Loading...
boa_11 16 1987LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES NOVEMBER 16, 1987 2:00 P.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A quorum was present being nine in number. II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting The Board approved the minutes of the previous meeting as mailed. III. Members Present: George Wells John McDaniel Joe Norcross Jim Mitchell Ronald Woods Ronald Pierce Cynthia Alderman Thomas McGowan, Chairman Rex Crain City Attorney: Stephen Giles November 16, 1987 Item No. A - Z-4919 Owner: Mike Montgomery Address: #77 Eldorado Drive Description: Lot 5, Pleasant Valley, 22nd Hole Addition Zoned: "R-2" Single Family Variances Requested: (1) From the rear and side yard setback provisions of Section 5-102 (A) 2.(e) to permit construction of wooden decking around a swimming pool. (2) From the 30 percent land coverage provisions, Section 5-102.(A) 2.c to permit construction of a deck around a swimming pool. Justification: We are building a swimming pool in a limited area, and the extra decking would greatly benefit the installation and convenience to the owner. Present Use of Property: Single Family Proposed Use of Property: Single Family STAFF REPORT: A. Engineering Issues There are none to be reported at this time. B. Staff Analysis What the applicant is proposing before the Board of Adjustment is the construction of extra wooden decking to surround a pool that is to be built. The extra wooden decking would be located on the south and west property lines. The ordinance states that an accessory structure has to be at least three feet on the side and rear property line. The applicant is also requesting a waiver of the 30 percent rear yard provision because with the addition of the extra wooden decking the rear yard would occupy more than 30 percent and the ordinance states that no more than 30 percent for an accessory structure. November 16, 1987 Item No. A - Continued The property in question has located on it a two-story brick and frame house. It is located below the street level of Eldorado and abuts the Pleasant Valley Golf Course and a greenbelt strip. To the east and west of the property, there are residential uses. The applicant has secure approval of the request from the Property Owners' Association, and staff has no problems with the request. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending approval of the application as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant was not in attendance nor had the applicant met the notice requirement. The Board then made a motion to defer this application until the November 16, 1987, meeting. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (11-16-87) Mike Nolan of Nolan's Pools represented the applicant. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the Board that there was a problem with the notice requirement due to the fact that at least two signatures were not obtained in accordance with the ten -day requirement. The Chairman then addressed the City Attorney for guidance as to what the Board should do in regard to this matter. The City Attorney, Stephen Giles, informed the Board that there was no legal reason as to why they couldn't. The Board then went ahead and discussed the case. Mike Nolan indicated that he no problems with the recommendation of staff. A motion was then made to approve the application as recommended by staff. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent. November 16, 1987 Item No. 1 - Z-4154-A Owner: Conestoga Wood Products Specialists Address: 700 Calhoun Street Description: Long Legal Zoned: "I-3" Heavy Industrial Variance Requested: From the area regulation provisions of Section 7-104.3 to permit a new building with reduced side yard setbacks and the review of an overall site plan. Justification: There is a need to clean up the lot and provide for additional storage. Present Use of Property: Commercial Proposed Use of Property: Commercial STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues B. Staff Analysis Two years ago, this applicant came before the Board of Adjustment seeking a waiver to the parking requirements of the ordinance. At that time, the requested waiver was approved conditioned that it be for a time period of two years and additional improvements or changes in the plan be reviewed by the Board of Adjustment or Planning Commission. The applicant is again coming before the Board for a waiver from the requirements in the "I-3" Heavy Industrial zone and to adhere to the stipulations placed on the last approval by the Board of Adjustment. Two years ago, the issue was parking and now what the applicant proposal involves is the construction of a building to serve as storage on the same site of the last approved parking area. In a "I-3" Heavy Industrial District, the requirement of the ordinance is that the side yard setbacks be 30 feet, and the applicant is proposing 17.5 feet. Also, the applicant November 16, 1987 Item No. 1 - Continued is including in the request an overall site plan review of the entire property site. The site plan shows those buildings that will be removed, where the new parking will be located, a commitment by the applicant for certain areas to remain storage only, and the meeting of landscaping especially on the frontage off 6th Street. The site in question is part of an overall area that encompasses several lots. The business is that of wood products; therefore, a considerable amount of lumber is stored on the site. To the north of the site across 6th Street is the East Little Rock Complex. The applicant's new site plan will bring in-house that storage of lumber presently fronting the complex which will enhance that area. Staff feels that the applicant is displaying some concern in regard to making the proposed and existing area more attractive as well as making of commitments to continue in the same direction with future site developments. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval with the understanding by the applicant that: (a) if any further site development is planned for the committed open space area, it will be necessary to bring it to the attention of the Planning Department, (b) the meeting of the landscaping requirements on -site, and (c) the Board of Adjustment having continuous involvement in any future plans that cannot be addressed administratively. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (November 16, 1987) The applicant was represented by Mr. Sam Davis. Also in attendance was Bruce Zimmer, an employee of Conestoga. There were several persons present requesting clarification as to what was being proposed at the site. Mr. Davis was asked if he felt that there would be any problem for the applicant to meet the requirements of staff, and Mr. Davis stated, no. Ms. Iola Romans, who has property at 610 and 612 Calhoun Street wanted some clarification in regard to how the request of the applicant would affect her property. After Mr. Davis explained the application to Mrs. Romans, it was then stated by staff that the address of 700 Calhoun Street was the address given the entire site of Conestoga by David Hathcock of the City of Little Rock and the application in question would not affect her property at this time. November 16, 1987 Item No. 1 - Continued Inasm»ch as there were other persons present who also wanted clarification of the application, the Chairman then asked Mr. Davis if it was okay with him if the application was moved to the end of the agenda, and in the meantime, he could take those persons with questions to one of the offices in the Planning Department and address their concerns. Mr. Davis agreed and a motion to that affect was made and passed. Mr. Davis then came back before the Board for action on the application. The Chairman asked Mr. Davis if the concerns had been resolved, and Mr. Davis said, yes. Some of the concerns were where the new building would be located, information regarding other areas that Conestoga does not own, the possible noise, and the clearing up of the stack lumber on 6th Street. It was then asked what the egress and ingress were, and Mr. Davis stated that the only opening would be to the south side. There would be no traffic or curb cuts on 6th Street. A fence is presently on the frontage to 6th Street and probably would remain. Staff stated that in light of the fact that staff had encouraged the Little Rock School District to make significant improvements to 6th Street on the north of their site, staff would like for the record to be noted to remind the City Engineer of that fact which is the realignment and see if there possibly should be modifications made to this application in line with what staff required of the applicant to the north. A motion was then made to approve the variance subject to the preconditions specified in staff's recommendation. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent. November 16, 1987 Item No. 2 - Z-4926 Owner: Douglas Fisher Address: 7923 Lassie Lane Description: Lot 26, Block 2, Westlawn Addition Zoned: "R-2" Single Family Variance Requested: From the subdivision provisions of Section 37.10 to permit an addition to cross a platted building line. Justification: (1) The need for additional living area for an elderly parent; therefore, the present garage will have to be enclosed. (2 ) We will also need to provide for a covered area for our vehicles to protect them from vandalism. Present Use of Property: Single Family Proposed Use of Property: Single Family STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues B. Staff Analysis In order for any platted building line to be encroached upon, a building line waiver has to be obtained. This waiver is obtained first of all by coming before the Board of Adjustment which will make a decision whether to endorse or not endorse the modiication to the platted building line. At this time, the applicant is seeking out permission to encroach into a 25-foot platted building line five feet for the construction of an addition of a garage. The lot in question is large in appearance. There is a large platted curb at the front or north and west sides of the lot where Lassie Lane and Danwood intersect. November 16, 1987 Item No. 2 - Continued There is an existing two-story brick and frame structure on the lot. The proposed new addition will be on the west side where there is already an existing concrete drive. Surrounding the lot on all sides is residential usage. The encroachment to the west frontage on Danwood would not impair any vision from the intersection. Because of the fact this lot has such a large platting curve from the intersection of Lassie Lane and Danwood and the need for the additional living space, staff feels that the applicant does, in fact, possess a hardship. It is incumbent of the applicant to understand that if this building line waiver is endorsed by the Board of Adjustment, it will then be necessary to comply with two additional steps in the process of obtaining a building line waiver which are: (a) the submittal of a properly drafted amended Bill of Assurance to the Planning Office, and (b) the filing of a one lot replat at the County Clerk's Office and Planning Department. It isn't until these two additional steps are completed that the total building line waiver is considered completed and any additional permits can be issued. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval conditioned upon the applicant submitting to the Planning Department a properly drafted amended Bill of Assurance and the filing of a one lot replat in the Planning Office. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (November 16, 1987) The applicant and his wife were in attendance at the meeting. There were no objectors present. The Chairman asked the applicant if there would be any problems meeting the requirements of staff, the applicant responded, no. A motion was then made to approve the variance request with the conditions as specified by staff. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent. November 16, 1987 Item No. 3 - Z-4921 Owner: Donald Gene Pruett Address: 4223 Zion Street Description: Lot 12, Block 66, John Barrow Addition Zoned: "R -3" Single Family Variance Requested: From the height and area exceptions provisions of Section 5- 102.2/C to permit an accessory structure to be less than 60 feet from the front property line. Justification: Because of the lot size and to protect my cars from the weather. Present Use of Property: Single Family Proposed Use of Property: Single Family STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues B. Staff Analysis This issue is coming before the Board of Adjustment because of an enforcement action. The applicant has constructed a garage that is located less than 60 feet from the front property line on West 43rd Street. The actual distance is 25 feet, and the garage is completed all but for a little finishing touches. The structure is located in the John Barrow Addition which is zoned "R-3" and the lot is 47.72 feet in size, which makes it a hardship on the applicant to meet the required 60 feet. Surrounding the structure on all sides are residential usage. There is located along the south side of the property a fence that adds to the appearance of the lot and gives more separation from the south property line and the street on West 43rd. November 16, 1987 Item No. 3 - Continued STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of the variance as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (November 16, 1987) The applicant was present at the meeting. There were no objectors in the audience. The Chairman asked the applicant if there were any problems with the recommendation of staff, the applicant stated, no. A motion was then made to approve the application as filed. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent. November 16, 1987 Item No. 4 - Z-4927 Owner: James E. Fennell Address: 9217 Asher Avenue Description: Part of the SE 1/4 on the NE 1/4, Section 22, T-1-N, R-13-W, Pulaski County, Arkansas Zoned: "C-3" General Commercial Variance Requested: From the off - street parking requirement provision of Section 8-101 to permit a waiver from the parking design standards. Justification: (1) We do not want to change the parking area because of the unusual lot configuration. (2) The Highway Department intends to build a four-lane highway in this area, and we not know how it will affect our parking. Present Use of Property: Commercial Proposed Use of Property: Commercial STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues B. Staff Analysis The issue before the Board of Adjustment is a waiver from the parking design standards as specified in the Zoning Ordinance. What the applicant is seeking to have granted is a delay in the striping of the parking area for a veterinarian clinic. The clinic is located at the intersection of Asher Avenue and Arkansas State Highway No. 5. At some point in the near future, the City of Little Rock and the Arkansas State Highway Department plans to widen Arkansas State Highway No. 5 and will require of the applicant some dedication of right-of-way. At this time, neither the City of November 16, 1987 Item No. 4 - Continued Little Rock or the Arkansas State Highway Department has any indication as to what amount of right-of-way will be requested. The applicant has stated that there is no problem with bringing the present gravel lot up to ordinance standards but feels that since it isn't known how much right-of-way will be taken because of the expansion of Arkansas State Highway No. 5, it would present a hardship to complete the parking design and landscaping at this time. At present, the parking is basically to the front and west side. The applicant is required to provide four parking spaces. Surrounding the property are commercial usages. A new addition is being added to the existing structure which is included in the required number of spaces but is not a part of this application in regards to setback requirements. The lot configuration is an unusual shape. The present structure is a small brick building. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of the waiver from the parking design standards conditioned upon the applicant: (a) meeting the requirement in the ordinance for the paving of the parking area, and (b) an agreement being worked out between the Arkansas State Highway Department and the City of Little Rock's Engineering Department with the applicant for the dedication of right-of-way not to exceed ten feet. This agreement has to be achieved before the final inspection can be done for the new addition. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (November 16, 1987) Mr. Fennel, the applicant, and Mr. Earl Fox, the contractor, were in attendance. There were no objectors present. The applicant was asked by the Chairman if there were comments or questions in regard to the recommendation of staff. Mr. Fennel responded that he had no problems with Part A of the recommendation, but due to the fact that no one knows at this time what amount of right-of-way will be required for dedication, it will place a hardship on him to agree to ten feet because it would take a good portion of what is now the existing parking lot. The Chairman then asked staff if they had any knowledge or information to share in regard to Mr. Fennel's concern. Staff stated that typically the Board of Adjustment has asked the applicant for dedication of the right-of-way that the Master Street Plan has specified, and November 16, 1987 Item No. 4 - Continued in this case, staff felt that the recommendation would put the burden on the Arkansas State Highway Department to specify how much right-of-way would be needed. There was discussion among staff and the Board about whether the Board had the right to waive any of the requirements of curb and gutter or the landscaping requirements. Staff informed the Board that the requirements for curb and gutter as well as landscaping come under different ordinances. All the Board at this time can do is not require the applicant to meet the requirement because the requirement still could be placed on the building permit. So, in other words, the Board could only delay the requirements at this time. The Board felt that since the Arkansas State Highway Department has no idea when the right-of-way will be needed nor how much, it will present a problem for the applicant to meet the requirement of B as stated in the staff recommendation. It was then stated for clarity what exactly the Board could have done at this meeting which was a delay for the parking design interior standards. But, the applicant would still need to meet the upgrading of the lot and also the reaching of some agreement with the Arkansas State Highway Department and the City Engineering Department on the amount of right-of-way to be dedicated and street improvements. A motion was then made to permit a delay from the parking design standards. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent. November 16, 1987 Item No. 5 - Z-4928 Owner: Randy L. Dowd Address: 330 North Summit Avenue Description: Lot 18, Block 2, Virginia Heights Addition Zoned: "R-3" Variances Requested: (1) From the height and area exception provisions of Section 5-102/2.C to permit an addition less than 60 feet from the front property line. (2) From the height and area exception regulations provision of Section 5-102/2.C to permit a waiver from the 30 percent rear yard coverage. Justification: This site is the most reasonable and the streets are too narrow for on-street parking. Present Use of Property: Single Family Proposed Use of Property: Single Family STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues B. Staff Analysis This application is coming before the Board of Adjustment for the granting of a variance from the zoning requirements to allow for an accessory structure to be three feet from the front property line on Riverfront Avenue. The requirement of the ordinance states that an accessory structure has to be 60 feet from both front property lines when the property has two street frontages. November 16, 1987 Item No. 5 - Continued What the applicant is proposing is the construction of a garage that will be accessed by construction of a concrete drive that will cross an existing ditch on Riverfront Avenue. There is also a request for a waiver from the 30 percent rear yard coverage which cannot be achieved because the proposed structure would be more than what is allowed. The requirement of the ordinance does present the applicant with a hardship because of the corner lot having two front yards and the size of the lot being only 50 feet. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of the variance as requested. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (November 16, 1987) The applicant was in attendance. There were no objectors present. The applicant was asked by the Chairman if there was any problem with the recommendation of staff. The applicant stated, no. Therefore, a motion was then made to approve the variance as requested. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent. November 16, 1987 Item No. 6 - Z-4935 Owner: Brown and Brown Construction Address: 14701 Shepherd Avenue Description: Lot 1, Secluded Hills Addition Zoned: "R-2" Single Family Variance Requested: From the subdivision provisions of Section 37.10/C to permit an addition to cross a platted building line. Justification: Due to the error made by both the City inspector and the builder, the house was built over the building line. Present Use of Property: Single Family Proposed Use of Property: Single Family STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues B. Staff Analysis The issue being present before the Board of Adjustment is that of a building line waiver. It is the task of the Board to determine whether to endorse or not endorse modification to the building line waiver. The required building line on the front or north should be 22 feet and the side yard on the east should also be 25 feet but is 20 feet 4 inches. The structure is already built and ready for occupancy. Measuring tape was run by the City inspector and the builder at the time the foundation was approved for stakes on the property. It was not discovered until the final survey that the house was over the building line. The house in question is located in one of the newly developed areas of the City. There is residential use surrounding the site, and even though the house is built across the platted building line, it does not take away from the appearance within the subdivision when compared to other existing houses. November 16, 1987 Item No. 6 - Continued The applicant must understand that if the Board of Adjustment approves the building line waiver, it is then incumbent of the applicant to complete two additional steps which are: (1) the submittal of a properly drafted amended Bill of Assurance to the Planning Department, and (b) the filing of a one lot replat in the Planning Office and County Clerk's Office. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval conditioned upon the applicant submitting a properly drafted amended Bill of Assurance and the filing of a one lot replat in the Planning Department. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (November 16, 1987) The applicant was represented by Marian Birmingham. No objectors were in attendance at the meeting. Mrs. Birmingham was asked if she had any problems or concerns with the staff's recommendation, she stated, no. A motion was then made to approve the building line waiver with the normal conditions attached as stated in staff's recommendation. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent. November 16, 1987 Item No. 7 - Z-4939 Owner: Dennis Blevins Address: 1015 Beechwood Avenue Description: Lots 13 and 14, Block 11, Hillcrest Addition Zoned: "R-2" Single Family Variance Requested: (1) From the area regulation provisions of Sections 7-101.2/D.2 and 3 to permit reduced rear and side yard setbacks. (2) From the height and area exception regulation provisions of Section 5-102/2.C to permit a waiver from the 30 percent rear yard coverage. Justification: (1) There is no safe place to park our vehicles due to the fact our City street is in the 1100 block of Beechwood Avenue and is very narrow. (2) There is either potential for either bodily or property damage any time we are coming or going from our home. (3 ) This section of Beechwood is located between North Lookout and South Lookout; therefore, it is heavily traveled because it is the shortest route for traffic coming from North Lookout to access the Hillcrest area. (4) Our home being well over 60 years had the scrutiny of needed storage space, and therefore, like one of the necessities of life, a place to store and and, of course, a place to keep our vehicles out of the elements and be able to enter our home in confort and safety, rain or shine. November 16, 1987 Item No. 7 - Continued Present Use of Property: Single Family Proposed Use of Property: Single Family STAFF REPORT: A. Engineering Issues B. Staff Analysis This item is before the Board of Adjustment because of an enforcement action. The variances in question are a side yard setback of four feet and the requirement by the ordinance is eight feet; also included is a rear yard setback of three feet and the requirement of the ordinance is 25 feet. Due to the fact of the addition encompassing a large portion of the rear yard, the 30 percent rear yard coverage is added to the request. The applicant has already constructed a two-car carport and storage. The location of this application is in one of the older established neighborhoods. Residential usage surrounds the property and the street, Beechwood Avenue is narrow in width. The structure sets atop a hill, and the alley to the south is open and is used as a drive to access the existing structure as well as for use by the neighbor to the south. Mature landscaping surrounding the property with some off-street parking being used on the west side in front of the house. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval conditioned upon the two-car carport and storage area never being enclosed. BOARD OF ADJUSMTMENT: (November 16, 1987) Mr. Dennis Blevins, the applicant, was present. There were no objectors in attendance. Mr. Blevins was asked if he any problems with the recommendation of staff, and he stated, no. A motion was then made to approve the variance with the condition that the two-car carport and storage area never be enclosed. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent. November 16, 1987 Item No. 8 - Other Matters Approval of the 1988 Board of Adjustment calendar of meeting dates. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (November 16, 1987) The Board unanimously approved the calendar dates for 1988. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CALENDAR OF MEETING DATES 1988 FILING DATE LEGAL AD MEETING 1/2 12/28/87 1/08/88 1/19/88 1/25/88 2/11/88 2/22/88 2/29/88 3/11/88 3/21/88 3/28/88 4/07/88 4/18/88 4/25/88 5/05/88 5/16/88 5/23/88 6/09/88 6/20/88 6/27/88 7/07/88 7/18/88 7/25/88 8/04/88 8/15/88 8/22/87 9/08/88 9/19/88 9/26/88 10/06/88 10/17/88 10/24/88 11/10/88 11/21/88 11/28/88 12/08/88 12/19/88 12/27/88 1/05/89 1/16/89 NOTE: 1/ All meetings to be held at 2:00 P.M. unless otherwise changed by the Board. 2/ Agenda meetings to be held at 1:30 P.M. in the Board Conference Room on meeting date. NOTICE: AN INTERPRETER WILL BE PROVIDED FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED UPON REQUEST. REQUESTS SHOULD BE MADE TO THE OFFICE OF COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AT LEAST TWO WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULED MEETING DATE. November 16, 1987 There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 2:50 p.m. Chairman Planning Director 12-23-87 Date