Loading...
boa_09 28 1983LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SUMMARY AND MINUTE RECORD SEPTEMBER 28, 1983 5:00 P.M. I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum. A Quorum was present being 8 in number. II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting. The Minutes of the Previous Meeting were approved as mailed. III. Members Present: Members Absent: Ellis Walton George Wells Richard Yada Joe Norcross B.L. Murphree Steve Smith Thomas McGowan Herbert Rideout None (There is one open position on the Board at this time.) City Attorney: Carolyn Witherspoon September 28, 1983 Item No. 1 - Z-4084 Owner: First Baptist Church Address: 901 Calhoun Street Description: Long Legal Zoned: "R-3" Single Family District Variance Requested: From all yard setbacks of Section 43-7-101.3 of the Code of Ordinances and a variance of the off-street parking provisions to permit 54 parking spaces in lieu of 60 required Justification: The applicant states that there are several points of justification on the building variance. The configuration of the block which is askewed at a severe angle thereby creating a design problem. Although the projection on the front is beyond the setback line, it is behind the plane of the present building plus the building averages over 25' in setback. The block contains an alley which is not open and adds to the setback offered of 101. A minimum of 30' of open space will exist between the new building and the lot -line to the east. As to the parking variance: 1. The growth potential of the church is on the adjacent property to the south of the present sanctuary. Therefore, the parking has to be replaced off -site. 2. The church feels that development of the block across the street to fill church needs would be better design and use. The church hopes to acquire the remaining lots across the street for additional spaces and develop the entire six lots as parking. Present Use of the Property: Church and vacant lots Proposed Use of the Property: Remain same with expanded structure and parking September 28, 1983 Item No. 1 - Continued STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues The only engineering issues attendant to this proposal concern final design on parking lots, drives to those lots and the need for opening alleys not now in use. The basic street improvements are in place. B. Staff Analvsis The staff view of this variance is that the request is well documented and researched by the applicant with a resultant justifiable application. Points raised by the applicant we feel support the variances. However, there are several points of discussion we would like to raise. 1. The number of parking spaces is dealt with as ordinance requirement and it is obvious that even 60 spaces will not provide all of the parking needs for a 300 capacity church. There will be on -street parking. 2. Future expansion of this facility beyond 300 seats as suggested by the applicant will probably add a requirement for many additional parking spaces. It is the feeling of staff that these spaces should be so located as to be within the block from 9th to loth on either side of the street. Such location should not present a single family residence boxed in between adjoining parking lots and interrupting the continuity of property usage. 3. The applicant should be committed to returning to the Board of Adjustment for review of future parking expansion plans. 4. The potential for additional seats within the sanctuary should be tied down to a future review so as to preclude the addition of significant seating without review by the Board. 5. The staff's view of the alley behind the church is that it should not be opened, but retained as a permanent green strip in the block. We would ask that the City Engineer Division review and approve any opening of the alley on the west side of Calhoun. September 28, 1983 Item No. 1 - Continued 6. The Board should be aware that this variance is preliminary to a conditional use permit application to be reviewed by the Planning Commission on October llth. Any motion should comment on that action to follow. C. Staff Recommendation Approval of the request, subject to applicant commitment to items 2-5 above. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: Mr. Jerry Wooldridge, the architect for the project, was present and presented a brief comment on the project. There were no objectors in attendance. Staff and the Board held a brief discussion. A motion was then made to approve the variance package as requested subject to the comments of staff in Items 2-5 of the staff recommendation. The motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 nay, 1 abstention (Herbert Rideout). September 28, 1983 Item No. 2 - Z-3646-A Owner: Claude Carpenter Address: 801 Marshall Street Description: Part of Block 1, Fausts Addition Zoned: "0-3" General Office District Variance Requested: From the off-street parking provisions of Section 8 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit accessory parking for Arkansas Children's Hospital Justification: The applicant points to a need for parking for the Children's Hospital immediately across Marshall Street and a strong personal obligation to the hospital. The owner states that he hopes to sell the lot to the hospital, but doesn't know when they will be able to afford the purchase. He further states that when notified by the hospital that they no longer desire to purchase the lot he will use it as an office property. Present Use of the Property: Parking lot/operation of unauthorized commercial lot Proposed Use of the Property: Accessory parking for Children's Hospital STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues None attendant to this request. B. Staff Analysis The application filed is the result of enforcement action against the owner. The parking lot in place and operating has received much attention from the City over the past year. The issues raised by staff are: 1. Operating a commercial parking lot in an 110-3" zone which is not permitted. 2. Deficient landscaping to qualify with City ordinance. A plan for development of the lots landscaping has been reviewed and approved by the Permits staff, but has not been completely executed. September 28, 1983 Item No. 2 - Continued The staff feels that the request before the Board can only be valid if the Children's Hospital forwards a written commitment to purchase the land or provide a long-term lease. The Board of Adjustment cannot allow a commercial lot for any pay arrangement in an "0-3" zoning classification. C . Staff Recommendation Denial of the request as filed unless the applicant can present documentation described in the staff analysis whereby the lot becomes accessory parking to the hospital and not a principle use of the land. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: Mr. Claude Carpenter was not present. A request was presented for deferral of this item to the October 17th Board meeting in order to permit sufficient time to resolve the involvement of the Children's Hospital in the usage of this site. There were no objectors present. However, one letter of objection was received. A motion was then made to defer this item to the regular scheduled meeting on October 17, 1983. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 nay. September 28, 1983 Item No. 3 - Z-4094 Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: variance Requested: Justification: Robert East 2621 North Fillmore Street Lots 1 and 2 of Block 24, Parkview Addition "R-2" Single Family District From the side yard setback provisions of Section 43-7-101.2 of the Code of Ordinances to permit a 2' setback The applicant states that the existing structural setback in place since 1965 provides for fixed relationships within the kitchen and dining room that preclude the placement of the addition at another location. Specific justification for the fireplace variance is not offered except that he would like to place it as shown. Present Use of the Property: Single Family Proposed Use of the Property: Remain the same with additional floor space STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues None attendant to this request. B. Staff Analysis The staff view of this request is that it is justified only for the room addition proposed and not for the fireplace location. The present alignment of the house at a 4-foot setback will not be significantly expanded by an 8-foot addition to the west, if this is the last structural change. We see a potential for a future garage or carport addition which could extend the 4-foot side yard another 20 plus feet. We do not encourage such a construction and suggest that if the Board feels disposed to grant the room variance, that a September 28, 1983 Item No. 3 - Continued prohibition be attached. As to the fireplace, we feel that the owner should research the possibility of constructing a fireplace with the outside wall flush with the 4-foot setback line and projecting into the room area. We feel the length of the addition and relationship with adjacent residences are basis for denial of the fireplace. C. Staff Recommendation Approval of the 8' x 12' room addition and denial of the fireplace setback. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: Mr. East, the applicant, was present and addressed the Board. There were no objectors in attendance. A brief discussion was held concerning the modification of the chimney dimension to a 14-inch intrusion into the side yard. Staff suggested its recommendation was not modified by this change. The Board then acted on a motion to approve the application as filed with the modification on the chimney to allow a 14-inch intrusion into the side yard. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 nay. September 28, 1983 Item No. 4 - Z-4091 Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: variance Requested: Justification: Patrick Goss 2800 North Taylor Street Park of Block 16, Parkview Addition "R-2" Single Family District From the side yard setback provisions of Section 43-7-101.2 of the Code of Ordinances to permit a 2.1' setback The applicant states that the proposed construction will provide for additional floor space for removal of a laundry area from the kitchen. This will allow for a seating area for eat in kitchen arrangement plus the addition will house a new storage area to replace a storm damaged outbuilding. A pantry will also be included within the area. The floor layout of the house dictates the location of the addition there being no further option. Present Use of the Property: Single Family Proposed Use of the Property: Remain the same with additional structural space STAFF REPORT A. Fngineerinq Issues None attendant to this request. B. Staff Analysis The staff review of this proposal does not reveal information which suggests that the variance is warranted. It is obvious that there is a family circumstance which could be remedied by the addition. However, in the interest of consistency, we feel compelled to retain as much of a required yard area as possible. We observed that the neighbor on the north has maintained a good side yard relationship and from a pure visibility standpoint, the intrusion would not be offensive. We do not feel it is appropriate to require the owner on the north to maintain the needed light, air and safety aspects of the setback requirement within his lot. September 28, 1983 Item No. 4 - Continued C. Staff Recommendation Denial of the variance request. We would further like to point out for the record that the addition noted on the front of the house is not included for variance but for informational purposes. We would suggest that the applicant pursue further review of design possibilities with his architect. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: A letter was presented to the Board from Mr. Goss requesting the withdrawal of this item from further consideration. He stated in his letter of request that he had redesigned the proposed structure so as to remove the variance required. The Board voted on a motion to withdraw this item from the agenda. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 nay. September 28, 1983 Item No. 5 - Z-4083 Applicant: Warren Baldwin Address: 39385 John Affolter Lane Description: Long Legal Zoned: 11R-2" Single Family District Request: Review and interpretation of Zoning Ordinance relative to group home use of subject site for 1124 Hour Club" Justification: Zoning Ordinance makes no provision for this use except in a broader context of institutional occupancy. Present Use of the Property: Six acre land area with one log residence Proposed Use of the Property: A counseling home for women alcoholics with some overnight boarding. There would be four or five women living in the house and caring for the structure and the property. STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues The only issue which could be design or construction related is the access road from Taylor Loop which crosses other private ownerships. It would be appropriate should the Board allow this activity to document the record with easement access rights. B. Staff Analvsis This proposal was submitted to the Board of Adjustment as a follow-up to a previous issue reviewed by the Board several months ago. That issue was location of the same activity on Woodlawn Street across from the Hillcrest Safeway store. On that occasion, the issue of interpretation was not resolved due to the site being sold to another party. Mr. Warren Baldwin has searched many areas of northwest and central Little September 28, 1983 Item No. 5 - Continued Rock with a view to locating a site with little or no potential controversy. The site chosen and presented here is well removed from urbanized land as is possible and remain within the city limits. There are several single family preliminary plats approved within one-half mile radius and several large lot rural single family. The balance of this area is natural wooded terrain. The site is accessed by way of a narrow gravel road from Taylor Loop and then to Highway No. 10 approximately three quarters of a mile. The site contains a single log structure, which at one time was a montessori school. It's most recent occupant is not known to staff. The use as now proposed is, we feel, a true group home concept in that a closed group of persons will either live in or visit the site from time to time for counseling purposes. A residential atmosphere will be maintained about the structure with permanent occupancy in mind. The ordinance definition of group home is rather narrowly drawn and staff feels that it is too limited. The request here is entirely appropriate to the circumstances. C. Staff Recommendation Approval of the location as a group home and acceptance of this activity as a group home within the definition of the ordinance pertaining to family. We do feel that several conditions pertaining to this site should be resolved by the Board. 1. On -site parking to serve residents and visitors should be paved. 2. No new buildings should be added to the site without Board of Adjustment review. 3. A written assurance in the case file of access rights. 4. An up-to-date survey with improvements indicated should be provided for staff file. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: Mr. Warren Baldwin, the applicant, was present and made a lengthy presentation of his request discussing the activity level, the traffic generation and the occupancy average for this use. Mr. Robert Wilson and several adjacent owners made a presentation offering their concerns and objection to the type of usage proposed with this request. Mr. Dean September 28, 1983 Item No. 5 - Continued Williamson and Mr. Clint Boshears, developers and owners of adjacent subdivision land, expressed strong concern for the effect on land values and future development potential of this area of the City. A lengthy discussion of the proposal followed. A motion was then made to accept this use as a permitted use within the definition of family within the Zoning Ordinance as it applies to this site. With the attachment of the several items set forth in the staff recommendation, the motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 2 nays. September 28, 1983 Item No. 6 - Z-3095-B Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: Variance Requested: Justification: Fraternal Order of Police Lodge No. 17 201 North Izard Street Long Legal "0-3" General Office District From all yard setbacks of Section 43-7-102.3 of the Code of Ordinances and off-street parking provisions of Section 43-8-101. The applicant states the following: 1. That the largest maximum seating area possible be provided within the existing structure and expanded area. 2. That the meetings in general are held at 3:00 p.m. when two police shifts are already parking in the area approximately two blocks from the site. Most members will be parked on City parking areas prior to going on duty. Prsent Use of the Property: Proposed Use of the Property: STAFF REPORT Of f ice Expanded use a lodge facility A. Engineerinq Issues None attendant to this proposal. B. Staff Analvsis The Planning staff view of this proposal is that it is overbuilding an already impacted office use site. The existing building was expanded on the east side to a setback of 2.6' by Board of Adjustment variance in May of 1977. Prior to that time, the building was a residence. The staff supported that expansion to allow an 11' x 27' room addition for office use. The September 29, 1983 Item No. 6 - Continued activity proposed and later occupying the building was a low key office with very little parking demand and several off-street parking spaces provided. Those spaces were on the north side of the building and unimproved. The staff feels that we are asked here to approve a building addition as large as the present building and eliminate all on -site parking. This would present a total land coverage by structure of over 60 percent. On several occasions, the City Planning staff has made studies of this isolated pocket of residential being some eight square blocks in area and, on each occasion, the recommendation has been comprehensive redevelopment of large segments of the area. These recommendations were based principally on the deteriorating housing stock in the area, and few, if any, of the small business conversions being long-term viable. The streets in this area have been impacted for many years by employees of the many businesses within walking distance to the south. On most working days from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., few, if any, on -street parking spaces are available. Therefore, should this proposal be approved, the users will have to rely on public parking lots provided for police parking for their activity. The staff has concluded that long-term, the best interest of the City, the Fraternal Order of Police and the neighborhood will be better served if this request is not granted. C. Staff Recommendation Denial of the requested variances. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: Mr. Kenny Baer, representative of the Lodge, and several others were present. Mr. Baer briefly discussed the proposal with the Board offering comments concerning the staff recommendation. He stated in answer to a question from the Board that approximately 40 to 50 members of the lodge are in attendance at a regular meeting. These meetings are normally held in the afternoon between shift changes of the morning and afternoon shifts. He also pointed out that police personnel are on the site utilizing existing police and on -street parking. Mr. Sandy McMath, representing himself and several neighbors, appeared in opposition. He offered a lengthy comment on the proposal outlining the objections of the neighborhood. He offered a petition with 31 signatures of owners in the area. September 29, 1983 Item No. 6 - Continued Rosalie King and a Ms. Williams, residents nearby, spoke to the issue. A brief general discussion of the proposal followed. A motion was then made to deny the application. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 nay. September 28, 1983 Item No. 7 - Z-3410-A Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: Variance Requested: Justification: Faucett Development Company By: Ed Willis Financial Centre Parkway at Hardin Road Long Legal "0-3" General Office District and "C-3" General Commercial From the height provisions of Section 7-103.3 and 7-102.3 to permit an office structure of 10 stories or approximately 160 feet. The applicant states that economic feasibility, slope of the land, ground coverage and retention of trees are sufficient justification. Prsent Use of the Property: Vacant Proposed Use of the Property: An office building with attendant accessory commercial STAFF REPORT A. Engineering Issues There are several items for discussion as follows: 1. The alignment of the Financial Centre Parkway as an arterial thoroughfare impacts the south 50' + of this site. The Engineer Division of Public Works has begun discussion with the developer and his engineer with a view toward the appropriate design and dedication of right-of-way. It is suggested that if a variance is permitted, that it be conditioned on proper resolution of the street issue. September 28, 1983 Item No. 7 - Continued 2. If street right-of-way dedication is required, a subdivision replat will be required in order to dedicate the street. 3. The design of the arterial may seriously impact the design of curb cuts, internal circulation and possibly the building site. 4. The 25-foot buffer strip retained as "R-2" when rezoning this site will require a plan for replanting inasmuch as some of it has been cleared. B. Staff Analysis The staff view of this proposal, however, is that a structure of this magnitude is out of character with the neighborhood to the north and west. We do not believe that anyone envisioned more than four or five stories on this site at the time of rezoning. We feel that had that been the information dealt with a signficantly larger buffer would have been applied. The building proposed does provide for a large setback on the west against the existing single family. However, with most of the ground cover removed for parking spaces, that neighborhood will have a clear unobstructed view of almost everything above the third floor of the structure which will be approximately 1001. Although not dealt with in this application, there are a couple of sites north and east which could lay claim to an equal structural involvement thereby creating an office tower park more appropriate to a downtown location. If a development of this character had been proposed as a core structure for a mix of office heights and types and had it been placed at the location of Financial One, then perhaps it would have been appropriate in this neigborhood. As to the justification offered, the ordinance does not permit financial basis for variance. However, it does address terrain and unique site circumstances. We feel this project does not measure up to the type and character of development as permitted in the 110-3" and "C-3" districts adjacent to built-up single family areas. September 28, 1983 Item No. 7 - Continued C. Staff Recommendation Staff position on this application is prefeced by the following comments: First, office use is appropriate to this site, which is designated for this purpose both by zoning and the Suburban Development Plan. Second, the project would involve construction of Class "A" office space in a handsome structure. The building is conceived of as a landmark in west Little Rock and a private club would occupy the top floor. The project quality is not at issue. Third, height variances have been granted rather routinely in the past. Staff has no inherent objections to the granting of height variances. Rather, we think they should be granted when an applicant can demonstrate that such a variance is justifiable. The staff recommends denial of the request for variance of height above 60' permitted by ordinance in "0-3." However, we would recommend variance of the limitation within the 11C-3" portion of the site to permit a lesser height. This will, of course, require a redesign of the project to a building or buildings more compatible with the neighborhood. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: Mr. Ed Willis and Mr. Nolan Blass were present, representing the proposal. Prior to the applicant's presentation, Nathaniel Griffin of the staff offered additional comments and expanded staff recommendation relative to the proposal. Mr. Willis proceeded to offer a lengthy presentation utilizing various graphics and models discussing the history of the case and offering the owner's fixed position relative to the application. In answer to a question of the Board, Mr. Willis stated for the record that the minimum height acceptable to a financially feasible project would be eight floors at 108 feet + which would require a 48-foot variance. He also pointed out that that height would be located 165 feet from the west property line and include the vault element on the roof. The neighborhood was represented by approximately 25 persons in attendance. Several persons addressed the issue before the Board. Principal spokesperson, Mrs. Dorothy Stratton, spoke at length on the concerns of the neighborhood and specific objections to the proposal. Mr. Paul Walker was present and offered a September 28, 1983 Item No. 7 - Continued petition from the neighborhood. A lengthy general discussion then followed with various proposals submitted by the various factions for a reduced building height and siting relationships. It was then determined by the Board that the owner having stated his position on reducing the height and the neighborhood having taken a position of no variance above 60 feet, that a motion on the application as filed be in order. A motion was then made to approve the application as filed with the modification to permit a 165-foot setback from the west property line. This motion passed by a vote of 5 ayes, 2 nays, 1 abstention (Joe Norcross). September 28, 1983 There being no further business before the Board, the Chairman adjourned the meeting at 9 p.m. Date 5ecre ary f Chairman