boa_12 18 2006LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SUMMARY OF MINUTES
DECEMBER 18, 2006
2:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being three (3) in number.
II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meetings
The Minutes of the November 27, 2006 meeting were
approved as mailed by unanimous vote.
III. Members Present:
Members Absent:
Andrew Francis, Chairman
Terry Burruss, Vice Chairman
David Wilbourn
Open Position
Fletcher Hanson
City Attorney Present: Debra Weldon
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
AGENDA
DECEMBER 18, 2006
I. OLD BUSINESS:
ITEM NO.: FILE NO.: LOCATION:
A.
Z-8076
8223 Baseline Road
B.
Z -6347-A
10901 Rodney Parham Road
C.
Z-8125
5130 "P" Street
D.
Z-8127
317 North Ridge Road
E.
Z-8135
1730 N. Spruce Street
II. NEW BUSINESS:
ITEM NO.: FILE NO.: LOCATION:
1.
Z-8145
9716 Woodford Drive
2.
Z-8146
8116 Cantrell Road
3.
Z-8147
317 Fern Street
4.
Z-8148
6110 Mabelvale Cut -Off
5.
Z-8149
922 N. Spruce Street
6,
Z-8150
21 Dellwood Drive
7.
Z-8151
Northwest Corner of E. 4th and
Commerce Streets
QD
0
N
3NId
IL - a31ZYaJ
/1/'1
W
11OtlBIH1
T
t V
yid
�y
g(\i\� NYWa3O
NI
RVMOVO8B
HOatl NO1NJ
n
= 1S3H0 - a3H3aO o
t� `]NI)I Zvi �
0
MOaOOOA 3NId
= 3 l
0
In aVO 0 NO1lIWV 11OOs
� s SJNiddS
iJ
Na d NIV3 $ `-
Y�v 40
(� AJlSd3AINn AIGOAW x
� saNiads a3A3O
(� s3HanH
IddISS IN
5s >
J
� 1OO1HO
81OAOS39 M06NVO NHOr 3
�Q
3NW3H
—^,
96Od31N0VH5 o slaays
Oa 31 OV S � _
_
¢
WVHaVd A3NOOa- m _
s
4—j\�
NV 08
h6
c— 11Wn HJy0j3 39O1a AMA
Jyfso
Rei
r n
V ,
@ i NVAllln$ �
u
laVM3ls
Hs�b`Y
q-
0 0
s1lWlllllO
0 04'2 0J 0P
x
O1nJ 31VON833
0
m
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: A
File No.: Z-8076
Owner: R.S. Keathley, JR.
Applicant: Regina Haralson, Kaplan, Brewer, Maxey and Haralson, P.A.
Address: 8223 Baseline Road
Description: South side of Baseline Road, between Production and Distribution
Drives.
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: An administrative appeal is requested to determine that a
nonconforming use/status of the property (mobile home park) is valid.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Staff Anal
The R-2 zoned property at 8223 Baseline Road is currently vacant. For a
number of years the site was used as a mobile home park. Evidence of its
previous use still exists in the form of concrete/asphalt pads, utility stub -outs,
etc. There are two (2) asphalt drives on the property. There is a main access
drive from Baseline Road down the center of the property. This drive connects
to a drive along the west property line which accesses Victoria Street to the
west. There is one (1) unoccupied mobile home at the northeast corner of the
property.
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: A (CON'T.)
This R-2 zoned property had a nonconforming R-7 status for many years
during its use as a mobile home park. However, on July 20, 2004 the property
ceased being used as a mobile home park. Water to the property was cut-off
on July 19, 2004.
The City's Zoning Ordinance does not permit the operation of a mobile home
park as a by right use in R-2 zoning. The mobile home park which previously
existed on this property was in existence before the property became part of
the City, and was allowed to continue as a nonconforming use. Such a use
can continue as long as the use is not ceased for a period of one (1) year,
according to the following Section 36-153( c) of the City's Zoning Ordinance:
"( c) Abandonment or discontinuance. When a
nonconforming use has been discontinued or abandoned,
and the appearance of which [such use] does not depict
the identity of an ongoing use, and further if said situation
exists for a period of one (1) year, such use shall not
thereafter be reestablished or resumed. Any subsequent
use or occupancy of such land or structure shall comply with
the regulations of the zoning district in which such land or
structure is located."
Shortly before July 20, 2005 the mobile home which exists near the northeast
corner of the property was placed on the site. There was no evidence that the
mobile home was inhabited by July 20, 2005. Therefore, the City determined
that the nonconforming status of the property has been lost. According to a
letter dated February 8, 2006 from City Attorney Tom Carpenter to Phillip
Kaplan, the property owner's attorney:
"The City considers this property abandoned as a mobile home park and
will not permit any owner to engage in such a use. The ordinance clearly
notes that abandonment or discontinued use includes situations in which
"the appearance... does not depict the identity of an ongoing use." Little
Rock, Ark., Rev. Code §36-153( c) (1988). Arkansas law does not require
the City to prove an intent to abandon a use, merely that there has been a
discontinuance of such use."
The property owner is appealing the City's determination that the
nonconforming status of the property has been lost. The property owner is
asking the Board to determine that he has not abandoned the nonconforming
mobile home park use of the property and that he be allowed to continue said
use. A separate packet of information, including letters from the City
Attorney's office, has been provided by the applicant and will be given to the
Board members for review. A member of the City Attorney's office will be
present at the public hearing to provide additional information.
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: A (CON'T
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JULY 31, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to
the August 28, 2006 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred by a vote of 3 ayes, 0
nays, 1 absent and 1 open position.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(AUGUST 28, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to
the September 25, 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.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(SEPTEMBER 25, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to
the November 27, 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.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(NOVEMBER 27, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to
the December 18, 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.
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: A (CON'T.)
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(DECEMBER 18, 2006)
Philip Kaplan and R.S. Keathley, Jr. were present, representing the application.
There were no objectors present. Staff presented the application.
Philip Kaplan addressed the Board in support of the application. He provided the
Board with a history of the property. He explained that Mr. Keathley had cleaned up
the property and presented photos of the property and surrounding properties to the
Board. He noted that the mobile home on the property was hooked up to utilities.
He referred to Section 36-153( c) of the Code, noting that the appearance of the
property had the identity of an ongoing use, in the placement of the one (1) mobile
home. He discussed the condition of the surrounding properties. He noted that
there were no other suitable uses for the property. He explained that Mr. Keathley
would provide a unit on the property for a police sub -station. He noted that there
would be on-site care takers and the property would be kept clean.
Vice -Chairman Burruss asked if water and electricity were hooked -up to the mobile
home. Mr. Kaplan noted that they were. Vice -Chairman Burruss asked if the mobile
home was ever occupied. Mr. Kaplan responded that it had not been occupied.
Chairman Francis referred to advertisements that were placed in the paper for the
rental of the mobile home and asked if there was any response. Mr. Kaplan noted
that there were several responses soon after the ad was placed.
Vice -Chairman Burruss asked about requirements to tie down mobile homes in a
mobile home park. Staff noted that the nature of a mobile home park, with units
being moved in and out, does not require that units be tied down.
Chairman Francis asked about the city's position regarding the appearance of an on-
going use. Debra Weldon, City Attorney, explained that there was no appearance of
an on-going use since there were no residents on the property.
Chairman Francis noted that he seemed to agree with staff's position, but was
concerned with the fact that the applicant had tried to rent the mobile home.
Mr. Kaplan explained that Mr. Keathley had spent much money on cleaning up the
property for use as a mobile home park.
There was a brief discussion as to whether rental units within a mobile home park
should be treated differently from owner -occupied units.
Vice -Chairman Burruss asked how many mobile homes had been on the property in
the past. Mr. Kaplan stated that there had been as many as 60. Vice -Chairman
Burruss explained that his opinion was that placement of one (1) mobile home on
the property did not re-establish the mobile home park.
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: A (CON'T.)
Staff asked Mr. Kaplan questions related to the time the property was cleaned up
and the time the mobile home was moved onto the property.
There was a motion to uphold the City's position that the nonconforming use of the
property as a mobile home park has been lost/discontinued. The vote was 2 ayes, 1
nay, 1 absent and 1 open position. Based on the fact the item failed to receive three
(3) votes for or against, the application was automatically deferred to the January 29,
2007 Agenda.
KAPLAN, BREWER, MAXEY & 'HARALSON, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
PHILIP E. KAPLAN
JOANN C. MAXEY
REGINA HARALSON
OF COUNSEL:
SILAs H. BREWER
June 7, 2006
City of Little Rock Board of Adjustment
723 W. Markham .
Little Rock, AR 72201
Re: 8223 Baseline Road
Dear Members of the Board of Adjustment:
415 MAIN STREET
LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201
(501) 372-6400
FAX (501) 376-3612
SENDER'S E-MAILpkaplan@kbmlaw.net
HAND DELIVERY
Mr. Raymond Keathley owned and operated a mobile home park on the property at issue
from .the early 1990s until he sold it in 2000. Under Mr. .Keathley's ownership, the park
was.clean and maintained; it contained nice homes and housed decent tenants. Attached
and :marked as Exhibit A are pictures showing the condition of the park under Mr.
Keat:hley's ownership.
Steve and Lisa Thompson entered into a real estate contract to purchase the property from
Mr. Keathley on October 17, 2000 and took possession at that time. Mr. Keathley financed
the purchase; the Thompsons made monthly payments. The Thompsons, however, did
not maintain the park, and it eventually deteriorated to the point that the City became
involved. Mr. Keathley was not aware at the time and is not currently aware of
communication between the City and the Thompsons.- Mr. Keathley first became aware
of the issues when Ms. Barbara Hyatt contacted him as lien holder and notified him of
problems. Mr. Keathley agreed to talk with Mr. Thompson, which he did, and was assured
that Mr. Thompson would move the worst of the homes out of the park and repair and
restore the ones remaining. Mr. Keathley offered to assist further and advised Ms. Hyatt
to contact him if needed. When he had no further contact from Ms. Hyatt, Mr. Keathley
assumed the problems were resolved.
Unbeknownst to Mr. Keathley, water to the facility was cut off -on July 19, 2004, and the
City shut the park down on July 20, 2004. By this time, the park was in deplorable
condition, as tenants abandoned the homes, vandals stripped all the metal from the mobile
homes, and four loads of tires were dumped in the park. Attached and marked as Exhibit
B are pictures showing the mess. Thompson became delinquent.on his payments to Mr.
Keathley and deeded the property back to Mr. Keathley on September 24, 2004. Although
he believed some homes were salvageable, Mr. Keathley cleared everything from the
V
property, expending between $40,000 and $50,000 to do so. Attached as Exhibit C are
pictures of the park after the cleanup.
Parties contacted Mr. Keathley about purchasing the property from him, but reported that
they were told by the City that the property could no longer be used for a mobile home
park. Mr. Keathley, through this office, inquired abobt the zoning status of the property.
The City Attorney responded and advised that the property could continue its use as a
mobile home park if it renewed operation prior to July 20, 2005. Attached as Exhibit D is
a copy of the letter for your convenience. Mr. Keathley placed a new sign at the entrance.
He obtained -water and sewer service on June 23, 2005, purchased a new mobile home
for the property on July 8, 2005, had it transported and set up at the park on July 11, 2005,
and began advertising it and spaces for rent on July 13,,2005. Attached as Exhibit E are
receipts from Central Arkansas Water, Arkansas Liquidators, and Henley Mobile Home
Service, and a copy of Mr. Keathley's record with copy of advertising as evidence of these
efforts. Attached as Exhibit F are pictures of the mobile home.
In September2005, the City determined that the property's use as a mobile home park had
been abandoned and advised him to -remove the "abandoned" mobile home unit from the
premises. Mr. Keathley, through this office, responded and advised that operations had
resumed timely. The City Attorney responded and opined that.since no one had rented the
mobile home, the .City would consider the property abandoned as a mobile home park.
Attached as Exhibit G are copies of those letters for your convenience. Mr. Keathley
disputes this finding.
Mr. Keathley understands, however, that the property must meet the code requirements,
and he is committed to ensuring that it does. Moreover, he is committed to improving the
entire area, as the elements surrounding the mobile home park are less than ideal.
Attached as Exhibit H are pictures showing property that joins the park on the east, the -
west, across Baseline, and as you enter the park from Baseline. As you can see, the
surrounding conditions are less than desirable. A similar situation existed in Conway at
Mr.- Keathley's Brookside Village Mobile Home Park until Mr. Keathley donated a mobile
home for a Conway Police Department substation. As a result, undesirables moved away,
speeders slowed down, and the police department has a visible. p res ence', which has
resulted in developing relationships with nearby families and businesses. Attached as'
Exhibit I is a newspaper article printed recently lauding its success.
Mr. Keathley had no problems with the property during. his previous ownership. He then
went to great expense to clean the property when it was abandoned by the Thompsons.
He purchased a new home, installed it, obtained utility services, and advertised it and
spaces for rent. He offers to provide the Little Rock Police Department with a mobile home
and -space if it would like to open a substation there, as he'did at the Brookside Village
Mobile Home Park in Conway. This can be a positive space for the neighborhood, the
surrounding area, and the City. Mr. Keathley would like to see the park with nice homes,
nice families, maintained, with a police presence, and a. welcome addition to the area. He
W
asks that the Board of Adjustment find that he has not abandoned the property and give
him an opportunity to realize that vision.
Sincerely,
Philip E. Kaplan
PEK:nm
cc: Client
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: B
File No.: Z -6347-A
Owner: Selz Realty
Applicant: Jeff Quarles, K -Mart
Address: 10901 Rodney Parham Road
Description: Southeast corner of Rodney Parham Road and Shackleford Road
Zoned: C-3
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the development provisions of
Section 36-301 to allow seasonal outdoor storage of merchandise.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Commercial
Proposed Use of Property: Commercial
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Staff Analysis:
The C-3 zoned property at 10901 Rodney Parham Road contains an existing
commercial building occupied by K -Mart. There is paved parking on the north
and west sides of the building, with access drives from Rodney Parham Road
and Shackleford Road. The applicant recently placed two (2) metal, portable
storage containers along the west side of the building, between a three (3) foot
high masonry wall and the building's loading dock doors, as noted on the
attached site plan. When staff became aware of the storage containers, a
Courtesy Notice was issued for their removal.
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: B (CON'T.)
The applicant notes that the two (2) storage containers were placed on the
property for use as temporary storage of patio and garden merchandise. The
lawn and garden area of the K -Mart store is being used for storage of customer
layaways and seasonal Christmas merchandise. The applicant proposes to
use the two (2) storage containers from September 6 to January 30 of each
year.
Section 36-301(b) of the City's Zoning Ordinance states: "All commercial uses
shall be restricted to closed buildings, except packing lots, seasonal and
temporary sales per section 36-298.4, and the normal pump island services of
service station operations." Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to
allow two (2) temporary/seasonal storage containers to be located on the site
from September 6 to January 30 of each year.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff believes the request is
reasonable. The containers are located within a loading dock area between the
building and a short masonry wall. The containers are not located in a parking or
vehicular use area. Given the fact that the containers are located close to the
building, they are not very noticeable from the adjacent streets or properties.
Staff believes the yearly seasonal use of the storage containers will have no
adverse impact on the general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance, subject to the following
conditions:
1. There are to be no more than two (2) storage containers on the property.
2. The placement of the storage containers is limited to September 6 through
January 30 of each year.
3. The storage containers must not block any fire department connections or
fire hydrants.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(NOVEMBER 27, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the application needed to be deferred to the December 18,
2006 Agenda due to the fact that the applicant failed to complete the required
notification to surrounding property owners as required.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the December 18, 2006
agenda by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: B (CON'T.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(DECEMBER 18, 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 3 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position.
Kmart Store at 10901 Rodney Parham Rd request approval to have two temporary
storage units on site from Sept. 06 — Jan 30 each year. The units will be used for the
temporary storage of patio and garden merchandise to allow room for the store to use
indoor storage space for customer layaways, and seasonal Christmas merchandise during
the holiday season. Wal-Mart stores elimination of layaway has increased usage of
Kmart's layaway, with higher than expected volume during this fourth quarter. Your
consideration of this request is appreciated.
Jeff Quarles
Store Coach
K'inart
10901 Rodney Parham
Little Rock, AR. 72212
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.:
File No.: Z-8125
Owner: Todd Wilson George
Applicant: Todd Wilson George
Address: 5130 "P" Street
Description: Lot 17, Block 3, McGehee's Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-
254 to allow a carport addition with a reduced side setback.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property located at 5130 "P" Street is occupied by a one-story
brick and frame single family residence. There is a one car wide driveway
from "P" Street at the southwest corner of the property. The driveway extends
along the west side of the house. There is a small accessory storage building
in the rear yard, with an alley running along the north (rear) property line.
The applicant proposes to construct a 10 foot by 25 foot carport structure on
the west side of the existing residence, over the existing driveway. The
proposed carport addition will be unenclosed on its south, west and a portion
of the north sides. The carport structure is proposed to be located one (1) foot
from the west side property line, and 42 feet back from the front (south)
property line.
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: C (CON'T.)
Section 36-254(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side
setback of five (5) feet for this R-2 zoned lot. Therefore, the applicant is
requesting a variance to allow the reduced side setback. The applicant is also
proposing room and deck additions to the rear of the residence. These
proposed additions conform to ordinance standards and are in the process of
being constructed.
Staff does not support the requested side setback variance. It has been staff's
past policy to support setbacks of no less than 18 inches for this type of
unenclosed structure. Staff views an 18 inch side setback as a minimum area
needed to construct and maintain the carport structure without encroaching
onto the adjacent property to the est. If the applicant were willing to provide an
18 inch side setback, including overhang, staff could support the application.
The application would have to install guttering to prevent water run-off onto the
adjacent property to the west. The guttering could be within the 18 inch side
setback. With these changes, staff would view the carport structure as having
no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the requested side setback variance, as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(NOVEMBER 27, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the application needed to be deferred to the December 18,
2006 Agenda due to the fact that the applicant failed to complete the required
notification to surrounding property owners as required.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the December 18, 2006
agenda by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(DECEMBER 18, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to the
January 29, 2007 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays,
1 absent and 1 open position.
11/1'/2006 15:16 Q7M9468694 APTC ( PAGE 02
Todd George
5130 P Street
Little Rock, AR, 72207
November 33. 2006
Mr, Monty Moore
Little Rock Planning &:. Development
Board of Adjustments
723 West Markham
Little Rock, AR. 72201
Re: Request for variance at 5130 P Street, Little Rock, AR. 72207
Dear Members of the Board:
Y. -
This letter is to respectfttlly request a variance in order to place an open -sided carport
within the boundaries previously established. As mentioned, this open -sided carport
would have guttering and no sides within the boundary. The neighbors to the West,
Michael & Dina Yates have given their consent to this project. Should you require any
additional information please reel free to contact me. at 501-425-2340.
Sincerely,
Todd Geor e
TG:jh
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: D
File No.: Z-8127
Owner: Gloria Lawson and Steve Arnett
Applicant: Jennifer Herron
Address: 317 North Ridge Road
Description: Lot 360, Kingwood Place Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section
36-254 and the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a porch addition with a
reduced front setback and which crosses a platted building line.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 317 North Ridge Road is occupied by a one-story
brick and frame single family residence. There is a two -car wide driveway
from North Ridge Road which serves as access. The property contains a 25
foot front platted building line. The existing porch near the center of the
structure extends approximately one (1) foot across the platted building line,
with steps extending slightly further.
The applicant proposes to construct a new 8 foot by 18 foot porch structure to
replace the existing porch. The new porch will be unenclosed on the north,
south and west sides, and be constructed to match the existing house. The
proposed porch will extend across the front platted building line by six (6) feet,
for a setback of 19 feet from the front property line. There will be two (2) or
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: D (CON'T.)
three (3) steps on front of the porch structure, extending slightly closer to the
front property line.
Section 36-254(d)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front
setback of 25 feet for this R-2 zoned lot. Section 31-12( c) of the subdivision
ordinance requires that encroachments across platted building lines be
reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant
is requesting variances to allow the new front porch and steps with a reduced
front setback and which crosses the front platted building line.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Although staff observed few
similar front encroachments in this area, the requested variances are very
minor in nature. The fact that the porch addition will be unenclosed will lessen
any possible visual impact on the adjacent properties. Staff believes the
proposed porch addition will not be out of character with the neighborhood and
will add to the street appeal of the residence. There appears to be no specific
uniform setback of the houses from North Ridge Road in this immediate area,
as there is some minor variation in front setback depths. Staff feels the
proposed 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 new porch/step 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 front setback and building line
variances, subject to the following conditions:
1. Completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the front platted
building line as approved by the Board.
2. The porch structure must remain unenclosed.
3. The steps must remain uncovered and unenclosed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(NOVEMBER 27, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the application needed to be deferred to the December 18,
2006 Agenda due to the fact that the applicant failed to complete the required
notification to surrounding property owners as required.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the December 18, 2006
agenda by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 open position.
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: D (CON'
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(DECEMBER 18, 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 3 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position.
October 27, 2006 -1 <? % '
Mr. Monte Moore
City of Little Rock Planning & Development
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
RE: 317 N. Ridge Road, Little Rock, Arkansas
Dear Monte:
Enclosed is an application for a zoning variance for the property located at 317 N. Ridge Road,
Little Rock, Arkansas.
On behalf of our clients, Gloria Lawson and Steve Arnett, we are requesting a variance for the
front building 25'-0" setback in order to provide a deeper porch. The existing depth of the
porch is 3'-10" and from the survey, encroaches on the 25'-0" building setback. We propose
removing the existing porch and building a new porch with the depth of 8'-0". We also propose
removing the existing walkway connecting the porch to the driveway and relocating it in order
to connect to the new porch.
The proposed porch will be open, not enclosed on the sides. Please refer to the attached
drawing for location and dimensions to the property lines and building setback.
If there are any questions, please give us a call.
Sincerely,
eenniferHerron, AIA
cc: Gloria Lawson and Steve Arnett
file
H E R R O N
H O R T O N
300 S. Spring St. Ste. 720
Little Rock, AR 72201
www.hh-architects.com
tel. 501-975-0052
fax. 501-978-0078
ARCHITECTS
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: E
File No.: Z-8135
Owner/Applicant: Larry Burrell
Address: 1730 N. Spruce Street
Description: Lot 42R, Cliffewood Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the fence provisions of Section
36-516 to allow a fence which exceeds the maximum height allowed.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
Cantrell Road (AR State Hwy 10) is a principal arterial street with high
traffic volumes and high traffic speeds. The iron fence on the existing rock
wall further deteriorates the intersection visibility for drivers entering
Cantrell Road from Spruce St. With this new addition, drivers are forced
to ease the fronts of their vehicles onto Cantrell Road creating a safety
hazard. Section 32.8 of city code states not obstructions higher than 30
inches shall be located within a triangular area 50 ft. back from the
intersecting right-of-way line (or intersecting tangent lines for radial
dedications) at intersections.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 1730 N. Spruce Street is occupied by a three-story
rock and stucco single family residence which was recently constructed. The
property is located at the southwest corner of N. Spruce Street and Cantrell
Road. There is a circular driveway from N. Spruce Street which serves as
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO • E (CON'T.)
access. There is a short masonry wall along the north (Cantrell Road)
property line.
The applicant recently placed a short wrought iron fence on top of the existing
masonry wall. The wall/fence ranges in height from 70 inches (72 inches
including fence post) at the northwest corner of the property to 72 inches (76
inches including fence post) at the northeast corner of the house. The
applicant is proposing a gate from the northeast corner of the house to the
fence. The applicant is also proposing a six (6) foot high wood fence along the
rear (west) property line.
Section 36-516(e)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum fence
height of four (4) feet for fences located between building setback lines and
street rights-of-way. Other fences may be constructed to a height of six (6)
feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the masonry
wall/fence with a height ranging from 70 inches to 72 inches along the north
property line, between the five (5) foot side building setback line and the
Cantrell Road right-of-way. The applicant is also requesting the variance to
include the north five (5) feet of the six (6) foot high wood fence along the rear
property line.
Staff does not support the variance as requested. As noted in paragraph A. of
the staff report, the masonry wall/fence overall height creates a health/safety
issue. The placement of the fence requires drivers on N. Spruce Street pull
the nose of their vehicles onto Cantrell Road to view oncoming traffic. Public
Works notes that the fence would have to be pulled back 50 feet from the
northeast corner of the property in order to comply with Section 32.8 of the City
code. If the applicant were willing to move the fence back to comply with this
standard, staff could support the fence height variance for the remainder of the
fence located between the side building setback line and the Cantrell Road
right-of-way.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the requested fence height variance, as filed.
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: E (CON'T.)
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (NOVEMBER 27, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested the application be deferred to
the December 18, 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.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (DECEMBER 18, 2006)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
item.
Staff informed the Board that the applicant had revised the application to construct
the proposed fence in conformance with the Public Works requirements as noted in
Paragraph A. of the staff report. Staff recommended approval of the revised
application, subject to obtaining a building permit for the fence construction.
The applicant offered not additional comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as revised and
recommended by staff by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position.
F/35
The Fence we would like to install is on the Cantrell side of our
property. It is foremost for the safety of our four young
grandchildren and our dog. It is a beautiful wrought iron fence,
which will be installed from the back of our lot to the front corner
of our house. Our front yard will not be fenced. This fence in No
Way obstructs the visual sight line of traffic. We respectfully
request permission to finish this project.
JAAA Larry - Burrell 0 - 2 3 _
Nancy Burrell
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: 1
File No.: Z-8145
Owner/Applicant: William Torres
Address: 9716 Woodford Drive
Description: Lot 120, Merrivale Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254
to allow a carport addition with a reduced side setback.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 9716 Woodford Drive is occupied by a one-story
brick and frame single family residence. There is a two -car wide driveway
from Woodford Drive which serves as access. The lot contains a 25 foot front
platted building line.
The applicant is in the process of constructing new front porch and carport
additions to the existing residence, as noted on the attached site plan. The
new carport addition is unenclosed on its north, south and west sides and was
constructed to match the existing residential structure. According to the survey
submitted by the applicant, the carport addition is located three (3) feet from
the west side property line at its northwest corner. The southwest corner of
the carport is approximately 12 feet from the west side property line.
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T.)
Section 36-254(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side
setback of 5.14 feet from this R-2 zoned lot. Therefore, the applicant is
requesting a variance to allow the reduced side setback for the new carport
addition.
Staff is not supportive of the requested variance. Staff's inspection of the
property revealed that the northwest corner of the carport structure is located
no more than one (1) foot from the west property line, with the overhang
appearing to cross the property line onto the adjacent property to the west.
Staff feels this type of encroachment should not be allowed. Staff believes a
minimum side setback of 1.5 feet should be required with the overhang not
crossing the side property line. If the applicant can supply an as -built survey of
the property reflecting the carport structure with at least an 18 inch side
setback, staff could possibly support a variance. Staff believes the proposed
structure, as it appears to cross the side property line, will have an adverse
impact on the adjacent property.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the requested side setback variance.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(DECEMBER 18, 2006)
Staff informed the Board that the application needed to be deferred to allow the
applicant time to submit additional information to staff (as -built survey) to determine the
exact location of the building addition. Staff recommended deferral to the January 29,
2007 Agenda.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the January 29, 2007
Agenda by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position.
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN,
A MORE ATTRACTIVE SOLUTION AND PROPERTY VALUE
INCREASE. CARPORT ADDITION TIES INTO HOUSE STRUCTURE
APPEARING TO BE PART OF ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION. LEFT CORNER OF
CARPORT DRIVEWAY CONTACTS ONE POINT FO PROPERTY LINE IN BACK
YARD. THERE ARE NO UTILITIES IN BACK OF HOUSE.
THERE IS NO PROBLEM WITH THE ADJACENT HOME.DOES
NOT ENCROACH ON THEIR PROPERTY. MY NEIGHBOR IS MY SISTER - IN-
LAW. SHE IS IN AGREEMENT WITH US ON THE ADDITION.
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.:
File No.: Z-8146
Owner: Davoud Hadidi
Applicant: Shahin Riahi
Address: 8116 Cantrell Road
Description: Lot 1 of Replat of Tract B, Cantrell Heights Commercial Subdivision
Zoned: C-3
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section
36-301, the parking provisions of Section 36-502 and the buffer provisions of Section
36-522 to allow a building addition with a reduced rear setback, reduced number of
parking spaces and reduced buffer.
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:
A landscape upgrade equal to the percentage of building expansion will be
required.
C. Staff Analysis:
The C-3 zoned property at 8116 Cantrell Road is occupied by a one-story rock
and frame commercial building. Hadidi Oriental Rug Company occupies 4,660
square feet of the building, with a dental clinic occupying 3,672 square feet.
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.)
There is a driveway at the southwest corner of the property. Paved parking is
located on the south and east sides of the building, with cross access between
this property and the property to the east. There is also an access drive along
the north side of the building and a carport -type structure at the northwest
corner (north side) of the commercial structure.
The applicant proposes to remove the existing carport -type structure and
construct a 2,900 square foot addition on the rear (north side) of the building as
noted on the attached site plan. The addition will be located 10 feet back from
the rear (north) property line and 20 feet back from the east and west side
property lines. The applicant notes that the addition will be used as
storage/display space for the oriental rug business. The proposed addition will
have two (2) exit doors and small windows near the top of the north wall.
The applicant is requesting three (3) variances with the proposed addition. The
first is from Section 36-301(e)(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance. This section
requires a minimum rear setback of 25 feet for C-3 zoning. The proposed
addition will have a 10 foot rear setback.
The next variance is from Section 36-502(b)(3). This section requires nine (9)
additional off-street parking spaces for the proposed building expansion. The
site contains 33 parking spaces which meet the minimum requirement for the
oriental rug business and dental clinic. The applicant is requesting the variance
to provide no additional parking.
The final variance is from Section 36-522(b)(3)2. This section requires a
minimum land use buffer of nine (9) feet along the rear (north) property line,
adjacent to multifamily zoned property. The proposed addition is set back 10
feet from the north property line, however, there is a 10 foot utility easement
along the north property line. The ordinance does not allow the utility easement
to be counted toward the buffer requirement.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff views the proposed building
addition as relatively minor in nature. There will be more than adequate
separation between the commercial building and the nearest apartment building
to the north. Although the 10 foot wide utility easement cannot be counted
toward the buffer requirement, the applicant will be installing additional
landscaping within this area as part of the landscape upgrade for the property.
With respect to the parking variance, staff feels there is adequate parking on the
site to serve the existing uses within the commercial building. Staff also feels the
additional building area should be used as storage/display space only for the
existing oriental rug business, and that any future uses be reviewed by the Board
of Adjustment with respect to off-street parking. If the entire building (including
addition) were used for retail/commercial, the overall parking requirement would
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.)
drop to 37 spaces. 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 variances, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Compliance with the landscape/buffer requirement as noted in paragraph
B. of the staff report.
2. The additional building area must be used for storage/display space for
the oriental rug business only.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(DECEMBER 18, 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 3 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position.
November 15, 2006
Department of Planning and Development
City of Little Rock
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
Re: Rear Setback and parking variance request for 8116 Cantrell Rd.
Mr. Davoud Hadidi of Hadidi Oriental Rug Company
Dear Sir:
We hereby request Rear setback and parking variance of parcel of land located at 8116 Cantrell road.
Setback variance -
Scope of work includes construction of additional 2,900 square feet of showroom space to the existing
showroom and dental office building. There will also be renovation of existing spaces in this project. The
reason necessitating the expansion is the need for additional flat floor display space for rugs in variety of
sizes that can be stacked any higher than 2'. There will not be any A/C units in the back area. There will
only be small high windows for light and two exit doors at the north wall of the addition. There will be
trees added for buffer at the north side of the property.
Parking variance for the additional space added —
We would like to keep the 33 existing parking space and not add any more spaces for the addition. This
retail business is operating more as a gallery/showroom space with only a few clients at a time. There has
never been a need for the number of spaces that we have. This building and business is owned and
operated by Mr. Hadidi and he has no intention of selling or moving. We would appreciate consideration
to permit the addition and wave the requirements for additional parking spaces for the addition.
We are enclosing a $205 fee for review of these variances.
Please direct any comments requiring our action to me.
Sincerely,
Shahin Riahi, A
1025 North Coolidge
Little Rock, AR 72207
Enclosures: Applications
Survey (3 copies)
Site Plans (18 copies)
Affidavit of Authorization
Filing Fee
cc: Davoud Hadidi
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: 3
File No.: Z-8147
Owner: Gardner Custom Homes
Applicant: Steve Gardner
Address: 317 Fern Street
Description: Lot 29, Block 7, Young's 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 construction of a new
home 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: Vacant Lot
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-3 zoned property at 317 Fern Street is currently a vacant platted lot.
The property slopes downward from Fern Street to the north. The rear portion
of the property is approximately 20 feet below the grade of the front property
line. There is a paved alley along the rear (north) property line. The lot
contains a 25 foot front platted building line.
The applicant proposes to construct a two-story single family home on the
property, as noted on the attached site plan. The proposed house will cross
the front platted building line by 12 feet at the southwest corner of the structure
and 15 feet at the southeast corner, resulting in a front setback ranging from
10 feet to 13 feet. The west side of the proposed structure will be 5 feet to 8
feet from the west side property line, with the east side setback ranging from 5
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO • 3 (CON'T.)
feet to 14 feet. The structure will be located over 70 feet from the rear (north)
property line.
Section 36-255(d)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front
setback of 25 feet for this R-3 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 new residence with a reduced front
setback and which crosses the front platted building line.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. The proposed single family
residence will align with several other structures along this side of Fern Street.
Because of the drastic slope downward from Fern Street, the other residences
have been pulled up closer to the front property line than the 25 feet as
typically required by ordinance. The proposed house will maintain essentially
the same setback as the residential structure immediately to the west.
Therefore, staff views the proposed residential structure as not being out of
character with the neighborhood. Staff believes the residence with reduced
front setback 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 new residence. 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 front setback and building line
variances, 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:
(DECEMBER 18, 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 3 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position.
Gardner Custom Homes, Inc
705 Beechwood St.
Apt. B
Little Rock, AR 72205
November 15, 2006
City of Little Rock
Dept. of Planning and Development
Re: W Fern St.
317
To whom it may concern,
2-- g147
This letter is to request a variance in order to reduce the current front 25' build line to
allow for a 10' build line. The variance is necessary due to the excessive slope of the lot.
Current houses along Fern have reduced setbacks due to the slope with the home
immediately to the left, 311 Fern, having an existing setback of 10' from the front
property line.
Sincerely,
Steve Gardner
President — Gardner Custom Homes, Inc.
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: 4
File No.: Z-8148
Owner/Applicant: Bernice and Ledell Ewing
Address: 6110 Mabelvale Cut -Off
Description: Lot 7, George Acres Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the fence provisions of Section 36-516
to allow a fence which exceeds the maximum height allowed.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
1. Section 32.8 of city code states no obstruction higher than 30 inches shall
be located within a triangular area 50 ft back from the intersecting right-of-
way line (or intersecting tangent lines for radial dedications) at
intersections. The obstruction resulting from the fence could cause drivers
to ease the nose of their vehicle out onto Mabelvale Cut -Off creating a
safety hazard.
2. Proposed fence should be located at least 10 ft off back of sidewalk and
out of the city right-of-way.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 6110 Mabelvale Cut -Off is occupied by a one-story
brick and frame single family residence. The property is located at the
northeast corner of Mabelvale Cut -Off and Judy Lane. There is a two -car wide
drive from Judy Lane which serves as access. There is a small storage
building an the northeast corner of the property. Portions of the rear yard are
fenced with a four (4) foot high chain-link fence.
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: 4 (CON'T.)
The applicants propose to construct a six (6) foot high wrought iron fence
around the perimeter of the property, as noted on the attached site plan. The
fence is proposed to be located on the property lines, extending to the
southwest corner of the property at the street intersection. The applicant notes
that the fence is requested for security purposes.
Section 36-516(e)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum fence
height of four (4) feet for fences located between building setback lines and
street rights-of-way. Other fences may be constructed to a height of six (6)
feet. Therefore, the applicants are requesting a variance to allow the six (6)
foot high wrought iron fence along the front (south) and street side (west)
property lines.
Staff does not support the variance, as requested. As noted in paragraph A. of
the staff report, the proposed fence could cause a sight -distance problem at
the intersection of Mabelvale Cut -Off and Judy Lane. The fence could reduce
visibility for drivers on Judy Lane pulling onto Mabelvale Cut -Off. Public Works
notes that the fence would have to be pulled 50 feet from the southwest corner
of the property (intersecting tangent lines) in order to comply with Section 32.8
of the city code. If the applicant were willing to move the fence to comply with
this standard, staff could support the fence height variance for the remainder of
the fence located between the front and street side building setbacks and the
Mabelvale Cut -Off and Judy Lane rights-of-way.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the requested fence height variance, as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(DECEMBER 18, 2006)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
item.
Staff informed the Board that the applicant had revised the application to construct
the proposed fence in conformance with the Public Works requirements as noted in
Paragraph A. of the staff report. Staff recommended approval of the revised
application, subject to obtaining a building permit for the fence construction.
The applicant offered not additional comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as revised and
recommended by staff by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position.
2&i3e/1414-1cle/6
614 0 9RAd� _.& C t Off
2,iu&R.,_v, ffiCk72209
509 -568 -6769
November 13, 2006
To Whom It May Concern:
There are several factors that lead me to request a variance on the front portion of my property
for a 6' tall Iron Fence versus the 4' tall approved code. This fence will be aesthetically pleasing
as well as very open with 1 " verticals on 5' centers.
I am vulnerable due to my weaken health status that includes being legally blind among other
conditions being so frail I am presently in a constant stage of freight, especially due to our past
experiences of theft and break ins. I am defenseless, leaving my wife and I helpless prey.
Prior to fence plans several security steps have already been taken and this 6' tall decorative iron
fence would finalize every reasonable security measures.
-'This fence will in NO way obstruct vision of traffic because it is set back and angles away from
the street, also it is very open.
Thanks for your sincere consideration in this matter.
God Bless You!
Ledell Ewing
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: 5
File No.: Z-8149
Owner: Eric and Rosemary Bravo
Applicant: Kyle Blakely
Address: 922 N. Spruce Street
Description: Lots 1 and 2, and part of Lot 3, Block 61, Pulaski Heights Addition
Zoned: R-2 and R-4
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section
36-156 to allow an accessory garage and pool with reduced setbacks and increased
coverage.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Staff Analysis:
The R -2/R-4 zoned property located at 922 N. Spruce Street is occupied by a
two-story frame single family residence. The property is located at the
southwest corner of Spruce Street and Hillcrest Street. There is a two car
wide gravel driveway from Hillcrest Street which serves as access. The gravel
drive leads to a one-story frame carport/storage structure at the northwest
corner of the property. There is a paved alley along the west property line.
The applicant proposes to remove the carport/storage structure and construct
a new garage/pool house structure at the northwest corner of the property.
The garage/pool house will be one-story in height and constructed to match
the existing residence. The garage/pool house will be located approximately
two (2) feet from the north side property line at its northeast corner and 19 feet
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO • 5 (CON'T.)
at its northwest corner. The structure will be set back 5.25 feet from the west
(rear) property line. There will also be a new in -ground pool near the
southwest corner of the property. The pool will be 12 feet from the south side
property line and over three (3) feet from the west (rear) property line. The
pool and garage/pool house cover approximately 57 percent of the required
rear yard (rear 25 feet of the lot).
Section 36-156(a)(2)c. of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires accessory
buildings to have a minimum street side setback of 15 feet. This section also
requires that accessory buildings occupy no more than 30 percent of the
required rear yard in R-2 and R-4 zoning. Therefore, the applicant is
requesting variances to allow the garage/pool house to have a reduced street
side setback and both structures to occupy 57 percent of the required rear
yard.
Staff is supportive of the required variances. Staff views the proposed
additions to the property as being compatible with the neighborhood. A similar
setback variance was approved for the accessory garage structure at the
southwest corner of Hillcrest Street and N. Palm Street. The proposed
garage/pool house will basically align with that structure and another
accessory building along Hillcrest Street. Staff believes the proposed
construction will not be out of character with and have no adverse impact on
the adjacent properties or the general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested setback and coverage variances,
subject to the following conditions:
1. The accessory garage/pool house must be constructed to match the
existing principal structure.
2. No portion of the accessory structure (including overhang) may cross the
north side property line.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(DECEMBER 18, 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 3 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position.
November 15, 2006
Monty Moore
City of Little Rock
Department of Planning & Development
723 West Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
Re: Rear Yard Variance
Monty,
I have been charged by my client to file a variance application before the City of Little Rock
Board of Adjustments. Mr. and Mrs. Bravo have purchased the residence at 922 N. Spruce Street
and wish to construct a new garage/pool house and pool which will exceed the rear yard use area
to over the 30% allowed. The reason for this request is to preserve the large trees on site as well
as the unusual lot configuration which make the location of said garage/pool house and pool
limited to the rear yard area..
922 North Spruce Street is a corner lot at the corner of Spruce Street and Hillcrest Avenue. Being
a comer lot, the access to a driveway/garage is limited to the rear yard area (Existing driveway
and Carport are located in the approximate location as proposed Garage/Pool house). Also
limiting the access to a driveway/garage is the presence of large established trees along both the
Spruce Street side of the residence as well as on the Hillcrest Avenue side of the residence.. A
proposed garage/pool house and pool, will be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood.
Landscaping will be added to the street side of the new garage. (see plan for location).
I have enclosed a copy of the variance application, a recent survey and plans of the proposed
garage/pool house and pool. If there is any problem with this application or should you have any
question please give me a call at (501) 280-0123.
Thank you in advance for attention on this matter.
Sincerely,
0
Kyle Blakely, ASLA
Roberts & Williams Associates
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO:: 6
File No.: Z-8150
Owner/Applicant: Eddie Smith
Address: 21 Dellwood Drive
Description: Lot 43, Eastwood Heights Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-156
and the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow an accessory building with reduced
setbacks and which crosses a platted building line.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 21 Dellwood Drive is occupied by a one-story brick
and frame single family residence. There is a two -car wide driveway from
Dellwood Drive which serves as access. There is a small metal storage
building in the rear yard area. The lot contains a 25 foot front and street side
platted building line along Dellwood Drive.
The applicant proposes to construct an 8 foot by 16 foot accessory storage
building near the southeast corner of the property, as noted on the attached
site plan. The accessory building will be located approximately seven (7) feet
to 10 feet from the street side property line. The structure will be located
approximately 7.5 feet from the east (rear) property line and 9.8 feet from the
south side property line. All but a very small sliver of the building will be
located between the 25 foot side platted building line and the street side
property line.
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: 6 (CON'T.)
Section 36-156(a)(2)c. of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires that accessory
buildings in R-2 zoning have a minimum street side setback of 15 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
accessory building with a reduced street side setback and which crosses the
side platted building line.
Staff is not supportive of the requested variances. Staff feels the proposed
accessory building will be out of character with neighborhood. All of the
structures along Dellwood Drive maintain similar setbacks behind the platted
building lines as established by the original plat of the subdivision. The
proposed accessory building will have the appearance of being in the front
yard of the property immediately to the south. Additionally, staff believes there
is adequate space in the rear yard, near the existing accessory building where
the new proposed building could be placed without variances. Although the
owner of the property immediately to the south agrees with the placement of
the proposed accessory building, staff believes the placement will have an
adverse visual impact on the adjacent property and 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 new accessory building. The applicant should review the filing
procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a
revised Bill of Assurance.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the requested setback and building line variances.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(DECEMBER 18, 2006)
Eddie Smith was present, representing the application. There were no objectors
present. Staff presented the application with a recommendation of denial.
Eddie Smith addressed the Board in support of the application. He explained that
the proposed accessory building would be constructed to match the existing
residence. He noted that there were fruit trees in the rear yard which he was trying
to preserve.
Chairman Francis noted that the shape of the lot was unique. He explained that the
proposed location of the accessory building would have an adverse visual impact on
the property next door, and that the current owner may not always occupy that
residence.
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: 6 (CON'T.)
There was discussion of moving the structure to another location within the rear
yard. Mr. Smith noted that an overhead power line dictated the placement of the
structure within the rear yard.
Staff noted that if the item were deferred, staff could make a site visit and locate the
overhead power line and trees on the survey. Mr. Smith indicated that he did not
want a deferral.
There was a lengthy discussion between the Board, Mr. Smith and staff. During the
discussion several alternate locations for the accessory building were discussed.
The issue of private utility lines with respect to the placement of the accessory
structure was also discussed.
Chairman Francis and Chris Wilbourn indicated that they did not support the
application as filed.
There was additional discussion of deferring the application.
A motion was made to defer the application to the January 29, 2007 Agenda to allow
time for staff to meet with Mr. Smith on the property and discuss alternate locations
for the accessory structure. The motion passed by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays, 1
absent and 1 open position. The application was deferred.
To whom it may concern,
_L 'T -46
—g /5c1
My name is Eddie Smith owner and resident of 21 Dellwood drive I
am submitting this paperwork in order to permit me to place a storage
shelter on my property. In order to place this storage building, I come
before the board of adjustment in hopes that I can place a storage 5
feet off the back fence line south side, 13 feet from the curb" fence
line east side, and16 feet in from the fence on the Westside. It will
place my storage approximately in the area shown in the diagram
below. By placing the storage in this area it will save my pecan tree
from being cut down and be an asset to the beautification of the
property.
c
11/22/06 W£D 15:38 FAX Fn1.257 3162
November 20, 2006
2001
City of Little Rock, t
Planning and Development
723 NK Markha-ni
Little Rock, AR 72241
To 'Whom Jt May Concern:
This letter is to inform the Board of Adjustment that Mr. Eddie C. Smith, owner of the
property at 21 Dellwood Drive; has talked to me about the placement of a storage
building on his property. he has made me aware of the location, and 1 agree that the
location is not an issue. This statement is in lieu of me signing the petition of agreement
that Mr. Smith sent before the .Board_
Sincerely,
�.-•tL t� 7d�'� �
?7
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: 7
File No.: Z-8151
Owner: River Market South, LLC
Applicant: Tim Daters
Address: Northwest Corner of East 4th and Commerce Streets
Description: East 100 feet of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 16, Pope's Addition
Zoned: UU
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the development provisions of
Section 36-342.1 to allow construction of a new hotel building.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Parking Lot
Proposed Use of Property: Hotel
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
1. Bump outs or bulbs of curb with landscaping should be installed on the
street along the north and south property lines typical to other parts of the
downtown area. This will facilitate the movement of traffic with street
parking on Commerce Street, maintain sufficient sight distance at
intersection, and allow entry and exit to drop off area. Contact Bill Henry,
Traffic Engineering, at 379-1816 for additional information for design of
these improvements. These improvements are not required on 4th Street.
2. On site striping and signage plans should be forwarded to Public Works,
Traffic Engineering for approval with the site development package.
3. Obtain a franchise agreement from Public Works (John Barr, 371-4646)
for any improvements such as awnings, planter boxes, landscaping,
sprinklers, signage, etc. located on the right-of-way.
B. Landscape and Buffer Issues:
Street trees will be required as per ordinance standards.
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO • 7 (CON'T.)
C. Staff Analysis:
The UU zoned property at the northwest corner of East 4t" and Commerce
Streets is occupied by a paved parking lot. The property is located in the
southeast corner of the block bounded by East 3rd, East 4t", Commerce and
Rock Streets. The Tuf-Nut building is located immediately to the north, within
the northeast corner of the block.
The applicant proposes to construct an eight (8) story hotel building on the
property, as noted on the attached site plan. The proposed building will be
located on the east and south property lines. The building will contain slightly
over 71,000 square feet and have an overall height of 88 feet — 6 inches to the
top of parapet. A canopy is proposed on the east side of the building in
conjunction with a vehicular drop-off area along Commerce Street. The canopy
will extend approximately nine (9) feet into the Commerce Street right-of-way.
Additionally, there will be a pool, fountain and service courtyard located on the
west side of the proposed hotel building. A driveway from East 4t" Street will
serve the service courtyard area.
The applicant is requesting three (3) variances from the UU (Urban Use)
Zoning District standards in conjunction with the proposed hotel project. The
first variance is from Section 36-342.1(e) of the City's Zoning Ordinance. This
section allows a maximum building height of five (5) stories or 75 feet,
whichever is less, in the UU zoning district. As noted previously, the proposed
hotel building will be eight (8) stories and 88 feet -6 inches in height.
The second variance is from Section 36-342.1(c )(5)(b). This section requires
that street trees be provided along the East 4t" and Commerce Street sides of
the property. The trees are required to be a minimum three-inch caliper and
placed 30 feet on center at least two (2) feet off the back of curbs. The
applicant is requesting a variance from this requirement, as no street trees will
be provided where the vehicular drop-off area is proposed along Commerce
Street. Street trees will be provided elsewhere as required by ordinance.
The last variance is from Section 36-342.1(9)(b). This section requires that
awnings/canopies project no more than five (5) feet from a building into a public
right-of-way. As noted previously, a canopy is proposed to project nine (9) feet
into the Commerce Street right-of-way over a portion of the proposed vehicular
drop-off area.
Staff supports the requested variances from the UU district standards. Staff
views the request as reasonable and feels the proposed hotel will be a nice
addition to the Downtown area. As noted in paragraph A. of the staff report,
Public Works requires a minor revision to the vehicular drop-off area by providing
bump outs at the north and south ends of the area. This will create a safer
situation for vehicular movements within this area. With respect to the height and
canopy projection variances, the proposal is consistent with other developments
in Downtown Little Rock and will not be out of character with the area. Staff
DECEMBER 18, 2006
ITEM NO.: 7 (CON'T.)
believes the proposed hotel building as proposed will have no adverse impact on
the adjacent properties or the general area.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested variances from the UU district
requirements, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs A and B of the
staff report.
2. A franchise permit must be obtained for the improvements located in the
Commerce Street right-of-way.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(DECEMBER 18, 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 3 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position.
® WHITE - DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
24 Rahling Circle
Little Rock, Arkansas 72223
Phone: 501-821-1667��,�
Fax: 501-821-1668
November 17, 2006
Mr. Monte Moore, Zoning & Code Enforcement Administrator
City of Little Rock
723 W. Markham St.
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
RE: Hampton Inn — Board of Adjustment
Mr. Moore,
Please find attached three copies of the survey and site plan for the above captioned project.
Please place this item on the agenda for the December 18'', 2006 Board of Adjustment meeting.
The variances on height and number of stories are necessary to allow construction of a hotel on
this site. The increase in the canopy/awning is necessary for drop-offs. The curb line set back
will facilitate drop off and valet parking.
I have also attached copies of the preliminary elevation. Rett Tucker, the owner, will provide
his affidavit under separate cover.
Please contact me if you need any additional information.
Sincerely,
Timothy E. Daters, P.E.
Encl: 3 copies of survey/site plan
Application
Application fee of $150
CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT, SURVEYING
M
m
c
L
0
¢
Qi
G
z
Q
m
c
z
w
U)
m
¢
LU
¢
z
10
w > = o ti
w N ti
�
> Z
o Q
Z Z C5 v
Z U)U) z d ¢
w z� O m Z_ e
�
D ¢ J CL
LL m = 0
Vim\
N�
1..V
O
U
w
w
J
H
O
>
I—
z
w
cn
0
Q
`
LL
O
Q
O
00
LU
w
T-
0
U
o
>
Z
Z
w
�
0
O
Cf)
zQ
Z
0
dj
�-
W
mz�cnmz
U
m
d
0
¢
C --z
w
2
LL
m
z
o
M
m
c
L
0
¢
Qi
G
z
Q
m
c
z
w
U)
m
¢
LU
¢
z
10
w > = o ti
w N ti
�
> Z
o Q
Z Z C5 v
Z U)U) z d ¢
w z� O m Z_ e
�
D ¢ J CL
LL m = 0
December 18, 2006
There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 3:20 p.m.
Date: 01 �2- Vo'-?
r
Chairman