boa_03 27 2000` Ie...............�.iIl.n-...a... o�t,w .....a. a. ..... .: :.4...0 .1.....—.4... ..xe 4.,n Z, ......... x.... 1�
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SUMMARY OF MINUTES
MARCH 27, 2000
2:00 P.M.
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 February 28, 2000 meeting were
approved as mailed by unanimous vote.
III. Members Present: Gary Langlais, Chairman
William Ruck, Vice Chairman
Norm Floyd
Scott Richburg
Fred Gray
Members Absent: None
City Attorney Present: Cindy Dawson
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
AGENDA
MARCH 27, 2000
2:00 P.M.
I. VARIANCE ITEMS
1. Z -3204-A 6700 Allied Way
2.
Z -3637-E
4405
East Roosevelt Road
3.
Z -6195-A
8000
Scott Hamilton
4.
Z-6824
2606
Longcoy
5.
Z-6833
5209
"F" Street
6.
Z-6834
13012
Cherry Laurel
7.
Z-6835
901 West 3rd Street
8.
Z-6836
3015
West Markham Street
0
0
0
N
N
co
3NId
a31Ztla3
w
1lntlBIH1
�
Z
-
IM
� N
W
s
�o
Ntlwa3s
n9
1
1�
s
�
ecz
NIV
AYMOV08 HOW
83H380
y01NObl
S3H3
ONIN lW
S
00
MOa000M g
3NId 13'ZblS y
Jbb
3NId
aV
NO11MY 11005
s S�NjbdS'
I
A16a3AINn
Ad aIV3
ALIS83AINn
�J
SONIad a3A30
S3HOnH
s
z
IddISS Iw6
1WIH3 ��
I ' I
W
a
�y al0Aa353a
Q
MOaatlB NHOf
3
L�
i
as 31o
aaoe3la3vHs
swatls
_
n
CD
o
4�
d'
WVHaVd A3NOOa
o i
r�
i
NVwNO
S11WIl ALIO8
y0j3�b1S o 30018 AWIA
-
n
K0�
W
a
Q
P�
fQPR�� a
N
0
=a'
NVAnlnS
180315
0
hS�
sliwn A11O
Cc
Q
O�5
5
M
W
!,{01173 31VON833
Mach 27, 2000
Item No.: 1
File No.: Z -3204-A
Owner: MP Productions
Address: 6700 Allied Way
Description: Long Legal
Zoned: I-2
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the
area regulations of Section 36-320
to permit construction of two
additions with reduced front and
side yard setbacks.
Justification: The existing structure contains
20,270 square feet. The proposed
addition will contain 10,800 square
feet. The applicant is requesting
setback variances to allow the
additions to align with the
existing building. This alignment
will allow the buildings to tie
together structurally, allow the
internal traffic flow to remain
consistent, and allow the existing
loading dock to be extended in its
present location. All utilities
access the existing structure from
Allied Way and will also serve the
proposed addition. The attached
site plan also shows a proposed
future office addition of 1,265
square feet. The future office
addition will require relocation of
the existing visitor parking and a
re -work of the existing entry drive
to the warehouse parking area.
Present Use of Property: Staging Company
Proposed Use of Property: Staging Company
MaL-ch 27, 2000
Item No.: 1 (Cont.)
Staff Report:
A. Public Works Issues:
1. See David Scherer letter dated March 6, 2000 to Mike Pope
MP Productions for comments. (Attached)
B. Staff Analvsis:
MP Productions, an entertainment staging company, occupies
the 20,270 square foot warehouse building located on the I-2
zoned property at 6700 Allied Way. The applicant proposes
to expand the building by constructing a 10,800 square foot
addition onto the rear of the building and a 1,265 square
foot office addition onto the front of the building. The
additions are proposed to maintain the building's existing
6.51 foot side yard setback. The code requires a 15 foot
side yard in the I-2 District. The office addition will
maintain the building's existing 35 foot front yard setback.
The Code requires a 50 foot front yard in I-2.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Allowing
the additions to maintain the existing 6.5 foot side yard
will not impact the adjacent property. A gravel parking lot
on the adjacent tract separates the building on that
property from the applicant's building. The two buildings
are 200± feet apart. No other properties will be impacted
by the reduced side yard. Architecturally, it is desirable
to continue the existing setback rather than to design the
additions with an 8.5 foot offset.
Allowing the proposed office addition to maintain the
existing 35 foot front yard setback will not impact adjacent
properties or traffic in the street. The building sits 50±
feet from the pavement of Allied Way. The large warehouse
building across Allied Way, to the east, has a setback of
over 100 feet, providing appropriate separation.
The Flood Insurance Rating Maps show this development to be
in a flood -prone area rated as "AE". Development of the
site must conform to appropriate City and FEMA regulations
regarding floodplain/floodway development. Those conditions
are outlined in the attached letter dated March 6, 2000 from
David Scherer of Public Works to Mike Pope of MP
Productions.
Rq
Mah 27, 2000
Item No.: 1 (Cont.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested side and front
yard setback variances subject to compliance with the
following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer
Ordinances.
2. Compliance with Public Works Comments as outlined in
the attached letter dated March 6, 2000 from David
Scherer of Public Works to Mike Pope of MP Productions.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (MARCH 27, 2000)
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
City of Little Rock Engineering Division
Q Department of 701 West Markham
Public Works Rock, Arkansas 72201-1300
371-4811 FAX 371-4460
March 6, 2000
Mr. Mike Pope
MP Productions
6700 Allied Way
Little Rock, Arkansas 72209
RE: Zoning Variance Application No. Z -3204-A
Proposed Building Addition at 6700 Allied Way
Dear Mr. Pope:
Your application for a variance from setback requirements in connection with the referenced
application has been referred to this office for review. We are writing separately to inform you
of significant floodplain considerations that will affect the proposed development.
As background information, this office has been charged by the City Manager to administer the
City of Little Rock's ("City") Flood Loss Prevention ordinances. These ordinances, in turn,
require that we implement federal regulations pertaining to the National Flood Insurance
Program ("NFIP"). Proper administration of the ordinances and regulations is necessary to allow
property owners to acquire federally -backed flood insurance that previously was not available.
As part of the NFIP, the Federal Emergency Management Agency ("FEMA") has developed and
published a number of Flood Insurance Rating Maps ("FIRM") covering all areas of the City.
The FIRM identifies areas of special flood hazard. A FIRM further divides the flood areas into
risk premium rate zones, based on the results of scientific studies and data. For example, some
areas are rated as "AE" meaning that the flood surface elevation has been determined and shown
on the FIRM.
The map further delineates flood -prone areas into "floodplain" and "floodway" areas. Although
both designations are important, regulatory floodways are especially significant because the rules
regarding development in the floodway are much more stringent than for floodplains.
With the above as background, the FIRM for your area show that both the existing and proposed
development are located in a flood -prone area rated as "AE" and the flood surface elevation is
shown to be 257.0 feet above sea level (MSL). The maps also show these areas in regulatory
floodway. Little Rock Code Section 8-305 and 44 C.F.R. § 60.3(d)(3) prohibits any construction
in a floodway unless it can be demonstrated that the construction will not increase the base flood
"We're Proud of Our- Works!"
level. This section also requires FEMA approval of any demonstration through a process called
a Conditional Letter of Map Revision,(4MR).
Because this floodway is rather large and has relatively low flow velocities it may be possible to
"mitigate" floodway loss by,providing or constructing an equivalent area of floodway storage at
the fringes of the floodway. A floodway easement dedicated to the City will be required.
Even though this method is simpler than conducting a flood study, it would still be: necessary to
apply to FEMA to take the proposed expansion out of the floodway and to replace it with the
mitigation area. FEMA review takes approximately 90 days and an application fee is involved.
In addition, Code Section 8-302(2) requires that new commercial construction and "substantial
improvement" of existing structures be designed so that the lowest floor is one foot (1') above
base flood elevation. Because the FIRM map shows the flood elevation at 257', the new addition
would be required to have a minimum floor elevation of 258'.
Finally, we note that the plan shows asphalt paving in front of a loading dock on the new
addition. Our Board of Directors has instructed us not to approve new parking areas in
floodplain areas. We ask, therefore, that this paved area be removed.
If you need additional information concerning the above or if you would like to discuss this .
further, please contact me at (501) 371-4811.
Sincerely,
-Davi L.
Civil Engineering Manager
Z -
"We're Proud o, f Our Works!"
IL --h 27, 2000
Item No.: 2
File No.: Z -3637-E
I
Owner: Security Airport Parking
Address: 4405 East Roosevelt Road
Description: Lot 1-B, Pat's Addition
Zoned: c-4
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from
the height and area provisions of
Section 36-302 to permit
construction of a canopy on the
upper floor of this existing
parking deck.
Justification: Applicant's Statement: We are
requesting a non-residential zoning
variance for height (and setback)
restrictions for our parking deck
located at 4405 East Roosevelt Road
in Little Rock, Arkansas. We have
proposed a plan to cover the
parking spaces on the top floor of
the existing parking deck with a
single canopy for the purpose of
offering additional covered parking
spaces. This would add an
additional 10 feet to the deck and
we, therefore, are requesting a
height variance extending the
height restriction to 55 feet. No
antennas or light poles will be
mounted on the top of this
structure.
Present Use of Property: Parking deck
Proposed Use of Property: Parking deck
MCL 27, 2000
Item No.: 2 (Cont.)
Staff Report:
A. Public Works Issues:
9
1. Roosevelt Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way to 45 feet
from centerline is required.
2. Driveways shall conform to Sec. 31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.
3. Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP" (Master
Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvement to
these streets including 5 foot sidewalks with planned
development.
4. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
5. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property.
6. Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities
are required.
7. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing
street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the
Little Rock Code. All requests should be forwarded to
Traffic Engineering.
8. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec. 29-186(e)
will be required with building permit.
9. A Grading Permit per Secs. 29-186(c) and (d) will be
required with building permit.
10. Contact the ADPC&E for approval prior to start work.
B. Staff Analysis:
Security Airport Parking has a four story parking deck on
the C-4 zoned property located at 4405 East Roosevelt Road.
On October 30, 1995, the Board of Adjustment approved
building height and setback variances to allow the parking
deck. The structure is 45 feet tall and has a front yard
setback of 25 feet and a side yard setback on the west of
2.2 - 2.8 feet. The Code requires front and side yard
setbacks of 45 feet and 15 feet respectively for this lot.
C-4 has a building height limit of 35 feet. The applicant
now proposes to construct a canopy to cover the parking
spaces on the top floor of the parking deck. The canopy
will raise the height of the deck to 55 feet and will
maintain the building's existing setbacks. No antennas or
light poles will be mounted on the top of the structure.
2
Mrch 27, 2000
Item No.: 2 (Cont.)
Staff believes the variance request to be reasonable. The
applicant's property extends eastward to Bankhead Drive.
The large, open property of Little Rock National Airport is
across Roosevelt Road to the north. The property to the
south, extending to I-440, is also owned by the applicant.
A 5 -story hotel is located on the property adjacent to the
west. A parking lot and driveway separate the hotel and
parking deck. Allowing the increased height within the
existing setbacks should have no effect on adjacent
properties.
Due to the site's proximately to the airport, FAA approval
is required for this project.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested building height
and setback variances subject to compliance with the
following conditions:
l.Compliance with Public Works Comments including any
variance or waiver of those requirements as may be
granted by the Board of Directors or the Director of
Public Works.
2. FAA approval must be granted prior to issuance of a
building permit.
3. There is to be no signage on the canopy.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (MARCH 27, 2000)
The applicant was present. There were two objectors present.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject
to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff
Recommendation" above.
James Moore, representing the applicant, described the canopy as
being of metal construction and covering the entire upper floor
of the parking deck. Mr. Moore stated that FAA approval had been
received and there would be no light poles or antennas on top of
the canopy. In response to a question from Fred Gray, Mr. Moore
stated that the purpose of the canopy was to provide covered
parking for cars on the top level of the parking deck.
In response to a question from William Ruck, Mr. Moore stated
that the canopy would be unenclosed on all sides other than on
the west side, adjacent to the hotel. Mr. Moore explained that
it was a building code requirement to enclose the west side, due
K
Mach 27, 2000
Item No.: 2 (Cont.
to the structure's proximately to the property line. Mr. Moore
stated that the hotel on the adjacent property was perhaps 100-
150 feet away from the parking deck.
George Ivory, attorney representing Hawthorne Suites, and Carl
Smith, general manager of Hawthorne Suites, spoke against the
variances. Mr. Smith stated that the increased parking deck
height would block visibility of a wall sign proposed for the
east side of the hotel. Mr. Ivory showed the Board construction
plans of the hotel, which was in the process of being remodeled.
Mr. Ivory specifically pointed out the location of proposed
signage and reiterated that the objection was to the parking deck
blocking visibility of the signs. Mr. Ivory presented a short
video showing the hotel and parking deck, emphasizing the
visibility from the intersection of Airport Drive and East
Roosevelt Road. Mr. Ivory stated that the building permit had
been approved, with the sign locations shown.
Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, stated that no permits had
been obtained for the proposed signs and that separate permits
would need to be obtained. Mr. Carney stated that approval of
the building permit for remodeling of the hotel did not include
approval of the signage. Mr. Carney also noted that the proposed
signs on the east, west and south walls of the hotel required
variances since they did not front onto a street.
Mr. Ivory questioned what hardship there was to justify granting
a variance for the increased height of the parking deck. Mr.
Ivory stated that a desire for increased profit was not a
hardship.
Norm Floyd noted that the 5 story hotel, represented by Mr.
Ivory, was itself approved by a height variance. Mr. Floyd
questioned the justification for granting a height variance for
the hotel. He speculated that the motive was increased profit.
Mr. Moore stated that he did not believe the proposed Hawthorn
Suite signage would be visible from the intersection of Airport
Drive and Roosevelt Road with or without the increased parking
deck height.
In response to a question from the Board, Dana Carney explained
what signage was allowable for the hotel.
A motion was made to approve the requested variances subject to
compliance with the conditions proposed by staff in the "Staff
Recommendation." The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
4
Ma�.ch 27, 2000
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:
Z -6195-A
Arkansas Electric Cooperatives
8000 Scott Hamilton Drive
Long Legal
I-2
A variance is requested from
the banner size provisions of
Section 36-557 to permit a banner
exceeding 100 square feet.
Applicant's Statement: The
applicant's justification is
presented in an attached letter.
Electric Cooperative Offices
Electric Cooperative Offices
None related to this sign variance.
B. Staff Analysis:
The Little Rock Campus of the Arkansas Electric Cooperatives
is located on the I-2 zoned property at 8000 Scott Hamilton
Drive. The Cooperative's headquarters building fronts onto
the I-30 Frontage Road. The Cooperative recently erected a
large banner in front of its headquarters building in
conjunction with an extensive remodeling and construction
project. The banner is 14 feet tall and 48 feet wide and is
mounted onto a frame structure. The banner is 672 square
feet in area. The Code limits the size of banners to 100
square feet in area. The Cooperative is asking to have this
banner for no more than 90 days after the March 27, 2000
Board of Adjustment meeting.
March 27, 2000
Item No.: 3 (Cont.)
Staff is supportive of the request. Although the banner is
very large, the visual impact is mitigated by the
positioning of the frame structure and the size of the
property. The banner faces I-30 and is located parallel
(not perpendicular) to the freeway. The banner is located
in a landscaped area above and apart from the freeway
traffic lanes. The banner appears to be mounted in a safe
and secure manner and will be removed by June 27, 2000.
Part of the Cooperative's remodeling and expansion project
will result in an educational museum that will be open to
the public. This economic and cultural investment will be
an asset to the City. The 90 day time frame requested by
the applicant is within that allowed by city code for
placement of banners.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested banner -size
variance subject to:
1. Required special event permits being immediately
obtained.
2. The banner is to be removed by June 27, 2000.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(MARCH 27, 2000)
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.
E
A 5 S O C I A T E S
A O V E R T) 9 1 N O A O@ N C Y
February 11, 2000
Mr. Kenny Scott
City of Little Rock
723 W. Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
Dear Mr. Scott:
As the advertising agency of record for The Electric Cooperatives of Arkansas,
it was brought to our attention that a temporary banner being displayed at
ground level in front of the Cooperatives' headquarters on 81St street is non-
compliant with city code.
The original intent of the banner was to help build community pride in the
Southwest Little Rock area. The Electric Cooperative is investing over 7
million dollars in an economically trailing area of town with an extensive
remodeling and new headquarters construction. Part of this project includes
an educational museum that will be open to the public this spring.
It was never the intent of The Electric Cooperatives of Arkansas to create a
public nuisance with the ground level display of this banner, but rather to
inform the local community of the economic and educational investment
under construction.
Please present this letter to your board for consideration of an approximate
90 day variance to the city ordinance regarding the display of this temporary
banner. I would like to be present at this hearing to answer any questions
the city may have.
If you have any questions, please call me immediately at 821-9900.
Sincerely,
David Edwards
Vice President/ General Manager
DE
cc: Doug White
The Electric Cooperatives of Arkansas
17500 CHENAL I'AILKWAV. SUITE 120
LITTLE RC)CK. ARKANSAS 72223
501-ri21-4.00 FAX SUI -821-4`U1
f
Match 27, 2000
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:
No Comments.
B. Staff Analysis:
Z-6824
Joel Kennedy
2606 Longcoy
Lot 3, Block 1, Sandon Addition
IM
Variances are requested from
the accessory structure setback and
separation provisions of Section
36-156 and the building line
provisions of Section 31-12.
The applicant's justification is
presented in an attached letter.
Single Family
Single Family
The R-2 zoned property located at 2606 Longcoy is occupied
by a one-story, brick and frame single-family residence. A
detached, single -car carport was previously located in front
of the house. The structure fell into disrepair and was
removed by the current owner. The applicant now desires to
place a 22 feet by 24 feet, two -car carport structure in
front of the house. The carport will have a front yard
setback of 16.7 feet, will be placed across a platted
building line and will be "butted" up to the house. The
code requires a front yard setback of 60 feet for accessory
structures and requires 6 feet of separation between an
accessory structure and the principal structure.
f
Mai,;h 27, 2000
Item No.: 4 (Cont.)
Staff believes the request to be reasonable. The carport
will be open and unenclosed allowing for passage of air and
light and reducing the possibility of a sight distance
hazard. The carport sits 30+ feet from the edge of Longcoy
Street, providing adequate maneuvering area between the
structure and traffic. Since the carport is unenclosed,
there is adequate access to the principal structure which
might otherwise be impeded if the carport was enclosed.
Across Longcoy Street, just to the south, a residence has a
carport with an even greater intrusion into the front yard.
Staff does not believe that allowing the carport will impact
adjacent properties.
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. 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,
separation 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. The carport is to remain open and unenclosed on all
sides.
3. The carport structure is to be properly anchored and all
required building permits are to be obtained.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(MARCH 27, 2000)
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.
0�
i
DEkR.__ BOARD oF. "U-usrtAe"T;
. -- .-.-W&RE 65 M`,j SiTUltTI oay. .M.`j C7R6ND F47'M�-R (3u 1C.7': _ _ _ .-
_ Ti is __l+Wst . A•T a4 0(a jxQ&CoY $rte cit IT -d,. S MoVel-.: .
lJlJj 11-1.. 1 q.9ifilG_ A-FTtg 14E lDt Lp . T"14E J+vUSE 5 VEtZj�
SPL ctAL ro MEz AND . Z f Lr . Vl IVGr. l+ERr FR 0 A
onl...= 'NAVE HEtw FoclNG lT' UP MlctLY tN Tt+t
L-A Sr . FEW Y1=APLSj SUCH 7741tiJ&S LJKL` AL(JMLNUM
5t_DING-., _,JEW WAITER LtNt: � Ajrw c.cxjm# -L a Arrq-ND AIR, VA)_t
PRJVA-c.El .. Feki c ts/ &—TC... ALL. S`.NttrD .-m_ .Do .,fow/ is
..To Pu T.. lit W1 NEw CARPORT". M t+A-VE_ �JE:EDE_ TN-Es-
aR l-a�JG.T'AM,15Nov!. Aot.y GR^ND pATHER FAD gut L -T
...A -SMALL. 5 t NGt ,tr t:14 £SPO RT'� 8 A-cK t1J _ TWF S & k'rI ES , !T . wk5
N-E<JD UP By 4 E t_ Po c.us MOD ttAD . A . W00 D TO Pr
_. _n4E_ WOOD WAS aEGlkJiVtrJC_ i o ROT AND DUE T0Up.
-RECENT SNOW ST-oRtil,, cr WAS SF-Ve-RELy DAMAG45:1) .
_-r TORE tT-.DowN tn! G060 FAITH Wtrk FULL tNTENSIOMS.
4F RMPLAUQ& tr WIT -H. A 1JCt&! D0U13LE:-.u-JLD:'. (X-.14AVt= ._
Two.. VEHICLES) ?NE S1zE or CA PORT a
_ .. _COVER Maj TWO... RA-THER LARGE VEL -t1 CC,tS_ t5 ;L4 .`._t,.ItDr
.. _� ND �a . Lo NCS i"� t5 . t3R �nlG-s �s To _ Ti�E t✓ I�Kd� t..EM .
Ttf� _ _a�' LENGTH wou L- L'NCRc Ac 4. PASr..Tt4E.:
FE✓07- =F .- T14E7..CARP p r. IS Anl_y-
_ SKoRT A Tt-&O._A2 FEET. 1T..6✓0U D N0 -r.. F-MoV.tDE✓...--
P.Ro fe-K.......0 VER G -E 6F THE VE;+MLrS._.. kl_ IS FoR _-n4is._
REA SO rl.-T^+A-r-_._X!AA ptSKjMC— .t--oR .A _ 1G�ZoM'_.y i tZh -
V RIANCE, . 14A�J.k Ijou.. F:'oR -_ `fouR TME ..AND CwJStDErZPtTtofl ..
�P.S.�`..T 15 G4R ft7r..wti.,l, ntoZ' WTIERFER-E . wi.rt•# k Y. SvRR0uA1QW S)
SiAJCcRELr
1
Ma.,.-.h 27, 2000
Item No.: 5
File No.
Owner:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Variance Requested:
Justification:
Present Use of Property
Proposed Use of Property:
Staff Report:
A. Public Works Issues:
Z-6833
Raymond B. Alexander, Sr.
5209 "F" Street
Lot 3, Block 30, Pulaski Heights
Addition
R-2
Variances are requested from
the area regulations of Section 36-
254 to permit construction of an
addition and remodeling of the
existing home with reduced
setbacks.
The applicant's justification is
presented in an attached letter.
Single Family
Single Family
1. Proposed garage structure must be min. 40 feet from
centerline of Harrison Street to prevent cars parking on
the driveway blocking sidewalk.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property located at 5209 "F" Street is
occupied by a one-story, brick and frame single-family
residence and a detached, two -car garage. The applicant is
in the process of remodeling the house and proposes further
extensive remodeling including removing the detached garage
and constructing a substantial addition onto the rear of the
house. The new addition will include a two car garage and
is proposed to maintain the existing garage's side yard
setback of 0 feet. The code requires a side yard setback of
5 feet for this lot. A porch/carport is located on the
Ma. ,:h 27, 2000
Item No.: 5 (Cont.)
front of the house. The applicant proposes to remove the
carport and remodel the porch so that it is architecturally
compatible with this house. The porch lies almost entirely
within the required front yard setback and, as such, staff
felt it was appropriate to have Board of Adjustment approval
for the remodeling.
The Planning Staff is supportive of the requested variances.
The removal of the front carport and remodeling of the porch
will actually bring the structure closer to compliance with
the required setbacks. The resulting structure will be an
architectural improvement that should be of benefit to the
area.
The only portion of the proposed addition to the rear that
is within the required setback is the 24 foot by 24 foot
garage. The garage is proposed to maintain the same 0 foot
side yard setback as the existing detached 20.4 foot by 18.3
foot garage. In staff's opinion, the proposed addition is
actually bringing the property closer to compliance with
code since it will be part of the principal structure which
has a 5 foot side yard setback requirement, whereas a
detached structure is required to have a 15 foot street side
yard setback. Harrison Street is a relatively narrow, one-
way street and the garage (both existing and proposed) sits
20 feet from the street. The remainder of the right-of-way
is used as parking by the elementary school which is located
across Harrison Street to the west. Moving the garage
further into the property will likely require the removal of
at least one large oak tree. In staff's opinion, allowing
the garage addition as proposed will be of no greater impact
than the existing garage and will result in an improvement
to the property that should be an asset to the neighborhood.
The Public Works Department has recommended that the
addition be moved 10 feet to the east to prevent vehicles
which might be parked outside of the garage from blocking a
potential future sidewalk.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested setback
variances, as filed subject to compliance with the following
condition:
K
IL .:h 27, 2000
Item No.: 5 (Cont.
1. No portion of the proposed addition, including eaves or
overhangs, is permitted to extend over the property line
into the Harrison Street right-of-way.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(MARCH 27, 2000)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval,
subject to compliance with the condition outlined in the "Staff
Recommendation" above.
Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, informed the Board that he
had spoken with Bob Turner, Director of Public Works, about the
issue. Mr. Turner had stated that he had no problem with the
application as filed since any sidewalk which might be
constructed on this street would most likely be built on the west
side, where the elementary school is located.
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
Ray B. Alexander
103 ElDorado Drive • Little Rock, AR 72212-2815 • Telephone 501-227-8227
February 23, 2000
Mr. Dana Carney
Zoning Administrator
City of Little Rock
Dept of Planning and Development
723 W Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
RE: 5209 "F" Street, Little Rock, AR
Application for Zoning Variance
Dear Mr. Carney:
Attached is my application for a zoning variance on the above property. I am asking for
permission to take down the existing two car garage structure and replace it with another,
more usable two -car garage which will also sit on and have access at the west property
line. In addition, I wish to add a third bedroom/second bath to the existing residence and
attach the garage to the house in the manner shown on the attached survey. A third
reason for the variance request is to remodel the present porch/carport.
A problem occurs because this lot is only fifty (50) feet wide and sits on a corner. The
required building set -backs would place the garage directly in the middle of the lot which
would substantially detract from the value and street appeal of the property. The
relationship of the actual property line and the actual curb of the street where the proposed
garage will sit is approximately twenty (20) feet which, I believe, will be more than
adequate to allow ease of egress and ingress. Additionally, Harrison Street is not heavily
traveled at this point.
Allowing this variance would save the five large oak trees in the back yard and bring the
residence in character with other three bedroom/two bath structures in the neighborhood.
I believe it is important that the residence be upgraded in a way that it does not detract
from the value of the property and additionally, preserves the general ambience of the
neighborhood.
Thank you for your assistance.
7Si erely,
Ray Alexander
M(_ch 27, 2000
Item No.: 6
File No.:
Owner:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Variance Requested:
Justification:
Present Use of Property
Proposed Use of Property:
Staff Report:
A. Public Works Issues:
Z-6834
Built -Wright Construction Co., Inc.
13012 Cherry Laurel Drive
Lot 13, Block 14, Cherry Creek
R-2
A variance is requested from
the area regulations of Section 36-
254 to permit construction of a new
residence with a reduced rear yard
setback.
The usual lot shape limits the
buildable area and creates the need
for a setback variance.
Vacant lot
Single Family
1. Driveway must be minimum 5 feet from property line to
acknowledge turning radius at street entrance. Apron
flare shall not extend past property line from street to
corner pin.
B. Staff Analysis:
The applicant proposes to construct a new single-family
residence on the R-2 zoned lot located at 13012 Cherry
Laurel Drive. The proposed home will have a rear yard
setback varying from 9.1 feet to 30 feet. The code requires
a rear yard setback of 25 feet for this lot.
Staff believes there is adequate justification for the
requested variance. The lot is unusually shaped which does
have an impact on its buildable area. The lot is very wide
across the front (142.33 feet) but shallow on the sides,
Ma,( - 27, 2000
Item No.: 6 (Cont.)
ranging from 72 feet to 107.68 feet. The shallow depth
combined with the 25 foot building line on the front creates
the need for the variance. That portion of the house with
the least rear yard setback is a porch. The main body of
the house has a setback of 17 feet. The house to the rear,
fronting onto Misty Creek, has a rear yard setback of 25
feet, providing adequate separation between structures.
The proposed driveway must be moved slightly to provide the
required 5 foot turning radius at the street:
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested rear yard setback
variance subject to compliance with the following
conditions:
1. The porch on the rear of the house is to remain
unenclosed. It may be covered.
2. Compliance with Public Works Comment to relocate the
driveway.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(MARCH 27, 2000)
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.
2
Mach 27, 2000
Item No.: 7
File No.:
Owner:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Variance Requested:
WER Holdings LLC
901 West 3rd Street
Lots 10, 11, and 12, Block 253,
Original City of Little Rock
C-4
Variances are requested from
the area regulations of Section
36-302 to permit construction of
canopy additions with reduced
setbacks.
Justification: The city has approved recent
changes that allow a zero setback.
The applicant wishes to provide
protection from the weather at
entrances.
Present Use of Property: Office
Proposed Use of Propertv: Office
Staff Report:
A. Public Works Issues:
With Building Permit:
1. West 3rd Street is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way to 35 feet
from centerline is required.
2. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required
at the corner of West 3rd and Izard Street.
3. Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and ramps
brought up to the current ADA standards.
4. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is
damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
5. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
6. Remove old aprons and reestablish curbs and gutter.
Ma_ :h 27, 2000
Item No.: 7 (Cont.)
B. Staff Analvsis:
Witsell, Evans and Rasco Architectural Firm proposes to
remodel the one-story brick office building located on the
C-4 zoned property at 901 West 3rd Street to serve as its
new office. The firm proposes to install canopies over the
entrances on the West 3rd Street and Izard Street frontages.
The canopy on West 3rd Street will result in a setback of
0 feet. The canopy on Izard Street -will result in a setback
of 3.5 feet. The code requires a 45 foot setback in both
instances.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. The
building currently has setbacks of 14.9 feet and 10.1 feet
on the West 3rd Street and Izard Street perimeters
respectively. C-4, Open Display district, with its required
setbacks is inappropriate for urban development. The C-4
and I-2 zoning pattern downtown reflects the Original Zoning
Pattern established in 1937. On -March 7, 2000, the Board of
Directors approved a comprehensive rezoning of Downtown
Little Rock eliminating the hodge-podge of zoning which to
this point has included C-4, I-2 and the Central Little Rock
Urban Renewal Project zoning. This property is within an
area designated as Urban Use District. The Urban Use
District has a 0 foot build -to line on the street which
actually requires new construction to be built to the
property line and requires a variance if it is not. Under
the UU designation, the proposed canopy additions would not
require a variance. The Ordinance passed by the Board on
March 7, 2000 has a 6 month "waiting" period before it takes
effect.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested setback variances
subject to compliance with Public Works Comments including
any variance or waiver of those requirements as may be
granted by the Board of Directors or the Director of Public
Works.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(MARCH 27, 2000)
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.
M_ch 27, 2000
Item No.: 7 (Cont.)
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{ _oh 27, 2000
Item No.: 8
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-6836
Property Owner - George Hronas/
Applicant - John Adams
3015 West Markham
Part of Lots 23 and 24, Block 2,
C. S. Stifft's Addition
C-3
Variances are requested from
the projecting sign area, setback
and pedestrian clearance provisions
of Section 36-555.
The applicant's justification is
presented in an attached letter.
Retail guitar shop
Retail guitar shop
Atomic Guitars, a retail guitar shop, is located in the C-3
zoned building at 3015 West Markham Street. The building is
part of the historic Stifft' s Station Commercial
neighborhood. The applicant proposes to install a
projecting sign on the front fagade of the building. The
total area of the sign is approximately 25 square feet, the
sign will be set back from the property line no more than 4
feet and will have 8 feet of clearance above the sidewalk.
The Code limits projecting signs to 15 square feet in area,
requires a 5 foot setback and requires 9 feet of clearance
above pedestrian use areas.
Mai�:h 27, 2000
Item No.: 8 (Cont.)
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Although
the sign is larger than allowed, the design is such that the
area is broken up and the visual impact is reduced. The
sign is compatible with other projecting signs in the
immediate vicinity and will not project out as far as any of
the other existing projecting signs. An existing 6 foot
projecting pole which held a previous sign will be removed.
8 feet of clearance over the 8 foot wide sidewalk should be
adequate and not create difficulties for pedestrians.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested sign area,
setback and clearance variances as filed.
BOARD OF -ADJUSTMENT:
(MARCH 27, 2000)
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 the staff. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes and
0 absent.
K
Atomic Guitars Sign Proposal
Signs are an integral part in the success of any business. This is a
proposal to describe the rationale for the need for issuance of a variance
of city code. The proposed sign for Atomic Guitars will be installed at
3015 W. Markham Avenue. Atomic Guitars is located adjacent to historic
Buice Drug, near the Markham and Kavanaugh intersection.
Reason For Need of Variance:
The need for this variance is due to the physical location of the
business in relationship to the property lines and city right of way. There
is 8 feet between the edge of the curb and the face of the building, the
sign proposed will extend 4 feet from the building. Current city code
requires a certain space between edge of property and city right of way.
The proposed sign will be less obtrusive to current guidelines as
compared to the existing signage of those businesses located within the
same city block. The building currently has antiquated existing sign
hardware consisting of a 6 foot protruding pole that will be removed
during the installation of the proposed sign. The proposed sign will be
significantly less obtrusive into city right of way as compared to the
existing hardware. The sign is expected to project approximately 4 feet,
and definitely will not exceed 5 feet. This sign will be significantly less
obtrusive than every sign located on the same block.
Concept of Sign Design:
The design concept is 1940's Art Deco/Modern. It will be similar to
a movie theater, hardware store, or other retail business sign located in a
downtown area during that time period. It will be constructed of steel and
will be lighted with non -animated neon. The sign is to have a nostalgic
appeal appropriate for a business whose products are vintage guitars.
The design is that of a historically correct guitar outlined with a minimal
amount of neon lighting and copy. The sign design and construction are
a figurative carbon copy of an antique sign for a guitar store located in
Denver Colorado. Even though the design is quite bold, it is very
analogous to multiple existing signs located immediately adjacent and
across the street from the proposed sign (see attached, Buice Drug, and
Little Rock Paint and Wallpaper). The sign is very age appropriate in
design considering the building was constructed in 1931.
Specifics Concerning Location and Safety :
The sign will be designed to be structurally safe and will be
constructed by experienced personnel. The sign will be installed and
mounted by an experienced sign installer. The building is structurally
sound is believed to be capable of supporting the sustained load of the
sign. The installation has the approval of the building owner George
Hronas. The sign installation also has the approval of adjoining
businesses owners/managers, primarily George Wimberly of Buice Drug.
Business Specifics:
Atomic Guitars is owned by Johnathan L. Adams of Little Rock. Atomic
Guitars has been in business since January 1, 1998. The primary focus
of the store is sales of vintage guitars. The business is located at 3015
W. Markham Avenue.
Spacing of Signs of Nearby Businesses (less than 1 blockl:
Name of business / Address distance from curb
width of sign
Buice Drug 3013 W. Markham
1 ft.
85 in.
Capital Mortgage 3009 W. Markham
6 in.
90 in.
Oyster Bar 3003 W. Markham
1.5 ft.
80 in.
Pizza D' Action 2919 W. Markham
1.5 ft.
98 in.*
Razorback Laundry 3014 W. Markham Sign 1
overhangs
80 in.**
Razorback Laundry 3014 W. Markham Sign 2
2.3 ft.
56 in.**
Proposed Atomic Sign
4 ft
48 in.
Note: 8 foot sidewalk unless noted
* = 9 foot sidewalk
*"= 7 foot sidewalk
D.
a�
c
0
Q
c
a�
z
m
Q
z
w
U)
m
Q
W
Q
z
g
o �
�o�
0 Or -0 0 - Q
Q
LL �
O ry z U
pLL(DQC�ry
1
�
Q
0
W
�
C
UJ
(D
Q
J
�
Uj
Z
0O
LL
-
Q
w
:
Q
z
QJ
=
U
LL
(D
O
D.
a�
c
0
Q
c
a�
z
m
Q
z
w
U)
m
Q
W
Q
z
g
o �
�o�
0 Or -0 0 - Q
Q
LL �
O ry z U
pLL(DQC�ry
March 27, 2000
There being no further business before the Board, the
meeting was adjourned at 2:40 p.m.
Date:
7
Chairm n