Loading...
boa_06 15 1981LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD June 15, 1981 2:00 P.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum A Quorum was present being five in number. II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting. The minutes were approved as mailed out. III. Members Present: Marcelline Giroir, Chairperson Jim Summerlin William Ketcher Ellis Walton Jerry Wilcox Members Absent: Richard Yada George Wells City Attorney Present: Lester McKinley June 15, 1981 Item No. 1 - z-3673 Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: variance Requested: Present Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property: Carmo, Inc. By: Hershel Moseley 10100 Mabelvale Pike Long legal "R-2" Single Family Relief from Section 8-101-I to permit a waiver of paving on a bicycle, motocross dirt track Commercial refrigeration business Same, plus the track Staff Recommendation: The applicant in this case has completed the action through the Little Rock Planning Commission. The Planning Commission failed to approve the request to rezone this property from "R-2" Single Family to "C-4" Open Display, and as a result the applicant will not be permitted to construct the race track that was proposed and was the subject of this variance request. On the basis of this information, Staff recommends that the Board simply withdraw this application from its Agenda with the proviso that the applicant may refile at a later date if required. Board Action: The Board formally withdrew this application from this agenda with the provision that the applicant may refile at a later date if necessary. The motion for withdrawal was passed: 5 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent. June 15, 1981 Item No. 2 - Z-3698-A Owner: Calvary Baptist Church By: Ralph Cloar, Jr. Address: No address Description: Block 11, Mountain Park Addition Zoned: "R-2" Single Family (110-1" Quiet Office requested) Variance Requested: Relief from Section 7-102.1D to permit five-foot setbacks on Pierce and Fillmore Streets Present Use of Property: Single Family Proposed Use of Property: Church and related facilities Staff Recommendation: The applicant has submitted the necessary site plans for review by Staff and the Planning Commission. These plans will be sent along with this agenda to the Board of Adjustment. Staff is satisfied that the applicant has provided the necessary information and is also satisfied that the proposed development warrants the variances being requested at this time. Staff recommends approval of the two front yard variances being requested. Board Action: The applicant was present, and there were no objectors. Staff went over the development plan with the Board of Adjustment and the applicant made a number of comments. After a brief discussion, the Board moved to approve the variance as requested. The motion was passed: 4 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 abstention (Jim Summerlin abstained). June 15, 1981 Item No. 3 - Z-1937-B Owner: Greater Paradise Baptist Church By: Rev. Jerry Black Address: 12th and Johnson Streets Description: Lots 4, 5 and 6, Block 12, Jones and Worthen Addition Zoned: "0-3" General Office Variance Requested: Relief from Section 8-101 to waive all required parking Present Use of Property: Church Proposed Use of Property: Church Staff Recommendation: This application is a continuation of an earlier variance request from the church. The original issue dealt with the construction of a larger sanctuary, and this request deals with the desire to eliminate any additional parking requirement which would be brought about by the increased seating capacity of the sanctuary. Although the present parking for the church is located off -site, which is in conflict with the Zoning Ordinance, there appears to be no possibility of providing on -site parking for the church without the church being able to acquire land on several surrounding lots. Staff cannot support a waiver of any parking of this magnitude, and the Staff recommends denial. Board Action: The applicant was present, and there were no objectors. There was a lengthy discussion about the parking issue relating to this case. Several attempts were made to come to some reasonable solution. The Board made a motion to appoint a committee of its members to work with the church and staff to try to work out some reasonable solution to the parking problem. A motion to appoint the committee and to defer the matter was passed: 5 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent. Jim Summerlin and Jerry Wilcox volunteered to work on the committee. June 15, 1981 Item No. 4 - Z-3301-A Owner: Markham Inn By: Robert J. Bailey Address: 5120 West Markham Description: Long Legal Zoned: "C-3" and "R-3" Variance Requested: Relief from Section 7-103.3 to permit side and rear yard waivers. Present Use of Property: Motel Proposed Use of Property: Motel Staff Recommendation: Proposed development will require a franchise from the Board of Directors. This has been requested. This variance request will permit a scaled -down addition similar to one approved by the Board of Adjustment approximately two years ago. The proposed setbacks will produce no hardship on any other land use relationship. Staff recommends approval. Board Action: The applicant was present, and there was one objector. There was a lengthy discussion about this variance and the variance which had been received earlier by the same applicant. After a lengthy discussion, the Board moved to defer consideration of this matter for a period of one month in order that the applicant have time to submit more complete plans on this proposed development. That motion was passed: 5 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent. June 15, 1981 Item No. 5 - Z-3708 Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: Variance Requested: Present Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property: Chester M. Hall 3009 South Elm Street Lots 1 through 6, Block 6, Dickinson Mill Addition "I-2" Light Industrial Relief from Section 7-104.2E to permit a a 13-foot south side yard encroachment and a 10-foot front yard encroachment. Industrial Industrial Staff Recommendation: The applicant intends to add onto an existing industrial building and locating the addition on this end of the building is required because operating requirements involve the use of an overhead crane. This crane cannot feasibly be relocated to accommodate another expansion site, and there are no adverse land use relationships requiring any additional setback from 31st Street. Staff recommends approval. Board Action: The applicant was present, and there were no objectors. After a brief discussion, the Board moved to approve the application as filed. The motion was passed: 5 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent. June 15, 1981 Item No. 6 - Z-3704 Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: Variance Requested: Present Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property: Race Trac Petroleum Company By: Phil Norris 8000 Geyer Springs Road Track B-1, Marvin Bass Industrial Acres "I-2" Light Industrial Relief from Section 7-104.2 to permit an addition onto an existing structure. Gas Station Gas Station Staff Recommendation: The applicant proposes to construct an addition onto an existing nonconforming building for the purpose of providing rest room facilities. The addition will maintain the alignment of the existing building and no hardship upon any other owner will result. Staff recommends approval. Board Action: The applicant was present, and there were no objectors. After a brief discussion, the Board moved to approve the application as filed. The motion was passed: 5 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent. June 15, 1981 Item No. 7 - Z-3706 Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: variance Requested: Present Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property: Ellis M. James, Jr. By: Chuck Helgeson 5808 West 51st Street Lot 13, Honeysuckle Hill Subdivision "R-2" Single Family Relief from Section 7-101.2D to permit a 16-foot rear yard encroachment. Single Family Single Family Staff Recommendation: The applicant proposes an addition to an existing house. The development potential of the lot is impacted by platted building lines on both street frontage sides of the lot. The proposed addition should produce no hardship upon any other neighboring owner. Staff recommends approval. Board Action: The applicant was present, and there were no objectors. After a brief discussion, the Board moved to approve the application as filed. The motion was passed: 5 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent. June 15, 1981 Item No. 8 - Zoning Ordinance Interpretation Request: Section 4-103F of the Zoning Ordinance states that the Planning Commission shall not [approve] a site plan which "does not comply with the minimum height and bulk and area or density regulations applicable to the zoning classification for which the site plan has been requested" (Page 43). There is not a clear opinion among Staff regarding this statement's meaning. Two interpretations seem possible as follows: 1. That it means that the Planning Commission does not have the authority to permit less than required setbacks, higher densities or height variances. 2. That no site plan can be approved which requires variance from standards of the ordinance. Explanation: If the first interpretation is correct, then it simply means that an applicant must receive approval from the Board of Adjustment prior to incorporating some variance into a site plan to be approved by the Planning Commission. It means that the Planning Commission has no special powers granted to it under the site plan review procedures, which it does not have under the other sections of the ordinance, thereby preserving the authority of the Board of Adjustment granted under Section 3-101. The second interpretation would eliminate all possibility of approving site plans designed to deal with problem locations, topography or uses. This interpretation would seem to undermine the purpose of site plan review. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that this paragraph of Section 4-103F be interpreted to mean that the Planning Commission is prohibited from granting variances in conflict with provisions of Section 3-101, but that it is possible for the Board of Adjustment to grant such variances as warranted, using the authority granted to them under Section 3-101. June 15, 1981 Item No. 8 - Continued Board Action: There was considerable discussion about this Zoning ordinance interpretation. After a full explanation of the issues by Staff and the City Attorney, the Board moved to follow the Staff recommendation thereby interpreting paragraph 4-103F to mean that the Planning Commission is prohibited from granting variances under the site plan review process, but the paragraph does not prohibit an applicant from seeking a waiver from the Board of Adjustment on a project for which site plan review is required. That motion was passed: 5 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent. June 15, 1981 Item No. 9 - Z-3709 Owner: Pleasant Valley, Inc. By: Sharon Cain Address: Tract E-2, Riverdale Addition Description: Long Legal Zoned: "0-2" Office and Institutional Variance Requested: Relief from Section 7-102.2 to permit a 35-foot setback on a 95-foot tall building. Present Use of Property: Vacant Proposed Use of Property: Office Staff Recommendation: The applicant plans to construct a seven -story office building which will serve as the headquarters for the Allied Telephone Company. This project is to be accomplished under Act 9 Bonds, which have been approved by the Little Rock Board of Directors. The variance issue results from the long range plan for the development of this property. Tract E-2 represents one-half of the total property proposed for development by Allied. The company has an option on a tract immediately to the southeast, and it is proposing that a second matching office building be constructed on that tract later and then, that the two buildings be attached to result in one large building containing two office towers. Once completed, the resulting development would have more than required setback from all property lines, but the financing arrangements preclude construction of the entire project at this time, or the inclusion of the second lot in this present phase. There seems to be no public interest in requiring the extra setback for this project. Staff recommends approval. June 15, 1981 Item No. 9 - Continued Board Action: The applicant was present and presented a site plan for this development and explained the specifics of the proposal and the need for the variance. There were no objectors. After a brief discussion, the Board moved to approve the application as filed. A motion was passed: 5 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent. June 15, 1981 Item No. 10 Request: Staff has received a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Floyd Dean, who received a variance to build a carport on their residence at 2221 Howard Street, on July 21, 1980. In the letter, Mr. and Mrs. Dean state that the high interest rates and the cost of construction have forced them to delay their plans for construction for at least this year. They have requested that an extension of the variance granted be provided for that same period. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the variance be extended for Mr. and Mrs. Dean for a period of one year. This would mean that between now and July 31, 1982, construction permits could be granted, using this variance. Board Action: Staff explained what had occurred relative to this earlier variance request (reference zoning case file Z-3512), and the Board moved to approve an extension of the variance approval for a period of one year. A motion was passed: 5 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent. June 15, 1981 There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m. Date: Chairman_________._._._______ S cre�ar r