boa_04 21 1986LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTE RECORD
APRIL 21, 1986
2:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A quorum was present being 6 in number.
II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting
The minutes of the previous meeting were approved as
mailed.
III. Members present: George Wells
Ronald Woods
Richard Yada
Thomas McGowan
Herbert Rideout
John McDaniel
Members absent: Joe Norcross
Open positions: 2
April 21, 1986
Item No. 1 - Z-4610-A
Owner: David J. Jones
Address: 10715 Mabelvale West Road
Description: East 25 feet of Lot 8 and all of
Lots 9, 10, 11 and 12, Block 21
Town of Mabelvale
Zoned: "C-3" General Commercial
Variance
Requested: From the setback provisions of
Section 7-103.3/d to permit new
construction with a 10-foot and 15-foot
side and front yard respectively
Justification:
As applicant, we ask for the variance for the following
reasons: there is an existing building that currently
stands over the setbacks. We propose an addition to this
existing building. As the plans show, the building scheme
is a U -shape which allows for a landscaped courtyard in the
middle. It will also reduce the amount of new building that
will be beyond the setback lines along Mabelvale West Road.
The idea is to maintain a uniform building line matching the
existing along both streets.
Next, a new sloped roof is proposed that will tie the new
and old buildings together into a cohesive whole. The
building will be one story to keep with the surrounding
residential appearance. Further, the U- shaped building
configuration allows us to save all but a few trees on the
site.
Present Use of
Property: Vacant and Little Rock Police Department
Substation
Proposed Use of
Property: Commercial /offices
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
Boundary street improvement in lieu fee shall be
submitted at the time of building permit issue for main
street. Also, a written agreement shall be completed
with the City Engineer at the time of building permit
issue for the remaining improvements on Mabelvale West
Road.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 1 - Continued
Utility Comment
New construction should recognize the presence of an
8 -inch sewer and its easement along the alley property
line.
B. Staff Analysis
The subject site contains a single small building now
used as a police substation which will be incorporated
into the development. The land involved was annexed
with the current nonconforming setbacks and this is
part justification for the request. The Master Street
Plan impacts this property to some extent due to
dedication requirements. However, the City Engineer's
Office advises that an alternate routing plan for
through traffic may remove this involvement. They have
suggested that no right -of -way be required at this time
and have offered the thought that once the new arterial
alignment is in place, Mabelvale West Road could be
abandoned. This right -of -way area could then become
part of the yard area. This would eliminate one
variance relationship. We feel that the alley access
needs attention. This owner should either gain control
of the entire alley through abandonment and acquisition
or improve it to carry the load of all traffic access
to the site.
C. Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the requested variances
subject to: (1) abandonment and acquisition of all of
the alley for drives and parking, or (2) leave the
alley open and improve it to street standards, (3) the
owner should specify what, if any, commercial uses will
be located within the complex and potentially increase
the parking. The parking needs of the total complex
should be identified.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION:
The staff offered its comments. There were no objectors
present. The applicant was present and offered comments in
support of his variance. After a brief discussion of the
issues, a motion was made to approve the variances. The
motion conditioned on the following modifications:
April 21, 1986
Item No. 1 - Continued
1. Since the applicant has stated that the alley will
remain open, the improvements to the alley should be to
street standard, absent curb and gutter.
2. In the absence of specific listed uses within the
structures, the owner is to commit to provide any
necessary parking spaces per ordinance requirement for
future changes in occupancy which increase the
requirement overall.
3. Provide construction for in lieu funds as necessary on
the main street side of the project.
The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and
2 open positions.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 2 - Z-4638
Owner: Girod Adkinson
Address: 7204 Azalea Drive
Description: Lot 109, Cloverdale Addition
Zoned: "R -2" Single Family
Variance
Requested: From the rear yard provisions of
Section 7-101.2/d.3 to permit a new
garage with a 20-foot setback
Justification:
By connecting the garage to the house with a covering, I
would be providing further protection for vehicles that I
would park there and it would also not be necessary to park
visitors vehicles on the street, thereby eliminating
additional hazards to drivers on an already heavy traveled
street.
During periods of heavy rain, the covering would also
prevent water from entering the garage since the garage
carport and connecting slab are all on the same elevation.
The covering would concentrate all vehicles under roof and
close to the house, thereby lessening the chances of
vandalism and creating a more pleasing view from the street
with only one vehicle being seen in the carport instead of
several in the driveway.
By connecting the garage to the house by means of a roof, my
property and especially the structures would become more
attractive to the neighborhood by maintaining the
architectural continuity of our home.
Present Use of
Property: Single Family
Proposed Use of
Property: Single Family
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
No adverse comment received.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 2 - Continued
B. Staff Analvsis
The staff visit to this site reveals a detached garage
under construction. This construction in our
estimation creates a circumstance that renders the
canopy connection a minor issue. The garage
encroachment and yard space is permitted as a detached
building. Therefore, connection to the house does not
create a light, air or congestion problem for neighbors
in the conventional sense. The several issues of this
nature which have been reviewed by the Board invariably
results in a requirement to maintain the canopy and
prohibit any sidewalls or storage room extensions.
C. Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the variance as filed
subject to this being maintained as a roof over only
and no enclosure of the side walls between the garage
and house and no extension of the carport storage room.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION:
The staff presented its recommendation. There were no
objectors present. The owner was present and offered a
statement in support of his variance. A brief discussion
was held resulting in a motion to approve the request as
recommended by staff. The motion passed by a vote of:
6 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 2 open positions.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 3 - Z-4640
Owner: Signal Media of Arkansas Inc.
Address: 2400 Cottondale Lane
Description: Tract F-2A, Riverdale Addition
Zoned: "I-2" Light Industrial District
Variance
Requested: From the radio tower provisions of
Section 38.3 of the Code of Ordinances
to permit a tower with a height of
199 feet
Justification:
The auxiliary transmitter which is used if our main
transmitter is experiencing technical difficulty is also
located in the Tower Building at Fourth and Center. When we
are forced on auxiliary transmission, it interferes
dramatically with computers and office machines located in
other offices nearby. With our freestanding tower, the
entire auxiliary section in the Tower Building could be
eliminated and our auxiliary unit could then be placed up on
Shanall Mountain.
KHLT has an obligation to serve the public with vital news
and information during emergency situations. The ability to
transmit directly to Shanall Mountain would eliminate any
retransmission of the signal. Therefore, eliminating this
extra (link) and reducing the chance of interruption of
radio service to the community. This is extremely important
during periods of a national emergency or severe weather.
It would eliminate any possible security problems since all
equipment would then be housed in our main studios.
Present Use of
Property: Radio Broadcasting
Proposed Use of
Property: Remain the same
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
No adverse comment received.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 3 - Continued
B. Staff Analysis
This request is filed under provisions of the Tower and
Antenna Ordinance, and as such, is not a hardship
variance in the conventional sense. The staff visit to
the site reveals the circumstance which we do not
believe could be better for a tower site. We think
that given the industrial uses, multistory office
buildings and adjacent levee, that this variance harms
no one. The large open spaces and setbacks also lessen
impact.
C. Staff Recommendation
Approval as filed subject to the tower being painted a
neutral color so as to lessen the visual impact from a
distance, and further that no signs be permitted on the
structure.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION:
The staff offered its recommendation. There were no
objectors present. The applicant was present and responded
to questions from the Board concerning the height, color and
dimensions of the tower. It was determined that this tower
would be the only tower in the River Valley on the south
side of the river and would not require the usual FAA
identification colors. A lengthy discussion of the
application was held. A motion was made for approval as
filed. The motion failed for lack of an affirmative vote.
The vote 4 ayes, 2 noes, 1 absent and 2 open positions.
THE REQUEST WAS DENIED.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 4 - Z-4642
Owner: L. Allen Curtis
Address: 2701 N. University Avenue
Description: Lot 6 and the S 1/2 of Lot 5
Parkview Addition
Zoned: "R-2" Single Family District
Variance
Requested: From the rear and side yard provisions
of Section 7-101.2 /d to permit a new
garage with reduced rear and side yards
Justification:
1. The proposed addition has been sited so as to save the
existing 46 inch oak tree located to the south of the
addition and to avoid possible conflicts with the
existing sewer line located approximately three feet
from the north side of the addition.
2. As can be seen on this survey, this is the only area of
the property where such an addition can be located.
Present Use of
Property: Single Family
Proposed Use of
Property: Single Family
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
No adverse comments have been received.
B. Staff Analysis
The staff visit to this site once again confirms our
opinion that many of the lots in this neighborhood are
being overbuilt. A first reaction to this proposal was
that the garage could be sited as a detached garage
without variance if 6 feet from the current principal
structure. That would impact the lot even more so than
this proposal. However, we still feel that this
addition and its solid bulk should be disallowed on the
basis of light and air circulation alone. Further, any
hardship which may exist is self- imposed by previous
April 21, 1986
Item No. 4 - Continued
actions of this owner or others. The residence to the
east is located approximately 25 feet east of the
common rear property line which means that the normal
50 foot minimum rear separation of houses will be
reduced to 35 to 40 feet.
C. Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends denial of the variance as filed and
suggest that the Board consider an alternative plan
which would provide for one closed garage space of
approximately 12 feet in width and the remaining
east /west dimension be constructed as an open carport
space limited to a flat roof with no outer walls. We
suggest the 4 feet and 13 feet setbacks proposed be
utilized for this purpose.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION:
The staff offered its recommendation. There were no
objectors present. The owner was represented by Mr. Charles
Lupzig, architect for the project. Mr. Lupzig responded to
staff recommendation by stating that the owner preferred a
double carport rather than as staff has suggested. A brief
discussion of the issue followed. A motion was made to
approve the variance for placement of a double carport only
with no closed side walls and utilizing the same setbacks
proposed for the garage those being 4 feet and 13 feet. The
motion passed by a vote of 5 ayes, 1 noe, 1 absent and
2 open positions.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 5 - Z-4643
Owner: Parents and Friends of Children, Inc.
Address: 1009 Wolfe Street
Description: Lots 2 and 3 of Block 12
Marshall and Wolfe's Addition
Zoned: "O-3" General Office District
Variance
Requested: From the side yard provisions of
Section 7-102.3/d.2 to permit a new
addition with a 3.6 -foot setback
Justification:
We request a variance of this 10 foot minimum to 3' 6" in
order to be able to match existing structure on the south
side of the building. This will help provide the additional
space we need and cause the structure to look better to
enhance the beauty of the area. If we have to bring the
addition in 10 feet, we will lose over 100 square feet of
office space we desperately need.
Present Use of
Property: Charitable Organization /Lodge
Proposed Use of
Property: Remain the same
.STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
No adverse comments received.
B. Staff Analysis
A staff visit to this site revealed no problems with
this variance. The addition adversely effects no one.
The side yard at issue abuts a large parking lot plus
the front yard is maintained per ordinance.
C. Staff Recommendation
Approval as filed.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 5 - Continued
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION:
The staff offered its recommendation. There were no
objectors present. The owner was represented by Mr. Don
Capehart. He made a brief comment on the request. The
Traffic Engineering staff requested removal of the existing
driveway off Wolfe Street if possible. The applicant stated
that could be accomplished inasmuch as only one car now uses
that space. After a brief discussion, a motion was made for
approval subject to removal of the driveway. The motion
passed by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent, 1 abstention
and 2 open positions.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 6 - Z-4645
Owner: C.I.C., Inc.
Address: Patterson Road South of the Missouri
Pacific Railroad Tracks
Description: Long Legal
Zoned: "I-2" Light Industrial District
Variance
Requested: From the development criteria provisions
of Section 7-104.2/b to permit a
nonopaque fence
Justification:
There will be outside storage of brick throughout the tract
while most if not all of the property will be fenced, the
level terrain of the land would prohibit optimum security
behind an opaque barrier and materials reached will be
subject to possible theft and damage.
An opaque barrier would have a substantial adverse effect on
the very nature of the business itself in that it is
extremely important that outside display be highly visible
as with automobiles, track vehicles, mobile homes, etc.
In addition, this would put an unfair requirement on this
particular tract in light of the fact of the surrounding
uses of the property who are not required to have opaque
bariers.
The history of Holly Springs Brick and Tile is such that
their property development is attractive and in no way
detracts from the surrounding property values or usage.
Present Use of
Property: Vacant
Proposed Use of
Property: Wholesale /Retail Brick Yard
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
Traffic Engineering requested that the Blind Corner
Ordinance be observed at Patterson and Freezer Road;
also at driveways to the site. No building permit is
to be issued until plans are approved by the Traffic
Engineer.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 6 - Continued
B. Staff Analysis
A staff visit to this site reveals that the arguments
offered by the applicant are valid. There are several
neighbors whose business activities might warrant
screening to protect this site. If this use is to be
limited to open display of new brick, then there is
little to be gained by a screen. However, we feel it
important to point out that there should not be open
display of debris or broken or salvaged brick or allied
products. Perhaps there should be some screening of
mass storage areas and display of a specified amount on
a portion of the lot only.
C. Staff Recommendation
Approval of the variance but suggest the Board discuss
the possibility of some screening of the larger bulk of
material.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION:
The staff offered its recommendation. There were no
objectors present. The application was represented by
Ralph Teed of the Holly Springs Brick Company. The
applicant presented arguments in support of an open mesh
chain link security fence only. He stated that visibility
and security were the key reasons for eliminating the opaque
requirement. He offered certain planting on the perimeter
of the site in place of the opaque fencing and to increase
landscaping. A lengthy discussion then followed during
which several alternate plans of fencing were offered. A
staff suggestion was made that opaque fencing be erected
along Freezer Road property line and in the form of wing
walls extending north and south off the rear corners of the
building. These fences would be opaque in their entirety
except that there would be driveway openings on both sides
of the building with either one or two gates as necessary by
the user. A motion to approve the application as indicated
in the staff recommendation was made. The motion passed by
a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes, 1 abstention (George Wells),
1 absent and 2 open positions.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 7 - Z-4646
Owner: Mt. Zion Baptist Church
Address: 908 Cross Street
Description: Lots 8 and 9 of Block 308
Original City of Little Rock
Zoned: "O-3" General Office
Variance
Requested: From the side and rear yard provisions
of Section 7-102.3/d to permit a new
addition with setbacks of 8 feet and
4.6 feet
Justification:
1. The present education building is the only portion of
the existing building that can be conveniently annexed
to match existing walls in said building.
2. The new facility will be an extension to the existing
building to house offices, classrooms and equipment
room.
3. The hallways will extend straight through making exits
from building easily accessible without curbs.
4. Steps leading to the sanctuary at the Cross Street
entrance are very high. There are no restroom
facilities in sanctuary area. Therefore, a new annex
will have restrooms at ground level to accommodate the
elderly and the handicapped. A fellowship hall also at
ground level to accommodate the elderly and the
handicapped persons participation as well as a nurses
guild room for emergencies.
Present Use of
Property: Vacant
Proposed Use of
Property: Education Building /Fellowship Hall
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
The Traffic Engineer questioned parking requirements
and if any additional were required.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 7 - Continued
B. Staff Analysis
This church site currently is generally in conformance
with all setback requirements of ordinance and probably
was constructed under the former Zoning Ordinance which
was less restrictive. The neighboring properties are
primarily single family with one building's use unknown
lying to the south. That structure was a mortuary at
some point in the past and appears to be a residential
use currently. It is that property that is the only
concern of Planning staff. A small frame building
exists on the property line adjacent to this variance
area and appears to be located such that it would be a
maximum of eight feet from the new building wall. This
relationship could present a fire hazard to the new
structure. We would encourage the church to work with
the owner of that lot toward removal. The structure
does not appear to be useful. This addition does not
expand the seating capacity of the sanctuary of the
church. Therefore, parking requirements are not an
issue of this variance.
C. Staff Recommendation
Approval of the request subject to resolving the frame
building issue on the south property line.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION:
The staff offered its recommendation. There were no
objectors present. The applicant presented his case. He
stated that the church could not deal with the owner of the
property to the south for removal of the garage, that owner
desires to retain the structure. He indicated the church
will clean up the south property line and erect a fence.
The Board discussed the request briefly resulting in a
motion to approve the requested as filed. The motion passed
by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 2 open positions.
Ed. Note:
This request required no additional off - street parking
inasmuch as the sanctuary seating capacity did not increase.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 8 - Z-4647
Owner: Helen K. DeNoble
Address: 5108 Stonewall
Description: Lot 12, Block 17, Newton Addition
Zoned: "R -2" Single Family District
Variance
Requested: From the side yard provisions of
Section 7- 101.2/d.2 to permit a new
addition with 4.4 foot setback
Justification:
1. It will extend the existing west wall of the residence
some 20 feet north. The existing house was built
before current zoning laws were adopted. It is 4' 4"
from the west property line.
2. It will in essence enclose an existing patio.
3. It cannot be added elsewhere because the floor plan
places all living areas on the west side of the house,
sleeping on the east. Also, the only back door opens
onto the patio and will be the entrance to the proposed
addition.
4. The east side of the house has already been extended
about 12 feet. This addition was built in 1978.
5. The addition will be in conformity with the character
of the neighborhood and will not be visible from the
street.
6. The room will serve the purpose of adding sleeping
space which is badly needed because my large family
visits frequently.
7. It will add what will be in effect a screened porch as
it will have all 6 -foot casement windows from the floor
with a smaller window above on the west and the south.
This will permit energy conservation by reducing the
need for air conditioning during the summer months.
8. It will provide an accessible entry to the house which
will make it much easier for one of my daughters, a
wheelchair user, to visit.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 8 - Continued
Present Use of
Property: Single Family
Proposed Use of
Property: Single Family
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
No adverse comments received.
B. Staff Analysis
The staff visit to this site revealed no problem with
the proposal. This is one of those variances that
staff feels uncomfortable having to bring to the Board
for .6 of a foot. However, the ordinance offers no
option.
C. Staff Recommendation
Approval as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION:
The staff offered its recommendation. There were no
objectors present. Ms. DeNoble made a brief statement.
After a brief discussion, the Board voted to approve a
motion to approve the request as filed. The vote: 6 ayes,
0 noes, 1 absent and 2 open positions.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 9 - Z-4648
Owner: Don Crow
Address: 4325 North Lookout
Description: Lot 7, being a replat of Block 14
Hillcrest Addition
Zoned: "R -2" Single Family District
Variance
Requested: From the rear yard provisions of
Section 7-101.2/d.3 to permit a new
carport with a zero-foot setback
Justification: A drainage problem is the stated
hardship for encroachment based on
recent paving of the alley.
Present Use of
Property: Single Family
Proposed Use of
Property: Single Family
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
No adverse comments received.
B. Staff Analysis
This lot is an example of the site overbuilding which
has occurred in this area of the City. Much of this
overbuilding occurred 25 to 30 years ago. The subject
site is impacted by grade on the front 60'± and an
addition by the several structures added to the
original house. The primary issue before the Board of
Adjustment is that most of the rear yard being covered
by a canopy /carport. The intrusion into the alley
cannot be authorized by the Board of Adjustment and
instructions for its removal are in order. Some appeal
for a right -of -way franchise usage might be filed, but
is no value if the Board of Adjustment rejects the
carport.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 9 - Continued
C. Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends denial of the variance as requested.
We recommend to the Board the elimination of all of the
alley encroachment and that the east portion of the
carport beyond the east sideyard setback be removed.
An approval of this fashion would still extend the
primary structure to the rear property line, but it
would be maintained as an open carport thereby allowing
the circulation of light and air.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION:
The staff offered its recommendation. There were no
objectors present. Ms. Crow was in attendance and addressed
the Board. She stated that the carport was erected for her
by a neighbor who did not obtain a building permit. This
person was identified as a part -time worker and not familiar
with procedures. A lengthy discussion of the proposal was
held involving many solutions. The result being a motion to
approve the rear yard variance to allow retention of the
carport to the rear property line. This motion conditioned
approval on removal of the canopy overhanging the
right -of -way but retaining that portion of the canopy
extending into the east side yard. The motion passed by a
vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 2 open positions.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 10 - Z-4649
Owner: First Baptist Church of Highland Park
Address: 3800 Block of West 18th Street
Description: Lots 9, 10, 11 and 12 of Block 12 and
Lot 3 of Block 15, Braddock's Addition
Zoned: "R-3" Single Family District and
"I-2" Light Industrial District
Variance
Requested: From the parking provisions of
Section 8-101.8.2 of the Code of
Ordinances to permit parking areas
on land zoned "R-3" and "I-2"
Justification:
In October of 1979, the Board of Adjustment granted
authorization allowing the church structure to be built on
the property adjacent to and in close proximity to the
variance site. The church has grown tremendously causing
visitors and parishioners to park on the street and at a
great distance from the church building. To help alleviate
the problem, the church purchased the referenced property
and hereby requests permission to properly prepare and use
it for the parking that we severely need. The church has
already acquired permission to use Lot 3 adjacent for
parking. The mentioned property will be paved with asphalt
according to City specifications, drained as required and
marked to provide accommodation for a maximum number of
vehicles according to the City code.
Present Use of
Property: Residential/under demolition
Proposed Use of
Property: Church parking lots
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
Traffic access, parking plan and curb cut locations
shall be approved by the Traffic Engineer before any
building permits are issued.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 10 - Continued
B. Staff Analysis
This request is the second from this church to use
vacant` lots in the area as parking. This off street
parking will not only aid in removal of street parking,
but will eliminate some deficient housing. The lot
indicated on the south side of 18th Street abuts a lot
previously approved for parking. This lot is currently
covered with gravel and in default on the original
approval. The corner lot at 18th Street and Pine is
currently zoned "I-2" Light Industrial which is totally
out of conformance with the neighborhood zoning plan
and should be down zoned to "R-3" prior to its usage.
C. Staff Recommendation
Approval subject to resolving the issues discussed in
the analysis.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION:
The staff offered its recommendation. There were two
persons present expressing concerns about the parking lot
and neighborhood security. These persons were Josephine
Berryman and Hugh Fountain. The applicant was present and
offered an overview of the proposal and history of the
church development in this area. After a lengthy discussion
of the request, a motion was made to approve the request as
filed subject to the following:
1. Cable gates on all driveways to control use by others.
2. Rezone the lot on the corner at Pine Street to "R-3"
Single Family from its current "I-2" zoning. (A
recommendation to the Planning Commission for fee and
notice waiver is added.)
3. Pave Lot 2 from the previous variance request in
accordance with ordinance standards.
The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and
2 open positions.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 11 - Z-4622 - Reconsideration Matter
Owner: St. Michael's Episcopal Church
Address: 2313 and 2317 Durwood Road
Description: Lot 3, Queen Manor Addition
Zoned: "C-3" General Commercial
Variance
Requested: From the front yard provisions of
Section 7-103.3/D.1 to permit an
addition with a 15-foot setback
Justification: The extension is for a vestibule so that
the double front doors will not open
directly into the sanctuary which during
cold weather could be extremely
uncomfortable as well as energy
wasteful. There is a current overhang
of at least five feet and the extension
would be on an existing entrance
walkway.
Present Use of
Property: Commercial Building
Proposed Use of
Property: Church
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
None reported.
B. Staff Analvsis
The request is to allow a 10 -foot encroachment into the
required front yard which is 25 feet in the "C-3"
district. The proposal is to convert an existing
commercial structure into a church and the proposed
10 x 20 addition is to be a vestibule. The church is
currently located on the east side of Durwood, almost
directly across the street, so the use is not new to
the location. Currently there is a 10-foot walk in the
25-foot yard area and the plan's addition will not
extend beyond the existing intrusion. Because of the
area, staff feels that the setback encroachment will
not have an impact and supports the request. The
April 21, 1986
Item No. 11 - Continued
church has provided adequate justification and with the
existing building's placement on the lot, the proposed
modification appears to be the most reasonable. Staff
recognizes that parking is a problem in the area and
ask that the church make every effort to address this
situation. Because of general traffic circulation in
the neighborhood, staff recommends that the paved area
in the front yard not be utilized for parking.
C. Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the variance with the
condition that the curb along Durwood be extended in
the front of this lot to prohibit parking.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (3-17-86)
There was no representative of the church present. There
were two objectors in attendance and the Board of Adjustment
allowed those persons to speak. Joe Scerbo said that there
was a serious parking problem and he was opposed to the
church being in the neighborhood. He went on to say that by
approving the variance, the problem would only get worse.
Bob Grable reinforced what Mr. Scerbo said about the parking
problem and indicated that Durwood Road was almost blocked
at times because of parking on both sides. William Cheney,
Pastor of St. Paul's Methodist Church, addressed the Board.
He said that his church did not have adequate parking and
discussed the two lots that were being used for parking.
Mr. Cheney said he was not opposed to the variance, but was
concerned about the parking situation. A motion was then
made to deny the variance. The motion was approved by a
vote of: 5 ayes, 2 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions.
The setback variance was denied.
POST MEETING ACTION:
The applicant contacted the Planning staff and members of
the Board of Adjustment for purposes of obtaining permission
to address the Board for reconsideration. A polling of the
members reflected a 6 to 1 vote for placement on this
agenda. Six votes were required by the bylaws for this
consideration. It will be necessary for the applicant to
establish through presentation of his arguments the basis
for the rehearing. The applicant's appeal, if granted, will
be set by the Board of Adjustment for earliest public
hearing possible which will be May 19, 1986.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 11 - Continued
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (4-21-86)
The staff presented the request. The applicant was present
and offered justification for a rehearing. After a brief
discussion, the Board voted to rehear the matter at its
regular scheduled meeting on May 19, 1986. The vote:
6 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 2 open positions.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 12
Owner: Bill Lusk
Location: 5302 Pinnacle Valley Road
Request: To review determination of the City
staff that the nonconforming use in
place has expired.
Petitioner's Statement:
I, Bill Lusk, am the owner of the referenced real property
which is situated on the west side of Pinnacle Valley Road
at its intersection with Arkansas Highway No. 10 now in the
City of Little Rock. I have owned the property since 1970.
For a long time prior to and at the time this property was
annexed to the City, it was used for commercial warehouse
and storage purposes. It was so used as late as April 1,
1985, at which time the lessee of the property wanted to
renew his lease, but wanted assurance that his use would be
permitted to continue at least as nonconforming. At that
time, I initiated efforts to seek assurances from the
appropriate City personnel, all to no avail. The formal
denial is in the form of a letter dated December 20, 1985,
over the signature of Mr. Kenny Scott, Zoning and Sign Code
Chief of the Department of Public Works of the City of
Little Rock. A copy of that letter is attached hereto as
Exhibit A and is made a part of my request. The order or
decision of the Chief of Zoning and Sign Code that the
property does not have an established nonconforming status
is not supported by facts and is erroneous. The fact of
this holding is to deny me as owner any meaningful use of
this property and such results I contend was never the
intent of the City in its enactment of the Zoning Ordinance.
Please accept this as my appeal of the letter order of
Mr. Kenny Scott, Zoning and Sign Code Chief. In support of
this appeal to reverse the denial order and gain an order of
approval for this property as nonconforming for commercial
warehouse and storage use purposes, please find the
following items in support thereof:
a. Copy of land survey.
b. Copy of letter to Mr. Scott.
C. Copy of sheet setting dates and uses of the property.
d. Copy of seven letters from property owners and other
parties.
STAFF REPORT:
Staff attaches in support of its arguments several items of
communication.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 12 - Continued
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION:
The staff offered the attached material and statement of
Mr. Lusk contained in his letter attachment to Ken Scott on
November 15, 1985. Mr. Lusk offered comments in support of
his appeal. He requested clarification of what constituted
a nonconforming use. The staff and City Attorney addressed
the definition to the end that it was apparent that this
property was annexed as a church. The nonconforming church
use was abandoned for several months beyond its moving from
the structure. Therefore, no commercial nonconformity
continues from prior usage before annexation. After a
lengthy discussion, a motion was made to declare that the
staff had properly applied the ordinance in its
interpretation. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes,
0 noes, 1 absent and 2 open positions.
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF LITTLE ROCK
December 6, 1985
TO: Gary Greeson, Director of Planning
FROM: Richard Wood, Chief of Current Planning
SUBJECT: Public Works Department Memo Relative to
5302 Pinnacle Valley Road and Its Current
Nonconforming Status
I have reviewed the circumstances of this request. It is my
opinion that given the annexation date of this property and
the changed uses since annexation, there is not now an
established nonconformity on the premises. The subject
property as identified in the attachment apparently lies
within an annexed area approved by City Ordinance #13,484 on
August 1, 1978. On that date, this applicant's statement is
that the property was occupied by a Pentecostal church and
continued to do so until November of 1979. Subsequent to
that occupancy, the building was vacant from December 1979
until January 1981. The only commercial usage of the
property was that which is referenced between January 1981
and December 1984 whereby an antique and used furniture
operation functioned on this premises.
It is apparent from my review that the usage was a violation
of ordinance which apparently was not observed by our
enforcement people nor was it reported by the neighborhood.
However, I do believe that the violation of ordinance should
not be utilized as a basis for creating a nonconforming
occupancy. The only question which I believe could be
raised concerning the information provided above is the
actual description of the property as to whether it did in
fact lie within the area of Ordinance #13,484. The reason I
say this is that we do not at this time have a metes and
bounds description of the subject property, but it is clear
to me on our office records and the annexation description
that the subject site lies immediately inside the west
boundary of that annexation.
If you require follow-up review on this subject, please
advise.
RW:af4
cc: Tony Boznyski
Van McClendon
Citv of Little Rock
Department of
Public Works
Engineering Division
701 West Markham
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
371-4800
M E M O R A N D U M
December 9, 1985
TO: Gary L. Greeson, Director of Planning
VIA: Jim Hathcock, Environmental Codes Chief
FROM: Kenny Scott, Zoning & Sign- Enforcement Chief
SUBJECT: Obtaining Nonconforming Status for Parcel
11-13-2N18, 03-7580-02, .44 acres
5302 Pinnacle Valley Road
Mr. Bill Lusk, owner,'of the above mentioned property, has
delivered to our office seven letters from current and past
neighbors of the property.' Also, Mr. Lusk gives a listing
of past uses of the property. Mr. Lusk is asking that the
property be classified as having a nonconforming commercial
status. The property'was annexed to the.City August 2, 1978.
After reviewing the information submitted by Mr. Lusk, it is
the opinion of this office that the property in question has
forfeit it's nonconforming status. Several.letters submitted
are not clear as to when use was occupied or vacant. Mr.
Lusk summary letter indicated property was vacant in 1979
1981.
I am asking that your office review the enclosed material
given to us by Mr. Lusk and determine whether the property
should be allowed a nonconforming commercial status. Please
respond in writing within the next ten days. The proposed
use is an antique shop. .A copy of this request it also
being forwarded to the City Attorney's office.
KS /ps
cc: Mark Stodola
Roy Beard
November 15, 1985
Mr. Kenny Scott
Zoning and Sign Enforcement Chief
Little Rock Public Works
Little Rock, AR 72201
Re: Parcel 11-13-2N18
03-7580-02 .44 Acres
Dear Mr. Scott:
Enclosed is a description of the use of
the above property since I acquired it.
Also enclosed are seven letters from. the
neighbors substantiating this use.
I am requesting that a non-conforming,
commercial zoning use be reinstated for this
property.
Sincerely,
BILL LUSK
#7 Berwyn Drive
Little Rock, AR
Encl.
BUILDING AT COUNTY FARM ROAD
PULASKI COUNTY
.44 Acres
Parcel 11-13-2N18
03-7580-02
Purchased: May 15. 1970.
Purchased for use as a warehouse for insulation
materials for Razorback Insulation. Used for this
purpose until company sold out in July. 1974:
July, 1974 to January, 1978.
Building was used a a manufacturing site for
Super.Pillows. Owner of Super Pillows was
Allan Siebert. and building was rented to him.
January, 1978 to November, 1979.
Building was rented to a Pentecostal Church
Group, which subsequently broke up.
December, 1979 to 1981.
Building was vacant.
January 1981 to December 1984.
Building was rented to Hogan Antiques and Used
Furniture, and used for a warehouse until vacated.
Building is presently vacant.
October 21, 1985
Hogan's Antiques
Hwy. 10
Little Rock, AR 72212
Lusk Construction
7706 Cantrell Rd.
Little Rock, AR 72207
To the City of Little Rock,
This letter is in regards to the building located at
the corner of Hwy. 10 and County Farm Road behind Pine Valley.
This building has been used as a commercial business site as
long as can be remembered. In the early 1970's, it was used
as an installation warehouse. After that, it was used by
Allen Siebert for the manufacturing outlet called Super Pillow.
For a short period of time it was used as a Pentecostal Church
then it was used by Hogan's Antiques for storage up until
April 1, 1985. At this point, Hogah's Antiq.ues moved and is
now located behind this location on Hwy. 10
This letter hereby acknowledges that this location has
been continuously used as a commercial site and that we
have no objections for it to continue to be used commercially.
Thank you,
Sarah Hogan
Hogan's Antiques
8404 Cunningham Lake Road
Little Rock Ar. 72205
October 27, 1985.
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN.
The Super Pillow Manufacturing Company occupied the building owned by Bill Lusk
on the north west corner of Highway 10 and County Farm Road from 1973 until 1977.
Super Pillow Co. initially was a foam furniture manufacture. The company developed
into a retail and wholesale outlet for upholstery supplies and accquired the name
of Allan Siebert Co.. Business expansion forced the company to move to a larger
facility. Refore.Super Pillow Manufacturing rented the building a insulation
company named 'Razorback Insulation' had occupied the building for several years.
After Allan Siebert moved out a church named 'Independent Pentecosts' moved in.
I was employed by Allan Siebert Company from June 1973 until January 1974
as general factory labor.
Craig A. Stauber
R. WINGFIELD MARTIN
ROUTE 5 BOX 598
LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72212
29 October 1985
Mr. Bill Lusk
7706 Cantrell Road
Little Rock, Arkansas 72207
Dear Bill:
Pursuant to your call to me probably now two months
ago in which you requested that I set forth in writing my
recollection of the former Church several hundred feet
northwest of the intersection of Pinnacle Valley Road and
Highway Ten, west side of the road. (Pinnacle Valley Road)
We moved out on the County Farm Road in January of
1964. At that time the County Farm Road extended to High-
way Ten. Dr. John Hundley prevailed upon a past County
Judge to rename the County Farm Road right after it passed
his house. This is at the intersection immediately east of
his house. The road going north from his house that ends
at what is now State Highway 300 on the North side of
Pinnacle Mountain was called Fulk Road, since the Fulk
family at that time owned Pinnacle Mountain and considerable
acreage that was east of the State Highway 300, which used
to be called the Roland Road.
At the time, January 1964, that we moved to the
County Farm Road, the Church building that I have described
above was the Nalls Baptist Church. This later moved over
right off of Highway Ten just southeast of the present
County Store.
After the Church was sold, I believe that you purchased
it, it was used to store insulation for houses for probably
ten years (1970 to 1980) After that for a period of time
it was vacant and Hogan Antiques that moved to the Fields
Property on Highway Ten, after being relocated because of
the widening of the bridge on Highway Ten and the Pinnacle
Valley Road, just west of where the Pinnacle Valley Road
intersects Highway Ten rented, the building for several
years. At present the old church building appears to be
vacant.
Sincerely yours,
R. Wing ield Martin
RWM/smc
HARRIS CONCRETE PUMPS, INC.
RT. 5, BOX 420
LITTLE ROCK, ARK. 72212
Phone 501 868.5579
November 8, 1985
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
My business has been located at Route 5,
Highway 10 for 20 years. This is about 1/2 block
from the building at Highway 10 and County Farm
Road owned by Bill Lusk.
Originally, the building served as a site
for Nalls Baptist Church, however, for many years
this building has been used for commercial
purposes. It has been used by an insulation
company, a pillow manufacturing company, and an
antique business.
I recall that for a short time several years
ago a church group met there, but after they moved
out it housed an antique business.
At the present the building appears to be
empty.
Sincerely,
RAY HARRIS
April 21, 1986
Item No. 13 - Z-3125-B
Owner: Rick's, Inc. /DBA /White Water Tavern
Address: West 7th Street and Thayer Street
Request: To review determination of City staff
that subject site contains a
nonconforming use /structure that cannot
be expanded.
Statement of Petitioner's Attorney:
1. Please be advised that our firm's representative,
Rick's Inc., DBA White Water Tavern, contests the staff
determination in this matter. On March 24, 1986, I was
contacted by Mr. Ken Scott, head of the Enforcement
Division of the City of Little Rock, regarding an
alleged expansion of the nonconforming use at our
client's business located at West 7th and Thayer
Streets. Mr. Scott informed me that a notice to have
the alleged building addition removed would be issued
unless we took immediate steps to initiate an appeal of
said interpretation or seek a variance.
2. Please accept this as notice of my client's intention
to appeal. The alleged building addition involves a
roofed screened in porch located on the south side of
the building. The screened in area houses a bar-b-que
smoker and was required by the State Health Department.
The porch is located on part of the preexiting slab of
the building and no new slab or concrete was poured for
erection of the porch. All that was done was to erect
a roof and a screen around an area that already
existed. There was no outward expansion of the
building slab in any manner.
Ordinance Provisions at Issue:
"Article V, Section 5-101.c.1
(c) NONCONFORMING USES:
1. Expansions
A nonconforming use shall not be extended,
expanded, enlarged or increased in intensity to
any structure or land area other than that
occupied by such nonconforming use on the
effective date of this ordinance or any amendment
hereto which causes such use to become
nonconforming."
April 21, 1986
Item No. 13 - Continued
"Article V, Section 5-101.d.1
ENLARGEMENT, REPAIR OR ALTERATIONS:
Any nonconforming structure may be enlarged,
maintained, repaired or altered provided, however, that
no such enlargement, maintenance, repair or alteration
shall either create an additional nonconformity or
increase the degree of the existing nonconformity for
all or any part of such structure."
STAFF REPORT:
The Planning staff will develop the City staff position
relative to this subject prior to the public hearing
inasmuch as it is an involved issue. We will be prepared to
address this issue at the public hearing. However, there is
one point at this time that we would like to place in the
record. The fact that the State Health Department required
this smoker to be located at this point is not a concern
that we have viewed in the past which abridges or modifies
any of our regulations. It is our understanding from past
opinions of the City Attorney that certain health
regulations of the State of Arkansas did preempt the Zoning
Ordinance. However, that was in instances where the
addition or the proposal was required to meet certain health
standards of an existing activity. The smoker and /or
facility in place here is an expansion of the use was not
formerly in place and is part of the issue at hand.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (4-21-86)
The Chairman offered deferral to those applicants who felt
that the attendance problem impacted their request.
Inasmuch as there were only six members present and five
votes are required for action on any matter, this applicant
chose deferral to May 19, 1986. A motion to this effect was
made and passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and
2 open positions.
April 21, 1986
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at
4 p.m.
Secretary Chairman
Date