shortly thereafter. Due to the heavy damage to the tree 1 felt it only prudent to have the remaining portion removed. This left me with me with no shade in the back yard. The back yard becomes unbearably hot very early in the day -by about 10 a. m."in the summer -and there is no shade until quite late in the evening from the tree in the front yard. After losing the pecan tree 1 immediately planted the perimeter of the back yard with a screen of 'Nellie R. Stevens' holly to provide privacy from traffic on 17th Street. The hollies are now 4 1/2' to 5 1/2' tall. 1 plan to maintain the "screen at about 8' or 9' tall to provide privacy and screening from traffic. The contractor" will be placing 2" x 6" boards every two feet on top of the arbor. 1 will also be planting evergreen 'Lady Banks' roses to provide additional shade and screening for the arbor. There will be gardenia 'August beauty' planted between the deck and the house and on the north side of the deck there is an existing row of camellia 'yuletide'. In addition to the deck being surrounded on three sides by shrubs there are 18 pots that will be permanently planted with shrubs—boxwoods, windmill palms and a weeping Japanese maple. There will also be 8 pots of aquatic lilies and irises in the fish pond. So, you see there will be an abundance of plant material on and around the deck, arbor, and fish pond. 1 am also trying to make the deck space functional for my mother who has multiple sclerosis and has great difficulty negotiating steps. Her health is declining. When the time comes that she needs to live with me, I want her to have easy access to the back yard. The deck and arbor have been designed to provide shade, seating, a smooth walking surface, a safe and easily negotiable egress from the house. All areas of the deck will be wheelchair accessible from the house. The fish pond and fountain have been designed to provide soothing sound and movement. This ,project has been designed to be an aesthetically pleasing enhancement to the neighborhood as well as my property. Exhibit A is six copies of a survey dated 13, March 2008 on which Brooks Surveying Inc. has drawn the measurements and location of the proposed structure. Exhibit B is the list of signatures of property owners within 200 feet north, south, east and west of my property at 1617 South Fillmore Street. Exhibit B will be delivered at a later date. Exhibit C photos show properties in a three block radius of my address that do not seem to meet the minimum required setback. These include a two story deck that practically abuts the shared property line, carport additions that are about eighteen inches from the property line,two decks across the street from myproperty that were built without permits houses that are being allowed to deteriorate as well as photos of properties that have poorly maintained and trashy yards. 1 have also included photos of the view from my front door. Exhibit D photos show some of my landscape work at my prior residence. These are included to show that 1 will improve the aesthetics of the property. Exhibit E photos show the views of my neighbors' properties from my proposed deck. These photos also show the holly screen that is intended to block the neighbors' view of the proposed structure. 1 have also included photos of the alley behind my property to show that my proposed structure will not hinder service vehicles from accessing the alley. This set of photos includes the views of my'proposed construction site from a direct line of sight from my neighbors' back doors. Exhibit F is a copy of the materials list and �a colored landscape master plan. Exhibit G is a letter of support from my neighbor at 1615 S. Fillmore Street. She is a property owner. The house on the other side of my property is a rental. Included is a copy of the notification letter that 1 will send to property owners that 1 will not be able to contact personally. This is to respectfully request your consideration and approval for the stated work to be done. Sincerely, James W. Miller 1617 S. Fillmore St. Little Rock, AR 72204 Phone 838-2262 or 660-4474 El C 0 W W 0 w D Q LL 0 Q. O co P" F- L 0 0 0 0 PC FRI I .90 ro W z 27 W Q iA&MMUM,.,_. . F- L 0 0 0 0 PC FRI I .90 ro W z 27 W Q r O W �N 0 m O E ry > in W ~ 0 Q> O� W CO ME Z D O= p W U 11111111 liallill Z Z_ 1 p m § U) F- L 0 0 0 0 PC FRI I .90 ro W z 27 W Q r O W �N 0 m O E ry > in W ~ 0 Q> O� W CO Z D O= p W U W mH Z Z_ p m § U) F- L 0 0 0 0 PC FRI I .90 ro W z 27 W Q April 28, 2008 There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 3:13 p.m. go Date: Chairman