Loading...
boa_11 21 1983LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD NOVEMBER 21v 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. III. Present: Ellis Walton Richard Yada Steve Smith Thomas McGowan Joe Norcross B.L. Murphree Absent: George Wells Herbert Hideout City Attorney: Hugh Brown November 21, 1983 Item No. A - Deferred Matter - Z-1390-A Owner: U-Haul, Company of Arkansas By: James R. Munson Address: 4809 West 65th Street Description: A part of Tract 17, Leigh and Butler Acres Zoned: "I-3" Light industrial District Variance Requested: From the rear yard setback provisions of Section 43/7-104.2 of the Little Rock Code of Ordinances to permit a 15-foot setback. JUSTIFICATION The site to be built upon will be approximately 12 feet below the grade of the properties lying to the south. Therefore, the building will not be visible from the apartments. After erection of a privacy fence which has been suggested by the applicant, the view of this site will be considerably diminished. Further, this proposal will keep vehicles between the buildings, and the present paint building will be eliminated. It is now completely exposed. Present Use of the Property: Sales, rentals and repair of vehicles. Proposed Use of the Property: Remain the same. STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues There are no reported issues. There will be some excavation on the site but that action should not adversely affect adjacent properties. B. Staff Analysis This site was occupied in the late summer of 1964 by this usage after the owner committed to a specific site plan with amendment allowed only through review by the Planning Commission or Board of Adjustment. We feel the structure intended is a good use for the site and will upgrade the property. We see no problem with the prior plan or addition of this structure. In fact, the November 21, 1983 Item No. A - Continued proposal at hand will eliminate a use area now located in a metal structure which appears to be a vehicle painting facility. We do think that the fence along the south property line is a necessity and should be part of the Board's motion if the variance is approved. The fence should be opaque in nature and located so as to provide protection against damage by vehicle maneuvering in the adjacent apartment house parking lot. Staff Recommendation The staff feels that the variance requested is justified by the site circumstances and improvement of the property adjacent to its residential neighbors. Approval of the proposal subject to the fence as noted above. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The application was represented. Staff advised the Board that the notice to adjacent property owners had not been accomplished as directed; therefore, the issue should be deferred until the following meeting. The applicant was advised of the date. A motion was then made to defer the matter to November 21, 1983. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (11-21-83) The application was represented by Mr. Munson. It was noted for the record that proper notice had been provided. Mr. Munson made brief comments in support of his request. There were several persons in attendance objecting to the proposed construction. These persons were represented by Beverly Rochell, Rental Agent for Westgate Apartments, also by Betty Holt, the resident manager of the building. Objectors offered concerns about noise and after -hour operation of this use. They feel that this proposal would promote the continuance of these types of disturbances. Mr. Munson offered for the record that the business is now a 24-hour a day activity which will, to some extent, negate the requirement for the burglar alarm which appears to be one of the principal sources of complaint. A discussion of the application then followed resulting in a motion to approve the application as recommended by the staff which requires a 6-foot board fence, opaque in nature, to be provided generally along the south property line. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. November 21, 1983 Item No. 1 - Z-4077-A Owner: Eldo Properties, Inc. Address: Riverbend Road at the Arkansas River Description: Tract D-2A, Riverdale Addition Zoned: "MF-18" Multifamily District Variance Requested: Provisions of Section 13A-16 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Little Rock to permit a dock structure within a current designated floodway. JUSTIFICATION None is offered inasmuch as this structure and the use are recreational in nature and not a hardship circumstance. Present Use of the Property: None - under development as condo's Proposed Use of the Property: A 20' x 20' deck over the floodway STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has approved the plans for this structure. The City Engineer also reviewed and approved the action. The Planning Commission and City Board of Directors has authorized the use by issuance of a conditional use permit in September of this year. B. Staff Analysis A structural involvement should not present problems for the area either physically or aesthetically. The staff feels a well designed, properly located accessory structure of this nature can be an asset to the subject site. C. Staff Recommendation The staff recommends approval of the requested variance to allow construction as approved by the Corps of Engineers. November 21, 1983 Item No. 1 - Continued BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The application was represented. There were no objectors present. There was a brief discussion of the proposal followed by a motion to approve the application as filed. The motion passed by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 abstention (Joe Norcross). November 21, 1983 Item No. 2 - Z-4124 Owner: Mr, and Mrs. Claiborne Patty, Jr. Address: 324 Midland Avenue Description: Lot 9 and the S 1/2 of Lot 8 and the N 2/3 of Lot 10, all in Block 13 Midland Hills Addition Zoned: •R-3" Single Family District Variance Requested: From the side yard setback provisions of Section 43/7-101.3.D of the Code of Ordinances to permit intrusion of 2.1' into a required 5-foot side yard. JUSTIFICATION 1. -The owner states that internal structural configuration of the residence limits living area in the kitchen. 2. Excessive slope prohibits extension into the rear yard. 3. Location in the kitchen of the breakfast area dictates side yard intrusion. Present Use of the Property: Residence Proposed Use of the Property: Remain the same STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues There are no repprted problem areas relative to structural or utility involvement. All off -site improvements are in place. B. Staff Analysis The request is one of a few which appear on the surface difficult to justify due to the use being one of personal preference. We feel that even though the strict application of hardship requirements say deny the request, there is merit from a human need standpoint. Livability of the residence would be enhanced by this addition. There are no problems with light and air circulation inasmuch as adjacent homes are well separated from this site. C. Staff Recommendation Appproval of requested variance. November 21, 1983 Item No. 2 - Continued BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant, Mr. Patty, was present and offered additional comments in support of his request. A brief discussion of the proposal followed. A motion was made to approve the application as filed. The vote: 6 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. November 21, 1983 Item No. 3 - Z-4122 Owner: Carl F. Keller, Jr. Address: 1700 North Palm Street Description: Lot 30, Cliffwood Addition Zoned: "R-2" Single Family District Variance Requested: From the rear yard setback provisions of Section 43/7-101.2.D of the Code of Ordinances to permit construction of a carport attaching an accessory building to the principle structure and maintaining a 3.7-foot rear yard. The addition is to include a second story for a bedroom. JUSTIFICATION 1. The owner's architect states the present neighborhood appearance, retention of several large trees and concealing the structure from view as justification. Present Use of the Property: Residence Proposed Use of the Property: Remain the same STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues There are no reported problem areas relative to structural or utility involvement. All off -site improvements are in place. B. Staff Analysis Staff view of this variance request is that a true hardship has not been identified. However, consideration of disruption or destruction of neighborhood aesthetics by removal of trees is certainly some justification as is retention of the streetscape. All adjacent setbacks and building relationships will remain the same inasmuch as this proposal will place a two story addition between two existing two story structures. C. Staff Recommendation Approval of the variance as requested. November 21, 1983 Item No. 3 - Continued BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: Mr. Keller was present. There were no objectors in attendance. After a brief discussion, the Board voted on motion to approve the application as filed. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. November 21, 1983 Item No. 4 - Z-4128 Owner: Fred and Ted Darraugh By: Robert Richardson Address: Rock Creek Adjacent to the Terminus of Shady Lane Description: Lot 19, Darraugh Addition Zoned: "R-2" Single Family District Variance Requested: Under provisions of Section 13A-16 of the Code of Ordinances to permit construction of an 8 inch sanitary sewer line on piers within the floodway of Rock Creek. JUSTIFICATION 1. The developer, through his engineer, Robert Richardson, states that sewer access to a recently approved single family plat must be provided by extending this eight inch main across the creek. Present use of the Property: Floodway for Rock Creek Propose use of the Property: Remain the same with a utility crossing STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues This variance has been reviewed by the various public agencies. At this time, we have not received adverse comments from anyone. This sewer line will serve at least 10 residential lots on the hill above the creek. The line as proposed for placement is located on supports at an elevation approximately 12' below the 100 year flood elevation of 2651. B. Staff Analysis The staff feels that the issue at hand is one for technical review and approval by the Corps of Engineers and the City Engineer. We find no problem with the proposal to serve this plat as requested. November 21, 1983 Item No. 4 - Continued C. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the request subject to the engineer of record providing a letter for the file reflecting the approval of the Little Rock Wastewater Utility on the design of this facility and certification by the Corps of Engineers as to their approval. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant was not present nor was his engineer. However, Mr, Mike Batie of the City Engineering Division of the Public Works Department provided comments in support of the proposal. There were no objectors in attendance. A brief discussion followed. A motion was then made to approve the application subject to the staff recommendation. A motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. November 21, 1983 Item No. 5 - Z-3672-B Owner: Hillcrest Camshaft Service, Inc. By: Joseph C. Kemp, Attorney Address: 3517 Asher Avenue Description: Lot 1, Shelby and Reynolds Subdivision Zoned: 0I-2" Light Industrial District Variance Requested: From the side yard setback provisions of Section 43/7-104.2 of the Code of Ordinances to permit an existing building on an an existing slab with a 5-foot setback to be extended 25' southerly. JUSTIFICATION 1. The applicant states that the present building was constructed in 1977 at a time when the Little Rock Zoning Ordinance did not require a side setback. The slab for the now proposed construction was constructed at that time with the same 5-foot side yard setback as the building. The applicant states further that the present ordinance adopted in 1980 and subsequently amended created the larger requirement of 15' now in effect. The integrity and the uniformity of the building would be damaged by requirement of the 15-foot setback. STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues There are no reported adverse comments from any of the reviewing agencies. The lot is platted and all dedication and street improvements are in place. B. Staff Analysis The staff view of this request is that the variance is justified based on the points made by the applicant and the open relationship between buildings in this neighborhood. There should be no adverse impact on any abutting owners. C. Staff Recommendation Approval as requested. November 21, 1983 Item No. 5 - Continued BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant, Mr. Kemp, was present and made further comments in support of his request. There were no objectors in attendance. A brief discussion of the proposal was held followed by a motion to approve the application as filed. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. November 21, 1983 Item No. 6 - Z-2079-E Owner: Baptist Medical Systems Address: 9601 Interstate 630 Description: Lot 2, Baptist Medical Center Development Subdivision Zoned: 110-2" Office and Institutional District Variance Requested: 1. From the setback provisions of Section 43/7-102.2 to permit 0' setback on the front and 0' setback on the west. 2. Height provisions of Section 43/7-102.2 of the Code of Ordinances to permit a height of 235' 6' on an office tower and 80' on a parking deck (permitted maximum height by ordinance on both structures is 120 feet). JUSTIFICATION (1) The proposed design allows the potential of the land to be used for its intended purpose in the most appropriate and desirable way. It preserves and recaptures open space, remains in character with the existing campus (low base buildings with high rise on top), lessens the impact of on grade parking and provides for the best pattern of circulation, and (2) vehicular and pedistrian to be maintained within the site and along Lyle Avenue. The proposed design allows the long range operations of the facility to be more cost-effective due to the creation of services and the minimizing of lost motion of people and services allowed by its layout. This is offered for your review due to the overall implication of health care costs and the regulatory agencies requiring this as a prime consideration in health care facility design. Present Use of the Property: Medical Systems parking Proposed Use of the Property: Construction of an office tower and a parking deck November 21, 1983 Item No. 6 - Continued STAFF REPORT Engineering Issues There are no adverse comments from reviewing agencies at this writing. Specific comments concerning ingress and egress and the traffic flows in the area are expected from the City Engineer's Office. All off -site physical improvements are in place on Lyle Drive. A subdivision site plan has been reviewed for the total project by the Planning Commission which will be followed by a replat of this tract to accommodate the movement of the platted building line along Lyle Drive. B. Staff Analysis Development proposal set forth in the following paragraphs is entirely appropriate to the site and circumstances. There are no negatives exposed by our review of this project, only indication that the Baptist Medical Center is continuing to provide for good development in a cohesive design. Item No. B-1 - Project Analysis As Filed by Architect The proposed project consists of a combined hospital and professional office building with a parking deck which will be built on land that is zoned "0-2." The Arkansas Rehabilitation Institute (ARI) will house 160 patients and will be located on the first five floors. Two floors will be shared with MT II. Medical Towers II will occupy the upper 12 floors with medical office condominiums. The total structure is 17 floors. ARI will occupy 136,303 gross square feet. MT II will occupy 206,025 gross square feet. The parking deck will contain 810 spaces. The total parking area will be 1,122 spaces for this project. The entire project will be built on Lot 2 of the Baptist Medical Center development. The lot contains 36.114 acres. The structural coverage will be 6.9 acres or 19,14 percent of the property. Staff Recommendation The Planning staff recommends approval of the requested variances as filed. November 21F 1983 Item No. 6 - Continued BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The Baptist Medical Center was represented by Mr. Earl Paul. He made a brief statement in support of the proposal. There were no objectors in attendance. A brief discussion followed. A motion was made to approve the application as filed. The motion passed by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 abstention (Joe Norcross). November 21, 1983 Item No. 7 - Z-2832-8 Owner: Phoenix Real Estate, Inc. Address: 5619 "R" Street Description: East 140 feet of Lot 12, Block 12 Mountain Park Addition Zoned: "C-3" General Commercial District Variance Requested: From the setback provisions of Section 43/7-103.3.D of the Code of Ordinances to permit reduction of the front yard to 0' and rear yard to 20'. JUSTIFICATION This applicant states that he feels the proposal approved earlier this year established the side yard and front yard setbacks on this lot. He maintains that adding a second story and squaring the building should not require a return to the Board of Adjustment if all other ordinance requirements are met. Present Use of the Property: Vacant land Proposed Use of the Property: Two story office building with four parking spaces STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues There are no reported adverse comments at this writing. All off -site improvements are in place except for improvement of the alley on the east and some sidewalk work along "R" Street. B. Staff Analysis This request brings to the Board of Adjustment a question that has arisen on many occasions which is_are site plans in support of variances secured to the extent that a design change complying with the setbacks granted allowed to occur. Staff has long held to the proposition that all variances are attached to specific November 21, 1983 Item No. 7 - Continued site plans, the plans being basis for approval by reflecting the hardship issues. There are good points to be made for a redesign such as offered by this owner if the circumstances of the lot were more conventional. The lot size and severe reduction in usual setbacks negate most of these arguments. Record of the Board of Adjustment action on May 17, 1982, is the following: "Staff Recommendation: The applicant proposes an 800 square foot octagonal structure for this property. The 800 square foot commercial use would require two parking spaces according to ordinance. This lot, a legal lot of record created in 1950, is quite small and difficult to develop. There is a sidewalk between the alley just east of this property and Fillmore Street to the west running along "R" Street in front of this property. The staff feels that the appropriate location for the building would be on the front of the property having no front yard setback and placing the proposed parking to the south end of the property. This will create a more neighborhood business appearance and will tend to ensure that patrons will not be backing from the parking space directly onto "R" Street. Staff recommends approval of the variance which will result in the building location stated above and with the condition that the alley be paved along this property. Board Action: (5-17-82) The applicant was present, and there was one objector present. The applicant made a brief presentation to the Board and stated that he was in agreement with the staff recommendation to move the building forward and move the parking to the rear of the property. There was considerable discussion and it was pointed out that the site plan showed 18-foot parking stalls versus the 20' required by ordinance. There was considerable discussion of the need to obtain a variance in order to provide this size of parking space. November 21, 1983 Item No. 7 - Continued The objector, Bill Watt, 1819 North Fillmore, an attorney representing several property owners in the block stated that all of the owners were opposed to the variance because they saw the proposed construction to be a burden to them. He spoke primarily of traffic and parking considerations. There was a lengthy discussion of all of the issues involved. The Board moved to approve the application as per staff recommendation allowing zero front setback from "R" Street and a 15-foot rear yard. The motion passed: 6 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. The Board also made a motion to have the record show that the parking stall length of 18' was discussed and that the Board did not grant any variances from Section 8-101 of the Zoning Ordinance. It further wished the record to show that a 13-foot right-of-way exists between the property line where the building would be located and the curb of "R" Street. This motion passed: 6 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent." C. Staff Recommendation: (11-21-83) Staff's position on this issue is that we are strongly opposed to placement of a two story building on the subject site. There are several reasons for this position, not the least of which is lot size. The ordinance requirement for "C-3" lots is 14,000 square feet which means this 40' x 50' lot is 14 percent of the required land area and is less than one-half the required width for such lots. There are good arguments to support some use of the land inasmuch as the lot is a lot of record of long-standing. However, the use of the site for more than the previously allowed 800 square feet would be an imposition on the neighborhood in its present circumstance. That is, deficient parking. There is no assurance that the building constructed will always be utilized by offices since it is zoned "C-3" and has many uses allowed of significant traffic generation. The staff recommendation is that the Board give consideration to allowing the previously permitted 800 square feet in a rectangular building of one story with all other conditions of the prior approval to remain. November 21F 1983 Item No. 7 - Continued BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant, Mr. Buffington, was present and offered additional comments in support of his request for a two story building. There were no objectors present. The Board then entered into a lengthy discussion of the proposal. There were several options or alternatives offered for solution of the problem. There were several motions offered by various members of the Board with no seconds. Each of these motions failed. A final action motion was made for securing denial of the proposal. However, this motion and vote was expunged by a later action of the Board. In place of the previous expunged record, the Board entered a motion to approve the application as requested for a one story building with dimensions reflected on the proposed site plan and a provision for four car spaces on the rear of the lot area. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. November 21, 1983 Item No. 8 - Z-2550-A Owner: Budget Rent-A-Car of Arkansas, Inc. By: Mike Allwine Address: 4509 East Roosevelt Road Description: Long Legal Zoned: "I-2" Light Industrial District Variance Requested: From the front yard setback provisions of Section 7.104 of the Code of Ordinances to permit expansion of an existing building with an 18.8-foot setback from the street right-of-way (required by Ordinance at 501), JUSTIFICATION The applicant states in his letter that an airport realignment of Roosevelt Road to the south around this property will render the site without access and that the airport runway project will acquire this site within three years. Therefore, is a temporary addition until a new site can be located and new construction accomplished. Present Use of the Property: Rent -a -car firm Proposed Use of the Property: Remain the same with car wash facility and parking spaces STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues There are no adverse comments from reviewing agencies. There are no street improvement issues attached inasmuch as Roosevelt Road is proposed for relocation to the south. This property was previously submitted to the Board of Adjustment in 1981 for a parking lot paving variance which was approved. November 21, 1983 Item No. 8 - Continued B. Staff Analysis This request is temporary in nature due to the impending airport project. This site and many adjacent acres will be utilized in creating a new runway system extending to the Arkansas River over a mile distance. The justification offered appears to be acceptable although we do not at this writing have a written statement on this issue from Mr. Rogers at the Airport Commission Office. We would not desire by our recommendation or action of the Board to create or imply additional value for public acquisition when the Airport Commission takes title to this property. The structural involvement here is insignificant as a percentage of lot coverage. The structure proposed is 34' x 55' on one acre of land. The setback issue would not be significant even if the airport project was not on line. Staff Recommendation Approval as filed, subject to a three year limit on continued use of the site for the proposed car wash. Further, that a letter be obtained from Mr. James Rogers of the Airport Commission agreeing to the expansion and the time limit. Mr. Rogers advised this office by telephone that he's not opposed to this request. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: Mike Allwine was present representing Budget Rent-A-Car. There were no objectors in attendance. A brief discussion followed. A motion was then made to approve the application subject to the comments included within the staff recommendation relative to the time limit and letter from the Airport Commission. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. November 21, 1983 Item No. 9 - Z-2981-A Owner: Poe Travel, Inc. By: James Moses Address: 915 Cumberland Street Description: The N 1/2 of Lot 5 and the South 12 1/2 feet of Lot 4. Block 44 Original City of Little Rock Zoned: "HR" High Density Residential Variance Requested: From on -site parking provisions of Section 43 of the Code of Ordinances to permit less than the required percentage on -site and 9 of 13 total off -site. JUSTIFICATION This owner does not offer specific comment as justification, only a general statement as to a desire to remain in the building and in the Quapaw Quarter area. In support of the variance the owner proposes to lease a parking lot approximately 150 feet from the building containing 9 stalls. This parking area will provide for a total of 13 spaces which includes four now on -site. Thirteen spaces is the requirement for the total floor space of the existing and new structures. Present Use of the Property: Travel agency office Proposed Use of the Property: Remain the same with additional floor space STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues There are no adverse comments received at this writing. Should there be off -site parking spaces allowed as requested, there will be a need for a design review of that parking and a long-term lease to commit parking tc this site. Long-term in this instance is usually determined to be at least 10 years. The lot involved in this application is a lot of record and existed as is many years. However, we would like to point out that this ownership is only 37.5' wide. November 21, 1983 Item No. 9 - Continued B. Staff Analysis The property was involved in an application for a conditional use permit in January 1976. At that time the owner, Poe Travel Agency, requested use of this as a travel agency office, using a residential building and providing four paved parking spaces. The ordinance required seven parking stalls at that time, three of which were waived by the Board of Adjustment. The conditional use permit required that some provision be made to leave adequate open ground space for protection of the large trees in the rear yard area. This review by this office suggests that the proposed addition is an overbuilding of the site, inasmuch as the existing lot has problems with bulk, area and parking. The existing proposal to locate nine parking spaces off -site could work providing a long-term irrevocable lease is produced along with evidence that the parking meets all ordinance standards as to surfacing, marking and access to the street. At this writing, they have not provided this office any information to exact location of the nine stalls or the structure of a lease. The structural involvement in this request appears excessive on so small a lot and could possibly lead to similar requests on adjacent lots, thereby severely impacting the historic character. There is at this time a requirement for review by the Historic District Commission dealing with modification of the status of this building and block of structures involved in the original approval. Staff's feeling is at this time that the proposal presented here is to ambitious for so small a lot. Staff Recommendation Denial of the requested variance. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The application was represented by Mr. James Moses. Mr. Moses offered additional comment in support of the proposal, his argument countering those offered by the staff recommendation. Mr. Moses offered a letter for the record from the property owner immediately across the street being the Knights of Columbus Association. This letter in general terms offered to provide off-street parking for the nine required spaces for an indeterminate time. A lengthy November 21, 1983 Item No. 9 - Continued discussion of the proposal and the parking issue followed. There were a number of motions made by various members of the Board. The motions failed to reach a conclusion, that is, failed to receive seconds or affirmative votes. A final motion was made to approve the variance as filed accepting the letter offered by Mr. Moses from the Knights of Columbus as an agreement to run with the land and not with the tenancy presently in the building. The motion passed by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent, 1 abstention (Ellis Walton). November 21, 1983 There being no further business before the Board of Adjustment, the Chairman adjourned the meeting at 9 p.m. Date �?--\°�•4� 12Z Secre ar airman