boa_08 19 2021BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Frank Allison - Chairman
James Bertram - Vice-Chairman
Austin Grinder
Joe Justus
Katherine Lashley
The five (5) member board of Adjustment is a quasi-judicial body.
Hearing Procedure – Opportunities to speak will be given to the applicant and others for or
against an application. A spokesperson should be designated for large groups to avoid repetition
and save time. Each person speaking is requested to use the microphone, giving first his or her
name and address. Persons in the audience are requested to keep conversations to a minimum
and to refrain from clapping or other noises. Your cooperation is appreciated.
Voting – During Public Hearings where fewer than the full Board membership is present, every
application shall be required to receive three (3) affirmative votes to approve or deny issues
other than procedural matters. Those items failing to receive three (3) votes for approval or
denial are automatically deferred to the next scheduled meeting as specified by the Little Rock
Board of Adjustment. An application not receiving three (3) votes either for approval or denial
on the second appearance before the Little Rock Board of Adjustment is automatically denied.
If the full Board is present at the first appearance and an application does not receive at least
three (3) affirmative votes, then the application is automatically denied.
Time Limit – All variances for approval with or without conditions shall be granted for a period
of two years from the date of approval. Within the two year time period the applicant should
have obtained a building permit as well as initiate some type of construction.
Appeals – In the event of denial of the variance requested, the applicant has the right to file an
appeal with Circuit Court if pursuit of the request is desired.
Office – For information or assistance, contact can be made at the Department of Planning and
Development, located on the first floor, 723 West Markham Street or by telephoning 371-4790.
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
AGENDA PROCEDURE
AUGUST 19, 2021
4.00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
II. Approval of the Minutes of the July 15, 2021
meeting of the Board of Adjustment
III. Presentation of Consent Agenda
IV. Presentation of Hearing Items
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SUMMARY OF MINUTES
AUGUST 19, 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 July 15, 2021 meeting of the Board of Adjustment.
The Minutes of the June 17, 2021 meeting were
approved.
Members Present: Frank Allison - Chairman
Richard Bertram -Vice Chair
Justin Grinder
Joe Justus
Katherine Lashley
Members Absent: None
City Attorney Present: Sherri Latimer
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
ABBREVIATED AGENDA
AUGUST 19, 2021
4:00 P.M.
OLD BUSINESS:
1. Z-9590 1700 Beechwood Street
NEW BUSINESS:
No New Business
AUGUST 19, 2021
ITEM NO.: 1 Z-9590
File No.: Z-9590
Owners: Walton Mary Ellis Bullion Revo Living Trust
Applicant: Ellis Walton
Address: 1700 Beechwood Street
Legal Description: Lot 7, Cliffwood Addition to the City of Little Rock
Zoned: R-2
Present Use: Single-family Residence
Proposed Use: Single-family Residence
Variance(s) Requested: A variance is requested from area regulations of Sec. 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.
STAFF REPORT
A. Planninq_and Development Civil Engineering Comments:
No Comments.
B. Bufferinq 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 property at 1700 Beechwood Street is located in 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 subject property is located on the west side of the street, south of the
intersection of Cantrell Rd and Beechwood St. The existing 2-story masonry home
was recently constructed in this established neighborhood and built to the limits of
the setback lines.
1
AUGUST 19, 2021
ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T.) Z-9590
The survey indicates a 6-foot utility easement spilt by the rear property line. This
places 3-feet of the easement on the subject property and 3-feet on the neighboring
property to the west. A fence is shown 3.5-feet east of the easement line and the
rear wall of the home is located approximately 18-feet from this point.
The applicant has described the rear yard of their home as an outdoor garden space
surrounded by privacy fences and is requesting an extension of the primary
structure. A sketch proposing an addition to an existing patio on the southwest
corner of the home has been provided. This covered porch addition is shown to
encroach into the rear yard to a depth of 9-feet and a width of 23.5 feet.
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 primary structure 9-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 variance 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 (16) feet with the following conditions:
1. A building permit being obtained for all construction.
2. Install trees, if deemed applicable at the time of building permitting, in
accordance with Heights Landscape Design Overlay District requirements.
Board of Adjustment
(July 15, 2021)
Mr. Rodney Parham of Polk Stanley Wilcox Architects was present, representing
the applicant. There was one (1) person registered in opposition. Staff presented
the item and a recommendation of approval. The applicant deferred to the
registered opposition.
Mr. C. Winston Brown addressed the Board in opposition to the application. He
stated that he opposed the extension of the patio into the rear yard due to the
additional light, site, and sound that would impact his property. Mr. Brown
presented several photographs to demonstrate his concerns. He stated that he
had visited with his neighbor, Ms. Walton regarding these issues and also met with
Mr. Parham to discuss possible options. Mr. Parham stated that an existing TV
mounted on the current patio wall will not be relocated, additional sound (speakers)
will not be installed, the expansion will only require two (2) new columns, and the
porch addition will only be raised eight (8) inches above finished grade of the
backyard.
2
AUGUST 19, 2021
ITEM NO.: 1 (CON T.) Z-9590
Chairman Allison inquired about the porch elevation and site lines from the
opposition's property. Mr. Parham responded that during the visit to the
oppositions property he could only see the top of the TV located on the wall of the
applicant's porch.
Chairman Allison inquired about landscaping options. Mr. Parham responded he
is encouraging two (2) options with the owner to address the oppositions concerns:
1) to install a trellis with vines between the columns and 2) eliminating the porch
addition and adding an open-air accessory structure closer to the property line. It
was noted that an accessory structure may be more intrusive but could be
constructed within the code requirements without seeking a variance
Mr. Brown addressed concerns regarding elevation stating this is an elevated
home that requires four (4) steps at the front entrance.
Chairman Allison recommended a trellis extending the entire length of the property
line as an immediate solution to address screening concerns. Mr. Brown
responded he did not see landscaping as a solution.
Chairman Allison asked staff to clarify setbacks for accessory structures. Staff
provided clarification, specifically the side yard setback and noted that accessory
structures may be connected to the residence with a roof constructed over the
walking paths.
Chairman Allison further proposed a compromise that a trellis be added to mitigate
some of Mr. Brown's concerns as a condition to be added to staffs conditions. Mr.
Parham responded he does not have authority to modify the application regarding
subsequent conditions.
Mr. Brown addressed the Board and agreed with installing a trellis to provide
screening but was opposed to any expansion.
Board Member Grinder stated Mr. Brown already has concerns with the existing
residence and inquired about the issues the opposition has with the addition? Mr.
Brown responded that he is primarily concerned with the possible addition of
people, light, and noise that would be encountered from his property.
The board members discussed deferring the application to provide the applicant
and Mr. Brown an opportunity to resolve any concerns.
Mr. Parham requested that the Board defer the application.
A motion was made to waive the By -Laws to allow the Board to request a deferral
and seconded. The vote was 4 ayes, 1 nay and 0 absent.
A motion was made to defer the application and seconded. The vote was 4 ayes,
1 nay and 0 absent. The application was deferred.
3
AUGUST 19, 2021
ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T.) Z-9590
F. Staff Update:
As per the oppositions attached letter an agreement has been reached with the
applicant concerning their rear yard setback variance request. The opposition has
withdrawn their previous objection to the requested variance.
Board of Adjustment
(August 19, 2021)
The applicant was present. There were no persons present 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. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent.
rd
August 19, 2021
There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at
4:07 p.m.
Date
Chairman