Loading...
boa_10 25 2004LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY OF MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 2004 2:00 P.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being four (4) in number. II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting The Minutes of the September 27, 2004 meeting were approved as mailed by unanimous vote. III. Members Present: Members Absent: Fred Gray, Chairman Andrew Francis, Vice Chairman David Wilbourn Debra Harris Terry Burruss City Attorney Present: Debra Weldon LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA OCTOBER 25, 2004 2:00 P.M. I. DEFERRED ITEM: A. Z-7659 Kenwood Subdivision H. NEW ITEMS 1. Z -3328-A 5419 Edgewood Road 2. Z -5611-A 2212 Beechwood 3. Z -6773-A 2400 Cantrell Road 4. Z-7121 -A 4 Parliament Place 5. Z -7467-A 18 Greathouse Bend Drive 6. Z-7731 5 Cantrell Road 7. Z-7732 2324 Summit Street 8. Z-7733 1904 N. Monroe Street 9. Z-7734 13 Christopher Cove 10. Z-7735 9 Wood Sorrel Point 11. Z-7736 21 Longfellow Lane 12. 2005 Board of Adjustment Calendar 2 Q) Q) ; ~ LO # ee •� � } . w 7 � � Co Ei ■ Q \ a � � * 1 � �� | M • � _� _ � k CL� o , ! _w § e m, a _ § ® 'wn .ice■��a_� �� - �� . �� - ƒ . H d am \ ( / _ . % _ a ! o % (§ 330N m .s « — � « £ ¥slinn®� -�� � � - � f � _ _ a ,JWGNM ƒ � � � - M ( 0 m OCTOBER 25, 2004 _u 170•MA 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 OCTOBEk 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: A (CON'T.) 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 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 2 i OCTOBEk 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: A (CON'T.) 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: 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: (JUNE 28, 2004) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested to defer the application to the July 26, 2004 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the July 26, 2004 Agenda by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. 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. 3 OCTOBEk 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: A (CON'T. 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. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 30, 2004) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested to defer the application to the October 25, 2004 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the October 25, 2004 Agenda by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (OCTOBER 25, 2004) Staff informed the Board that the applicant submitted a letter to staff requesting that the application be withdrawn, as the Planning Commission revised the preliminary plat for the property which addressed the fence issue. 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 absent. C! K WHITE - DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 0 24 Rahling Circle 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, 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 OCTOBER 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 1 File No.: Z -3328-A Owner: Scott and Kay Woods Address: 5419 Edgewood Road Description: Lot 146 and part of Lot 145, Prospect Terrace No. 2 Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254 to allow a building addition with reduced 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 5419 Edgewood Road is occupied by a two- story brick and frame single family residential structure. There is a one - car wide driveway from Edgewood Road which serves as access. The existing structure extends to within 13.5 feet of the rear (south) property line. There is a one-story detached storage building between the home and the rear property line. The applicants propose to remove the one-story addition on the rear of the structure and the accessory building and construct a new two-story building addition. The proposed addition will be constructed the width of the existing home, and be set back 8 feet from the side (west) property line and 12 feet from the rear property line. An uncovered, unenclosed deck will be constructed along the east side of the existing porch and building addition, at the southeast corner of the structure. The 5.5 foot wide deck will be located 28 feet from the side (east) property line and 8 OCTOBER 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T.) feet from the rear property line. The proposed addition will include an exterior door on the west side of the addition, with steps which will be located approximately four (4) feet back from the side (west) property line. Section 36-254(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum eight (8) foot side setback for this R-2 zoned lot. Section 36-254(d)(3) requires a minimum rear yard setback of 25 feet. Therefore, the applicants are requesting variances from these ordinance standards. Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff feels that the proposed building addition will not be out of character with the neighborhood. Several building additions with similar massing have been approved in this general area. As noted previously, the existing house is located 13.5 feet from the rear property line, with an accessory building between the house and the rear line. The addition is proposed to go slightly closer to the rear property line (12 feet), with removal of the accessory building. Although the proposed building addition is wider than the portion of the house to be removed, staff feels that the proposed building addition will be compatible with the neighborhood, and have no negative impact on the adjacent properties. C. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the requested setback variances, subject to the proposed deck structure on the east side of the residence and the proposed steps on the west side of the structure remaining uncovered and unenclosed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (OCTOBER 25, 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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. 6 Request for Variance ��e-,,,_ 44 Address: 5419 Edgewood Rd. Little Rock, AR General Location: Prospect Terrace Legal Description.: Single Family Dwelling Applicant (owner): Scott and Kay Woods The applicant proposes to remove an existing, attached structure and replace it with a new master bedroom and bath. The existing structure, at one time, was probably a detached garage or utility house that, over the years, was attached to the main house. However, the condition of the structure today does not warrant updating because of the lack of insulation, unsteady sub flooring and limited crawl space. The proposed new structure will basically go back in the same spot. However, the existing structure and the proposed structure are closer to the back property line than is allowed. Also, the proposed structure will occupy a larger percentage of the back yard. Applicant signature c� // -7 4 Date OCTOBER 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 2 File No.: Z -5611-A Owner: Randall and Karen Mourot Address: 2212 Beechwood Description: Lots 3-5, Block 10, Country Club Heights Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254 to allow a building addition with a reduced rear setback. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 2212 Beechwood is occupied by a three- story frame single family residence. There is a two -car wide concrete drive from Beechwood which serves as access. There is a one -car wide carport/breezeway on the south side of the house, with a two-story detached garage at the southwest corner of the property. The detached carport is located approximately three (3) feet from the side (south) property line and 7 feet from the rear (west) property line. The applicants propose to remove the existing breezeway and detached garage, and construct a two-story building addition on the southwest corner of the existing house. A new breezeway with porch extension will be constructed along the east and south side of the proposed addition. The proposed building addition will be approximately 33 feet wide and be located approximately 27 feet from the side (south) property line, and maintain the same 7 foot rear yard setback as the l OCTOBEk 2-5, 2004 ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T. existing garage structure. The breezeway structure will be located 17 feet from the east side property line. Section 36-254(d)(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear yard setback of 25 feet. Therefore, the applicants are requesting a variance from this ordinance standard to allow the 7 foot rear setback for the proposed addition. Staff is supportive of the requested variance. The proposed addition will not be out of character with other single family residences in this immediate area near the Little Rock Country Club. The existing garage structure which will be removed has 34.3 feet of width along the rear property line, with the new addition being approximately 33 feet wide. Therefore, the overall building mass on the site will be approximately the same as currently exists. Staff feels that the proposed building addition will be compatible with the neighborhood, and will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties. C. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the requested rear yard setback variance, as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (OCTOBER 25, 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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. FA September 22, 2004 Dear Members of the Board of Adjustment, We are requesting a variance for an addition to our home at 2212 Beechwood, Lots 3, 4, and 5 of the Country Club Heights addition. Since building our home in 1994, we have increased the size of our family from two children to four children, and we have not only outgrown our space, but the spaces we have need adjusting. We currently have a three car garage that is detached from our house(7 feet away). It is currently being used primarily for storage, since the storage in our house is not sufficient enough for the six of us. Above the garage, on the second floor, is a bedroom, a small living room and a bath. Because it is detached, we cannot use this bedroom for our children, and therefore, it does not resolve the issue of needing another bedroom for our children. We are also faced with the fast approaching situation of two more drivers in our family as our children get to be driving age. We know our neighbors do not want cars parked on the street, which is a narrow dead-end street, so our plan includes a longer driveway. Finally, as my mother approaches her 85th birthday, I am realizing that we soon will need a bedroom downstairs where she ca-dhve as her health declines. Our proposal is to tear down our existing two-story, three -car garage/guest quarters, and build back a two -car garage with storage space. Upstairs we would add an additional bedroom for one of our children, and downstairs a bedroom suite for my mother. Regarding the two neighbors that this would directly effect, the new structure would actually be farther away from our neighbors to the south, and less linear footage running along our property to the east. Also, by connecting the garage to the house, it moves the structure out of our eastern neighbors direct line of sight from the back of her house, and behind the trees in the corner of her lot. Sincerely, been b,. WCU. ro- - Karen B. Mourot OCTOBEk L5, 2004 ITEM NO.: 3 File No.: Z -6773-A Owner: Gus Blass III Applicant: Cuerden Sign company Address: 2400 Cantrell Road Description: North side of Cantrell Road, east of Riverfront Drive Zoned: 1-3 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-554 and 36-557 to permit more projecting signs than allowed and the permanent use of banner signs. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Restaurant and Office/Warehouse Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: Restaurant and Office/Warehouse The 1-3 zoned property at 2400 Cantrell Road is occupied by a multi - building office/warehouse development. There are three (3) large office/warehouse buildings oriented east/west on the property. There is a smaller building oriented north/south along the west property line. Cajun's Restaurant is located in the west end of the northernmost east/west building. There is a main entry drive from Cantrell Road at the southwest corner of the property. Access to the rear (northernmost) building is by way of the driveway at the west end of the two (2) southern east/west buildings. The applicant proposes to mount three (3) banner signs permanently on the west end of the each of the two southernmost buildings, for a total of OCTOBER 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T. six (6) banner signs. The signs would advertise Cajun's Restaurant, with each banner being approximately 8 feet by 4 feet in size. The banner signs would be interchangeable and mounted to metal brackets (frames) attached to the buildings. The metal frames would extend approximately 3.5 feet above the roof line of each building. Each banner sign will be lighted by way of gooseneck light fixtures at the top of each metal frame. In addition to the banner signs, the applicant is also making upgrades in the landscaped areas (including accent lighting) along the access drive leading to the restaurant. Section 36-554(a)(2)c of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows only one (1) projecting sign per occupancy, not to exceed 12 square feet in area for industrial zoned property. 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 variances from these ordinance standards to allow the six (6) projecting signs for Cajun's Restaurant, and the permanent use of banner signs. Staff is not supportive of the variances as requested. Staff cannot support the variances due to the fact that the banner sign will advertise a specific business within the development, and that they will extend above the roofline of the buildings. Staff has supported variances for the permanent use of banner signs in the past (1001 S. Bowman Road and 12309 Chenal Parkway), with certain conditions. Those conditions included the banner sign being for identification of the overall development only, that there be no wording on the banner signs which advertises a specific business, sale/promotion, merchandise or product line, and that they be removed or replaced if damaged. Staff could support the banner sign for this location under these conditions and with the frames being located below the roofline of the buildings. Staff feels that the requested use of banner signs is not reasonable and would be unfair to the other businesses located within this development. C. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends denial of the sign variances, as requested. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (OCTOBER 25, 2004) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested to defer the application to the November 29, 2004 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. 2 OCTOBER L5, 2004 ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the November 29, 2004 Agenda by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. 3 INWFiF'OFA7ED Serving Arkansas Since 1920 Po Box 187 Conway AR 72032-0187 www.cscsigns.com email:cuerden@swbel1.net (501) 329-6317 Fax(501)327-3438 (800) 844-3155 September 24, 2004 Monty Moore City of Little Rock 701 West Markham Little Rock AR Re Capital Park/Cajun's Wharf Variance Application Dear Mr. Moore, j'-� &W -7- -7 73 -A- Enclosed please find our application for a variance to allow projecting signs at the Capital Park property on Cantrell Road in Little Rock. We respectfully request a variance due to the face that projecting signs are not allowed in the sign ordinance, and placing the signs flat on the building would make them unreadable due to the proximity of the drive -way in relation to the elevations. Capital Properties has carefully crafted a very unique entrance to Cajun's Wharf, and the projecting banners are a key architectural element to the design. The banners would be primarily promotional in nature, similar to what many cities do on street light -poles along their rights of way. In addition to the signs Capital Properties is to install bollard style lights to help create a safe park like atmosphere. While the city has spent substantial sums of money to create a safe pedestrian friendly atmosphere at the Riverfront, it is necessary for private property owners to fund similar efforts elsewhere, and that is the intent of this project. As I mentioned the projecting banners would be seasonal and changed periodically. The banners are illuminated to enhance the nighttime atmosphere and pedestrian safety of the area. Enclosed please find a site plan showing the proposed improvements, and drawings of the proposed banners, there will be six banners, three on the west end of the two buildings on the right hand side of the drive into the north parking area of the complex. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 501 329 6317. Thank you for your assi$ance in the matter. Sign Co., Inc. OCTOBEk 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 4 File No.: Z-7121 -A Owner: Gerald and Patsy Vines Address: 4 Parliament Place Description: Lot 1 A, Block 5, Villages of Wellington Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254 to allow a building addition with a reduced 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 Analvsis: Single Family Residential The R-2 zoned property at 4 Parliament Place is occupied by a one- story brick and frame single family residence. There is a two -car wide driveway from Parliament Place which serves as access. The property has a slight slope downward from north to south. Wellington Village Road is located along the west property line, with a narrow strip of green space between the lot and the street. The grade of Wellington Village Road is approximately 3 to 4 feet below the grade of this property. There is a 6 foot high wood fence which encloses the rear yard of the property. The applicants propose to construct a 10 foot by 18 foot sunroom addition on the rear of the residence, with a 10 foot by 10 foot covered, unenclosed patio. The sunroom and patio additions are noted on the attached site plan. The additions will be located 12 feet to 14 feet from the rear property line, along Wellington Village Road. OCTOBEk 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 4 (CON'T.) Section 36-254(d)(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum 25 foot rear setback for R-2 zoned lots. Therefore, the applicants are requesting a variance from this ordinance requirement. The Board of Adjustment recently granted a variance for a reduced rear yard setback for the single family home, as it is located 21.2 feet from the rear property line at the structure's northwest corner. Staff is supportive of the requested rear yard setback variance. Staff views the variance as relatively minor. The property has a rear yard relationship with a narrow strip of green space and a street right-of-way, as there are no adjacent single family structures to the west. Additionally, the front of the lot has an unusual curved shape being within the bulb of a cul-de-sac street, which causes the house to be pushed back on the lot further than usual. Otherwise, there would be ample lot space for the proposed addition with no variances. Staff believes the proposed sunroom/covered patio addition will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the requested rear yard setback variance, subject to the covered patio area remaining unenclosed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (OCTOBER 25, 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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. 6 September 23, 2004 To whom it may concern; ©e'_tx_4 We rtld lire to submit a proposal tohave a licensed contrail build a additional structure to our home. The property is located in.the Villages of Wellington @ 4 Parliament Place. The addition will be on the rear (west) side of the home. The complete structure is 10 x 28 with the same pitch and hip roof line as well as architectural shingles and vinyl eves. The enclosed structure will be 1.0 x 18 with wall to wall storm windows and 2 exterior doors. The additional 10 feet will serve as a covered patio for furniture and a grill, all being on. a concrete -slab. The addition will serve as a family area, sitting room, game room for our grandchildren as well as for outdoor activities. The structure. will be as such that i i -ill not appear to be an add ont A 7ft wood fence is presently framing the back yard. This will riot only add value to our home but also more space and character! a Thank you in 40vance for your time and .consideration in this structural audition to our home. Gerald and Patsy Vines A011t !�= 0 1- CO 0-2 - 3 0 8 OCTOBER 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 5 File No.: Z -7467-A Owner: James Raczynski and Martha Phillips Address: 18 Greathouse Bend Drive Description: Lot 23, Greathouse Bend Estates Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the height provisions of Section 36-254 to permit a single family structure which exceeds the maximum height allowed. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residence under construction. Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analvsis: The R-2 zoned property at 18 Greathouse Bend Drive is occupied by a three-story rock and stucco single family structure which is in the process of being constructed and nearing completion. A driveway from a rear access easement will serve as access to the property. The property slopes downward from back to front (south to north). The new house is located within the east half of the property, with a detached garage structure within the west half. The garage is connected to the principal structure by an unenclosed breezeway. The garage structure is located approximately 53 feet back from the front property line. On August 25, 2003 the Board of Adjustment granted a front setback variance for the detached garage at the west end of the residence. At that same meeting, the Board denied a requested height variance. The applicants proposed to construct a new single family residence on the OCTOBER 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 5 CON'T. property. The structure was to have two (2) main levels, with a finished basement level and an observation level (4th story). The building had an overall height of 42 feet, as measured from the finished floor of the basement to the mean roof line of the observation level. After the Board denial of the height variance, the applicants decided to proceed with construction of the residence and not finish out the basement level. With the basement level being unfinished, the overall height of the structure complies with ordinance standards. The overall height is less than 35 feet as measured from the first level finished floor to the mean roof line of the observation level. The applicants are back before the Board requesting another height variance, based on the fact that they now wish to finish out the basement level of the structure. Section 36-254(c ) of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum building height of 35 feet for R-2 zoned property. As noted previously, the building will have an overall height of approximately 42 feet if the basement level is finished out, as measured from the finished floor of the basement to the mean roof line of the observation level. Staff supports the variance request. Staff views the requested variance as very minor in nature. The topography of the lot and the fact that the applicants wish to finish out the basement level of the structure, dictate the way that the building height is calculated. The height variance in this case is only a technical issue in how the overall height is calculated. As far as the overall height of the structure is concerned, there will be no physical changes from what exists on the site at this time. Staff believes allowing the basement level to be finished will not affect the impact of the structure on adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendations.- Staff ecommendations: Staff recommends approval of the requested height variance, as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (OCTOBER 25, 2004) Staff informed the Board that the applicant requested to defer the application to the November 29, 2004 Agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the November 29, 2004 Agenda by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. 2 i Proposal for Zoning Variance Located at Lot 23, Greathouse Bend Estates Phase H in the City of the Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas. . Presented by General Partners of FC Enterprises, Inc. Justin Cleveland and Chuck Fiser September 24, 2004 FC Enterprises, Inc. 1 Pinehurst Circle Little Rock, AR 72212 Page 1 Zoning Variance Summary The following document represents the proposal for (1) Zoning Variance for the property located at #18 Greathouse Bend Drive. Acting on behalf of the property owners, James H. Raczynski & Martha M. Phillips; FC Enterprises is requesting 'I zoning variance. The variance deals with the proposed height of the single-family dwelling. Height Variance: It has been communicated to FC Enterprises that the maximum height of a single-family dwelling is 35 feet. Due to the topography of the property and the fact that the property is being constructed with the intent to `view' the Arkansas river, the property owners built a house that includes a basement, 2 levels and an observation tower. The basement, if finished out, would cause the house to exceed the maximum height 35 feet. The final height would be approximately 41 feet. However, since the basement is not finished out, it currently remains in compliance with the all city code and zoning restrictions. With that said, the property owners would like to propose this zoning variance to allow them to finish the living space that is currently the basement. The structure already exists and the proposal would allow the basement to become another living area in the house. Page 2 OCTOBER 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 6 File No.: Z-7731 Owner: Raymond and Kimberly Battle Address: 5 Cantrell Road Description: Lot 6, Pine View Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the fence provisions of Section 36-516 to permit 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 Residence under reconstruction. Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property at 5 Cantrell Road is occupied by a two-story rock and frame single family residence which is currently being remodeled, including building additions. There is a circular drive from Cantrell Road which serves as access. There is an existing six (6) foot high chain-link fence along the east and west property lines which extends to within 11 to 14 feet of the front (north) property line. There is also an existing six (6) foot high wrought iron fence with vehicular gates along the front property line, approximately 11 to 14 feet back from the front property line. The applicants propose to replace the existing chain-link fence along the east and west property lines with a six (6) foot high wood privacy fence. The proposed fence will tie into the existing wrought iron fence, extending no closer to the front property line than the existing chain-link OCTOBEk 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 6 (CON'T.) fence. The fence is located between a front platted building line and the Cantrell Road right-of-way. Section 36-516(e)(1)a. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum fence height of four (4) feet for fences located between building setback lines and street rights-of-way. A maximum fence height of six (6) feet is allowed for fences elsewhere on the property. Therefore, the applicants are requesting a variance to allow the six (6) foot fence height between the front platted building line and the Cantrell Road right-of-way. Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the request as very minor. The applicant is requesting to remove an existing six (6) foot high chain link fence and replace it with a wood fence of the same height. An inspection of the property by staff revealed that the fence is set back far enough from the edge of Cantrell Road as to not create a sight/distance problem with vehicles exiting this property or the adjacent properties. Therefore, staff feels that the proposed fence will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the requested fence variance, subject to a building permit being obtained for the fence construction. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (OCTOBER 25, 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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Battle 5 Cantrell Road - Little Rock, Arkansas 72207 Mr. and Mrs. French Bill 7 Cantrell Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72207 Mr. and Mrs. Ray Bell 3 Cantrell Road Little Rock, Arkansas 12207 .Dear Board of Adjustment Members; �R -- -7 73 I (2 -- to -Y?- We respectfully request approval to replace the existing 6 foot chain link fence with a 6 foot wooden privacy fence. The existing fence will be professionally removed and replaced by Ingle Fence Company. The beautiful new fence will be wooden with Ingle's signature box posts and top railings. We request this change for several reasons; I . The new wooden double faced fence will be more aesthetically pleasing than the current chain link fence ---the neighborhood will be improved. 2. The privacy and security for our homes will be enhanced. 3. The new wooden fence will reduce the traffic noise from Cantrell. 4. The exception distance we request is very smallto transition to a 4 foot fence for this distance would look contrived. To leave the existing chain link for that small distance would also look contrived. S. The existing fence runs perpendicular to Cantrell and will not be an obstruction—there is good visibility when exiting any of the surrounding driveways. Thank you for giving this request your positive consideration. We are available to answer any questions that you may have. Xnmiin ely, n Raymon attle Martha F and Fre�nch HiII Caroline and Ray Bell Sep 21 04 09:10p Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Battle 5 Cantrell Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72207 Mr. and Mrs. French hill 7 Cantrell Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72207 Mr. and Mrs. Ray Bell 3 Cantrell Road Little Rock, Arkansas 12207 Dear Board of Adjustment Members; We respectfully request approval to replace the existing 6 foot chain link fence with a 6 foot wooden privacy fence. The existing fence will'be professionally removed and replaced by Ingle Fence Company. The beautiful new fence will be wooden with Ingle's signature box posts and top railings. We request this change for several reasons; I. The new wooden double faced fence will be more aesthetically pleasing than the current chain link fence—the neighborhood will be improved. 2. The privacy and security for our homes will be enhanced. 3. The new wooden fence will reduce the traffic noise from Cantrell. 4. The exception distance we request is very small—to transition to a 4 foot fence for this distance would look contrived. To leave the existing chain link for that small distance would also look contrived. 5. The existing fence runs perpendicular to Cantrell and will not be an obstruction—there is good visibility when exiting any of the surrounding driveways. Thank you for giving this request your positive consideration. We are available to answer any questions that you may have. Most sincerely, Kim and Raymond Battle Martha and French Hill Caroline and Ray Bell p.2 OCTOBEk 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 7 File No.: Z-7732 Owner: Mervin and Alma Walker Address: 2324 Summit Street Description: Lot 6, Block 9 Sheldon's Addition Zoned: R-4 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-256 to allow a building addition with a reduced side setback. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: The R-4 zoned property at 2324 Summit Street is occupied by a two- story frame single family residence. Driveways from West 24th street and the alley along the west property line serve as access to the property. The site is located on the northwest corner of Summit and West 24th Streets. The applicants recently made a 10 foot by 20 foot room addition on top of an existing deck structure at the northwest corner of the residence. The addition is located approximately 0.8 foot from the side (north) property line, as was the existing deck structure. The addition's overhang extends approximately 1.4 feet across the north side property line. The remainder of the existing deck structure (10 feet by 20 feet) is located immediately west of the addition and is unenclosed and uncovered. The property owner has noted that the deck structure was OCTOBER 25, 2004 7 (CON'T. in place and appeared several years old when he purchased the house in 1998. Section 36-256(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side yard setback of 4.9 feet for this R-4 zoned lot. Therefore, the applicants are requesting a variance from this ordinance requirement. The existing deck/addition is located well over 40 feet from the rear (west) property line, so no rear setback variance is needed. Staff is not supportive of the variance, as requested. Although the addition only occupies 10 feet of the overall 132.5 foot lot depth, staff cannot support the structure overhanging the side property line. If the applicant were willing to reduce the addition's overhang and provide guttering inside the side property line, and obtain a letter of approval from the property owner next door (north), staff could support the side setback variance. The house on the property immediately to the north is located approximately 10 feet back from the dividing side property line. Therefore, staff feels that adequate separation would exist between the two residences. If the applicant amends the application as suggested by staff, staff feels that the building addition will have no adverse impact on the adjacent property or the general area. C. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends denial of the requested side setback variance, as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (OCTOBER 25, 2004) Staff informed the Board that the applicant, Mr. Walker, revised the application to reduce the overhang and provide guttering, all on his side of the side property line. He also provided a letter from the property owner to the north approving the building addition. Staff recommended approval of the revised application, subject to the overhang being reduced and guttering being installed (all on Mr. Walker's property) within 30 days. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved, as revised and recommended by staff, by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. 2 14� 4- -,2—-7737, ,,__7737, 9 -to -09 Cn, Deve(o rte V v i tv 4-1"C _C4. s 'h ©yam a r G nee- e, rv\ 'i �, ► Y j1.. � +�.� S _- O C" /l C' 6 !1J � �r�. b r � i �t C � .-__ _ .- _ N� a -a ry —C o -v ` S A/ V 2• a�vd.,T4.- 6 & so o e�r+� --- ._.-- - J ccr r w� w Ye s C&4 s G e t+wto e ('+ e r o tv (- o4 u s khe w g of P- r b b rt e Dn� rvs CtYAACe, OCTOBER 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 8 File No.: Z-7733 Owner: Danny Wewers and Elizabeth Braatelien Address: 1904 N. Monroe Street Description: Part of Lots 59 and 60, Shadowlawn Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254 and the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a porch addition with a reduced front setback, and which crosses a 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 Analvsis: The R-2 zoned property at 1904 N. Monroe Street is occupied by a two- story brick and frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide concrete drive from N. Monroe Street which serves as access. The applicants propose to remove an existing small covered porch and steps from the front of the house and construct a new porch with steps. The proposed porch will be eight (8) feet wide and extend almost the entire width of the house (34.5 feet). The porch will be covered and unenclosed. The main body of the porch structure will be located 22 feet to 27 feet back from the front (east) property line, with the new steps being 21 feet back from the front line. The new structure will cross a 30 foot front platted building line. OCTOBER 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 8 (CON'T.) 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 applicants are requesting variances from these ordinance standards to allow the proposed porch addition with a reduced front setback and which crosses a platted building line. Staff is supportive of the requested variances associated with the proposed porch construction. Staff feels that the proposed unenclosed porch will be compatible with the neighborhood, and give the single family residence more street appeal. With the curvature of N. Monroe Street from this lot north to Club Road, the proposed porch addition will have the appearance of lining up with the residences to the north, along this side of N. Monroe Street. Therefore, staff believes the proposed porch addition will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the platted front building line for the proposed porch 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 approval of the requested variances associated with the porch addition, subject to the following conditions: 1. Completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the front platted building line as approved by the Board. 2. The porch must remain unenclosed on the north, south and east sides. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (OCTOBER 25, 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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. 2 Wm. B. HEARNSBERGER, INC. 174, Y ENGINEERING/CONSTRUCTION ;�—' — 77-3 3 Sept. 24, 2004 Ms. Donna James City of Little Rock Planning Department 723 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: 1904 North Monroe The North 40'of Lot 59 AND the South 20' of Lot 60, SHAWDOWLAWN Dear Ms. James: Please process our application for a Reside 'tial Zoning Variance at the above address. We are proposing to improve the property by`addin a (8' x 34'6") covered porch attached to the front of the house. We feel this porch addition will provide an increased value to the property, and an aesthetic value to the home. Not only will this improvement provide value, but it will also prolong the exterior condition of the house by transferring water away from vulnerable areas. I am attaching the following: 1. Application 2. Three (6) copies of a recent survey, certified by a registered land surveyor 3. A check in the amount of $80.00 Thank you for your assistance. Please contact my office should you have questions or need additional information. Sinc ely, Wm. B. Hearnsberger 26901 Highway 10 - Roland, AR 72135 Office 501-367-2606 Fax 501-367-2607 OCTOBER 25, 2004 E File No.: Z-7734 Owner: Ross Phillips Address: 13 Christopher Cove Description: Lot 496, Phase VIII C, Pleasant View Subdivision Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254 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: Vacant Proposed Use of Property STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: Single Family Residential The R-2 zoned property at 13 Christopher Cove is currently undeveloped. However, there is an existing concrete block foundation for a house and slab for an attached garage which was constructed several years ago. For reasons unknown, the developer of the property did not finish the house. Ross Phillips, the current property owner, purchased the property with the intent of finishing the single family structure. The property slopes downward from front to back (south to north), and backs up to an apartment complex. As part of the home construction, the applicant proposes to construct a 10 foot by 20 foot deck (uncovered and unenclosed) on the rear of the structure. The deck will be located 19 to 20 feet back from the rear property line, and be 8 to 12 feet above grade. The applicant has noted that the deck will be necessary for exiting the rear of the house given the finished height of the rear exit above the grade of the rear yard. t OCTOBER 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 9 (CON'T. Section 36-256(d)(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear setback of 25 feet for R-2 zoned property. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance from this ordinance requirement to allow the proposed deck construction. Staff is supportive of the requested rear yard setback variance. Given the topography and shape of this single family lot, staff feels that the request is very reasonable. The curvature of the front property line, being at the end of a cul-de-sac, limits the amount of buildable area (depth) front to back. The lot has a 15 foot platted front building line, with the front of the garage slab being 21 feet back from the front property line. If the house were pulled up to the front property line, no variances would be needed for the proposed deck. Also, as noted earlier, the property backs up to an apartment complex. Therefore, staff believes that the proposed deck will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the requested rear yard setback variance, subject to the following conditions.- 1. onditions: 1. The deck structure must remain uncovered and unenclosed. 2. A building permit must be obtained for the deck construction. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (OCTOBER 25, 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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. 2 773`f To the members of the Board of Adjustments, I am requesting a variance on this property due to the following reasons.) purchased the property with the existing foundation and pored garage floor.The block foundation and garage area are in good and usable condition and I want to build from this foundation.The lot has a lot of steep slope to the north of the existing foundation which justified the previous owners decision to place the foundation and placement of the house where he did.The problem is the house meets the required set backs with the current foundation but the rear of the house will be 10 or 12 feet high and will require a deck across the back of the house.I wish to build a 10 feet wide by 20 feet long deck starting from the back door and running south 20 feet.) will have steps from the deck into the backyard.The deck will encroach into the 25 foot set back area and this will require a variance. Again I will emphazise that the shape of the lot and steep slope determined the placement of the existing foundation.) hope you will see the problem I have an grant the approval of my variance request. Sincerely, Ross Phillips, applicant OCTOBER 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 10 File No.: Z-7735 Owner: Howard Duty Address: 9 Wood Sorrel Point Description: Lot 34, Block 2, Woodlands Edge Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254 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 Residence under construction Proposed Use of Property STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments B. Staff Analysis: Single Family Residential The R-2 zoned property at 9 Wood Sorrel Point is occupied by a two- story brick and frame single family residence which is under construction and nearing completion. There will be a two -car wide concrete driveway from Wood Sorrel Point which will serve as access. The property backs up to a platted green belt tract within the Woodlands Edge Subdivision. The green belt is approximately 100 feet wide. The applicant proposes to construct a wood deck with steps on the rear of the house, as noted on the attached site plan. The proposed deck will be uncovered and unenclosed, and located approximately 2.5 to 3 feet above grade. The deck will be located eight (8) feet from the rear (south) property line and 21 feet from the side (east) property line. Section 36-254(d)(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear yard setback of 25 feet for R-2 zoned lots. Therefore, the applicant is OCTOBEK 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 10 (CON'T. requesting a variance from this ordinance requirement to allow the proposed eight (8) foot rear setback for the deck structure. Staff is supportive of the requested variance, as it is very minor in nature. As noted previously, there is a rather wide platted open space tract immediately south of this lot. The nearest house to the south is over 100 feet away. Given the fact that the proposed deck structure will be uncovered and unenclosed and that it will be only 2.5 to 3 feet above grade, it should prove to be fairly unobtrusive. Staff believes that the proposed deck structure will have no negative impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. As has been the practice with recent variance requests within this new Woodland's Edge Subdivision, staff requests that the applicant provide a letter from the subdivision's developer approving of the proposed deck construction. C. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the requested rear yard setback variance, subject to the following conditions: 1. The deck structure must remain uncovered and unenclosed. 2. The applicant must submit a letter from the developer of the subdivision approving the deck construction, prior to a building permit being issued. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (OCTOBER 25, 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 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. 2 -F ., .- , 0 ,21 - 7-23S co etc -0 p PAO glfd�� Q f Cao ., 40c ice— �. N� n� ujCs)c4 6 f4 k t ale- f'3�- �- ° �' C4 -}- q rd c eo 7f\a cjcc__ OCTOBER 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 11 File No.: Z-7736 Owner: Dr. and Mrs. Edward Saer Address: 21 Longfellow Lane Description: Lot 21, Beverly Place Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254 and the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow a building addition with a reduced side 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 21 Longfellow Lane is occupied by a two- story brick and frame single family residence. There is a two -car wide concrete driveway from Longfellow Lane which serves as access. There is a carport and storage addition at the northwest corner of the house which extends across a 30 foot platted building line, and is located approximately 8 feet back from the front (Longfellow Lane) property line. The existing carport structure also extends across the side (west) property line by approximately three (3) feet and onto the adjacent property owned by the Diocese of Little Rock. The applicants propose to remove the one-story portion of the house at its northwest corner, including the carport and storage addition. In its OCTOBER 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 11 (CON'T.) place, the applicants propose to construct a one-story addition which will include a three -car garage and a new 36 foot wide concrete driveway. The new addition will be located approximately 27.5 feet back from the front (Longfellow Lane) property line, extending 2.5 feet across the 30 foot front platted building line. Additionally, the addition will be located approximately one (1) foot from the side (west) property line. Section 36-254(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side setback of eight (8) feet for this R-2 zoned lot. 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 applicants are requesting variances to allow the reduced side setback and the building line encroachment. Although Staff feels that the proposed construction, with removal of the existing carport structure, will be an improvement over what currently exists, staff does not support the variances as requested. Staff has no problem with the minor building line encroachment, but it is staff's policy to not support side setbacks for new construction of less than 1.5 feet. Therefore, staff does not support the side setback, as proposed. If the applicant could amend the application and provide a 1.5 foot side yard and provide guttering if necessary (if the roof slopes toward the west property line), staff would recommend approval of the application. In that case staff would feel that the proposed addition would have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the platted front building line for the proposed garage 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, as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (OCTOBER 25, 2004) Staff informed the Board that the applicant, Mr. Dean, revised the application to provide a 2 foot side setback along the west property line. Staff recommended approval of the revised application, subject to the following conditions: K OCTOBER 25, 2004 ITEM NO.: 11 (CON'T. 1. Guttering must be provided to prevent water run-off onto the adjacent property to the west. 2. Completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the front platted building line as approved by the Board. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved, as revised and recommended by staff, by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. 3 Preliminary ADOPTED: "D12-$ C� BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CALENDAR OF MEETING DATES 2005 FILING DATE LEGAL AD MEETING DATE 12-17-04 01-21-05 01-31-05 01-28-05 02-18-05 02-28-05 02-25-05 03-18-05 03-28-05 03-25-05 04-15-05 04-25-05 04-22-05 05-13-05 05-23-05 05-27-05 06-17-05 06-27-05 06-24-05 07-15-05 07-25-05 07-22-05 08-19-05 08-29-05 08-26-05 09-16-05 09-26-05 09-23-05 10-21-05 10-31-05 10-28-05 11-18-05 11-28-05 11-18-05 12-09-05 12-19-05 12-23-05 01-20-06 01-30-06 NOTE: (1) All Board meetings to be held at 2:00 P.M. unless otherwise changed by the Board. (2) Agenda meeting to be held at 1:30 P.M. in the Board Conference Room on . meeting date. NOTICE: AN INTERPRETER WILL BE PROVIDED FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED UPON REQUEST. REQUEST SHOULD BE MADE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AT LEAST TWO WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED MEETING DATE. r At RIA K CD CD D 0 c rn CL ca O N v 0 a v c cnz 0 1 m O v c 2 G) co -n —i x c x 2 rD co > ;u D m O-< ;oZ „c �� n Z Cl)_ D o o --i Z D X M < D m o � � m O C ca O N v 0 a v c cnz 0 1 m O v c 111 1� ca O N v 0 a v c cnz 0 1 m O v c October 25, 2004 There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 2:10 p.m. j Date: Chairman