Loading...
boa_07 20 1987LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTE RECORD JULY 20, 1987 2:00 P.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A quorum was present being six in number. II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting The minutes were approved as mailed. III. Members Present: Thomas McGowan Ronald Woods Joe Norcross Jim Mitchell Ronald Pierce Rex Crane Members Absent: George Wells John McDaniel Cynthia Alderman City Attorney: Stephen Giles July 20, 1987 Item No. A - Z-4848 Owner: Timothy and Margaret Farrell Address: 5715 Hawthorne Road Description: Lot 27, Forest Heights Place Zoned: "R-2" Variances Requested: From the area provisions of Section 7-101.2/D.2 to permit a deck with a reduced side yard setback. Justification: (1) Because the structure solves the problem of the excessive slope of the property in a unique, practical, and attractive way which enhances the overall value of the property. (2) Because it has been in existence for four years. Present Use of Property: Single Family Proposed Use of Property: Single Family STAFF REPORT: A. Engineering Issues There are no issues. B. Staff Analysis This issue is before the Board because of an enforcement action. Recently, the Enforcement staff received a complaint about a possible violation of a setback provision for the "R-2" District. Upon investigation, it was determined that a wood structure/deck was built into the side yard and that it needed to be removed or the necessary variance be applied for. (The ordinance requirement for the side yard setback is ten percent of the average width or six feet for this lot. The house is constructed to the setback line.) This request presents a somewhat unique situation because the construction in question has been in place for four years without any inquiries being made until now. In 1982, a tornado passed through this part of the City and heavily damaged many structures in the neighborhood, including the one at 5715 Hawthorne. July 20, 1987 Item No. A - Continued At the time of rebuilding the house, the owners decided that something needed to be done to provide access to a back door because the lot slopes downward from the Hawthorne side. To solve this problem, a wood walkway/deck was constructed between the house and the east property line connecting the front with a deck which was built at the same time. All the necessary permits for the major construction were obtained, but the deck/walkway was not included in the original permit application because it was an afterthought and no inspection of the deck was done by the City. (This was an oversight on the part of the various parties involved.) The structure starts at grade in the front and then is several feet above ground level at the rear of the house. It is constructed right to the property line, but there is separation betwen this lot and the residence to the east because of the driveway. Also, there is a masonry wall along the east property line which appears to lessen the impact of the structure being built to the line. The walkway/deck does address a unique feature of the lot and appears to be the most functional design solution for the property. C. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the variance as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (6-15-87) The Chairman reported that he had received a written request for a deferral. A motion was made to defer the item to the July 20, 1987, meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (7-20-87) Staff reported that the item needed to be deferred to the August meeting. A motion was made to defer the request to the August 17, 1987, meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 3 absent. July 20, 1987 Item No. 1 - Z-4862 Owner: Ronald G. and Beverly L. Kuerner Address: 5124 Country Club Boulevard Description: Lot 8, Block 17., Newton's Addition Zoned: "R-2" Variances Requested: From the area provisions of Section 7-101.2/D to permit additions with reduced front and rear setbacks. Justification: (1) To take away the box look and improve the visual appearance for ourselves and our neighbors. (2) There is not a bedroom downstairs and the changes will allow for one with no stairs to climb. (3) would like to build a garage addition to the house to keep a golf cart, improve clutter, and protect things from the weather. (4) A covered walkway is intended to protect persons form inclement weather. (5) The proposal is not establishing any new encroachment distance in relation to the property line and is merely extending the building walls of the existing structure. Present Use of Property: Single Family Proposed Use of Property: Single Family STAFF REPORT: A. En ineering Issues None reported. July 20, 1987 Item No. 1 - Continued B. Staff Analysis The request before the Board is to grant setback variances for several additions to the residence located at 5124 Country Club Boulevard. The new construction will involve a large addition to the rear of the house, enlarging the garage and attaching it to the residence with a covered walk, and enclosing an existing porch on the Country Club Boulevard side. To accomplish the proposed additions and remodeling, variances for reduced front and rear yard setbacks are necessary. By being situated on a corner, the lot has two front yards with a required setback of 25'. Also, the Ordinance requires a 25 foot rear yard because of not providing the necessary 25 feet on the Newton Street side and the structures are nonconforming so no expansion can take glace without first obtaininq the necessary variances. If the existing garage remained detached then there would not be a rear yard issue, but by connecting it to the residence it becomes part of the principle structure. The proposed additions to the garage and the house will maintain the existing setbacks which have not impacted the adjoining properties. Newton Street has a 60 -foot right-of-way so there is ample setback, of approximately 251, from the street itself to the house. A variance is also needed for the Country Club side because of enclosing the existing porch which has a 23 -foot setback. Staff has no problems with the proposal and the requested variances but does question the size of the covered walk which is represented on the survey as being 12 X 16. These dimensions appear to be quite excessive for a walk area and need to be explained and/or justified. C. Staff recommendation Staff recommends approval of all the necessary variances as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant was represented by Wassell Turner. There were no objectors. Mr. Turner discussed the proposed walkway and said that the size was being dictated by the need to maneuver a golf cart in and out of the garage. He also pointed out that the existing doors have an offset, and there was a grade difference. Mr. Turner told the Board July 20, 1987 Item No. 1 - Continued that the owners have no intention of ever enclosing the walkway. Kenny Scott of the City's enforcement staff asked that a letter be attached to the building permit indicating that the walk area will not be enclosed. A motion was made to grant the setback variances subject to the owner providing a letter stating that the walkway will not be enclosed. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 3 absent. July 20, 1987 Item No. 2 - Z-4865 Owner: Riegler Health Service Address: 923 Rock Street Description: Lots 4, 5, and 6, Block 59, Original City of Little Rock Zoned: "HDR" High Density Residential Request: To grant a Conditional Use Permit for a new medical office building and a setback variance for the structure. Justification: A reduced side yard setback is necessary to provide the required front yard and an area for parking on the north side. Present Use of Property: Vacant Proposed Use of Property: Medical Office STAFF REPORT: A. Engineering Issues None reported as of this writing. B. Staff Analysis The proposal is to construct a new medical office building at the northeast corner of East 10th and Rock which is in the downtown area that is under the jurisdiction of the Central Little Rock Zoning Ordinance. This is a separate zoning document, adopted as part of the Central Little Rock Urban Renewal Project, that regulates land use for an area from Broadway to I-30 and from the Arkansas River to just south of I-630. The property under consideration is zoned "HDR" which allows professional offices as conditional uses, and Section 43-37 of the Central Little Rock Zoning Ordinance gives the Board of Adjustment the authority to grant the necessary Conditional Use Permit .for the proposed use. Section 43-37 requires submission of a site plan and states: In granting a Conditional Use Permit, the Board of Adjustment shall impose requirements and conditions including bulk and area requirements in addition July 20, 1987 Item No. 2 - Continued to those expressly the particular use for the protection public interest. stipulated in this article for as the Board may deem necessary of adjacent properties in the (The proposal must also be reviewed by the Little Rock Historic District Commission.) The request involves three 50-foot lots and the plan proposes an 8,100 square foot one story building with parking areas located to the north and along the east side of the structure, utilizing the alley for access. In addition to the Conditional Use Permit issue, the owners are also requesting a setback variance for the East 10th Street side. The Ordinance requires a 10-foot setback and the owners are proposing to reduce that to 5'. (The corner lot provision does not apply to this location because of the Central Little Rock Ordinance.) The primary request involves a land use question and the proposed plan's compatibility with the neighborhood. The owners feel that the use will not impact the neighborhood and that they are providing a needed service for the area. (The office is currently located at East 11th and Scott, but the practice has outgrown the building.) The immediate vicinity is primarily a mixed residential neighborhood with single family and multifamily units. To the north, there are some nonresidential uses along East 9th and one block to the east is MacArthur Park. In this type of neighborhood, a quite office is a reasonable use if the design and plan take into account the character of the area. The design must be sensitive to the historical fabric of the vicinity and recognize the area as primarily a residential neighborhood. Because of these factors, the design of the structure will be critical as well as the hours of operation. The building should incorporate design features that reflect a residential appearance and the office hours should not be the same as those of a medical facility located in a shopping center. Staff feels that the site plan is workable but is concerned with the 5-foot setback on the south side. A setback of 5 feet on a street side is not in keeping with the neighborhood and should be increased to the ordinance requirement of 10 feet. Finally, the owner should contact the City's Traffic Engineer about possible off-site improvements and to review the parking layout. It appears that the parking area on the north side of the building has some deficiencies. July 20, 1987 Item No. 2 - Continued C. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that a Conditional Use Permit be granted for the medical office subject to the Historic District Commission's necessary approval and the Traffic Engineer's review of the site plan. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant, Alan Beasely, was present. There were no objectors. Mr. Beasely addressed the Board and presented a modified site plan which showed a 10-foot setback on the south side and a 20-foot yard area for Rock Street, the front yard. He then requested a 5-foot variance for the front setback because the Central Little Rock Zoning Ordinance requires a 25-foot front setback. Mr. Beasely said that he had discussed the proposal with representatives of the Quapaw Quarter Association and the State Historic Preservation Program, and they suggested the 10-foot setback for East 10th which is the ordinance requirement. He reported that the City's Traffic Engineer had no real problems and described neighborhood. Glen Hanson, administrator of the clinic, said that the medical office is currently located at Scott and 11th and is open from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Saturday. Mr. Hanson also said that the clinic takes appointments and accepts walk-ins. He then indicated that Dr. Riegler was in the process of increasing the staff and that they were the only physicians in the general area. Mr. Beasely spoke again and discussed the site plan which he said will save several large trees. There was a long discussion about parking and the hours of operation. A motion was then made to grant the conditional use permit for the Riegler Medical Office Building as well as a 20-foot setback on Rock Street and a 10-foot setback on East 10th (the ordinance requirement) conditioned upon the hours of operation being from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m., Monday through Saturday and the owner's ability to work out a satisfactory parking layout with the City's Traffic Engineer. The motion was approved by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 3 absent. (The applicant was reminded that the project also required Historic District Commission review.) July 20, 1987 Item No. 3 - Z-4866 Owner: Rose T. Ruffin Address: 2408 Wolfe Street Description: Lots 11 and 12, Block 9 McCarthy's Addition Zoned: "R-5" Variances Requested: From the area provisions of Section 7-101.7/D.3 to permit an addition with a reduced rear yard setback. Justification: The owner proposes to rehabilitate the existing structure and operate a rooming, lodging, and boarding facility as defined by Subsection 2-101/B/4 of the Zoning Ordinance. In order to ensure passage between all living elements such as dining, kitchen, and bathrooms, it will be necessary to attach the main structure to the existing two story garage in the rear. As a result, the rear yard will have a depth of four feet, a violation of the 25 -foot rear yard setback. Grant of the variance will not adversely affect adjoining property owners and will facilitate completion of this much needed community improvement. Present Use of Property: Rooming and Boarding Facility Proposed Use of Property: Rooming and Boarding Facility STAFF REPORT: A. Engineering Issues None have been identified. B. Staff Analysis The issue before the Board is to grant a setback variance for a rear yard area of 4 feet and not 25 feet as required in the "R-5" district. This request is being made to allow a large addition which will attach July 20, 1987 Item No. 3 - Continued the principle structure to the accessory building located on the back property line. The addition is being constructed to ensure passage between all the various living elements for a rooming and boarding facility, the proposed use. The Zoning Ordinance definition of rooming, lodging, and boarding facility is: A building or establishment which provides for more than four but fewer than sixteen persons and may provide meal service. The building or facility shall be so arranged as to permit passage between all living elements such as dining, kitchen, and bathroom. Detached units or private access accommodations are not permitted. As of this writing, the owner has not provided any information about the contemplated number of residents, but it appears with the addition that the property could accommodate the maximum as defined by the Ordinance. In addition to the Zoning Ordinance, there are other requirements, Building Codes and State Regulations for rooming and boarding facilities and they are probably responsible for dictating the size of the addition. The existing residence is a large two story structure with substantial square footage but it appears that some of it will be lost as living area because of various codes for the proposed use. Another Ordinance problem that the owner faces is caused by trying to utilize the accessory structure as part of the boarding facility and needing to provide passage between all of the areas. This requires a large addition to be constructed to create the necessary structural connection between all the living elements. Because of the location of the accessory building, attaching it to the residence would require a variance since the structure has a nonconforming setback and encroaches into the alley. To accommodate all the regulations that govern this type of use, the proposed addition seems to be a reasonable option but staff feels that certain issues need to be clarified before a final recommendation can be offered. First of all, the owner/applicant should specify the number of persons that will reside at the location and describe the addition in more detail, such as whether it is one or two stories and its exact use. Also, additional justification for the size of the new construction needs to be made, and if it is due to building codes or other regulations. Other issues that need to be addressed are location of parking and identifying open July 20, 1987 Item No. 3 - Continued space areas which are critical for this type of use and its liveablity. In the "R-5" district parking is prohibited in the front yard area, so that must be taken into account when designing the parking areas. The site plan should also provide some landscaping along the north property line to buffer the existing single family use. The site involves two lots so adequate land area is available and overbuilding is not a concern, but to ensure that a separate development does not occur on Lot 12, the property should be replatted into one lot. The proposed new construction with the necessary variance is not unreasonable, but more information about the size needs to be provided and a finalized site plan should be submitted for review. C. Staff Recommendation Until certain issues identified in the analysis are addressed, staff is not prepared to make a recommendation at this time. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant, B.J. McCoy, was present. There were no objectors. Mr. McCoy spoke and said that the proposed construction involves a two-story 1300 square foot addition that will connect the residence to an accessory structure in the rear yard. He said this was necessary to meet the Zoning Ordinance requirement and permit 16 persons subject to approval by the state. Mr. McCoy indicated that the site plan has not been completed, but it will provide 8 to 12 parking spaces and have some buffering along the north property line. Mr. McCoy pointed out to the Board that the owner is in a difficult position because all the necessary approvals were needed before the plan could be finalized. There were some additional comments, and Mr. McCoy said that the boarding house will be a transitional type facility. A motion was made to approve the rear yard setback variance. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 3 absent. July 20, 1987 Item No. 4 - Z-4867 Owner: Greater Second Baptist Church Address: 2901 Pulaski Street Description: The north 50 Feet of Lots 13 and 14 Block 16, Bowman's Addition Zoned: "C-3" Variances Requested: From the area provisions of Section 7-103.3/E to permit a building with a reduced setback. Justification: Only reasonable location available on the lot. Present Use of Property: Parking Proposed Use of Property: Parking and Bus Storage STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues None reported as of this writing. B. Staff Analysis The request is to grant a variance to allow a reduced setback for an accessory type structure, a storage shed for a church bus. A portion of the lot is zoned "C-3" where the building is proposed, and for a corner lot the setback requirements are 25 feet for the two street sides and for the rear yard with a 15 -foot setback for the side yard on the south. In the "C-3" District the same setbacks apply to both principal and accessory structures. The property is currently paved and used for church parking, so the proposed structure will change the use of the site. Decreasing the setbacks for this type of building and use should not have an impact on other properties in the neighborhood and staff supports the proposal. West 29th Street is not a through street and primarily provides access to the parking areas for the church which is located to the northwest of the site under consideration. To the west, there is a large building with residential and nonresidential uses and it has a reasonable rear yard July 20, 1987 Item No. 4 - Continued area, so a reduced setback for this lot will not create any problems. C. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the setback variances for a bus garage/storage structure only. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (7-20-87) Staff informed the Board that the item needed to be deferred because of several deficiencies in the file. A motion was made to defer the request to the August 17, 1987, meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 3 absent. July 20, 1987 Item No. 5 - Z-4868 Owner:A.W. Bradley Address: 723 Cumberland Description: The west 1/2 of Lots 4, 5, and 6, Block 42, Originial City of Little Rock Zoned: "HDR" High Density Residential Request: To grant a Conditional Use Permit for an office and church related educational space Justification: (None required) Present Use of Property: Office Proposed Use of Property: Church Office and Related Educational Space STAFF REPORT: A. Engineering Issues None reported. B. Staff Analysis The proposal before the Board is to grant a Conditional Use Permit for the northeast corner of East 8th and Cumberland which is in the area covered by the Central Little Rock Zoning Ordinance. (This Ordinance authorizes the Board of Adjustment to review and approve Conditional Use Permits within the Central Little Rock Zoning area.) The property is zoned High Density Residential and occupied by a two story building which has been used for office space and classrooms. The proposal involves a change to church related uses such as offices and educational space for Second Baptist Church which is located across Cumberland Street. The land use in the immediate vicinity includes surface parking, residential units for the elderly, office, and several churches. The area is very mixed and the approval of the proposed Conditional Use Permit will not have any impact on the existing development pattern and is compatible with the area. The proposed use modification is very minor and could possibly be considered continuation of the July 20, 1987 Item No. 5 - Continued existing nonconformity, but to avoid any potential problems in the future staff recommended that a Conditional Use Permit be applied for. C. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the Church related uses proposed for 723 Cumberland. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant, Lyndell Lay, was present. There was one interested person in attendance. Mr. Lay said that Second Baptist Church will purchase the property, and the use will almost remain the same. Calvin Brown of the Little Housing Authority spoke and discussed some parking concerns. Mr. Lay said that there were 18 spaces on the lot, and the church has other parking available in the area. He felt that the proposed use should not compound the parking situation. There was some discussion about parking and other issues. A motion was made to grant a conditional use permit for 723 Cumberland. The motion was approved by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 3 absent. July 20, 1987 Item No. 6 - Z-4869 Owner: Virgil Hudson Address: 1720 South Tyler Description: Lot 6, Block 15, Cherry and Cox Addition Zoned: "R-3" Variances Requested: From the area exception provisions of Section 5-102.2.0 to permit a new garage to be located less than 60 feet from a front property line and to occupy more than 30 percent of the required rear yard area. Justification:Size of the lot and being located on a corner. Present Use of Property: Single Family Proposed Use of Property: Single Family STAFF REPORT: A. Engineering Issues No issues have been identified as of this writing. B. Staff Analysis The request is to construct a detached garage and accessory structure in the rear yard. For accessory buildings, the Ordinance requires a 60 -foot setback from a front property line and the structure cannot occupy more than 30 percent of the required rear yard area. The property in question is a corner lot so the 60 -foot setback is required from both South Tyler and West 18th Street. The lot is only 50 feet wide and to meet the setback requirement for an accessory building is impossible and a hardship does exist. Because of being located on a corner and the lot width, any new construction in the rear yard would require some type of variance. Staff feels that the owner has selected the best option available because of beinq compatible with the neighborhood, and also leaves a usable open area between the structures. The proposed garage also July 20, 1987 Item No. 6 - Continued exceeds the permitted rear yard coverage by approximately 30 percent, but that is not an unreasonable variance because of the placement of the garage. One concern that staff does have is potential runoff from the garage and impacting other properties. To avoid any problems, the owner should make every effort to ensure that all water from the structure falls or drains directly onto his property. C. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the necessary variances for the garage structure. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant, Randy Rodewald was present. There were no objectors. Mr. Rodewald said that the runoff will be directed to the alley and then to West 18th. A motion was made to approve the necessary variances as filed. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 3 absent. July 20, 1987 Item No.7 - Z-4871 Owner: Douglas W. and Roxanne J. Becker Address: #9 Bradford Court Description: Lot 100, Lindenwood Addition Zoned: "R-2" Variances Requested: (1) From the area provisions of Section 7-102/D.2 to permit a new garage with a reduced side yard area. (2) From the floodplain restrictions of Paragraph A of Paragraph 4 of Section B of Article 5 of Ordinance No. 14,534 of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas to permit construction of an attached garage and bedroom. Justification: (1) Unusual configuration of the property. (2) The lot is located within the 100 year flood zone, Zone A, and the City's Engineering staff has recommended that the garage be built alongside the house so as to keep it as far out of the floodway as possible. The same is true for the proposed bedroom. Present Use of Property: Single Family Proposed Use of Property: Single Family STAFF REPORT: A. Engineering Issues The floodplain issue and removing any new construction as far away from the floodway as possible. B. Staff Analysis There are two issues associated with this request that July 20, 1987 Item No. 7 - Continued the Board must act on. A setback variance is needed for the proposed garage and a variance from the floodplain restrictions is required for the new construction which includes the garage and a bedroom area. The property is not a conventional lot and because of this staff has determined that a maximum side yard of 8 feet is required. The proposal is to reduce the yard area to 5 feet at the front of the garage and because of the shape of the lot, the setback will be approximately 12 feet at the rear. Only a small portion of the garage is involved with the request and the variance will not have any effect on the adjacent lot. Because of the lot being located in a flood zone, the City's Engineering staff has asked the owner to construct both additions as close to the front of the property as possible to minimize any impacts on the floodway. Staff feels that a true hardship does exist because of the engineering request and the shape of the lot. The floodplain variance is very minor and should not cause any problems. C. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the setback and floodplain variances as requested. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant, Doug Becker, was present. There were no objectors. Mr. Becker said that Mike Batie of the City Engineering staff had requested that the garage be constructed toward the front of the lot and that created the need for the setback variance. A motion was made to grant the setback and floodplain variances as filed. The motion was approved by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 3 absent. July 20, 1987 Item No. 8 - Z-4870 Owner: Vick L. Pannell Address: 2700 Flakewood Street Description: Lot 143, Kingwood Place Addition Zoned: "R- 2" Variances Requested: From the area provisions of Section 7-101.2/D.2 to permit a carport and deck with a reduced side yard setback. Justification: The structure is situated on a pie shaped corner lot and exceeds minimum distance from adjoining residents. Present Use of Property: Single Family Proposed Use of Property: Single Family STAFF REPORT: A. Engineering Issues None reported. B. Staff Analysis This issue is before the Board as the result of an enforcement action because of a neighbor's concern over the distance from the property line. Both the carport and deck are in place, constructed without the benefit of a building permit, and upon inspection it was determined that encroachments into the required side yard existed. In the "R-2" District, the side yard setback is 10 percent of the average width of the lot not to exceed 8 feet. With this particular lot, the setback has been estimated to be 7 to 8 feet. The carport has a setback of approximately 2 feet at the nearest point to the property line. At the front of the structure, the setback increases to 13 feet. With the deck, there is an encroachment of 2 feet for only a very small portion, the steps. The lot is situated at the intersection of two streets but is not a conventional corner lot because it abuts a street on only one side. Because of this configuration, the lot July 20, 1987 Item No. 8 - Continued to the west faces Dalewood and has an adequate yard area. It appears that over the years the west side of the residence has always been used for auto parking because of a driveway constructed along the property line, so the owner has selected the most logical location for the carport. Also, the west side has the greatest amount of land area available to accommodate any new construction on the lot. With both additions, the carport and deck, the intrusions are minor and should not impact the adjoining properties. C. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the variance as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant was present. There were no objectors. There was a brief discussion. A motion was made to approve the variance as requested. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 3 absent. July 20, 1987 Item No. 9 - Z-4872 Owner: Coleman Dairy, Inc. Address: 5801 Asher Avenue Description: Part of the SW 1/4, Section 18, T-1-N, R-12-W, containing 8.50 acres ± Zoned: "I-2" Variances Requested: From the height provisions of Section 7-104.2/D to permit two storage tanks with a height of 70 feet. Justification: Expansion of the milk storage capacities is necessary due to the growth of the business. Present Use of Property: Industrial Proposed Use of Property: Industrial STAFF REPORT: A. Engineering Issues No issues have been reported. B. Staff Analysis The request is to grant a height variance to permit the construction of two storage tank/silos for milk. In the "I-2" District the height restriction is 45 feet and the proposal is to exceed this by 25 feet. The property is situated on Asher Avenue and is the location of a large milk producing operation. The site is heavily developed with buildings and other storage facilities so the proposed tank should not introduce a new visual element to the area. To the west there is a vacant drive-in theatre with a large screen and the remainder of the land use along this segment of Asher is very mixed. Because of the development pattern found in the immediate vicinity, the height variance should not have an impact on other properties. The tank/silos will be placed next to some existing storage containers so the use of the immediate area will remain the same. July 20, 1987 Item No. 9 - Continued C. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the height variance as requested. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The owner, Coleman Dairy, Inc., was represented by Jim Summerlin. There were no objectors. A motion was made to approve the height variance as filed. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 3 absent. July 20, 1987 There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 3:20 p.m. Chairman Secretary Date