The URL can be used to link to this page

boa_04 29 2002LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY OF MINUTES APRIL 29, 2002 2:00 P.M. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being four (4) in number. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meetings The Minutes of the March 25, 2002 meeting were approved as mailed by unanimous vote. Members Present Members Absent: William Ruck, Chairman Fred Gray, Vice Chairman Scott Richburg Gary Langlais Andrew Francis City Attorney Present: Cindy Dawson LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA APRIL 29, 2002 2:00 P.M. I. DEFERRED ITEM: A. Z -7047-A 7102 Asher Avenue 1. Z -2549-A 6117 West 65th Street 2. Z -3150-A 7700 N. Chicot Road 3. Z -6023-A Southeast corner of Ridge Park Dr. and Glenmere Dr. 4. Z -6065-A 722 N. Palm Street 5. Z -7103-A 120 Commerce Street 6. Z-7203 6 Robyn Lane 7. Z-7204 5117 Edgewood Drive 8. Z-7205 14 Pinnacle View Cove 9. Z-7206 8 Chenal Circle 10. Z-7207 14 Maywood Drive 11. Z-7208 Various Locations - Chenal Valley N O N Nd T 02Vae T � 11nvelHl coa WP �i LC) goo e i Nvrva30 NlYn u AVMOVOa@ HOaV — NOlNpNI a 153H0 � 6314380 cd ONIN IN x Og MOa000M $ 3NId Nld e N HJdb �d aV J N011nV 11005 s S�NiydS' V J W Q Navd alae A11Sa3nINn A -ba INII _ SONIWS 83A30 Q 534OnH Q N ddlSS In ? y6 1031143 24% Nana a MONVS NHOr 3 W v 3NN13H n Oa 31 OV 080331NJVHS o SIOatl$ S — wtlHava A3N006 — s j NV 0B ,o a � sllrvn urJ yob o w 3001a AWN a S11AIl A11J g\ Wm '" tlOO� �� s11rvn un a 00 QgKy`W O �r�Zv NVAMnS w' AUKS OOH '^ tlMH IH t Sllnn AUO Q ti !101'70 3ltlONa3d r o O CQ April 29, 2u02 ITEM NO.: A File No.: Z -7047-A Owner: Abdias and Rosalinda Montoya Address: 7102 Asher Avenue Description: North side of Asher Avenue at Oak Park Drive Zoned: C-3 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the parking provisions of Section 36-502 to allow a reduced number of on-site parking spaces. Justification: Present Use of Property Proposed Use of Property STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. STAFF REPORT: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Restaurant Restaurant The applicant submitted a letter to staff on March 8, 2002 requesting that this application be deferred to the April 29, 2002 agenda. The applicant needs additional time to work out parking details associated with the variance request. Staff supports the deferral as requested. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (MARCH 25, 2002) Staff informed the Board that the applicant submitted a letter on March 8, 2002 requesting that this application be deferred to the April 29, 2002 agenda. Staff supported the deferral as requested. April 29, 2002 Item No.: A The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the April 29, 2002 agenda by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. The applicant submitted a letter to staff on April 17, 2002 requesting that this application be deferred to the May 20, 2002 agenda. The applicant needs additional time to work out parking details (with the adjacent property owner) associated with the variance request. Staff supports the deferral as requested. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 29, 2002) Staff informed the Board that the applicant submitted a letter requesting that this application be deferred to the May 20, 2002 agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the May 20, 2002 agenda by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. 2 February 22, 2002 Mr. Monte Moore Planning & Development 723 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 A " 7o' 7--4 The Applicant has obtained a written permission to use off-site parking on the adjacent lot for 10 additional parking spaces. See the attached letter. The Applicant intends to obtain rights for additional parking spaces in the area which are within 300 feet of the subject property. These will be furnished to you. These additional parking spaces provide substantial additional parking for use by customers of the subject restaurant. Also, all employees shall park in spaces which are not on the subject property so that all on-site parking shall be for customers only. Sincerely, Abdias Montoya Rosalinda Montoya May 16, 2001 7102 Asher Ave. Little Rock, AR 72204 (501) 225-3088 To Whom It May Concern: I, Abdias Montoya, am borrowing ten parking spaces from my neighboring business, owned by Sheila Muller. These spaces, combined with the parking from my location, would add up to the parking spaces required to obtain a building permit in order for my restaurant to open. Ms. Shelia Miller has agreed to allow our future customers to use these parking spaces at any time during business hours. There will be a sign at my location indicating that customers are welcome to use those parking spaces. El Viejo San Luis may also have the extra -unpaved parking, by paving and stripping. There should be more than ten parking spaces. Simply Raw will not be responsible for any accidents that may occur between Simply Raw clients and El Viejo -San Luis. This contract may be terminated in the case that it becomes an in convince. Sincerely, Ji, Abdias Montoy t April 29, 2002 ITEM NO.: 1 File No.: Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: Variance Requested: Justification: Present Use of Property Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: Z -2549-A Brundage Management Co., Inc. 6117 West 65th Street Part of Lot 1, Geneva Addition 1-2 Variances are requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-554 to permit a ground -mounted sign which exceeds the maximum height and area allowed by ordinance. The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Mini -warehouses Mini -warehouses The property at 6117 West 65th Street is zoned 1-2 and is occupied by a mini -warehouse development. There is an existing wall -mounted sign attached to the end of one of the warehouse buildings, facing West 65tH Street. The applicant, Arkansas Sign and Neon, proposes to place a ground - mounted sign between the two (2) existing access drives along the West 65th Street frontage. The sign will be "key -shaped", with a height of 31 feet — 3 inches and approximately 240 square feet of area. The City's Zoning Ordinance allows a ground -mounted sign in 1-2 zoning to have a maximum height of 30 feet and a maximum area of 72 square feet. April 29, 2002 Item No.: 1 (Cont.) Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances to allow the ground - mounted sign to exceed the maximum height and area allowed. Staff does not support the requested variances. Staff does not believe that the proposed sign area is reasonable. Although staff has no problem with the minor height variance, the proposed sign area is three (3) times that allowed by ordinance. Staff feels that the proposed sign area would be out of character with the existing gyround-mounted signs within this industrial zoned area along West 65t Street and Geyer Springs Road. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested sign variances. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 29, 2002) Staff informed the Board that the applicant submitted a letter requesting that this application be deferred to the May 20, 2002 agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the May 20, 2002 agenda by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. 011 4-16-02; 8:ZP1M;AETNA SIGN GROUP LTD 1 aerna S 1 G N • G R O U P ;21- 937 1603 2/ 2 OVER 70 YEARS OF SIGNING THE BEST NAMES IN BUSINESS April 16, 2002 City of Little Rock Planning and Development Department 723 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Variance Request for Signage To Whom It May Concern: Please let this letter serve as a request that a variance be granted for the A-AAAKey Mini Storage located at 6117 W. 65th Street, Little Rock AK. as the signage allowed by code will not be visible to potential customers from University Street. If you have any questions, or need additional information, please feel free to contact us at (210) 337-3900. j na-McGroup, Ltd. 888 -669 -SIGN (7446) 4202 DIVIDEND SAN ANTONIO, TX 78219 (2 10) 337-3900 FAX (210) 337-1603 April 29, 2uO2 ITEM NO.: 2 File No.: Z -3150-A Owner: Old Oaks Ltd. Partnership Address: 7700 N. Chicot Road Description: Southwest corner of Chicot Road and Mabelvale Pike Zoned: MF -18 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: Present Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Multifamily Multifamily 1. Fence should not obstruct corner line -of -sight at the corner of Chicot Road and Mabelvale Pike. Refer to Section 32-8 of Traffic Ordinance. (Fence should not extend into the triangular area between the property lines and a diagonal line joining points on the property line fifty- (50) feet from the point of intersection.) B. Staff Analysis: The property at 7700 N. Chicot Road is zoned MF -18 and is occupied by a multiple building apartment complex. There is an existing privacy fence along the south property line, between this property and the existing mini - warehouse development and a newly constructed ornamental iron fence (six feet in height) along the west property line. The applicant was in the process of installing a six (6) foot high ornamental iron fence along the north and east property lines, having the support posts in place, when the City's enforcement division issued a notice. April 29, 2002 Item No.: 2 (Cont.) Section 36-516(e)(1)a. of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires that fences constructed within the required building setbacks adjacent to streets be limited to a maximum height of four (4) feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow construction of a six (6) foot high ornamental iron fence along the north and east street side property lines. The fence will have an electronically controlled access gate at the property's main entrance from Chicot Road. The applicant notes that the purpose of the fence is to provide security and controlled access to the apartment development, as well as to enhance the appearance of the property. Old Oaks Apartments recently obtained a grant from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in order to install security measures on the property. Staff supports the requested fence height variance. Staff feels that the fence will aid in providing the additional security to the complex as desired by the applicant. The fence will also be an upgrade to the property's appearance. To staff's knowledge, the fence will have no adverse impact on the surrounding properties or the general area. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested fence height variance, subject to compliance with the Public Works requirement noted in paragraph A. of this report. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 29, 2002) 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. M OA"7700 N. Chicot Rd. LITTLE ROCK, AR 72209 ,AparbnenitS 501-565-7110 March 20, 2002 Board of Adjustment Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Re: Old Oaks Apartments 7700 North Chicot Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72209 To whom it may concern: Please accept this correspondence as a request fora variance to the fence height restriction at the above reference property and address. Old Oaks Apartments obtained a grant from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development in the amount of $125,000 for the purpose of installing security measures. That grant has been awarded to a number of properties in Little Rock over the last several years including Terrace Green Apartments in southwest Little Rock. Old Oaks proposes to install an ornamental wrought iron fence with an electronically controlled access gate on the perimeter of the property. The property is surrounded on the west by undeveloped forested land that is largely in a flood plain. The south boundary of the property abuts a commercially zoned mini -storage facility that has a 6 foot wooden security fence with razor wire on top. The east boundary of the property was recently reconfigured by the Arkansas Highway Department as part of their installation of overpasses along US I-30. Chicot road formerly abutted this eastern boundary but has been eliminated with the eastward expansion of the overpass. The northern boundary of the property abuts Mablevale Pike which is a moderately used connection road between I-30 and University avenue. It is largely vacant land except for one single family home. The current zoning of Old Oaks prohibits fences above 4 ft. in height along the frontal property lines. Old Oaks request that a variance be issued allowing us to install a standard 6 foot ornamental iron fence along the Mablevale Pike and Highway Department boundaries. The purpose of this fence is to provide security and controlled access for the 112 apartment homes at the property and to enhance the curb appeal and value of the property. Page 2 The fence will be constructed with pickets on 4" centers so that at all times visibility will not be hampered for motorist or residents. The design is in keeping with fences already installed at Terrace Green as well as numerous other properties in the area. There is a 10 foot setback of the fence from Mablevale Pike which has a 60 foot right-of-way. This will make the fence attractive and improve the appearance of the property as well as the area as a whole. Old Oaks was awarded the grant from HUD due to its efforts to stem crime in this area of the city. The construction of the overpass by the highway department has greatly increased traffic and crime statistics in southwest Little Rock allowed Old Oaks to be awarded the grant ahead of other applicants from around the state. Invaluable help was received from Mayor Dailey's office, city director Joan Adcock, the Little Rock Police Department and numerous other agencies. Further, the application received neighborhood supporta Therefore, we respectfully request that the board take these factors into consideration and grant our request for a waiver of the 4 R fence height and allow for a height of 6 foot. Sincerely, Old Oaks Limited Partnership, by First Capital Manan Group, Inc., it's managing agent t), 41J D. Shiver, President April 29, 2002 ITEM NO.: 3 File No.: Z -6023-A Owner: Sharon Adkins and Melissa Glenn Address: Southeast corner of Ridge Park Drive and Glenmere Drive Description: Lot 499, Broadmoor Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to permit construction of a new single family residence which crosses a platted building line. Justification: Present Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Vacant Single Family Residence The single family lot at the southeast corner of Ridge Park Drive and Glenmere Drive is zoned R-2 and is undeveloped. The lot slopes from the east downward to Ridge Park Drive. The lot has a triangular shape, with 25 foot platted building lines along both the north and west property lines. The property owner proposes to construct a new single family residence on the lot. Based on the size and configuration of the lot, the property owner is requesting a variance from the building line provisions of Section 31-12. The proposed residence extends approximately 13 feet over the west platted building line, resulting in a 12 foot side yard setback along Ridge Park Drive. Section 31-12(c) of the City's Subdivision Ordinance April 29, 2002 Item No.: 3 (Cont.) requires that variances for encroachments over platted building setback lines be reviewed by the Board of Adjustment. Staff is supportive of the building line variance. Staff feels that the variance is reasonable given the irregular shape of the lot which, with the addition of platted lines, leaves very little buildable area. The proposed placement of the structure will align with the existing houses along Glenmere Drive and be located far enough away from the nearest existing house to the south as to have no adverse visual impact. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the front platted building line for the proposed house. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested building line variance subject to the applicant completing a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the building line as approved by the Board. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 29, 2002) 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 April 29, 2002 ITEM NO.: 4 File No.: Owner: Address: Description: Zoned.- Variance oned:Variance Requested: Justification: Present Use of Property Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT 0 Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: Z -6065-A John Newbern and Adam Frith 722 N. Palm Street Part of Lots 11 and 12, Block 37, Pulaski Heights Addition C-3 A variance is requested from the parking provisions of Section 36-502 to permit increased restaurant seating without the minimum number of required off-street parking spaces. The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Coffee House Coffee House The property at 722 N. Palm Street is zoned C-3 and contains a 2,900 square foot residential structure which was converted to a coffeehouse/restaurant several years ago. There are five (5) on-site parking spaces in front of the structure which are accessed from Palm Street and three (3) parking spaces in the rear yard accessed off of the alley. A 2,900 square foot restaurant use is required to provide 29 on-site parking spaces. On December 18, 1995 the Board of Adjustment approved a variance allowing a reduced number of on-site parking spaces for the restaurant April 29, 2002 Item No.: 4 (Cont.) use. The application was approved for use of the building as a restaurant, utilizing the eight (8) on-site parking spaces as existing. The restaurant owners currently propose to utilize a portion of the upstairs seating area to expand the restaurant office. In doing so, the seating capacity for the restaurant would be reduced by 12 seats. Therefore, the applicant proposes to construct a 400 square foot deck along the north side of the building which would provide an additional 16 seats. The total seating capacity for the restaurant would increase from 76 seats to 80 seats. The deck addition would require four (4) additional on-site parking spaces. Therefore, the applicant is requesting another variance to allow a reduced number of on-site parking spaces. Staff is supportive of the requested variance. The addition of the 400 square foot deck, with the conversion of part of the second floor to restaurant office space, would provide a net increase in seating capacity of only four (4) seats. This increase in seating capacity is very minimal and therefore, staff feels that the requested parking variance is reasonable. To staff's knowledge, the restaurant has operated at this location for the past six (6) plus years with no adverse impact related to the reduced number of on-site parking spaces. Although staff has no concerns with the proposed parking variance, conditions relating to the operation of the deck area will be recommended in the next paragraph which will recognize the adjacent single family residences. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested parking variance subject to the following conditions: 1. There are to be no outside speakers. 2. There is to be no live music within the outside deck area. 3. Any exterior site lighting must be low-level and directed away from adjacent residential property. 4. The deck area must be properly screened from adjacent residential property. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 29, 2002) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. April 29, 2002 Item No.: 4 (Cont. 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. K /a ��-t-44 4- 5WOUMDi _ fJG S /� SUFFICIENT GROUNDS COFFEEHOUSE 3/22/02 Department or Planning 2nd Development 723 VTest Markham Little Rock, AR :2201 To Whom It May Concern: Sufficient Grounds Coffeehouse would like to add a deck for out patrons on the north side of our restaurant. The proposed deck's =2 would be app=imate_y 404 scuare feet (please see highlighted area on survey) and nvald seat 16 customers. We are interested in having a deck for two reasons. First, wo would Wke to be able to off r our patrons a truly srnoke ..-CC ensironn ent. Second, we are interested in ezpanLng our office on the second floor and this would allow us to do that wit :out losing any seating capacity. 1,unently, the build ng is 2,400 square fcet and the addition of the deck would raise the areaw 2,800 square feet. Remcvi g one of our upstairs moms for office space nrould redscc 0urseat7ngcap2city'vl2. Thus, tle Towl seating, capacitv of the restaurant would change- from 76seat3tc-80 seats. It should be noted tsar the deck % ll be secluded and be sur_rtfunded by a privacy fence and the actual reraurint itself. The side where• the proposed deck will be faces the back of a strip of commercial stores and is separated by a primcy fence, VN:'c are applyir_g for this variance because we do not have enough parking spaces for aur restaum-it. T sk you, John H. Newbern Secrerary/Treasurer E•6*AIL: JA`JACRBEZE0AR1.9T0T%r1;ET April 29, 2002 ITEM NO.: 5 File No.: Z -7103-A Owner: City of Little Rock as Trustee for the Central Arkansas Library System Address: 120 Commerce Street Description: Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 8, Pope's Addition Zoned: UU Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the sign provisions of Sections 36-353 and 36-543. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Mixed Commercial Uses Proposed Use of Property: Mixed Commercial Uses STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: On October 29, 2001, the Board of Adjustment approved several variances to allow banner signs to be placed on the Cox Building at 120 Commerce Street. A total of 13 banners were approved; six (6) to be located on the east side of the building, one (1) on the south side, and six (6) on the southwest side. The variances were approved subject to a number of conditions (see attached October 29, 2001 Board of Adjustment minute record). Also attached is the applicant's original cover letter, dated September 24, 2001 and the River Market Design Review Committee letter, dated October 16, 2001. On December 17, 2001, the Board of Adjustment approved revisions to the previous approval. The Board approved moving the seven (7) banner signs attached to the south and southwest sides of the building to the light poles within the existing parking area between the building and East 2" April 29, 2u02 Item No.: 5 (Cont.) Street (see attached December 17, 2001 Board of Adjustment minute record for details). The applicant is requesting a revision to the previous Board of Adjustment approvals involving only the banner signs located on the east side of the building, along the Commerce Street right-of-way. The applicant proposes to remove the six (6) banners on the east side of the Cox building and replace them with four (4) 4 -foot by 22 -foot banners attached flat against the north wall of the building facing the River Market (see the attached building elevation sketch for proposed sign placement and typical wording). The River Market DRC has reviewed the proposed revision and has no objection. The DRC's recommendation of approval is based on the following conditions: The banners on the east side of the building will be removed including all mounting hardware. A two-year variance will be required so that the banners can be reviewed for condition of the banners. This is the same two-year variance as before. Staff is supportive of the revision as requested. Staff feels that the banner signs as proposed will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. Staff feels that the banner signs will be compatible with the uniqueness and atmosphere of this entertainment -oriented district. Staff supports the River Market Design Review Committee's review and recommendation on this application. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the revised application subject to the following conditions: 1. The banner signs must be properly attached/anchored to the building. 2. Sign permits must be obtained as per City Ordinance requirements. 3. Compliance will all other conditions of the previous approvals as noted in the Board of Adjustment minute records dated October 29, 2001 (except condition #10) and December 17, 2001. 4. Compliance with the conditions noted in the River Market DRC letter dated April 8, 2002. 5. The variances be approved for two (2) years. At the end of this time period the Board of Adjustment will review the banner signage to assure the structural integrity and maintenance of the signs. 1► April 29, 2002 Item No.: 5 (Cont.) BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 29, 2002) 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. 3 THE PUBLIC LIBRARY � LITTLE ROCK • JACKSONVILLE • PULASKI and PERRY COUNTIES • MAUMELLE • SHERWOOD 74,-4s = _r©3 --A March 22, 2002 Mr. Monte Moore Little of Little Rock Planning and Development 723 W. Markham St. Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Requesting 4 new banners placed on the north side of the Cox Building, 120 Commerce St., and the removal of the 4 banners and mounting hardware located on the east side of the building, previously approved. Dear Mr. Moore: The Central Arkansas Library System is applying to the Board of Adjustment to place 4 banners, which are 4 feet wide by 22 feet high on the north side of the Cox Building at 120 Commerce St. The Board of Adjustment previously approved 4 banners (3'wide by 4'high), which were placed on the east side of the building. Since the building has been open to the public, the tenants would rather have banners on the north side of the building facing the River Market. If these 4 north banners are approved, the tenants will take down the previously approved banners on the Commerce side of the building. Attached to the application are the banner specifications from Arkansas Flag and Banner and 3 copies of the north elevation of the Cox Building with the proposed banners superimposed on the building. Please call if you have any questions or request additional information. Sincerely, Susan Schallhorn, Assistant Director Central Arkansas Library System Manager, Cox Building 501-918-3033 CENTRAL ARKANSAS LIBRARY SYSTEM MAIN LIBRARY • 100 ROCK STREET • LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 • 501-918-3000 • FAX 501-375-7451 W W W.CALS.LIB.AR.US Market Frank Porbeck, Chairman Design Tim Heiple, Member Review Jim Schimmer,Member VuL r Melissa Tanner, Member Committee Patty Wingfield, Member Planning end Development • 723 W. Markham -Little Rock • Arkansas • 72201.501-371-4790 • fax 371-6863 April 8, 2002 Bobby Roberts CALS 100 Rock Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Cox Building banners on north side M Mr. Roberts, The River Market DRC has reviewed the banners on the north side of the Cox building and has approved th.e signage. The conditions are as follows: • The banners on the east side of the building will be removed including all mounting hardware. • A two-year variance will be required so that the banners can be reviewed for condition of the banners. This is the same two-year variance as before. This item will appear on the April 29, 2002 Board of Adjustment agenda. Thank you, Brian Minyard River Market DRC Staff cc: Frank Porbeck Melissa Tanner Jim Schimm.er Tim Heiple Patty Wingfield Board of Adjustment Decembei 17, 2001 7/ 03 ITEM NO.: 8 / -7 File No.: Z-7103 Owner: City of Little Rock as Trustee for the Central Arkansas Library System Address: Description: Zoned: Variance Requested: Justification: Present Use of Property: 120 Commerce Street Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 8, Pope's Addition M The applicant is requesting a revision of the previously - approved Board of Adjustment variances to allow banner signs at this location. The applicant's justification is Presented in an attached letter. Mixed Commercial Uses Proposed Use of Property: Mixed Commercial Uses STAFF REPORT EN Public Works Issues: No issues. B. Staff Analysis: On October 29, 2001, the Board of Adjustment approved several variances to allow banner signs to be placed on the Cox Building at 120 Commerce Street. A total of 13 banners were approved; six (6) to be located on the east side of the building, one (1) on the south side, and six (6) on the southwest side. The variances were approved subject to a number of conditions (see attached October 29 Board of Adjustment minute record). Also attached is the applicant's original cover letter, December 17, 2001 Item No.: 8 dated September 24, 2001 and the River Market Design Review Committee letter, dated October 16, 2001. The applicant is requesting a revision in the previous Board of Adjustment approval for the location of some of the signs only. The applicant proposes to move the one (1) banner sign from the south side of the building and the six (6) banner signs from the southwest side of the building to the light poles within the existing parking area between the building and East 2nd Street. See the attached site plan sketch for proposed banner sign locations. The total number of signs has not changed. The River Market DRC has reviewed the proposed revision and has no objection. The DRC's recommendation of approval is based on the number of banner signs remaining the same and compliance with all other conditions of the previous approval. (See attached letter dated December 3, 2001). Staff is supportive of the revision as requested. Staff feels that the banner signs as proposed will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. Staff feels that the banner signs will be compatible with the uniqueness and atmosphere of this entertainment -oriented district. Staff supports the River Market Design Review Committee's review and recommendation on this application. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the revised application subject to the following conditions: 1. The banner signs attached to the light poles must have a minimum clearance of nine (9) feet over the sidewalks. 2. The total number of banner signs for this property must not exceed thirteen (13). 3. Compliance will all other conditions of the previous approval as noted in the Board of Adjustment minute record dated October 29, 2001. K December 17, 2001 Item No.: 8 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (DECEMBER 17, 2001) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes and 0 nays. 3 Stocks an Mann am Architects, PLC In C=0cictlon with a ARCHITECTS P.A. November 15, 2001 Mr. Monte Moore City of Little Rock Planning and Development 723 West Markham, 1 st Floor Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Renovation of the Cox Building Central Arkansas Library System Main Library Annex Project #9904 Request for Revision — Application to Board of Adjustment File No. Z-7103 Mr. Moore: 7/o3 On behalf of the Central Arkansas- Library System, Stocks - Mann Architects are requesting a revision to the Application to the Board of Adjustment for the Cox Building, 120 Commerce Street. Please find attached a site plan indicating the relocation of the seven (7) banners originally granted to go on the southwest and south side of the Cox Building. We are requesting that these seven banners be allowed to be relocated to the light poles within the parking area as indicated. Please call if you have any questions or request additional information. Sincerely, R. Mark Mann copies: file 9904 PM — Regs Linda Bly, CALS 401 WEST CAPITOL. SUITE 402 LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201 501-370-9207 FAX $01-370-9208 Rivet' Frank Porbeck, Chairman Market Greg Hart, Member Design Tim Heiple,rvlember Review Jim Schimmer,Member Committee Patty Winofield,Member Planning and Development - 723 W. Markham - Little Rock -Arkansas 072201 e 501-371-4790 - fax 371-6863 December 3, 2001 Mr. William Ruck, Chairman Board of Adjustment 723 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Chairman Ruck and Board Members, — 71 c)3 —/4 The River Market Design Review Committee (DRC) has discussed the revision of the previously approved BOA variances granted to allow banner/signs on the Cox Building at 120 Commerce Street. The DRC has no objection to moving the banner/signs from the south and southwest facades of the building to the existing light poles within the interior of the existing Library parkin; lot. This recommendation of approval is based on the number of banner/signs remaining the same and compliance with all other conditions of the previously approved variances. The DRC members look forward to working with the Board of Adjustment members on protecting the visual integrity of the district. Shawn Spencer DRC Staff October 29, 2001 ITEM NO.: 9 File No.: Z-7103 L4 Z- 710-3 w�i--�- C Owner: City of Little Rock as Trustee Y for the Central Arkansas Library .System Address: Description: Zoned: Variance Requested: Justification: Present Use of Property: 120 Commerce Street Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 8, Pope's Addition UU Variances are requested from the sign provisions of Sections 36-353 and 36-543. . The applicant's explanation is presented in an attached letter. Vacant warehouse building Proposed Use of Property: Mixed commercial uses STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The property at 120 Commerce Street is zoned UU and is occupied by an existing warehouse building (Cox Building), which is currently being renovated. A new parking lot was recently constructed along the south and west sides of the building. The applicant is proposing to place thirteen (13) projecting banner signs on the building. The applicant proposes to place six (6) of the signs on the southwest elevation of the building, one (1) sign on the south elevation and six (6) signs on the east elevation. The applicant notes that each banner sign will be 36 inches by 48 inches and attached to two (2) permanent metal poles (see October 29, 2001 Item No.: 9 attached sketch). The number of signs proposed by the applicant will be used by the individual business tenants and for promotions of the Central Arkansas Library. The applicant has submitted elevations of the building (see attached sketches) showing where the signs will be located on the building and that the signs will have a nine (9) foot clearance over pedestrian walkways. Section 36-543 of the City's Zoning Ordinance prohibits the use of banner signs in all zoning districts. Section 36-353 (e) (1) d. limits the number of projecting signs in the River Market Design Overlay District to one (1) sign per 100 feet of primary street frontage per building. The applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards for the proposed projecting banner signs. The River Market Design Review Committee (DRC) met on October 4, 2001 and discussed the applicant's proposal for signage at 120 Commerce Street. The DRC is recommending approval of the sign variances requested by the applicant with the -following conditions: 1. The variances be approved for two (2) years, at which time the Board of Adjustment review the signage to assure the structural integrity and maintenance of the signs. 2. The number of projecting signs is not to exceed thirteen (13) . 3. No signs are allowed on the north (Markham Street) fagade of the Cox Building. 4. No more than three (3) of the signs will be used for each business. 5. The applicant must obtain a franchise for the signs along Commerce Street. As noted in the attached letter from the River Market Design Review Committee, the Committee feels that the proposed projecting banner signs are appropriate and will aid in "...creating a festive, pedestrian -oriented district." E October 29, 2001 Item No.: 9 Staff is supportive of the variances as requested. Staff feels that the signage as proposed will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties orthe general area. The permanent banner signs approved by the Board of Adjustment several years ago for the Museum Center in the River Market District have worked out well and been properly maintained. Staff supports the River Market Design Review Committee's review and recommendation on this application. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested sign variances subject to compliance with the following - conditions: 1. The applicant must obtain a franchise permit from the City for the signs on the Commerce Street fagade before the issuance of a sign permit. 2. Each projecting banner sign must not exceed twelve (12) square feet in area. 3. Letters on the signs must not exceed one (1) foot, six (6) inches in height and text shall not exceed three-quarters of the height of each sign. 4. Signage colors, typeface and style shall be compatible with the River Market District and approved by the River Market DRC. 5. The projecting signs must be placed at a 90 degree angle to the building. 6. The projecting signs must maintain a nine (9) foot clearance over pedestrian walkways. 7. The height of the projecting signs shall not extend past the sill of the second story windows. 8. The projecting signs shall extend a maximum of three (3) feet from the face of the building. k October 29, 2001 Item No.: 9 9. The number of projecting signs must not exceed thirteen (13) total, with each building elevation limited to the number of signs noted in paragraph B. of this report. 10. No signs will be allowed on the north (Markham Street) fagade of the Cox Building. 11. No more than three (3) signs can be utilized by an individual business tenant. 12. Sign permits must be obtained for all signs as,; per City Ordinance requirements. 13. The variances be approved for two (2) years. At the end of this time period the Board of Adjustment will review the projecting banner signage to assure the structural integrity and maintenance of the signs. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (OCTOBER 29, 2001) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent. 4 i7tOCkS ■■ Mann ■■ Architeas, PLC In c=ciolton wflh - ARCHITECTS P.A. September 24, 2001 Mr. Dana Camey City of Little Rock Zoning Division 723 West Markham, 1 st Floor Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Renovation of the Cox Building Central Arkansas Library System Main Library Annex Project #9904 Request for Sign Variance Mr. Carney: 3-A C7 -P --SRS l On behalf of the Central Arkansas Library System, Stocks - Mann Architects are requesting a signage variance for the attached property. This existing building is owned and will be operated by the Central Arkansas Library System as an annex to the Main Library upon completion of the planned renovation. We are proposing the use of 3' wide x 4' tall digitally printed double faced mesh banners wall mounted, top and bottom, to the existing masonry wall as per the attached building elevations. We offer the following justifications for this variance request: a. Banners are currently in use in the River Market area on the light fixtures as indicators of the River Market area and also are currently iri use' on the Museum Center. b. Banners offer tenants access to pedestrian and a vehicular traffic in lieu of flush wall signs or window signage: c. Banners offer tenants the flexibly of changing out signage for specials or pending events on a temporary basis. d. These are lighter than other type of projected solid signage made of wood or metal. The mesh type banner will not catch the wind like other type of solid signs. e. Glass area on this building is sufficiently less than other.glass areas at street level as compared to other buildings in the River Market. 401 WEST CAPITOL. SUITE 402 LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201 301-370-9207 FAX 301-370-9208 f. Due to the number of organizations of the Library and the tenants in the building, additional signage above the 1 per 100 feet of frontage is needed for the promotion of their organization or business. Please find attached three (3) copies of Site Survey, Site Development Plan, the elevations indicating areas and the number of banners being requested, a drawing indicating the size of the banners, the "Application for Zoning Variance (Signs)" and a signed "Affidavit" authorizing Stocks - Mann Architects to act the agent regarding the variance request. An "Acknowledgement of Franchise Conditions" was granted as per City of Little Rock letter to Jamison Architects, dated April 24, 2000, for metal canopies and grates on the east elevation (Commerce Street). Please call if you have any questions or request additional information. Sincerely, R. Mark Mann copies: file 9904 PM - Regs River Market Design Review Committee Frank Porbeck,Chairrnan Greg Hart, Member Tim Heiple, Member Jim Schimmer,Member Patty Wingfield, Member rlarui[ng and Development • 723 W. Markham • Little Rock Arkansas • 72201.501-371-4790 •fax 371-6363 October 16, 2001 Mr. William Ruck, Chairman Board of Adjustment 723 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Chairman Ruck and Board Members, The River Market Design Review Committee (DRC) has met. and discussed the proposal for. signs/banners at 120 South Commerce (Cox Building). The DRC is recommending that the BOA issue a variance to allow banners to be used as permanent signs on the Cox Building. After a lengthy discussion with the applicant, DRC members felt that banners used as signs would be appropriate. The DRC members referred to the signs (banners) on the Museum Center and how they had held up fo the weather and time. The DRC also asks that a two year variance be placed on the signs, so they can be reviewed. The DRC is also recommending that the BOA issue a variance to allow more than one (1) projecting sign per one hundred feet of building fagade. The applicants proposal was within the DRC's goal of creating a festive, pedestrian oriented district. The number of projecting signs will not exceed thirteen (13) for the building and none are allowed on the north (Markham) fagade of the Cox Building. The applicant has been informed of the District guidelines of only three signs per business. The issuance of a sign permit will be based on Public Works granting a franchise permit for the signs on Commerce Street. The DRC members look forward to working with the Board of Adjustment members on protecting the visual integrity of the district. Shawn Spencer DRC Staff April 29, 2002 ITEM NO.: 6 File No.: Z-7203 Owner: J. A. and Barbara Penney Address: #6 Robyn Lane Description: Lot 5, Pennwyck Subdivision Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254 to permit construction of a new single family residence with a reduced rear yard setback. Justification: Present Use of Property Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Vacant Single Family Residence The R-2 zoned lot at #6 Robyn Lane is vacant, with some site work having taken place in the past. The lot is relatively flat. There are single family residences to the west and south across Robyn Lane, with a church to the southeast. There is a school located immediately north of the site, with single family residences further north across Taylor Loop Road. There are additional undeveloped single family lots to the east. The applicant proposes to construct a new one-story single family residence (approximately 2,400 square feet) on the site which encroaches into the required rear yard. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow a reduced rear yard setback. April 29, 2002 Item No.: 6 (Cont. The proposed residential structure will extend 15 feet into the required rear yard at the structure's northeast corner and 9 feet into the required rear yard at the northwest corner. The resulting rear yard setback will be 10 feet at northeast corner of the structure and 16 feet at the northwest corner. Section 36-254(d)(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear yard setback of 25 feet. As noted in the attached letter from the applicant, the proposed house is to be constructed for an elderly lady, and due to her age must be a one - level structure. The Bill of Assurance for this subdivision calls for a minimum area of 1,800 square feet for single family residences constructed on these lots. The applicant notes that it would be difficult to construct a one-story 1,800 square foot structure on this lot and meet the required minimum setbacks. Staff does not support the requested variance. Although the lot has a substandard area for R-2 zoning (approximately 6,400 square feet), staff believes that the applicant could fit a house with a different floor plan on the lot, while maintaining 1,800 — 2,300 square feet of floor area and complying with the minimum yard setbacks. The proposed house design does not make efficient use of the lot and leaves very little rear yard. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the requested rear yard setback variance. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 29, 2002) Butch Penney was present, representing the application. There were several other persons present in support of the application. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Butch Penney addressed the Board in support of the application. He noted that the proposed residence was 1,834 square feet in area. He proposed moving the house closer to the street and discussed. He provided the Board with a copy of the subdivision plat and described. He noted that all of the surrounding property owners were in favor of the application. He also noted that there was fencing between this property and the school to the north. Vice -Chairman Gray asked about the floor plan for the proposed residence. Mr. Penney noted that the floor plan included three bedrooms, two baths, a great room and a two -car garage. ej April 29, 2002 Item No.: 6 (Cont. Vice -Chairman Gray asked if the proposed floor plan was needed because of the physical condition of the applicant. Mr. Penney indicated that it was. Chairman Ruck asked if there were any future plans to add to the front of the proposed house. Mr. Penney indicated that there were no plans and explained. Vice -Chairman Gray asked what the minimum needs were for the applicant. Mr. Penney stated that there was a need for a single -level home. Sam Williamson, of 10 Robyn Lane, addressed the Board in support of the application. He explained the applicant's need for a one -level structure and noted that most of the applicant's family lived out-of-town. Gary Langlais asked about the size of the proposed structure. Staff explained that the area as noted in the staff analysis was the footprint of the structure, including the garage. Mr. Penney noted that the 1,800 square foot requirement of the Subdivision's Bill of Assurance was for heated and cooled area only. This issue was briefly discussed. There was a motion to approve the application, as filed. The motion passed by a vote of 3 ayes, 1 nay and 1 absent. The application was approved. 3 miolill cv—i , 64 -St aA� April 29, 2002 ITEM NO.: 7 File No.: Z-7204 Owner: Hardin Design and Construction Address: 5117 Edgewood Drive Description: Lot 58 and the West Y2 of Lot 59, Prospect Terrace Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the easement provisions of Section 36-11 and the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to permit building additions which encroach over an easement and a platted building line. Justification: Present Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Single Family Residence Single Family Residence The R-2 zoned property at 5117 Edgewood Drive is occupied by a two- story brick and frame single family residence, with a single car driveway from Edgewood Road. There is an existing uncovered front porch on the structure which extends approximately two (2) feet over the front 30 foot platted building line, at the porch's northeast corner. The site is located in the Prospect Terrace Addition, with all surrounding properties containing single family homes. The applicant proposes to make two (2) additions to the existing residential structure. First, the applicant proposes to construct a roof over April 29, 2u02 Item No.: 7 (Cont.) the existing porch on the front of the house. The proposed roof structure would also slightly encroach over the 30 foot front platted building line by two (2) feet at the northeast corner of the porch. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow this encroachment. Section 31-12(c) of the City's Subdivision Ordinance requires that variances for encroachments over platted building setback lines be reviewed by the Board of Adjustment. The resulting front yard setback would be 28 feet. The applicant also proposes to construct a 690 square foot covered carport and covered walkway along the east side of the existing house. The proposed carport and covered walkway will be attached to the existing residential structure. This proposed addition complies with all of the minimum setback requirements for R-2 zoning however, it crosses a platted easement which runs north/south along an old lot line. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the easement encroachment. Section 36-11(f) of the City's Zoning Ordinance states that no building or structure be constructed over or into an easement. The applicant has presented staff with letters from all of the utility companies approving of the proposed covered carport/walkway addition. Staff is supportive of the requested variances. The proposed covered front porch encroachment over the platted building line is very minor in nature. The resulting setback from the front property line will be 28 feet. The ordinance requires a minimum front setback of 25 feet in R-2 zoning. As noted previously, the proposed covered carport/walkway addition complies with the minimum setback requirements for R-2 zoning, and the applicant has approval from all of the utility companies for the construction. Therefore, staff has no issues with this addition. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the front building line for the proposed house. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested variances subject to completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the front platted building line as approved by the Board. K April 29, 2002 Item No.: 7 (Cont. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 29, 2002) 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. 3 Hardin Design 8r Construction 2024 Arkansas Valley Drive, Suite 402 Little Rock, AR 72212 Office- 501-312-8778 Fax: 501-312-8780 March 22, 2002 City of Little Rock Department of Planning & Development 723 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas Re: 5117 Edgewood Drive Lot 58 & the West one-half of Lot 59 Prospect Terrace Addition Dear Sirs: We are requesting the following variances for the above address. 7zn We would like to install a full covered porch on the front of the house. This proposed addition crosses a front platted building line. Currently, the existing porch is uncovered. The normal set back is 25' and the existing home was constructed with a 30' set back. We would like to install a covered carport and covered walkway. This proposed addition crosses an easement. All of the utility companies have been contacted and have given their approval for the use of the easement. Copies of their approval are attached. The only location for the proposed carport and walk way are on the vacant area of Lot 59. The lot was split years ago and combined with Lot 58. Thank you for your attention in this matter. Sincerely, Dottie Trim Office Manager April 29, 2u02 ITEM NO.: 8 File No.: Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: Bobby Keith Moser Revocable Trust 14 Pinnacle View Cove Lot 251, Cypress Point Addition GA Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area regulations of Section 36-254 to permit construction of a new single family residence with a reduced rear yard setback. Justification: Present Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Vacant Single Family Residence The R-2 zoned lot at 14 Pinnacle View Cove is vacant, with some site work having taken place in the past. There are relatively new single family homes to the east, west and south along Pinnacle View Cove, with undeveloped R-2 zoned property and a railroad right-of-way to the north. The applicant proposes to construct a new two-story single family residence on the site which encroaches slightly into the required rear yard. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow a reduced rear yard setback. The proposed residential structure will extend three (3) feet into the required rear building setback, resulting in a 22 foot setback from the rear April 29, 2002 Item No.: 8 (Cont.) property line. Section 36-254(d)(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear yard setback of 25 feet. Staff is supportive of the requested variance. This particular lot has an irregular shape, with only 50 feet of frontage at the end of a cul-de-sac, widening to 144 feet plus at the rear property line. Because of the irregular pie -shape, the proposed house had to be setback 42 feet from the front property line in order to maintain the required side yard and accommodate a driveway which serves a side loading garage. Staff views the requested variance as being very minor in nature, as an administrative approval could be given for a rear setback of 22.5 feet. The proposed placement of the single family structure should have no adverse impact on the adjacent single family homes. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested rear yard setback variance, as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 29, 2002) 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. E BARRY J. JEWELL0 KEITH MOSER O • SCOTT D. FLETCHER JOHN T. HOLLEMAN, IV■AO SHARROCK DERMOTT❑ • PAUL PFEIFER O ARKANSAS BOARD RECOGNIZED SPECIALIST IN TAX LAW ♦ CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT ■ MASTER OF LAWS IN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW ❑ MASTER OF LAWS IN TAXATION ♦ ALSO LICENSED IN TEXAS • ALSO LICENSED IN TENNESSEE VIA TELECOPIER NO. (501) 399-3435 AND U.S. MAIL Mr. Monte Moore City of Little Rock UMMID \ Jewell, Moser, Fletcher & Holleman A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W ADDRESS A Professional Association 111 Center Street, Suite 1250 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 TELEPHONE (501)376-8250 FACSIMILE (501)376-8471 INTERNET http://www.JMFH.com April 15, 2002 Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Re: Application for a Residential Zoning Variance Dear Mr. Moore: (2- Po'r� A residential zoning variance is being requested in connection with the above -referenced real property in order to encroach three (3) feet upon the twenty-five (25) foot setback on the rear of the lot. Please be advised that Lot 250, which is 12 Pinnacle View Cove was previously approved for a reduced rear yard setback of ten (10) foot on a portion of the rear yard. Please be advised that Lot 252, which is 11 Pinnacle View Cove was previously approved for a rear yard setback of fifteen (15) feet instead of the code required rear yard setback of twenty-five (25) feet. We propose to construct a two-story single family residence on the lot. Due to narrow lot frontage, the residence has been moved toward the rear of the real property. This was necessary in order to maintain the required side yard setbacks and to accommodate a side loading garage. The resulting rear yard setback is twenty-two (22) feet. The variance in the rear yard setback will have no impact on the adjoining properties since this lot backs up to a lake. There will be no development behind this property. All other required setbacks are either met or exceeded. Little Rock, AR Memphis, TN Dallas, TX J "M-' Jewell, Moser, Fletcher & Holleman A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W A Professional Association Mr. Monte Moore April 15, 2002 Page 2 If you have any questions, or if you need additional information, please feel free to call. Sincerely, JELL, MO,SER, A rofessioryl Asso Keith Mdser ' BKM:slb:BKM2952 Enclosures LLEMAN, STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned lot at #8 Chenal Circle is undeveloped and contains a number of small trees. The east 1/3 of the lot slopes downward to a creek which runs along the east property line. There are existing single family residences located to the east, west and south along Chenal Circle, with the Chenal Valley golf course located to the north. The applicant proposes to construct a new two-story single family residence on the site which encroaches slightly over the front platted building line within the west portion of the lot. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the encroachment. The proposed residential structure will extend five (5) feet over the 35 foot front (west) platted building line, resulting in a 30 foot setback from the April 29, 2002 ITEM NO.: 9 File No.: Z-7206 Owner: David H. Pickering Address: #8 Chenal Circle Description: Lot 33, Block 1, Chenal Valley Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to permit construction of a single family residence which crosses a platted building line. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Vacant Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residence STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned lot at #8 Chenal Circle is undeveloped and contains a number of small trees. The east 1/3 of the lot slopes downward to a creek which runs along the east property line. There are existing single family residences located to the east, west and south along Chenal Circle, with the Chenal Valley golf course located to the north. The applicant proposes to construct a new two-story single family residence on the site which encroaches slightly over the front platted building line within the west portion of the lot. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the encroachment. The proposed residential structure will extend five (5) feet over the 35 foot front (west) platted building line, resulting in a 30 foot setback from the April 29, 2002 Item No.: 9 (Cont.) west property line. Section 31-12(c) of the City's Subdivision Ordinance requires that variances for encroachments over platted building setback lines be reviewed by the Board of Adjustment. Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Approximately one-third of this lot is unbuildable due to a creek and floodway/floodplain lying along the east property line. The top of the slope is located 20 to 70 feet from the east property line. In order to construct a single family residence which will be compatible with the existing homes in the neighborhood, the applicant feels that the encroachment is necessary. Additionally, the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front yard setback of only 25 feet in R-2 zoning. The proposed house will be located 30 feet back from the west (front) property line. Staff feels that the proposed placement of the single family residence will have no adverse impact on the adjacent homes. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the front building line for the proposed house. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested building line variance subject to completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the front platted building line as approved by the Board. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 29, 2002) 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 © WHITE - DA�_ .S & ASSOCIATES, INC. (� 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, Arkansas 72223 March 22, 2002 Mr. Monte Moore City of Little Rock Neighborhoods and Planning 723 W. Markham St. Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Chenal Valley Lot 33, Block 1 Mr. Moore, . 4� 'q Z- -1z0b Attached please find six copies of the site plan for the above referenced project. The original design of this lot does not fit the style of homes that have been constructed in this development. The builder needs to reduce the front building setback from 35 ft. to 30 ft. in order to construct a home that is conducive to the neighborhood. Please place this item on the next available Board of Adjustment agenda. Mr. Pickering is coming by this afternoon to sign an affidavit. I will forward that to you as soon as possible. Your help in this matter is greatly appreciated. B gar oe D. ite Jr. CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT, SURVEYING April 29, 2002 ITEM NO.: 10 File No.: Z-7207 Owner: Jim and Connie Wright Address: 14 Maywood Drive Description: West side of Maywood Drive, approximately 300 feet south of Cantrell Road Zoned: 5W Variance Requested: The applicant is requesting an appeal of an administrative interpretation, in order to recognize the property as a nonconforming use. Justification.- Present ustification: Present Use of Property Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. B. Staff Analysis: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Single Family Residential Auto Repair The R-2 zoned property at 14 Maywood Drive contains a one-story brick and frame single family residence and two (2) accessory garage buildings. The property is located in a small "island" area which was recently annexed into the City of Little Rock. The City's extraterritorial zoning was extended to include this area in 1990. When the City's jurisdiction was extended the welding shop at the southwest corner of Cantrell Road and Maywood Drive (immediately north of 14 Maywood Drive) was given a nonconforming C-4 status to recognize the existing commercial use. This property was zoned R-2. April 29, 2002 Item No.: 10 The City's Zoning Enforcement Staff recently received a complaint that the westernmost accessory building/garage on the property at 14 Maywood Drive was being used as a commercial business, possibly expansion of the nonconforming welding business immediately to the north. On March 18, 2002 the Zoning Enforcement Staff issued a notice to Jim and Connie Wright to cease the use of the garage structure at 14 Maywood Drive for business purposes. This was based on the fact that the City's Enforcement Officer observed possible business activity involving the accessory building, including iron fence materials in the building. The property owners, Jim and Connie Wright, contend that the accessory building/garage at the rear of the property at 14 Maywood Drive should have a nonconforming C-4 status based on the fact that an auto repair business had previously been operated in the building. Staff instructed the Wrights to submit written, dated documentation showing that the building had been used for auto repair. The Wrights did submit some documents, but staff determined that the documentation submitted was not enough to show that an auto repair business has been continually operated at 14 Maywood Drive since 1990. The documents presented to staff by the Wrights are attached for Board of Adjustment review. Therefore, Jim and Connie Wright are requesting an appeal of staff's administrative interpretation, in order to operate an auto repair business in the westernmost accessory building on the property at 14 Maywood Drive. The Board of Adjustment is asked to determine if an auto repair business should be recognized as a nonconforming use of this property. As of this writing, staff has asked the Wright's attorney to provide additional documentation relating to the past use of the property at 14 Maywood Drive. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 29, 2002) David Henry, Jim and Connie Wright and Larry Miller were present, representing the application. There were several persons present in opposition to the application. Staff explained the applicant's request for appeal and provided a brief history of the property. Staff explained that the property was located immediately south of the welding shop at the southwest corner of Maywood Drive and Cantrell Road. David Henry, the Wright's attorney, addressed the Board in support of the application. He noted that Pulaski County 9-1-1 had assigned the address of 14 Maywood Dr. to this property. He presented the Board with a sketch of this property and the surrounding property. He stated that the property was utilized 2 April 29, 2002 Item No.: 10 for an auto repair business when it was brought into the City's jurisdiction in 1990. He noted that the auto repair business had been on the property since 1986 or 1987. Larry Miller, the previous owner of 14 Maywood Drive, addressed the Board. He noted that the auto repair business was started in 1986 or 1987. He noted that it was a full-time business for 12 or 13 years, then part-time until mid-January or February of this year when he moved from the property. He also noted that a wrecker service was associated with auto repair business. Mr. Henry noted that the Wrights proposed to access the property from Cantrell Road and not Maywood Drive. Cindy Dawson, City Attorney, asked for clarification on the past use of the property. Mr. Miller explained the previous use of the property as noted above. Vice -Chairman Gray noted that the City's Code Enforcement office had observed equipment in the garage building. Mr. Miller explained that those were his tools. Mr. Henry noted that the Wrights did have fencing materials stored in the building. There was additional discussion of the past use of the property. Cindy Dawson asked if there were income tax records for the past auto repair use. Mr. Miller noted that he could come up with tax records if necessary. Vice -Chairman Gray asked if any other records existed. Mr. Miller noted that he had no place to store records and had discarded most of them. Mr. Henry stated that the Wrights had improved the property by paving the drives and fencing the perimeter. Gary Langlais asked if a nonconforming use went with the property or an individual owner. Cindy Dawson noted that a nonconforming use could be transferred from owner to owner. Alicia Finch, president of the Maywood Manor Neighborhood Association, spoke in opposition to the application. She presented the Board with photos of the Wright's property. She referenced letters sent to staff and provided to the Board. She expressed concerns with the expansion of the welding shop. She noted that there had not been an auto repair garage at 14 Maywood Drive in several years. She noted that the Wrights had recently expanded the welding shop by moving the fence and expanding the outside storage area. She noted concerns with traffic (loading and unloading of welding supplies along Maywood Drive) and discussed. She also noted concern with fire and safety issues and explained. 3 April 29, 2002 Item No.: 10 (Cont.) She questioned the validity of the receipts given to staff by the applicants. She noted that there had been no business activity on the site in the past 12 months. She also noted that Mr. Miller is shown as the property owner, according to county records. Vice -Chairman Gray asked Ms. Finch how she thought that the Wrights had expanded the welding business. Ms. Finch noted that the outside storage area had been expanded and that the use had been expanded into the accessory garage at 14 Maywood Drive. Mr. Henry showed the Board a copy of the deed which had yet to be recorded. He noted that trucks which deliver to the welding shop will begin to use the access drive from Cantrell Road. He also noted that the Wrights' family live in the immediate area. The driveway from Cantrell Road was briefly discussed. Mr. Henry noted that this was not a new drive, just newly paved. He stated that the drive had existed for over 30 years. Chairman Ruck asked how the Wrights intended to use the garage building. Mr. Henry noted that the Wrights wished to paint fence materials in the garage building, or use it for auto repair. He also mentioned office/warehouse as a possible use. Vice -Chairman Gray asked if both accessory structures on the property at 14 Maywood Drive had been used for business activity. Mr. Henry explained that only the westernmost structure had been used as the auto repair business. He identified the building on the map he provided to the Board. Janet Hughes, of 37 Maywood Drive, spoke in opposition to the application. She asked that any statements made be part of the public record. Carol Bulloch, of 11 Dee Dee Circle, also spoke in opposition. She noted that the garage building could be seen from her front porch. Victor Bulloch, of 11 Dee Dee Circle, also spoke in opposition. He noted concern with future use of the property by the Wrights. Russell Lynch, of 21 Maywood Drive, noted safety concerns. He noted that in the past, trucks had unloaded welding supplies along Maywood Drive. Ms. Finch stated that she had no problem with the improvements that the Wrights had made to the property. She expressed concern with the expansion of the welding shop business. She stated that the activity which taken place on this property affects the entire neighborhood. _'n April 29, 2002 Item No.: 10 (Cont. Gary Langlais asked to hear from the City's Zoning Enforcement Staff. Kenny Scott, Zoning Enforcement Coordinator, noted that several inspections of the property were made as a result of complaints received regarding the expansion of the welding business. He noted that a courtesy notice was issued on March 18, 2002 based on evidence of welding materials being stored in the garage structure at 14 Maywood Drive. He explained that the receipts provided to staff by the Wrights did not contain enough evidence to establish a nonconforming use. Chairman Ruck discussed the issue which was before the Board. Vice - Chairman Gray concurred with Chairman Ruck. Mr. Henry noted that the issue before the Board was whether or not the garage building at 14 Maywood Drive had a nonconforming use for the auto repair use. Dana Carney, of the City Planning Staff, noted that the issue was whether or not the property at 14 Maywood Drive had a nonconforming status. Cindy Dawson also explained the issue before the Board. Vice -Chairman Gray asked for clarification of the issue. Mr. Carney noted that the use of 14 Maywood Drive was the only issue before the Board. This issue was further discussed. There was a motion to approve the appeal of staff's administrative interpretation and recognize the property as a nonconforming use. Cindy Dawson explained the motion. Chairman Ruck called for a vote on the motion. The motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes, 4 nays and 1 absent. The appeal was denied. A J. MARK SPRADLEY ATTORNEY AT LAW 8114 CAmRELL, surrE 240 LrrrLE ROCK, ARFANsAs 72227 jmspradleygalltel.net March 21, 2002 Mr. Monte Moore Zoning and Code Enforcement Administrator Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1364 Dear Mr. Moore: t ,;Z17,2 -o! TELEPHONE: (501) 537-4290 TELEcoppim (501) 537-4293 Re: Apeal to Little Rock Board of Adjustment by Jim and Connie Wright; 14 Maywood Drive Mr. and Mrs. Jim Wright have requested our assistance in appealing to the Little Rock Board of Adjustment the City of Little Rock's decision not to recognize the Wright's property at 14 Maywood Drive as an established nonconforming use. In that regard we submit herewith on the Wright's behalf the required form requesting to be placed on the agenda for the Board of Adjustment's meeting scheduled for April 29, 2002. Also submitted herewith is our firm's check for the filing fee. Please confirm to us that the Wright's appeal is so docketed and at what time and where the meeting will convene. Your assistance with this request will be appreciated. Yours truly, I--; fil) J. Mark Spradley Jms/lhs Enclosures cc/w Enclosures: Mr. and Mrs. Jim Wright CAWINWORD\IJMS\WRIGHTSV\March 21.doc AFFADAV IT s• 4 / 72-6>7 RE: ADDRESS: 14 MAYWOOD MANOR LEGAL: Part of the NIV V of the SW 'V, of Section 14, Township 2 North, Range 14 . West; Pulaski County, Arkansas more particularly described as follows: .—Begin 500 feet South & 210 feet East of the NW corner of the NW V, of the SW '/ of Section 14,.ToW hship 2 North, Range Irl West; thence East 210 feet, thence North 125 feet, thence West 210 feet, thence South 125 feet to the point of the beginning. I, LARRY MILLER, owned 14 MAYWOOD MANOR I have resided at this address all of my life. My father deeded property to me over 15 years ago and at that time I built a shop on the property to do painting, auto repair and body work as part time employment. During the process of the rezoning, this was never listed as a shop on the property. Please check and update your records if necessary to ensure tl'tat this is properly reflected as a commercial non-confonning shop on residential property. ��.•0. H MASS .�XAg0 IOTA&)' • PUBLXG AG '• �� 17.20,E 1QQe Date 09/07/2013 22:25 FAX 002 1�- MILLER'S AUTO 23 MAYWOOD Lri iU ROM, AR. ' 722U CLAIMS AND RETURR ACCOMPANIEDKiWl it -1-94-0-5RECD BY 5R320 corbonleffm DATE F: CLAIMS AND RETURR ACCOMPANIEDKiWl it -1-94-0-5RECD BY 5R320 corbonleffm DESCRIPTION PRICE, AMOUNTrs Jillr� nod CLAIMS AND RETURR ACCOMPANIEDKiWl it -1-94-0-5RECD BY 5R320 corbonleffm 09/07/2013 22:25 FAX Ij003 -. MILLER'S AUTO 23 MAM00-D CUSTOMER'S ORDER NO. / DATE / NAME r17194 AD � 1.94 :Q.•4 REC'D BY SR320 carbon/efts 09/07/2013 22:26 FAX MILLERS AUTO 23 MAYWOOP LMU ROCK, AR 722 1' ImWffm X1004 1• W • L V ! RECD BY . 5R320 "FFM • • � ��bonl�s LER'S AiiTn f J14 UP 5Rs20 M . ' carboniesa 09/07/2013 22:26 FAX MILLER'S AUTO. 23 MAPWOOD 2006 i V T W w RECD 8Y SR320 �(e;jM . c4rbanlE'set 09/07/2013 22:22 FAX MUER'S AUTO 23 MAY WOOD Li b` U ROCK, AR 7412 DATE NAME , •,� �. 4 U b RECD BY 5RM f!EDIFa1:M. • carbon/�yf [a 002 09/07/2013 22:22 FAX MILLER'S AUT© 23MAY'lVQrjD :u.4 RK'D BY 5R320. Cerbon/ess •::v w � RECD•BY� . CTO xv3 CS : ZZ CTOZ/LO/TT 11/07/2013 22:52 FAX _ 17 RC C'A BY carbanieom 5R3" 12008 11/07/2013 22_51 FAX _ _. .. 004 MILLER,,jTO 23 nAyWQDD 72212 CUSTOMEWS ORDER NO. DATE NAME ` f r ADDRESS 1 v 35211 RECD BY • csrbvnley�r 11/07/2013 22:53 FAX ---�YwANMU by THIS BILL . ..... ... RfC'D-BV BR320 F_MDWCM, carbonless 11/07/2013 22:52 FAX CUSTOMEVS ORDER NO, QUAN DESCRIPTION PKICE AMOUNT i- OVA �A Tax F Total ALL CLAIMS AND RETURNED GOODS MUST BE ACCOMPANiEp BY THIS BTI! ,+ u NJ RECD BY SR320 Ii ORM • carbonless 2011 11/07/2013 22:52 FAX --�-f: - ---..._.... . _..........._... _.. _....-:._..-•-- ....__..-----......_...... - ,....:� _ . to 6.9 La „J REC'DBY rarbonle�s 5R320 �« APDRE55 39190 7 a: n '�+' RECD BY 'raI'bOpleis 5R320 RM, �' Coos 11/07/2013 22:51 FAX 5TOME[t 5 ORDER NO' NAME �- �1 carponleaa 1. n9 4-.^ RECD BY _ 11/07/2013 22:51 FAX Z 00 DATE my"Eirs ORDER NO. NAME ADORE ?carbonless01 L , Rr-c,o BY 11/07/2013 22:51 FAX —5 - NAME ADDRESS n r afro -sr --- 5R320 REWOM. C!lrbon/rts� 1 a 005 i,e i � REG'D SY .. Carbonless 5R320 �' - •- - - All CLAIMS ANU.KrIUM1.1- BY 4 2002 April 29, 2002 ITEM NO.: 11 File No.: Z-7208 Owner: Deltic Timber Corporation Address: Chenal Valley — Various Locations Zoned: Various zonings Variance Requested: Variances are requested in conjunction with the Chenal Valley Sign Master Plan. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Various uses Proposed Use of Property: Various uses 0 :_'•:1 Public Works Issues: 1. Signs should not obstruct corner line -of -sight. Refer to Section 32-8 of Traffic Ordinance. (Signs should not extend into the triangular area between the property lines and a diagonal line joining points on the property line fifty- (50) feet from the point of intersection.) B. Staff Analysis: The applicant, Deltic Timber Corporation, requests approval of a Sign Master Plan for the Chenal Valley area of west Little Rock. The issue is before the Board of Adjustment based on the fact that most of the signs will be located in the public right-of-way and variances are needed for some of the signs. A total of 14 sign locations are proposed as noted on the attached plan. All of the proposed signs will be monument -type signs, except for banner signs on light poles which are proposed for The Village At Rahling Road development. The signs will identify various subdivisions and developments in the Chenal Valley area. The applicant notes that eight (8) of the signs are existing. According to Section 36-530 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, the definition of an off -premise sign is as follows: April 29, 2u02 Item No.: 11 (Cont. "Off -premises sign means a sign structure advertising an establishment, merchandise, service or entertainment, which is not sold, produced, manufactured or furnished at the property on which the sign is located, e.g., billboards or outdoor advertising." The first issue before the Board is an interpretive issue as to whether or not the monument -type signs are considered off -premise signs. Although the signs are located in the public right-of-way, staff believes that the signs should not be interpreted as off -premise signs. This is based on the fact that the signs are located within the overall Chenal Valley development and identify specific areas of the overall development. According to Section 36-552, subdivision identification signs are allowed a maximum area of 32 square feet. Three (3) of the existing monument signs (#3, #7 and #10 as shown on the attached site sketch) exceed the 32 square foot maximum area. These signs range in size from 36 square feet to 64 square feet. Therefore, the applicant requests a variance for these signs. Staff is supportive of this variance. The two (2) signs with the largest area are main entry signs to the Chenal Valley development, with the other sign identifying a number of the small developments within Chenal Valley. The last variance relates to the 41 banner signs attached to lamp posts within The Village At Rahling Road commercial/office development. Each banner sign is attached to two (2) poles which extend horizontally from each the lamp pole. The banners are approximately eight (8) square feet in area. Section 36-557(d) of the City's Zoning Ordinance limits the placement of banner signs to four (4) events in a calendar year, with a limit of six (6) weeks per event, for a total of 24 weeks. The applicant is requesting that the banners be allowed to remain up on a year-round basis. Staff also supports the variance to allow year-round use of the banner signs. Staff feels that the request is reasonable and should have no adverse impact on the general area, given the small size of the banner signs proposed. Staff does however recommend that the banner signs be for the identification of "The Village At Rahling Road" development only. The banners must not advertise an individual business, sale/promotion, specific merchandise or product line. K t April 29, 2002 Item No.: 11 (Cont.) C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Chenal Valley Sign Master Plan including variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. A franchise must be obtained for all signs located in the public right-of- way. 2. Sign permits must be obtained as per the City Zoning Ordinance. Staff also recommends approval of the variance to allow year-round use of banner signs within "The Village At Rahling Road" development subject to the following conditions: 1. The banner signs are for the identification of "The Village At Rahling Road" development only. 2. There is to be no wording on the banner signs which advertise a specific business, sale/promotion, specific merchandise or product line. 3. The banner signs are to be attached only to the light poles within "The Village At Rahling Road" development, with limitation of the size and number of signs as described in the "Staff Analysis." 4. Any banner sign that becomes torn or damaged must be promptly removed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 29, 2002) 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. K3 March 19, 2002 Mr. Monty Moore Little Rock Planning & Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mr. Moore, 2- %Zok Attached please find the Application for Zoning Variance and Sign Masterplan showing existing RUSSELL and future sign and banner locations in Chenal Valley. As per Jim Lawson's conversation with Jack McCray of Deltic Timber, Russell & Roberts was asked to prepare this comprehensive for & City review and approval. ROBERTS The Sign Masterplan shows development signs that exist or are proposed in the public L T D. rights-of-way for Deltic Timber properties in Chenal Valley from State Highway 10 south to Kanis Road. A legend is provided on the left side of the page to define the symbols, type and quantity of the signs and banners. Call -outs adjacent to each sign location denote the plaque size and text with a sketch showing the shape and size of each monument sign and banner. The Village at Rahling Road is the only Deltic Timber property with light pole mounted banners (shown in green on the plan) The banners in this area are intended to carry out the New Orleans shopping village environment established by the building architecture. Some of the existing signs (shown in red on the plan) have been in place well over ten years with the most recent monument sign installed on Chenal Parkway, near Rahling Road, just last year. All existing monument signs in Chenal Valley have received City of Little Rock franchise application approval. A construction schedule for the proposed signs (shown in blue) has not been established. The four proposed monument signs on Highway 10 may be submitted for franchise approval as soon as this year. The application for the three signs on Kanis will probably be at a later date not yet determined. Please let us know if additional material is required. We will be happy to provide any necessary information the Planning Department desires. Sincerely, Dave Roberts, ASLA 1501 N. UNIVERSITY,STE. 430 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72207 501/280-0123 FAX 501/280-0114 E-NIAIL: landarc@aristotle.net N� 0 U w CK 2E L �A IR ii c Z w U) m w Q z w Q s D 0 ,.J F - w J` �o H Q U :E o Z z < o w (DQ c� LL Z U Q OD _� of � z U h LL (D Q W cr- }� Of W � o<�Q LL CD m � U z Q > Q Q z 1:) = Y U LL U J 0� cr� 2E L �A IR ii c Z w U) m w Q z w Q D 0 F - w w �o H Q U :E o Z z < o w (DQ LL Z U Q OD _� of � z U h LL (D Q 2E L �A IR ii c Z w U) m w Q z w Q April 29, 2002 There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 3:25 p.m. Date: A 0 e Zv7 Z Chairman