boa_01 29 2001i
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SUMMARY OF MINUTES
JANUARY 29, 2001
FW1I���
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being five (5) in number.
II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meetings
The Minutes of the December 18, 2000 meeting were
approved as mailed by unanimous vote.
III. Members Present: Gary Langlais, Chairman
William Ruck, Vice Chairman
Norm Floyd
Fred Gray
Scott Richburg
Members Absent: None
City Attorney Present: Cindy Dawson
I. NEW ITEMS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
AGENDA
JANUARY 29, 2001
2:00 P.M.
Z -5779-A
5322
Asher Avenue
Z-6962
2020
N. Tyler Street
Z-6963
2102
N. McKinley
Z-6964
62 Pleasant
Valley Dr.
Z-6965
2901
Welch Street
Z -3915-B
12024
I-30, Time Extension
is
CITY LIMITS
u ML KING
CHEST
ARCH
BROADWAY T
MAIN
07
(\�\/�� •
a
� D
y �
Fn
zl V
THIBAULT
cQ
�ULLIVAN
A pfppgQ/
n o
RIDGE
CITY LIMITS
- s
80 AN
S
-
RODNEY PARHAM
as
o
-
AC LE RD
o
SHACKLEFORO
-
;E
'yy
a �n
RESERVOIR
E
JOHN BARROW
;HICOT
i
9
F
MI SSIPPI
HUGHES
r ,�
v J
GEYER PRINGS
-
UNIVERSITYI
UNIVERSITY
u ML KING
CHEST
ARCH
BROADWAY T
MAIN
07
(\�\/�� •
a
� D
y �
Fn
zl V
THIBAULT
cQ
Jo..uary 29, 2001
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:
Z -5779-A
O'Reilly Auto Parts
5322 Asher Avenue
Long Legal
I-2
Variances are requested from the
sign areas provisions of Section
36-554.
The applicant's justification is
presented in an attached letter.
Auto parts store, under
construction
Auto parts store
No issues related to this sign variance.
B. Staff Analysis:
A new O'Reilly Auto Parts Store is being constructed on the
I-2 zoned property located at 5322 Asher Avenue. O'Reilly
proposes to erect one, ground -mounted sign on the Asher
Avenue frontage. The sign will be a maximum of 30 feet in
height and have an area of 112 square feet. The code limits
ground -mounted signs in the I-2 district to 30 feet in
height and 72 square feet in area.
Staff is supportive of the requested sign area variance.
The sign is designed with two components; the main
identification portion which is 80 square feet in area and a
message board which is 32 square feet in area. Dividing the
total area of the sign into the two components reduces the
overall visual impact of the sign.
J._._uary 29, 2001
Item No.: 1 (Cont.)
The property is one of several along Asher Avenue that have
been proposed by staff for rezoning as a result of the Asher
Avenue Corridor Study. This site has been proposed for
rezoning from I-2 to C-3. The property owner has agreed to
staff's recommendation. The rezoning request will be heard
by the Planning Commission on January 25, 2001 and will be
forwarded to the Board of Directors once a certificate of
occupancy has been issued for the new building. Ground -
mounted signs in the C-3 district may be up to 36 feet in
height and may have an area up to 160 square feet. The
proposed sign is both shorter and smaller in area than what
is permitted in C-3.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested sign area
variance, as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JANUARY 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 by a vote
of 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
K
December 20, 2000
Dana Carney
Zoning & Subdivision Manager
City of Little Rock
Department of Planning & Development
723 W. Markham
Little Rock AR 72201-1334
Re Sign Variance Request for Oreilly's Auto Parts Store 5322 Asher Avenue Little Rock
Dear Mr. Carney,
As we have discussed previously, Oreilly's is opening a new store on Asher Avenue. It is our understanding that the
property is currently zoned I2, but that Oreilly's and the zoning department would like to have the property rezoned to C3.
The pole -signs normally installed at a store location are 112 square feet and 30' in height and the building signs measure
146' square feet. While these signs would be less than the maximum allowed in a commercial zone, they exceed the
allowable size in an industrial zone. Therefore we respectfully request that a variance be granted to allow the signs to be
permitted under the commercial zoning allowances. The main reasoning for the request is timing, Oreilly's plans to open
the store in February, and the zoning process will not be completed until March. To require Oreilly's to adhere to the
industrial zoning requirements simply because the zoning process has been delayed seems unfair.
I have talked with the corporate office concerning the rezoning, and they have assured me that, it is their intent to proceed
with the rezoning as requested by the city. I understand that they will be sending you a letter concerning this matter.
It is unfortunate that we cannot receive an administrative variance to allow us to proceed. In any case, it is very important
that Oreilly's be allowed to install their signs prior to their opening, and they have requested that I represent them
concerning the Sign Variance Request. Enclosed please find your application, site survey, sign drawings, building
elevations and your check for the application fee.
I appreciate your assistance in this matter, if you have any questions, or if I can be of any assistance, please call me at 800-
844-3155.
DEC 28 '00 81016PM O REILLY RUTOMOTIVE
P. 1/1
' .►ffl AUTO PARTS.-
P. ti Bax I IM 0 233 S. Patterson
3pr ngfleld, MNOW
Phone (417)862-1733
www. MIXY8010, Coln
$endeT'8 dimct dial 941"7-974.7103
Senders direetfax y417-374-7112
k�rainito�?Rore illYauto.corn
December 28, 2000
VIA TFLECOPY #501-399-3435
DANA CARNEY
ZONING & SUBDIVISION MANAGER
CITY OF LITTLE ROCK
RE: O'Reilly Auto Parts Store located on Asher and Fair Park
Dear MT. Carney.
We consent to the City of Little Rock's request that our property at the corner of Asher and Fair Park is
rezoned to commercial use upon our receipt of a Certificate of Occupancy regarding our current -construction
on this property. We desire to complete construction then take part in the rezoning effort. Please feel free
to call me at (417) 874-7103 if you have any questions or concerns. Thank you for your attention to this
matter.
c: Saundra Wilkinson
FOMILTR
Yours very truly,
O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE, IN
Kathleetl Prainit
Corporate Counsel
RIGHT PART, RIGHT PRICE GUARANTEE!
J�_.uary 29, 2001
Item No.: 2
File No.:
Owner:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Variance Requested:
Justification:
Present Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
Staff Report:
A. Public Works Issues:
No issues.
B. Staff Analysis:
Z-6962
M. Jane Dickey and Don K. Barnes
2020 N. Tyler Street
Lot 1, Block 23, Newton Addition
R-2
Variances are requested from the
accessory structure setback and
area coverage provisions of Section
36-156.
The applicant's justification is
presented in an attached letter.
Single Family
Single Family
The R-2 zoned property located at 2020 North Tyler Street is
occupied by a one-story, brick and frame, single family
residence and a detached, accessory structure. The
accessory structure contains a one -car carport and a
workshop. The applicants propose to remove the existing
accessory structure and build in its place a new, two -car
garage with room for storage and a hobby darkroom. The new
structure is proposed to maintain the same 5 foot street
side yard setback as the existing accessory structure. The
code requires a street side yard setback of 15 feet for
accessory structures. All other setbacks will be exceeded.
546 square feet of the proposed structure will be located in
the required rear yard area. The code limits accessory
structures to a rear yard area coverage of 30 percent; 375
J_uary 29, 2001
Item No.: 2 (Cont.
square feet for this lot. The applicants propose a rear
yard area coverage of 43.7 percent.
Staff is supportive of the requested setback and area
coverage variances. Although the proposed structure is
somewhat larger than the existing carport/storage building,
the visual impact from the street will not be much
different. The new structure will maintain the same street
side yard setback. The width of the new structure visible
from Tyler Street is slightly larger than the width of the
existing structure. The visual appearance of the new
structure will be an improvement over the older, existing
building which should be of benefit to the neighborhood.
The structure is located 19 feet from the curb of Tyler
Street, providing adequate back -out space and not creating a
sight -distance issue. The other homes abutting Tyler Street
front onto the intersecting streets and have a side yard
relationship to Tyler. A side yard setback to Tyler Street
of 5 feet is common.
Although the proposed structure is larger than what is
permitted by code, it is not so large as to be incompatible
with the neighborhood. The more narrow side of the
structure faces Tyler Street. The applicant proposes
setbacks of 10 feet and 8 feet from the property lines on
the south and west respectively, providing adequate
separation from the neighboring properties. The rear yard
is enclosed by a 6 foot tall, wood privacy fence which helps
mitigate the visual impact of the structure. Staff believes
it is reasonable to limit the structure to one-story in
height. The applicant has not indicated otherwise.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested street side yard
setback and area coverage variances subject to compliance
with the following conditions:
1. The structure is to be limited to one-story in height.
2. The brick driveway accessing the existing
carport/storage building is to be removed.
N
0—uary 29, 2001
Item No.: 2 (Cont.)
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JANUARY 29, 2001)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject
to compliance with .the conditions outlined in the "Staff
Recommendation" above.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
recommended by staff. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
3
M. JANE DICKEY AND DON. K. BARNES
January 5, 2001
Mr. Dana Carney
Department of Planning & Development
723 West Markham Street
Little Rock, AR 72201-1334
Re: Zoning Case File No. Z-6962
Dear Mr. Carney:
We are writing to describe the proposal_ for the residential zoning variance referenced
above.
Our house sits on the southwest corner of North Tyler Street and Stonewall Road.
Although the lot is oriented toward Stonewall Road (that is, it has 50 feet of frontage on
Stonewall and 140 feet of frontage on North Tyler), the walks terminate on North Tyler
Street and the house has a North Tyler Street address. The house was originally constructed
in 1928 and was substantially remodeled in the late 1970s. We have owned the house since
1983.
At present, there is a one -car carport with attached workshop just south of the
house, with the back yard south of the workshop. We propose to raze these structures and
construct a 2 -car garage 10 feet from the south property line. The new structure will also
include a 12 foot by 8 foot storage room and a 12 foot by 8 foot hobby darkroom along its
west side, away from the street. We have 3 vehicles and propose to have a parking pad south
of the new garage to park the third vehicle.
Our reasons for placing the garage so far to the rear of the lot are to allow light in
the rooms on the south side of the house, place the rear yard close to the house rather than
isolating it behind the garage, and preserve a mature Japanese red maple tree. We need it to
be as large as it is so that it can include the areas for storage and a specialized hobby room.
This placement of the garage at the back of the lot is consistent with many other 1920 -
vintage houses in the neighborhood.
Sincerely,
M( a e Dickey
2020 NORTH TYLER STREET
LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72207-4530
(501) 664-5823
DICKEY BARNES@SWBELL.NET
JLaary 29, 2001
Item No.: 3
File No.:
Owner:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Variance Requested:
Justification:
Present Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
Staff Report:
A. Public Works Issues:
With Building Permit:
Z-6963
E -Z Mart/Richard McKinney
2102 N. McKinley
Lots B and 22, Westover Hills
C-3
Variances are requested from the
area regulations of Section 36-301
to permit construction of a gas
island canopy.
The irregular shape of the property
limits the buildable area without a
variance.
Convenience store
Convenience store
1. Pine Valley and McKinley are classified as commercial
streets. Dedication of right-of-way 30 feet from
centerline of existing road will be required.
2. A 20 -foot radial dedication of right-of-way will be
required at the corner of Pine Valley and McKinley.
3. Driveways shall conform to Sec. 31-210 or Ordinance
18,031. Eliminate driveways that do not meet ordinance
requirements.
4. Provide design of street conforming to "MSP" (Master
Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvement to
these streets including 5 -foot sidewalks with planned
development.
5. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
J aary 29, 2001
Item No.: 3 (Cont.
B. Staff Analysis:
The C-3 zoned property located at 2102 N. McKinley Street is
occupied by a one-story, 3,880 square foot, commercial
building. The building houses, a laundromat and a
convenience store. The operator of the convenience store
proposes to reinstall gas pumps on the site. A 24' X 52'
canopy is proposed to cover the gas pump islands. The
canopy is proposed to have a 5 -foot setback on both the
McKinley Street and Pine Valley frontages. The code
requires setbacks of 25 feet on both frontages. The lot is
pie -shaped, coming to a point at the intersection of Pine
Valley and McKinley. The unusual shape greatly reduces the
available buildable area.
Staff has concerns about the proposal. The lot is indeed
unusually shaped, requiring variances for any additional
structure to be built on the site. Staff's primary concern
is that adding the canopy appears to result in overbuilding
the site. Once the required right-of-way is dedicated for
Pine Valley and McKinley, the canopy will have a 0 foot
setback on both of those perimeters. The majority of the
proposed canopy extends into the required setbacks. This
3,880 square foot commercial building requires 13 on-site
parking spaces. Allowing the canopy to be built, as
proposed, will eliminate several parking spaces, leaving
only 10 spaces across the front of the building. The
existing building itself extends into the setbacks along
both streets and is built very near the rear (north)
property line as a result of previous action by the Board of
Adjustment in 1964. The canopy appears to be located within
15 feet of the curb of McKinley Street. The lots across
McKinley, to the east, are occupied by single-family homes
with typical 25± foot front yards. The visual effect of the
canopy on these nearby residences could be negative. Staff
also has significant concerns about traffic patterns on the
site once the fuel pump islands are installed. As a result
of these concerns, staff cannot support the variance
request.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the application.
VA
I
J.-_aary 29, 2001
Item No.: 3 (Cont.)
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JANUARY 29, 2001)
Frank Riggins, of the Mehlburger Firm, was present representing
the applicant. There were two interested parties present. These
persons did not fill out attendance cards. Staff informed the
Board that the applicant had requested that the item be deferred
to the February 26, 2001 meeting to allow the architect time to
prepare additional drawings.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to
the February 26, 2001 meeting by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes and
0 absent.
3
Ja__aary 29, 2001
Item No.: 4
File No.:
Owner:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Variance Requested:
Justification:
Present Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
Staff Report:
A. Public Works Issues:
With Buildina Permit
Little Rock's First Baptist Church
62 Pleasant Valley Drive
Long Legal
Variances are requested from the
area regulations of Section 36-254
and the building line provisions of
Section 31-12.
The applicant's justification is
presented in an attached letter.
Church
Church
1. Construct sidewalk along Rodney Parham Road and Happy
Valley Drive.
2. Rodney Parham is classified on the Master Street Plan as
a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet
from centerline is required.
3. Happy Valley is classified on the Master Street Plan as a
commercial street. A dedication of right-of-way to 30
feet from centerline will be required.
4.A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required
at the corner of Rodney Parham and Happy Valley.
B. Staff Analysis:
Little Rock's First Baptist Church occupies the R-2 zoned
property located at 62 Pleasant Valley Drive. The church
fronts onto N. Rodney Parham Road and has a front yard
setback of 40 feet. A 40 -foot building line extends along
JM .aary 29, 2001
Item No.: 4 (Cont.
the Rodney Parham frontage. The church proposes to
construct a new entrance canopy onto the front of the
building, providing covered access to the main entrance to
the facility. The proposed canopy is to extend across the
platted building line, resulting in a front yard setback of
22.25 feet. Once the required right-of-way for Rodney
Parham Road is dedicated, the front yard setback will be
17.25 feet. The code requires a front yard setback of 25
feet in the R-2 district.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. When the
church was constructed in the mid-1970s, a covered drop-off
was built at the rear, lower level. No covered drop-off was
constructed near the main entrance. This requires elderly,
physically disabled and other members and guests to make
their way through the length and various levels of the
building to access the main sanctuary.
The proposed canopy will be set back 40 feet from the curb
of Rodney Parham Road. The canopy is 26 feet in width, a
very small dimension intruding into the front setback of
this 800+ feet wide property. The canopy will remain open
and unenclosed on the front and sides. The properties
across Rodney Parham Road are occupied by single-family
homes that are set back well away from Rodney Parham Road.
The proposed canopy addition should have no impact on nearby
residential properties or on traffic on Rodney Parham.
If the Board approves the building line variance, the
applicant will have to do a one -lot replat reflecting the
change in the building line for the canopy. 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 setback and
building line variances subject to compliance with the
following conditions:
1. A one -lot replat reflecting the change in the building
line as approved by the Board.
2. Compliance with Public Works Comments including any
variance or waiver of those requirements as may be
E
J, nary 29, 2001
Item No.: 4 (Cont.)
granted by the Director of Public Works or the Board of
Directors.
3. The canopy is to remain open and unenclosed on the front
and sides. .
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JANUARY 29, 2001)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject
to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff
Recommendation" above.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
recommended by staff. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
3
{
ROARK • PERKINS • PERRY • YELVINGTON
713 WEST SECOND STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-2287 0 501372-0272 0 FAX 501372-3645
December 5, 2000
Mr. Dana Carney
Department of Planning & Development
Board of Adjustments
City of Little Rock
723 W. Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
Re: Building Line & Setback Variance
Little Rock's First Baptist Church
Dear Mr. Carney:
As we have discussed, attached is the information required for the above-mentioned project, to
be on the January 29th agenda. RPPY Architects (Tim Yelvington, A.I.A.) will be representing
the church during the meeting. Please address all concerns or comments to me.
The existing church was constructed in the 70's, therefore, the front door(s) leading directly into
the sanctuary are on the front of the building. These doors are on the building setback and there
is a problem with elderly or physically disabled being dropped off entering directly into the
sanctuary. At this time, they must enter on a lower level on the north end near the back of the
building. Once they are dropped off, they must find their way to the elevator or a stair to go up to
the sanctuary floor level. In our professional opinion, this is a hardship, therefore, we are asking
for a variance in the building line and setback line for a new canopy to be constructed on the
front of the existing building. This will enable the elderly, physically disabled, and other
members or guests to be dropped off under a covered drive and enter directly into the sanctuary.
RPPY Architects and LRFBC feel this is a better solution for an ongoing problem.
Thank you for your consideration and all the help you have given me in regard to this project.
Sincerely,
ROARK•PERKINS•PE Y•YELVINGTON
Timothy S. Yelvington, A.I.A.
TSY/bp
Ju_._aary 29, 2001
Item No.: 5
File No.: Z-6965
Owner: Billy Thomas
Address: 2901 Welch Street
Description: Lots 9 and 10, Block 3, Owen's
Subdivision
Zoned: I-2
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the
pavement requirements of Section
36-508, the buffer requirements of
Section 36-522 and the screening
provisions of Section 36-523.
Justification: Additional time is required to
obtain funding. This business was
operated only a part-time basis
(Friday and Saturday) until
recently.
Present Use of Property: Restaurant and lounge
Proposed Use of Property: Restaurant and lounge
Staff Report:
A. Public Works Issues:
1. Paving of first 25 feet will be required to prevent
gravel dragging to the streets.
With Building Permit:
2. Provide design of street conforming to "MSP" (Master
Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvement to
these streets including 5 -foot sidewalks with planned
development.
3. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
J'. aary 29, 2001
Item No.: 5 (Cont.)
B. Staff Analvsis:
The I-2 zoned property located at 2901 Welch Street is
occupied by a restaurant and lounge, Billy Gene's place. In
1997, a building permit was issued to allow for a 959.3
square foot expansion of the existing building. Associated
with the building expansion was a required upgrade in
parking, landscaping and buffers/screening. The addition
was completed and occupied. The other required elements
were never completed. The Planning Department has recently
assigned a code enforcement officer to the task of enforcing
the City's landscape requirements, including following up on
incomplete projects such as this. The applicant was issued
a notice on November 9, 2000 advising him that he was in
violation and directing him to complete the required paving,
screening and landscaping. The applicant has requested
additional time to secure funding. He states the business
was, until recently, operated only on a part-time (Friday
and Saturday) basis and did not generate the income
accessory to pay for the required improvements. A copy of
the approved site plan is attached. To date, no
improvements have been made. The site has only a gravel -
covered parking lot. There is a 6 -foot tall, wood privacy
fence along the east perimeter and along the north perimeter
where the site is adjacent to a single-family residence.
Although the applicant has had over three years to complete
the required improvements, staff is willing to support an
additional 12 -month deferral. This support is based on the
following reasons:
1. To staff's knowledge, there have been no neighborhood
complaints. The issue was found as a result of follow-up
by staff.
2. Staff must accept part of the blame for not more
diligently following through on required inspections that
would have prevented this situation from taking 3 years
to be brought to light. The applicant was only advised
in November 2000 that he was in violation.
3. The applicant states additional time is needed to secure
funding due to the business being operated only on a
part-time basis until recently.
2
J, _wary 29, 2001
Item No.: 5 (Cont.)
C. Staff Recommendation:
l
Staff recommends approval of a 12 -month deferral, through
January 29, 2002, subject to compliance with the following
conditions:
1. Within 30 days, the following steps must be taken:
a. Temporary devices, such as crossties, must be
extended across the Welch Street perimeter of the
parking lot, leaving only a 25 -foot wide entrance
to control access to the site.
b. The entrance to the parking lot from Welch Street
must be paved to a depth of 25 feet to prevent
gravel being dragged onto the street.
2. Compliance with Public Works Comments including any
variance or waiver of those requirements as may be
granted by the Director of Public Works or the Board of
Directors.
3. By January 29,
and landscaped
dated February
March 11, 1997.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
2002, the site must be paved, screened
to conform to the approved site plan
10, 1997 and approved by staff on
(JANUARY 29, 2001)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject
to compliance with the conditions noted above in the "Staff
Recommendation" and the following additional condition:
4. Within 30 days, the applicant is required to
obtain a temporary certificate of occupancy for
the addition.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
recommended by staff. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
3
J�_._aary 29, 2001
Item No.: 6
File No.:
Name:
Z -3915-B
CalArk Trucking
Address: 12024 I-30
Type of Issue: 12 -month extension of previously
granted 36 month deferrals of the
paving requirements of Section
36-508.
Staff Report:
CalArk Trucking Company is located at 12024 I-30; a 30± acre, C-4
zoned tract bounded by Otter Creek Road on the north and I-30 on
the southeast. The trucking company is located on the western
22± acres of the tract. On November 24, 1997, the Board of
Adjustment granted a two-year deferral of the paving requirements
of Section 36-508, allowing the trucking company to utilize a
gravel parking area for the company's trucks and employee
vehicles. There was some question, at that time, of a possible
realignment of the Otter Creek Road overpass over I-30 which
could have affected this site. That two-year deferral expired on
November 24, 1999.
On November 11, 1999, the Planning Commission approved a
preliminary plat, dividing the easternmost 8± acres of the site
into 4 lots which are to be sold for potential development by
other parties. CalArk stated it was uncertain how the truck
terminal facility would be "laid out" on the remaining property.
It appeared that the possible realignment of the overpass was no
longer an issue. The 4 -lot plat was approved without the
realignment issue being of concern, other than for some specific
driveway placement.
On January 31, 2000, the Board approved an additional deferral,
through November 24, 2000. Although staff supported the
additional 12 months, it was clear that the support was only for
a deferral through November 24, 2000. The applicant is now
requesting an additional 12 months deferral of the paving
requirement. The justification offered by the applicant is the
same as previously offered; it is uncertain how the property will
"layout" for a truck terminal once the easternmost portion is
developed into the previously approved 4 lot subdivision.
J' .aary 29, 2001
Item No.: 6 (Cont.)
Staff is not supportive of an additional deferral. Staff
questions whether any steps have been taken toward development of
the 4 -lot subdivision which is being touted as justification for
the deferral. At some point, a decision must be made and the
site developed to comply with City Code. It may very well be
that the preliminary -plat that was approved on November 11, 1999
has expired. Section 31-94(e) of the Subdivision Ordinance
states:
(e) A preliminary plat approved by the planning
commission shall be effective and binding upon the
commission for one (1) year from the date of
approval or as long as work is actively progressing,
at the end of which time the final plat application
for the subdivision must have been submitted to the
planning staff. Any plat not receiving final
approval within the period of time set forth herein
or otherwise conforming to the requirements of this
chapter shall be null and void, and the developer
shall be required to submit a new plat of the
property for preliminary approval subject to all
zoning restrictions and this chapter.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff does not recommend approval of the requested 12 -month
extension of the previously granted deferrals of the paving
requirement of Section 36-508.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
The applicant, Chuck Reimer, was present
item.
(JANUARY 29, 2001)
Staff presented the
Mr. Reimer addressed the Board in support of his request. He
stated there had been some interest in the 4 lots, but nothing
definite. Mr. Reimer stated that he had spoken with Arkansas
Highway and Transportation Department representatives and, due to
the pending change to one-way traffic for access roads, the issue
of a possible realignment of the Otter Creek overpass had
resurfaced.
In response to a question from Fred Gray, Mr. Reimer stated that
the 4 lots were listed with the Hathaway Group realtors. He
stated the lots were well -signed and had been actively marketed.
Mr. Reimer stated he would like to see how the 4 retail lots
2
IT, .nary 29, 2001
Item No.: 6 (Cont.)
develop prior to finalizing plans for the truck terminal so that
truck traffic did not interfere with the retail traffic. Mr.
Reimer reiterated that there was still uncertainty about the
status of the Otter Creek overpass. He stated he had no idea why
AHTD was taking so long to make a determination about the
overpass.
At the request of the Board, Mr. Reimer approached and showed the
location of the 4 lots in relationship to the truck facility.
Norm Floyd questioned whether the site was in the floodway.
Staff responded that the truck parking area in question was in
the floodplain, not the floodway.
Scott Richburg asked if AHTD had given any indication of when a
decision would be made regarding the overpass. Mr. Reimer
responded that he had not been told of any time frame. Mr.
Richburg commented that it could take months for a decision to be
made and years for the lots to be sold and developed. Mr.
Richburg stated that, at some point, the site needed to be
properly developed.
Fred Gray stated that he perceived Mr. Reimer's concern being
that he did not want to pave the site and then have somebody
purchase a lot or lots. He asked Mr. Reimer if the 4 -lot area
was not actually needed for the truck terminal since the plan was
to sell that portion of the site. Mr. Reimer agreed with Mr.
Gray's assessment.
Norm Floyd asked if there was no plan for expanding the terminal.
Mr. Reimer responded that there were no plans to expand the
terminal itself.
Fred Gray asked if it would take the sale of one lot or all 4
lots for the truck terminal plans to be finalized. Mr. Reimer
responded that it would require the sale of all 4 lots to assure
that there would be no conflict between the activities.
Norm Floyd asked if there was not some reasonable boundary that
could be established and developed for the truck terminal use.
Mr. Reimer responded that it depended upon the potential users of
the retail lots; that the lot sizes could change and could
involve expanding further onto the truck terminal site.
Norm Floyd commented that Cal Ark Trucking was an asset to the
City but that the gravel lot was creating a problem. He stated
3
J,, wary 29, 2001
Item No.: 6 (Cont.)
he was in favor of an additional year deferral but would like to
see some good faith effort on Cal Ark's part.
Gary Langlais commented that waiting on the 4 lots to sell and
develop could take years.
William Ruck commented that he was familiar with AHTD's plans for
the interchange and how those plans had "bounced around". He
stated he was in favor of granting one more year to see what AHTD
has "up its sleeve".
Fred Gray asked if it was possible to grant an extension and to
make a definitive statement that it would be the last deferral.
Staff responded that such a statement could be made part of the
record and would be considered by the Board in any further
requests for deferrals.
Fred Gray asked Mr. Reimer if 12 months was a "magic number".
Mr. Reimer responded that it was not. Mr. Gray asked if it would
be inconvenient to return to the Board in 6 months for an update.
Norm Floyd commented that he had seen AHTD's plans for widening
I-30 and that he did not expect there would be any definite
actions taken within 6 months.
Scott Richburg stated he wanted to go on record as supporting the
deferral due to questions about the plans for I-30 and the
overpass, not due to issues about the sale of the 4 lots.
A motion was made to approve an additional deferral, through
January 30, 2002. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 ayes,
0 noes and 0 absent.
4
The Irbeels of
American business
December 11, 2000
Mr. Dana Carney
Department of Planning & Development
723 West Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
P.O. Box 990
RE: Extension of Paving Requirements of Section 36-508 Mabelcale, AR 72103.0990
Dear Mr. Carney:
I am writing to request an extension to the zoning variance granted to CalArk in
January of 2000.
Our request, as was the previous, to extend is that we are in the process of selling
a portion of the property, approximately 7 acres for retail development, and it is
uncertain how the property will layout for the Truck Terminal at this time.
Therefore, I would like to request an additional 12 months extension.
You may contact me at 455-3399, ext. 43300, if you have any further questions.
(::uzck
y,
Re er -
-L
President
Cc: Office of the City Attorney
501/455-3399
800/434-3399
501/455-5241 FAX
FCT:T',TAt k. -4 -
DK 2000
11
0
NW
1�.1.�
LWL
1�
0
F -
5Z
L
V
Q
LL
0
0
Q
0
m
H
J
Cl)
O
�
�
Q
[if
MCCD
Z
O
W
g
(D
J_
�zct�
OJ
u-Q��
Z
Lr
W
d
m
=
Y
�OC7g��
H
Cl)
Q
0
Z
f:
g
OJ
<
Z
CD
U
0
MA
7
21
W
Q
Z
W
Q
January 29, 2001
There being no further business before the Board, the
meeting was adjourned at 2:45 p.m.
Date: 2 /f Z- 00
IP I
X�� Zoe/ --
Chairman