Loading...
boa_07 26 2004LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY OF MINUTES JULY 26, 2004 WIT"IMNAIll Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being three (3) in number. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting The Minutes of the June 28, 2004 meeting were approved as mailed by unanimous vote. Members Present: Members Absent Andrew Francis, Vice Chairman Debra Harris David Wilbourn Fred Gray, Chairman Terry Burruss City Attorney Present: Debra Weldon LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA JULY 26, 2004 2:00 P.M. I. DEFERRED ITEMS: A. Z-7659 Kenwood Subdivision B. Z-7637 1319 Kavanaugh Blvd. C. Z-7438 2809 W. 12th Street It. NEW ITEMS: 1. Z-1 704-A 5808 N. Country Club Blvd. 2. Z-3021 -H 801 Barrow Road 3. Z-7633 2020 N. Spruce Street 4. Z-7686 7411 Geyer Springs Road 5. Z-7687 6904 Azalea Drive 6. Z-7688 16 Timber Lane 7. Z-7689 5515 "H" Street 8. Z-7690 3800 N. Rodney Parham Road 9. Z-7691 2412 N. Filmore Street 10. Z-7692 20 Pebble Beach Drive 11. Z-7693 9201 Cynthia Drive 0 • � �- 3NId I 1 \ i 11nVEIFl1 V/ U•,�, 0�� NVW7 rn i V � ON e Avmavoae HOatl NO1N0 m 1S3HO o d3H380 ONIN lry i ~ / 1"j o F-� OOOM � O _ = � 3NId 33 r �1S 3NId z z HJyy � o 8V0 N0111WV 110OS $ JNiyds • Nd d 8IV3 -� J J (� A115a3AINn �' A1i5a3A1N(1 5Z)NIadS a3A30 � v s3HsnHLo Idd155 IN 04 J `" s 103M MOUVO NHOf � al0Aa353a 3NNI3H —° 060331NOtlHS o s11 8vs ga 3l Otl p WVHaVd AAQOa 4"'J NY OR — � y w S11Wf1 Al IO 3001a AWN • - a �e o OJJJb1S F R W o w z cn lQpRN',NP� _ o - � � Z NVAIllnS V latlM315 ysdb�i' 4- 0 0 S11Wf1 Allo��� �P 0J� 0�P`e CIO nJ 31VON83A 0 JULY 26, 2�� ITE File No.: Z-7659 Owner: Davis Fitzhugh and various owners Address: Along David O. Dodd Road, South of J.A. Fair High School Description: Kenwood Subdivision (Lots 2-12, 52-61 and 85-95). Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the fence provisions of Section 36-516 to allow privacy fences which exceed 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: Kenwood Subdivision is a 215 lot single family subdivision located along the east and north sides of David O. Dodd road, south of Colonel Glenn Road and west of Interstate 430. The preliminary plat for the subdivision was approved by the Planning commission on November 11, 1999. The first two (2) phases of the subdivision have been final platted, with several homes having been constructed and in the process of being constructed. When the plat was approved, the Planning Commission required a 10 foot wide "no vehicular access easement and undisturbed buffer" along the entire perimeter of the subdivision where adjacent to David O. Dodd Road. In other words, the rear 10 feet of Lots 1-12, 53-60 and 86-95 were set aside as an undisturbed buffer with no vehicular access. Rear portions of Lots 61 and 85 are also included in the undisturbed buffer/no vehicular access issue. A larger portion of Lot 52 is included in a drainage easement with no fencing allowed. It recently came to staff's attention that the 10 foot wide buffer had been cleared on several of the lots, with some of the lots having constructed fences JULY 26, 2k ITEM NO.: A (Con't.) on the rear property lines. Inspection of the property revealed that Lots 1 and 85-95 are developed. Lots 85-88 and 93-95 have 6 foot high wood fences located on their rear property lines within the 10 foot buffer area. Lots 89-92 have 6 foot wood fences that appear to be 10 feet back from the rear property line. The 10 foot buffer at the rear of Lots 85-95 appears to have been cleared with each individual lot development. Lots 53-61 are undeveloped, but have been cleared. It appears that the 10 foot buffer at the rear of these lots has also been cleared. No fences have been constructed on these lots. Lots 2-12 are also undeveloped. The 10 foot buffer at the rear of these lots is undisturbed. Lot 1 recently was approved by the Board of Adjustment for a six (6) foot high fence, 10 feet back from the rear property line. The 10 foot buffer at the rear of Lot 1 which was disturbed was replanted as a condition of the Board of Adjustment approval. Section 36-516(e)(1)a. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum residential fence height of four (4) feet for fences located between a required building setback line and a street right-of-way. A maximum fence height of six (6) feet is allowed elsewhere on a residential lot. The subdivision developer, Davis Fitzhugh, has filed a variance request to allow six (6) foot high wood privacy fences to be constructed within the rear 25 feet of Lots 2-12, 53-61 and 85-95. The fences will be located 10 feet back from the rear property lines to recognize the required 10 foot buffer. Mr. Fitzhugh has filed the variance request on behalf of the lots he still owns and the other individual lot owners (Lots 85-95). Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff feels that the request is reasonable. However, staff will require that the 10 foot buffer area along David O. Dodd Road be replanted where it has been disturbed. Given the fact that the 10 foot undisturbed buffer was a requirement of the Planning Commission's approval of the plat and not a Zoning Ordinance buffer requirement, the Board of Adjustment cannot approve a fence to be located within the buffer area nor can the Board approve a variance from the buffer requirement. If any of the lot owners wish to locate their fences within the buffer area and/or not replant the buffer where disturbed, a revised preliminary plat must be filed with the Planning Commission. C. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the requested variance, subject to the following conditions: FA JULY 26, 2d. ITEM NO.: A (Con't.) 1. The six (6) foot high fences must be located 10 feet back from the rear property lines and not within the required buffer area. 2. Any fences currently within the 10 foot buffer area must be removed from the buffer within 30 days. 3. The buffer area which has been disturbed (Lots 53-61 and 85-95) must be replanted within 60 days. Contact Bob Brown, Plans Development Administrator, (371-4864) for details concerning the replanting. 4. Any fencing must be located 7.5 feet back from the side property line between Lots 55 and 56 to recognize a platted auxiliary access easement. 5. No fencing will be allowed within the drainage easement at the rear of Lot 52. Staff supports a 6 foot high fence within the rear 25 feet of this lot, outside the drainage easement area. 6. Construction fencing must be placed at the rear of Lots 2-12 (10 feet in from rear property line) prior to any clearing, in order to protect the undisturbed buffer. 7. Construction fencing must also be placed at the rear of Lots 53-61 (10 feet in from rear property line) prior to individual lot development, in order to protect the buffer area which will be replanted. Board of Adjustment: (July 26, 2004) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested to defer the application to the August 30, 2004 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the August 30, 2004 Agenda by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 © WHITE - DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 0 24 Rahling Circle 0 Little Rock, Arkansas 72223 May 28, 2003 Mr. Monte Moore, Zoning Administrator City of Little Rock Planning Department 723 W. Markham St. Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 RE: Kenwood Subdivision Fence Variance Mr. Moore, .J - " � 2 - .76 S? The developer along with the various lot owners would like to request a fence height variance for the above referenced project. The variance would allow the construction of a 6 ft. tall fence within the setback along David O'Dodd. Also, the property owner would work directly with Bob Brown to restore any portion of the 10 ft. buffer that has been disturbed. Mr. Fitzhugh owns lots 2 through 12 and 52 through 61 which have not been recorded. Lots 85 through 95 are owned by various individuals that have purchased homes within this development. Please place this item on the next available Board of Adjustment hearing. Do not hesitate to call should you have any questions or require additional information. Your help in this matter is greatly appreciated. Best regards, Joe D. Whit , Cc: Mr. Davis Fitzhugh — Kenwood Subdivision CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT, SURVEYING JULY 26, 1 ITEM NO.: B File No.: Z-7637 Owner: David Hall Address: 1319 Kavanaugh Blvd. Description: Lot 13, Block 9, Midland Hills Addition Zoned: R-3 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-255 to allow a deck addition with reduced front and side yard setbacks. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: Condominiums Condominiums The R-3 zoned property at 1319 Kavanaugh Blvd. is occupied by two (2), two-story brick and frame duplex/condominium structures. One (1) of the duplex/condo structures faces Kavanaugh Blvd., with the other fronting on Louise Street. A one -car wide driveway from Louise Street serves as access to the property. There is a one-story frame garage structure located in the rear yard, at the southeast corner of the property. The applicant recently constructed a 12 foot by 18 foot wood deck structure at the east end of the northernmost duplex/condo structure (facing Kavanaugh Blvd.). The northeast corner of the deck structure is located on the side (east) property line. The southeast corner of the deck extends across the side (east) property line by approximately two JULY 26, j04 ITEM NO.: B (Cont. (2) feet. There is another multi -unit condominium type structure located on the lot immediately to the east. The floor of the new deck structure is approximately 10 feet above grade, as the property slopes downward from Kavanaugh Blvd. The deck is located between 12 feet and 15 feet back from the front (north) property line. Section 36-255(d)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front setback of 25 feet for principal structures in R-3 zoning. Section 36-255(d)(2) requires a minimum side yard setback of five (5) feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards to allow the existing deck with reduced front and side yard setbacks. Staff does not support the requested variances. Staff does not feel that the requested variances are reasonable. Staff typically does not support zero (0) side setbacks for residential structures. Additionally, staff does not have the authority to recommend approval of nor does the Board of Adjustment have the authority to approve a structure which crosses a property line and extends into another property ownership. Given the fact that a driveway exists on the adjacent property to the east, between the deck and the adjacent condominium building, staff could support a minimum two (2) foot side yard setback for the deck structure. If the deck were moved back two (2) feet from the side property line, staff would also support the reduced front setback. As noted earlier, the deck is approximately 10 feet above grade. This should allow for proper maintenance of the yard area under and beside the deck structure. C. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends denial of the requested setback variances, as filed. Board of Adiustment: (July 26, 2004) David Hall was present, representing the application. Based on the fact that only three (3) Board members were present, the Board offered a deferral to the applicant. Mr. Hall requested to defer the application to the August 30, 2004 Agenda. A motion was made to defer the application to the August 30, 2004 Agenda. The motion passed by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. The application was deferred. 2 2-713-7 TO: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SUBJECT: ZONING VARIANCE FOR DECK AT 1319 KAVANAUGH I, David Hall, the owner of 1319 Kavanaugh request a zoning variance to the setback rule for construction on property lines. This variance is necessary in order for this property to have a deck, which is accessible to the owners via the back door, and is of area to sufficient enough provide room for a gazebo and deck furniture. This deck is also I believe of cosmetic value not only for this property but also for the neighboring properties. There are several reasons/justifications for a variance in this case. Photographs, the petitioning of surrounding neighbors, will support the justifications and other exhibits to be produced at the zoning meeting. Most importantly the allowance of a variance should have the greatest possible benefit to the most people. In my opinion there would be no loser in a positive decision for a variance. The justifications are as follows: • The internal structural configuration for this duplex places the back entryway on the east side of the property making this the prime place to put a deck. There is not another doorway for both duplexes except on the north side of the property facing a busy Kavanaugh blvd. with no available building space. • The Lot configuration is also unusual in that the building is very close proportionately to the east side of the property. The building is not parallel to the property line and is therefore at a slight angle, which further reduces building space. • The deck provides a positive environment and play space for the children of this residence to be outside and have a safe protected play area. • The deck does not interfere or restrict any activity, freedom, or daily function that my neighbors would undertake. • The deck provides a pleasant cosmetic covering for the side of my building, two storage rooms and our garbage receptacles. This is especially beneficial to one of my neighbors who has a dining room directly facing this area. JULY 26`; j04 ITEM NO.: C File No.: Z-7438 Owner: Mattie Irby Rhodes Address: 2809 W. 12th Street Description: Lots 4 and 5, Block 3 Worthen and Brown Addition Zoned: C-3 Variance Requested: A time extension is requested on a previously approved variance to allow a temporary gravel parking lot. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Commercial Proposed Use of Property: Commercial STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Landscape and Buffer Issues: Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with ordinance requirements. This takes into account the reductions allowed within the designated mature area. A protective border, such as cross -ties, should separate gravel from areas to be landscaped. At such time that the vehicular use area is paved, required landscaping must also be installed. An approved protective border, such as the cross -ties or curb and gutter, will be required to protect landscaped areas from vehicular traffic. A water source within seventy-five (75) feet of landscape areas will also be required when the site is paved and landscaped. JULY 26( X04 ITEM NO.: C (Cont. C. Staff Analysis: The C-3 zoned property at 2809 West 12th Street is occupied by two (2)1 commercial buildings, one within the northwest portion of the property and one along the rear property line. Two (2) other buildings which previously existed within the east one-half of the property were recently removed. There is a new gravel parking lot within the east one-half of the property, with existing curb cuts (with concrete aprons) from West 12th Street and the alley which runs along the south property line. A portion of the southernmost building is occupied by a beauty shop. The beauty shop has existing on the site for 20 years, utilizing an existing gravel parking lot on the property immediately to the west which is owned by the owners of the convenience store at the southeast corner of West 12th and Wood Streets. The beauty shop has had an agreement with the convenience store owners to use the gravel parking area during the past 20 years. The building at the northwest corner of the property was recently converted to a sports bar and grill from a general commercial use. The conversion of the building from a retail use to a restaurant -type use requires an additional seven (7) on-site parking spaces. Therefore, the property owner purchased the lot immediately to the east and removed the two (2) buildings in order to construct a new 12 -space paved parking lot. On July 28, 2003, the Board of Adjustment granted a 12 -month deferral of the paving requirement, as found in Section 36-508 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, (to July 28, 2004) for the parking lot, subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the landscape and buffer requirements as noted in paragraph B. of this report. 2. The applicant must submit plans for a building permit at least 60 days prior to and have the construction completed by the 12 - month expiration date. The applicant originally requested an 18 -month deferral, but revised the application to a 12 -month deferral as recommended by staff. The applicant is currently requesting a second deferral for 12 additional months to July 28, 2005. The applicant has noted that she is not financially able to construct the parking lot at this time. E JULY 24, X04 ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) As noted previously, the area where the paved parking lot will be constructed is currently gravel. A recent inspection of the property revealed that the existing gravel parking lot has been well maintained. It appears that no gravel has been pulled onto the concrete drive aprons or West12th Street. Staff does support an additional deferral of the paving requirement for the new parking lot, but staff will only support an additional deferral of 6 months. Staff feels that this will be adequate time for the applicant to work out details associated with the parking lot construction. Additionally, this will give the applicant the full 18 -month deferral as originally requested in July of 2003. The applicant should submit plans for a building permit at least 60 days prior to and have the construction completed by the 6 -month expiration date. The Public Works Department reviewed the proposed new parking lot in July, 2003. Public Works approves of the location of the driveway aprons as shown on the plan submitted, and noted that the alley right- of-way along the south property line should be capable of carrying the traffic generated by the proposed parking lot. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the 12 -month paving deferral, as requested. Staff does support a 6 -month deferral of the paving requirement (to January 28, 2005) subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the landscape and buffer requirements as noted in paragraph B. of the staff report. 2. The applicant must submit plans for a building permit at least 60 days prior to and have the construction completed by the 6 -month expiration date. Board of Adjustment: (July 26, 2004) The applicant was not present. Staff recommended that the application be deferred to the August 30, 2004 Agenda. A motion was made to defer the application to the August 30, 2004 Agenda. The motion passed by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. The application was deferred. 3 E R �116-04 To: The Board Of Zoning For my zoning variance, I am asking for an extension on my temporary gravel parking lot form for July 28,2004 until July 28,2005. JULY 26, 2d ITEM NO.: 1 File No.: Z -1704-A Owner: Sam Nickol Address: 5808 N. Country Club Blvd. Description: Lot 49, Forest Heights Place 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 carport addition with reduced setbacks and which crosses a platted building line. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single-family residential Proposed Use of Property: Single-family residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 5808 N. Country Club Blvd. is occupied by a one- story frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide drive from N. Country Club Blvd., with a small detached frame garage at the northeast corner of the residence. The detached garage is located two (2) feet from the side (east) property line. The applicant is in the process of constructing a building addition on the rear (north side) of the structure which conforms to ordinance setback requirements. The applicant proposes to construct a carport addition at the southeast corner of the residence. The carport will be attached to the house and be unenclosed on the north, south and east sides. The carport addition will be constructed to match the architectural design of the existing residence. The proposed carport addition will be approximately 11.5 feet by 25 feet in size. The carport will be located approximately 0.65 feet from the side (east) property line and 20 feet JULY 26, 2d ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) from the front (south) property line. The carport will cross a 25 foot front platted building line by five (5) feet. Section 36-254(d)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front setback of 25 feet for principal structures in R-2 zoning. Section 36-254(d)(2) requires a minimum side yard setback of six (6) feet for this 60 foot wide lot. Additionally, Section 31-12(c ) of the City's 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 carport addition. Staff is not supportive of the variances, as requested. Staff typically does not support side yard setbacks in residential zoning of less than 1.5 feet. Additionally, staff can see no reason why the carport addition cannot be pushed back to meet the minimum 25 foot front setback. Staff feels that providing a 1.5 foot side setback in this case would still allow a carport structure wide enough to cover a private passenger vehicle. Staff could support construction of the carport addition, subject to the following conditions: 1. The carport addition must have a minimum 1.5 foot side setback, including any overhang. 2. The structure must be at least 25 feet back from the front property line. 3. Guttering must be provided to prevent water run-off onto the adjacent property to the east. 4. The structure must be unenclosed on the north, south and east sides. With conformance to these conditions, staff feels that the carport addition will have no adverse impact on the adjacent property or the general area. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the front building line for the carport 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 Recommendations: Staff recommends denial of the variances, as requested. FA JULY 26, 26 ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) Board of Adjustment: (July 26, 2004) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the Board that the applicant had revised the application, moving the proposed carport structure back to meet the minimum 25 foot front setback. Staff also noted that the applicant had a written agreement with the property owner to the east to provide a maintenance easement for the carport structure. Staff recommended approval of the revised application, subject to the following conditions: 1. Guttering must be provided on the carport structure to prevent water run-off onto the adjacent property to the east. 2. The carport must remain unenclosed on the north, south and east sides. 3. A maintenance easement (minimum 5 feet) must be provided on the property immediately to the east. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as revised by the applicant and recommended by staff by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 SAM NIGKOL 4f 67 ROBINWOOD DRIVE — 74 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72227 Phone 501-225-5723 samnickolC@yahoo.com June 25, 2004 City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas Dear Sirs: RE: Zoning Variance 5808 N. Country Club Lot 49, FOREST HEIGHTS PLACE, an ADDITION to the City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas We request a zoning variance for a site -built attached open carport at 5808 N. Country Club. The proposed open carport will be within the property line and extend 4-5 feet in front of the house for the following reasons: 1. The house was built in the 1940's, zoning standards were different then, homes and garages were often built on the property lines. 2. There is no covered parking now. The existing garage, which is on the property line, is not large enough to accommodate a modern car. 3. 1 have a handicapped parking permit, and this carport would allow me a covered entrance. 4. We will use the existing drive. 5. The new roofline will match the architecture of the house. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Sam and Bonnie Nlckol -r 7o -,-4 DISABLEDPERSON'S ACCESS TO PARKING APPLICATION For Issuance of Special License Plate or Placard for a Disabled Person Disability Code: A Issue Date: 02/17/20 Plate or Placard Number: C51555 Social Security Number: 429747897 Name: SAMUEL D NICKOL Address: 67 ROBINWOOD DR LITTLE ROCK AR 72227-2223 Vehicles qualified to display Special Plate or Placard are as follows: Passenger Vehicles (automobiles), Light Trucks (including vans), with 314 ton or less manufact- urer's rated capacity or larger vehicles (placard only) if the vehicle is specially adapted for use by disabled individuals through the use of lift, ramp, hand controls, etc. I hereby certify that I am qualified to display the Special License Plate or Placard authorized by Act 656 of 1991, which states that if the applicant, dependent of the applicant or any individual who depends primarily on the applicant for more than 60% of his/her transportation is disabled as determined by a physician according to the criteria listed in the Act (see. doctor's certification form), or if the applicant is an organization, the owner of the vehicle may apply for a Special License Plate or Placard. ignature of Applicant LITTLE ROCK WEST 60-03 JOYCE JACKSON Address: 801 BARROW RD (501)324-9243 RXTMCDO �&nnic l7'ld O&m June 27, 2004 Jeff Tarkington 5804 N. Country Club Little Rock, AR 72207 Dear Jeff, 67 ROBINWOOD DRIVE LITTLE ROCK, AR 72227 Phone SOI -225-5723 samnickolCityahoo. corn ZONING VARIANCE 5808 NORTH COUNTRY CLUB Bonnie and I have applied for a variance to build an attached open carport, which crosses the plotted building line. This carport will be built using the existing driveway. Please note that our property line extends a few inches onto your driveway. Our builder says that only the roof line will extend to the property line. We would like to come by and talk to you about our carport so that you are comfortable with it. The City of Little Rock requires that we obtain the signatures of every home owner within 200 feet of our home. Since this carport is next to your property we were advised to ask you to write a letter to the City of Little Rock, saying you have seen the plan and have no objections. Your signature means that we have notified you of the public hearing. The hearing will be held on July 26, 2004 at 2 PM at City Hall. We decided this would be a good way to meet our neighbors, sorry you weren't home! Please call us so we can set up a time to come by. Sincere 4 JULY 2d, J04 ITEM NO.: 2 File No.: Z-3021 -H Owner: Arvest Bank Address: 801 Barrow Road Description: Southeast corner of Barrow Road and 1-630 Zoned: C-3 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from Sections 36-553 and 36-555 to permit ground -mounted signs which exceed the maximum area allowed. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Mixed Office and Commercial Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: Mixed Office and Commercial Locate signs out of the public right-of-way. B. Staff Note: On July 8, 2004 the applicant notified staff and requested that the application be withdrawn, as Arvest Bank had other plans for signage at 801 Barrow Road. Staff supports the withdrawal as requested. Board of Adiustment: (July 26, 2004) Staff informed the board that the applicant requested to withdraw the application. Staff supported the withdrawal request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and withdrawn by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. Arkansas Sign& Neon Co., Inc. June 24, 2004 Mr. Monty Moore City of Little Rock Zoning & Signs 723 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201-1134 RE: TENNANT TYPE SIGN & PYLON SIGN. Monty, We request the installation of one Pylon type sign in place of existing TARGET pylon sign and one tenant type sign in place of the other existing TARGET sign. Instead of erecting multiple signs for each tenant along John Barrow we would like to consoli- date the signs onto two signs. Please consider this for approval and if you have any questions please feel free to call me on my cell phone 3504703. Sincerely, Frank "With" Withrow JR. 8525 Distribution Dr. Little Rock, AR. 72209 Phone: 501.562.3942 Fax: 501.562.6651 Cell: 501.350.4703 JULY 2d X04 ITEM NO.: 3 File No.: Z-7633 Owner: Steve and Anna Harper Parks Address: 2020 N. Spruce Street Description: Part of Lots 8-10, Block 1, Country Club Heights Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254 and the easement provisions of Section 36-11 to allow building additions with reduced setbacks and which extend into a utility/drainage easement. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: Single family residential Single family residential The project proposes to construct a portion of a carport within the rainage and utility easement of (closed) Stonewall Street. Public Works has major drainage facilities in this easement consisting of a rock and concrete box culvert that drains Club road from the west. Public Works supports a maximum five (5) foot encroachment (including overlay) into the easement. B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 2020 N. Spruce Street is occupied by a one- story brick and frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide driveway from Spruce Street which serves as access. There is a concrete parking road located along the north side of the residence. A 35 foot wide portion of Stonewall Road which was abandoned a number of years ago is part of the property. The abandonment area was retained as a utility and drainage easement, as a significant underground drainage structure is located within the area, running east - west. JULY 26 X04 ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont. The applicants propose to make a one-story addition on the rear of the structure. A 20 foot wide master bedroom/study addition is proposed at the southwest corner of the residence. The addition will be located four (4) feet from the side (south) and rear property lines. The applicants also propose a covered porch addition on the rear of the home, with an unenclosed carport addition at the northwest corner of the structure. The carport is proposed to ?? (no support structures) five (5) feet into the utility/drainage easement. The carport structure will be located 3 feet to 12 feet from the rear (west) property line. Additionally, a 14 foot by 8 foot addition is proposed to one of the bedrooms at the northwest corner of the house. Section 36-254(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side yard setback of 6.5 feet for this R-2 zoned lot. Section 36-254(d)(3) requires a minimum rear yard setback of 25 feet. Additionally, Section 36-11(f) requires that encroachments into easements be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicants are requesting variances to allow reduced side and rear yard setbacks for the proposed master bedroom/study addition and a reduced rear yard setback for the proposed carport addition. The applicants are also requesting a variance to allow the proposed carport structure to ? five (5) feet into the utility/drainage easement along the north property boundary. The applicants have submitted letters from each of the five (5) public utility companies addressing the proposed encroachment into the utility/drainage easement. None of the utility companies object to the proposed easement encroachment. Little Rock Wastewater Utility made the following comments: 1. Little Rock Wastewater Utility has an existing 10" Sewer Main located under the existing residence. 2. Prior to start of construction the Contractor for the project must submit final plans to the Little Rock Wastewater Utility for approval. The Utility needs to be assured that no remodeling or additional construction will adversely affect the existing sewer main. Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff feels that the proposed rear and side setbacks are reasonable given the fact that the existing structure is located 29 to 43 feet back from the front property line. Additionally, staff feels that the proposed size of the structure will not be out of character with the neighborhood. There have been several rather large single family residences built in the area, including directly across N. Spruce Street to the east. Staff also has no problem with the proposed easement encroachment, subject to compliance with the Little Rock Wastewater Utility comments. Staff feels that the 2 JULY 26�,. 104 ITEM NO.: 3(Cont.) proposed additions will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the requested variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. The carport structure must remain unenclosed on the north, south and west sides. 2. The carport structure must ? (no support structure) no more than five (5) feet into the utility easement. 3. Compliance with the Little Rock Wastewater Utility comments as noted in paragraph B. of this report 4. A building permit must be obtained for all construction. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JULY 26, 2004) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 Yeary Lindsey Architects July 12, 2004 Monte Moore Department of Planning and Development 723 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: 2020 N. Spruce Dear Monte, 7 1, We are writing to request a zoning variance for reduced side and rear yard setbacks, and a 5' cantilevered projection into an existing utility easement @ 2020 N. Spruce. My clients, Steve and Anna Harper Parks, desire to remodel and construct additions to their existing one story residence. The existing driveway is at the northernmost edge of the main portion of the property. This drive connects with an existing parking pad that projects into a utility easement at the northwest comer of the site. The easement and northwest portion of the property exist as a result of the permanent closing of a portion of Stonewall Road in 1978. My clients hope to build a new attached carport that would be entered from an extended drive at the northernmost side of the easement. The supporting columns of the new carport will not project into the 35' utility easement. A 5' cantilevered overhang at the north end (entrance) of the carport would encroach 5' into the easement. This new carport will also require a reduced rear yard setback to be 3' from the rear property line at the easement and 13' from the main rear property line. We have included letters with this application from the required utility companies obtaining their permission to encroach into this easement. We are also requesting reduced side and rear yard setbacks at the southwest portion of the site. In an effort to maintain the existing character of the residence, we plan to add a one story master bedroom/ study addition. In order to allow for an adequately sized porch at the end of the existing main living space toward the rear yard, we are asking that the new 20'x42' addition and an 8' rectangular bay at the master bath be allowed to be constructed 4' from the property lines at both the south and west. This dimension would still allow access around the addition, while enabling the Parks' to maintain as much view to the usable rear yard as possible and to preserve an existing 20' magnolia tree in the yard. Thank you for your serious consideration of our request. Sincerely / len Yeary, CE�VE JAIL 1.2 2004 319 President Clinton Ave., Suite 201 Little Rock, AR 72201 501-372-5940 FX: 501-707-0118 JULY 26� .04 ITEM NO.: File No.: Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: Z-7686 Juan Gutierrez 7411 Geyer Springs Road East side of Geyer Springs Road, south of Forbing Road W!. Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-557 to allow wall signs without public street frontage. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Commercial Proposed Use of Property: Commercial STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: The C-4 zoned property at 7411 Geyer Springs Road is occupied by a one-story block commercial building which contains an Hispanic grocery store and restaurant. There is an access drive from Geyer Springs road, with paved parking on the east, west and south sides of the building. There is a small ground -mounted sign at the northwest corner of the property, with a wall sign on the west side of the building (facing Geyer Springs Road) and a small wall sign above the door on the south building fagade. The small sign above the door has existed for a number of years and is nonconforming based on the fact that it has no direct street frontage. The applicant recently placed two (2) 2 foot by 16 foot wall signs on the building, one (1) on the north fagade and one (1) on the south fagade. Each sign has a white background with red lettering reading "Mexican Restaurant.) Neither sign faces a public street. Section 36-557(a) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires that all on -premise wall signs face JULY 26( X04 ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.) required street frontage. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance from this requirement to allow the two (2) new wall signs. Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff feels that signage on the north and south building facades will aid in identifying the business by north and south bound traffic on Geyer springs road. The new wall signs have a background color that matches the building color. Staff believes this makes the signs appear smaller than they actually are, and lessens any impact they might have on the adjacent properties. Staff feels that the signs without direct street frontage will have no adverse impact on the general area. C. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow wall signs without street frontage, subject to the following conditions: 1. The variance be approved for this business owner only (Juan Gutierrez). If this business vacates the building, the signs are to be removed. 2. The signs are to have a background color that matches the building color. 3. Sign permits must be obtained for the signs. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JULY 26, 2004) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 2 June 17, 2004 Attn. Little Rock Board of Adjustment From: Mercado San Jose 7411 Geyer Springs Little Rock, AR 72209 We are requesting a sign variance for signs located on the south & north side of the building. The way the building is located, the front of the building is to close to the street and traffic speeds by to quickly to see the business. The south and north sides of the building is very visible to traffic from both direction. By getting these sign we can increase the business because it would be more visible from the ongoing traffic. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, JULY 26 04 ITEM NO.: 5 File No.: Z-7687 Owner: Levelle and Sycrece Thomas Address: 6904 Azalea Drive Description: Lot 299 and part of Lots 298 and 300, Cloverdale Subdivision Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-156 and the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a carport structure with reduced front setbacks and separations and which crosses a platted building line. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single-family residential Proposed Use of Property STAFF REPORT Single-family residential A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 6905 Azalea Drive is occupied by a one- story brick and frame single family residence. There is a two -car wide concrete driveway from Azalea Drive which serves as access. The applicants recently placed a 20 foot by 20 foot metal detached carport structure within the front yard, over a portion of the driveway. The carport structure is located approximately six (6) feet back from the front property line, seven (7) feet from the side property line, and is separated from the house by approximately 6.5 feet. The carport structure is not permanently mounted, and is located almost entirely between the 25 foot front platted building line and the front property line. Section 36-156(a)(2)b. of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum six (6) foot separation between accessory buildings and JULY 26! )04 ITEM NO.: 5 (con't) principal dwellings. Section 36-156(a)(2)c. requires a minimum front setback of 60 feet for accessory buildings, and Section 36-156(a)(2)f. requires minimum side and rear setbacks of three (3) feet. Section 31- 12(c) of the City's Subdivision Ordinance requires that variances for encroachments across platted building lines be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicants are requesting variances to allow a reduced front setback for the carport structure and the structure's encroachment across the front platted building line. Staff does not support the requested variances. Staff feels that the front yard encroachment, as proposed, will be out of character with this single family neighborhood. When staff made an inspection of this property, a close look was taken at all of the residences along Azalea Drive to the east and west. Staff could find no other properties along Azalea Drive with encroachments similar to the one proposed. All of the residences along Azalea Drive basically line up with setbacks of at least 25 feet from front property lines. Staff feels that the proposed carport structure will have an adverse visual impact on the surrounding properties. 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 carport structure. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. C. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends denial of the requested variances for placement of the carport structure. Board of Adiustment: (July 26, 2004) Sycrece Thomas was present, representing the application. Based on the fact that only three (3) Board members were present, the Board offered a deferral to the applicant. Ms. Thomas requested to defer the application to the August 30, 2004 Agenda. A motion was made to defer the application to the August 30, 2004 Agenda. The motion passed by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. The application was deferred. 2 t �-76k*7 May 26, 2004 To: The Board of Adjustment: This letter is in response to a courtesy notice we received from the Department of Planning & Development dated May 14, 2004. On May 4, 2004 we had a metal 20x20 detach carport placed on our front concrete driveway. Our home is located at 6904 Azalea Drive, Little Rock Arkansas. We wanted this carport to keep our cars out of the harsh weather. Most of all it helps us from getting wet when unloading groceries or other heavy objects in the rain. The carport helps as a covering until we can get an umbrella up for protection. The carport also help in keeping your car cooler on hot sunny days. We carefuily made a decision in the type of carport we chose, because we wanted one that would compliment our home and add value to the property. We would like very much if we could keep the carport as is and not have to remove it from the driveway. The carport is not near the street and does not block the view of drivers in anyway. There is not enough space on the side of the house for it, and we cannot get a car into our back yard. Therefore, placing it anywhere else on my property would not be feasible. We are asking to be considered for a residential zoning variance or permit to keep the carport as is. Sincerely yours, NO Jh Levelle Thomas Sycrece Thomas JULY 26 X04 ITEM NO.: 6 File No.: Z-7688 Owner: Manuel and Sonia Castrillo Address: 16 Timber Lane Description: Lot 14, Stonegate 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 carport addition with reduced setbacks and which crosses a platted building line. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single-family residential Proposed Use of Property: Single-family residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 16 Timber Lane is occupied by a one-story brick and frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide concrete driveway from Timber Lane which serves as access. The applicants recently constructed an unenclosed carport structure along the front and east side of the residence. The structure (support posts) is located on the east (side) property line, with the roof overhang extending slightly (6" to 1') over the side property line. The structure is located approximately 6 to 6.5 feet back from the front property line, extending across a 25 foot front platted building line. The structure's support posts are landscape timbers, with 2"x8" lumber as support beams. There are 2"x4" cross members and a plywood roof Heavy plastic material overlays the plywood roof. All of the 2x8 support beams and 2x4 cross members are spliced together, none are JULY 26, j04 ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont. continuous wood pieces. The carport structure is 20 feet wide and extends approximately 23.5 feet from the house toward the front property line. Section 36-254(d)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front setback of 25 feet for principal structure in R-2 zoning. Section 36-254(d)(2) requires a minimum side yard setback of 6.3 feet for this R-2 zoned lot. Additionally, Section 31-12(c ) of the City's Subdivision Ordinance requires that variances for encroachments across platted building lines be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Therefore, the applicants are requesting variances to allow the carport additions with a zero (0) side setback, 6 foot to 6.5 foot front setback and the structures encroachment across the front platted building line. Staff does not support the requested variances. Staff feels that the front yard encroachment, as proposed, will be out of character with this single family neighborhood. When staff mad an inspection of this property, a close look was taken at all the residences along Timber Lane to the east and west. Staff observed no other residences along Timber Lane with encroachments similar to the one proposed. All of the structures are aligned with front setbacks of approximately 25 feet. Staff feels that the proposed carport structure will have an adverse visual impact on the surrounding properties. Additionally, staff feels that the carport structure is a potentially unsafe structure. As noted above the cross members and main support beams are spliced together and not continuous wood pieces. Staff feels that the structure could very well not hold up with strong winds or heavy snow. 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 carport 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 Recommendations: Staff recommends denial of the requested variances associated with the carport addition. F JULY 26( j04 ITEM NO.: 6 (Cont.) Board of Adjustment: (July 26, 2004) The applicant was not present. Staff recommended that the application be deferred to the August 30, 2004 Agenda. A motion was made to defer the application to the August 30, 2004 Agenda. The motion passed by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. The application was deferred. 3 -;_I - -76 y4' June 18,2004 City Of Little Rock Planning and Development. Here I state the following reason why we need a variance for a carport. !For protection. to or vehicles and the family from weather conditions Example (rain, snow, etc .) And falling branches . • So the surface will not be muddy and wet. eFor security and privacy Thank you for the attention and I hope you understand why my family needs the variance for the carport. Sincerely, i Manuel Castrillo JULY 26, X04 ITEM NO.: 7 File No.: Z-7689 Owner: Teri Lipsmeyer Address: 5515 "H" Street Description: Lot 1 and part of Lot 2, Block 3, Lincoln Park Addition Zoned: R-3 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-255 and 36-156 to allow a new home with a reduced front setback and an accessory building with an increased rear yard coverage. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Vacant Proposed Use of Property: Single-family residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: 1. The general area has a long history of drainage problems. No encroachment of fill or wall construction of any kind should be placed within the existing alley ditch that would obstruct flow or narrow the channel. Call Mel Hall, Public Works, for grading instructions at 918-5217. B. Staff Analysis: The R-3 zoned property at 5515 "H" Street is currently an undeveloped lot. Some site work has taken place in preparation for construction of a new single family residence. The lot has a slight slope downward from front to back (north to south). The applicant proposes to construct a new home, in -ground swimming pool and accessory garage building on the lot, as noted on the attached site plan. The home (two stories) will have dimensions of 35 feet by 60 feet, and be located 15 feet back from the front property line and five (5) feet from the side property lines. The accessory building will be 30 feet JULY 26( 04 ITEM NO.: 7(Con't.) by 30 feet and located three (3) feet from the rear property line and 5 to 10 feet from the side property lines. The accessory building will be two stories in height and occupy 660 square feet (58%) of the required rear yard (rear 25 feet). The accessory building will be accessed by way of a new driveway within the platted alley along the east property line. There is also a platted alley along the south (rear) property line. Both alley rights-of-way are currently undeveloped. The applicant is also proposing an in -ground swimming pool located between the proposed principal and accessory buildings. Section 36-255(d)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front setback of 25 feet in R-3 zoning. Section 36-156(a)(2)c. allows accessory buildings to occupy a maximum of 30 percent of the required rear yard of the lot (rear 25 feet). Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances to allow a 15 foot front setback for the proposed home and an increased rear yard coverage (58%) fro the proposed accessory building. The proposed structures conform to all other minimum setback and separation requirements. Staff is not supportive of the variances, as requested. Although staff has no problem with the rear yard coverage variance, as it is not out of character with the neighborhood, staff cannot support the proposed 15 foot front setback for the proposed home. Staff feels that the reduced front setback will be out of character with the other homes along "H" Street. The two (2) homes immediately west of this property have front setbacks of 25 feet. The residence immediately to the east is considerably closer to the street, but it is a side yard relationship as the home faces Polk Street. Staff suggests reducing the depth of the accessory building by eliminating the north eight (8) feet of the structure, and pushing the principal structure and pool back further on the lot. Given the large size of the proposed home, as compared to the single family homes immediately west, staff feels that it would be most appropriate to move the structure back on the lot to more align with the smaller homes. Staff feels that a smaller accessory building (22 feet by 30 feet) will be sufficient to serve the principal structure and still allow for parking of two (2) vehicles. C. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends denial of the variances, as requested. 2 JULY 26( X04 ITEM NO.: 7(Con't.) Board of Adiustment: (July 26, 2004) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the board that the applicant had revised the application, moving the proposed house back to meet the minimum 25 foot front setback. Staff noted that the applicant had removed the pool from the proposed plan. Staff recommended approval of the revised application, subject to compliance with the Public Works comments noted in paragraph A. of the staff report. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as revised by the applicant and recommended by staff by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 Q�3 cx�,��I © 1 V C-C' LA c5 cess �ebc�5) S% S JULY 26, X04 ITEM NO.: 8 File No.: Z-7690 Owner: Roman Catholic Diocese Address: 3800/3900 N. Rodney Parham Road Description: Lots 1 R and 2R, Independence Square Subdivision Zoned: O-3 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-553 to allow a second ground -mounted sign on an office zoned lot. 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 B. Staff Analysis: The 0-3 zoned property at 3800/3900 N. Rodney Parham Road is occupied by two (2) multi -story office buildings, one (1) on each lot (Lot 1 R and Lot 2R, Independence Square Subdivision). There are paved drives and parking along the north, south and east sides of the buildings. There are two (2) access drives from N. Rodney Parham Road and one (1) drive from Woodland Heights Road. There are cross access and parking easements between the two (2) lots, essentially functioning as a single office development. Both lots are owned by the Roman Catholic Diocese. There is currently one (1) brick monument sign -on the north side of the main entry drive from N. Rodney Parham Road. The drive is centered between the two (2) office buildings, but entirely on Lot 1 R (3900 N. Rodney Parham Road). The sign is approximately 42 inches in height JULY 2d, iO4 ITEM NO.: 8(Con't.) and 40 square feet in area. There is no ground -mounted sign on Lot 2R (3900 N. Rodney Parham Road). The applicant proposes to construct a second monument sign on the south side of the main entry drive from N. Rodney Parham Road. The second sign would also be located on Lot 1 R, and be a mirror image of the sign on the north side of the drive. The new sign would identify businesses within the office building on Lot 2R. Section 36-553(a)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows one (1) ground -mounted sign per premises in office zoning. The sign is allowed to have a maximum height of six (6) feet and a maximum area of 64 square feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow a second ground -mounted sign on Lot 1 R. Both signs are under the maximum height and area allowed. Staff is supportive of the variance request. Staff feels that the request is reasonable, and is aesthetically the best solution in providing ground - mounted signage to both office buildings. Staff's support is based on there being no other ground -mounted signs along the N. Rodney Parham Road frontage of Lots 1 R and 2R, Independence Square Subdivision (3800/3900 N. Rodney Parham Road). Lot 2R would be allowed a ground -mounted sign along the Woodland Heights Road frontage according to ordinance standards. Staff feels that the second ground -mounted sign on Lot 1 R will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the requested sign variance, subject to the following conditions: 1. There are to be no other ground -mounted signs along the N. Rodney Parham Road frontage of Lots 1 R and 2R, Independence Square Subdivision (3800/3900 N. Rodney Parham Road). 2. A sign permit must be obtained for the new sign. JULY 26( 04 ITEM NO.: 8(Con't. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JULY 26, 2004) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 DICKSON FLAKE PARTNERS INC.- R E A L E S T A T E June 23, 2004 Dept. of Planning and Development City of Little Rock 723 West Markham Little Rock, AR Re: Application for Sign Zoning Variance 3800 N. Rodney Parham Rd. Little Rock, AR Dear Staff: As authorized agent of the owner for the above referenced property, we are hereby applying for a sign zoning variance. Although, there are two property parcels owned by the same entity, The Roman Catholic Diocese of Little Rock, the property gives the appearance of being one. The two buildings on this land are identical and face each other with one main entrance to the property between them. There is currently one monument type sign on the north side of the entrance that will be utilized by Christ the King for the north building. We are proposing an identical monument sign on the south side of the entrance that would allow business names for the tenants in the south building. The Diocese purchased both buildings with the intention of occupying the north building themselves and utilizing the existing monument sign for Christ the King. The south building is being used for multi -tenant office purposes. It is imperative that these tenants have signage at Rodney Parham identifying their businesses. The property line runs directly through the proposed area for the new sign. Although we understand that current zoning ordinance allows us to place the new sign 5' south of the property line, we are requesting a variance allowing us to place the sign on the property line. This would allow us to duplicate the existing signage and would provide uniform signage for the properties. In addition, placing the sign 5' south of the property line would place the sign directly on the curb line of the parking lot close to parked cars. 400 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE SUITE I200 Posy OFFICE Box 3546 L= Roar, ARKANSAS 72203 PHONE 50I-372-6I6I • FAX 50I -372-067I E-MAE. info@dickson4lakepartners.com http://www.dicksonflakepartners.com "L. DICKSON FLAKE, CRE, CCIM, SIOR *MARK A. BENn.E7, SIOR GAINES BoNNER DENISE BowER.s, RPA DAvm B. CARPENTER DRu E. ENGusH, CPM KAREN FLEMING MELANIE GTBsom CCIM, CPM *PHYLLIS-LASER GLAZE, CPM PHILIP GRACE DANA GRAY J. F=a-wR HANSON III • KEvua H. Hua-iiNwoN, CCIM, SIOR ° GARY L. JONES, CPM KAREN KEATHLEY DIANA G. LACY MARGARET M. MAHER ANDY NEwBERG BRAD RLINSICK • NoLAN L. RusHMG ° THOMAS J. RYSMM, CPM, CCIM LEAH M. SEARS MARGEREI STEVENS, CPM ° PRINCIPALS INDIVIDUAL OR CORPORATE MEMBERSHIPS Building Owners and Managers Association Counselor of Real Estate Commercial Investment Institute Institute of Real Estate Management International Council of Shopping Centers Little Rock Board of Realtors, Inc. National Association of Realtors Society of Industrial and Office Realtors Dept. of Planning & Development June 23, 2004 Page 2 Attached are the following documents to assist in this process: 1) Three (3) copies of a recent survey. 2) Graphic information with dimensions. 3) Application for Zoning Variance (Signs) Please contact me at 664-5524 should you have questions or need additional information. Thank you for your consideration in this request. Sincerely, ��- 60re�� /Denise Bowers, RPA Attachments Sign Zoning Variance JULY 2d, X04 ITEM NO.: 9 File No.: Z-7691 Owner: Michael and Marsha Ballard Address: 2412 N. Fillmore Street Description: Lots 10 and part of Lot 11, Block 31, Parkview Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254 and the fence provisions of Section 36-516 to allow an addition with a reduced side setback and a fence which exceeds the maximum height allowed. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: Single family residential Single family residential The R-2 zoned property at 2412 N. Fillmore Street is occupied by a one-story brick and frame residence. There is a one -car wide driveway from Fillmore Street which serves as access to the property. There is an attached carport on the north side of the residence which is located 3.5 feet from the side (north) property line. The carport is unenclosed on the north and east sides. The applicants propose to remove the existing carport structure at the northwest corner of the residence and make several two-story additions, as well as adding a second story to the existing residence. A copy of the proposed front building elevation and site are attached for Board of Adjustment review. JULY 26. X04 ITEM NO.: 9(Con't. The applicants propose to add a two-story porch to the front of the residence. The porch will be unenclosed (first story) on the north, south and east sides, and will be located 50 feet back from the front property line. A two-story room addition is proposed on the rear of the structure. Lastly, a two-story (13 foot wide) carport structure is proposed to be added on the north side of the residence. The structure will be unenclosed (first story) on the north, east and west sides, and will provide covered parking for two (2) vehicles. The carport addition will be 2.5 feet from the side (north) property line. As part of the redevelopment plan for the property, the applicants propose to construct an 8 foot high wood fence to enclose the rear yard. Section 36-254(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side setback of 6.5 feet for this R-2 zoned lot. Section 36- 516(e)(1)a. allows a maximum fence height of six (6) feet for residential property. Therefore, the applicants are requesting variances to allow the carport addition with a 2.5 foot side setback and the eight (8) foot high fence to enclose the rear yard. Because the existing house has a nonconforming side setback of 4.5 feet (south side), the addition of a second story will also require a side setback variance from Section 36- 254(d)(2). The applicants are also requesting a variance from this ordinance standard for the addition of the second level. Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff feels that the redevelopment plan for this property is reasonable and will not be out of character with the neighborhood. There are several rather large homes located to the north along both sides of Fillmore Street. Additionally, the home will have increased front (50 feet) and rear (40 feet) setbacks which will lessen the visual impact of a larger structure on the surrounding properties. Staff feels that the reduced side setback and increased rear yard fence height will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the requested variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. The carport structure (first floor) must remain unenclosed on the north, east and west sides. 2. Guttering must be provided to prevent water run-off onto the adjacent property to the north. 3. A building permit must be obtained for all construction, including the fence. 2 JULY 26, X04 O.: 9(Con't. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JULY 26, 2004) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 Office of Planning and Development Dear Monte, On behalf of Marsha and Mike Ballard, owners of property located at 2412 North Fillmore Street, we would like to request a variance to the side yard setback requirements. The house as it currently sits does not meet the minimum set back requirement of 6.5 feet. The Ballards would like to remove the existing carport structure on the north side of the property and construct in its place, and extending directly east of the existing structure, a covered carport that is open on 3 sides (the front, back, and north side) with the exception of structural columns. This remodel would require removing the roof of the existing house to allow for construction of a second floor over the entire footprint of the existing structure including the new carport. (Please see attached drawing). Due to the narrow lot.,configuration and without the ability to access parking from the rear of the house, there is no other alternative for off the street covered parking adjacent to the house. The current structure is quite old and does not adequately meet the needs of the property owners. It will not be in keeping with the rest of the house after the remodel. The Ballards would also like to request an 8 foot fence variance along the 'interior' property lines surrounding the house. There is currently a 6 foot fence on these property lines. The 8 foot fence will provide for privacy in the backyard area where the Ballards are planning to create an outdoor living space directly off the back of the house. Thank you very much for your consideration of these variances. Sincerely, Cathy ursell Creative Heights Partners YJ"r'%1G/YJ4 10:1H HHM,---LNiKHL � 7-4913773u3J riu. rou Ybb.J/q ti -E4 a, -4 1 i- -76 1 r July 1, 2004 City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201-1334 Re; Zoning' Variance Request — 2412 North Fillmore We are the owners of the property 4acent to and immediately north of 2412 North Fillmore Street. We have reviewed the architectural plans and the survey showing the remodeling project proposed by Michael and Marsha Ballard, owners of the home located at 2412 North Fillmore, and we have no objections. Specifically, we do not object to the remodeling project requiring a zoning variance for the reduction of the set back requirements far the side yard to the north and south of the property and the variance request for an 8 foot fence. Thank you. Sincerely, ` �•r�t'i � Qi�G Phillip and Diane Carroll 2424 North Fillmore Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 (501) 663-6025 07/22/04 15:18 AHEC-CENTRAL a 5013993435 N0.780 P002/003 July 2, 2004 City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201-1334 Re; Zoning Variance Request — 2412 North Fillmore I am the sole owner of the property adjacent to and immediately south of 2412 North Fillmore Street. I have reviewed the architectural plans and the survey showing the remodeling project proposed by Michael and Matshe Ballard, owners of the home located at 2412 North Fillmore, and I have no objections. Specifically, I do not object to the remodeling project requiring a zoning variance for the reduction of the set back requirements for the side yard to the north and south of the property and the variance request for an 8 foot fence. Thank you. Sincerely, (94,� 1 Pat A. Wiggin 2410 North Fillmore Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 (501)603-9762 JULY 26 104 ITEM NO.: 10 File No.: Z-7692 Owner: William and Rhona Temple Address: 20 Pebble Beach Drive Description: Lots 12, Block 7, Pleasant Valley Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the building line provisions of Section 31-12 and the fence provisions of Section 36-516 to allow existing structures which cross a platted building line and an existing fence which exceeds the maximum height allowed. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: Single family residential Single family residential The R-2 zoned property at 20 Pebble Beach Drive is occupied by a two- story brick and frame single family residence, with an in -ground swimming pool located in the rear yard. The property is located on the northwest corner of Pebble Beach Drive and Roswell Court. A two -car driveway from Roswell Court serves as access to the property. There is an existing six (6) foot high wood fence enclosing the rear yard. The property has a 40 foot platted building line along the front (east) property line and along the street side (south) property line. The platted building line narrows to 24 feet at the southwest corner of the property. When the property was developed 28 years ago, the southwest corners of the residence and pool structure were constructed across the platted building line (south side). Approximately 164 square feet of the residence and 78 square feet of the pool extend across the platted JULY 26, )04 ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) building line. Additionally, when the property was developed a six (6) foot high wood fence was constructed to enclose the rear yard. A portion of the fence is located between the platted building line and the south (Roswell Court) property line, with a small portion of the fence at the southwest corner of the property being located in the public right-of- way. Section 31-12( c) of the City's Subdivision Ordinance requires that encroachments across platted building lines be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. Section 36-516(e)(1)a. of the Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum fence height of four (4) feet for residential fences located between a building setback line and a street right-of- way. A maximum fence height of six (6) feet is allowed elsewhere on single family lots. Therefore, the applicants are requesting variances from these ordinance standards in order to bring the property into compliance and avoid possible future title problems. Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff views the variances as minor in nature. The principal structure and accessory pool structure conform to the minimum ordinance required setbacks. Staff is unsure how the structures got built 28 years ago with encroachments across the side platted building line. Additionally, when the fence was constructed, the current residential fence requirements were not yet in place. Staff has no problem legitimizing the nonconforming building line encroachments and fence height, as they have had no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or general area since the lot was developed. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the side building line for the single family residence and pool structure. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. C. Staff Analysis: Staff recommends approval of the requested variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. Completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the side platted building line as approved by the Board. 2. A franchise must be obtained from the Public Works Department (John Barr 371-4646) for the portion of the fence which extends into the public right-of-way at the southwest corner of the property. 2 JULY 26( X04 ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont.) BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JULY 26, 2004) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 3 Mr. William C. 'Temple c� #20 Pebble Beach Drive / Little Rock, Arkansas 72212 April 6, 2004 Board of Adjustment Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: Requests for Residential Variances from the Requirements of the Zoning Ordinances — Lot 12, Block 7, Pleasant Valley Addition to the City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas. Dear Sir or Madam: When we purchased our home at #20 Pebble Beach Drive in Little Rock in August of 2002, we were informed that a variance would be needed. The problem with the title was not disclosed until the date of our closing on the house. We need to resolve the variance issues in order to obtain clear title to the property as defined by Bill's employer, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Should he be transferred, the FBI will not assist with any issues related to our housing if title to our home is not clear. We certainly hope that no transfer will be forthcoming, but it is prudent that we address this matter at this time. Based upon the enclosed survey, apparently when the house and swimming pool were constructed, approximately 28 years ago, the corner of the house, the driveway and a part of the swimming pool extended beyond the building lot lines. The house is a brick dwelling, the driveway is concrete and the pool is concrete, in -ground. Also our south fence, a wood fence that was constructed approximately 28 years ago, appears to extend into the area that may have been platted as a part of Roswell Court cul-de-sac. To the best of our knowledge, none of these improvements have been extended or materially changed since they were originally constructed during the development of this area of the subdivision. In order to have clear title to the property, we would respectflAy request variances concerning these issues. You can contact us at 501-224-9933 or 501-228-8500. Our fax number is 501-224- 9934. Thank you so much for your kind assistance in these matters. Yours truly, William C. Temple 6) 40 0 , III Rhona Weaver Temple JULY 26( )04 ITEM NO.: 11 File No.: Z-7693 Owner: Rebecca Walter Address: 9201 Cynthia Drive Description: Lot 40, Clover Hill Place, Sec. B Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-156 and the easement provisions of Section 36-11 to allow an accessory structure with a reduced side setback and which extends into a utility easement. Justification: No cover letter submitted by the applicant. Present Use of Property: Single-family residential Proposed Use of Property: Single-family residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments — Public Works has no drainage facilities in this easement. B. Staff Note: A recent inspection of the property revealed that the applicant moved the accessory building to meet the minimum required setbacks and has located the structure out of the utility easement along the west property line. Therefore, no variances are needed, and the applicant is requesting that the application be withdrawn. Staff supports the withdrawal request. JULY 26( )04 ITEM NO.: 11(Con't.) Board of Adiustment: (July 26, 2004) Staff informed the board that the applicant requested to withdraw the application. Staff supported the withdrawal request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and withdrawn by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. i► 0 0 U W w H 0 H z W ''N^ v, ^D Q U. 0 a 0 m A I� LA l a W W >- 0 F- 0 °W Z H 0 m LU o e C x LL 0 Of 4 W z � >- � Q YUW I- LL m (D 2 wr O 0 y' w Q> Er � o W Z�-0m Q to w LL CO0 LL w- Cn U Q LL 5 Q m (D � >m _ 0- a� c 0 WE Ow .. z ' W�/� U) co mi w z E LU J¢ W W >- 0 F- 0 °W Z H 0 m LU o e C x LL 0 Of W z � >- � Q m J_ I- LL m (D 2 0- a� c 0 WE Ow .. z ' W�/� U) co mi w z E LU J¢ July 26, 2004 There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 2:11 p.m. Date: o--50- 2± f hairman Se retary