boa_06 26 2006LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SUMMARY OF MINUTES
JUNE 26, 2006
%fIlls►�
Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being four (4) in number.
II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting
The Minutes of the April 24, 2006 meeting were
approved as mailed by unanimous vote.
III. Members Present: Andrew Francis, Chairman
Terry Burruss, Vice Chairman
Fletcher Hanson
David Wilbourn
Open Position
Members Absent: None
City Attorney Present: Debra Weldon
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
AGENDA
JUNE 26 2006
2:00 P.M.
I. OLD BUSINESS:
ITEM NO.: FILE NO.: LOCATION:
A. Z -2668-A 209 N. Pierce Street
B. Z-8016 4015 West Markham Street
C. Z-8024 124 North Woodrow Street
II. NEW BUSINESS:
ITEM NO.: FILE NO.: LOCATION:
1.
Z -3386-A
923 S. Filmore Street
2.
Z -4099-B
1118 West 3rd Street
3.
Z -7079-D
8921 Fouche Dam Pike
4.
Z-8046
2001 S. Harrison Street
5.
Z-8047
41 Scenic Blvd.
6.
Z-8048
2900 West Capitol Avenue
7.
Z-8050
2 Cantrell Road
8.
Z-8051
412 Midland Avenue
9.
Z-8052
404 Hickory Creek Court — S.E.
10.
Z-8053
11 Woodridge Drive
11.
Z-4301 -A
6700 Cantrell Road
12.
Z -4546-B
509 Scott Street
13.
Z -4746-C
8820 Knoedl Court
II. NEW BUSINESS (Con't.):
ITEM NO.:
FILE NO.:
LOCATION:
14.
Z -5849-A
5201 Hawthorne Road
15.
Z-8057
2600 N. Pierce Street
16.
Z-8058
28 Maisons Drive
17.
Z-8059
6000 Scott Hamilton Drive
18.
Z-8060
6404 Geyer Springs Road
19.
Z-8062
21 Edgehill Road
20.
Z-8069
5241 Edgewood Road
�
� o
o
■ ��
O
3NId
— a31ztla3
/'1 �
linaelHl
�!
n
`o
, o
Z M
W
" U
W
U�� eoy0 Nvwa3D
m I
—
D Q Nltlw
� AtlM0V0a9
H7aV h'OIND
53HJ r zo a3H3a0
ON i
x u
OJ m
5
�MOa 3NId JS
LO �_ 1
3NId � S
�Nb
_
OaV 0 N011lwtl llODS
� � 5 SgN/ydS
Q Natld aIV3
(� AllSa A11S83AINn I
S'NIadS a3A30
.--I 53H9nH
IddISS Sim _
N 6
c 1001HD
� s _
MDaaVB NHOf
al0Aa353a 3 'yb
v� 3NN13H
-
Oa0d3lNOVHS o SIOM
06 31 OV _
o am
o wtlHaVd A3N00a
NY 09 —
o
4—j
h �
o — S11WIl A110 N,7y��Y,, 3001a Awl3
o 3�blSo�
ORS\(
o f
Q tiQ O 6�4a GRJS�P�
�
r n
V J
fQpPN'yypy �
o z
u
�2c
� NVAill05
latlM315
/
V`
HSddh
O
� VP
SIM11 A11 �2Y �Q J�
OPVZC
x <
d�Oln�
3ltlONa3d
O
CD
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: A
File No.: Z -2668-A
Owner: Ron Miller
Applicant: White-Daters and Associates
Address: 209 N. Pierce Street
Description: Lot 21, Strong and Waters Addition
Zoned: O-3
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the development provisions of
the Midtown Overlay District standards of Section 36-385 through 36-396 to allow
construction of a new office building.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Office
Proposed Use of Property: Office
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
A 5 foot wide sidewalk is required along the property frontage.
B. Landscape and Buffer Issues:
Site plan must comply with the City's minimal landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
A minimum six foot and nine inch (6-9") perimeter landscaping strip is required
along the northern, southern and western perimeters of the site. This area is
to be located out of the public right-of-way. This is a requirement of both the
landscape ordinance and the buffer ordinance. A variance from this
requirement will require approval from the City Beautiful Commission.
It appears the parking lot maneuvering area can be reduced; thus allowing for
more green space along the perimeters of the property.
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.:
A water source within seventy-five feet is required for all new landscaped
areas.
C. Staff Analysis:
The 0-3 zoned property at 209 N. Pierce Street is occupied by a one-story
brick and frame structure which is being used as an office. There is a one -car
wide driveway from Pierce Street leading to a small parking area on the east
side or rear of the building. The property is located with the Midtown Overlay
District as established by the Board of Directors on December 2, 2003. The
Midtown Overlay District provides specific design requirements for new
development or redevelopment within the district boundaries.
The applicant proposes to remove the existing structure from the property and
construct a new 3,200 square foot (2 story) office building on the property, as
noted on the attached site plan. The proposed building will be located
approximately 94 feet back from the front (west) property line. A driveway at
the northwest corner of the property is proposed to serve a small parking area
(8 spaces) located between the proposed building and Pierce Street.
The applicant is requesting several variances from the Midtown Overlay
District design standards. The requested variances are as follows:
• Section 36-389( c) of the City's Zoning Ordinance (Midtown DOD) allows
no more than one (1) curb cut per block face. The proposed new
driveway will be one (1) of several curb cuts along this block face from W.
Markham Street to "B" Street.
• Section 36-390( c) requires that all surface parking be located to the side
and rear of buildings. As noted previously, the applicant is proposing an
8 -space parking lot between the proposed building and Pierce Street.
• Section 36-392(a) requires that at least 60 percent of a building's ground
floor front fagade be glass windows. The applicant has not provided
building design information to staff, as of this writing.
• Section 36-392(b) requires that front setbacks on streets other than
arterial streets be zero (0) feet, but no more than 20 feet. As noted
previously, the proposed building is set back approximately 94 feet from
the front (west) property line.
The applicant should also be aware that signage and site lighting must
conform to the overlay district. Any ground -mounted sign must be monument
style and conform to the height and area standards of the 0-3 zoning district.
No wood, painted signs or pan -face -style signs are allowed in the district. Any
site lighting must conform to Section 36-395 of the ordinance. Additionally, any
2
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: A
variances from the City's Landscape Ordinance must be reviewed and
approved by the City Beautiful Commission.
Staff does not support the requested variances from the Midtown Overlay
District requirements. Staff believes the proposed development does not
comply with the purpose and intent of the newly established Midtown Overlay
District Ordinance. The site should be designed as to compliment and
encourage pedestrian use. Staff believes there is space on the site to pull the
building up to near the front property line with a different building footprint, and
have a drive on one side of the building with the parking in the rear. This type
of revised site design could eliminate all but one (1) of the requested
variances. Staff feels the proposed site plan could have an adverse impact on
future redevelopments in the Midtown Overlay area.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the requested variances from the Midtown Overlay
District requirements.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (MARCH 27, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to the
April 24, 2006 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the April 24, 2006 Agenda
by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent.
Staff Update:
The applicant contacted staff on April 10, 2006 and requested this application
be deferred to the May 22, 2006 Agenda. The applicant is continuing to work
on an alternative site design. Staff supports the deferral request.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 24, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to the
May 22, 2006 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request.
The item was places on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the May 22, 2006 Agenda
by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent.
3
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: A
Staff Update:
The applicant contacted staff on May 9, 2006 and requested the application be
deferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda. The applicant continues to work on a
revised site plan for the property. Staff supports the deferral request.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(MAY 22, 2006)
Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2)
members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no
meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be
transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to the
July 31, 2006 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays
and 1 open position.
0
® WHITE - DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. I
24 Rahling Circle -f-
Q Little Rock, Arkansas 72223
0 Phone: 501-821-1667 —
Fax: 501-821-1668
February 24, 2006
Mr. Monte Moore, Zoning Administrator
City of Little Rock
Neighborhoods and Planning
723 W. Markham St.
Little Rock, AR 72201
RE: Arkansas School Pictures
Mr. Moore,
Please find attached three copies of the site plan for the above referenced project. Ron Miller
with Arkansas School Pictures would like to redevelop his office building at this location. ASP
currently operates from an office at this location. The existing office building would be razed and
the new facility constructed towards the rear of the property to allow parking in the front.
This property is zoned 0-3, but falls within the Midtown Overlay District. This property is small
and with the existing development on either side, many of the fabulous ideas within this new
Ordinance fail to apply. The developer is requesting a variance from the requirements of this
district, but will develop under the 0-3 requirements.
A side yard setback variance from the required 10 ft. is requested. The property is only 50 ft. in
width and this requirement makes it difficult for redevelopment.
Please place this item on the next available Board of Adjustments docket. Do not hesitate to call
should you have any questions or require additional information.
Your help in this matter is greatly appreciated.
uc: Kon miner — Arxansas Jcnool pictures
CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT, SURVEYING
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: B
File No.: Z-8016
Owner: Allied Food Industries
Applicant: Mark Rickett
Address: 4015 West Markham Street
Description: Block 4, Plateau Addition
Zoned: C-3
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the buffer provisions of Section
36-522 to allow redevelopment of property with reduced buffers.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Restaurant
Proposed Use of Property: Restaurant
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
1. Obtain a franchise agreement form Public Works (John Barr, 371-4646)
for the improvements and parking located in the right-of-way.
B. Landscape and Buffer Issues.-
Site
ssues:
Site plan must comply with the City's minimal landscape and buffer ordinance
requirements.
Eight percent (8%) of the paved surface area must be allocated for landscaped
area, per the city landscape ordinance. These interior islands are to be evenly
distributed throughout the site.
A minimum six foot and nine inch (6-9") perimeter landscaping strip is required
along the northern, southern, eastern and western perimeters of the site. This
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: B (CON'T.)
area is to be located out of the public right-of-way. This is a requirement of
both the landscape ordinance and the buffer ordinance. A variance from this
requirement will require approval from both the City Beautiful Commission and
the Board of Adjustment.
An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required.
Staff Note:
On March 14, 2006 the applicant contacted staff and requested the application
be deferred to the April 24, 2006 Agenda. The applicant noted that a revised
development plan for the property was being worked out and would be
submitted to staff. Staff supports the deferral request.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (MARCH 27, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to the
April 24, 2006 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the April 24, 2006 Agenda
by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent.
Staff Update:
The applicant contacted staff on April 10, 2006 and requested this application
be deferred to the May 22, 2006 Agenda. The applicant is continuing to work
on an alternative site design. Staff supports the deferral request.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 24, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to the
May 22, 2006 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request.
The item was places on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the May 22, 2006 Agenda
by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent.
0)
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: B (CON'T.)
Staff Update:
The applicant contacted staff on May 8, 2006 and requested the application be
deferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda. The applicant is continuing to work on
an alternative site plan. Staff supports the deferral request.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
MAY 22, 2006)
Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2)
members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no
meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be
transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be withdrawn.
Staff supported the withdrawal request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and withdrawn by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays
and 1 open position.
February 23, 2006
Mr. Monte Moore
City of Little Rock Planning Department
723 W. Markham
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
RE: Burger King — 4015 W. Markham
Request for Variances
Dear Mr. Moore,
Pleased find enclosed the following information:
1. Three (3) copies of proposed improvements to the Burger King site.
2. Application for Variances
3. Filing fee.
2- ?0/ �
To satisfy the master street plan requirements, the appropriate right of way will be dedicated
along the abutting streets. The following is a brief description of the requested variances and
justification for the requests:
1. Variance from the 6'9" landscape buffers along Markham and Cedar Streets. The
required right of way dedication along these frontages encroaches into the existing
parking lot. All proposed perimeter landscaping will be installed in the public right of way.
2. Variance from the 8% interior landscape requirement. Three additional islands will be
added to increase the interior landscaping. The total interior landscaping is
approximately 5%.
3. Variance to allow parking in the public right of way. This is necessary because of the
additional dedication requirement. The existing parking will be in the public right of way
after dedication.
4. A franchise agreement to allow parking and landscaping in the public right of way.
The ownership of this Burger King store desires to simply raze the existing building and construct
a new one in its place with very.little work proposed on the site. The replacement of the existing
facility will vastly improve the appearance of the site along with the proposed addition of
landscape materials. Leaving the site as -is will allow Burger King to retain most of its existing
parking and function of the site. The justification for these variance requests is simply that the
proposed improvement to the site will substantially improve the site over the existing site
conditions and improving the site to meet code will create a hardship for the Burger King
ownership. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this project and the
requested variances.
Sincerely,
Rickett Engineering, Inc.
Mark E. Rickett, PE
Rickett Engineering, Inc.
P.O. Box 242862 • Little Rock, Arkansas, 72223 • 501.868.6302 • fax 501.868.6296 • mobile 501.690.6068
mark.rickett@rickettengineering.com
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: C
Owner: Randall and Carolyn Prickett
Applicant: Randall Prickett
Address: 124 North Woodrow Street
Description: Lot 8, Block 5, Midland Hills Addition
Zoned: R-3
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-
255 to allow a carport 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:
STAFF REPORT
Single Family Residential
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
Staff Update:
The applicant contacted staff on April 7, 2006 and requested this application
be deferred to the May 22, 2006 Agenda. Staff supports the deferral request.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-3 zoned property at 124 N. Woodrow Street is occupied by a one-story
frame single family residential structure. There is a one -car wide driveway
from N. Woodrow Street which serves as access. There is an alley right-of-
way along the rear (west) property line.
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: C (CON'T.
The applicant proposes to construct a 24.1 foot by 10.9 foot unenclosed
carport addition, a 10 foot by 15 foot unenclosed porch addition, and a 14.1
foot by 16.2 foot sunroom addition on the rear (west end) of the residential
structure, as noted on the attached site plan. The carport will be at the
northwest corner of the residence and set back approximately two (2) feet from
the side (north) property line. The proposed sunroom addition at the
southwest corner of the house will be located 7.5 feet from the south side
property line. All of the additions will be located over 30 feet back from the
rear (west) property line. A one -car wide driveway from the alley is proposed
to access the new carport addition.
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. Therefore, the applicant is
requesting a variance to allow a reduced side setback for the proposed carport
addition.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the request as
relatively minor. The side setback is requested for the carport structure which
will be an unenclosed addition. The fact that the carport will be unenclosed will
lessen the visual impact on the adjacent property. Adequate separation will
exist between the proposed carport addition and the single family residence
immediately to the north. Staff believes the proposed addition will have no
adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested side setback variance, subject to
the following conditions:
1. The additions must be constructed to match the existing residence.
2. The carport addition must remain unenclosed on all sides.
3. Guttering must be provided on the carport addition to prevent water
run-off onto the adjacent property to the north.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 24, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to the
May 22, 2006 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the May 22, 2006 Agenda
by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent.
2
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: C (CON'T.)
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(MAY 22, 2006)
Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2)
members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no
meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be
transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
3
1-e,,-6
2--- ko Z4
ren-mj�)
Department of Planning and Development February 14, 2006
723 West Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
RE: Request for Zoning Variance at 124 N. Woodrow
Dear Sir:,
Thank you in advance for your consideration of our zoning variance request. We have
recently purchased the property at 124 North Woodrow in Hillcrest after residing a few blocks
away at 321 Ridgeway for 28 years. It is our plan for this to be our retirement home. As such,
we are proposing to add a sunroom and carport to the rear of the house, which will be handicap
accessible. The driveway is proposed to enter from the paved alley at the rear of the property. It
is our understanding that a zoning variance is required for construction within 5 feet of the
property line on the side of the lot. We are requesting to be allowed to build the carport three
feet into this five foot perimeter, to a point two feet from the property line_
Per your request, we have tried to list some of the reasons for this zoning variance
request below:
1) We are nearing retirement and want to have level access from the proposed carport
to the house. The present driveway/carport at the front of the house is ten feet below
house level, with access via steep front steps. Based on the slope of the back yard
(from north to south), the location of the proposed carport (which will be attached
to the house) needs to be as far north as possible, in order to provide level access to
the house. The farther south the carport goes, the more it "falls off' from the level
of the first floor of the house.
2) Along the same line as 1) above, both of our Mothers are on walkers and
wheelchairs, so we would like to be able to provide them with level access to our
house,
3) The present roof architecture prevents some challenges for adding on, while still
maintaining the period architecture of the house. This is very important to us, as we
have been avid supporters of the Hillcrest community for over thirty years and want
to do whatever we can to minimize the architectural impact of these changes. If the
carport is moved over to the five foot line, the roof eave of the carport would be
three feet closer to the roof eave of the sunroom, creating an architectural imbalance
to the design. In addition, this move would cause the roofline of the carport to
intersect with the current roofline of the original house (above the dining room) at
RANDY & CAROLYN PRICKETT
''4 N. WOODROW STREET, LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72205
(501) 661-9039 HOME; (501) 240-9039 MOBILE (RANDY); (501) 240-9040 MOBILE (CAROLYN)
the northwest corner of the house, thus causing more negative impact to the design
(please refer to enclosed sketch). The northern wall of the sunroom cannot be
moved any further south, because of the entrance door from the kitchen.
4) The proposed plan allows for a rear porch (between carport and sunroom) that is
thirteen feet wide by eight feet deep. If the carport is moved over to the five foot
line, it would reduce the width of the rear porch by 23% to ten feet, making it less
ideal for use as an outdoor room.
5) The proposed design minimizes the impact of the carport on the present view from
the dining room into the backyard.
6) The proposed driveway lies just outside the canopy of an oak tree that we wish to
preserve. If the carport is moved over to the five foot line, the driveway would pass
three feet under the canopy and could very likely harm the oak tree permanently.
7) The proposed plan centers the old oak tree in the landscaping area, presenting a
more balanced landscape plan.
8) If the carport is moved over to the five foot line, it would reduce the size of the
already small yard that would be available for landscaping.
We hope that the above information is what you need. If you have any questions, please
feel free to call Randy on his mobile phone anytime at 240-9039. Thanks for your
consideration in this matter.
Sincer y,
Randy and Carolyn Prickett
Encl: Application for Zoning Variance
Survey of 124 N. Woodrow (6)
Check #7003-$80.00 Filing Fee
Check #7004-$5.00 Sign Fee
P. S. The nearest structure on the neighbor's property at the point of requested variance is
approximately twenty-five feet from the nearest edge of the proposed carport. This is primarily
due to the neighbor's property being a lot and a half (75 feet wide).
RANDY & CAROLYN PRICI<F-TT
_,24N- WOODROW STREET, LITTLE ROCK ARKANSAS 72205
(501) 661-9039 HOME; (501) 240-9039 MOBILE (RANDY); (501) 240-9040 MOBILE (CAROLYN)
JUNE 26, 2006
1�1r�t•�►[��il
File No.: Z -3386-A
Owner: Anne G. Moore
Applicant: Mark Rickett
Address: 923 S. Filmore Street
Description: Lots 7-12, Block 5, Perry Heights Addition
Zoned: 1-2
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the buffer provisions of Section
36-522 and the area provisions of Section 36-320, associated with a proposed addition
to an existing commercial building.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Office-showroom/warehouse, with outside storage.
Proposed Use of Property: Office-showroom/warehouse, with outside storage.
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B. Landscape and Buffer Issues:
The proposal does not allow for the minimal 8 foot wide street buffer distance
and to average 16 foot along the southern perimeter of the site. This is a
requirement of the buffer ordinance; therefore, Board of Adjustment approval
must be obtained. This approval must be obtained prior to the issuance of a
building permit. Easements cannot count toward this requirement.
The proposal does not allow for the minimal 6'-9" wide landscape strip along
the southern perimeter of the site. This takes into consideration the site being
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 1 (,CON'T.)
located within the City's designated mature area. A variance from this
requirement will require approval from the City Beautiful Commission.
The proposal does not allow for the minimal 12 foot wide landuse buffer strip
along the northern perimeter of the site next to the residentially zoned
properties. This takes into consideration the site being located within the
Designated Mature Area of the city. The full width requirement is 16 foot. A
variance from this minimum requirement would require Board of Adjustment
approval.
Due to the building expansion, a 31% upgrade in the landscaping will be
required prior to the issuance of a building permit.
A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side
directed outward, a wall, or evergreen plantings, is required along the northern
perimeter of the site.
C. Staff Analysis:
The 1-2 zoned property at 923 S. Filmore Street is occupied by a one-story
commercial building (plumbing supply -office with showroom and warehouse).
The property is located at the northeast corner of S. Filmore Street and West
10th Street. There is paved parking (head -in) on the south side of the building
along West 10th Street. There are two (2) metal shed structures at the rear
(north side) of the commercial building. The rear yard portion of the property is
partially paved and partially gravel, and used as an outdoor storage area and
truck loading/unloading area. There are also two (2) metal temporary storage
structures in the rear yard area. The rear yard area is accessed by way of a
driveway from S. Filmore Street.
The applicant proposes to construct a one-story 3,400 square foot building
addition to the rear of the existing commercial building, as noted on the
attached site plan. The addition will be located 10.93 feet to 12.48 feet from
the side (east) property line. With the proposed building addition, the applicant
proposes to redesign the parking area on the south side of the building. The
redesigned parking area will consist of five (5) parking spaces (1 handicap
space) and a one-way in/one-way out set of driveways from West 10th Street.
The applicant also proposes to pave the rear yard area which is used for
outdoor storage and truck loading/unloading.
With the proposed building addition and parking upgrades, the applicant is
requesting two (2) variances. The first variance is from the area provisions of
Section 36-320 of the City's Zoning Ordinance. Section 36-320(e)(2) requires
side setbacks of 15 feet. As noted previously, the proposed building addition
2
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T.)
will be located 10.93 to 12.48 feet from the east side property line. All other
proposed building setbacks conform to minimum ordinance standards.
The second variance is from the buffer requirements of Section 36-522(b)(4)b.
As noted in paragraph B. of this report, this section requires that the street
buffer along West 10th Street (associated with the new parking design) have a
minimum width of eight (8) feet and an average width of 16 feet. The street
buffer as proposed falls significantly below the minimum required width. The
applicant is proposing some landscaping within the right-of-way along West
10th Street. This landscaping will require a franchise permit from the Public
Works Department.
The proposed building addition will be used for warehouse space. Based on
the size of the addition, one (1) additional off-street parking space will be
required. The applicant has informed staff that at least one (1) parking space
will be striped off and designated within the new asphalt area in the rear yard
area of the property. The applicant has also noted that the land use buffer
along the north property line will be increased to meet ordinance requirements,
and that screening will be installed along the rear (north) property line as
required.
To staff's knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with the
proposed building addition and parking lot upgrades. Staff is supportive of the
requested variances. Staff feels the building addition and parking/vehicular
use area upgrades will be quality improvements to the property. The applicant
has noted that the two (2) metal storage structures and the two (2) metal
storage containers will be removed from the property in conjunction with the
proposed improvements. There is an alley right-of-way which runs along the
east property line which will basically make the proposed side setback for the
proposed addition a non -issue. A portion of the existing building is located
slightly closer to the east side property line. Staff believes the proposed
building addition and parking improvements will have no adverse impact on the
adjacent properties or the general area.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested setback and buffer variances,
subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the Public Works and Landscape/Buffer issues as noted
in paragraphs A. and B. of the staff report.
2. The land use buffer strip along the north property line must be increased
to a minimum width of 12 feet.
3. Screening must be provided along the north property line, as noted in
paragraph B. of the staff report.
3
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T.)
4. At least one (1) parking space must be designated within the rear asphalt
area.
5. Any landscape ordinance variances must be approved by the City
Beautiful Commission prior to issuance of a building permit.
6. A franchise permit must be obtained for the landscaping within the West
10th Street right-of-way.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
MAY 22, 2006)
Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2)
members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no
meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be
transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
0
April 21, 2006
Mr. Monte Moore
City of Little Rock Planning Department
723 W. Markham
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
RE: Plumbing Warehouse, 10th & Filmore
Request for Variances
Dear Mr. Moore,
Pleased find enclosed the following information:
-2 -33864
1. Three (6) copies of proposed improvements to the Plumbing Warehouse site plan and survey.
2. Application for Variances
3. Filing fee.
The following is a brief description of the requested variances and justification for the requests:
1. Variance from the 9' landscape buffers along 10th Street. Due to the close proximity of the existing
building to the 10th Street right of way and the need to maintain some parking in front of the
building, it is physically impossible to provide the required landscape strip and provide a functioning
parking area. Additionally, the site improvements will be a significant improvement over the
existing condition of head -in parking off of 10th Street.
2. Variance from the 8% interior landscape requirement for the paved area at the rear of the site.
Due to the nature of the use of this area, there is no practical way to incorporate interior
landscaping.
3. Variance to decrease the building setback requirement for the east and west sides of the site. The
existing building is 25' to 27' of the existing right of way along Filmore and is 7.5' to 12.5' from the
rear property line. With the new right of way dedication along Filmore as required by the Master
Street Plan, the existing building will be 14' to 16' from the right of way.
4. Variance from the off-street parking requirement of 12 spaces. Only five are proposed due to the
constraints of the property.
5. Additionally, with the required right of way dedication on Filmore, an existing fence will fall within
the public right of way. A franchise agreement will be requested to allow that fence to remain
around the outside material storage yard.
This building has existing on this site for approximately forty years. The existing site does not meet many
current code requirements. With the new building addition and renovation, the Ownership of this property
will be significantly improving the site and eliminating safety hazards that currently exist in regard to traffic
movements. The new parking, landscaping, and building facade will greatly improve the appearance and
function of this facility. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this project and the
requested variances.
Sincerely,
Rickett Engineering, Inc.
Mark E. Rickett, PE
Rickett Engineering, Inc.
P.O. Box 242862 . Little Rock, Arkansas, 72223 • 501.868.6302 • fax 501.868.6296 • mobile 501.690:6068
mark.rickett@ricketteng!neering.com
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 2
File No.: Z -4099-B
Owner: Floors First By Hill's, Inc.
Applicant: Jim Hill, Jr.
Address: 1118 West 3 d Street
Description: East '/z of Lots 4-6, Block 294, Original City Of Little Rock
Zoned: UU
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the development provisions of
Section 36-342.1 to allow an addition with a corrugated metal exterior. Also, a time
extension is requested for previously approved variances.
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:
1. The cross slope of the driveway at the sidewalk crossing does not comply
with ADA requirements. With the expansion and improvements, the
driveway apron should be constructed with a maximum cross slope of
1:50 at sidewalk crossings across a 3 foot path.
Comment from Original Approval:
1. With building permit, repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that
is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
B. Landscape and Buffer Issues:
Comment from Original Approval:
Areas set aside for landscaping meet with Landscape Ordinance requirements
with the reductions allowed within the designated mature area of the City.
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.)
C. Staff Analysis:
The UU zoned property at 1118 West 3rd Street is occupied by a one-story
brick commercial building. The building is located within the west Y2 of the
property, with a non conforming gravel parking lot located within the east 1/2 .
A driveway from West 3rd Street serves as access.
The applicant proposes to construct a one-story, 39 foot by 69 foot addition at
the rear (north) of the existing building. The building addition will be located
six (6) inches from the north and east property lines and five (5) feet from the
west property line. The addition will have a 10 foot wide garage door and a
standard walk through door on its south side, facing West 3rd Street. The
building addition will allow for the use as an office with showroom and
warehouse.
As part of the proposed development, the applicant proposes to pave the
existing gravel parking lot within the east '/z of the lot. The new parking lot will
contain 10 parking spaces. The applicant proposes to landscape the parking
lot as per Landscape Ordinance requirements.
On April 26, 2004, the Board of Adjustment approved variances from the UU
(Urban Use District) development standards for the proposed building addition
and parking lot. Variances were approved to allow less than 60 percent
transparent or window display for the front of the proposed addition, location of
the new parking lot and building setback for the addition. Please see the
attached April 26, 2004 minute record for details on the approved variances.
The front building setback is no longer an issue, as the ordinance has been
changed to require no build -to line.
The applicant is back before the Board of Adjustment requesting an additional
variance for the proposed building addition, and to have the time for the
previously approved variances extended for two (2) years to align with the
newly requested variance. The previously approved variances expired on April
26, 2006.
The new variance requested is also from the Development standards of
Section 36-342.1 of the City's Zoning Ordinance. Section 36-342.1(c)(4)
requires that fagade materials be any standard material, except corrugated or
ribbed materials. The applicant is currently requesting to construct the addition
with a corrugated metal exterior, and therefore is requesting a variance to
allow use of this material.
Staff is not supportive of the variance, as requested. Although staff would
have no problem with the side and rear fagades being corrugated metal
construction (north, east and west facades), staff feels the front, street facing,
fagade should be constructed of a masonry brick to match the fagade of the
2
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.)
existing commercial building. In addition, the trash receptacle area in front of
the building addition must be screened with an eight (8) foot high masonry wall
to match the front fagade of the building addition. If the applicant were willing
to make this change to the front fagade of the building addition, staff will
support the variance for the other building sides, and the time extension for the
other previously approved variances, subject to the following conditions:
1. The front (south) fagade of the building addition must be masonry
construction to match the existing commercial building.
2. The trash receptacle area in front of the building addition must be
screened with a eight (8) foot high masonry wall to match the facade of
the building addition.
3. Compliance with the Public Works and Landscape and Buffer comments
as noted in paragraphs A and B of the staff report.
4. Compliance with all Building and Fire Codes.
5. A building permit must be obtained for all construction.
6. Compliance with all other Urban Use development standards.
7. The new variance and previously approved variances will expire on May
22, 2008.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the requested variance, as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(MAY 22, 2006)
Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2)
members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no
meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be
transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to the
July 31, 2006 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays
and 1 open position.
3
Department of Planning & Development
City of Little Rock
723 West Markham St.
Little Rock, AR. 72201
RE: Zoning Variance
Gentlemen,
Two years ago I came before you requesting approval to build a warehouse on my property. At that time
there were issues to overcome regarding: 1. the amount of windows required, 2. parking between the
building and the street and, 3. the building is to be built with 0' setback. These items were approved at
that time (see attachments) and I now wish to be granted an extension of time as I have not constructed
this warehouse.
Today, my primary request is to be allowed to fabricate this building as a corrugated metal structure.
After the last meeting, cost were determined for building with various materials (namely concrete block
as it was the least costly) which were cost prohibitive and visually unappealing from my standpoint.
This metal building would be from colors that would be pleasing to the eye._ likely soft tans or grays
with possibly a black or charcoal roof, and after the final color for the metal building is determined we
would then paint the exterior of the existing building to match, and then, accent both buildings by
painting the exposed clay tile roof (that shows) black/charcoal to match the awning. and perhaps have a
black garage and regular entrance door to the warehouse or black awnings over the warehouse doors... all
of which would make this a visually appealing addition to the neighborhood in light of the previous
additions (paved parking and landscaping). Please keep in mind that this structure will setback 110'
from the front property line and that this property is on the outskirm1border of Zone UU.
We strive to keep our property tidy and I'm reasonably sure my neighbors would welcome this addition
as it could only enhance their property values.
I do not want to move from this location.
neighbors will not be sorry!
cerely
111-0
Jim ill Jr.
President
.....please, give this every possible consideration .... you and my
TI --9,-4 2-
ST
by
TmFL04RS FIRST by Hill's, Inc
Jim Hill Jr. -President
1118 West 3b Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
Phone (501) 375-9300
Fax (501) 375-1630
floorsfirst@sbcglobal. net
April 21, 2006
Department of Planning & Development
City of Little Rock
723 West Markham St.
Little Rock, AR. 72201
RE: Zoning Variance
Gentlemen,
Two years ago I came before you requesting approval to build a warehouse on my property. At that time
there were issues to overcome regarding: 1. the amount of windows required, 2. parking between the
building and the street and, 3. the building is to be built with 0' setback. These items were approved at
that time (see attachments) and I now wish to be granted an extension of time as I have not constructed
this warehouse.
Today, my primary request is to be allowed to fabricate this building as a corrugated metal structure.
After the last meeting, cost were determined for building with various materials (namely concrete block
as it was the least costly) which were cost prohibitive and visually unappealing from my standpoint.
This metal building would be from colors that would be pleasing to the eye._ likely soft tans or grays
with possibly a black or charcoal roof, and after the final color for the metal building is determined we
would then paint the exterior of the existing building to match, and then, accent both buildings by
painting the exposed clay tile roof (that shows) black/charcoal to match the awning. and perhaps have a
black garage and regular entrance door to the warehouse or black awnings over the warehouse doors... all
of which would make this a visually appealing addition to the neighborhood in light of the previous
additions (paved parking and landscaping). Please keep in mind that this structure will setback 110'
from the front property line and that this property is on the outskirm1border of Zone UU.
We strive to keep our property tidy and I'm reasonably sure my neighbors would welcome this addition
as it could only enhance their property values.
I do not want to move from this location.
neighbors will not be sorry!
cerely
111-0
Jim ill Jr.
President
.....please, give this every possible consideration .... you and my
April 26, 2(.,64
(TEM NO.: 1 C__�
File No.: Z -4099-A
Owner: Floors First By Hills
Address: 1118 W. 3rd Street
Description: East % of Lots 4, 5 and 6, Block 294,
Original City of Little Rock
Zoned: UU
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the
development provisions of Section 36-
342.1 associated with building and parking
lot additions.
Justification:
Present Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
STAFF REPORT
V
Public Works Issues:
The applicant's justification is presented
in an attached letter.
Commercial with office
Office/showroom with warehouse
1. With building permit, repair or replace any curb and gutter or
sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to
occupancy.
Landscape and Buffer Issues:
Areas set aside for landscaping meet with Landscape Ordinance
requirements with the reductions allowed within the designated mature
area of the City.
C. Staff Analysis:
The UU zoned property at 1118 W. 3rd Street is occupied by a one-story
brick commercial building. The building is located within the west Y2 of the
April 26, 2bo,4
ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.)
property, with a non conforming gravel parking lot located within the east
%2. A driveway from W. 3rd Street serves as access.
The applicant proposes to construct a one-story, 39 foot by 69 foot
addition at the rear (north) of the existing building. The building addition
will be located six (6) inches from the north and east property lines and
five (5) feet from the west property line. The addition will be located 110
feet back from the front property line. The addition will have a 10 foot
wide garage door and a standard .walk through door on its south side,
facing W. 3�d Street. The building addition Will allow for the use as an
office with showroom and warehouse.
As part of the proposed development, the applicant proposes to pave 'the
existing gravel parking lot within the east'/ of the lot. The new parking lot
will contain 10 parking spaces. The applicant proposes to landscape the
parking lot as per Landscape Ordinance requirements.
The applicant is requesting three (3) variances from the development
standards of Section 36-342.1 (urban use development standards) for the
proposed building addition and parking lot. Section 36-342.1(c)(8)
requires that the ground -level (street fronting) floor of non residential
structures have a minimum surface area of sixty (60) percent transparent
on window display. As noted previously the south side of the building
addition, facing W. 3rd Street, will have only a garage door and walk-
through door and no windows.
Section 36-342.1(c)(10)b. requires that surface parking lots be located
behind or adjacent to a structure, never between the building and abutting
street. Although the parking lot is located adjacent to the existing building,
it will be located between the building addition and the street. Therefore,
staff feels that a variance needs to be requested.
Section 36-342.1(f)(1) requires that buildings within the UU zoning district
be constructed to the front property line with a 0 foot setback. As noted
earlier, the building addition will be located 110 feet back from the front
(south) property line.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff feels that the
applicant's plan represents a quality redevelopment of the property. Staff
feels that the new parking lot is needed, based on the fact that there is no
on -street parking on W. 3rd Street. Given the narrowness of the lot, the
building additions could not be constructed along the front property line
with parking to the rear, because it would be impossible to gain vehicular
access to the lot. Staff feels that with compliance to the- landscape,
2
April 26, 2004
EM NO.: 1 (Cont.
buffer, building and fire codes, the proposed redevelopment of the site will
have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or general area.
D. Staff Recommendations:
Staff recommends approval of the requested variances, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Compliance with the Public Works and Landscape and Buffer
comments as noted in paragraphs A & B of the staff report.
2. Compliance with all Building and Fire Codes.
3. A building permit must be obtained for all construction.
4. Compliance with all other Urban Use development standards.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: . (APRIL 26, 2004)
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 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent.
3
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 3
File No.: Z -7079-D
Owner: Crackerbox, LLc.
Applicant: Jim Hill
Address: 8921 Fourche Dam Pike
Description: Part of Tract C, Area 203, Little Rock Port Authority
Zoned: C-3
Variance Requested: A time extension is requested for a previously approved
variance to allow a gravel parking area.
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:
1. Comment from the original approval: Public Works supports a
variance for the additional driveway, provided the new parking lot is
paved within one year of construction. The width of driveway must
not exceed 36 feet.
B. Landscape and Buffer Issues:
At such time that the gravel area is to be paved, then landscape and
buffering requirements must be satisfied prior to obtaining a
construction permit.
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 3 (CON
C. Staff Analysis:
The C-3 zoned property at 8921 Fourche Dam Pike is occupied by a
convenience store with gas and diesel pumps which was recently
constructed. There are access drives from Lindsey Road and Fourche
Dam Pike which serve as access to the site.
On September 30, 2002, the Board of Adjustment granted a variance
from Section 36-508 to allow overflow, gravel, truck parking on the 1-2
zoned strip (100 feet wide) immediately east of the convenience store
site. The gravel parking variance was approved with the following
conditions:
No direct access to Lindsey Road from the gravel parking area
will be allowed. All access must be through the convenience
store development.
2. The front twenty-one (21) feet along Lindsey Road must be
reserved for the street buffer landscaping area. This area will be
required to be irrigated.
3. If, in staff's opinion, the overflow, gravel, truck parking area
becomes a problem (dust, maintenance, etc.) the issue will be
brought back to the Board of Adjustment for further consideration,
and possible paving requirement.
On April 28, 2003, the Board of Adjustment amended the previously
approved variance to remove condition #1, and allow a concrete
driveway from Lindsey Road. The amendment was approved, subject to
the following conditions:
1. The driveway width must not exceed 36 feet.
2. The overflow truck parking area must be paved within 12 months
after the driveway construction is completed.
3. Compliance with the landscape comment as noted above in
paragraph B. of this report.
4. Compliance with previous conditions (#2 and #3) as noted above.
On April 25, 2005, the Board of Adjustment granted a one (1) year time
extension on the previously approved parking variance.
E
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T.)
As of this date, the overflow gravel truck parking has not been
constructed. The applicant notes in the attached letter that inclement
weather has had their crews behind on other construction projects and
they have not been able to get to this project yet. The applicant is
requesting a 12 month extension to construct the overflow, gravel truck
parking lot, as the previously approved extension expired on April 25,
2006.
Staff supports the time extension as requested. Staff feels that the project
represents an acceptable solution to internal traffic flow problems which
have been experienced on the property. Letters of approval from the Little
Rock Port Authority (gravel parking area and driveway location) were
received with the previous approvals. The time extension of the
previously approved variance should have no adverse impact on the
adjacent property or the general area. Staff will suggest this be the last
time extension for the previously approved gravel parking lot.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the 12 month time extension for the
previously approved parking variance, subject to the following
conditions:
1. The driveway width must not exceed 36 feet.
2. The overflow truck parking area must be paved within 12 months
after the driveway construction is completed.
3. Compliance with the landscape comment as noted in paragraph
B. of the staff report.
4. Compliance with previous conditions (#2 and #3) as noted in
paragraph C. of the staff report (September 30, 2002 approval).
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(MAY 22, 2006)
Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two
(2) members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff
explained that no meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all
applications would be transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda.
3
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T.)
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
0
Fred HUNT Company
5200 Highway 5 North, Suite 5
Bryant, Arkansas 72022
(501) 847-7575
BUSINESS COMMERCIAL 8s INDUSTRIAL REALTORS
Mr. Monte Moore
City of Little Rock
Dept. of Planning & Development
723 West Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201-1334
April 12, 2006
-143
Re: 1-7079-D, 8921 Fourche Dam Pike, Part of the Tract C, Area 203, Little
Rock, Port Authority.
Dear Monte:
April 28, 2003, Crackerbox, LLC was granted a variance to construct an
additional driveway to Lindsey Road and approximately one acre of parking for
trucks.
April 27, 2005, we were given a one year extension to April 28, 2006 (copy of
approval attached).
Monte, we have had all of our construction crews building new stores and with
the recent rains we have been unable to finish this project, therefore we are
requesting a one year extension to April 28, 2007.
Monte, if you need to talk to me, you can reach me anytime at 1-501-690-
4106. Please mail correspondence to me at PO Box 24862, Little Rock, AR,
72221.
Thanks for your help.
i
Sihc rely,
Jim Hill, Agent
Crackerbox, LLC
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 4
File No.: Z-8046
Owner/Applicant: Williford Frazier
Address: 2001 S. Harrison Street
Description: Lot 6, Replat of the North 'h of Lot 4, Block 2, Hyde Park Addition
Zoned: R-3
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section
36-255 and the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a garage addition with
reduced side and rear setbacks, and to cross 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:
STAFF REPORT
Single Family Residential
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-3 zoned property at 2001 S. Harrison Street is occupied by a one-story
brick single family residence. There is a two -car wide drive at the northeast
corner of the residential structure and a one -car wide drive located at the
northeast corner of the lot. The property is located at the southeast corner of
South Harrison Street and Charles Bussey Drive. There is also a small metal
storage building at the southeast corner of the property. There are 25 foot
platted building lines located along both street frontages.
The applicant proposes to remove the existing metal storage building and
construct a new garage addition at the east end of the residential structure, as
noted on the attached site plan. The garage addition will be 24 feet by 33 feet
in size. The addition will maintain the same four (4) foot side (south) setback
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 4 (CON'T.)
as the existing house. The addition will also cross the 25 foot platted side
building line by approximately four (4) feet, resulting in a street side setback of
21 feet. The proposed rear (east) setback is approximately 17 feet. The lot is
platted front to back, west to east, even though the actual front door and porch
are on the building's north side. A second two -car driveway will be constructed
from Charles Bussey Drive.
Section 36-255(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side
setback of 5.8 feet for this R-3 zoned lot. Section 36-255(d)(3) requires a
minimum rear setback of 25 feet. Additionally, 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 from these ordinance standards to allow the
garage addition with reduced side and rear setbacks and to cross a side
platted building line.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff feels the request is
reasonable given the fact that the lot is only 58 feet wide and has 25 foot
platted building lines along both street frontages, and the fact that the front of
the house is orientated toward the north street side property line. The building
lines greatly limit the amount of buildable area on the lot. Staff believes the
proposed garage addition will have no adverse impact on the adjacent
properties or the general area. Staff will recommend that the one -car wide
drive at the northeast corner of the property be removed with the proposed
conditions.
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 proposed 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 variances, associated with the
proposed addition, subject to the following conditions:
1. Completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the side platted
building line as approved by the Board.
2. The garage addition must be constructed to match the existing single
family structure.
3. The single car wide driveway at the northeast corner of the property
must be removed with the proposed construction.
2
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 4 (CON'T.)
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(MAY 22, 2006)
Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2)
members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no
meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be
transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
41
Department of Planning and Development
723 W. Markham
Little Rock, Arkansas
Dear Sir:
I am proposing to construct a garage as an addition to an existing dwelling at 2001 S. Harrison in
Little Rock.
I would like to request a variance from the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The variance
is required due to the limited space behind and on one side of the existing structure. Originally the
home was constructed by the builder facing Charles Bussey (20' Street). The home should have
been facing Harrison. The proposed garage will be on the side of the existing structure which will
place it in the back yard of the structure as shown on the property survey_ The variance will allow
me to construct the new structure behind the existing structure beyond the property line limit
requirements. Also the garage will be attached to the existing structure which will require a
variance on the side of the property of about 1' 8". The existing structure was constructed about
4' from the side property line and I would like to construct the garage as an attachment to the
existing structure with the same dimensions. This will allow for uniform internal and external
construction and will enhance the features of the entire home.
The garage will allow for better security when entering and leaving the home and will allow me to
protect the vehicles that I own by providing a secure enclosure. It will also allow me to remove
the vehicles from the street and side of the property and place them in an enclosure.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 5
File No.: Z-8047
Owner: Terry and Ginger White
Applicant: Ron Keeling
Address: 41 Scenic Blvd.
Description: Lot 41 A, Scenic Heights Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section
36-156 to allow a carport with reduced front setback and separation.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property:
STAFF REPORT
Single Family Residential
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 41 Scenic Blvd. is occupied by a one-story rock and
frame single family residence with basement. There is a two -car wide
driveway from Scenic Blvd. which serves as access. The drive leads to a
concrete parking pad at the northeast corner of the residential structure. The
property severely slopes downward from Scenic Blvd.
The applicant proposes to construct a new concrete parking pad and
unenclosed 20 foot by 20 foot carport structure (detached) at the northeast
corner of the residence. The carport will be located 18 feet to 21.5 feet back
from the front (south) property line and seven (7) feet from the rear (north)
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 5 (CON'T.)
property line. The proposed carport will be separated from the house by 4.5 to
5 feet. The carport structure will be located at the lower level of the house and
below the grade of Scenic Blvd.
Section 36-156(a)(2)c. of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum 60
foot front setback for accessory buildings in residential zoning. Section 36-
156(a)(2)b. requires that accessory buildings be separated from principal
structures by at least six (6) feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting
variances to allow the carport structure with reduced front setback and
separation.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff feels the request is
reasonable given the very shallow lot depth. The lot depth ranges from 35.2
feet along the east property line to 72 feet along the west boundary.
Combined with the drastic slope of the lot, no accessory structure of any size
could be constructed on the lot and comply with all of the area requirements.
The proposed carport will not be very visible from the street or adjacent
property, as it will be located below the grade of the street. Staff believes the
proposed carport structure will have no adverse impact on the adjacent
properties or the general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested setback and separation
variances, subject to the following conditions:
1. The carport structure must remain unenclosed on all sides.
2. The carport structure must be constructed to match the existing principal
structure.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(MAY 22, 2006)
Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2)
members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no
meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be
transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item
and a recommendation of approval.
2
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 5 (_CON'T.)
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (CON'T.) (JUNE 26, 2006)
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff
by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
3
Davenport Contracting Incorporated
Ken Davenport ph# 952-4207
Post Office Box 94107
500 Main Street, Suite B
North Little Rock, Arkansas 72116��
Re: New Covered Carport
Terry & Ginger White
Ph#681-4840
#41 Scenic Blvd.
Little Rock, Ark. 72206
To Whom it may concern,
This letter is in reference to a new covered carport parking area located on the
East side of the existing residence. The new structure shall not extend no further than
6'-0" away from adjoining residence, but will be encroaching on the required 25'-0"
Setback of the property line. As of now the White's have a driveway entry and patio
at this location, the new structure will be maintained within this existing parameters.
The White's and Davenports Contracting shall be completing all proper city documents
required for this new Structure. We ( The White's and Davenport Contracting Inc. ) shall
be asking for a Setback and Adjoining Variance Wavier for this new structure. If any
resident would like to meet or discuss.this issue with Terry or Ginger White, please feel
free to call and make an appointment, or contact the Department of Planning and
Development, 723 West Markham, Little Rock. (Ph# 371-4790)
A representative of Davenport Contracting shall be at the Board of Adjustments meeting
dated May 22, 2006, to discuss this issue.
The White's Proposal shall try and alleviate some the street congestion by city trash
Pickup, mailman, and parking at their residence located on Scenic Blvd.
Sincerely,
Terry & Ginger White
Davenport Contracting Inc.
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 6
File No.: Z-8048
Owner: Steven and Paula Imhoff
Applicant: Steven Imhoff
Address: 2900 W. Capitol Avenue
Description: Lots 11 and 12, Block 4, Boone's Addition
Zoned: R-3
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the fence/wall 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. In accordance with Section 32-8, no obstruction to visibility shall be
located within a triangular area 50 ft. back from the intersecting right-of-
way line at the intersection of Capitol Ave. with Woodrow Street. The
location of the existing house does not allow adequate site distance for
vehicles on Capitol Avenue. The proposed fence will worsen the
condition.
2. If the fence were moved back at least five (5) feet from the back of curb of
Woodrow Street, its location within the 50 foot triangular area would be
acceptable.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-3 zoned property at 2900 W. Capitol Avenue is occupied by a two-story
frame single family residence. The property is located at the northwest corner
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 6 (CON'T.)
of W. Capitol Avenue and S. Woodrow Street. There is a one-story frame
carport/storage structure located in the rear yard. A one -car wide driveway
from Capitol Avenue serves as access to the carport structure.
The applicant proposes to construct a six (6) foot high wood fence along the
east side (Woodrow Street) and rear (north) property lines, as noted on the
attached site plan. The proposed fence will start approximately 26.4 feet back
from the southeast corner of the property and run along the east property line
to the northeast corner of the property, and along the rear property line.
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 and
a street right-of-way. Fences elsewhere on the property, along property lines,
can be constructed to a maximum height of six (6) feet. Therefore, the
applicant is requesting a variance to allow the six (6) foot high fence between
the five (5) foot side building setback line and the Woodrow Street right-of-way.
Staff does not support the fence variance, as requested. As noted in
paragraph A. of the staff report, the Public Works Department is of the opinion
that the proposed fence will add to an existing sight -distance problem at the
intersection of Woodrow and Capitol caused by the existing single family
residence. Staff could support the fence variance if the fence were started 50
feet back from the southeast corner of the property. If the fence is moved back
five (5) feet from the back of curb of Woodrow Street, Staff could also support
the variance. This would mean moving the fence approximately two (2) feet
inside the east property line. The fence height as proposed will not be out of
character with other fences in the general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the requested fence height variance, as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
MAY 22, 2006)
Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2)
members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no
meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be
transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda.
Staff Update:
The applicant submitted a letter to staff prior to the May 22, 2006 Board of
Adjustment meeting. The applicant requests to revise the application to move
the proposed fence five (5) feet back from the curb line of Woodrow Street
2
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 6 (WON'T.)
(two (2) feet inside the property line). This solution was suggested by Public
works.
Revised Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested fence height variance, subject to
the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the Public Works conditions, as noted in paragraph A. of
the staff report.
2. A building permit must be obtained for the fence construction.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
3
Mr. Monte Moore
Zoning & Enforcement Administrator
Department of Planning & Development
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334
RE: Request for zoning variance at 2900 West Capitol Ave.
Dear Mr. Moore:
By this letter, I am requesting a variance from the zoning ordnance to allow the erection
of a six foot tall wooden privacy fence along the Woodrow Street (east) side of my
property. As you are probably aware, Woodrow Street carries a heavy traffic load and
the resulting noise is very bothersome. I also have problems with people's loud car
stereos, and objects are frequently thrown at my house by people driving down the street.
A street side window recently was damaged by someone with a BB gun.
I have tried vegetative screening to no avail and I believe that a four foot tall fence will
not provide the noise reduction and protection from thrown objects that I need, as
Woodrow Street is at a higher elevation than my property.
I have contacted the City Traffic Engineer and he has no objection to the fence, as it will
be no closer to the intersection of Woodrow and Capitol than my house and will,
therefore, have no impact on the visibility of motorists.
Thank you for your consideration,
Steven M.off
Encl: Survey plat of lots 11 & 12 dated 12/12/01 (6)
Mr. Monte Moore,
Zoning & Enforcement Administrator
Department of Planning & Development
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334
RE: Request for zoning variance at 2900 West Capitol Avenue File No.
Z-8048
Dear Mr. Moore,
City staff has indicated that they could support a variance request if the location of the fence were
moved back to a point at least five feet from the back of the curb of Woodrow Street. This would
place the fence two feet west of the property line, rather than the six inches that I had originally
requested and is acceptable to me. Please revise my request to reflect staffs recommendation.
Sincerely,
Steven M. Imh
r
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 7
File No.: Z-8050
Owner: James E. Jackson
Applicant: Blake Jackson
Address: 2 Cantrell Road
Description: North side of Cantrell Road, approximately 900 feet east of
Beechwood Street.
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the fence/wall provisions of
Section 36-516 to allow a masonry wall which exceeds the maximum height allowed.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Undeveloped
Proposed Use of Property: Yard Area For Single Family Residence
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 2 Cantrell Road occupied by a brick single family
residence. There is an access drive from Cantrell Road which serves the
property. There is also a brick wall along the front (south) property line, with a
wrought iron gate which controls vehicular access to the property. The
existing wall is five (5) feet to eight (8) feet in height. The owner of 2 Cantrell
Road also owns the two (2) vacant lots immediately to the east, as highlighted
on the attached zoning map.
The applicant proposes to extend the existing brick wall along the front of the
two (2) vacant lots, as noted on the attached site plan. The new masonry wall
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 7 (CON'T.)
will be six (6) to seven (7) feet in height. The wall will also be located four (4)
to six (6) feet back from the front property line and nine (9) feet back from the
street curb.
Section 36-516(e)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum
fence/wall height of four (4) feet for fences/walls located between a building
setback line and a street right-of-way. Six (6) foot high fences/walls are
allowed elsewhere along property lines. Therefore, the applicant is requesting
a variance to allow the masonry wall located between the 25 foot building
setback and Cantrell Road to have a height of six (6) to seven (7) feet.
Staff is supportive of the requested fence height variance. The proposed
masonry wall will not be out of character with the taller fences/walls located
along Cantrell Road in this general area. The proposed wall will aide in
providing privacy to the residential yard located along the very busy arterial
street. Additionally, the proposed wall will not create any sight -distance
problems for the traffic on Cantrell Road. Staff believes the proposed masonry
wall will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general
area.
C. Staff Recommendation.-
Staff
ecommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested fence/wall height variance,
subject to a building permit being obtained for the wall construction.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(MAY 22, 2006)
Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2)
members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no
meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be
transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
2
To the Board of Adjustment,
-;Z-,?650
Included is a survey of the property on Cantrell Road that I would like to construct a 6' stone wall
on. My house is on tract 15 or #2 Cantrell Road. There is an existing brick wall that is 5' to Tin
height in front on the house. I would like to extend the existing wall east 400; approximately 10'
behind the curb line. As indicated on the survey the property line is 2.5' behind the curb line.
Attached is a survey of my existing house and wall; a survey of adjacent property (tracts 16 and
17), which I have owned for 30 years, but have been unable to use because of the noise and lack
of privacy; a topography of Cantrell Road showing property and proposed wall; photos looking
east and west.
qT you for Watnt;ion,
James E. Jackson, AJA
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.:
File No.: Z-8051
Owner: Timothy and Jeanie Hursley
Applicant: Blake Jackson
Address: 412 Midland Avenue
Description: Lots 1 and 2, Block 13, Midland Hills Addition
Zoned: R-3
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section
36-156 to allow an accessory building with a reduced street side setback.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B. Staff Analvsis:
The R-3 zoned property at 412 Midland Avenue is occupied by a two-story
rock and frame single family residence. The property is located at the
southwest corner of Midland Avenue and Alpine court. There is a paved alley
along the rear (west) property line. There is also a swimming pool in the rear
yard, within the southwest portion of the property.
The applicant proposes to construct a one-story frame accessory building (for
personal storage) along the alley at the northwest corner of the property, as
noted on the attached site plan. The proposed structure will be located 2.5
feet from the rear property line and 6 to 8 feet from the street side (Alpine
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 8 (CON'
Court) property line. The overhang for the storage building will extend to the
rear and street side property lines. The proposed accessory structure will
occupy approximately 13 percent of the required rear yard (rear 25 feet of the
lot). When added to the swimming pool the coverage is 19 percent.
Section 36-156(a)(2)c. of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum 15
foot street side setback for accessory buildings in R-3 zoning. Therefore, the
applicant is requesting a variance to allow the accessory storage building with
a street side setback ranging from six (6) to eight (8) feet (overhang not
included in setback calculations).
Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the requested
reduced street side setback as very reasonable. The proposed accessory
building will not be out of character with other accessory buildings located
along the paved alley to the north and south. The accessory structure will also
have a similar setback from the Alpine court property line as the principal
structures to the west, along the south side of Alpine Court. Staff believes the
proposed accessory storage building will have no adverse impact on the
adjacent properties or the general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested setback variance, as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(MAY 22, 2006)
Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2)
members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no
meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be
transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
2
---- 6
9-905/
To the Board of Adjustment,
Included is a survey showing the location of the proposed storage shed, plans and elevations of
the storage shed and photos of the existing site. Reasons we are requesting a variance is because
locating the shed 15' off of the street would require excessive removal of trees and vegetation,
and due to the location of the existing pool and the slope of the site, the corner is the most
appropriate place for the new shed. The proposed shed will act as a privacy screen as well as a
place for storage. The proposed design is in character with the rest of the neighborhood and will
be an improvement to this corner of the property.
Thank you for your attention,
19J-1—
Blake Jackson
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 9
File No.: Z-8052
Owner: Ladley and Jesha Abraham
Applicant: Jennifer Herron
Address: 404 Hickory Creek Court - Southeast
Description: Lot 41, Hickory Creek Addition, Phase I.
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section
36-254 and the building line provisions of Section 36-12 to allow a porte-cochere with a
reduced front setback and which crosses a front platted building line.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Undeveloped
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 404 Hickory Creek Court -Southeast is currently
undeveloped. The lot backs up to an adjacent subdivision to the east. Single
family residences exist on the adjacent lots to the north and south. The lot has
a 25 foot front platted building line.
The applicant proposes to construct a new single family residence on the lot,
as noted on the attached site plan. A circular drive is proposed from Hickory
Creek Court -Southeast to serve as access. As part of the new home
construction, a porte-cochere (attached) is proposed on front of the house,
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 9 (CON'T.)
over the circular drive. The porte-cochere will extend across the front platted
building line by six (6) feet to 7.5 feet. The resulting front setback will be 17.5
to 19 feet.
Section 36-254(d)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front
setback of 25 feet for R-2 zoned property. 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 from these ordinance requirements to allow the
proposed new residence with a reduced front setback and to cross the front
platted building line.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff views the request as
relatively minor. The lot is located within the bulb of a cul-de-sac street, so the
porte-cochere will not have the appearance of being out of alignment with
adjacent structures. The property is located within the gated Hickory Creek
Subdivision, and the architectural review committee for the subdivision has
approved the proposed construction. Staff believes the proposed single family
residence, with porte-cochere, will have no adverse impact on the adjacent
properties or the general area.
If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to
complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the platted front building line
for the residential structure. 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, associated with the new residential structure, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the front platted
building line as approved by the Board.
2. The porte-cochere structure must remain unenclosed on the north, south
and west sides.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(MAY 22, 2006)
Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2)
members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no
meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be
transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda.
2
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: .9 (CON'T.)
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item
and a recommendation of approval.
Staff informed the Board that the applicant had revised the application to provide a 34
foot setback from curb for any portion of the porte-cochere structure. Staff noted that
the neighborhood association and both abutting property owners had submitted letters
supporting the revised application. Staff added the following condition to the "staff
recommendation:"
3. The porte-cochere structure must be at least 34 feet back from the street curb at
any point.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff
by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
3
April 21, 2006
Mr. Monte Moore
City of Little Rock
Planning & Development
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock, AR 72201-1334
Dear Monte:
On behalf of Ladley & Jesha Abraham, we are submitting a request for a variance of the
front building line of 25'-0" for the property located at Lot 41, Hickory Creek Subdivision,
Phase I. The existing lot is located at the end of a cul-de-sac and is a vacant lot. We propose
a new single-family house with an attached open but covered porte-cochere. The north
portion of the proposed porte-cochere encroaches within the 25'-0" building line
approximately 6'-0" and the south portion of the porte-cochere encroaches within the 25'-0"
building line approximately 8'-0". Due to the unusual shape of the lot and the client's
desire to have a circular driveway, we propose this location for the porte-cochere. It is not
uncommon to have a circular driveway in this subdivision.
In the Bill of Assurance of Hickory Creek Subdivision, Little Rock, Arkansas, it states that
no principal dwelling shall be located on any lot nearer than 25 feet from the rear lot line.
The proposed single-family residence meets this guideline.
The proposed plans and location of the porte-cochere have been reviewed and approved by
the Hickory Creek Property Owner's Association. The attached documentation shows the
signatures for approval dated October 4, 2005. If more information is needed, please
contact me.
If there are any questions, please give me a call at 975-0052.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Herron, AIA
cc: file
H E R R 0 N
H 0 R�T 0 N
300 S. Spring St. Ste. 720
Little Rock, AR 72201
hharchaae-architect. com
te1.501-975-0052
fax.501-978-0078
ARCHITECTS
04/19/2006 21:38 FAX 50186834x' (�j001/001
t.
NSAS
!OWN AND
7RDANCE WITH
,)CROACHMENTS
=MENTS (RECORDED
;S OR ANY OTHER
YEAR FLOOD
A TEs, INC.
Date July 6, 2005
lob No, 05-560P
ISSUE DATE:
REVISIONS:
SHEET TITLE
SHEET NO_
08,!5.05
SITE SURVEY
L
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 10
- ► . :lin]
Owner: H L Land Development, LLC,
Applicant: Pat McGetrick
Address: 11 Woodridge Drive
Description: Lot 6, Woodridge 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 new residence with a
reduced rear setback and which crosses a platted rear building line.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Undeveloped
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
0QIL T,MO7iMM
No Comments.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned lot at 11 Woodridge Drive is currently undeveloped and
partially wooded. The lot is relatively flat. The lot backs up to Brodie Lane,
which runs along the east property line. Recently constructed single family
homes are located on the lots immediately north and south. The lot has 25
foot front and rear platted building lines.
The applicant proposes to construct a new single family residence on the lot,
as noted on the attached site plan. A two -car wide driveway at the northwest
corner of the property will serve as access. The proposed home will cross the
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 10 (CON'T.)
rear 25 foot platted building line by eight (8) feet at the northeast corner of the
structure and six (6) feet at the structure's southeast corner. The resulting rear
setbacks are 17 feet and 19 feet respectively. The rear patio will consist of an
at -grade concrete slab only.
Section 36-254(d)(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear
setback of 25 feet for R-2 zoned property. 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 proposed residence with a reduced rear
setback (17 feet to 19 feet) and to cross the platted rear building line.
Staff supports the requested variances. Staff views the request as reasonable,
given the irregular lot shape and depth. The lot has a depth of only 89 feet, as
measured along the north property line. Because of the curvature of the front
building line (dictated by the curvature of the street), there is only 30 feet of
buildable depth at the center of the lot. If the curve in the front building line did
not exist, the proposed house would be able to be constructed with no
variances. Staff believes the proposed single family residence 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 residential structure. 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, associated with the new residential structure, subject to the
completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the rear platted building
line as approved by the Board.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
MAY 22, 2006)
Vice Chairman Burruss called the meeting to order. Roll call revealed only two (2)
members present (Burruss and Wilbourn) and lack of quorum. Staff explained that no
meeting could take place without a quorum, and that all applications would be
transferred to the June 26, 2006 Agenda.
E
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 10 (CON'T.)
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
K?
WOETRICK 1 OETKICK
ENGINEERS - PLANNERS - OURVEY095
APRIL 21, 2006
Monte Moore
Department of Planning & Development
723 West Markham St.
Little Rock, AR 72201
Re: Board of Adjustment Application
LOT 6 WOODRIDGE ADDITION
Dear Mr. Moore,
-Z—gO53
We are herewith submitting the above captioned project for review. The property
is zoned R-2. The owner plan to built a single family house on this lot. The owner is
requesting the following variances:
1) Building setback requirement from 25' to 17' along Brodie Lane, because of
the buidable depth of the lot currently is on1y30'.We have a house plan shown on the
submittal that we are planning to construct on the lot. This plan will require a 17' rear
setback.
If you have any questions regarding this submittal please advise.
Sincerely,
McP.erh—& & McGetrick, Inc.
.
Patrick M. McGetrick, P.E.
......... .
10 Otter Creek Court, SuU A
LIWe Roek Arkansas 72210
501-455-8899 fax 501-455-8898
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 11
File No.: Z-4301 -A
Owner: Mike Frost
Applicant: Stanley Schulte
Address: 6700 Cantrell Road
Description: Lot 1, Block 1, White City Subdivision
Zoned: C-3
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-301 to allow a
building addition with a reduced side setback.
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. Landscape and Buffer Issues:
An eighteen percent (18%) upgrade in the landscape ordinance is required.
Replace any fencing that is in disrepair and any landscaping that is either missing, diseased,
or dead.
C. Staff Analysis:
The C-3 zoned property at 6700 Cantrell Road is occupied by a one-story brick and frame
commercial building. The property is located at the northwest corner of Cantrell Road and
N. Hughes Street. The existing building is located 9.2 to 18 feet back from the front (south)
property line and two (2) feet back from the east side property line. The west side of the
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 11 (CON'T.
building is on the west property line. There is paved parking on the north side of the building
which is accessed from N. Hughes Street.
The applicant is proposing to make a 10 foot by 40 foot (one story) building addition on the
north side of the building, as noted on the attached site plan. The proposed addition will be
located eight (8) feet back from the west side property line, and maintain the same two (2)
foot setback from the east side property line as the existing building. The addition will be
used for additional storage.
Section 36-301(e)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum street side building
setback of 25 feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the
continuation of the two (2) foot street side setback for the proposed building addition.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance, viewing it as a relatively minor issue. Staff
feels that extending the 45 foot deep building by an additional 10 feet along N. Hughes
Street will create no additional public safety concerns with its proximity to the street.
Additionally, the proposed addition will not eliminate any paved parking which exists on the
north side of the commercial building. Staff believes the proposed building addition will have
no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested setback variance, subject to compliance with
the landscape and buffer requirements, as noted in paragraph B. of the staff report.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(J U N E 26, 2006)
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 4
ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
2
SCHULTE CONSTRUCTION
"A Name You Can Trust Since 1945"
7905 Foxchase Road, Suite A Little Rock, AR 72227
501/224-0968 Fax 224-0458
G
I
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 12
File No.: Z -4546-B
Owner: Christ Episcopal Church
Applicant: Mark Alderfer
Address: 509 Scott Street
Description: Lots 1-6, Block 29, Original City Of Little Rock
Zoned: UU
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the development provisions of
Section 36-342.1 to allow an addition with a reduced front setback.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Church
Proposed Use of Property: Church
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Landscape and Buffer Issues:
The new trees proposed need to be labeled, size and type. These trees will
also need to be irrigated. The trees should comply with the street tree for
Capitol Avenue.
A franchise agreement must be obtained for any work that is to occur in the
public right-of-way, contact John Barr at 371-4646.
C. Staff Analysis:
The UU zoned property at 509 Scott Street is occupied by a two-story rock
church building. The property is located at the southeast corner of Scott Street
and Capitol Avenue. The church building is located within the west half of the
block, with a paved alley along the east side of the church building. There is a
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 12 (CON'T.)
paved parking lot which serves the church on the south side of the church
building. The main entrances to the church building are located on its north
and west sides, near the northwest corner of the building.
The applicant proposing to construct a 50 foot tall bell tower at the northwest
corner of the church building, as noted on the attached site plan. The
proposed bell tower will have an area of 10 feet square. The bell tower will be
located 7.5 feet back from the north property line and 9 feet back from the west
property line. In conjunction with the bell tower construction, new landings and
steps will be constructed at both entrances near the northwest corner of the
building, also noted on the attached plan. The new landings will wrap around
the bell tower, be located several feet above grade and slightly closer to the
north and west property lines. New steps from the landings will extend down
to the existing sidewalk levels on the north and west sides of the building.
Additional landscaping and a prayer garden will also be part of the project.
Section 36-342.1 (f)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum
front building setback of 25 feet along Capitol Avenue, east of Scott Street. No
minimum rear or side setbacks are required. Therefore, the applicant is
requesting a variance to allow the bell tower and associated landings and
steps to have a reduced setback from the north (Capitol Avenue) property line.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance. The requested setback for the
proposed construction will not be out of character with other building setbacks
along Capitol Avenue. The proposed bell tower and landings/steps will not be
located closer to the north property line than the majority of the north wall of
the existing church building, much of which is located on the north property
line. Additionally, the small footprint of the bell tower and the fact that the
landing will be only 5.5 feet above the grade of the sidewalk will have a
minimal visual impact. Staff believes the requested setbacks will have no
adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
D. Staff Recommenda
Staff recommends approval of the requested setback variance, subject to a
building permit being obtained for all construction.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item
and a recommendation of approval.
Staff informed the Board that the applicant had revised the application by moving the
proposed bell tower closer to the north and west property lines. Staff noted the
proposed bell tower would be 2'-3" from the north and west property lines.
2
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 12 (CON'T.)
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (CON'T.) (JUNE 26, 2006)
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff
by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
3
May 26, 2006
Mr. Monty Moore
Department of Planning and Development
723 W. Markham Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
Re: Board of Adjustment
Christ Episcopal Church
509 Scoff Street
Dear Monty:
300 Spring Building, Suite 1015
Little Rock, AR 72201
voice: 501-350-5942
fax: 501-374-4959
alderferarchitect@comcast.net
. 412 --
As an officer of Christ Episcopal Church, I make application for a non-residential zoning
variance required for the proposed construction of a free-standing bell tower and necessary
work on the front plaza and steps in front of the church sanctuary.
As shown on the enclosed Site Plan and artist's rendering, Christ Church desires to construct a
50 foot tall free-standing bell tower on the northwest corner of the church property. The bell
tower is envisioned as a light steel frame structure which will not block light or view and thus
be an unimposing structure and not compete with the classic Gothic architecture of the church
sanctuary.
The other part of the proposed project is the reconstruction of the staircases and landings
leading up to the sanctuary. The current steps are in dire need of repair and this work would
be done in conjunction with the bell tower construction.
Up until very recently, the Urban Use zoning would have allowed the construction of this bell
tower and changes to the stairs and plaza as of right, but due to recent changes, this work now
requires a variance. Our justification for requesting a variance from the 25 foot setback on
Capitol Avenue is that with the current church facility layout, there is no other location for a bell
tower at the front of the church.
Should you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 350-5942.
Ily,
Junior War n, estry M
Christ Episco Church
Enclosures
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 1
File No.: Z -4746-C
Owner: Little Rock Surgery Center
Applicant: Jason Offutt
Address: 8820 Knoedl Court
Description: Northwest corner of Interstate 630 and Knoedl Court
Zoned: O-3
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-
553 to allow a ground -mounted sign with increased height.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Medical Clinic
Proposed Use of Property: Medical Clinic
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues-.-
No
ssues:
No Comments
B. Staff Analysis:
The 0-3 zoned property at 8820 Knoedl Court is occupied by a one-story
medical clinic building. The property is located on the northwest corner of
Barrow Road and Interstate 630. There is a drive from Knoedl Court which
serves as access. There is paved parking along the north, east and west
sides of the building.
The applicant is proposing to place a ground -mounted sign near the southeast
corner of the property, as noted on the attached site plan. The sign will have
an overall height of 19 feet, with an area of approximately 61.75 square feet.
The copy/wording on the sign will be approximately 16 feet in height, with an
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 13
arched ornamental feature on top of the copy/wording. The sign will be
located within a grass -covered landscaped area.
Section 36-553(a)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows ground -mounted
signs in the office districts to have maximum heights of six (6) feet and
maximum areas of 64 square feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a
variance to allow the increased sign height.
Staff is supportive of the variance. Staff feels the request is reasonable, given
the location of the property. The property takes access from the end of Knoedl
Court, which runs off of Barrow Road. There is no direct access to the
property from Barrow Road or 1-630. Therefore the sign will aid in identifying
the building to persons trying to find the property. Additionally, the sign will be
located back approximately 300 feet from the main lanes of 1-630 and 175 feet
from Barrow Road. Staff believes the proposed sign will have no adverse
impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested sign variance, subject to the
following conditions:
1. A sign permit must be obtained for the sign.
2. The sign must be located at least five (5) feet back from any property line.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
2
To whom it may concern,
I am representing Little Rock Surgery Center located at 8820 Knoedl Ct. The Little Rock
Surgery Center is requesting a variance in height for an architectural ground sign facing
Barrow Rd.
The following items are valid reasons to allow a variance in height:
Because of existing signs for other businesses there is no room for a ground sign at Knoedl Ct. and Barrow.
The distance of the property is approximately 100' from Barrow with the overpass and the
intersection of the off ramp is at a higher grade than the Little Rock Surgery property.
A fence separating the highway department right of way from the Little Rock Surgery Center would
obstruct lower sign.
In view of the obstructions, the only alternative for clients finding the surgery center is a taller ground sign.
The sign proposed is a beautiful architectural sign matching the building facade and would enhance the
environment of Barrow Rd.
Thank you for your consideration.
Jason Offutt
Ace Signs of Arkansas
Phone 501-562-0800
Fax 501-423-2407
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 14
File No.: Z -5849-A
Owner: Chuck Hamilton Construction
Applicant: Chuck Hamilton
Address: 5201 Hawthorne Road
Description: Lot 1, Block 11, Newton's Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section
36-254 to allow a new house with reduced setbacks.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property:
STAFF REPORT
Single Family Residential
A. Public Works Issues:
1. Little Rock Code prohibits encroachments in the right-of-way. The
proposed fence shows to be built at the back of curb and encroaches in
the right-of-way creating unsafe driving conditions.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 5201 Hawthorne Road is occupied by a one-story
brick and frame single family residence. The property is located at the
southwest corner of Hawthorne Road and Newton Street. There is a one-story
frame carport/storage structure within the south portion of the property. The
property sits approximately 3 to 4 feet above the grade of the streets. There is
a two (2) foot high rock wall along the curb line of Newton Street.
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 14 (CON'T.)
The applicant proposes to remove the existing structures from the property
and construct a new single family residence (two-story), as noted on the
attached site plan. The proposed structure will be located 25 feet back from
the front (north) property line, five (5) feet back from the west side property
line, zero (0) setback from the east side property line (portion of the structure),
and five (5) feet from the rear (south) property line. The applicant is also
proposing improvements to extend across the east side property line and into
the Newton Street right-of-way, also noted on the attached plan. A new patio
area, wall/fence, steps and the fireplace chimney are proposed to cross the
east property line into the right-of-way.
Section 36-254(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires minimum side
setbacks of five (5) feet for this R-2 zoned lot. Section 36-254(d)(3) requires a
minimum rear setback of 25 feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting
variances to allow reduced side and rear setbacks for the proposed residential
structure, and improvements to extend into the Newton Street right-of-way.
Staff is not supportive of the requested variances. It is very clear to staff that
the applicant is proposing to overbuild the residential lot. Given the overall
mass (footprint and height) of the proposed structure, staff cannot support
either setback variance. Staff will also support no encroachments into the
Newton Street right-of-way. Staff feels a two-story structure at this location
should provide the minimum five (5) foot east side setback. Staff could
support a rear setback of 10 feet if the side setback were provided and no
improvements were proposed to extend into the right-of-way. Variances for
large single family homes have been granted in this general area in the past.
However, those variances have not included zero (0) setbacks and
improvements into rights-of-way. Staff believes this type of extreme structural
massing would have an adverse impact on the adjacent properties and the
general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the requested variances, as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to the
July 31, 2006 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays
and 1 open position.
2
Chuck Hamilton Construction -4
823 West Markham Street, Suite 300
Little Rock, AR 72201 —Z —�/ —�
May 26, 2006
Mr. Monte Moore
Department of Neighborhoods and Planning
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
RE: Zoning Variance Application for
Dawson Residence, 5201 Hawthorn
Monte,
We are requesting a zoning variance concerning the following items in regard to the new
home we plan to construct on this site. It is our opinion that these encroachments on the
building lines are not out of character with other new homes and additions to existing
homes in the area.
• The north building line will be encroached upon by the fireplace and the
front planter which will also include the front steps.
• The west side of the house will meet the 5' building line set back.
• The east side of the house will have a 5'x19' section of the southeast
corner extending 5' past the building line. We would also like construct an
open air arbor to help block the east sun. We also plan to heavily
landscape this side of house to soften it from the street.
• The south elevation which includes a two car garage would be constructed
5' from the rear property line. This has been approved on several homes in
the Heights, it is our opinion that it would not adversely affect any
adjoining properties.
It is our opinion that these encroachments can be achieved within the scale and character
of the neighborhood.
Thank you for your time and consideration regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
L i
Chuck Hamilton
6A ^1-11'"
I �r
V 1 -1
&4C5
�
I
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 15
F911540
Owner: Melanie and Phillip Grace
Applicant: James I. Lasley, III
Address: 2600 N. Pierce Street
Description: Lots 7 and 8, Block 22, Parkview Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-
254 to allow a new house with a reduced rear setback.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Vacant
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
1. Applicant should be aware that parking in the right-of-way is not permitted
by code, creates unsafe conditions, and is not recommended by staff. In
this older, well established area of the city, cars routinely park in the right-
of-way and applicant should be aware of the issues.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 2600 N. Pierce Street is currently vacant. The
residential lot is located at the northwest corner of N. Pierce Street and "X"
Street. A single family residence and accessory structures were recently
removed from the property.
The applicant proposes to construct a new two-story single family residence on
the property, as noted on the attached site plan. The proposed home will be
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 15 (CON'T.)
located 25 feet back from the front (east) property line, 8.4 feet from the south
side property line, 13.6 feet from the north side property line and 18.7 feet from
the rear (west) property line. There will be porches located on the front, side
and rear of the proposed structure, as noted on the attached plan.
The proposed structure conforms with all of the ordinance required minimum
building setbacks, with the exception of the rear (west) setback. Section 36-
254(d)(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear setback of
25 feet for R-2 zoned property. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a
variance to allow the 18.7 foot rear setback for the proposed house.
Staff is supportive of the requested rear yard setback variance. Staff views the
request as reasonable. The proposed rear setback for the new house will not
be out of character with other structures in this neighborhood. The rear of the
house located on the lot immediately to the west is over 25 feet from the
dividing rear property line. Therefore, no separation issue will be created.
Staff believes the requested reduced rear setback will have no adverse impact
on the adjacent properties or the general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested rear setback variance, subject to no steps
to the porch area extending into the minimum required front and side setbacks.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item
and a recommendation of approval.
Staff noted that there would be 3 to 4 steps from the front porch which would extend into
the front setback. Staff noted the steps would be included in the variance application.
Staff supported the application as filed.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff
by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
2
The LASLEY co,
REAC,ESTATE'
May 23, 2006
Planning & Development
City of Little Rock
723 W. Markham Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
RE: Variance 2600 North Pierce
Gentlemen:
This letter is written on behalf of Phillip and Melanie Grace who are building a new
home at 2600 North Pierce in Little Rock, Arkansas. They are requesting a 6 foot
variance to the rear set back to provide for a three car garage. This has been done with
another home just up the street. Additionally, they are requesting permission to build an
uncovered parking pad to the west of the garage for additional off street parking.
If you have any questions, please call.
Sincerely,
James I. Lasley, III
5110 Kavanaugh • Little Rock, Arkansas 72207 • 501-975-5550 • Fax 501-975-5551
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 16
File No.: Z-8058
Owner: Brian and Kristen Marr
Applicant: Jon C. Lewis
Address: 28 Maisons Drive
Description: Lot 6, Block 118, Chenal Valley 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 new house with a
reduced front setback and which crosses a platted building line.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 28 Maisons Drive is occupied by a one-story rock
and brick single family residence which was recently constructed. There is a
two -car wide driveway from Maisons Drive which serves as access. A small
portion of the residence extends across a 25 foot platted building line, as noted
on the attached site plan. This portion of the house is located 19.4 feet back
from the front property line. The applicant has noted that a mistake was made
when laying out the foundation, and the mistake was not caught until an as -
built survey was done. The front property line is curved, as the lot is located
along a curved stretch of Maisons Drive.
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 16 (CON'T.)
Section 36-254(d)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front
setback of 25 feet. 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 new house with a reduced front setback and which crosses a platted
building line.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff views the request as very
minor. It appears that when the house was being placed on the property the
front setback was measured from a straight line between the two (2) front
corner pins and not from the actual curved front property line. Only
approximately 75 square feet of the house extends across the 25 foot front
platted building line. Staff believes the front encroachment will have no
adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to
complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the platted front building line
for the residential structure. 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, associated with the new residential structure, subject to completion
of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the front platted building line as
approved by the Board.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
lio
L E W I S
B U I L D E R S
May 25, 2006
Department of Planning & Development
723 West Markham
Little Rock, Arkansas 72202
Re: 28 Maisons Drive -Zoning Variance
Dear Board Members:
We are requesting a zoning ordinance variance to the property listed above. Due to the
unusual lot configurations, there was a measurement miscalculation when the house was
originally laid out. The house is on a curve with a radius in the easement which resulted
in the error.
Please feel free to contact my office manager, Donna Mahoney, at 868-9742 if additional
information or documentation is needed. Thank you in advance for your attention and
consideration of this matter.
Sincere
Jon C Lewis
President
2916 MOSSY CREEK DRIVE
LITTLE ROCK, AR 72211
501-868-9742. 868-9743 FAX
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 17
File No.: Z-8059
Owner: Shollmier Family Limited Partnership
Applicant: Robert Holloway
Address: 6000 Scott Hamiltoon Drive
Description: Tract P, Little Rock Industrial District
Zoned: 1-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-
320 to allow a building addition with a reduced rear setback.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Light Industrial
Proposed Use of Property: Light Industrial
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Landscape and Buffer Issues:
A thirty five percent 35% upgrade is required on the site towards the landscape
ordinance requirements.
Plan is unclear? What is existing asphalt vs. proposed? Please delineate.
Additional interior landscaping may be required in conjunction with new
proposed parking.
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 17 (CON'T.)
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an
approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape
Architect.
The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees
as feasible on this tree covered site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape
Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch
caliper or larger.
C. Staff Analysis:
The 1-2 zoned property at 6000 Scott Hamilton Drive is occupied by a one-
story office/warehouse building (approximately 26,000 square feet in area).
The property is located on the southwest corner of Scott Hamilton Drive and
Hoerner Street. There are two (2) access drives from Scott Hamilton Drive.
There is paved parking (trucks access) on the south side of the building within
a fenced area, and a small concrete parking lot on the east side of the building.
There is also a driveway from Hoerner Street leading to a loading dock on the
north side of the building. The rear portion of the property is undeveloped and
fenced.
The applicant proposes to construct a one-story addition on the rear (west
side) of the existing building, as noted on the attached site plan. The proposed
addition will be 9, 270 square feet in area. The addition will be located 12 feet
back from the rear (west) property line, and over 60 feet from the north and
south side property lines.
Section 36-320(e)(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear
setback of 25 feet for 1-2 zoned property. Therefore, the applicant is
requesting a variance to allow the proposed building addition with a 12 foot
rear setback.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff feels the request for a
reduced rear setback is reasonable, and will not be out of character with the
area. There are a number of large industrial buildings in this general area
which occupy a large percentage of the properties. Additionally, the proposed
addition will back up to undeveloped, wooded property to the west. Staff
believes the proposed building addition will have no adverse impact on the
adjacent properties or the general area.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested rear setback variance, subject to
compliance with the landscape and buffer requirements as noted in paragraph
B. of the staff report.
2
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 17 (CON'T.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
9
,ffze ObiToway Finn, Inc.
Civil and Envirorrrnentall)esign
Roben 0. Hallowa_v 0
200 Casey Drive
Pnf Gngi-.en:
Maumei!e,AR 72113
r,.f. LanJ turvc.nr 0.;,ictrtioa
AY.t�cnu
Telepl!one
(501.) 851-BROb
May 26, 2006 (501) 851-3366
Facsimile
(507) 851-3368
♦
Monte Moore E -Mail
Zoning and Enforcement Administrator holloNvayfirm @sbc siobal.ne?
City of Little Rock Planning & Development
723 West Markham Street
Littic Rock, AR 72201-1334
RE: Application for Zoning Variance, 6000 Scott Hamilton Drive, Little .Rock, Pulaski
County, Arkansas
Dear Mr. Moore,
We are herewith requesting a Zoning Variance for the above -referenced project. The
owner, Shollmier Family Limited Partnership, would like to extend their present
DistributionAN. 'arehouse another 75' feet. This would reduce the required rear yard
setback from 25' Beet to 12' feet. Attached you will find sig: copies of the recent Survey
of this property along with the Application for Zoning Variance and three different
Affidavits 1Torn Mr. Shollmier authorizing our Firm along with Mark Redder and Robert
Holloway to act as his agent.
If you need further information or clarification on any of the above,. please don't hesitate
to call.
ENGINEER)NG A DESIGN ♦ SURVEY!NLAPPING
a'd RRRPTCgInC wJSJ a—nTTI.J r �. �_
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 18
File No.: Z-8060
Owner: Charles W. Calver
Applicant: Mark Winstead
Address: 6404 Geyer Springs Road
Description: Lot 1, Yates Subdivision
Zoned: 1-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-
320 to allow a building addition with a reduced side setback.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Vacant Industrial Building
Proposed Use of Property: Light Industrial
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
1. A future public street project shows acquiring additional right-of-way on the
west side of Geyer Springs Road for an overpass. The proposed addition
appears to be west of the proposed new right-of-way.
B. Landscape and Buffer Issues:
The landscape ordinance requires an eighty percent (80%) upgrade in the
landscape and buffer ordinance. Credit can be given for large trees shown to
be preserved. This upgrade must include the removal of concrete along Geyer
Spring Road and the southern property line.
An automatic irrigation system is required for all new landscaped areas.
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 18 (CON'T.)
Parking is not shown on the plan; however, additional interior landscaping may
be required.
The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of three foot (3'-0") landscaped
area to be located between the parking and the building.
C. Staff Analysis:
The 1-2 zoned property at 6404 Geyer Springs Road is occupied by a one-
story metal building near the northeast corner of the property. There are two
(2) access drives from Geyer Springs Road which serve as access to the
property. There is concrete parking on the south side of the building and
asphalt parking (in poor condition) on the east side of the building. There is an
roof sign on top of the existing building. The rear (west) portion of the property
is fenced and occupied by a wrecker service.
The applicant is proposing to construct additional building space on the west
end of the existing building, as noted on the attached site plan. The additional
building area will be one-story in height and 4, 000 square feet in area. The
proposed building will be located 8.62 to 8.71 feet back from the north side
property line.
Section 36-320(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side
setback of 15 feet for this 1-2 zoned lot. Therefore, the applicant is requesting
a variance to allow the new building construction with a reduced side (north)
setback.
Staff is supportive of the requested side setback variance, under certain
conditions. The State Highway Department, in conjunction with Metroplan, has
plans to construct an overpass for Geyer Springs Road over the existing
railroad tracks just north of this site. There are three (3) options for the
overpass construction. Two (2) of the options include acquiring right-of-way
which goes into the existing building on the site. Therefore, staff can only
support the additional building area if it is constructed as a separate building,
so the new building would not be included in future right-of-way acquisition.
Staff believes the requested side setback variance will have no adverse impact
on the adjacent properties or the general area.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested side setback variance, subject to
the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the Landscape and Buffer requirements as noted in
paragraph B. of the staff report.
K
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 18 (CON'T.)
2. The additional building area must be constructed as a separate building,
including separate foundation, roof, east wall and utilities.
3. The existing roof sign, including support structures, must be removed from
the existing building.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to the
July 31, 2006 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays
and 1 open position.
3
Lasiter Construction, Inc. • 505 West Dixon Rd. • Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 • 501.374.1557 FAX 374.8314 • WATS 1.800.264.1557
May 24, 2006
Mr. Monte Moore
City of Little Rock
723 West Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
501.371.4826
RE: Requesting a variance on the set back line at 6404 Geyer Springs Little Rock, AR
Dear Sir:
On behalf of Arkansas Sling, the owner of the property at 6404 Geyer Springs Road, Lasiter
Construction, Inc. is requesting a zoning variance to the set back line on the north side of the property.
Arkansas Sling, is desiring to build a warehouse that will be an add on to an existing building already
located on the property. The existing building is approximately 9' off the property line. The proposed
building addition is drawn with the foundation matching the north line. This is not in code with the
current 15' set back requirement.
The warehouse will be used for commercial use.
Should you require additional information please call me at 501.539.0805
Thank you for your time and consideration on this matter.
Respectfully submitted,
Lasiter Construction, Inc.
Mark Winstead
Vice President
General Construction • Asphalt Paving • Concrete Construction • Seal Coating • Crack Sealing
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 19
File No.: Z-8062
Owner: Christopher Darby
Applicant: Dave Roberts
Address: 21 Edgehill Road
Description: Lot 32, Edgehill Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-
516 to allow a masonry wall/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 21 Edgehill Road is occupied by a two-story brick
and frame single residence. There is a two -car wide driveway at the southeast
corner of the property. The property slopes upward from Edgehill Road.
There is a short brick retaining wall (approximately 2 feet high) along the front
(south) property line. There are steps from Edgehill Road near the center of
the property, with a sidewalk leading to the front of the house.
The applicant proposes to construct a six (6) foot high decorative brick wall
with wrought iron gates along the front property line, as noted on the attached
site plan. The proposed wall will be located approximately 10 feet back from
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 19 (CON'T.)
the front property line. Wrought iron gates will be located at the steps near the
center of the property and across the driveway. Columns along the main body
of the wall will be 6 feet — 7 inches in height, with the columns on each side of
the driveway being 8 feet — 1 inch in height because of the slope.
Section 36-516(e)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum fence
height of four (4) feet for residential fences/walls located between a building
setback and a street right-of-way. Fences/walls with a maximum height of six
(6) feet may be constructed elsewhere on the property. Therefore, the
applicant is requesting a variance to allow the increased fence/wall height for
the proposed masonry wall with wrought iron gates located between the front
building setback and the street right-of-way.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance. The proposed wall with wrought
iron gates will not be out of character with other fences and walls located
throughout this subdivision. There are fences/walls exceeding six (6) feet in
height located along the street property lines at 19, 29 and 47 Edgehill Road,
as well on other single family properties in this general area. Staff believes the
proposed masonry wall with wrought iron gates will have no negative impact
on the adjacent properties or the general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested fence/wall height variance,
subject to a building permit being obtained for the fence/wall construction.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
2
May 26, 2006 ..
Monty Moore
City .of Little Rocker
Department of Planning & Development LANZ?5CAPE
723 West Markham .
ARCHITECTS
Little Rock, AR 72201
Re: Wa11.Variance
Monty,
I have been charged by- my client to file a wall variance -application before the City of Little Rock
Board of Adjustments Mr.. and Mrs. Darby, have just purchased be. residence at #21 Edgehill and
wish to exceed the. wall height in front of the building setback to. a maximum height 'of six::feet
tall. The reason for this request is the safety and privacy for their 2 year, old toddler who will play
in the front yard. .
As you know; Edgehill is a very narrow street. Mr: &. Mrs. Darby fear their young son, while
Playing in the,front yard; may fall off the low wall that: borders the property and end up in the
street. A 6' decorative brick'wall and wrought iron. gates added to the.top of the front grass slope.;
will be. in'keeping*ith the character of the neighborhood while providing safety and privacy for.
the family: Landscape will beIadded ,to the front of the new wall to. soften the height as well.:as.
take up the grade between the low wall and the new wall. ''(see plan for location).
I have . enclosed a. copy of the variance application;' a recent survey, plans of the proposed wall
location and, elevations; the application fee as well as. photos of the existing sit e._. If there. is any
Problem with this deadline or should you have any question please give me a.call at (501) 280-
0123.
Thank you in:advance for attention on this matter:.
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 20
File No.: Z-8069
Owner: Dr. Robert and Marilyn Porter
Applicant: Rick Thomasson
Address: 5241 Edgewood Road
Description: Lot 50 and part of Lot 51, Prospect Terrance Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-
254 and the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a building with a reduced
rear setback and which crosses a platted building line.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property
STAFF REPORT
Single Family Residential
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 5241 Edgewood Road is occupied by a two-story
rock and stucco single family residence. The property is located on the
southeast corner of Edgewood Road and N. Harrison Street. There is a two -
car wide driveway from N. Harrison Street which serves as access. There is a
one-story frame carport/storage accessory building located on the south side
of the residence. There is a swimming pool at the southeast corner of the
property. There is also a 30 foot platted building line running along the north
(Edgewood) and west (Harrison) property lines.
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 20 (CON'T.)
The applicant proposes to remove the carport/storage structure and construct
a new building addition, as noted on the attached site plan. The new addition
will be one (1) story in height with heated/cooled storage space within the roof
line. The proposed addition will include a master bedroom and garage. The
addition will be located six (6) feet from the rear (south) property line and 11
feet — 9 inches from the street side (west) property line. The addition will also
cross a 30 foot platted side building line.
Section 36-254(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear
setback of 25 feet for this R-2 zoned lot. 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 building addition with a reduced rear
setback and to cross a platted side building line.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff views the request as
reasonable. The proposed addition will not be out of character with other new
structures which have been constructed in this neighborhood in recent years.
There is a driveway along the north property line of the property immediately
south, which provides more than adequate separation between the proposed
addition and the house to the south. 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 side building line
for the proposed 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, associated with the proposed building addition, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the side platted
building line as approved by the Board.
2. The building addition must be constructed to match the existing principal
structure.
0
JUNE 26, 2006
ITEM NO.: 20 (CON'T.)
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 26, 2006)
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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
K
-2-o
Rob and Marilynn Porter, 5241 Edgewood, are requesting a variance in regards to our
pool house. It was built in 1970 and the attached pictures will show it's condition. We
are concerned that it is a potential hazard and an "eyesore" for our neighbors. We plan to
replace this pool house with a garage and master bedroom in keeping with our home. It
will be attached to the current structure with an eight foot wide hallway. The outer
materials will match our present house. Our house was built in 1927 by Charles
Thompson and served as the last governor's mansion to Tom Terrell, before the current
governor's mansion was built. We have no desire to overbuild on this property, just to
improve it. George Wittenberg is our architect and Rick Thomasson is our Contractor.
We have worked with both of these excellent craftsmen for over 25 years. Thank you for
your time and support in this matter. Sincerely, Marilynn Porter
E I
F -
Q
IMEN
C.
n.
Q)
c
0
Q
a�
z
Q
CO
m
Q
F—
Z
W
m
Y Q
1^ W
Q
z
J
•C\-
w�}=gyp
W
0 W W
W
Q U) z - D Q
W z � O m >
C N D < J
1- LL m 2
June 26, 2006
There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 2:12 p.m.
Date:
.&2 --
Chairman