Loading...
boa_05 20 1985n ) u LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTE RECORD MAY 20, 1985 2:00 P.M. I.Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A quorum was present being 8 in number. II.Approval of the Minu tes of the Previous Meeting The minutes were approved as mailed. III.Members Present: Members Absent: City Attorney: B.L. MurphreeEllis WaltonGeorge WellsRichard YadaThomas McGowanJoe NorcrossSteve SmithHerbert Rideout Ronald woods Pat Benton May 20, 1985 Item No. A -Z-4425-A Owner: Various Owners (By: James Isom) 914 Broadway (West 10th & Broadway) Lots 4, 7, 8 and 9, Bl ock 112 Original City of Little Rock Address: Description: Zoned: "GB" General Business Request: Conditional use for bus terminal JUSTIFICATION: None required. Present Use of the Property: Used Car Lot Proposed Use of the Property: Bus Terminal STAFF REPORT: A. B. Engineering Issues The traffic engineer requires: ( 1) pedestrian signalsat the corners of Broadway and West 10th Street and (2)widening driveway on Broadway to 30 feet minimum.Other concerns expressed by engineering are: (1) Taxiparking as shown is difficult� taxis normally willrequire curb side loading� and (2) As sho wn, passengerswill be required to walk between buses to get tocustomer parking. This could be dangerous. Planning Staff Analysis The issue before the Board of Adjustment is whether to grant a conditional use permit for a bus terminal at the northwest corner of Broadway and West 10th. This is the second time this request has been before the Board of Adju stment. The previous application was withdrawn from the agenda without prejudice. With the initial site plan, the st aff had 9 or 10 concerns with the plan, and based on those items, recommended denial of the previous conditional use permit applic ation. These issues were primarily engineering or technical concerns. Following is a list of the issues and how the current site plan has addressed them. ) May 20, 1985 Item No. A -Continued 1+2 The site providing customer parking is a poor choice due to access restrictions at one point too near an intersection. Also, internal circulation is poor both for pedestrians and vehicles due to fragmented vehicle use area. The plan is now providing vehicular access through the site and only one curb cut is provided on Broadway. Employee, customer, taxi and handicapped parking areas are provided along the north side of the site. 3.The site configuration provides limited de signalternatives for facilities served by long wheelbased vehicles. 4. 5. The dr iveway access onto Broadway has an increased radius to facilitate bus turnings in order not to block the two traffic lanes. The plan area is almost void of livability factors, i.e., landscaping and people are as. The existing large surface area of the sidewalk has been maintained and a landscaped area ha s been created between it and the building lo cation. Additional landscape buffer zone along West 10th Street frontage area has been provided. There appears to be no provision for parcel pickup or additional parking for that use. Parcel pickup is located in close proximity to the west end of the building where this service will be provided as direct ac cess to the concourse. 6.Facilities of this character require immediatearea parking for taxi service. This is notindicated on or off the site and is probablyimpractical. Handicapped parking and ta xi zones are located in the closest proximity of the entryway to the building. 7.The alley closure may ca use a design problem atthe southeast corner of Lot 4 inasmuch as thestate will receive one-half of the right-of-way.The present design of bus parking cuts thatcorner. ) May 20, 1985 Item No. A -Continued The angle of parking for the bus con course has been changed from 45 ° to 60 ° in order that the buses do not cross the Highway Department right-of-way upon clo sure of the alley. 8.The plan area incorporates a presently usedparking lot for the veterinary clinic adjacent on the north. No provision has been made forreplacement of those stalls. This issue has not been resolved and staff still views it as negative aspect of the site plan. 9.The plan does not reflect the site for a proposedbillboard on Lot 4. This co uld be critical toboth parking and landsca ping. The proposed billboard is shown on the sout h sideof Lot 4 which is the natural lo cation for thissignage, giving it the clo sest proximity to thefreeway. Staff is now satisfied that the te chnical issues have been addressed with the exception of the needed parking for the building directly to the north. The final issue is one of land use. After carefully reviewing the proposal, the staff feels that the proposed location is appropriate for bus ter min al use based on the following points. 1.Being adjacent to I-630, which provides directaccess, creates a suitable site. 2.The new site plan has met the previous con cerns. 3.The proposed use is compatible with the existingadjacent land uses and should not adversely impactthe adjacent and nearby uses. 4.I-630 and the cemetery provide an adequate bufferfor the residential neighborhood to the south. 5.The Downtown Plan recommends the expresswaycorridor as an in-town lo cation for distribution,warehousing and mini-warehouse functions. It also suggested that the co rridor should be redeveloped by land uses requiring ready access to and from the freeway. Staff believes that the bus termin al is co nsistent with this type of proposed land use pattern. May 20, 1985 Item No. A -Continued c. (The plan also addresses the issue of mass transit by recommending construction of a multi-modal tr ansportation center to be utilized by private bus companies along the Chester Street corridor no rth of I-630. The ce nter would consolidate all private bus line services at one location at the perip hery of downtown. The st aff feels that this is very lon g-term and not viable at the present time.) Staff's position is now one of support, with conditions, for the bus terminal at the proposed location. Planning Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit with the conditions that: (1) the owner of the building directly to the north (existing animal clinic) must receive approval for any new use from the Board of Adjustment, to ensure compliance with the appropriate parking ordinances; and (2) the tr affic engineer's requirements are satisfied. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The owner was represented by Robert Brown, a landscape architect. There were 20 plus persons in attendance regarding this issue. Staff informed the Board of Adjustment that the owner had submitted a written re quest for deferral to the May 20, 1985, meeting. Mr. Brown addressed the deferral request and said it was to permit better coordination between various groups and to resolve the remaining engineering issues. Dickson Flake, a property owner, spoke against the deferral request. He said the owner was only trying to get additional votes and asked that the issue be heard. Cheri Nichols of the Quawpaw Quarter Association said the Engineering issues were not concerns, but the station itself was the issue. Sylvia Caruth, representing the Downtown Neighborhood Association, requested that a vote be taken on the proposal. Mr. Brown spoke again and answered several questions. A motion was made to deny the deferral request. The motion failed because of gaining only two positive votes (George Wells abstained). A second motion was made to defer the request to the May 20, 1985, meeting. The motion passed by a vote of: 4 ayes, 1 no, 2 absent and 2 open positions. A final motion was made that no additional deferral requests will be considered beyond the May 20th meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of: 5 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 2 open positions. \ ) May 20, 1985 Item No. A -Continued BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (5-20-85) James Isom, the developer of the proposed bus terminal, was present. There were approximately 20 objectors in attendance. Staff informed the Board that the applicant/dev eloper had submitted a letter requesting that the application be withdrawn from consideration. Jim Lynch of the Downtown Neighborhood Association spoke in opposition to the withdr awal request and asked the Board of Adjustment to vote on the merits of the issue. Cheryl Nichols, Quapaw Quarter Association, urged the Board to consider the application and settle the issue. Mrs. George Rose Smith representin g the Mt. Holly Cemetery Board was opposed to the location for a bus terminal. Jim Lynch at this time submitted written comments for the record. James Isom spoke and apologized to the Board for the various delays. He then verbally requested the members to act on the item by withdrawing it. There was a long discussion about various issues. Mr. Isom spoke again. He asked the Bo ard to consider deferring the item if the withdrawal request was not granted because of not being prepared to present the necessary information. A motion was then made to deny the withdrawal request. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 1 noe, 1 absent and 1 abstention (George We lls). The request was denied. At this time, James Isom requested the Bo ard of Adjustment to deny the conditional use permit for the bus terminal. A motion was made to deny the request as filed. The motion was approved. The vote 8 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. May 20, 1985 Item No. B -Z-4430 Owner: R.Carl and Lark Hunter 5909 Valley Drive Address: Description: Lot 174, Hoyt's Replat of Tr act B, Section A, McClellan Place Zoned: "R-5" Urban Residence Variance Requested: From the pavement requirements of Section 8-101.I to permit use of materials not meeting ordinance requirements. JUSTIFICATION: The end result is a major improvement that appears to be permanent and very similar to hot asphalt. Present Use of the Property: Multifamily units Proposed Use of the Pr operty: Same STAFF REPORT: A.Engineering Issues B. Driveway needs to be concrete from street toright-of-way line. Also, parking lot needs to beupgraded to current standards. Staff Analysis The issue at hand is to grant a variance to allow theuse of paving materials not meeting the ordinancestandards. Th is request was filed by the owners of theproperty as a result of en forcement action by the City.The Zoning Ordinance states that the minimum pavementrequirement shall be "l 1/2" asphaltic concrete hot mixwith a 5" compacted base or a 4" concrete slab andshall ha ve the appropriate bumper guards where needed."Instead of meeting the ordinance sta ndards to repair adriveway and parking area for an ei ght unit multifamilyproject, the owners utilized asphalt ta bs or clippings.These are the remains from production of asphalt ) May 20, 1985 Item No. B -Continued shingles. The owners have stated that the cracks and potholes were caused in part by heavy equipment accessing through this property to clean and improve the drainage ditch to the south. The problem was corrected by use of the asphalt clippings and the owners are now requesting permanent use of these materials for this location and similar situations. After viewing the site, staff cannot support the request even as a temporary solution. The materials in question do not appear to provide a permanent surface and are very unsightly. The improvement is not similar to hot asphalt as suggested by the owners and staff questions whether the asphalt tabs can withstand the influences of the elements for a long period of time. The ordinance provides for the necessary pavement materials and it should be adhered to at all times. C. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends denial of the requested variance. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (4-22-85) The owner, Carl Hunter, was present. There were no objectors. Mr. Hunter spoke and requested a deferral to the May 20, 1985, meeting. Mark Stodola, City Attorney, addressed the deferral issue briefly. A motion was made to defer the item to the May 20th meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of: 5 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 2 open positions. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (5-20-85) The owner, Carl Hunter, was present. There were no objectors. Mr. Hunter spoke and requested that a temporary variance be issued for a period of not more than six months. He said that the asphalt tabs had been used since February and they were at least a temporary solution. Mr. Hunter went on to say that because of money problems, the owners were not able to bring the lot up to ordinance standards. He said the lot was an improvement over the previous situation. Mike Batie, City Engineering, said that a concrete driveway was required from the street to the property line. Kenny Scott of the City's Zoning Enforcement Division said that his office had received a complaint. Th ere was a long discussion about several items. A motion was then made to deny the permanent variance and grant a temporary variance until September 1, 1985, and for the owner to work with the staff. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. ) May 20, 1985 Item No. 1 -Z-649-B Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: Variance Requested: JUSTIFICATION: Melvin Bell 1706 , 1712 and 1714 East 2nd Street Lots 2, 3 and 4, Block A, Fletcher & Clark's Addition "I-2" Light Industrial (A "C-3" application has been filed) From the off-street parking provisions of Section 8-101/B.2.E to permit less spaces than required by ordinance The purpose of the lodge is for a meeting and recreation location for Fraternal Order of Police. This organization is composed of members of the Little Rock City Police Department. The size of the building, however, does not thoroughly indicate its use. Approximately half of the building's square footage will consist of a basketball court area and the other half will be general meeting area. It would be completely unusual for the two parts of it to be used simultaneously. Additionally , there is additional off-street parking near the building and some on-street parking. This location is not a high traffic area, and the variance will not place an undue burden on traffic. Present Use of the Property: Vacant Proposed Use of the Property: Lodge STAFF REPORT A. B. Engineering Issues None reported as of this writing. Staff Analysis The request before the Board of Adjustment is to permit less parking spaces than required by the zoning ordinance. The proposed use will be a lodge for the Fraternal Order of Police or the FOP. (A rezoning ) j May 20, 1985 Item No. 1 -Continued c. application has been filed for "C-3.") The ordinance requires one space per 100 square feet of gross floor area for a lodge or related use. The proposed building will have 7200 square feet, which requires 72 spaces by ordinance. The site plan for the project proposes 39 spaces, 33 less than the ordinance requirement. The applicant has stated that approximately one-half of the total footage will be a basketball court and the remaining portion to be utilized as a general meeting area. Because of this arrangement, it is anticipated that the entire building will not be used at the same time and, thus, the ju stification for the variance. It does not appear that this variance will impact the immediate area because the development is somewhat limited and the demand for parking is not a problem. In the event of a function that would necessitate the need for additional parking, there are locations to the west and east of this site in question that could accommodate the overflow. Staff supports the variance, but feels that all required parking should at some point be provided in the future. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the requested variance with the condition that all necessary parking be provided by the end of three years or when a request is made for expansion to the existing building. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: Staff informed the Board of Adjustment that the applicant had requested a withdrawal. A motion was made to withdraw the request. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. ) May 20, 1985 Item No. 2 -Z-4444 Owner: David Rosen 5611 Kavanaugh Address: Description: Lots 5 and 6, Block 5, Mountain Park Addition Zoned: "C-3" General Commercial Variances Requested: (1)From the rear yard setbackprovisions of Section 7-103.3/D.l topermit a new st ructure with an 8-footrear yard. Ordinance requires 25 feet. (2)From the parking design provisionsof Section 8-101/J to permit parkingarea not meeting design standards. JUSTIFICATION: To preserve a large oak tree in the middle of the lot. Present Use of the Property: Commercial Proposed Use of the Property: Commercial STAFF REPORT A.Engineering Issues The proposed parking and access will require approvalby the Traffic Engineer. B.Staff Analysis The proposal to co nstruct a new building on the lotwith an 8-foot rear yard. The ordinance requires 25 feet in the "C-3" district. The second variance is for the proposed parking area that do es not meet ordinance requi rements. The lot is 50 feet wide and with the proposed 22-foot building, tht leaves 28 feet between the building and property line. The remaining area is not sui table for proper parking based on the zoning ordinance requirements. (See attached design standards.) Another issue is hav ing two principal structures on the lot, both with primary uses. One ) May 20, 1985 Item No. 2 � Continued questionable element of the plan is that the proposed building woul d be oriented towards the alley, which staff views as being somewhat undesirable. Staff is concerned that what is being proposed is overbuilding the lot and could aggravate the existing situation. Currently, the property is being used for office and retail with very inadequate parking. It appears that the propo sal under consideration will not imp rove this, but possibly make matters worse. After analyzing the request and its impact on the immediate area, staff does not support the requested variances for the following reasons: 1.The proposed building's orientation to the alley. 2.The parking as proposed has problems and it doesnot meet ordinance requirements. The lot is toosmall to accommodate the necessary parkingstandards. 3.The existing building and having inadequateparking. 4.Overbuilding of the lot. C.Staff Recommendation Staff recommends denial of the requested variances. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The owner, David Rosen, was present. There were no objectors. Mr. Rosen spoke and said that the location of the proposed building was dictated by trying to save a large tree in the rear yard. He stated that a substandard accessory building would be replaced and the proposed use of the new structure would be service oriented. The parking would be for employees because there would be very little or no foot traffic. Mr. Rosen felt that the proposal would have no impact on the area. There was a long discussion about various concerns including the issue of a hardship. Mr. Rosen said that the building would be an attractive addition to the area. A motion was made to deny the variances as filed. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 2 noes and 1 absent. The request was denied. ) May 20, 1985 Item No. 3 -Z-4446 Owner: Pat rick J. Morgan 7104 Asher Avenue Long Legal Address: Descript ion: Zoned: "C-3" General Commercial Variance Requested: From the rear yard setback pro visions of Section 7-103.3/C.3 to permit a 5-foot rear yard. JUSTIFICATION: 1.The proper ty cu rrently has a building that do es notconform to the rear yard requirements. 2.Unless the setback is ch anged, the lo t size will be toonarrow to accommodate parking. Lot size from thestreet is 105 feet on the east end and 124 feet on thewest end. The length of the lot for building pu rposesis 151 feet (the west 30-foot slope would make it toodifficult to build on). 3.We would like to con struct a building 50 feet wide and120 feet lo ng. Consequently, in order to get theproper amount of parking spaces, we need to buildwithin 5 feet of the rear proper ty line. There is a7 to 8-foot dro poff at the proper ty line. ARKLA GasCompany owns or uses the property adjacent to the rearyard for storage and repair of heavy equipment . I donot think that the adjustment of a rear yard setbackwill pose any problems for them. Present Use of the Property: Retail Proposed Use of the Property: Retail and rental spaces. STAFF REPORT A.Engineering Issues 1.Right-of-way may be required. May 20, 1985 Item No. 3 -Continued B. 2.Traffic Engineer must approve driveway locationsand parking plan at time of site plan review.Curb cuts and parking as shown on sketch will haveto be redesigned in coordination with TrafficEngineer. Staff Analysis The proposal is to construct a new 6,000 square foot building west of the existing structure with a 5-foot rear yard. The property is zoned "C-3" and the ordinance requires a 25-foot setback in the rear for the "C-3" district. The property to the north is a storage yard for heavy equipment and other construction materials, so it appears that the variance will not impact that use. In addition, the structural involvement on the tract to the north is some distance from the property line and the storage yard is lower in elevation than the property in question. The size of the lot does create a hardship and to provide adequate parking, the proposed site plan is the only feasible option. The owner has provided proper ju stification for the variance, and staff supports the request. Because of the location of the property, the necessary curb cuts should be reviewed and approved by the Traffic Engineer. C. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the request as filed, subject to the Traffic Engineer approving the driveway locations and parking. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The owner was present. There were no objectors . A motion was made to approve the variance subject to the traffic engineer approving the driveway locations and parking. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. ) May 20, 1985 Item No. 4 -Z-4447 Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: Variance Requested: JUSTIFICATION: First Baptist Church East 9th and Calhoun, nor thwest co rner Lots 5 and 6, Block 4, Cl inton Park Addition "R-3" Single Family Residential From the off-street parking provisions of Section 8-101/H.2 to permit church parking on property zoned "R-3." On September 19, 1983, the Little Rock Board of Adjustment approved a request for off-street parking. Since that time, the church has traded for the two described lots across from the church. These two lo ts are closer to the church and would provide more co nvenient parking. In addition, three more parking sp aces could be acquired becuase of the two lots adjoining each other. Present Use of the Property: Vacant Proposed Use of the Property: Parking STAFF REPORT A.Engineering Issues 1.Ordinance requires that 40 ft. minimum distance is used between curb cuts. Therefore, the TrafficEngineer requests that only one curb be used foraccess from Calhoun. 2.The alley sho uld also be upgraded to the samestandards as the parking lot. B. Staff Analysis The request is to allow church parking on two lo ts at the northwest corner of East 9th and Calhoun, currently zoned "R-3." The zoning ordinance gives jurisdiction ) May 20, 1985 Item No. 4 -Continued c. to the Bo ard of Adjustment to approve this type of parking. The church received approval in September 1983 for parking on two other lots somewhat removed from the church building. The church currently has a parking area at the southwest corner of East 9th and Calhoun. With the addition of these two lots, the parking will be consolidated in one general location and readily accessible to the church facility. The proposed use of the lots should not create any problems for the remainder of the block. Staff feels that the proposed parking is an improvement and supports the request. Because the alley will be utilized, it is requested that it be upgraded to proper standards. Also, staff is concerned that the parking layout as shown will not work properly because of a row of spaces accessing from the alley. These spaces should be designed so as to conform with the rest of the lot which enters from Calhoun Street. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the requested variance with the condition that the alley be improved to proper standards and access is approved by the Traffic Engineer. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant, William Thrasher, was present. There were no objectors. Staff informed the Board that the required notification of property owners was deficient and recommended that the item be deferred. Mr. Thrasher spoke at length about the various concerns including the church's plan to occupy the building by the first of June. Staff pointed out to the Board that the Planning Commission would have to review the request because the parking proposal was modifying a previously approved conditional use permit. There were some additional comments made about the issues associated with this application. A motion was made to defer the request to the June meeting and for staff to work with the applicant to receive approval by both the Board of Adjustment and the Planning Commission and occupancy of the church. The motion failed by a vote of: 1 aye, 6 noes, 1 absent and 1 abstention (Herbert Rideout). A second motion was made to conditionally approve the variance subject to proper notice being given for the June meeting, the alley being improved to City standards and the traffic engineer approving the access. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 1 noe, 1 absent and 1 abstention (Herbert Rideout). The item was deferred to the June 17, 1985, meeting. ) May 20, 1985 Item No. 5 -Z-4448 Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: Variance Requested: JUSTIFICATION: Phil lip K. Lyon 311 North McAdoo South 90 feet of Lot 19, Shannon Hills East "R-2" Single Family From the side yard provisions of Section 7-101.2/D.2 to permit a new garage with a 5-foot side yard. Due to the size of the lot and the design of the ho use, the only feasible location for the garage is the proposed site. The garage would be built on the nort hern portion of the lot adjacent to a rock ret aining wall. Because the lots slopes severely from north to south, the roof of the garage will be roughly at gr ound level. Therefore, the garage will not disrupt any view or use of the lot directly to the north. Present Use of the Property: Single Family Proposed Use of the Property: Single Family STAFF REPORT A.Engineering Issues No engineering issues ha ve been reported as of thiswriting. B.Staff Analysis The request is to permit construction of a new garagewith a 5-foot side yard. In the "R-2" district, thezoning ordinance requires a side yard setback "of notless than 10 percent of the average width of the lotnot to exceed 8 feet." The garage is to be located on the north side of the lot, ut ilizing the existingdriveway, and this appears to be the on ly site for thenew construction because of structural configurat ionand the lot. The reduced setback will not impact ) May 20, 1985 Item No. 5 -Z-4448 the property to the north because of a substantial grade difference between the two lots that places the roof of the garage at ground level. The other adjacent residences will be unaffected because of the garage's location and the different yard relationships. To help reduce the potential for any runoff problems from the garage, the overhang on the north side should be restricted to the minimum. C.Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the requested variance. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The owner, Philip K. Lyon, was present. There were no objectors. A motion was made to grant the variance as filed. The motion was approved by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. n ) u May 20, 1985 There being no further business before the Board, the Chairman adjourned the meeting at 3:20 p.m. Date-1J;z/� �e��