boa_03 18 2021LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
AGENDA PROCEDURE
MARCH 18, 2021
4:00 P.M.
I.Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
II.Approval of the Minutes of the December 17, 2020
meeting of the Board of Adjustment
III.Presentation of Consent Agenda
IV.Presentation of Hearing Items
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SUMMARY OF MINUTES
MARCH 18, 2021
4:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being five (5) in number.
II. Approval of the Minutes of the December 17, 2020 meeting of the Board of
Adjustment
Members Present: Frank Allison - Chairman
Richard Bertram-Vice Chair
Justin Grinder
Joe Justus
Katherine Lashley
Members Absent: None
City Attorney Present: Shawn Overton
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
ABBREVIATED AGENDA
MARCH 18, 2021
4:00 P.M.
I. OLD BUSINESS:
No Old Business
II. NEW BUSINESS:
1. Z-2348-A 515 Rice Street
3. Z-7051-A 2400 N. Taylor Street
4. Z-9555 2 Marchwood Cove
5. Z-9556 10633 Rivercrest Drive
6. Z-9557 1014 Beechwood Street
7. Z-9558 1101 Riverfront Drive
8. Z-9559 1301 Rebsamen Park Road
9. Z-5928-A 5423 Country Club Boulevard
10. Z-9568 4415 Country Club Boulevard
11. Z-9569 2901 S. Summit Street
12. Z-9570 1701 N. Palm Street
13. Z-9571 4419 country Club Boulevard
14. Z-9572 1402 Loyola Drive
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 1 Z-2348-A
File No.: Z-2348-A
Owner: Jeremy Brasher
Applicant: Jeremy Brasher
Address: 515 Rice Street
Description: Lots 3, 4, 5 Block 27, Capitol Hill Ext
Zoned: I-2 (Light Industrial)
Variances Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section
36-320 to allow a reduced front and side yard setback in an
I-2 District.
Justification: The applicant’s justification is presented as per the attached
letter dated December 14, 2020.
Present Use: Undeveloped
Proposed Use: I-2 (Woodworking Shop)
STAFF REPORT
A.Planning and Development Civil Engineering Comments:
1. At time of building permit, provide design of street conforming to the Master
Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Rice Street including five
(5) foot sidewalks with planned development.
2. A grading and drainage plan should be provided with the building permit
application. The proposed finished floor elevation should be determined to
prevent flooding of the proposed structure during a twenty-five (25) year storm
event.
3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, obtain a franchise agreement from Public
Works (Bennie Nicolo, (371-4818) for the private improvements such as vehicle
parking which may be proposed to be located in the City of Little Rock public
right-of-way.
4. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance.
1
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 1 (CON’T.) Z-2348-A
B. Buffering and Landscape Comments:
1. Any new site development must comply with the City’s minimal landscape
and buffer ordinance requirements.
2. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing
trees as feasible on this site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance
requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or
larger.
C. Building Codes Comments:
No Comment.
D. Staff Analysis:
The I-2 zoned property located on the east side of Rice Street is currently
undeveloped. This parcel is mostly vegetated with an existing concrete slab from a
previous establishment which partially crosses the south and west property lines.
The property is included within the overall Brasher ownership of Lots one through
five (1-5) with Lots one (1) and two (2) to the north zoned PR-D and occupied by two
recently built duplexes. North of the duplexes and the subject property is the Rose
Creek Trail. The properties to the south and east are also zoned I-2 with the east
property being undeveloped and characterized by mature trees and vegetation and
the south property line being adjacent to an active railway easement. The west side
of Rice Street is zoned R-2 and PD-R and occupied by single family homes.
The applicant is proposing to construct a 2400 square foot metal shop building. This
would incorporate similar roof, wall, and siding materials as the existing duplexes to
the north to assimilate with the surrounding structures. The developer would also
like to take advantage of the existing 5400 square foot concrete slab from a previous
development and repurpose the on-site portion as parking.
The applicant has stated that with the construction of the Rose Creek Trail on the
north side of the property, drainage has been diverted and created a construction
hardship. The applicant has indicated that due to the culvert adjacent to the trail, the
french drain that empties into the culvert, and the impervious pavement of the trail
and street create a substantial accumulation of rainfall capable of flooding, eroding,
and washing out the construction.
The applicant has also stated that if minimum setbacks required by code are retained
substantial earthwork to reroute the drainage would be required. In addition, several
mature trees being used to mitigate the runoff would need to be removed to
accomplish the new grading. A variance from the fifty (50) foot front yard setback to
allow a minimum proposed depth to thirty-five (35) feet and a variance from the
fifteen (15) foot side yard setback to allow a minimum proposed width of ten (10)
feet are being requested to allow the building to be constructed outside of the natural
drainage path.
2
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 1 (CON’T.) Z-2348-A
Section 36-250(e)(1) requires a minimum front yard setback of having a depth of not
less than fifty (50) feet. Section 36-250(e)(2) requires a minimum side yard setback
of the building to be not less than fifteen (15) feet.
The setback variance would not encroach on the properties to the north or the east
and would not restrict the railroad operation to the south. The a pplicant has indicated
that there are several other buildings in this area located closer to the railroad than
this proposal and that the requested variances would be in keeping with similar
building allowances for drainage paths adjacent to the Rose Creek waterway.
E. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval to reduce the fifty (50) foot front yard setback to a
minimum of thirty-five (35) feet and to reduce the south fifteen (15) foot side yard
setback to a minimum of ten (10) feet, and in accordance with paragraphs A, B, and
D of this staff report.
Board of Adjustment (March 18, 2021)
The applicant was present. There were no persons present registered in opposition. The
item was heard on the Regular Agenda. Staff presented the item and a recommendation
of approval as outlined in the “Staff Recommendation” above. There was no further
discussion.
There was a motion to approve the application as recommended by staff. The motion
was seconded. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent.
3
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 2 Z-6113-B
File No.: Z-6113-B
Owner: Heart Residence Management LLC
Applicant: Rajesh Mehta
Address: 1401 S. Shackleford Road
Description: Parcel Number: 44L0800001500
Legal Description of Land
A part of the Wl/2 of the NWl/4 of the NWl/4 of Section 10, T-1-N, Range 13 West, Pulaski
County, Arkansas, more particularly described as: Commencing at the NW comer of
Section 10; thence East 25.00 feet; thence South 01 degree 42 minutes 30 seconds West,
900.00 feet to the point of beginning; thence South 88 degrees 27 minutes 05 seconds
East, 616.50 feet to a point on the West right of way of Kaufman Road; thence South 01
degree 34 minutes 38 seconds West, 227.00 feet along said right of way; thence North 88
degrees 26 minutes 03 seconds West 612.30 feet to a point on the East right of way
Shackleford Road; thence North 00 degrees 15 minutes 51 seconds West, 138.4 feet along
said right of way; thence North 01 degree 42 minutes 30 seconds East, 88.50 feet along
said right of way to the point of beginning.
LESS AND EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING 2 TRACTS
1) A part of the Wl/2 of the NWl_/4 of the NWl/4 of Section 10, T-1-N, R-13-W,
Pulaski County, Arkansas, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the NW
comer of said Section 10; thence East 25.0 feet; thence South 01 degree 42 minutes 30
seconds West, 900 feet to the North property line of Little Rock Lodging Associates I,
Limited Partnership, and the point of beginning; thence South 88 degrees 27 minutes 05
seconds East, 5.00 feet along said property line, thence leaving said North property line
South 01 degree 44 minutes West, 88.23 feet; thence South 00 degrees 15 minutes 51
seconds East, 138.47 feet to the South property line of said Little Rock Lodging Associates
I, Limited Partnership, thence with said South property line North 88 degrees 30 minutes 37
seconds West, 5.00 feet; thence North 01 degree 44 minutes 14 seconds East, 88.30 feet
to the point of beginning.
2) A portion of the Wl/2 of the NWl/4 of the NWl/4 of Section 10, T -1-N, R-13-W, Pulaski
County, Arkansas, more particularly described as follows, to wit: Commencing at the NW
comer of Said Section 10; thence East 25.00 feet; thence South 01 degree 42 minutes 30
seconds West, 900.00 feet; thence South 98 degrees 27 minutes 05 seconds East, 606.5 feet
to the point of beginning; thence continuing South 88 degrees 27 minutes 05 seconds East,
10.00 feet; thence South 01 degree 34 minutes 38 seconds West, 226.01 feet; thence North
88 degrees 30 minutes 37 seconds West, 10.00 feet; thence North 01 degree 34 minutes 38
seconds East, 226.01 feet to the point of beginning.
Parcel No. 44L-080-00-01S-00
1
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 2 (CON'T.)Z-6113-B
Zoned: O-2 Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
Variances Requested: A variance is requested from the sign height provisions of
Section 36-553. Signs permitted in institutional and office
zones.
Justification: The applicant’s justification is presented per attached letter
dated December 12, 2020.
Present Use: Hotel
Proposed Use: Hotel
STAFF UPDATE
On February 12, 2021 the applicant requested this application be withdrawn, without
prejudice. He has decided not to proceed with the project at this time. Staff supports the
withdrawal request.
Board of Adjustment (March 18, 2021)
The applicant was not present. There were no persons present registered in support or
opposition. Staff informed the Board that the applicant submitted a letter to staff on
February 12, 2021 requesting that this application be withdrawn, without prejudice. The
applicant decided not to proceed with the project at this time. Staff supports the withdrawal
request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and withdrawn , without prejudice
as recommended by staff. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
2
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 3 Z-7051-A
File No.: Z-7051-A
Owners: Jeff Fuller Homes LLC
Applicant: Jeff Fuller
Address: 2400 N. Taylor Street
Legal Description: Lot 7, Block 32, Parkview Addition
Zoned: R-2
Present Use: Vacant
Proposed Use: Single-family Residence
Variance(s) Requested: A variance is requested from area regulations of Section 36-
254 to allow a reduced rear yard setback in the R-2 district;
Justification: The applicant’s justification is presented as per the attached
letter dated December 20, 2020.
STAFF REPORT
A. Planning and Development Civil Engineering Comments:
No Comments.
B. Buffering and Landscape Comments:
No Comments.
C. Building Codes Comments:
In October 2020 the City adopted the “Heights Landscape Design Overlay District,”
requiring installation of one (1) tree per forty (40) linear feet of street frontage
within the Heights District Boundary, applicable to [among other types] residential
construction in excess of 600 square feet.
D. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 2400 N. Taylor Street is located within a predominantly
R-2 zoned neighborhood, within the Heights Landscape Design Overlay District.
This overlay district generally has no bearing on the subject variance requests. The
site was previously occupied by a small one-story single-family home and detached
garage/shed accessory building. The lot is on the northwest corner of N. Taylor and
V Streets and approximately forty-seven (47) feet in width and 148 feet in length.
The previous home fronted N. Taylor Street with the accessory structure located
behind the residence at the rear of the property and a partial two-car asphalt pad
connecting V Street to the structure.
1
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 3 (CON’T.) Z-7051-A
Since the filing of this application the existing structures have been razed and the
property cleared. The applicant proposes a new two-story single-family home and
attached garage. The new home will expand the footprint of the previous residence
from approximately 1400 square feet to a total of 5383 square feet square foot which
will include a three-car garage and covered porch. The length of this primary
structure will be approximately 112 linear feet and maintain the twenty-five (25) foot
front yard setback. However, the proposed length of the addition will expand into the
twenty-five (25) foot rear yard setback approximately seventeen (17) feet reducing
this required twenty-five (25)-foot width to eight (8) feet. If this were an accessory
structure (detached) it would be permitted in the rear yard, with setbacks as narrow
as three (3) feet and with no variance.
Section 36-254(d)(3) of the City’s Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear
setback of twenty-five (25) feet. The applicant requests a variance to allow the
extension of the structure seventeen (17) feet into the rear yard setback.
Staff finds the request to generally be in conformance with the development
pattern in the Heights neighborhood and nearby area . Based on the above
assessment and analysis, staff finds the requested variances to be reasonable.
E. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested rear yard setback reduction from
twenty-five (25) feet to a minimum of eight (8) feet with the following conditions:
1.Install trees, if deemed applicable at the time of building permitting, in
accordance with Heights Landscape Design Overlay District requirements.
Board of Adjustment (March 18, 2021)
The applicant was present. There were several persons registered in opposition. Staff
presented the item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “Staff
Recommendation” above.
Lucy Jackson expressed opposition and presented a petition signed by fourteen (14) of
her neighbors. Ms. Jackson stated that the front yard and rear yard setbacks are not
characteristic of the neighborhood. Chairman Allison emphasized that the front yard
setback was not a variance request in the application. Staff presented a sketch showing
the proposed front yard setback in compliance with the current zoning standard in the R-
2 District.
Representing the application, Jeff Fuller emphasized the following points: 1) the required
right-of-way and front yard setback resulted in a greater setback from the street than
many of the houses on North Taylor Street; and 2) attaching the garage was the best
option for the rear yard.
2
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 3 (CON’T.) Z-7051-A
A motion was made to approve the requested rear yard variance as recommended by
staff. The motion was seconded. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent. The
application was approved.
3
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 4 Z-9555
File No.: Z-9555
Owners: Hamp Stokes /Gwen Stokes
Applicant: Hamp Stokes /Gwen Stokes
Address: 2 Marchwood Cove
Legal Description: Lot 10, Block 1, Sienna Lake Estates
Zoned: R-2
Present Use: Single-family Residence
Proposed Use: Single-family Residence
Variance(s) Requested: Variances are requested from the height and area provisions
of Section 36-516 to allow an increased fence height from four
(4)feet to six (6) feet between a required building setback line
and a street right-of-way.
Justification: The applicant’s justification is presented as per the attached
letter dated December 14, 2020.
STAFF REPORT
A. Planning and Development Civil Engineering Comments:
No Comments.
B. Buffering and Landscape Comments:
No Comments
C. Building Codes Comments:
No Comments
D. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property located at 2 Marchwood Cove is bordered by Sienna Lake
Drive to the north, Sienna Lane to the east and Marchwood Cove to the south. A
single-family home is located to the west adjacent to the subject property. The front
of the home faces Marchwood Cove with a drive and garage accessed from Sienna
Lake Lane. The rear of the home and associated back yard is adjacent to the Sienna
Lake Drive right-of-way.
The residence is located within a recently developed R-2 zoned neighborhood in the
southwest portion of the city. The neighborhood is generally located north of Crystal
1
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 4 (CON’T.) Z-9555
Valley Road and west of Interstate 430. The areas surrounding the neighborhood
and zoned R-2 or AF (Agriculture and Forest District) and mostly characterized by
dense mature forest.
The applicant has requested to install a fence which exceeds the maximum of four
(4) feet in height between the building setback and the street right -of-way. The
proposal indicates a desire for a six (6) foot fence adjacent to the Sienna Lake Drive
and Sienna Lake Lane rights-of-way on the north and east property lines. It has also
been stated that the reason for the requested height extension is to contain the
family dogs, provide a barrier to prevent deer from accessing the small garden, and
to provide a secure play area for their grandchildren.
Section 36-516 (e)(1)(a) of the City’s Zoning Ordinance states that the residential
fence standards; “Between a required building setback line and a street right-of-way,
the maximum height shall be four (4) feet. Other fences may be erected to a
maximum height of eight (8) feet.” The applicant requests a variance to allow the
extension of the fence height to six (6) feet on the north and east property lines.
The City of Little Rock Department of Public Works Traffic Engineering reviewed the
homeowners request on site to install a six (6) foot tall private fence along the north
and east property lines and has found no issues with the sight distance. The Public
Works findings are attached.
Staff finds the request to generally be in conformance with the development
pattern in the area and notes that other residential side and rear yards allow the
construction of fences to a height of eight (8) feet.
E. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested side and rear yard fence variance as
presented in the attached documentation with the condition that a survey, site plan
indicating the fence location, and approval letter from Little Rock Public Works be
submitted with permit application.
Board of Adjustment (March 18, 2021)
The applicant was present. There were no persons registered in opposition. Staff
presented the item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “Staff
Recommendation” above. There was no further discussion.
The item remained on the Consent Agenda for approval. A motion was made and
seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0
absent.
2
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 5 Z-9556
File No.: Z-9556
Owners: Michael Wolfe
Applicant: Michael Wolfe
Address: 10633 Rivercrest Drive
Legal Description: Lot 76, Block 3, Walton Heights
Zoned: R-2
Present Use: Single-family Residence
Proposed Use: Single-family Residence
Variance(s) Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section
36-254 to allow a reduced front yard setback in the R-2
district.
Justification: The applicant’s justification is presented as per the attached
letter dated December 14, 2020.
STAFF REPORT
A. Planning and Development Civil Engineering Comments:
No Comments.
B. Buffering and Landscape Comments:
No Comments.
C. Building Codes Comments:
No Comments.
D. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property located at 10633 Rivercrest Drive lies within a
predominantly R-2 zoned neighborhood. Rivercrest Drive is characterized by a
single row of homes on both the north and south sides of the street that back up to
undeveloped wooded areas. The back yard of subject property on the south side of
the street lies adjacent to a city owned PR (Parks and Recreation District) parcel
while the homes on the north side of the road back up to a mostly unbuildable slope,
railroad easement, and then southern bank of the Arkansas River.
The site is currently occupied by a single-family home originally constructed in the
1960’s.The surrounding single family homes appear to have been developed in the
1
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 5 (CON’T.) Z-9556
same time period and have been maintained and renovated through the years to
establish a well-kept desirable neighborhood.
The applicant stated that the front porch of their home is no longer structurally sound,
doesn’t function well as a porch, and does not blend well with similar front facades
of the surrounding homes. As indicated on the survey the front wall of the house has
been built to the twenty-five (25) foot front yard setback. The existing porch structure
extends 5.5 feet from the front wall of the house into the setback and is 13.3 feet in
width. The proposed porch will extend approximately seven (7) feet from the face of
the house to the outside edge of the existing sidewalk. The width of the new structure
will be sixteen (16) feet. The proposed porch will occupy slightly more area than the
existing porch structure and only partially encroach into the front yard setback
Section 36-254(d)(1) of the City’s Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front
setback of twenty-five (25) feet. The applicant requests a variance to allow the
extension of the structure 13.3 feet into the front yard setback.
The width of the property is 100 feet. This small addition will not encroach into the
side yards and only minimally impact the overall permeable area of the front yard. In
addition, this will have little or no effect on the surrounding residenc es.
Staff finds the request to generally be in conformance with the development pattern
in this area, and based on the above assessment and analysis, finds the requested
variance to be reasonable.
E. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested front yard setback reduction from
twenty-five (25) feet to a minimum of seventeen (17) feet as per the attached site
plan and proposed porch renovation and construction.
Board of Adjustment (March 18, 2021)
The applicant was present. There were no persons registered in opposition. Staff
presented the item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “Staff
Recommendation” above. There was no further discussion.
The item remained on the Consent Agenda for approval. A motion was made and
seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0
absent.
2
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 6 Z-9557
File No.: Z-9557
Owner: Eliot Seven Holdings LLC, Attn: Anthony & Kimberly Gary
Applicant: Hope Consulting, Inc., Attn: Jonathan Hope
Address: 1014 Beechwood Street
Description: Lot 4, Block 9, Hillcrest Addition
Zoned: R-2 (Single-Family District)
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section
36-156 to permit more than thirty (30) percent coverage of
the rear yard for an accessory building.
Justification: The applicant’s justification is presented as per the attached
letter dated October 14, 2020.
Present Use: R-2, Single Family Residential
Proposed Use: R-2, Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Planning and Development Civil Engineering Comments:
No Comment.
B. Buffering and Landscape Comments:
No Comment.
C. Building Codes Comments:
No Comment.
D. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property is located in the Hillcrest Overlay District at 1014
Beechwood Street and occupied by a one -story single-family frame home. The
adjacent and surrounding properties are also occupied by single family residences
with the adjacent south property being zoned PDR. The home to the north is a similar
single-story home with alley access and on street parking located at the front of the
property. The rear yard of the subject property is accessed from the alley on the
west side of the property while the front of the home faces Beechwood Street . An
existing planter and privacy fence are placed adjacent to the north property line and
the survey indicates a retaining wall on the south property line.
1
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 6 (CON’T.) Z-9557
The applicant is proposing to install an in-ground swimming pool with an associated
deck in the rear yard where an existing driveway is presently located off of the alley.
The applicant has stated that the location for this accessory structure has been
chosen due to the existing utilities further east towards the residence and to
maximize green space of the back yard.
The rear yard space is approximately 3785 square feet in area and is currently
occupied with an existing 320 square foot shed structure, and 165 square feet of
sidewalk. The proposed pool and associated deck are indicated on the site plan to
provide an additional 870 square feet of non -permeable area. The existing structures
and proposed pool addition will yield approximately thirty-six (36) percent of
coverage of the rear yard exceeding the maximum code allowance of thirty (30)
percent.
The proposed pool deck will be located on the north and west property lines with an
approximate three (3) feet of surface before reaching the pool edge. The rest of the
pool is surrounded with an additional three (3) foot concrete edge and larger
concrete deck approximately nine (9) feet in width between the pool and existing
shed. The proposed pool in the northwest corner of the property is set approximately
forty-five (45) feet from the back of the house.
Section 36-156(a)(2)c states, “Accessory buildings or structures in the R -1 through
R-4A districts… may not occupy more than thirty (30) percent of the required rear
yard area... Swimming pools and all appurtenant structures both above ground and
below grade of adjacent yard area shall be construed to be accessory structures
and conform to the standards of this section…”
The proposed in-ground pool would have less of an impact on the surrounding
properties than an above ground structure. This proposal is similar to other
neighborhood installations, and presents no foreseeable adverse effects to the
neighboring residences.
E. Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the requested thirty-six (36) percent coverage
variance per the attached site plan, subject to a building permit being obtained for
all construction.
Board of Adjustment (March 18, 2021)
The applicant was present. There were no persons registered in opposition. Staff
presented the item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “Staff
Recommendation” above. There was no further discussion.
The item remained on the Consent Agenda for approval. A motion was made and
seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0
absent.
2
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 7 Z-9558
File No.: Z-9558
Owner: Verizon Wireless
Applicant: White-Daters & Associates, Inc., Attn: Tim Daters
Address: 1101 Riverfront Drive
Description: Tracts H-2 & H-3 Riverdale Addition
Zoned: C-3 (General Commercial District)
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the building height provisions
of Section 36-301 to permit primary structures to exceed the
maximum of thirty-five (35) feet in height as allowable on C-3
zoned property.
Justification: The applicant’s justification is presented as per the attached
letter dated December 15, 2020.
Present Use: Undeveloped
Proposed Use: Multi-Family Development
STAFF REPORT
A. Planning and Development Civil Engineering Comments:
1. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property which is required to be
satisfied at the time of the issuance of the Building Permit. Show the proposed
location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan. Maintenance of the
detention pond and all private drainage improvements is the responsibility of the
developer and/or property owners association and detailed in the Bill of
Assurance with mandatory fees collected for future maintenance.
2. Driveway locations and widths must meet the traffic access and circulation
requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The width of driveway must not
exceed thirty-six (36) feet. Knox box should be installed at the secondary access,
which is for fire and emergency access vehicles.
3. Traffic Study may be required to determine if additional left -turn stacking is
required.
B. Buffering and Landscape Comments:
1. Any new site development must comply with the City’s minimal landscape and
buffer ordinance requirements and the Chenal Overlay District.
2. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees
as feasible on this site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance
requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or
larger.
1
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 7 (CON’T.) Z-9558
C. Building Codes Comments:
No Comment.
D. Staff Analysis:
The two C-3 zoned subject tracts are located at the northwest corner of Riverfront
Drive and Cottondale Lane and contain a combined 11.42 acres. The neighboring
property to the north is also zoned C-3 and contains a parking lot and a soccer field.
The west side of the subject property is bordered with a levee, a heavily wooded
railroad easement, and the Riverdale Shopping Mall which fronts Cantrell Roa d. The
south portion of the property converges at Riverfront Drive and Cottondale Lane
while the east edge of the property is bordered by Riverfront Drive. The development
east of Riverfront Drive is zoned O-3 and occupied by the Verizon Wireless and
Arkansas BlueCross BlueShield offices, associated parking and the Arkansas River
behind the office facilities.
The applicant proposes to construct a three building multi-family development as per
R-5 guidelines which is allowable on C-3 zoned properties. The building elevations
that have been submitted indicate a four-story complex proposing the main height
of the building to be fifty-five (55) feet six (6) inches with an architectural tower
feature rising to a maximum of sixty (60) feet at the site entry and leasing office.
Section 36-301(d) states, “No building hereafter erected or structurally altered shall
exceed a height of thirty-five (35) feet.” The applicant is requesting a variance to
allow for a sixty-six (66) feet four (4) inches building height.
The proposed complex indicates three (3) separate four (4) story buildings. The
Leasing Office / Building one (1) will be accessed from Riverfront Drive. Building two
(2)is proposed to be located north of the Building one (1) and adjacent to the street
right-of-way while Building three (3) will be placed in the back-northwest area of the
site adjacent to the railroad easement. A gated entry north and south of the leasing
office will access the associated parking which will be lar gely located within the
interior of the site and on the north perimeter of the complex. Smaller parking areas
and the secondary facades of the three buildings will be adjacent to the other
property lines.
The closest buildings to this proposed development have been constructed in
excess of thirty-five (35) feet. The O-3 Verizon property to the east is developed with
several multi-story buildings all of which exceed four (4) stories while a four (4) story
apartment complex is located north of Cedar Hill Road. The apartment building on
Cedar Hill Road is similar in style, height, and materials and was also developed on
a C-3 zoned property for which a height variance was granted.
Staff is supportive of the height variance due to numerous nearby buildings
exceeding thirty-five (35) feet in height.
2
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 7 (CON’T.) Z-9558
E. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance to exceed the thirty-five (35)
foot height maximum typically permitted in C-3 zoning and to allow a building height
not to exceed sixty (60) feet.
Board of Adjustment (March 18, 2021)
The applicant was present. There were no persons registered in opposition. Staff
presented the item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “Staff
Recommendation” above. There was no further discussion.
The item remained on the Consent Agenda for approval. A motion was made and
seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0
absent.
3
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 8 Z-9559
File No.: Z-9559
Owner: Centennial Bank
Applicant: Little Rock Sign – Conway Sign Inc., Attn. Bob Whitehouse
Address: 1301 Rebsamen Park Road
Description: Ross Mauney Subdivision, Lots 1 and 2, Lot 2 Top Coat
Subdivision
Zoned: I-2
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the sign provisions of Section
36-557 to allow wall signs without street frontage.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented as per the attached
letter dated December 15, 2020.
Present Use: Under construction
Proposed Use: Bank / Office
STAFF REPORT
A. Planning and Development Civil Engineering Comments:
No Comment.
B. Buffering and Landscape Comments:
No Comment.
C. Building Codes Comments:
No Comment.
D. Staff Analysis:
The I-2 zoned property located at 1301 Rebsamen Park Road was formerly occupied
by the Dixie Café restaurant and now occupied by a three-story commercial bank
building which is under construction. The property is located at the east side of
Rebsamen Park Road between Cantrell and Cedar Hill Roads. The south property
line is adjacent to a two-lane private drive that services several office buildings to
the east of the subject property. The adjacent property to the north is occupied by
the Town Pump bar / restaurant and liquor store while the propert ies to the west
across Rebsamen Park Road are occupied with a Waffle House restaurant and
parking lots that service a Boy Scouts of America facility and the Bank of England
on the northeast corner of Rebsamen Park Road and Cedar Hill Road. A paved
drainage channel borders the east property line with CDI Cont ractors office located
on the other side of the stormwater culvert.
1
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 8 (CON’T.) Z-9559
The new occupant of this commercial building (Centennial Bank) is requesting to
install wall signs on the north, south, and east building elevations which are not
adjacent to street frontage as required by code. The proposed north wall sign at the
front of the building will indicate the name of the facility and be approximately thirty
eight (38) feet in length and thirty-six (36) inches in height (114 square feet). In
addition, a Centennial Bank logo is on the west portion of the north façade
approximately nine (9) feet in width and five (5) feet in he ight (45 square feet). A
logo approximately twenty (20) feet in width and twelve (12) feet in height (240
square feet) is proposed for the south elevation facing the private drive and the east
elevation facing the drainage channel and CDI contractors will replicate the
proposed south elevation sign in size and style.
Section 36-557(a) of the Municipal Code states, “All on-premises wall signs must
face required street frontage except in complexes where a sign without street
frontage would be the only means of identification for a tenant.”
The applicant has stated that the front of the building is not oriented towards the
street. Therefore, a request is being made to place signage on the sides of the
building that will be most visible to vehicular traffic. The applicant has indicated that
a precedent has been set in this area for building signage that does not face the
primary road. The Bancroft building facing Cantrell and serviced by the private drive
at the south of the subject property has provided graphics on each of the four sides
of the building facing all directions of approaching vehicles.
The proposed wall signs conform with guidelines for building mounted signs in all
respects, with exception of the north, south, and east orientations adjacent to the
surrounding private properties rather than public streets. Except for the west side of
the building adjacent to Rebsamen Park Road, vehicular traffic approaches the
building from either the north, south or east with Rebsamen Park Road only
participating as an access to onsite parking. The applicant stated the existing
circulation routes to the site imply the need for proposed wall signs which will be
visible to this approaching traffic.
Based on the above assessment and analysis, staff finds the requested variances
to conform to established sign patterns throughout the surrounding area .
E. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested wall mounted signs as specified in
the submitted plans and elevations.
2
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 8 (CON’T.) Z-9559
Board of Adjustment
The applicant was present. There were no persons registered in opposition. Staff
presented the item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “Staff
Recommendation” above. There was no further discussion.
The item remained on the Consent Agenda for approval. A motion was made and
seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0
absent.
3
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 9 Z-5928-A
File No.: Z-5928-A
Owners: Ross Clinton Davis & Sara Nutt Davis
Applicant: Yeary Lindsey Architects
Address: 5423 Country Club Blvd.
Legal Description: Lot 9R, Block 4, Country Club Heights Addition
Zoned: R-2 (Single-Family District)
Present Use: Single-family Residence
Proposed Use: Single-family Residence
Variance(s) Requested: Request from the area provisions of Sec. 36-254 to allow a
reduced side yard setback in an R-2 District.
Justification: The applicant’s justification is presented as per the attached
letter dated January 18, 2021.
STAFF REPORT
A. Planning and Development Civil Engineering:
No Comments.
B. Buffering and Landscape Comments:
In October 2020 the City adopted the “Heights Landscape Design Overlay District,”
requiring installation of one tree per 40 linear feet of street frontage within the
Heights District Boundary, applicable to [among other types] residential
construction in excess of 600 square feet.
C. Building Codes Comments:
The required fire separation distance (building to property line) prescribed by the
building code terminates at five (5) feet. Buildings are allowed to be closer than
five (5) feet if they have properly constructed fire walls which provide the requisite
one (1) hour fire resistance rating. When buildings are five (5) feet or more from
the property line, the requirement no longer applies to the wall itself, only the
projections such as eaves or overhangs.
Openings such as doors and windows are limited when the exterior wall is three (3)
feet from the property line and are prohibited when the exterior wall is less than
three (3) feet from the line. There is no restriction on openings when the exterior
wall is more than three (3) feet from the property line.
Contact the City of Little Rock Building Codes at (501)371-4832 for additional
details.
1
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 9 (CON’T.) Z-5928-A
D. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property located at 5423 Country Club Boulevard is occupied by a
single-family residence. The parcel sets on the southeast corner of North Polk Street
and Country Club Blvd. The home fronts Country Club Blvd and off-street parking is
accessed on the west side of the property from North Polk Street. A single-family
home is located south of the property that faces Stonewall Road. An additional
single-family home is located east of the subject property with an associated one-
lane drive separating the neighboring house and the shared property line.
The applicant has submitted a sketch proposing a new raised covered patio and
retaining wall located on the east side of the home. The applicant’s letter of intent
additionally states that the porch would project six (6) feet three (3) inches from the
side of the primary structure to within one (1) foot four (4) inches of the east property
line. The applicant has also stated that the new porch would be thirty (30) feet in
length and would cover the existing stoop that accesses the home’s kitchen and
incorporate an existing patio area to the north. The associated brick retaining wall
would terminate on the east property line and a new fence or brick wall will be
constructed on top of the wall to provide privacy.
The survey indicates the lot width to be fifty (50) feet which would normally requires
a 5-foot side yard setback. The length of the lot is 140 feet and currently the eastern
side yard setback is compliant with the current zoning code. While the primary
structure will remain unchanged the exterior patio addition will be built to the property
line eliminating thirty (30) linear feet of this side yard setback. This is not out of
character with the surrounding properties in this older established neighborhood.
Property searches within proximity to the subject parcel indicate several homes
showing the entirety of the primary dwelling walls constructed on the property line
eliminating all of the required side yard setback.
Section 36-254(d)(2) states “Side yard. There shall be a side yard set-back on each
side of the building having a width of not less than ten (10) percent of the average
width of the lot, not to exceed eight (8) feet.” The applicant requests a variance to
allow an encroachment into the east side-yard setback.
Based the analysis above, Staff believes the subject proposal is in keeping with the
character and scale of the neighborhood and views the variance request as
reasonable.
E. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested side yard setback, per the submitted
survey / site plan sketch.
2
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 9 (CON’T.) Z-5928-A
Board of Adjustment (March 18, 2021)
The applicant was present. There were no persons registered in opposition. Staff
presented the item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “Staff
Recommendation” above. There was no further discussion.
The item remained on the Consent Agenda for approval. A motion was made and
seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0
absent.
3
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 10 Z-9568
File No.: Z-9568
Owners: Seth & Hailey Easley
Applicant: Yeary Lindsey Architects
Address: 4415 Country Club Blvd.
Legal Description: Lot 9R, Block 4, Country Club Heights Addition
Zoned: R-2 (Single-Family District)
Present Use: Single-family Residence
Proposed Use: Single-family Residence
Variance(s) Requested: Request from the area provisions of Sec. 36-254 to allow a
reduced side yard setback in an R-2 District.
Justification: The applicant’s justification is presented as per the attached
letter dated January 18, 2021.
STAFF REPORT
A. Planning and Development Civil Engineering Comments:
Per City code Sec. 30-43, no driveway shall be constructed within five (5) feet of a
line drawn from the point of intersection of a property line with the right -of-way line
of a street and perpendicular to the centerline of the street, except where proper ty
abuts an alley the minimum distance shall be ten (10) feet.
B. Buffering and Landscape Comments:
In October 2020 the City adopted the “Heights Landscape Design Overlay District,”
requiring installation of one (1) tree per forty (40) linear feet of street frontage
within the Heights District Boundary, applicable to [among other types] residential
construction in excess of 600 square feet.
C. Building Codes Comments:
The required fire separation distance (building to property line) prescribed by th e
building code terminates at five (5) feet. Buildings are allowed to be closer than
five (5) feet if they have properly constructed fire walls which provide the requisite
one (1) hour fire resistance rating. When buildings are five (5) feet or more from
the property line, the requirement no longer applies to the wall itself, only the
projections such as eaves or overhangs.
Openings such as doors and windows are limited when the exterior wall is three (3)
feet from the property line and are prohibited when the exterior wall is less than
three (3) feet from the line. There is no restriction on openings when the exterior
wall is more than three (3) feet from the property line.
Contact the City of Little Rock Building Codes at (501)371-4832 for additional
details.
1
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 10 (CON’T.) Z-9568
D. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property located at 4415 Country Club Blvd. was previously occupied
by a single-family residence. The overall property sets on the southeast corner of
North Palm Street and Country Club Blvd. The original home has since been
demolished and the property divided into two separate single-family lots. The subject
property occupies the eastern half of this formerly larger parcel and fronts Country
Club Blvd. An alley borders the eastern property line and the rear of the proposed
home is adjacent to a single-family residence that faces N Palm Street. The west
side of the property is adjacent to a new single -family home currently under
construction.
The applicant has indicated the proposed garage for the home will be located off the
alley on the east side of the property. The applicant’s letter of intent additionally
states that the narrow ten (10)-foot-wide alley provides a challenge for vehicular
access turning into the garage and proposes that the eastern wall of the house be
placed deeper beyond the required 7.2-foot setback. This would allow for an
approximate twelve (12)-foot turning radius to access into the garage and provide
most of the house setback greater than twelve (12) feet but in no case less than 9.7
feet.
Pushing the structure to the west to accommodate vehicular circulation on the east
side of the home has caused a portion of the residence to encroach into the setback.
The attached sketch indicates most of the proposed residence western wall will be
located 7.9 to 8.5 feet from the property line. However, a section of the residence
approximately 26 feet in length will encroach into the 7.2-foot western setback. This
26-foot section of the façade is proposed to be constructed 3 to 3.2 feet from the
west property line as indicated on the attached site plan.
Section 36-254(d)(2) states “Side yard. There shall be a side yard set-back on each
side of the building having a width of not less than ten (10) percent of the average
width of the lot, not to exceed eight (8) feet.” The applicant requests a variance to
allow an encroachment into the west side-yard setback.
Based on the above analysis, Staff believes the proposal is in keeping with the
character and scale of the neighborhood and views the variance request as
reasonable. In most cases, the east and west side yard setbacks exceed the 7.2 -
foot code requirement. In addition, the adjacent property owner to the west at 4419
Country Club Blvd has provided a letter in support of a three (3)-foot side yard
setback.
E. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested side yard setbacks, per the submitted
site plan dated January 14, 2021, with the following conditions:
1. Install trees in accordance with the Heights Landscape Design Overlay District.
2
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 10 (CON’T.) Z-9568
Board of Adjustment (March 18, 2021)
The applicant was present. There were no persons present registered in opposition. The
item was heard on the Regular Agenda. Staff presented the item and a recommendation
of approval as outlined in the “Staff Recommendation” above. There was no further
discussion.
There was a motion to approve the application as recommended by staff. The motion
was seconded. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent.
3
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 11 Z-9569
File No.: Z-9569
Owner: Kenneth Redus / L Visa Beavers
Applicant: Kenneth Redus
Address: 2901 S. Summit Street
Description: Lot 1, Block 2 and Lot 12, Sunset Addition
Zoned: R-3 (Single-Family District)
Variance(s) Requested: Request from the area provisions of Sec. 36-252 to allow an
accessory building to be located on a lot not occupied by a
primary structure in an R-3 District.
Justification: The applicant’s justification is presented as per the attached
letter dated January 19, 2021.
STAFF REPORT
A. Planning and Development Civil Engineering:
No Comments.
B. Buffering and Landscape Comments:
No Comments.
C. Building Codes Comments:
No Comments.
D. Staff Analysis:
The currently vacant R-3 zoned property located at 2901 S. Summit Street was
previously occupied by a single-family residence. The former home was demolished
in the mid 2000’s and the lot has retained only turf and mature trees on the perimeter.
The overall property sits on the southeast corner of S. Summit and W. 29th Streets.
The subject property faces Summit Street with the north perimeter being adjacent to
the 29th Street right-of-way. The east perimeter is bordered by an alleyway accessed
off 29th Street and an adjacent single-family residence is located to the south of the
subject property. The remainder of the neighborhood is characterized predominantly
by single family homes and numerous vacant lots.
1
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 11 (CON’T.) Z-9569
East of the subject property, across the alley the applicant owns an additional
property with a dwelling at 1901 W. 29th Street. The alley dividing the two lots serves
as a utility easement and cannot be closed. The applicant is requesting that the
vacant Summit Street property west of the alley (subject property) be considered as
an accessory lot to the off-site property occupied by the dwelling.
The applicant has provided a sketch indicating a 20’x30’ metal garage / storage
building to be constructed on a concrete slab. This preliminary site p lan shows the
structure sited three (3) feet from the east property line adjacent to the alley and
three (3) feet from the south property line adjacent to the neighboring residential
property. The minimum side yard setback for an accessory building shall b e no less
than three (3) feet and the proposed building is shown to be located within the
parameters of the code requirements.
Section 36-254(5) states “In R-2, R-3, R-4 and R-7A districts, a single-family dwelling
or manufactured home must be on the site prior to approval of location of an
accessory dwelling.” The applicant requests a variance to allow an accessory
building on a separate lot adjacent to an alley and property occupied by the
applicant’s primary dwelling.
Based the analysis above, Staff believes the proposal is in keeping with the
character and scale of the neighborhood and views the variance request as
reasonable. The neighborhood has developed with accessory buildings located in
the rear yards of the residential properties and accessed from the alleys. In addition,
the proposed structure will be placed to allow for a future dwelling located on the
subject property if desired.
E. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested accessory building located on the
property adjacent to the applicant’s primary dwelling property.
Board of Adjustment (March 18, 2021)
The applicant was present. There was one (1) person present registered in opposition.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “Staff
Recommendation” above.
Dessa Murphy expressed opposition on behalf of the property owner of 2905 South
Summit Street, Earl Criswell. She emphasized concerns regarding the potential decrease
in property value with the placement of the accessory building on the subject property
without a primary structure.
The applicant, Kenneth Redus, a real estate appraiser, emphasized that the placement
of the accessory building would not decrease property value. He stated that his efforts to
continue to improve the property adds value to adjacent property and surrounding
properties.
2
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 11 (CON’T.) Z-9569
There was a motion to approve the application as recommended by staff. The motion
was seconded. The vote was 5 ayes, O noes, and 0 absent.
3
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 12 Z-9570
File No.: Z-9570
Owners: Eric Wippo / Mary Margaret Jones
Applicant: Eric Wippo
Address: 1701 N. Palm Street
Legal Description: Lot 18 except the North 20 feet and Lot 17, Block 4, except the
South 15 feet thereof, Cliffwood Addition
Zoned: R-2 (Single-Family District)
Present Use: Single-family Residence
Proposed Use: Single-family Residence
Variance(s) Requested: Request from the area provisions of Section 36-156 to permit
more than 30% coverage of the rear yard for an accessory
building.
Justification: The applicant’s justification is presented as per the attached
letter dated January 19, 2021.
STAFF REPORT
A. Planning and Development Civil Engineering:
No Comments.
B. Buffering and Landscape Comments:
In October 2020 the City adopted the “Heights Landscape Design Overlay District,”
requiring installation of one tree per forty (40) linear feet of street frontage within the
Heights District Boundary, applicable to [among other types] residential construction
in excess of 600 square feet.
C. Building Codes Comments:
The required fire separation distance (building to property line) prescribed by the
building code terminates at five (5) feet. Buildings are allowed to be closer than
five (5) feet if they have properly constructed fire walls which provide the requisite
one (1) hour fire resistance rating. When buildings are five (5) feet or more from the
property line, the requirement no longer applies to the wall itself, only the projections
such as eaves or overhangs.
Openings such as doors and windows are limited when the exterior wall is three (3)
feet from the property line and are prohibited when the exterior wall is less than three
(3) feet from the line. There is no restriction on openings when the exterior wall is
more than three (3) feet from the property line.
Contact the City of Little Rock Building Codes at (501)371-4832 for additional details.
1
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 12 (CON'T.) Z-9570
D. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property is located in the Heights Overlay District at 1701 N Palm
Street and occupied by a one-story single-family frame home. A driveway on N Palm
Street serves as access to a parking structure at the rear of the property. The
adjacent and surrounding properties are also predominantly single-family
residences.
The survey indicates that the rear yard is mostly occupied by a carport with an
attached frame structure, and freeform concrete patio. The building and carport are
located approximately 4.5 feet from the east (rear) property line and 2.5 feet from
the north (side) property line. The patio fills most of the remainder of the backyard
with shrub vegetation between the structures and the concrete deck edge.
The applicant is proposing to remove the existing concrete patio and install an in-
ground swimming pool and associated pool deck. In addition, the applicant also
proposes to construct a small addition to the rear of t he primary residence that will
extend into the rear yard.
The addition to the primary dwelling is indicated to be 16 x 22 feet in area. This new
structure will not expand into the 25-foot rear yard setback and a variance for the
extension will not be required. The proposed swimming pool is shown to be
constructed within the allowable setbacks for accessory structures.
The rear yard is approximately 1,875 square feet in area. The frame building
occupies approximately 705 square feet of this space. Currently, the rear yard
coverage exceeds the 30 percent maximum allowance by an approximate 8 percent.
The proposed 16x20 pool will be mostly located in the rear yard setback and add an
additional 300 square feet to the area bringing the overall rear yard coverage up to
approximately 54 percent.
Sec. 36-156(a)(2)c states, “Accessory buildings or structures in the R-1 through R-
4A districts… may not occupy more than thirty (30) percent of the required rear yard
area... Swimming pools and all appurtenant structu res both above ground and below
grade of adjacent yard area shall be construed to be accessory structures and
conform to the standards of this section…”
Staff views the rear yard coverage of this existing small space as minor compared
with the buildable capacity available to the property owner. The proposed in-ground
pool would have less of an impact on the surrounding properties than an above -
ground structure. In addition, the expansion of the primary dwelling is allowable
within the code requirements. This proposal is similar to other neighborhood
installations. Apart from the house addition the additional backyard coverage cannot
be viewed from neighboring properties and presents no foreseeable adverse effects
to the neighboring residences.
2
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 12 (CON'T.)Z-9570
E. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested coverage variance per the attached
site plan, subject to a building permit being obtained for all construction.
Board of Adjustment (March 18, 2021)
The applicant was present. There were no persons registered in opposition. Staff
presented the item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “Staff
Recommendation” above. There was no further discussion.
The item remained on the Consent Agenda for approval. A motion was made and
seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0
absent.
3
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 13 Z-9571
File No.: Z-9571
Owners: JL House Investments LLC
Applicant: Jason & Lara Hum
Address: 4419 Country Club Blvd.
Legal Description: Lot 8R, Block 4, Country Club Heights Addition
Zoned: R-2 (Single-Family District)
Present Use: Single-family Residence
Proposed Use: Single-family Residence
Variance(s) Requested: Request from the area provisions of Sec. 36-156 to allow a
reduced side yard setback for an accessory building in an
R-2 District.
Justification: The applicant’s justification is presented as per the attached
letter dated January 19, 2021.
STAFF REPORT
A. Planning and Development Civil Engineering:
1.Only 6.5 ft. is proposed from the garage to the property line. A vehicle parked
outside of the garage will be off the subject property and within the public right-
of-way. Per Sec. 30-5, it is unlawful for any person to block any part of any
right-of-way, street, or alley of the city. In addition, per Sec. 31 -256, building
lines for residential lots shall be at least 25 ft. form each street property line.
The garage should be relocated to at least 20 ft. from the property line.
B. Buffering and Landscape Comments:
In October 2020 the City adopted the “Heights Landscape Design Overlay District,”
requiring installation of one tree per forty (40) linear feet of street frontage within the
Heights District Boundary, applicable to [among other types] residential construction
in excess of 600 square feet.
C. Building Codes Comments:
The required fire separation distance (building to property line) prescribed by the
building code terminates at five (5) feet. Building s are allowed to be closer than
five (5) feet if they have properly constructed fire walls which provide the requisite
one (1) hour fire resistance rating. When buildings are five (5) feet or more from the
property line, the requirement no longer applies to the wall itself, only the projections
such as eaves or overhangs.
Openings such as doors and windows are limited when the exterior wall is three (3)
feet from the property line and are prohibited when the exterior wall is less than
1
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 13 (CON'T.) Z-9571
three (3) feet from the line. There is no restriction on openings when the exterior
wall is more than three (3) feet from the property line.
Contact the City of Little Rock Building Codes at (501)371-4832 for additional
details.
D. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property located at 4419 Country Club Boulevard was previously
occupied by a single-family residence. The property sets on the southeast corner of
North Palm Street and Country Club Blvd. The original home has since been
demolished and the property divided into two separate single-family lots. The subject
property occupies the western half of this formerly larger parcel and fronts Country
Club Blvd. A single-family home is planned for the adjacent east property, and the
rear-yard of the development will be located adjacent to a single-family home to the
south that faces N Palm Street.
The applicant is proposing a 20’x20’ detached garage to be located on the west side
of the site adjacent to North Palm Street right-of-way. The property owner is
requesting that it be allowable for the garage to be placed 6.5 feet from the right -of-
way line instead of the15 feet side-yard setback as required for accessory buildings.
The lot is indicated to be 65 feet at its widest point requiring a minimum 6.5 -foot side
yard setback between the primary structure and the east and west property lines.
With minor exceptions, most of the primary dwelling will be located 10 feet from the
side yard boundaries. The site plan specifies that the proposed detached garage will
be positioned on the primary dwelling setback line at 6.5 feet from the street right -
of-way.
The applicant has stated that requiring the structure to be located 8.5 feet further to
the east within the fifteen (15)-foot accessory building boundary is not feasible due
to the size and terrain of the site. Also, by adhering to the accessory building
requirement the length of the drive would extend to almost 30-feet but eliminate most
of the back yard. The provided site sketch indicates that the garage is proposed to
be placed 6.5 feet east of the west property line and would provide for a twenty (20)-
foot drive length from the front of the garage to the back of the street curb and retain
a backyard living space.
Section 36-156(2)(c) states “Accessory buildings or structures in the R-1 through R-
4A districts shall not be located closer than sixty (60) feet to the front property line,
fifteen (15) feet from a street side line and may not occupy more than thirty (30)
percent of the required rear yard area.”
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow an encroachment of an accessory
structure into the west side-yard setback. However, when measuring the sketch
provided by the applicant it appears that there is only an approximate ten (10) feet
of drive west of the property line totaling 16.5 feet between the street and the face
of the garage.
2
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 13 (CON'T.)Z-9571
As proposed, the site variance request will provide a larger rear yard. Staff views the
variance request as generally reasonable but is requesting that garage be moved
an additional 3.5 feet to the east. This adjustment will align the front of the garage
with primary western residence wall 10 feet east of the property line. This will provide
a twenty (20)-foot drive between the street curb and the garage; and also preserve
the majority of the rear yard space.
Based on the analysis above, Staff believes the proposal is in keeping with the
character and scale of the neighborhood.
E. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested side yard setback with the following
conditions:
1. The garage be placed 3.5 feet further to the east aligning the garage with the
primary western wall of the residence creating a minimum 20 -foot drive length
between the face of the garage and the back of the street curb.
2. Install trees in accordance with the Heights Landscape Design Overlay District.
Board of Adjustment (March 18, 2021)
The applicant was present. Two (2) persons registered in opposition, although they were
absent during the presentation of the item. The item was heard on the Regular Agenda.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “S taff
Recommendation” above. There was no further discussion.
There was a motion to approve the application as recommended by staff. The motion
was seconded. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent.
3
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 14 Z-9572
File No.: Z-9572
Owners: Moses and Joyce Ejiofor
Applicant: Billy Joe Rouse Jr (Lexcor, LLC)
Address: 1402 Loyola Drive
Legal Description: Lot 1, Block 4, Phase 3, The Village of Wellington
Zoned: R-2 (Single-Family District)
Present Use: Single-family Residence
Proposed Use: Single-family Residence
Variance(s) Requested: Request from the area provisions of Sec. 36-513 to allow a
driveway to exceed the 20-foot width limitation.
Justification: The applicant’s justification is presented as per the attached
letter dated December 14, 2020.
STAFF REPORT
A. Planning and Development Civil Engineering:
1. Loyola Drive is 31 ft wide and striped with a bike lane and existing sidewalk at this
location with multiple modes of transportation uses. The applicant proposes a
driveway width that exceeds the existing street width. The less than or equal to 27.5
ft width proposed by staff is acceptable. Once on the property outside of the public
right-of-way, the driveway can widen to the desired width.
2. Per City code Sec. 30-43, the maximum residential driveway shall not exceed 20 ft.
The 20 ft maximum shall not apply to a paved driveway to a garage or carport
provided the paved driveway does not exceed the width of the garage or carport and
the distance from the right-of-way to the entrance of the garage or carport is less
than 50 ft. Limit two (2) car garages. The driveway should be constructed per CLR
Public Works Detail PW-30 and PW-31.
3.The National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Report 659 states than
anywhere from eleven (11) to nineteen (19)% of all reported urban traffic collisions
involve a driveway. The location and design of a driveway affects both traffic flow
and safety on both the driveway and on the adjacent public street. Driveway s should
be located and designed to minimize negative impacts on traffic operations while
1
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 14 (CON’T) Z-9572
providing safe entry and existing to/from the abutting property. The location and
design should take into account characteristic of the roadway, abutting propertie s,
and the various users.
B. Buffering and Landscape Comments:
No Comments.
C. Building Codes Comments:
No Comments.
D. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property located at 1402 Loyola Drive lies within The Villages of
Wellington neighborhood which is predominantly made up of single-family homes.
Loyola Drive is characterized by a single row of houses on both the north and south
sides of the street. Most of the houses in this area include drives that acce ss
attached garages facing the roadway or side yards.
The subject property faces north with the garage and drive access located on the
west side of the property. The existing drive curb-cut is approximately 21.5 feet in
width. Within the property boundary, the drive is proposed to widen an additional
approximate 10 feet allowing an off-street parking pad west of the garage. The edge
of this parking area is bordered by a small retaining wall approximately eight (8) feet
from the neighboring property.
The applicant has provided a site plan proposing an additional 7.9 -8.9 feet of paving
adjacent to the existing drive. In addition, a new retaining wall will be located on the
edge of the new paving and a small portion of the west property line. The plans also
indicate that the proposed drive will extend into the street right-of-way expanding the
overall drive width to 36 feet.
Sec. 36-513(d) states, “No person, including any owner, tenant, manager, or
occupant of property used as a residence, shall allow any person to, keep, store or
park any motor vehicle on any portion of a front yard or corner street side yard of
any property used as a residence, except on a paved surface or on an unpaved
designated driveway area and parking pad not to exceed twenty (20) feet in
width….”
Sec. 36-513(d)(1) states, “The twenty-foot width limitation shall not apply to a
paved driveway to a garage or carport, provided the paved driveway does not
exceed in width the width of the garage of carport;”
The existing drive does exceed the width of the garage. The applicant is requesting
an additional width expansion of the drive to the west with an associated new
retaining wall adjacent to the proposed expansion. The proposal also requests an
2
MARCH 18, 2021
ITEM NO. 14 (CON’T) Z-9572
extension of the drive into the public right-of-way which would exceed the maximum
opening of a residential driveway as stipulated in Sec. 30-43(2) “Layout and design
generally”, for the construction of curbs, driveways, and sidewalks.
The documentation provided by the Village of Wellington Community Association
declines to allow the widening of the drive beyond the property line. Little Rock Public
Works has also been consulted and will accept the drive widening in the public right-
of-way to the width of the existing drive, 27.5 feet but not to the 36 foot width of the
proposed paving and new retaining wall inside of the property as requested by the
applicant. Staff finds the request to generally be in conforma nce with the
development pattern in this area. Based on the above assessment and analysis,
Staff finds the requested variance width for the expansion within the property lines
to be reasonable.
E. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested driveway width expansion within the
limits of the property, with the following conditions:
1. The drive expansion into the public right-of-way shall be limited to an
additional width of 5.5 feet, to an approximate 27.5 feet total width as
recommended by Planning and Development Civil Engineering.
Board of Adjustment (March 18, 2021)
The applicant was present. There was no person registered in opposition. Staff
presented the item and a recommendation of approval as outlined in the “Staff
Recommendation” above.
Representing the application, Billy Rouse, Jr. (Lexcor, LLC) expressed opposition to the
staff recommendation and conditions as outlined in the staff report. He stated that the
request to expand the full drive width into the public right -of-way was characteristic of other
homes in the Wellington neighborhood.
Staff explained 20 feet, or the width of the garage, dictate the maximum wid th of the
driveway, and staff recommends 27.5’ as a “compromise width” within the street right -of-
way.
The applicant asked if the 27.5’ driveway width within the Loyola Drive right -of-way is in
addition to the driveway curb returns, and staff responded, “yes.”
There was a motion to approve the application as recommended by staff. The motion
was seconded. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 noes, and 0 absent. The application was
approved.
3
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT - VOTE RECORD
DATE: 03-18-21 Time:4:00PM
Time In / Time Out
In
Out
ALLISON, FRANK
P
BERTRAM, JAMES
R
GRINDER, AUSTIN
R
JUSTUS, JOE
R
LASHLEY, KATHERINE
P
ITEM & VOTE Item Number:
ALLISON, FRANK
Minutes
✓
BERTRAM, JAMES
✓
GRINDER, AUSTIN
✓
JUSTUS,JOE
✓
LASHLEY, KATHERINE
✓
Consent
P= Present
R= Webex
V AYE ■ NAYE A ABSENT R RECUSE AB ABSTAIN Meeting Adjourned 5:30 PM
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT - VOTE RECORD (Continued)
DATE: 03-18-21 Time:4:00PM
Time In / Time Out
In
Out
ALLISON, FRANK
P
BERTRAM, JAMES
R
GRINDER, AUSTIN
R
JUSTUS,JOE
R
LASHLEY, KATHERINE
P
P= Present
R= Webex
ITEM & VOTE Item Number:
ALLISON, FRANK
Regular
1
✓
3
✓
10
✓
11
✓
13
✓
14
✓
BERTRAM, JAMES
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
GRINDER, AUSTIN
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
JUSTUS,JOE
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
LASHLEY, KATHERINE
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
V AYE • NAYE A ABSENT R RECUSE AB ABSTAIN Meeting Adjourned 5:30 PM
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT - VOTE RECORD CHAIR/VICE-CHAIR ELECTION
DATE: 03-18-21 Time:4:00PM
Time In / Time Out
ALLISON, FRANK
P
BERTRAM, JAMES
R
GRINDER, AUSTIN
R
JUSTUS,JOE
R
LASHLEY, KATHERINE
P
ITEM & VOTE Item Number:
Chairman (Allison)
vice -Chair (Bertram)
ALLISON, FRANK
✓
✓
BERTRAM, JAMES
✓
✓
GRINDER, AUSTIN
✓
✓
JUSTUS,JOE
LASHLEY, KATHERINE
✓
✓
✓
✓
P= Present
R= Webex
V AYE • NAYE A ABSENT R RECUSE AB ABSTAIN Meeting Adjourned 5:30 PM
MARCH 18, 2021
There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 5:30
p.m.
Date: /-2-6 Z6
Chairman Secretary