boa_02 14 1983LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD
FEBRUARY 14, 1983
2:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum.
A Quorum was present being six in number.
II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting.
The Minutes of the previous meeting were approved as
mailed out.
,I
III. Members Present: Ellis Walton
B.L. Murphree
Tom McGowen
Steve Smith
Marcelline Giroir
George Wells
Members Absent: Joe Norcross
Richard Yada
1 Vacancy
February 14, 1983
Item No. 1 - Z-3934
Owner:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Variance
Requested:
Present Use of
Property:
Proposed Use of
Property:
Tom A. Buford
5512 S. Grandview
Lot 49, Grandview Addition
"R-2" Single Family
Relief from Section 7-101.2d to permit
an side yard varying from 0.9 feet to
4.7 feet for a garage addition.
Single Family
Same
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The applicant plans to construct a new garage next to the
existing garage. The house to the south sets very close to
the intervening property line. Several trees appear to be
in jeopardy if this construction takes place. Staff is most
concerned that this proposal will create a too tight
relationship between houses.
Staff recommends denial.
BOARD ACTION: (12-20-82)
The applicant had requested deferral. The Board moved to
defer the item to the January 17 meeting. The motion
passed: 5 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 vacancy.
STAFF COMMENT:
Staff has received no new information regarding this case
but understands that the applicant is working to amend his
proposal.
February 14, 1983
Item No. 1 - Continued
BOARD ACTION: (1-17-83)
The applicant was present and there were a couple of
neighbors present. The neighbors, Robert Cohen and
Frank Leeder, both spoke in opposition to the proposed
addition to the house. Both cited esthetic values as well
as the closeness to the property line proposed by the
applicant. The applicant stated that he wanted to amend his
request to move the garage to the rear of the house removing
the existing one car garage and beginning the new two car
garage at what is now the rear wall of the present garage.
This would move the structure back approximately 23 feet
from the front of the existing house, thereby separating it
further from the house to the south. There was some
discussion of this proposal. Staff stated that it was
unable to make a recommendation based upon the new
information without an on -site inspection. The Board moved
to defer the matter to the February 14 meeting. The motion
passed: 6 ayes, 0 noes and 1 vacancy.
BOARD ACTION: (1-14-83)
The applicant did not appear, and since staff had not heard
any new information from the applicant, the Board moved to
withdraw this item from the agenda. The motion passed -
6 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent, 1 vacancy.
February 14, 1983
Item No. 2 - Z-3950
Owner:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Variance
Requested:
Present Use of
Property:
Proposed Use of
Property:
Pi Kappa Alpha
By: Arthur Pengelly
NW Corner 30th and Taylor Streets
Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8, Block 7,
C.O. Brack's Addition
"R-5" Urban Residence
Relief from Section 7-101.5 to permit
a 6-foot front yard and no side yard
for a deck
Fraternity house
Same
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The applicant's proposal is to construct an open deck as
shown on the graphic. Without access to complete plans,
staff expects that such construction will require removal of
a considerable amount of existing foliage, including one or
two substantial trees. Streets in this neighborhood are
very narrow, having 40 feet rights -of -way and about 15 feet
of paving width. The rear yard of this property is very
large and open, offering plenty of room for decks or patios.
Staff does not find any justification for the variance
requested and recommends denial.
BOARD ACTION: (1-17-83)
The applicant was not present, and the staff stated that the
filing fee had not been paid nor had notices been sent and
requested that this item be deferred to the February 14
meeting. The Board moved to approve the deferral. The
motion passed: 6 ayes, 0 noes and 1 vacancy.
BOARD ACTION: (2-14-83)
The applicant was not present. No action had been taken by
the applicant. The Board moved to withdraw this application
from the agenda. The motion passed - 6 ayes, 0 noes,
2 absent, 1 vacancy.
February 14, 1983
Item No. 3 - Z-3958
Owner:
Description:
Zoned:
Variance
Requested:
Present Use of
Property:
Proposed Use of
Property:
James A. and Sandra Rogers
Tracts 2, 3 and 4, Rushing and Tice
Subdivision
"I-2" Light Industrial
Relief from Paragraph 4a, Section B,
Article 5 of the Flood Hazard Ordinance
to permit construction within a
presently designated floodway.
Vacant
Warehouse
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The applicant obtained permission in 1981 to fill on this
property from the City of Little Rock. At that time, the
Flood Hazard Ordinance did not designate this property as
part of the floodway. In 1982, the floodway map was
altered, and this property became a part of the Rock Creek
Floodway. The filling had already been accomplished. The
applicant wanted to build his building. He is seeking
relief from the ordinance, and the Engineering Department
feels that he has a substantial hardship. Enclosed in your
packet are copies of the information received from the
Engineering Department. Someone will be present to speak on
this issue.
BOARD ACTION:
The applicant was present as was Mike Batie from the City
Engineering staff. Mr. Batie showed graphics which depicted
the changes in the floodway designation that had taken place
between 1981 and the present time. He stated because of the
unusual circumstances of this case that he was recommending
approval of this variance. It was determined by the Board
of Adjustment that Mr. Rogers did have an extreme hardship
in that he had attempted to comply with all City regulations
and that those regulations had been altered after he had
begun his project without his knowledge. The Board moved to
approve the variance for Mr. Rogers because of the hardship
factor and the fact that Mr. Rogers had complied with City
Ordinance. The motion passed - 6 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and
1 vacancy. The Board wanted the record to reflect the fact
that this variance was granted because of the hardship to
the applicant, that it was not intended to mean that future
variances would be easy to obtain.
February 14, 1983
Item No. 4 Z-3959
Owner:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Variance
Requested:
Present Use of
Property:
Proposed Use of
Property:
Mary Remmel
By: Mallory Crank
5819 Ampersand Street
Lot 1 and the North 12 feet of Lot 2,
Block 14, Parkview Addition
"R-3" Single Family
Relief from Section 7-101.3 D to permit
a 2.5-foot South yard and a 4.5-foot
North yard for a garage and deck
addition.
Single Family
Same
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The applicant proposes to construct a new garage to replace
one which was destroyed by the tornado a few weeks ago. The
original garage was somewhat smaller and detached from the
house, but the proposed structure will be a two car garage
and be attached. In addition, the applicant proposes to
construct an expansion of the existing deck system as shown
on the sketch.
The lot was platted with its frontage on Grant Street, but
the Ampersand Street frontage is actually the front yard for
this dwelling. The proposed garage would extend towards the
street to align with the existing house, and it will be 4.5
feet from the property line. The deck on the rear of the
house will extend to within 2.5 feet of the south property
and align with an existing deck.
Staff recommends approval as shown.
BOARD ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors. After
a brief discussion, the Board moved to approve the
application as filed. The motion passed - 6 ayes, 0 noes,
2 absent and 1 vacancy.
February 14, 1983
Item No. 5 - Z-3960
Owner:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Variance
Requested:
Present Use of
Property:
Proposed Use of
Property:
Tola Bates
By: Mallory Crank
7305 Cantrell Road
Lots 4, 5, 20, 21, 22, 23 and 24,
Block 1, Riffel and Rhoton's Addition
"C-3" General Commercial
Relief from Section
0 setback along the
for an addition.
Boat Sales
Same
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
7-103.3 D to permit
South property line
The applicant proposes to construct additional covered
storage for boats. Most of the structure is expected to be
open -sided; however, the south end may be enclosed. This
proposal has a variety of problems associated with it.
Kentucky Avenue is a substandard street which will require
that this owner dedicate 10 feet of right-of-way and
construct street improvements. There is a significant slope
downward from the existing fence line to the street.
The applicant states that two options are being considered:
(1) construction of a retaining wall and fill; (2)
supporting a raised floor with pier and beam construction.
Dedicating 10 feet of right-of-way will eliminate parking
spaces 2 and 3 shown on the sketch and reduce the usable
space between the existing building and the new south
property to about 13 feet.
Staff has no particular problem with the zoning aspects of
this request. Having not seen specific details of the
proposal beyond those presented here, we are doubtful about
the cost/benefit ratio of this project.
Staff has no objection to the setback variance so long as
all of the above mentioned issues are carefully resolved.
Approval should be keyed to Engineering and utility approval
of all plans and the proper dedication and improvement of
Kentucky Avenue.
February 14, 1983
Item No. 5 - Continued
BOARD ACTION:
The applicant was present, and there were no objectors.
After a lengthy discussion of the various issues associated
with this application, the Board moved to approve the
application as filed. The motion passed - 6 ayes, 0 noes,
2 absent and 1 vacancy. The Board did note that there were
a number of issues that needed to be settled, and the
applicant agreed that they would work with Engineering and
the Permits Office in order to assure that all construction
was done in accordance with City ordinances.
February 14, 1983
Other Business
The Board discussed a letter it had received from Robert E.
Farrell M.D. concerning a guest house at 501 N. Elm Street.
The Board, after some discussion of the letter and in view
of the fact that Dr. Farrell was not present, instructed
City staff to write Mr. Farrell and tell him that they would
like him to appear at the next Board of Adjustment meeting
and to notify neighboring property owners that the meeting
would be held so that if they wanted to they could make
comments as well.
The Board also is considering amending the bylaws such that
information relative to notice procedures are included.
This matter will be considered at the next meeting in
March.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned
at 3:15 p.m.
U
❑ate
e e
chairman