Loading...
boa_04 25 2005LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY OF MINUTES APRIL 25, 2005 2:00 P.M. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being five (5) in number. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting The Minutes of the March 28, 2005 meeting were approved as mailed by unanimous vote. III. Members Present: Andrew Francis, Chairman Terry Burruss, Vice Chairman Fletcher Hanson Debra Harris David Wilbourn Members Absent: None City Attorney Present: Debra Weldon LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA APRIL 25, 2005 2:00 P.M. I. OLD BUSINESS: A. Z-7809 3010 Painted Valley Drive NEW BUSINESS: 1. Z -4534-A 5315 West 12th Street 2. Z-4701 -A 11121 North Rodney Parham Road 3. Z -6514-C 2 Freeway Drive 4. Z -7079-D 8921 Fourche Dam Pike 5. Z -7369-A Belle Meadow Lane 6. Z-7825 7001 Kingwood Road 7. Z-7826 Various Locations (Vehicular Sign) 8. Z-7827 1620 North Jackson Street 9. Z-7828 505 North Woodrow Street 10. Z-7829 2800 Longcoy Street 11. Z-7830 5012 N. Country Club Blvd. 12. Z-7831 3810 Compton Street 13. Z-7832 501 Brookside Drive 14. Z-7833 623 North Beechwood Street LO Q • •� 3NId a312Vaa C I \ V nnvelHl ,� LO W N W � vd�W J ' 0 n 'r L.J. o Q Nvw839 ■ n� o Nltlw AVMatloae HOatl NO=NO 153H0 — a3H3a0 00 = o �MOa000fA � 3NId 33 _ 1 � w o 3NId�S H,7yb a 8VO N0111wV 11005 s �Niyys 7 a�$ (fl NaVd altl3 a � YJ 2 AlISa3nINn N Adlsd hINn SONIadS a3A30 �„' R smm IddISS IN d M s 1001HO Q y � M08dV8 NHor �. arona3s3a 3 ti pQ h 3NN13H _ o Qa 31 V S Oa0331NJVHS SIOaVS F p� wVHaVd A3NO06 — CV s — �� c J NV 08 — y0 s11wn A110 x 30018 AM �w H0bp0SjbfS o v � 0 $ w vo � a v s Nvn111ns laVM31S Hs�bh h �Q� S11WIl A11o2=� _d O s O1 HJ 31VONa33 T( O W APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: A File No.: Z-7809 Owner: Robert Tanner Applicant: Mark Thomas Meador Address: 3010 Painted Valley Drive Description: Lot 7, Block 30, Pleasant Valley Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254 and the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a porte-cochere addition with a reduced front setback and which crosses a platted building line, and 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: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 3010 Painted Valley Drive is occupied by a one- story brick and frame single family residence. There is a circular drive from Painted Valley Drive which serves as access. The driveway extends along the south side of the residence to an attached carport at the southwest corner of the structure. The single family lot has a 25 foot front platted building line. The applicant proposes to make two (2) additions to the single family structure. The first addition is a proposed 20 foot by 20 foot porte-cochere addition to the front of the house, over a portion of the circular driveway. The proposed porte- cochere will extend across the front platted building line by approximately 15 feet, resulting in a 10 foot front setback. The second proposed addition is a 21 foot by 43 foot addition at the southwest corner of the structure. This addition will include a garage for boat and trailer APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: A (CON'T. storage and an exercise/pool room next to an existing swimming pool in the rear yard. This addition will be located six (6) to eight (8) feet from the side (south) property line and 10 feet from the rear (west) property line. There is a 10 foot wide utility easement along the rear property line. The addition is not proposed to extend into the easement. Section 36-254(d)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front setback of 25 feet for R-2 zoned property. Section 36-254(d)(3) also requires a minimum rear yard setback of 25 feet. Section 36-254(d)(2) requires minimum side setbacks of eight (8) feet for this 100 foot wide lot. In addition, Section 31-12( c) of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that encroachments across platted building lines be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards to allow the proposed porte-cochere addition with a reduced front setback and which crosses the front platted building line, and the proposed building addition at the southwest corner of the house with reduced side and rear setbacks. Staff does not support the variances, as requested. Staff does not oppose the proposed addition at the southwest corner of the residence, as the neighborhood contains large residential structures on lots which are above average in size. Staff feels that this addition will not be out of character with the neighborhood. Staff would require that the applicant obtain a letter of approval from the neighborhood property owners' association for the proposed addition. Staff does oppose the proposed porte-cochere addition. Staff feels this proposed addition will not be compatible with the neighborhood. On inspection of the general area, staff observed no other similar front encroachments in the neighborhood. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the platted front building line for the proposed porte-cochere addition. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the setback and building line variances, as requested. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (MARCH 28, 2005) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested to defer the application to the April 25, 2005 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. 4 APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: A (CON'T.) The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the April 25, 2005 Agenda by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 25, 2005) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested to defer the application to the May 23, 2005 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the May 23, 2005 Agenda by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. 3 ! __ I—`rl I_II!Ilfill ►!�I III! .I_ i_I_III� I�Ili�l!(IIII I111.41L ..�I •. .(;_.� II �I±11±11,1 !II(�-�—_1:_._.±-_..�_..!►�'Il�liII±11!11!' IIII�I !..1.=�1i!!I!ili!i1�1X11 II I I.a I�Ii�l�lII !! i►�;Ii, ± { C cCN4- UOU --kxelt�CMZ 1I ! 'pr Ole *2m ,IIIII��I�III!Il'Ili' il!Ill!II!!!! 1!jl±I!i. II!�IIIIlI�II!iljl!!I±- l�iI�11�1.!.11�Ilillll! ! 1 I!�IIIIII!II11 1-!! I!I!!Illill!!!I!!�11- 4 III-!I!ill�ii�ji±l;!II �Ij±±jl!�Illl�iil:!!I II!II!�il�l!Ill�i�Ii1 APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 1 File No.: Z -4534-A Owner: Joe Hargrove Applicant: Gary Dean Address: 5315 West 12th Street Description: Lots 1-6, Block 1, Kanis Addition Zoned: C-3 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-301 to allow a building addition with a reduced side setback. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Medical Clinic Proposed Use of Property: Medical Clinic STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: 1. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way. B. Landscape and Buffer Issues: An upgrade in landscaping based upon the building expansion proposed (29%) will be required. There is considerable flexibility with this requirement, especially since the site is located within the designated mature area of the city. This upgrade may consist of additional plantings or green space or both. This is a requirement of the landscape ordinance. A variance from this ordinance requires City Beautiful Commission approval. C. Staff Analysis: The C-3 zoned property at 5315 West 12th Street is occupied by a one- story office/clinic building. There is paved parking on the south and west APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T.) sides of the building. Access to the parking is by way of driveways from Tyler and Harrison Streets. The building is occupied by the medical clinic of Dr. Joe Hargrove. The applicant is proposing to construct a 32 foot by 45 foot addition at the east end of the existing medical clinic building, as noted on the attached site plan. The addition is proposed primarily to house new CAT Scan equipment. The proposed addition will be located 25 feet from the front (north) property line, 18.8 feet from the side (east) property line and over 60 feet from the rear (south) property line. The addition will be one (1) story in height and will be constructed to match the existing clinic building. Section 36-301(e)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum street side setback of 25 feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance from this ordinance standard. Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff feels that the request is very minor in nature. The nearest single family structure is located across S. Harrison Street to the east. This property is also zoned C-3 and will likely be redeveloped as commercial in the future. There is an opaque wood fence along the south property line of the clinic property, which will screen the majority of the proposed addition from the property to the south. Therefore, staff feels that the proposed addition will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. As noted in paragraph B. of this report, a small landscaping upgrade will be required with the building addition. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested setback variance, subject to compliance with the Public Works and Landscape/Buffer requirements as noted in paragraphs A and B of the staff report. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 25, 2005) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. 2 APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 2 File No.: Z-4701 -A Owner: The Market Place Partnership Applicant: William Peterson Address: 11121 North Rodney Parham Road Description: Southeast and Southwest corners of Rodney Parham Road and Market Street. Zoned: C-3 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the sign provisions of Sections 36-543 and 36-557 to allow the permanent use of banner signs. 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 Market Place Partnership, LLC is requesting variances to allow for the year-round use of banner signs at 11121 N. Rodney Parham Road. The shopping center is located along the east and west sides of Market Street at Rodney Parham Road. Banner signs were recently placed on light poles within the parking lots for the two (2) commercial buildings. When the City's enforcement staff became aware of the signs, the property owner was informed that Board of Adjustment variance requests were in order. There are a total of six (6) light poles within the shopping center (3 on each side of Market Street) which contain the banner signs. There are two (2) banner signs on each pole. Each banner sign is 30 inches by APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.) 60 inches in size and contains the wording "Market" and "Place", as noted on the attached sketches. The attached site plan shows the approximate locations of the light poles within the two (2) parking lots. Section 36-543(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance prohibits the use of banner sign except as allowed in Section 36-557 for special events. Section 36-557(d) limits the placement of banner signs to four (4) events in a calendar year, with a limit of six (6) weeks per event, for a total of 24 weeks. The applicant is requesting that the banners be allowed to remain up on a year-round basis. Staff supports the variance request to allow the year-round display of banner signs on the six (6) light poles as requested. Staff feels that the request is reasonable and should have no adverse impact on the general area of the shopping center. Staff does recommend that the banner signs continue to be for the identification of the overall shopping center only. The banners must not advertise an individual business, sale/promotion, specific merchandise or product line. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the variances to allow year-round use of banner signs at 11121 N. Rodney Parham Road, subject to the following conditions: 1. The banner signs are for the identification of the shopping center development only. 2. There is to be no wording on the banner signs which advertise a specific business, sale/promotion, specific merchandise or product line. 3. The banner signs are to be attached only to the light poles within the shopping center development, with limitation of the size and number of signs as described in the "Staff Analysis." 4. Any banner sign that becomes torn or damaged must be promptly removed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 25, 2005) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. 1► APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.) The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. K, March 25, 2005 r 1' --Z z2 4--7o l - Little Rock Department of Planning and Development Board of Adjusters/Mr. Monty Moore 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: Request for variance approval Dear Ladies & Gentlemen: I am the property manager for the Marketplace Shopping Center which is located on 11121 North Rodney Parham Road. I was recently informed that I was in violation of the city code of enforcement regarding the placement of six (6) sets of two (2) banners which are on pole lights and located in the parking lot of the property. Since I have been managing the center for almost four years, this is the first time that I was informed of the violation. I offer my sincerest apology. With that said, please accept my request for continuing to keep the banners on the pole lights. We have over thirty tenants in the shopping center who wish to maintain the banners and feel that the banners add an identity and enhance the landscaping of the shopping center. Enclosed please find information regarding the size, design, amount of and location of the sign which will only identify the shopping center. Thanks for your time and consideration. Sin e William Peterson Property Manager, Market Place Shopping Center VOGEL REALTY COMPANY ■ 11219 Financial Centre Parkway, Financial Park Place, Suite 300 ■ Little Rock, AR 72211 501-225-6018 ■ FAX 501-225-6308 APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 3 File No.: Owner: Applicant: Address: Description Zoned: Z -6514-C Lynn Pettus Terry Burruss 2 Freeway Drive North corner of Freeway Drive and Rodney Parham Road C-3 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-543 to allow a roof sign Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Office/Showroom-Warehouse Proposed Use of Property: Office/Showroom-Warehouse STAFF REPORT A. Staff Note: Staff determined that the sign in question should be classified as a wall sign instead of a roof sign. This is based on the fact that the sign is located on a vertical wall/architectural feature of the building, and not simply a sign placed on the building which extends above the roof line. Therefore, no variance is needed and staff recommends withdrawal of this application. Staff has submitted the required paperwork to refund the applicant's filing fee. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 25, 2005) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested this item be withdrawn. Staff supported the withdrawal request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and withdrawn by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 recusal (Burruss). TERRY BURRUSS, ARCHITECTS 1202 S. MAIN, SUITE 230 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72202 501-376-3676 FAX 376-3766 design, planning and interiors �Z- t' March 25, 2005 Mr. Monte Moore Zoning and Code Enforcement Administrator Department of Planning & Development City of Little Rock 723 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Pettus Office Supply #2 Freeway Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72204 AIE # 0520 Dear Mr. Moore: Attached please find 3 copies of the Site Plan on the above referenced project. We have also attached a copy of the building elevations and a partial elevation drawing depicting the existing sign in question. It is our understanding that there is issue concerning whether the sign is a wall sign (which would be allowed) or a roof mounted sign (which would require a variance). It is our architectural opinion that this sign is a wall mounted sign as the sign back- ground element is a part of the wall. We appreciate your consideration on this request. If there are any questions or additional information is needed, please call. Yours very truly, TerryG tBurrujs2s, AIA APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 4 File No.: Z -7079-D Owner: Crackerbox, Ll -c. Applicant: Jim Hill Address: 8921 Fourche Dam Pike Description: Part of Tract C, Area 203, Little Rock Port Authority Zoned: C-3 Variance Requested: A time extension is requested for a previously approved variance to allow a gravel parking area. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Commercial Proposed Use of Property: Commercial STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: 1. Comment from the original approval: Public Works supports a variance for the additional driveway, provided the new parking lot is paved within one year of construction. The width of driveway must not exceed 36 feet. B. Landscape and Buffer Issues: At such time that the gravel area is to be paved, then landscape and buffering requirements must be satisfied prior to obtaining a construction permit. C. Staff Analysis: The C-3 zoned property at 8921 Fourche Dam Pike is occupied by a convenience store with gas and diesel pumps which was recently constructed. There are access drives from Lindsey Road and Fourche Dam Pike which serve as access to the site. APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 4 (CON'T.) On September 30, 2002, the Board of Adjustment granted a variance from Section 36-508 to allow overflow, gravel, truck parking on the 1-2 zoned strip (100 feet wide) immediately east of the convenience store site. The gravel parking variance was approved with the following conditions: No direct access to Lindsey Road from the gravel parking area will be allowed. All access must be through the convenience store development. 2. The front twenty-one (21) feet along Lindsey Road must be reserved for the street buffer landscaping area. This area will be required to be irrigated. 3. If, in staff's opinion, the overflow, gravel, truck parking area becomes a problem (dust, maintenance, etc.) the issue will be brought back to the Board of Adjustment for further consideration, and possible paving requirement. On April 28, 2003, the Board of Adjustment amended the previously approved variance to remove condition #1, and allow a concrete driveway from Lindsey Road. The amendment was approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. The driveway width must not exceed 36 feet. 2. The overflow truck parking area must be paved within 12 months after the driveway construction is completed. 3. Compliance with the landscape comment as noted above in paragraph B. of this report. 4. Compliance with previous conditions (#2 and #3) as noted above. As of this date, the overflow gravel truck parking has not been constructed. The applicant notes in the attached letter that inclement weather has had their crews behind on other construction projects and they have not been able to get to this project yet. The applicant is requesting a 12 month extension to construct the overflow, gravel truck parking lot, as the previous approval expires on April 28, 2005. Staff supports the time extension as requested. Staff feels that the project represents an acceptable solution to internal traffic flow problems which have been experienced on the property. Letters of approval from the Little Rock Port Authority (gravel parking area and driveway location) were 2 APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 4 (CON'T.) received with the previous approvals. The time extension of the previously approved variance should have no adverse impact on the adjacent property or the general area. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the 12 month time extension for the previously approved parking variance, subject to the following conditions: 1. The driveway width must not exceed 36 feet. 2. The overflow truck parking area must be paved within 12 months after the driveway construction is completed. 3. Compliance with the landscape comment as noted in paragraph B. of the staff report. 4. Compliance with previous conditions (#2 and #3) as noted in paragraph C. of the staff report (September 30, 2002 approval). BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 25, 2005) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. 3 Mr. Jim Hill Fred Hunt Company, Inc. 6815 Forbing Road, #21 Little Rock, AR 72209 Mr. Marty Moore City of Little Rock Department of Planning & Development 723 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201-1334 Re: Z -7079-D 8921 Fourche Dam Pike Part of Tract C Area 203 Little Rock, Port Authority Dear Monty, -9 4 -7o7q--,b April 28, 2003, Crackerbox LLC was granted a variance to construct an additional driveway to Lindsey Road and approximately one acre of parking for trucks. Inclement weather has us so far behind on other construction that we have not been able to start this project. I need a 12 month extension from April 28, 2004. Monty, if you need to talk to me, you can reach me anytime 1-501-690-4106. Please mail correspondence to me at PO Box 7655, Little Rock, AR 72217. Thanks for your help. mcerely, Jun Hill, Agent Crackerbox, L.L.C. APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 5 File No.: Z -7369-A Owner: Claire M. Bilheimer Applicant: Stephen Bilheimer Address: North end of Belle Meadow Lane Description: Lot 14A, Plantation Acres, Phase II Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a new house which crosses a front platted building line. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Undeveloped Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: Single Family Residential The R-2 zoned property at the north end of Belle Meadow Lane (Lot 14A, Plantation Acres Phase 11 Subdivision) is undeveloped and mostly wooded. Some site work has been done in preparation of new home construction. The property slopes upward to the north from Belle Meadow Lane and downward to the west. There is a drainage ditch which runs north/south through the lot, approximately 160 feet back from the front property line. The applicant proposes to construct an approximate 8,800 square foot (one story) single family residence on the lot, as shown on the attached site plan. The lot has a 100 foot platted front building line. The building line is actually located approximately 120 feet from the lot's east property line. APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 5 (CON'T.) The single family residential structure is proposed to be located almost entirely outside the platted building line, between the platted building line and the east property line. Section 31-12 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance requires that all encroachments across platted building lines be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. The proposed house is located 50 feet back from the east (front) property line and approximately 35 feet back from the southeast portion of the front property line along the cul-de-sac. The minimum required front yard setback, as typically required by the City's Zoning Ordinance, is 25 feet. Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff feels that the variance is reasonable given the uneven topography of the lot and the location of the rather wide drainage ditch. The placement of structure as shown on the proposed site plan should prove not to be out of character with the other homes along Belle Meadow Lane, given the fact that the lot is located at the end of the cul-de-sac. The applicant will need to submit a letter from the Plantation Acres Architectural Control Committee approving the proposed construction. On March 31, 2003, The Board of Adjustment approved a similar front building line encroachment for a single family residence which was never constructed on this lot. Staff feels that the proposed home construction will have no adverse impact on 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 front building line for the proposed single family 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. The adjusted (replatted) front building line should follow the outline of the proposed single family residence and not extend outside the building's footprint. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested building line variance, 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. A letter from the Plantation Acres Architectural Control Committee approving the proposed construction must be submitted to staff, prior to the staff approving the replat. 2 APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 5 (CON'T.) BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 25, 2005) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. 3 CLAIRE M. BILHEIMER 26 Plantation Acres' Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 March 9, 2005 Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: Lot 14A Plantation Acres Phase H, Pulaski County, Arkansas Dear Sirs: I request that my application for a variance to the building setback requirement for the above reference lot be granted as detailed in the survey submitted with this application. My predecessor in title had applied for such a variance and the Staff recommend and the Board approved a variance in matter Z-7369. My application is necessary because I intend to build a one story single family residence, whereas my predecessor in title intended to construct a two story structure. As a result, the footprint of my home will exceed the footprint as currently approved by the Board. The previous application pointed out the fact that there is a ravine on the property which impairs the placement of any residence without a variance from the current set back. Backfilling the ravine would require building on 12 feet of back fill and a redirection of the current storm drainage, neither of which is optimal. The property is located on a cul de sac where the impact of the variance will not be as noticeable, and my proposal will leave a 50 foot set back, which is substantial. The Architectural Control Committee of Plantation Acers has approved the building set back as set out in my application. A copy of their approval is submitted with this application. Your consideration of my application is appreciated. Sincerely, Claire M. Bilheimer APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 6 File No.: Z-7825 Owner: Owen Gazette Applicant: Owen Gazette Address: 7001 Kingwood Road Description: Lot 261, 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 an existing house with a reduced front setback and which crosses a front platted building line. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: 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 7001 Kingwood Road is occupied by a two- story (split level) brick single family residence. There is a two -car wide driveway from Kingwood Road which serves as access. The property slopes downward from front to back (north to south). There is a 20 foot front platted building line on this residential lot. The applicant recently inquired of staff the possibility of replatting this lot, to combine it with a portion of a lot to the south. Upon review of the survey of the property, staff noticed that the house has a 19.35 foot front setback, crossing the front platted building line by a few inches. Staff informed the applicant that variances associated with the building line APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 6 (CON'T.) encroachment would need to be addressed prior to a replat of the property. The applicant has noted that the house was constructed in 1952 and was mistakenly built across the front platted building line. Section 36-254(d)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front setback of 25 feet. Section 31-12(c ) of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that variances for encroachments across platted building lines be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards to recognize the existing building line encroachment. Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff feels that it is appropriate to have the Board of Adjustment officially acknowledge the existing encroachment prior to a replat of the property. Staff views the variances as very minor, having had no adverse impact on the general area in the past. 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 existing house. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested variances, associated with the existing house 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: (APRIL 25, 2005) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. F Dear Board Members, I am requesting a variance on the building set back line for the front of my property at 7001 Kingwood LR,AR 72207. The house was built over the set back line in 1952 when it was built. I was informed by Monte Moore the Zoning and Enforcement Administrator that this would have to be done in order to replat my lot with an adjoining piece of property that I acquired from the State of Arkansas through a Quiet Title Decree. The property appears to be 4 inches over the line. The road curves slightly in front of my house and this may be the reason it is over the line. S' relyV Owen Ga APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 7 lW-3i•[:��:wi Owner: Ballyhoo Delivery/Tony Cristee Applicant: Amy C. Markham Address: Various locations throughout the City of Little Rock (Mobile vehicular issue). Description: N/A Zoned: N/A Variance Requested: An administrative appeal is requested by Ballyhoo Delivery associated with a vehicular sign. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: N/A Proposed Use of Property: N/A STAFF REPORT A. Staff Analysis: On several occasions in late 2004 and January, 2005 the City's enforcement staff observed a box truck with signs on all sides of the cargo box which changed from one commercial message to another. It was staff's determination that this constituted a vehicular sign. The truck has an approximate one ton van classis, with a 14 foot box on the back and dual rear tires. Rentable signs are located on the panel over the cab, both side panels and the rear door panel. To staff's knowledge, all panels switch between two (2) commercial messages. On January 11, 2005 George Cristee, (Ballyhoo Delivery) the truck's owner, was issued a courtesy notice to cease the use of a vehicular sign in the City of Little Rock as per Section 36-543 of the City's Zoning Ordinance. On February 28, 2005 the vehicular sign was once again observed by City staff. At that time Mr. Cristee was issued a citation to appear in Little Rock Environmental Court. The case is set for trial on April 28, 2005. APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 7 (CON'T.) The applicant, George Cristee, is requesting an appeal (filed by his attorney, Amy C. Markham) of staff's determination that the vehicle represents a vehicular sign. In an attached letter submitted by Ms. Markham, the applicant contends that the primary use of the truck is to provide delivery services to clients and not that of advertising a business. Based on this, the applicant feels that there is no violation of Section 36-543. The applicant also refers to Section 36-530 which includes the definition of a vehicular sign. The Board of Adjustment is asked to determine if the vehicle in question represents a vehicular sign or is simply a delivery vehicle. It is staff's contention that the vehicle represents a vehicular sign, with the primary purpose being the sign advertising. Ms. Markham informed staff that after the citation was issued to Mr. Cristee, the truck was moved to another area of the state. Information is attached which was printed from the Ballyhoo Delivery web site. The information describes the delivery service as well as classifies the truck in question as a "Mobile Billboard". The definition of a vehicle sign as found in Section 36-530 and Section 36-543 are as follows" "Vehicular sign is any sign displayed on a parked or moving vehicle, where the primary purpose of the vehicle, is to advertise a product or business or to direct people to a business or activity. For purposes of this definition, vehicular signs shall not include business logos, identification, or advertising on vehicles primarily used for other business purposes." "Sec. 36-543. Prohibited signs and sales promotion devices. The following type signs are prohibited in all districts unless otherwise noted: (1) Abandoned signs. (2) Banners, pennants, festoons, searchlights, except as allowed in Section 36-557, subsection (d). (3) Signs imitating or resembling official traffic or government signs or signals. (4) Snipe signs or signs attached to trees, telephone poles, fences, public benches, or placed on public property or public right-of-way. r. APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 7 (CON'T.) (5) Vehicular signs. (6) Trailer or temporary signs that do not meet the standards for freestanding permanent signs. (7) Roof signs, or any sign that is not mounted on a vertical surface. (8) Rotating signs." BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 25, 2005) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested this item be withdrawn. Staff supported the withdrawal request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and withdrawn by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. 3 JAMES R. WALLACE, P.A. H.C. (JAY) MARTIN, P.A. DALE B. DUKE, P.A. AMY C. MARKHAM JOSH KING TAMES R. WALLACE & ASSOCIATES ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1ST FLOOR, CENTRE PLACE 212 CENTER STREET, SUITE 100 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 March 7, 2005 The Department of Planning and Development 723 W. Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: Ballyhoo, L.L.C. d/b/a Ballyhoo Delivery Dear Sir or Madam: (501)375-5545 Fax(501)374-9515 Enclosed, please find an Application for an Interpretive Hearing for the above - referenced company. The said company was recently issued a citation for violation of City Code §36-543 (5). We have reviewed the cited code section and agree that the Code states that vehicular signs are prohibited unless otherwise noted; however, according to §36-530, the definition of vehicular sign is a sign displayed on parked or moving vehicles where the primary purpose of the vehicle is to advertise a product or business . . .. Ballyhoo's primary purpose is to provide delivery services to its clients and not that of advertising a business; therefore, we feel that Ballyhoo does not violate Code §36-543 (5). We respectfully request an interpretive hearing before the Department of Planning and Development so as to inform the Department of Ballyhoo L.L.C.'s business purposes of delivering and transporting goods for his customers and to learn of the Department's interpretation of the City Code as it applies to Ballyhoo, L.L.C. Please find enclosed the $50.00 filing fee as required. If you are in need of any additional information, please feel free to contact me, and we will be happy to accommodate you. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Amy C. Markham ACM:mks Encl. Cc: Mr. Tony Cristee Ballyhoo Delivery P. O. Box 55705 Little Rock, Arkansas 72215 Ballyhoo Delivery it _kansas - Little Rock and central Arkansas Page 1 of 1 Northwest Arkansas Average Commute Time Increase of 17.6% -�4-- 7 -7S Z(, link to Arbitron stats industry news Now in NW Arkansas! Delivery with a Twist. Ballyhoo Delivery is a delivery company with a twist. The Ballyhoo Delivery truc with tri -vision signs on the sides, back and front of the truck box. These trucks h production since 2001. At last report, there are about 80 markets operating in the Ballyhoo Delivery is the first delivery company of this kind in the state of Arkans operate one of these unique vehicles. Thanks for checking us out! Home / Where is Ballyhoo / Why use Ballyhoo / Rates / Contact us 2005 Ballyhoo Delivery. All rights reserved. Web site design and hosting provided by: ArkansasWeb.com http://www.ballyhoodelivery.com/index.html 4/13/2005 Ballyhoo Delivery L( dons - Where we are. Page 1 of 1 Northwest Arkansas Average Commute Time Increase of 17.6% link to Arbitron stats industry news Now in NW Arkansas! V_ F Z - J Where is Ballyhoo ? Starting at 7 am the Ballyhoo Delivery truck is on the road. You will see the Ballyhoo delivery in Bentonville, Bella Vista, Rogers, Lowell, Springdale and Fayetteville. No two days are the Ballyhoo. Our truck, and your ad are being seen in the metro on the busiest streets during the times of the day. 7 am -7 pm Monday -Friday. Wherever we are, we're being seen. Home / Where is Ballyhoo / Why use Ballyhoo / Rates / Contact us 2005 Ballyhoo Delivery. All rights reserved. Web site design and hosting provided by: ArkansasWeb.com http://www.ballyhoodelivery.com/where—is—ballyhoo.htm 4/13/2005 Why use Ballyhoo 1�� very in Arkansas Page 1 of 1 Northwest Arkansas Average Commute Time Increase of 17.6% link to Arbitron stats industry news Now in NW Arkansas! Why use Ballyhoo Delivery ? When your business needs to pick something up or drop something off. Give us a call! Your of your employee's time is much too precious to spend at a stop light in traffic. Ballyhoo will p with prompt, convenient service. Home / Where is Ballyhoo / Why use Ballyhoo / Rates / Contact us 2005 Ballyhoo Delivery. All rights reserved. Web site design and hosting provided by: ArkansasWeb.com is http://www.ballyhoodelivery.com/why_use_ballyhoo.htm 4/13/2005 Tri -Message on a Tr(. _? Page 1 of 4 jt'3e . l l�� � y��;4i • A�'t • FREE E -Mail Message Boards Classifieds Advertise Product Showcase Join Now Article Archive Search The Buyer's Guide Industry News/Releases Events CATEGORIES 3-D Signs Tri -Message on a Truck ADA Architectural Awnings & Flexible Face Banners Business Development Computer Technology Digital Imaging Digital Signage Electric Estimating Finishing & Laminating Installation LED Displays LED Lighting Neon & Channel Letters Outdoor Articles Product Showcase Message Board Tips & Tricks Painted Signs Screen Printing Vinyl Signs Hot Shots Press Releases Tips & Tricks Industry Resources Books Event Calendar Associations What do you get when you mix motional advertising with mobile billboards? A hot advertising concept. Find out how to tap into a new revenue stream by combining tri -message signage and mobile advertising. By Jennifer LeClaire Tri -Message changed the face of the billboard industry. FULL STORY Mobile Tri -Message signage is changing the face of the billboard industry. Mobile billboard trucks are adding yet another dimension to the advertising mix. So what do you get when you cross three - message displays with mobile billboard trucks? You get a whole new realm of possibilities for advertisers. Implementing tri -message signs on trucks is a booming trend in the sign business as forward -thinking advertisers embrace new strategies for communicating their brands in a crowded media market. Companies like Mobile Master Trucks, Gotcha Mobile Media, Ads On a Roll and AdMobile are driving the trend with custom-built trucks and business models designed to escalate the adoption of three -message display trucks. "Mobile trucks displaying Tri -Action signs Outdoor Articles Industry Alert Hot Shots Photo Gallery Message Boards Visit Our Advertisers: • Alcan Composites • Advance Corp, Braille-TacTM Div. CADlink Cyrious Software Digital Art Solutions Gemini, Inc. Gerber Scientific Products . Graphtec (Western Graphtec) International Sign Assoc. JetUSA Mutoh America Oce North America Roland DGA http://www. signindustry.com/outdoor/articles/2005-02-14-TriMessageTrucks.php3 4/13/2005 Tri -Message on a Ti( Business are starting to boom," says Jaye Playter, Center former outdoor division manager for Retail Sign Jonesboro, Arkansas -based motion Shops graphics manufacturer Action Graphix. Advertising "We are going to see more and more of Information these trucks." Page 2 of 4 • SGIA Specialty Graphics Imaging Assoc • Spraylat- Sign Coatings • Time -O -Matic (Watchfire) • Wasatch Multiple Benefits Drive the Trend Several studies have been done to demonstrate the advertising benefits of both mobile outdoor media and motional displays. The Association of Mobile Advertising funded a study to gauge the efficacy of a campaign that advertised a fictitious brand of dog food in which three mobile trucks carried double -sided posters touting the Boomerang brand. Awareness increased by up to 32 percent among those surveyed and more than 70 percent associated the brand with mobile advertising. Likewise, Product Acceptance and Research, Inc. (PAR) conducted a study of motional ads for the beer industry. PAR examined sales without any point-of-purchase display, with a static display and with a motion display. The results showed that implementing the motion display increased sales by more than 100 percent. But proponents of mobile tri -message display trucks say the benefits of this new platform are multiplied exponentially because it combines the proven success of both concepts to take advertising to a new level, and often at lower prices. N Image Courtesy of Mobile Master Trucks Building Momentum These benefits are garnering growing interest for the tri -message display trucks across the country. Rick Johnson, president of Nashville -based Mobile Master Trucks, originally launched the concept several years ago after realizing that tri -message http://www.signindustry.comloutdoor/articles/2005-02-14-TriMessageTrucks.php3 4/13/2005 Tri -Message on a Tru_,? Page 3 of 4 *�- % (P -,v displays came in all shapes and sizes. After perfecting the vehicles and running a successful local operation, Johnson started franchising the concept under the name Gotcha Mobile Media in 2002. In 2004, Johnson sold the Gotcha franchising division to a California-based company, which has continued to grow the franchise organization nationally. Johnson continues to manufacture and sell tri -image billboard trucks to Gotcha Mobile Media as well as to independent entrepreneurs. "In the beginning, the challenge was educating businesses about the effectiveness of this form of advertising," says Johnson, whose company has been in the vehicle fabrication and advertising business for over 25 years. "Having your ad out on the road during rush hour traffic beats having your ad on a roadside billboard where 70 percent of those passing your ad are the same people every day. Now that the concept is more widely known, it's an easier sell to advertisers." The Concept Catches On Soon after Johnson started franchising his new concept, other companies started to spring up. Dave Buring started Memphis -based Ads On A Roll, LLC in 2002 with a different business model: direct sales to entrepreneurs. Buring once owned a traditional billboard company and built more than 100 tri -faced stationary billboards before he sold out to a nationwide firm and began exploring new avenues in the sign industry. While the notion of mobile advertising was appealing, Buris says he knew there had to be a better way to generate steady revenue from mobile advertising. "I couldn't see how we could consistently make money at a rate that was affordable to the customer - on a truck that had just two or three ads," says Buring. "But tri -action signs allow you more opportunity on the same truck." His challenge was similar to Johnson's: convincing people that the product will be effective. This concept is building momentum. Ads On A Roll has sold to entrepreneurs in Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Atlanta, Orlando, San Diego, and others. The entrepreneurs are responsible for selling their own ads. Bob Tarabella also started a mobile billboard company in Fairhope, Alabama, in 2002 "with the goal of establishing affiliates in markets across the nation and eventually provide advertising packages to regional and national advertisers." His company, AdMobile, sells specialty trucks directly to entrepreneurs, who are then assigned exclusive territories. "The economics of mobile billboard trucks from a business standpoint didn't http://www.signindustry.com/outdoor/articles/2005-02-14-TriMessageTrucks.php3 4/13/2005 Tri -Message on a Tk _ _,'? Page 4 of 4 �— 4- 7 (p1 -:Se -7 appeal to us because they can only handle one advertiser at a time, so you are at the whim of a few advertisers," says Tarabella. "When your contract is up with those advertisers, then you have to park the vehicle until you get a new contract. We combine the effectiveness of Tri -Message with the effectiveness of mobility. Put the two of them together and you get a platform that's new enough to get attention but not so far-fetched that it's seen as just a novelty." Moving On Up While the ads are undeniably eye-catching, proponents say safety issues are not any greater of a factor than with traditional tri -face signs or mobile advertising. The long-term outlook for this trendy advertising medium is bright, especially with stricter zoning ordinances for stationary billboards. "The growth potential for this concept is huge," says Buring. With more and more cities cutting down on billboards or creating stricter billboard ordinances, this type of product becomes more in demand. If presented properly, then this can be an incredible compliment to someone's marketing campaign." Johnson says "Our sales at Mobile Master Trucks show that the mobile trend is also being embraced by the traditional billboard companies as a complimentary marketing strategy, but our sales to independent entrepreneurs who have no affiliations as well as to the Gotcha franchises far outnumber our sales to billboard companies." Home Page I Message Boards I Classifieds I Product Showcase I Event Calendar I HELP Tips & Tricks I Industry Resources I Associations I Business Center I Retail Sign Shops I Site Map Books I Advertising Info I Jobs I Contributor's Guidelines I Privacy Policy I About Us I Contact Us Buyer's Guide Listings: Search I Add My Company I Edit My Company Learn about our advertising opportunities! This site is best viewed at 800 x 600 resolution. Signlndustry.com - 32 East Plant Street Winter Garden, FL 34787. *A phone: 407.656.5892 - fax: 407.656.0446 e-mail us here! If you'd like to link to our site, click here. © Copyright 1999-2005, All Rights Reserved. http://www.signindustry.comloutdoor/articles/2005-02-14-TriMessageTracks.php3 4/13/2005 APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 8 File No.: Z-7827 Owner: Janie Boyce Applicant: James Scroggins Address: 1620 North Jackson Street Description: Lot 76, Cliffewood 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: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 1620 N. Jackson Street is occupied by a one- story brick and frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide driveway from Jackson Street which serves as access. There is a one- story frame garage near the northwest corner of the property. The applicant proposes to remove the garage structure from the property and construct a two-story addition to the house, as noted on the attached site plan. The proposed addition will be slightly wider than the house, with a side setback (south side) of approximately 1.5 feet at the southwest corner of the addition. The addition will be set back approximately 12 to 14 feet from the rear (west) property line. The applicant has noted that the addition will include a master bedroom/bath APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 8 (CON'T.) and a two -car garage. The applicant has also noted that the addition will be constructed to match the existing home's architecture. Section 36-254(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side setback of five (5) feet for this 50 foot wide lot (as measured at the front building line). 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 proposed addition. Staff does not support the variances, as requested. Although staff has no problem with the requested rear setback variance, staff cannot support the requested side setback. Staff feels that a 1.5 foot side setback is not enough for a two-story structure. Staff would support a side setback variance if the applicant revised the site plan, making the proposed addition the same width as the house. This would result in a side setback of approximately four (4) feet at the addition's southwest corner. Staff feels that this would provide adequate separation between the structure and the abutting property to the south. If the applicant were willing to make the revision as noted above, staff would support the application with the following conditions: 1. The addition must be constructed to match the existing house. 2. Guttering must be provided (if necessary) to prevent water run-off onto the adjacent property to the south. 3. No accessory building(s) will be allowed to be constructed on the property. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested variances, as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 25, 2005) Staff informed the Board that the applicant revised the application to make the proposed addition the same width as the existing house, resulting in a 3.5 to 4 foot side setback at its southwest corner. Staff recommended approval of the revised application, subject to the following conditions: 1. The addition must be constructed to match the existing house. 2 APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 8 (CON'T.) 2. Guttering must be provided (if necessary) to prevent water run-off onto the adjacent property to the south. 3. No accessory building(s) will be allowed to be constructed on the property. The revised application was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. 3 James P. Scroggins, Assoc. AIA 10615 Hilaro Springs Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 (501) 570-9951 9l -j" e, Z - i March 11, 2005 Mr. Monte Moore Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: Residential Zoning Variance 1620 North Jackson Dear Mr. Moore: -79-2-"7 Enclosed please find an executed application for a residential zoning variance as well as a check for the filing fee. The application is submitted on behalf of the property owner and residents, Ms. Janie Boyce. I have been assisting Ms. Boyce in determining the best way to expand her unique historic home on a very narrow and long rectangular site to accommodate her growing needs. The attached survey shows a proposed 1250 sf addition to the rear or West side of the existing house. Due to the long and narrow configuration of the lot, the proposed design exceeds the side yard setback on the south side and the back yard setback to the west. The design and the sitting of the addition have been derived from both the programmatic and circulation needs in the house as well as the owner's desire to gain a master bedroom and bathroom, as well as a double car garage. Due to the narrow configuration of the site, and limited room for a new addition, the proposed addition is approximately 15 feet from the rear yard fence line and 4 feet +/- from the south property line. The addition will be constructed by matching the existing structure's style and architecture (i.e. brick, siding , windows, roofing). I hope you find the application satisfactory. Should you have any questions or need any additional information, please feel free to contact me or Ms. Boyce. Cor ially, oc. AIA James P. Scroggi APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 9 File No.: Z-7828 Owner: Graham Smith construction, LLC. Applicant: Graham Smith Address: 505 North Woodrow Street Description: Lots 213, Graham Smith Addition Zoned: R-3 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-255 to allow a deck addition with a reduced rear setback. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: Single Family Residential The R-3 zoned property at 505 N. Woodrow Street is occupied by a two-story brick and frame single family residence which was recently constructed. There is a two -car wide driveway from Woodrow Street which serves as access. As part of the new home construction, a 14 foot by 18 foot deck was constructed on the rear of the structure. The deck is uncovered and unenclosed, with an elevation of six (6) to eight (8) feet above grade. The deck is located 12 feet from the rear (east) property line. Section 36-255(d)(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear setback of 25 feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance from this ordinance requirement. APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 9 (CON'T.) Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the variance request as relatively minor. This residential lot backs up to the rear yards of large/deep residential lots which front on Ozark Street. These residential lots have a fairly steep slope from front to back. There are no structures on the lot immediately east which would conflict with the proposed deck structure. With the deck remaining uncovered and unenclosed, it should have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested rear setback variance, subject to the deck structure remaining uncovered and unenclosed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 25, 2005) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. 2 Graham Smith Construction LLC :z - -7g-2-9 2020 West 3rd Suite 1A, Little Rock, AR 72205 March 14, 2005 City of Little Rock Board of Adjustments Dear Sir or Madam: We are asking for a variance from the 25 -foot rear set back on 505 North Woodrow. We had originally intended to build a patio on the back of the house; however, because of terrain issues, it was more aesthetically feasible to build a deck. The house itself does not encroach the 25 -foot rear setback. Thank you for your consideration on this matter. Sincerely, de Graham Smith Managing Member APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 10 File No.: Owner: Applicant: Address: Description Zoned: Z-7829 Willard and Marilee Williams Mark S. Williams 2800 Longcoy Street Southwest corner of Longcoy Street and West 28th Street. R-3 Variance Requested: An administrative appeal is requested to allow parking of a commercial vehicle in single family residential zoning. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The R-3 zoned property at 2800 Longcoy Street contains a one-story frame single family residence. There is a two -car wide driveway from Longcoy Street which serves as access. A concrete parking pad was recently constructed along the south side of the house for parking a semi tractor truck. On February 15, 2005 the City's Enforcement staff observed the semi tractor truck parked on the residential property. A courtesy notice was issued to Mark Williams to cease parking the commercial vehicle on the residential property, as per Section 36-512 of the City's Zoning Ordinance. As per ordinance protocol, Mr. Williams appealed the commercial vehicle notice to the Director of Planning and Development on March 2, 2005. The appeal was subsequently denied. Therefore, APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 10 (CON'T. Mr. Williams is appealing the administrative denial to the Board of Adjustment. The applicant, Mark Williams, is requesting an appeal of the courtesy notice and administrative denial in order to park the semi tractor truck on the residential property at 2800 Longcoy Street. Mr. Williams notes in the attached letter that the truck would be parked at 2800 Longcoy Street approximately 48 hours every 14 days. Mr. Williams also notes that a parking pad exists to accommodate the truck parking. The Board of Adjustment is asked to determine if it is appropriate to allow the parking of a semi tractor truck on the R-3 zoned property at 2800 Longcoy Street. Photos of the truck are attached for Board review. As noted above, Mr. Williams was issued the notice for violation of Section 36-512 of the City's Zoning Ordinance. Section 36-512 reads as follows: "Sec. 36-512. Commercial vehicle parking (prohibited). (a) Except as provided herein, no portion of any lot, tract or parcel of land zoned for residential usage, including districts "R-1" through "R -7a" and "MF -6" through "MF -24," shall be utilized for the parking of commercial vehicles with a load carrying capacity of one (1) ton or greater. (b) For the purposes of this section, the following types of vehicles are expressly prohibited at any time. (1) All commercial tow vehicles or vehicle carriers. (2) Dump trucks, trash haulers, bulldozers and other earth haulers or excavation equipment. (3) Flatbed or stake bed trucks. (4) Trailers whose designed intent is storage or transport of material or equipment. (5) Trucks or buses used in inter -or intrastate commerce. (6) Vans, of one (1) ton or greater in load -carrying capacity. (7) School or church buses or vans of one (1) ton or greater in load -carrying capacity. APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 10 (CON'T (8) Street sweepers and vehicle -mounted vacuum devices intended for the cleaning of streets or parking lots." BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 25, 2005) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested to defer the application to the May 23, 2005 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the May 23, 2005 Agenda by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. 3 El Angel Delivery, Inc. 2800 Long Coy Little Rock, AR 72204 March 2, 2005 Department of Planning and Development Ms. Alice Chaep 723 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: code violation 36-512 Dear Ms. Chaep, I am asking the City of Little Rock to grant Angel Delivery, Inc. a variance to park a commercial tractor in my driveway. I have adequate paved off-street parking. As a truck driver, I will need to park the tractor for approximately 48 hours every 14 days. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, " ujl_'� Mark Williams APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 11 File No.: Z-7830 Owner: Amy Nicol Treadway Applicant: Jennifer Herron Address: 5012 North Country Club Blvd. Description: Lot 10, Block 13, Newton's Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-156 and Sections 36-254 to allow a garage/carport with reduced side and rear setbacks and increased coverage, and front steps with a reduced front setback. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: Single Family Residential The R-2 zoned property at 5012 N. Country Club Blvd. Is occupied by a one-story brick and frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide driveway from Country Club Blvd. which serves as access. There is an existing one-story frame carport/garage structure at the northwest corner of the property. The existing accessory structure is located approximately one (1) foot from the side (west) property line and 6.5 feet from the rear (north) property line. The applicant proposes to remove the existing carport/garage structure and construct a new carport/garage structure, as noted on the attached site plan. The proposed addition will be connected to a new two-story APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 11 (CON'T.) addition on the rear of the house by way of a five (5) foot wide covered walkway. The applicant is also proposing to construct a new porch entry with steps on the front of the house. The applicant proposes to maintain the same one (1) foot side setback as the existing carport/garage structure. The proposed carport/garage structure will also have a 1.4 foot rear setback. The proposed accessory structure will cover approximately 32 percent of the required rear yard (rear 25 feet of the lot). The proposed carport/garage will be located six (6) feet back from the house (after rear addition). The proposed porch entry will be located approximately 27 feet back from the front property line. The front steps associated with the new entry will be approximately 23 feet back from the front property line. This single family lot contains no front platted building line. Section 36-156(a)(2)f. of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side and rear setbacks of three (3) feet for accessory buildings in single family zoning. Section 31-156(a)(2)d. allows a maximum rear yard coverage of 30 percent for accessory buildings. Additionally, Section 36-254(d)(1) requires a minimum front setback of 25 feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances to allow the accessory carport/garage structure with reduced side and rear setbacks and increased rear yard coverage, and the front steps with a reduced front setback. The proposed two-story addition to the rear of the house conforms to ordinance setback requirements. Staff does not support the variances, as requested. Although staff has no problem with the requested variances for increased rear yard coverage and reduced front setback, staff cannot support the side and rear setbacks for the accessory carport/garage structure, as filed. It has been staffs policy to support minimum side and rear setbacks of 1.5 feet for accessory buildings in residential zoning. This has been the case in order to allow a minimal amount of space to construct and maintain the structure without encroaching onto adjacent property. Staff feels that anything less than 1.5 feet would not be sufficient space. If the applicant were willing to revise the application to provide minimum 1.5 foot side and rear setbacks for the accessory carport/garage structure, staff would support the application with the following conditions: 1. Guttering must be provided (if necessary) to prevent water run-off onto the adjacent properties to the north and west. 2 APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 11 (CON'T.) 2. The covered walkway between the accessory and principal structures must remain unenclosed. 3. The carport section of the accessory building must also remain unenclosed. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested variances, as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 25, 2005) Staff informed the Board that the applicant revised the application to provide 1.5 foot side and rear setbacks for the proposed carport/garage structure. Staff recommended approval of the revised application, subject to the following conditions: 1. Guttering must be provided (if necessary) to prevent water run-off onto the adjacent property to the north and west. 2. The covered walkway between the accessory and principal structures must remain unenclosed. 3. The carport section of the accessory building must also remain unenclosed on the east and west sides only. The revised application was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. 3 March 23, 2005 Mr. Monte Moore Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Monte: 7730 �2p 7-) On behalf of our client, Amy Treadway, we are filing for a variance for the property located at 5012 N. Country Club Blvd. We are requesting a variance for the following: 1. The client wishes to have a two -car garage; however, due to the existing location of the driveway and proximity to the property line as well as the turning radius of a car, we propose a one car garage with a carport and covered walkway attached to the south of it. Therefore, it would be tandem parking. There is an existing carport and storage building, which will be removed. The dimensions of the proposed one car garage are 17'-0" x 21'-0". The one car garage is situated 3'- 0" from the rear property line, l'-0" from the west property line, 31.5' from the east property line and 114' from the south property line. 2. The attached carport and covered walkway is sited 1'-0" from the west property line, 31.5' from the east property line and 93' from the south property line. 3. The 5'-0" wide covered walkway is attached to the proposed 12'-0" addition at the existing house. 4. We propose a new entry porch located on the south of the building. This porch is approximately 5'-6" x 4'-4" and is situated 27'-0" from the south property line, 19'-0" from the east property line and 25'-0" from the west property line. Enclosed are six copies of a recent survey showing the proposed items. Please contact either Jeff Horton or myself if there are any questions. Sincerely, Jnnifer Herron/,AI A cc: Amy Treadway file H E R R 0 N 1_0 R T ON 300 S. Spring St. Ste. 720 Little Rock, AR 72201 www.hh-architects.com tel. 50'-975-0052 fax. 501-978-0078 ARCHITECTS April 4, 2005 Mr. Monte Moore Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Monte: We are submitting a revised siteplan for the property located at 5012 N. Country Club Blvd. We submitted a siteplan on March 25, 2005 which showed a 3'-0" rear setback from the north property line. We have revised the rear setback to 1.4' from the north property line as shown on the revised site plan. We propose this revised siteplan after further developing the drawings and realizing this space would help the client better maneuver into the carport around the 12'-0" addition. If there are any questions, please call me at 975-0052. Sincerely, eO e-ferron, /Aj cc: Amy Treadway file H ER_ R O_ N H .O_6—T-Y-6--N —N 300 S. Spring St. Ste. 720 Little Rock, AR 72201 www.hh-architects.com tel. 501-975-0052 fax. 501-978-0078 ARCHITECTS APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 12 File No.: Z-7831 Owner: Phillip and Jaime Norton Applicant: Phillip Norton Address: 3810 Compton Street Description: Lot 3, Lida A. Dice's Addition Zoned: R-3 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-156 to allow an accessory building with increased rear yard coverage, and the fence provisions of Section 36-516 to allow a fence which exceeds the maximum height allowed. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The R-3 zoned property at 3810 Compton Street is occupied by a one- story frame single family residence. There is a one car wide drive from Compton Street which serves as access. A one-story frame garage which was near the northeast corner of the property has been torn down and is in the process of being removed from the site. A new wood fence was recently constructed along the rear (north) property line. The fence ranges in height from 8'-4" to 8'-8". The applicant proposes to construct a new 24 foot by 28 foot garage structure at the northeast corner of the property, as noted on the attached site plan. A 10 foot by 24 foot covered patio area is proposed APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 12 (CON'T.) on the west side of the garage structure. The garage/covered patio structure will be located three (3) feet back from the rear (north) property line, four (4) feet from the side (east) property line, and be separated from the house by over 25 feet. The accessory structure is proposed to occupy approximately 59 percent of the required rear yard (rear 25 feet of the lot). The garage/covered patio structure will be constructed to match the existing house. Section 36-156(a)(2)c. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum rear yard coverage of 30 percent for accessory buildings in the single family zoning districts. Section 36-516(e)(1)a. allows a maximum residential fence height of six (6) feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances to allow the proposed accessory building to cover approximately 59 percent of the required rear yard, and the fence height along the rear property line to exceed six (6) feet. Staff supports the requested variances. Staff views the request as reasonable. The size of the proposed accessory building is not out of character with other structures within this single family neighborhood. The proposed garage/covered patio structure could be pulled closer to the house to reduce the amount of rear yard coverage, but adequate vehicular maneuvering area for the garage would not exist. Staff feels that the proposed placement of the structure is appropriate and should have no adverse impact on the general area. With respect to the requested fence variance, the single family lot backs up to the Pulaski Heights Elementary/Middle School campus. The campus occupies two (2) square blocks, with the large playground/field area being located adjacent to this single family lot. Staff feels that the requested fence height is appropriate for this location. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested rear yard coverage and fence variances, subject to permits being issued for the construction project, including the fence construction and demolition of the accessory structure. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 25, 2005) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. 2 APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 12 (CON'T.) The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. 3 Phillip Norton Jaime Norton 3810 Compton Little Rock, AR 72205 501.682.1278 (w) 501.664.6266 (h) City of Little Rock 723 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 To Whom It May Concern: -78 f Attached please find copies of a survey of the home at 3810 Compton, including a layout of a proposed detached garage and outdoor living space. The existing garage has been removed because of extensive termite damage and foundation problems. The new structure we seek to replace it with will be a 28' x 24' two car garage, with additional storage and workshop space. The west side will have a 24' x 10' covered patio area. It is our understanding this design (912 sq. ft.) will exceed the size limitation by taking up more than 30% of the last 25 feet of our back yard. Compton Street is a dead end street with only 10 houses. The street is narrow and is not easy to park multiple vehicles on. Our driveway is only wide enough to accommodate one car, so we are constantly having to juggle vehicles to get one or the other vehicle out. This driveway structure makes it difficult to have more than two vehicles in our driveway at a time. The new garage space will allow us to keep both vehicles out of the elements, and make accessing them much easier. We also will no longer need to park on the street, a benefit to our neighbors. 13y building a detached garage, we will maintain the integrity of an historic Hillcrest bungalow, but add much needed storage space for our small house. We plan to match design elements to that of our house, so the structure should fit in well with the existing homes. In addition to the garage, we were informed an existing fence would also need a variance. The fence exceeds the six foot limit. It is built along the north property line that backs up the the playground at Pulaski Heights Middle School. Our fence covers up a poorly maintained chain link fence owned by the school. The vegetation that consumes the school's fence every summer is unsightly. Their fence is built at a higher elevation, above a retaining wall, about 1-1 1/2 feet higher than our backyard elevation. In order to cover up the chainlink fence, ours need to be higher, coming close to 8 feet. The only reason our fence needs to be that height it to cover up an unattractive fence that we have no control over. We hope this information is helpful. Please let us know if more is needed. Sincerely, Phillip Norton u Jaime Norton APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 13 File No.: Z-7832 Owner: Nidia and Robert Cochran Applicant: Glenn Bearden Address: 501 Brookside Drive Description: Northeast corner of Brookside Drive and Rodney Parham Road Zoned: O-3 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-553 to allow a ground -mounted sign which exceeds the maximum height and area allowed. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Office Proposed Use of Property: Office STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments, proposed sign is shown outside the right-of-way. B. Staff Analysis: The 0-3 zoned property at 501 Brookside Drive (northeast corner of Brookside Drive and Rodney Parham Road) is occupied by a one-story office building located along the north property line. There is paved parking along the south side of the building, with an access drive from Brookside Drive. The parking lot is located approximately three (3) to four (4) feet below the grade of Rodney Parham Road. A 12 foot high ground -mounted sign is located at the southwest corner of the property, within the parking lot area. The applicant proposes to remove the existing ground -mounted sign and construct a new ground -mounted sign at the southwest corner of the parking lot. The new sign will be a monument style sign (masonry APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 13 (CON'T.) construction) with a height of 10 feet. The sign will consist of two (2) identical sections in a "v" shape, as noted on the attached site plan sketch. The sign will be located six (6) feet from the south and west property lines. The sign will have an overall area of approximately 160 square feet (including the ornamental masonry features of the sign). The actual copy on the sign will comprise approximately 90 square feet. Section 36-553(a)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum sign height of six (6) feet and a maximum sign area of 64 square feet for ground -mounted signs in office zones. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards to allow the proposed sign. Staff does not support the variances, as requested. Staff has no problem with the 10 foot sign height, given the fact that the property is located 3 to 4 feet below the grade of Rodney Parham Road. However, staff does not feel that the proposed sign area is appropriate for a small office development. Staff could support an increased sign height and area if the two (2) panels of the sign were placed back -to back and constructed perpendicular to the front (south) property line. This would result in the 10 foot height as requested, and an area of approximately 80 to 90 square feet. Staff feels that this would be a reasonable compromise for ground -mounted signage for this small office development. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested sign variances, as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 25, 2005) Staff informed the Board that the applicant revised the application to align with staff's suggestion. The sign will have a height of 10 feet, a width of 9 feet, with 5 foot wide sign copy. The sign will be placed perpendicular to the Rodney Parham Road right-of-way, with copy on both sides of the sign. The sign will also be at least 5 feet back from property lines. Staff recommended approval of the revised application subject to a sign permit being obtained. The revised application was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. 2 6z=J- 3 �- n Your Side Nidia Cochran Agency 501 Brookside Dr. Little Rock, AR 72205 (501) 228-5019 (501) 228-4768 Fax March 25, 2005 Department Of Planning & Development 723 West Markham Little Rock, AR To Whom It May Concern: I have recently purchased the property at 501 Brookside Dr. Little Rock, AR 72205. As a business owner and operator in the City of Little Rock for the past 5 years, I have been very involved with my community. I have great admiration for those who care to enhance and beautify the area in which they live and work. The sign I have purposed to build will do just this. Brick piers on each end will be 24" in diameter. The center pier will be at an approximate 22-%2 degree angle. The height of the sign will be 10 feet. This is approximately 2 feet less than the existing. The commercially manufactured signs will be custom installed into the upper portion of the brick. There will be vinyl -coated aluminum signs attached to the brick veneer below for the other existing complexes A -C. There will be a brick base, with a width no greater than 16 feet and cap, with the location address visible for emergency compliance. The slight angle of the sign will provide greater visibility even with its lower height. There are Bradford Pear trees bordering the property line. These natural elements also impede visibility. The base of the existing sign is approximately 44" below street level. By lowering the new sign, having the slight angle and trimming the lower limbs of the trees, it will increase overall visibility. The esthetics of the sign will be an enhancement to the area as well. A photo of an existing sign one block away from stated sight is provided as an example of design as to how the purposed sign will be. The most notable difference will be brick verses frame material. 54,4�-/S ((V .0-Y z The following are reasons I am requesting a variance for signage at my business location: 1. Natural elements impede the exposure of the existing sign. Elevation of said property is approximately 4 feet below street level. Bradford Pear trees border the property line. 2. Nationwide compliance for recommended signage. 3. The existing sign has been there for nearly 30 years. It is unsightly and has low visibility. Your kind consideration to this matter is very much needed and appreciated. Thank you, Niis E. Cochran APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 14 File No.: Z-7833 Owner: Jeff Johnson Applicant: Terry Burruss Address: 623 N. Beechwood Street Description: South 40 feet Lot 12 and North 4 feet of Lot 11, Block 21, Pulaski Heights Addition Zoned: C-3 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-301 and the parking provisions of Section 36-502 to allow a new building with reduced front setback and a reduced number of off-street parking spaces. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Commercial Proposed Use of Property: Commercial STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: 1. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. B. Landscape and Buffer Issues: A minimum of 4 Y2 foot wide perimeter landscape strip is required north of the proposed four car parking area by the Landscape Ordinance. This takes into account the reductions allowed for being within the designated mature area of the city and for being a rehabilitation of an existing development. A variance from this ordinance requires City Beautiful Commission approval. C. Staff Analysis: The C-3 zoned property at 623 Beechwood Street is occupied by a one-story frame commercial building. The building is approximately 1,755 square feet in area, with an additional 640 square feet of storage space (concrete block building) at the southeast corner of the property. The concrete block building is APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 14 (CON'T.) connected to the main structure. The main building sustained some interior fire damage in the past. There is a small gravel/grass area at the northeast corner of the property, within a fenced area, which has been used for parking in the past. Access to this area is gained by utilizing a paved alley which runs along the east property line, between Kavanaugh and Woodlawn. There is on -street parking on both sides of Beechwood Street in this area. The applicant proposes to remove the 1,755 square foot building and construct a new 2,800 square foot commercial building (one story) for two (2) businesses, as noted on the attached site plan. The new building will be connected to the existing block building at the southeast corner of the property. The proposed building will be located 20 feet back from the front (west) property line, two (2) feet from each side property line, and 50 feet back from the rear (east) property line. A six (6) foot wide awning structure will be located on the front of the new structure, setback 14 feet from the front property line. The applicant also proposes a small area of paved parking at the northeast corner of the property, where gravel parking existed in the past. The parking area will consist of four (4) stacked spaces to be utilized for employee parking only. Section 36-301(e)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front setback of 25 feet for C-3 zoned property. Section 31-502(b)(3)a. requires a minimum of 11 off-street parking spaces for a new commercial building of the size proposed. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards to allow construction of the new commercial building. Staff supports the requested variances associated with the new building construction. Staff views the project as a good infill development. The proposed building will be located slightly closer to Beechwood Street than the buildings to the south, however, the large commercial building immediately to the north is located on its west (Beechwood Street) property line. Therefore, the front building setback as proposed will not be out of character with this and other commercial buildings in the area. With respect to the parking variance, many of the smaller businesses in this general area have very little, if any, off- street parking. The existing commercial building has existed for many years with only a few off-street parking spaces for employees. Staff feels that there is adequate on -street parking on Beechwood as well as other streets in the area to accommodate the parking needs of this commercial site in combination with the other commercial uses in this general area. Staff feels that the proposed commercial redevelopment will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested setback and parking variances, subject to compliance with the Public Works and Landscape/Buffer requirements as noted in paragraphs A. and B. of the staff report. 2 APRIL 25, 2005 ITEM NO.: 14 (CON'T ) BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 25, 2005) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 4 ayes and 0 nays and 1 recusal (Burruss) 3 TERRY BURRUSS, ARCHITECTS 1202 S. MAIN, SUITE 230 �-�y- � 1 4 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72202 r 501-376-3676 FAX 376-3766 3 design, planning and interiors March 25, 2005 Mr. Monte Moore Zoning and Code Enforcement Administrator Department of Planning & Development City of Little Rock 723 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Hillcrest Junk Company 623 North Beechwood Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 A/E # 0519 Dear Mr. Moore: Attached please find 6 copies of a survey and Site Plan on the above referenced project. The site currently has a 1,640 square foot residential structure and a 640 square foot concrete block storage structure with a gravel parking area at the rear. The Owner is proposing to remove the existing residential structure and build a new 2,800 square foot commercial structure. The existing block building would remain in use as a storage area. The new structure would house the existing business in 1400 square feet and leave 1400 square feet for rental space. We are proposing to stack parr' four cars in the rear as staff parking. We are requesting a front yard set -back variance to facilitate the parking in the rear and create a street presence. Placement of the building will still allow for a landscaped entry, yet screen the service alley to the north. We appreciate your consideration on this request. If there are any questions or additional information is needed, please call. Yours very truly, Ter G. Burruss, AIA 0 w 0 V NW w LW r 0 z COui M a LL 0 0 a 0 m 11 KAIm VA ;?I I7 �n T z LU z LU Q a/ O ti Of w W = 0 o Z w w m o <C6 Un w 0 tl` c6 DO LL, - z x o 1) f m J F- x LL D m Q = Q _ W } Uj _ U Q > ~ LU m �Ccnz Q � LU U D m zofcn�m Q � z 0-1co 2 LL m = Z VA ;?I I7 �n T z LU z LU Q D Of w W = 0 o Z w w m o <C6 Un w 0 c6 DO LL, - z x o 1) f m J F- x LL D m Q = Q _ VA ;?I I7 �n T z LU z LU Q April 25, 2005 There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 2:10 p.m. Date: / Chairman