boa_12 21 1987LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES
DECEMBER 21, 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 last
meeting as mailed.
III. Members Present: Thomas McGowan, Chairman
Rex Crain
Ronald Pierce
Joe Norcross
George Wells
Cynthia Alderman
Ronald Woods
John McDonald
Jim Mitchell
IV. City Attorney Present: Pat Benton
December 21, 1987
Item No. A - Z-4877-A
Owner: I-30 Industrial Park Rentals
Address: 6900 Block of Allied Way
Description: Lots 4, 5, and 6, I-30 Industrial Park
Zoned: "I-2"
Variance
Requested: From the floodplain restrictions of
Paragraph A of Section B of Article 5,
Ordinance No. 14,534 to permit
construction of new buildings in the
floodway.
Justification: Due to the shape, size, and
configuration of the lot.
Present Use of
Property:
Proposed Use
of Property:
STAFF REVIEW
A.
Engineering Issues
Issues reported by Engineering will be discussed in the
staff analysis.
B. Staff Analysis
The issue before the Board of Adjustment is a variance
to allow for the construction of new buildings within
the floodway. The ordinance states that (a) within the
floodplain (100-year flood elevation), there exists an
area or the channel or stream bea called the floodway
and so designated on the 'type 15 flood insurance study.
No building or structure shall be allowed within said
floodway; (b) in order to build or operate any
structure or use, it must be an allowable use among
those specified as allowable uses in the base or
principal zoning classification, provided further so
such use shall adversely affect the capacity of the
channels or floodway of any designated creek, stream,
tributary to the main stream, drainage ditch, or other
drainage facility or system; and provided still
further, no such use or combination of uses shall raise
the level of the one hundred (100) year flood a
distance of one (1) foot.
December 21, 1987
Item No. A - Continued
The site in question is located in the I-30 Industrial
Park, and the applicant has filed with the Planning
Commission for consideration of a Planned Unit
Development. In January of this year, the Army Corps
of Engineers redesigned the boundaries for the floodway
in this area of the City, which placed the entire site
in the floodway. Prior to the redesign by the Corps,
the applicant had taken steps to put in place the
existing fill on the property to raise it out of the
then floodway boundaries. The applicant purchased the
property in October 1986, for development as a small
business Industrial Park prior to the revisions of the
floodway maps.
Engineering reports that the applicant has demonstrated
a hardship due to the fact of the revision of the
floodway map in January of this year by the Army Corps
of Engineers and the existing fill on the property
being done prior to the revision. Engineering's
recommendation of approval is conditioned upon the
following: (1) The floor elevations being at least 2
to 3 feet above that which is required by the 100 year
flood level. (2) That any further filling of the site
must come from the boundaries along the bank of Fourche
Creek. Engineering's intent is for there to be no fill
brought on-site from outside of the property.
Before the Planning Commission can take action on the
proposed Planned Unit Development, the Board of
Adjustment has to determine whether relief to the
applicant can be allowed for the proposed construction
in question, and if the variance is granted, the
applicant will be required to deed that property which
is in the floodway to the City.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval subject to and pursuant of the
conditions as reported in the staff analysis and recommended
by Engineering. Also meeting of the necessary requirements
of deeding to the City of Little Rock that property located
in the floodway.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (8-17-87)
The Board of Adjustment deferred this item until the
September 21, 1987, meeting due to the fact that neither the
applicant nor a representative was present at the meeting.
Also, the applicant had not returned to staff copies of the
notification requirements. There were objectors present at
the meeting. A motion for deferral was made and passed by a
vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent.
December 21, 1987
Item No. A - Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (9-21-87)
The applicant had requested a 60-day deferral. A motion was
made to allow for the deferral and passed by a vote of
5 ayes, 0 noes, 4 absent.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (12-21-87)
The Board was informed by staff that the applicant had
requested for this application to be withdrawn. A motion
was then made to withdraw the application. The motion
passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 1 - Z-1178-A
Owner: Arkansas Radiator Works, Inc.
Address: 3901 Asher Avenue
Description: Part of Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Block 1,
Dixon Mill's Addition to the City of
Little Rock
Zoned: "C-3" General Commercial
Variance From the area regulations
Requested: provisions of Section 7-103.3/E.3 to
permit an addition with a reduced rear
yard setback.
Justification: We are requesting the variance due to
the angle of the lot and in order to
have a depth of 30 feet which is
required to accommodate full-size cars,
a work bench at the rear of the
building, and a safe area for employees
to use in removing grills and radiators.
Present Use of
Property: Commercial
Proposed Use
of Property: Commercial
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
None to be reported at this time.
B. Staff Analysis
The request before the Board of Adjustment is for a
rear yard setback of 7 feet for the construction of an
addition to the west side of the present structure on
the site. The use is commercial in an "I-2" zone which
requires the setback to be 25 feet on the rear. The
newly constructed addition would provide four new
stalls to the present one-stall structure that is on
the site. To the rear of the property there is a hill
with mature vegetation, to the west and north there is
commercial use and to the south there is office use.
The site fronts onto Asher Avenue which is located in
an area of industrial and commercial uses primarily.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 1 - Continued
The applicant is proposing to upgrade the existing
parking area according to the requirements of the
Ordinance.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending approval subject to the applicant
meeting the parking requirements and design as well as the
requirements of the Landscaping Ordinance.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (12-21-87)
Mr. Edward Fryar represented the applicant. There was no
one in attendance that wished to object to the request. A
motion was made to approve the requested variance as
recommended by staff. The motion passed by a vote of 8
ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 2 - Z-2668-A
Owner: Hillhaven, Inc.
Address: 5720 West Markham
Description: Long Legal
Zoned: "O-3" General Office
Variance From the area regulations provisions
Requested: of Section 7-102.3/D.1 to permit an
addition to encroach within the front
property lines.
Justification: 1. Because many of our residents are
transported to and from the
facility by means of ambulance and
stretcher, the awning on Pierce
Street provides them with safety and
protection from the natural
elements.
2. The awning on Markham was installed
to extend our patio area making it
more usable by our residents. Due
to the intense sun and rain, without
this awning patients would not be
able to enjoy the out -of- doors.
Present Use of
Property: Nursing Home
Proposed Use
of Property: Nursing Home
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
None to be reported at this time.
B. Staff Analysis
This application is before the Board of Adjustment
because of an enforcement action. At issue is the
encroachment of two already-constructed awnings within
the front yard setbacks. The site in question is at
the corner of Pierce and Markham Streets. The awning
on Pierce is constructed over an existing driveway.
The awning encroaches within the front yard setback
23.5 feet, leaving a front yard of 2.5 feet.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 2 - Continued
There is a sidewalk and curb separating the front yard
from the street. The awning on Markham Street covers
an existing concrete patio area. The patio area has a
front yard setback of 22.5 feet which makes the awning
the same and leaves the front yard setback to be 3.5
feet.
The site has on it a four-story brick structure that is
zoned "O-3" and used as a nursing home. There is
mature landscaping on the site and the awnings do not
block any of the views from either Pierce or Markham
Street. To the south of the property is St. Vincent's
Medical Center, to the west there is an office use and
to the north and east there are two parking lots.
Staff does feel that the applicant possess a hardship
because of the corner lot provisions as set out in the
Ordinance.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending approval subject to, at which time the
awnings become damaged because of the weather or other
factors, the applicant is to replace, repair or make
arrangements to remove the structures.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (12-21-87)
Mr. Jim Ives, the Administrator for Hillhaven, spoke on
behalf of the application. There were no objectors in
attendance. Mr. Ives was asked if he had any problems with
staff's recommendation. He stated he had none. 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.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 3 - Z-4941
Owner: Steve Turner
Address: 3001 Elam
Description: Lots 7 and 8, Block 206, John Barrow
Addition
Zoned: "R-3" Single Family
Variance From the height and area exceptions
Requested: provisions of Section 5-102 /C to
permit an accessory structure to be
less than 60 feet from the front
property line.
Justification: My reason for wanting the garage in
this location is because of the grade
and if I place it anywhere else I would
have to bring in dirt to build up the
location.
Present Use of
Property: Single Family
Proposed Use
of Property: Single Family
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
None to be reported at this time.
B. Staff Analysis
What is being brought before the Board of Adjustment at
this time is a request for the construction of a garage
that will be 34 feet from the front property line on
West 30th Street. The Ordinance states that an
accessory structure, which this will be, on a corner
lot has to be 60 feet from the front yard setback.
Presently on the property is a one-story frame house
with an attached one-car carport. The applicant has
recently purchased a second car and the garage is
needed to protect the car from the weather. The
request is compatible with the surrounding houses in
the neighborhood. The applicant does in fact have a
hardship due to the corner lot requirement of two front
yards. A new driveway will be constructed to access
the garage.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 3 - Continued
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending approval of the variance as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (12-21-87)
Steve Turner, the applicant, was in attendance at the
meeting. There were no objectors present. A motion was
made and passed to approve the variance as filed. The vote
being 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 4 - Z-4944
Owner: Robert J. Shell
Address: 320 South Gaines Street
Description: The South 30 feet of Lot 8 and the
North 3 feet of Lot 7, Block 133,
Original City of Little Rock
Zoned: "C-4" Open Display
Variances 1. From the parking provisions of
Requested: Section 8-101.2/6 to permit a
waiver from the parking
requirements.
2. From the area regulations provisions
of Section 7-103.4/E.2 for reduced
side yard and Section 7-103.4/E.3
for a reduced rear yard setback.
Justification: A variance is being requested in order
to expand the existing structure for
more space.
Present Use of
Property: Office
Proposed Use
of Property: Office
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
None to be reported at this time.
B. Staff Analysis
The application before the Board of Adjustment is for
approval to allow the construction of a second floor
over a parking area to be attached to a two-story
office building and for a waiver from the parking
requirements for an office use.
What the applicant is proposing is to add a second
floor with approximately 2,112 sq. ft. to the existing
building. This will be accomplished by constructing a
second floor over the existing parking area and still
allow five parking spaces as currently used. The
addition will increase the size of the structure to
4,686 sq. ft. In order to construct the second floor,
the applicant need approval to encroach into the
existing already nonconforming side yard setback which
is required by Ordinance to be 15 feet and the
December 21, 1987
Item No. 4 - Continued
applicant wants to have zero feet and the rear yard
which is required by Ordinance to be 25 feet and the
applicant wishes to have 5 feet. The second floor
expansion will primarily be created by columns at
ground level.
In order to meet the requirements of the Ordinance for
the required parking spaces of which are 17 for an
office use, the applicant is proposing to continue
leasing the present 12 spaces from a lot less than 300
feet from the site and with the five parking spaces
on -site the requirement would be met.
The site in question is located in the downtown
district. To the north of the site there is a
commercial use, to the east there are two parking lots,
to the south office use, and to the west across a 20
foot alley there is a parking lot and two-story
structure. Directly adjacent to this site there is a
two -story office use that is a converted apartment
building.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff at this time would like to approach the Board without
a specific approval or denial of the request by the
applicant. We feel that from the viewpoint that the current
ownership's desire for expansion of the existing structure
would have been appropriate if it was without the variance,
but in regards to setbacks and parking the present Ordinance
"C-4" zoning is not appropriate for a downtown district, but
for a highway commercial district. We further would like
for the Board to provide staff with some policy direction as
to variances on parking in the downtown district. What
staff is requesting of the Board is some input or direction
on how to approach present or future requests by either
encouraging or discouraging when advising applicants.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (12-21-87)
Mr. Fred Perkins represented the applicant. There were no
objectors in attendance at the meeting. Mr. Perkins spoke
in regard to the present zoning for the property being
inappropriate for the present use on the property, but even
with an attempt to downzone the property, the requested
variance will still need to be obtained. During the agenda
session, there was discussion in regard to the off-site
parking that the applicant was proposing. Mr. Perkins
stated that for the additional space that the applicant was
requesting the applicant had no choice but to lease the
parking spaces. The 12 leased parking spaces are within 300
December 21, 1987
Item No. 4 - Continued
feet of the present structure and with the five on-site, the
required 17 parking spaces could be met. The Chairman,
Mr. McGowan, asked staff if there had been any thought given
to providing applicants with a particular type of lease
agreement. Staff stated that there have been times when the
Board has requested a certain period of time to be attached
to lease agreements, but the Planning Office does not
provide applicants with a particular type.
Bob Shell, the applicant, addressed the Board with some
additional information. Mr. Shell stated that since the
conception of the business there have been physical
restraints on them because of the limited space for parking
available in this area. Presently he has five parking
spaces but possibly could have eight, and with the leased 12
spaces the requirement for parking will be justified more so
without the addition. Over the past years with new
technical advances in his area of business, the additional
space is needed in order to meet the demand of the increase
in business. Mr. Shell also presented a letter from
National Garage that stated that if in the future additional
parking spaces are needed, National Garage could provide the
applicant with them. If a particular time period needs to
be placed on the lease agreement, Mr. Shell stated that he
would be willing to comply. The present leased parking
spaces are provided on a month-to-month lease.
A motion was made to approve the application subject to the
applicant providing a lease agreement for a period of five
years for the parking. The motion passed by a vote of 9
ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent.
The Board also agreed is in a future agenda session to discuss
in detail some policy on addressing the need for off-site
parking for future applications with the problem of meeting
the parking in the downtown area.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 5 - Z-4947
Owner: Markham Street Baptist Church
Address: 9601 W. Markham Street
Description: The North 200 feet of the East 136.6
feet of Lot 5, West Markham Street
Subdivision
Zoned: "R-2" Single Family
Variances From the off-street parking provisions
Requested: of Section 8-101-H.2 to permit a parking
lot in an "R-2" zone.
Justification: The proposed parking lot will provide
us with parking spaces south of Markham
Street, thereby easing the existing and
anticipated safety concerns of the
church.
Present Use of
Property: Single Family
Proposed Use
of Property: Parking Lot
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
Engineering is recommending the applicant either
eliminate parking space No. 37 on the sketch or provide
for the placement of a bumper block between parking
spaces Nos. 37, 36 and 26. There possibly will be
street improvements required for Wedgewood Road,
therefore the parking design will have to be reviewed,
approved and signed off by Engineering.
B. Staff Analysis
The request before the Board of Adjustment is for a
variance from the off-street parking requirement to
allow for a parking lot on a lot zoned for residential
use. The site in question is to the east of Markham
Street Baptist Church across Wedgewood. At present
there is a one-story frame house on the lot and
surrounding the site is mixed uses of commercial,
residential and some office. There is a gravel drive
that fronts on Markham Street. If the variance is
approved, the applicant is proposing for 156 parking
spaces to help alleviate the concern of safety for
church members who presently utilize an existing
parking lot on the north of Markham Street, which also
December 21, 1987
Item No. 5 - Continued
presently is up for sale and has approximately 50
parking spaces.
Staff feels that the applicant has attempted to provide
for a proper design for the conversion while preserving
the large, mature trees that are presently on the site.
The Ordinance states that off-street parking should be
provided within 300 feet of the principal structure.
This being a corner lot, there will not be any impact
as to the obstruction of view or the traffic flow to
either Markham Street or Wedgewood.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval with the understanding of the
applicant that the requirements of Engineering will need to
be met.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (12-21-87)
Mr. Carl Slocum of the Long -Range Planning Committee of the
Markham Street Baptist Church represented the application.
The Chairman asked if there were any problems with the
applicant meeting staff's recommendation, Mr. Slocum stated
there were none. No objectors were present at the meeting.
A motion was then made to approve the request subject to the
Engineering requirements which includes street improvements
on Wedgewood. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0
noes, 0 absent, 1 abstention (Rex Crain).
December 21, 1987
Item No. 6 - Z-4948
Owner: Richard H. Blank, Jr.
Address: 5525 N. Grandview
Description: Lot 59, Grandview Addition to the City
of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas
Zoned: "R-2" Single Family
Variance From the area regulations provisions of
Requested: Section 7-101.2/D.2 to permit an
addition with a reduced side yard.
Justification: A variance is warranted in order to
allow the new den to include the
existing garage space and continue the
east building line to the south.
Present Use of
Property: Single Family
Proposed Use
of Property: Single Family
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
None to be reported at this time.
B. Staff Analysis
The request before the Board of Adjustment is for the
construction of a new den addition onto the southeast
corner of the existing structure. The addition will
adjoin and align with an existing garage structure
which at present time is 7 feet 8 inches from the
property line. The addition will have a 15 foot 0 inch
section which will protrude 2 feet out making an
exterior wall at this area 5 feet 8 inches from the
side property line. Also included in the construction
plan is a new concrete stoop approximately 3 feet tall
that will be added to the east side of the house. The
stoop itself protrudes 3 feet 6 inches from the
existing house and has steps on each end. It will also
have a canvas awning directly above it.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 6 - Continued
Staff feels that the applicant's request is of minimum
impact because of the intrusion within the side yard.
For the new den and stoop, the applicant by Ordinance
definition would need 6 feet. The house is located in
one of the more established neighborhoods where in the
past few years several people are attempting to make
improvements to their present structures. The site in
question has mature landscaping that will provide added
screening to the property owner to the east.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending approval of the variance as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (12-21-87)
Mr. Richard Blank, the applicant, was in attendance at the
meeting. There were no objectors present. A motion was
made to approve the variance requested as filed. The motion
passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 7 - Z-4949
Owner: B.F. Phipps
Address: 7214 "N" Street
Description: Lot 20, Riffel and Rhoten's Addition
to the City of Little Rock, Pulaski
County, Arkansas
Zoned: "R-2" Single Family
Variance From the area regulations provisions of
Requested: Section 7-101.2 /D.1 to permit an
addition to encroach within the required
front yard setback.
Justification: In order to provide protection for my
car from the weather.
Present Use of
Property: Single Family
Proposed Use
of Property: Single Family
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
None to be reported at this time.
B. Staff Analysis
This application is before the Board of Adjustment as
the result of an enforcement action. The request is to
allow for an already constructed one-car carport to
encroach within the front yard setback. The carport is
a aluminum covered top that is supported on poles
located at each end. There is a concrete drive in
place and the carport is approximately 5 feet from
being attached to the house. The house is a one -story
frame structure. The encroachment of the carport
leaves a front yard of 13.6 feet. "N" Street is a
narrow street with no room for on-street parking. The
structure has no adverse impact to any of the
surrounding property owners. Due to the lot being
locked in, the applicant could not access any of the
area to the rear in order to provide for a possible
relocation of the carport.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 7 - Continued
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending approval of the variance as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (12-21-87)
The applicant was in attendance at the meeting with his son
speaking in his behalf. There were no objectors present. A
motion was made to approve the variance as filed. The
motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 8 - Z-4950
Owner: Sarah Collins
Address: 2524 Izard Street
Description: Lot 7, Block 32, Kimball's South Park
Addition
Zoned: "R-2" Single Family
Variance From the area regulations provisions of
Requested: Section 7-101.2 /D.1 to permit a front
yard less than 25 feet.
Justification: We are unable to build a house due to
the 25 foot setback requirement on West
26th Street.
Present Use of
Property: Vacant
Proposed Use
of Property: Single Family
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
None to be reported at this time.
B. Staff Analysis
The applicant is requesting of the Board of Adjustment
approval of a front yard setback of 20 feet rather than
the required 25 feet as stated in the Ordinance. The
lot is presently vacant and located in the Quapaw
Quarter. The lot fronts on Izard Street and West 26th
Street, which because of-it being a corner lot, is
required to have to front yard setbacks of 25 feet.
Located in this area of central Little Rock are a
number of different sizes and styles of homes.
Surrounding this property there are some older homes
that have been or are presently being renovated. The
site is elevated which gives the site appearance of
both Izard and West 26th Street being lower in
elevation. The applicant does have a hardship because
of the lot being on the corner and having to provide 25
feet on both frontages.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 8 - Continued
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending approval of the variance as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION
Mr. Brett Swearingen of Jim Walter's Homes represent the
applicant. There were no objectors in attendance. Staff
informed the Board that there was a problem with the notice
requirement being met. The notice form was returned with
only three signatures. The lot is 50 feet in width and if
proper notice was given within 200 feet of the property
there should have been more names. Mr. Swearingen stated
that an attempt was made to obtain the signatures, but most
of the people were renters and not owners. Staff then
informed the Board that the requirements for the notice does
not require a certified abstract list, but it is impressed
upon the applicant the importance of meeting the notice
requirement no matter the resources. A motion was then made
to defer this item for a 30-day period and the applicant was
instructed to obtain the necessary signatures by the next
meeting on January 19, 1988. The motion passed by a vote of
9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 9 - Z-4951
Owner: Joe White, Jr.
Address: 2323 South Maple
Description: Lot 12, Block 5, Chesterfield Square
Addition
Zoned: "R -2" Single Family
Variance
Requested: From the area regulations provisions of
Section 7- 101.2 /D.1 to permit
construction of a house with a reduced
front yard setback.
Justification: We are unable to build a house due to
the 25 foot setback on West 24th
Street side.
Present Use of
Property: Vacant
Proposed Use
of Property: Single Family
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
None to be reported at this time.
B. Staff Analysis
The proposal is for a reduced front yard setback on the
frontage to West 24th Street. A 21 foot setback is
being proposed for the construction of a house on a
vacant lot that is at the corner of Maple and West 24th
Street. The requirement by the Ordinance is a corner
lot is considered to have two front yards and should
have a setback of 25 feet for both frontages. The lot
is surrounded by residential uses, a church and school.
To the east side there is an open alley. West 24th
Street is narrow in size and there is some on-street
parking. The neighborhood is one of the older
established ones where the property owners are
attempting to renovate the houses. The lot is 50 feet
in size and the requirement of the Ordinance would not
allow for the setbacks to occur. Staff feels that a
hardship has been displayed by the requirement of 25
feet on both frontages to West 24th and Maple Streets.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 9 - Continued
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending approval of the variance as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (12-21-87)
Mr. Brett Swearingen of Jim Walter's Homes represented the
applicant. There were no objectors in attendance. A motion
was made to approve the variance as filed. The motion
passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 10 - Z-4952
Owner: Buddy and Carolyn Coleman
Address: #15 Cascade Drive
Description: Lot 30, Block 2, Seventh Installment,
Pleasant Valley Addition to the City of
Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas.
Zoned: "R -2" Single Family
Variances
of Requested: 1. From the area and heights exceptions
provisions of Section 5-102.2/C to
permit an accessory structure less
than 60 feet from a front property
line and coverage of more than 30
percent of the rear yard.
2. From the subdivision provisions of
Section 37.10/C to permit a change
in a platted building line.
Justification: Due to the impending improvements of
Hinson Road, which will restrict our
temporary access from Hinson to the
back yard, we wish to complete the
back yard improvements at this time.
Present Use of
Property: Single Family
Proposed Use
of Property: Single Family
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
Engineering states that the proposed construction of a
pool house will definitely have to be moved back
further to the north. Also the pool appears to be
acceptable in the proposed location but until a final
determination can be made on the widening project of
Hinson Road, engineering is withholding approval until
these issues can be address at the meeting.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 10 - Continued
B. Staff Analysis
The applicant is coming before the Board asking for
approval for two variances. First of all the applicant
is wanting to construct a pool in the rear of the
property, which according to the Ordinance is an
accessory structure which has to be at least 60 feet
from a front property line. Also included is a request
for a waiver from the 30 percent rear yard coverage.
The pool would be approximately 8 feet from the street
frontage of Hinson Road and with the construction of a
pool house, patio, walkway and ramp, the coverage of
the rear yard would be more than 30 percent. Secondly,
the proposed construction would cross over an existing
40 foot building line or planting screen. The pool
house that will be encroaching within the building line
will have a 3 foot rear and side yard, which are not an
issue because the Ordinance allows this amount of
setback for an accessory structure.
In order for the applicant to cross a platted building
line additional steps are needed if these variances are
approved. A one-lot replat will have to be filed in
the Planning Office as well as the filing of an amended
Bill of Assurance. These two steps must be
accomplished before any building line waiver is
considered complete. The property in question is
elevated a considerable amount of distance from the
street frontage on Hinson. To the south of this site
is a school and all other sites are residential uses.
The applicant is proposing a fence along the frontage
to Hinson and there is mature landscape separating the
property to the west.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Due to the issues stated in the engineering comments, staff
is withholding a recommended action until some agreement can
be decided upon between the applicant and Engineering. If
the Board approves the requested variances after
modifications, the applicant will still need to file an
amended Bill of Assurance and a one-lot replat in the
Planning Department.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (12-21-87)
Mr. Buddy and Mrs. Carolyn Coleman were present at the
meeting. There were no objectors present. Staff informed
the Board that the Engineer for the applicant, Jim
Summerlin, had telephoned to say that unfortunately he would
not be able to attend the meeting because of being in
December 21, 1987
the hospital and saw no problems with working with the
Engineering Department to achieve an agreement about the
engineering issues. Mr. and Mrs. Coleman stated that they
could go along with an approval condition upon their
Engineer reaching an agreement with the Engineering
Department. (For the issues of Engineering, see attached
sheet.) A motion was then made to approve the application
condition upon the applicant achieving an agreement with
Engineering concerning the issues regarding the widening of
Hinson Road and the applicant's request for variances and
building line waivers. The motion passed by a vote of 9
ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent.
City of Little Rock Engineerinq Division
Department of 701 West Markham
Public Works Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
371-4800
M E M O R A N D U M
December 17, 1987
TO: Anna Brown, Planner
FROM: Mike Batie, Chief of Civil Engineering
SUBJECT: Board of Adjustment Agenda - December 21, 1987
Item 10 15 Cascade Drive
Item 10 at 15 Cascade Drive requests a Board of Adjustment Action for the
following items:
a. Accessory structure less than 60' from the front,
b. Accessory structure more than 30% coverage,
c. A change in the platted building line.
The only two items that are of concern to the Engineering Section are the
location of the proposed pool and the location of the proposed building located
at the rear of the property adjacent to Hinson Road. After a field
investigation and measurement, it appears that the proposed pool's location is
acceptable. However, the proposed building located on the southwest corner of
the property needs to be located to the north at least 6' (six) from the
property line. This is due to the future widening of Hinson Road which was one
of the Bond Projects in the last election.
Also, the owners should agree to provide a 10' temporary construction easement
during the construction of Hinson Road, adjacent to their southern property line
at the time of construction.
It is my understanding that residents of the area are trying to obtain an
improvement district in order to construct a masonry retaining wall along
Hinson Road. If this wall were constructed and the foundations of the wall
were located below the proposed street widening area, the proposed building
could be located as shown which is 4' north of the south property line on
Hinson Road. However, without the wall in place at the time of construction,
the Engineering Section would have to insist that the proposed building be no
closer than 6' (six) from the southern property line.
If you have further questions, please contact me at any time.
cc: Don McChesney
Larry Young
December 21, 1987
Item No. 11 - Z-4953
Owner: Southern Real Estate and Financial Corp.
Address: 300 S. University
Description: Long Legal
Zoned: "C-3" General Commercial
Variances From the height restrictions provisions
Requested: of Section 7 -103.3 to permit a height
higher than the requirements of the
Ordinance.
Justification: In order to permit an entrance atrium
and two permanent structures supporting
a tent -like configuration to exceed the
height specified in the Zoning
Ordinance.
Present Use of
Property: Commercial
Proposed Use
of Property: Commerical
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
None to be reported at this time.
B. Staff Analysis
The proposal before the Board of Adjustment at this
time is for a height variance for the University Mall
site. The height variance is for 93 feet and the
Ordinance states that the permitted height for a "C-3"
zoning, which the site is on, is 35 feet. This then
makes the applicant's requested height variance for 58
feet.
The plans call for a second level featuring a
teflon-coated skylight which will play a integral role
in the heating and cooling process. The height being
requested is compatible to the Delta Financial Center
which is also in the area. The skylights, although
tall, are not wide enough to obscure any view of
adjacent houses in the area. Surrounding the site are
mixed usage of commercial, office and residential. The
residential uses on South McKinley are situated on a
higher elevation than the Mall. This expansion, if
December 21, 1987
Item No. 11- Continued
approved will create an additional 70,000 sq. ft. of
new retail space. Also included in the plan is a
300-car parking deck that will be added to the north.
Staff feels that the applicant does have a hardship.
This property was a transversion to the "C-3" zoning
from the old Ordinance "F-11" zoning. The present
"C-3" zoning does not allow for the modern concepts of
Malls as they appear today with the multicolored roof
designs, higher heights and energy saving devices.
Staff is recommending approval of the height variance as
filed.
Mr. Chris Parker, an attorney representing the applicant,
was in attendance at the meeting. There was one objector at
the meeting, Mr. Charles Nickerson, who spoke against the
height variances because of his concern that the view of the
structure would block his house. Staff stated that the
highest peak of the tent-like structure would be in the
center not the total structure. After a considerable amount
of discussion among the Board and applicant, a motion was
then made to approve the height variance as filed. The
motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 12 - Z-4955
Owner: Brown and Brown Construction
Address: Kings Pointe Addition /Kirby Road
Description: Lot 3, 4, 6 and 7, Kings Pointe
Addition
to the City of Little Rock, Arkansas
Zoned: "R-2" Single Family
Variances
Requested: From the subdivision provisions of
Section 37.10.C to permit a change
in the building line.
Justification:
We designed our house plans to fit on
the preliminary plat with a standard
6 foot side yard setback, which meant
we designed a deeper, narrower house
to fit the lot, which in effect still
has the same amount of feet on each
side yard as normally required and in
some cases more. Since that time, the
City changed the front building line
setback to a varied requirement of up
to 47 feet back. This change makes
several lots unable to be built upon.
Present Use of
Property: Vacant
Proposed Use
of Property: Single Family
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
Engineering is requesting that the applicant complete
all necessary changes on Kirby Road which have to be
signed off by the department before any building
permits are issued for the four lots if the building
line waivers are approved.
B. Staff Analysis
The request before the Board of Adjustment is for the
endorsement to allow for four lots (3, 4, 6 and 7) in
Kings Pointe Cove Addition off Kirby Road to be changed
with varied building lines on each lot. The lots in
question front onto a cul-de-sac which the usual policy
is the building line is platted wherever the lot
becomes 60 feet in width.
December 21, 1987
Item No. 12 - Continued
The lots are located in one of the newer developed
subdivisions. There are eight lots in the subdivision
with two lots now under construction. The four lots in
this application are vacant at this time. Surrounding
the property is residential usage and mature
vegetation. Kirby Road is constructed to City
standards up to a point which is past this location.
Located on all four lots to the rear are utility
easements with varied distances in width and length.
In place is the cul-de-sac with the four lots having
various widths, lengths and depths. The applicant has
certain house design plans for each lot and feels that
the meeting of the requirement in the subdivision
Ordinance would not allow for the best possible use of
the lots.
If these requested building line waivers are endorsed,
it will be necessary for the applicant to complete two
additional steps before the process is finished. In
order for this to be accomplished, the applicant will
have to file in the Planning Department an amended Bill
of Assurance as well as the filing of a replat to show
the new building lines for each lot in the Planning
Department and County Court House.
On the west side of Lot 3 the applicant is showing a
side yard setback of 6 feet, which staff feels should
be 7 feet. Because of this fact, the applicant also
needs to obtain a side yard variance.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending approval of the building line waivers
for Lots 3, 4, 6 and 7 with the conditions that the
applicant file an amended Bill of Assurance and a replat for
the new building lines in the Planning Department.
Staff does not recommend approval of the side yard setback
on the west side of Lot 3. The house designed on the sketch
could be moved to meet the requirements for the side yard.
The applicant is also required to meet the conditions stated
in the Engineering Comments.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (12-21-87)
Mr. Bob Holloway represented the applicant. There were no
objectors in attendance at the meeting. Mr. Holloway spoke
regarding what was involved in the Engineering issues.
Staff stated that not knowing the total involvement part of
the issues dealt with the fact that on a previous request
the applicant had made commitments for improvements to a
December 21, 1987
Item No. 12 - Continued
neighbor's property on Kirby Road and the problem has not
been corrected. Mr. Holloway stated that he was aware of
the problem and felt that the issues could be corrected.
Mr. Holloway then stated that Mr. John Wright, the
contractor, wanted to know if the application could be
changed to substitute Lots 1 and 2 for Lots 6 and 7 because
he was close to closing on the purchase of the lots. Staff
stated that it could not consent to the request because Lots
1 and 2 were not part of the legal description for the legal
ad that was published. Mr. Wright then asked if the
application could be amended to exclude Lots 6 and 7 from
the restriction on the Building Permit as specified by the
Engineering Department in order for him to proceed with the
closing on the purchase of the lots. Staff stated that
Engineering concerns were that some restriction be placed on
the construction in order for the applicant to satisfy the
earlier commitment.
A motion was then made to amend the application to exclude
Lots 6 and 7 from the restriction by Engineering on the
Building Permit, but allow it to remain for Lots 3 and 4.
The motion also included the approval for the building line
waivers for all lots, but not the variance on the side yard
on Lot 3 that staff felt the applicant needed. The motion
passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent.
December 21, 1987
There being no further business before the Board, the meeting
was adjourned at 3:30 p.m.
Chairman Secretary
L ��--88
Date