boa_11 26 2007LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SUMMARY OF MINUTES
NOVEMBER 26, 2007
2:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being five (5) in number.
II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meetings
The Minutes of the October 29, 2007 meeting were
approved as mailed by unanimous vote.
III. Members Present
I►yi[a'i,11074 MI -11 1:7'iV
Andrew Francis, Chairman
Terry Burruss, Vice Chairman
James Van Dover
David Wilbourn
Robert Winchester
None
City Attorney Present: Debra Weldon
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
AGENDA
NOVEMBER 26, 2007
2:00 P.M.
I. OLD BUSINESS:
ITEM NO.: FILE NO.: LOCATION:
A. Z -6979-A 26 Edgehill Road
II. NEW BUSINESS:
1.
Z-8288
225 N. Shackleford Road
2.
Z-8289
NW Corner of W. 8th and Center Streets
3.
Z-8290
5800 N. Country Club Blvd.
4.
Z-8291
8914 Fourche Dam Pike
i
O
O
g
NZ
a
1lntlelHl
Did
aylzva�
CIO
W
o
z
��L2y
6
M z
W
U14
gra
Ntlrv830
"
W
NIVH
AVMOtl0a8
HOaV
o
A'plryp
/
0
i$3H0
ONIN lW
� 83H3a0 0
�
Q
�
\BISON
x
„o MONO00M g
3NId
e
1'`)
aV 30 NO1lIVYV 11005
W H
m S 9pAdtlS
Na d SIVJ
SS c
ALIS83A Nn
AlIS83AINn
w E3
SDNIadS a3A 0
3HOnH
u
IddISS IN
✓
Y
a
1001H0
�
e� al0na3S3a
Moab 8 NHor
Ap
3NNI3H
� oa0331N0VHS $
Oa 3I 0V S o z
n
z � SItlaVS F
o
Ri Yi HaVd A3No0a
N j
m
D Ill
Hpbpp��b16 3001a ANIIA
r ' 1
� J
�B \S
E
V
fpPB n
� a
3
NVAIIInS
1aVM31S
/
1
y�
S1101I1 A11 �Ji �Q OJQ:
JS
�
0
0
o
s
'A'Ap10J 31tlONa33
0
NOVEMBER 26, 2007
ITEM NO.: A
File No.: Z -6979-A
Owner: Lynn and Frances Mayhan
Applicant: Rodney Parham
Address: 26 Edgehill Road
Description: Lot 37, Edgehill Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-
254 to allow a building addition with a reduced side setback.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: 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 26 Edgehill Road is occupied by a one-story, brick
and frame, single-family residence. The house has no covered parking. It
appears that the garage on the east end of the house may have been
enclosed some years ago. The site has a circular drive and a parking pad
located east of the house. The house and parking pad are slightly below street
grade. The rear portion of the lot falls off steeply to Allsop Park, which is
located behind this site.
The applicant proposes to construct a two-story 30.33 foot by 30.2 foot
addition on the east end of the existing residence, as noted on the attached
site plan. The first floor of the addition will include a garage, with additional
NOVEMBER 26, 2007 (
ITEM NO.: A (CON'T.)
bedroom space on the second floor. The roofline will run north/south, with a
gable end facing Edgehill Road. The addition is proposed to be located 3.25
feet from the east side property line. The proposed addition will be located
almost 100 feet back from both the front and rear property lines.
On February 26, 2001 the Board of Adjustment approved a minor separation
variance for a one-story detached carport within this same area on the east
end of the residence. The approved accessory carport had a three (3) foot
side setback from the east property line. The carport was never constructed
and the approved variance expired after two (2) years.
Section 36-254(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side
setback of eight (8) feet for this R-2 zoned lot. Therefore, the applicant is
requesting a variance to allow the proposed addition with a 3.25 -foot side
setback from the east property line.
Staff does not support the application, as filed. Staff believes the proposed
structure, being two (2) stories in height, is located slightly too close to the east
side property line. Staff believes that with the type of building massing
proposed, the addition should be at least five (5) feet back from the side
property line. That setback, combined with appropriate measures to address
water run-off, would be the least that could be supported by staff. The nearest
structure on the adjacent property is located approximately 20 feet from the
side property line, providing adequate separation.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the requested variance, as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(OCTOBER 29, 2007)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant submitted a letter on October 25, 2007
requesting the application be deferred to the November 26, 2007 agenda. Staff
supported the deferral request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the November 26,
2007 agenda by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays.
D. Staff Update:
The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on November 9, 2007. The
revised site plan provides for the five (5) foot side (east) setback as requested
by staff. The applicant also provided a front elevation of the proposed
addition. The elevation shows the two-story addition with a relatively low roof
pitch. The overall roof height (to peak) is only 7.5 feet taller than the roof peak
NOVEMBER 26, 2007
ITEM NO.: A (CON'T.)
on the existing house. The applicant also notes that there will be no windows
on the east side second floor of the addition.
Staff is supportive of the revised application. Staff believes that the five (5)
foot side setback will provide adequate separation between the residential
structure to the east and the proposed addition. With guttering provided to
prevent water run-off onto the adjacent property and no windows on the
second floor east elevation, staff feels the proposed addition will have no
adverse impact on the adjacent property or the general area.
E. Revised Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the revised application, subject to the following
conditions:
1. The addition must be constructed to match the existing residence.
2. Guttering must be provided to prevent water run-off onto the adjacent
property to the east.
3. The second floor east elevation is to contain no windows/openings.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(NOVEMBER 26, 2007)
Frances Mayhan and Rodney Parham were present, representing the application.
There was one (1) objector present. Staff presented the application noting that the
applicant had made a revision. Staff explained that the proposed building addition
had been moved to provide a five (5) foot side yard setback. Staff recommended
approval of the revised application.
Greg Hopkins, representing the adjacent property owner Mrs. P.L.D. Watson, spoke
in opposition to the application. He expressed Ms. Watson's opposition to the
proposed side setback. He explained that a one-story (smaller) garage, or a garage
located on the rear of the house could be done. He stated that the applicant had no
hardship in requesting the variance.
Chairman Francis questioned the hardship issue. Ms. Mayhan explained that there
was a steep drop-off directly behind the house which makes an addition to the rear
of the structure very difficult. Mr. Parham noted that the area proposed for the
addition is a fill area, approximately eight (8) feet above the grade immediately
behind the house. There was a discussion related to the grade of the house in
relation to the proposed garage. Mr. Parham explained that the proposed addition
would be almost four (4) feet below the grade of the existing house.
The size of the proposed garage was discussed with relation to the proposed
setback. The separation between the proposed addition and the nearest structure to
the east was also discussed. The height of the proposed addition was also
discussed.
NOVEMBER 26, 2007 i
ITEM NO.: A (CON'T.)
James Van Dover asked about the shrubs the applicant proposed to install along the
east wall of the addition. Ms. Mayhan stated that she intended the shrubs to help
soften the look of the addition from the adjacent property.
Chairman Francis explained that the slope of the lot justified hardship for placement
of the addition, and noted the low profile of the addition.
There was a motion to approve the application as revised by the applicant and
recommended by staff. The vote was 4 ayes and 1 nay. The revised application
was approved.
November 9, 2007
City of Little Rock
Board of Adjustment
Re: Zoning Variance Application
To whom it may concern:
A
-6175 -
We are proposing an addition to our home at 26 Edgehill Road in the Heights area of
Little Rock. The addition will include a two car Garage on the lower level with a Stair to
both levels and two Bedrooms and a Bath on the upper level. Our existing residence is
linear in design and the addition will be added to the left side of our home where we
currently have a parking area. The addition will extend our home 28'-7" in width and
will leave 5'-0" to the property line. The depth will match our current home.
The reason we are adding this addition is that we currently do not have a Garage or
Carport to park under to protect our car and to protect us in inclement weather and hot
weather in the summer and cold weather in the winter. We applied for a variance back in
2001 for a detached Garage and were successful in our attempt but after reflection
decided we needed the personal security of parking in a Garage and being able to enter
our home in a secure connection. The location of that addition in 2001 is in the exact
location of our proposed addition we are applying for today.
Our existing site at 26 Edgehill slopes down from our street under our house to the back
of our property. Our current home is a one level structure and the existing grade is 44"
below the finish floor where our proposed addition is planned. We decided to keep the
proposed addition at grade level so as to keep the addition in scale with our current home.
We are adding Bedrooms and Baths above the Garage for children and grandchildren
when they visit. We have purposely not added windows to the side of the Bedrooms so
they do not look into our neighbor's property on the left side. Our neighbor's property on
the left side has a row of shrubs with a drive and a detached building so the main
structure of their house is away from our proposed addition. We would also like the
Board to know that we will create and maintain a new row of shrubs between our
proposed addition and our property line.
We appreciate the Board's consideration of our application and we are open to any of
your questions regarding this matter.
Respectfully yours,
Lynn Mayhan Frances Mayhan
HoPKINs LAW Fmm
A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1000 WEST SECOND STREET
LITTLE ROCK, ARxANSAS 72205
TELEPHONE (SOI) 37S-1517
FACSIMILE (SOI) 375-0231 (24 HOURS)
HOMEPAGE WWW.HOPKINSLAWFIRM.COM
EMAIL HOPKINSLAWOHOPKINSLAWFIRM.COM
October 25, 2007
VIA HAND DELIVERY
Mr. Dana Carney
Little Rock Planning & Development
Board of Adjustment
723 West Markham
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
714
Re: Objection to Variance Request Submitted in Connection with 26 Edgehill
Road. Little Rock, Arkansas
Dear Mr. Carney:
. This firm represents Mrs. P. L. D. Watson, owner of real property located at 30 Edgehill
Road, Little Rock, Arkansas, also known as Lot 39, Edgehill Addition to the City of Little Rock.
Mrs. Watson's property adjoins 26 Edgehill Road, also known as Lot 37, Edgehill Addition to the
City of Little Rock. It has come to our attention that the present owners of Lot 37 have submitted
a formal request to the City of Little Rock for a variance from the applicable City Ordinance (i.e.,
Little Rock City Code § 36-254) for the purpose of construction of an addition to the existing
residence. For reasons set forth herein, Mrs. Watson objects to this request for variance and
urges that it be denied. Please make this objection part of the City's official record in connection
with the variance request.
The stated purpose for the variance is to allow the owners of Lot 37 to build an addition to
the existing residential structure which will house additional heated and cooled living space and will
include a two car garage. Section 36-254 of the Little Rock Code governs, and its provisions are
very clear that any structure must be a minimum of the lesser or ten percent (10%) of the lot width
or eight feet from the side lot line. Based the size of Lot 37, the eight -foot side setback applies.
Given the character of the neighborhood, the required eight -foot setback should be preserved,
especially since the proposed addition is a two-story structure. To allow such a drastic deviation of
the required setback is inconsistent with the other existing structures in the neighborhood and could
have an adverse impact on the aesthetics and values in the neighborhood.
Mr. Dana Carney
Little Rock Planning & Development
October 25, 2007
Page Two
A denial of the variance request will not preclude the owners of Lot 37 from accomplishing
their desired result. Rather, the owners can build this structure in accordance with the required
setback in at least two ways: Either the proposed addition could be downsized to fit the available
space in the side yard consistent with the eight -foot setback, or the structure could be offset slightly
and positioned behind the main structure, affording more room for an expanded addition.
Please note that we intend to be present at Monday's meeting to object to the variance
request. If you need additional information prior to that time, please do not hesitate to contact this
office. Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Yours very truly,
G gory M. ins
GMH: awh
NOVEMBER 26, 2007
ITEM NO.: 1
File No.: Z-8288
Owner: Mills 430 Central
Applicant: Jasper S. Burton, Jr., Cuerden Sign Co.
Address: 225 N. Shackleford Road
Description: East side of N. Shackleford Road, approximately 500 feet north of
W. Markham Street
Zoned: C-3
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the sign provisions of Sections
36-555 and 36-557 to allow wall signs without direct street frontage and a second
projecting sign.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Vacant Restaurant Building
Proposed Use of Property: Restaurant
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B. Staff Analysis:
The C-3 zoned property at 225 N. Shackleford Road is occupied by a one-
story commercial building. The vacant building previously housed a restaurant
and is currently being remodeled for a new restaurant use. There is a
driveway from N. Shackleford Road at the southwest corner of the property
which serves as access. There is also a driveway at the southeast corner of
the property which connects to shared drives and parking for the commercial
development immediately to the east. There is paved parking on the south,
east and west sides of the restaurant building.
As part of the remodeling project, the applicant is proposing a new signage
plan for the new restaurant use. A wall sign and projecting sign are proposed
for the front (west elevation) of the building, as well as new sign for the existing
NOVEMBER 26, 2007 (
ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T.)
sign pole in front of the building along N. Shackleford Road. In addition, a wall
sign and projecting sign are proposed on the south elevation of the building,
and a wall sign is proposed on the east elevation. The wall sign on the south
elevation is proposed as channel letter construction, with an area of 54.28
square feet. The projecting sign will be neon lighted and 14 square feet in
size. The wall sign proposed for the east fapade will be 32 square feet in area
and painted on the wall surface.
Section 36-555(a)(2)c. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows only one (1)
projecting sign per occupancy (15 square feet maximum). Section 36-557(a)
requires all on -premise wall signs to face required street frontage. Therefore,
the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards to allow
a second projecting sign on the building and the wall signs on the east and
south facades without street frontage. The proposed signs on the front of the
building and the proposed ground -mounted sign conform to ordinance
standards.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff views the request as
reasonable. The existing driveway along the south boundary of this property
serves as one (1) in a series of service drives which serve not only this
property but the entire commercial development bounded by W. Markham
Street to the south, 1-430 to the east, N. Shackleford Road to the west and the
Immanuel Baptist Church development to the north. The signage proposed
will.aid in identifying the building to vehicular traffic along these service drives.
Similar type signage is found on out parcels within commercial developments
throughout the City. Staff believes the proposed signage without street
frontage and second projecting sign will have no adverse impact on the
adjacent properties or the general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested sign variances, subject to permits
being obtained for all signage.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(NOVEMBER 26, 2007)
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 at vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays.
October 5, 2007
Monty Moore
City of Little Rock
Department of Planning & Zoning
Little Rock AR
Re: Famous Dave's Barbeque, 225 North Shackleford Road, Little Rock AR
Sign Variance Request
Dear Mr. Moore,
Please consider this letter as our variance request for the Famous Dave's Barbeque Restaurant, which is to be
located at the old Tia's Tex Mex Restaurant building. We are asking to be allowed to install the standard
Famous Dave's signs on the south and east elevations of the building. I understand that the streets located on
the south and east sides of the property are not dedicated streets, therefore under strict interpretation of the sign
ordinance, we are not allowed these signs. We feel that strict interpretation of the ordinance would create an
undo hardship because there are several signs facing the shopping center to the east, and to not allow us the
same opportunity would create a discriminatory situation. For all practical purposes, the streets located on the
east and south sides of our property are no different than dedicated streets, they serve thousands of cars per day,
and are the primary access routes to the shopping center and it's out -parcels. As we discussed, when the owners
decided upon this location, the existing business has signs located on the south and east elevations, and fully
expected to be allowed to place new signs on the same elevations.
Attached please find the drawings of the proposed signs.
Thank you very much for your help in this matter.
NOVEMBER 26, 2007
ITEM NO.: 2
File No.: Z-8289
Owner: First United Methodist Church of Little Rock
Applicant: J. Scott Schallhorn
Address: Northwest Corner of W. 81h and Center Streets
Description: Lot 7, Block 92, Original City of Little Rock
Zoned: UU
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-
342.1 to allow a ground -mounted sign in the UU (Urban Use) District.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Church Parking Lot
Proposed Use of Property: Church Parking Lot
STAFF REPORT
No Comments.
B. Staff Analysis:
The UU zoned property at the northwest corner of W. 8th and Center Streets is
occupied by a paved parking lot. The parking lot is accessed by way of
driveways from Center Street. The parking lot contains perimeter and interior
trees, with a large tree within a non -paved area at the southeast corner of the
property. The parking lot serves the First United Methodist Church located to
the east across Center Street and the CDC day care center to the west.
The church proposes to install a monument -type, ground -mounted sign at the
southeast corner of the property (northwest corner of intersection), as noted on
the attached graphics. The proposed sign will consist of two (2) 16.5 inch brick
columns, with an LED Display sign between the columns. The sign will have
an overall width of 11 feet (including columns) and height of six (6) feet. The
applicant notes that the sign will allow the church to "advertise and raise
NOVEMBER 26, 2007 (
ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.
awareness of its outreach programs, worship opportunities and other
ministries."
Section 36-342.1(c)(11) of the City's Zoning Ordinance prohibits ground -
mounted signs in the UU (urban use) zoning district. Therefore, the applicant
is requesting a variance to allow the proposed sign.
Staff is supportive of the variance request. The intent of the UU Zoning is for
the development of a pedestrian -friendly district, with buildings placed on front
building lines and signage located on the building fagade (wall or awning -
mounted). Given the fact that this property is located further south of the more
intense pedestrian use area of downtown, staff feels that the requested
variance is reasonable. The proposed sign will be of similar size and type to
other signs (pre -dating the UU regulations) in this general area, and should
have no adverse impact on the surrounding properties. Additionally, the sign
is at the maximum height (6 feet) and maximum area (64 square feet) typically
allowed in office zoning.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested sign variance, subject to the
following conditions:
1. The sign must be located at least five (5) feet back from any property
line.
2. The sign must not exceed the height and area as proposed.
3. A sign permit must be obtained.
4. The LED sign must be operated within the City's guidelines for
electronic message signs.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (NOVEMBER 26, 2007)
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 at vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays.
FIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH
723 CENTER STREET
LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201
501-372-2256
October 18, 2007 _
Board of Adjustment
Department of Planning and Development
City of Little Rock
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
Re: Application for Zoning Variance for Placement of Monument Sign
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Enclosed is the Application for Zoning Variance (Signs) and supporting materials filed
by First United Methodist Church. FUMC desires to construct and operate a ground mounted
sign on a lot owned by the church across 8th Street from its main building. The sign would be
placed on the northwest corner of the 8th and Center Street intersection. That lot is primarily
occupied by a parking lot.
The sign will permit FUMC to advertise and raise awareness of its outreach programs,
worship opportunities and other ministries. No other location on property owned by FUMC is
suitable for placement of a similar sign. Both Center and 8th Streets are one-way, so a sign
placed on the church building would not be visible from one street or the other. Moreover, the
church building is a historic structure and on the National Register of Historic Places. It would
be inappropriate to attach to the building a sign suitable to perform the needed task.
The proposed sign location and the sightlines to it should not adversely impact any
neighboring property. South across 8th Street is a half -block large asphalt parking lot. The
church building is east across Center Street. On the southeast corner of the intersection is a
commercial building. No residences would be affected by the sign as planned.
FUMC respectfully requests that the requested zoning variance be granted to permit the
installation of the sign. Please contact Don Woods, Church Administrator, or me with any
questions.
Yours very truly,
5;Y�sd_a"V,_�
J. Scott Schallhorn
for First United Methodist Church
cc: Mr. Don S. Woods (w/encl)
NOVEMBER 26, 2007
ITEM NO.: 3
File No.: Z-8290
Owner: Andrew and Jennifer Faulkner
Applicant: Andrew Faulkner
Address: 5800 N. Country Club Blvd.
Description: Lot 51, Forest Heights Place Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-
254 to allow a building addition with reduced side and rear setbacks.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
Steps should be taken to prevent water run-off onto adjacent properties.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 5800 N. Country Club Blvd. is occupied by a one-
story frame single family residence. The property is located at the northwest
corner of N. Country Club Blvd. and N. Pierce Street. There is a two -car wide
drive from N. Pierce Street, with parking for two (2) vehicles. The lot contains
a 25 foot front platted building line along N. Country Club and a 7.5 foot side
platted building line along the N. Pierce Street frontage. The rear yard is
enclosed with a wood privacy fence.
The applicant is proposing to construct a one-story addition on the rear (north
end) of the existing house, as noted on the attached site plan. The addition
will consist of a master bedroom and bath, and a garage accessed from N.
Pierce Street. The proposed addition will maintain the same west side setback
as the existing house (2.6 to 3 feet). The addition will be located 8.2 feet from
NOVEMBER 26, 2007
ITEM NO.: 3 (CO
the rear (north) property line and 7.5 feet from the east side property line along
N. Pierce Street.
Section 36-254(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side
setback of six (6) feet for this R-2 zoned lot. Section 36-254(d)(3) requires a
minimum rear setback of 25 feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting
variances from these ordinance standards to allow the building addition with
reduced side (2.6 to 3 feet) and rear (8.2 feet) setbacks.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. The proposed overall size of
the single family residence, including lot area coverage, is not out of character
with other structures in this immediate area. There are a number of other
structures in this area with similar setbacks and lot coverage. The applicant is
also proposing a courtyard area along the east side of the house, to serve as
usable outdoor space. This area will help compensate for the reduced rear
yard area as proposed. Staff support is based, in part, on this courtyard area
being maintained and never enclosed or roofed. Staff believes the proposed
addition with reduced setbacks will have no adverse impact on the adjacent
properties or the general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested setback variances, subject to the
following conditions:
1. The addition must be constructed to match the existing residence.
2. Guttering must be provided to prevent water run-off onto adjacent
properties.
3. The courtyard area must remain unenclosed and not roofed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (NOVEMBER 26, 2007)
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 at vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays.
Andrew B. Faulkner
5800 N. Country Club Blvd.
Little Rock, Arkansas 72207
(501) 766-0760
October 25, 2007
Little Rock Board of Adjustment
723 West Markham Street, 1St Floor
Little Rock, AR 72201-1334
Re: Application for Zoning Variance
Dear Board Members:
Please let this letter serve as my cover letter detailing my proposal and providing you
with my justifications and reasons for requesting a variance from the requirements of the Zoning
Ordinances.
I am requesting a variance to the area provisions of Section 36-254 of the Little Rock
Code of Ordinances to permit an addition with reduced rear setback. More specifically, my
personal residence sits on a lot that is zoned R-2. I have been informed that the rear setback on a
lot zoned R-2 is 25 feet. I want to construct an addition to the back of my existing house that
would consist of a master bedroom and bath. My lot is abnormally small for the area and 1
would be unable to construct my addition without a variance to the rear setback requirements. In
addition, the elevations in the rear portion of my lot are abnormal. I have excessive sloping in
the rear portion of my lot that only allows me to construct the addition in the location set forth in
the attached survey and architectural plan. I am also unable to construct the addition to the front
and/or side portions of my home because I sit on a corner lot. Therefore, I have no other choice
but to request a variance from the Board to my rear setback requirements.
I am requesting a 16.80 foot variance to the rear setback requirements of my lot. If
approved, my addition would still be 8.20 feet from the rear property line.
I believe that 8.20 feet is still a reasonable amount of rear setback space. This is
especially considering the neighborhood and what has been approved in the past. I have scene
numerous houses in my area much closer to the rear setback than 8.20 feet.
I respectfully request the Board approve my request and grant me a 16.80 foot variance to
the rear setback requirements of my lot. Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
^AA,n,di,,w.Faulkner
NOVEMBER 26, 2007
ITEM NO.: 4
File No.: Z-8291
Owner: Lexicon
Applicant: Jim Osborne
Address: 8914 Fourche Dam Pike
Description: West side of Fourche Dam Pike, 250 feet north of Sloane Drive
Zoned: 1-3
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the parking provisions of Section
36-502 to allow a building addition with reduced on-site parking
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Industrial/Manufacturing
Proposed Use of Property: Industrial/Manufacturing
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B. Staff Analysis:
The 1-3 zoned property located at 8914 Fourche Dam Pike is occupied by a
37,000 square foot metal industrial building which is used for heavy metal
fabrication. There is a driveway from Fourche Dam Pike which accesses a
paved parking lot (47 spaces) on the east side (front) of the building. There is
a gravel area along the north side of the building (north half of property) used
for storage of metals. The property is enclosed with chain-link security
fencing.
The applicant proposes to construct an 82,000 square foot addition to the
north and west sides of the existing building, as noted on the attached site
plan. The addition will be approximately 60 feet in height for the expansion of
the large and heavy metal plate manufacturing. The proposed addition
conforms to the height and area requirements of the ordinance, however, the
applicant is proposing no additional off-street parking for the facility.
NOVEMBER 26, 2007 (
ITEM NO.: 4 (CON'T.)
The proposed 119,000 square foot facility (existing and proposed) requires
198 off-street parking spaces (1 space/600 square feet of gross floor area),
according to Section 36-502(b)(4)a. of the City's Zoning Ordinance. The
applicant has noted that Lexicon, the property owner, also owns the facility
immediately to the south, which includes a 35,000 square foot building and
165 parking spaces. The applicant has also noted that there will be
approximately 75 total employees for both facilities combined, thus the request
to vary from the minimum ordinance parking requirements. Therefore, the
applicant is requesting a variance from the above noted parking requirement to
construct no additional parking spaces for the proposed addition.
Staff is supportive of the requested parking variance. Staff views the request
as reasonable, based on the type of industrial operation with a minimal number
of employees. As noted above, there are 212 parking spaces between this
property and the one immediately to the south, with only approximately 75
employees between the two (2) facilities. As long as both facilities share the
same ownership, staff believes the proposed shared parking plan is the best
option. If one (1) of the two (2) facilities is ever sold to a separate owner, the
issue of parking must be revisited, with the required parking provided within
the north half of the property, or additional Board of Adjustment review. Staff
feels the proposed parking variance will have no adverse impact on the
adjacent properties or the general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested parking variance, subject to the
following conditions:
1. The parking variance is for Lexicon, the current property owner, only.
2. If this property or the property immediately to the south ever has
separate ownership, the required parking must be provided or
additional Board of Adjustment review will be required.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(NOVEMBER 26, 2007)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
item and a recommendation of approval.
Staff added the following conditions to its recommendation:
3. Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by
staff by at vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays.
October 25, 2007
Department of Planning and Development
723 West Markham
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Reference: Zoning Variance.
We are requesting a variance in the number and location of parking spaces.
The existing building and proposed addition will be used as a large and heavy plate
manufacturing facility. This requires a large and tall building for fabrication
of these pieces. The building on Sloane Drive is a light gauge duct facility. In both
buildings there will be approximately 75 employees.
1
Applicant:
w
0
00
i�
c
�11
W
Q
z
November 26, 2007
There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 2:22 p.m.
Date:
Chairman