Loading...
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