Loading...
boa_03 19 1984LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES MARCH 19, 1984 2:00 F.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 were approved as mailed. III. Members Present: Members Absent: Ellis Walton George Wells Thomas McGowan B.L. Murphree Steve Smith Ronald Woods Joe Norcross Herbert Rideout 1 Open Position City Attorney: None March 19, 1984 Item No. A - Z-3826-A Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: Variance Requested: JUSTIFICATION: Dr. Gaylon Carter 9910 Chicot Road Lot lA of Burnelle Manor Subdivision "0-1" Quiet Office District From the rear yard setback provisions of Section 43/7-102.1D to permit reduction of the rear yard from 25 feet to 13 feet. The applicant states that a loss of architectural balance would occur if the addition is placed on the side of the building and that a loss of parking would occur if a building side placement is utilized. He also states that the ability to drive around the building would be restricted if the addition is on the side of the structure. Present Use of the Property: Chiropractic Clinic Proposed Use of the Property: Remain the same with an additional 876 square feet of floor space. STAFF REPORT: A. Engineering Issues There were none reported. B. Staff Analvsis The application as filed does not offer substantive reasons for expansion of the use. This is a recently rezoned and developed site which it appears did not receive design consideration for expansions. There are several options open to this owner including a second story which could be accomplished without variance. Unless and until a justifiable circumstance is offered in support of the request, we cannot recommend a variance. March 19, 1984 Item No. B - Continued 7. The lot adjacent on the south is owned by this same owner. Present Use of the Property: Service Station Proposed Use of the Property: Floor space for second business being an auto detail shop which is more or less a car wash. STAFF REPORT: A. Engineering Issues Boundary street improvements are required along Oak Lane on the west side of this lot. Also, Markham Street curb cuts should be reviewed for conformance to City Ordinance. B. Staff Analysis This request as filed offers little or no justification for variance as specified by Ordinance. Two of the requested actions directly tie to increases in investment return. The Ordinance suggests pecuniary difficulties are not grounds for variance. The pump island canopies proposed are as a separate issue justifiable because a public service is involved and convenience and safety are factors allowed in the Ordinance. The proposed 24' x 41' car wash addition is in our view inappropriate and causes the site to be grossly overbuilt. We say this in light of the parking requirement being 14 cars. This number is a 100 percent increase over the existing requirement which can barely be accommodated on the site. C. Staff Recommendation Denial of the request as filed and recommend that only those variances necessary to permit the pump islands and canopies location be granted. We would encourage the attachment of street improvements to the issuance of a variance. March 19, 1984 Item No. A - Continued C. Staff Recommendation Denial of the request. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (2-21-84) The applicant, Dr. Carter, was present. There was one objector present, Mr. Dennis Byerly. Mr. Byerly offered objection to an issue disassociated with the application at hand. The objection he offered was in fact a complaint relative to a fence requirement associated with the initial building permit. He offered no specific comment or thoughts on the proposal at hand. The applicant, Mr. Carter, then offered a lengthy discussion of the options that he had been offered by staff recommendation. He discussed with the Board the problems associated with an alternate location of his proposal. These problems generally were a loss of parking spaces and a loss of movement potential within the parking area, specifically in the rear of the building. General discussion of the proposal followed. The discusson resulted in a motion to defer this matter until March 19, 1984, in order to provide Mr. Carter sufficient time to review the options offered and develop further his justification for a variance. The motion passed by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes and 4 open positions. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (3-19-84) The applicant, Dr. Gaylon G. Carter, was not present but was represented by Don Bassett, an attorney. There were no objectors in attendance. Mr. Bassett discussed and reviewed the floor plan and how the proposed expansion was the only feasible way of expanding the building. Mr. Bassett explained that adding a second floor was unrealistic because of Dr. Carter's practice and expanding the building other than to the rear will not work because of the existing interior layout. Mr. Bassett also stated that the expansion would still allow adequate circulation around the building and reduce the parking significantly. A motion was made to approve the variance as filed. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 open position. March 19, 1984 Item No. B - Z-3888-A Owner: Martin S. Dorman Address: 9901 West Markham Street Description: Long Legal Zoned: "C-3" General Commercial District Variance Requested: 1. From the front, side and rear yard setback provisions of Section 43/7-103.3.0 of the Code of Ordinances to permit construction of a 24' x 41.2' addition for a second business and two freestanding pump island canopies. 2. From the parking requirements of Section 43/8-101 to permit less than required number of parking spaces. He provides 5 spaces not including any of the 8 stalls at the pump islands. The Ordinance requires a total of 14 for all uses as proposed. JUSTIFICATION: The owner states that: 1. He would like to place in use a pump island facility which was in use and uncovered as recent as five years ago. 2. Ten feet of clearance is needed for cars and should be covered on the street side. 3. The street side is on a dead-end street with low traffic generation. 4. The canopies would provide additional lighting for the site. 5. This plan will allow us to offer diesel fuel. 6. The rear yard construction variance is needed to permit a four -bay work area. March 19, 1984 Item No. B - Continued BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (2-21-84) The applicant, Mr. Martin Dorman, was present as was Mike Skipper, his spokesman. There were no objectors in attendance. However, staff received one letter of objection from a neighbor. A lengthy discussion of the proposal and the options offered followed. Mr. Skipper suggested that the use to be located in the new addition was in fact not a new use to the site, but consisted of movement from the service station service bays to this area. The Board then discussed the potential for violations of the zoning on the site if the proposed new structure were converted to a garage or auto service facility which is not permitted in "C-3" zoning. The issue of the nonconforming status of the service station was discussed with the result that it was determined that two uses were being discussed and that the service station's base use was not changed by the initiation or construction of the separate activity in the new addition. The discussion then moved to the area of the proposal for canopies above the pump islands, and the intrusion of the new island into the setback area. Staff and Board agreed that the proposals for the pump islands were in the public interest and appropriate. The discussion then moved to the area of perhaps separating this application into at least two hearing processes, the first of which the Board would deal with at this meeting and the second of which would be deferred. A motion was then made to approve the variances as necessary to permit the location of the pump islands and canopies. The motion included the caution to the applicant to file the appropriate information with Arkansas Power and Light Company for their review of the structural involvement. The motion passed by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes and 4 open positions. A second motion was then made. The motion was to defer the issue of the building addition on the rear to March 19, 1984, in order to permit the owner and the user time to develop their needs and return to the Board with additional justification and supporting information on that proposal. The motion passed by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes and 4 open positions. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (3-19-84) The applicant, Martin Dorman, was present. There were no objectors present. Staff reviewed the case and informed the Board that the applicant had modified his application and reduced the size of the proposed addition. Because of the reduction to approximately one-half of what was originally proposed, the staff was more supportive of the request. March 19, 1984 Item No. B - Continued Mr. Dorman also informed the Board that the property owner to the east had agreed to offer his parking lot for any additional parking. A motion was made to approve the variance with the condition that the addition not be constructed to allow future conversion into an auto repair facility. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 open position. March 19, 1984 Item No. 1 - Z-4189 Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: Variance Requested: JUSTIFICATION: Ralph Coppess 1004 Commerce Street South 47.5 feet of the East 89 feet of Lot 10 and the North 1/2 of Lot 9, Block 58, Original City "HR" High Density Residential From the accessory building setback provisions of Section 43/7A-104 to permit a new accessory building constructed on the property line (north and west sides). Ordinance requires 5 feet. 1. The proposed site serves the owner's needs for privacy, accessibility and security. 2. It replaces the existing building which sets on the north and west lines. Present Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT: A. Single Family Single Family Engineering Issues As of this writing, no adverse comments have been received. B. Staff Analvsis The proposal is to remove a deteriorating garage that is situated on two lots and replace it with a new accessory building. The new structure, a pool house, will be located on the lot in question on the property line. The pool house will be a vast improvement over the existing building and should not create any problems for the immediate neighborhood. Other locations on the property were looked at but all presented problems. The primary considerations for March 19, 1984 Item No. 1 - Continued the proposed location were its accessibility to the pool and house and cost of running the needed mechanical lines. C. Staff Recommendation Approval of the request as filed, providing complete removal of the existing structure takes place on both sides of the property line. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant was represented by Walt Stephens an architect. Staff presented a letter from the property owner to the north stating that he plans to continue to use his half of the building. Mr. Stephens stated at the time of filing the variance request, it was his understanding that all parties had agreed to the removal of the entire structure and that he was unaware of this new development. David Martinsen, the property owner to the north, was present and addressed his concerns. Mr. Martinsen indicated that if the structure was removed and a new garage was built it would have to be 5 feet from the property line and that would create problems. Because of the size of the lot, Mr. Martinsen said he would like to continue to have the building on the property line. Mr. Martinsen's father also spoke in favor of continuing to use their half of the building. Staff informed the Board that they would be very reluctant to support a variance on Mr. Martinsen's property. After a lengthy discussion, motion was made to approve the variance subject to the entire structure being removed and a letter being submitted to the staff from the two parties agreeing to that condition. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 open position. March 19, 1984 Item No. 2 - Z-3745-A Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: Variance Requested: JUSTIFICATION: Fellowship Bible Church By: Bill Wellons 12601 Hinson Road Long Legal "R-2" Single Family From the height restriction of Section 43/7-101.2.C. to permit erection of a tower 8' x 8' at 60 feet in height. The Ordinance permits 35 feet. 1. The building site is large and well buffered from adjacent property by a dense strip of tall trees. 2. The additional height is necessary to create the upward thrust in height dictated by traditional church architecture. 3. The height is required inside the worship space to produce the desired acoustical effect and to create the desired setting for a worshipful experience. Present Use of Property: Church Proposed Use of Property: Church STAFF REPORT: A. Engineering Issues As of this writing, no adverse comments have been received. B. Staff Analvsis The application provides reasonable justifications for the variance requested. The applicant points out that a lantern 8' x 8' and 16 feet high is the only structural element that exceeds the height limitation by a significant amount. This type of design feature and required height is in keeping with traditional church architecture. Staff does recommend that the church keep its commitment to upgrading Hinson Road to proper standards at this location and submit the final plat if that has not taken place. A building permit will not be issued until a final plat has been filed. March 19, 1983 Item No. 2 - Continued C. Staff Recommendation Approval, subject to the comments made in the Staff Analysis. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant was represented by John Sewell, the architect for the pr000sed addition. Mr. Sewell described the structure and explained why the variance was needed. He also stated that most of the site preparation was done and the existing trees would remain. Richard Hendricks, a nearby property owner, spoke to the Board. Mr. Hendricks was concerned over how the proposed tower would effect the value of his property and asked the members of the Board to address this issue. A majority of the members felt they were not qualified to give an answer. A motion was made to approve the variance providing that no further removal of trees is to take place. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 open position. March 19, 1984 Item No. 3 - Z-3152-A Owner: Various Owners By: Gus Walton Address: 913 and 915 Cumberland Street Description: Lot 4 and N 1/2 of Lot 5, Block 44 Original City Zoned: "HR" High Density Residential Variance Requested: Approval of a conditional use permit for joining of subject lots to create a single structure relationship on two lots by construction of a two-story tie between. Present Use of Property: Offices Proposed Use of Property: Offices STAFF REPORT: A. Enqineering Issues As of this writing, no adverse comments have been received. B. Staff Analysis The Board of Adjustment approved a conditional use permit for the expansion of the structure at 915 Cumberland. The proposal was to expand the building to the rear and decrease the available parking substantially. This application provides a good solution for accommodating expansion needs by creating an attractive connection between the two existing structures and not impacting the parking areas. This new plan supersedes the previous approval of the conditional use permit for the expansion of 915 Cumberland. Staff supports the new approach and recommends that a unified parking plan be developed for both lots. This overall approach will enhance both properties and create an attractive environment. The Quapaw Quarter Association and the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program both submitted letters to the Little Rock Historic Commission recommending approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness. The Historic Commission issued the Certificate of Appropriateness on March 7, 1984. March 19, 1984 Item No. 3 - Continued C. Staff Recommendation Approval, subject to the comments made in the analysis. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant, Gus Walton, was present. There were no objectors in attendance. Mr. Walton reviewed the first conditional use permit approval and how the new plan and request would supersede the previous approval. A motion was made to approve the conditional use permit as filed. The motion passed by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent, 1 open position and 1 abstention (Ellis Walton). March 19, 1984 Item No. 4 - Z-4193 Owner: James M. and Marjorie Wage Address: 2400 Durwood Road Description: Lot 72, Kingwood Place Addition Zoned: "R-2" Single Family District Variance Requested: From the rear yard setback provisions of Section 43/7-101.2.D. to permit construction of a covered porch attaching accessory and principal structures. JUSTIFICATION: 1. To enhance the beauty of the house and lot. 2. To provide additional safety for family and friends. 3. Remove hazardous conditions of tiered sidewalk and steps. Present Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT: Single Family Single Family A. Enqineerinq Issues As of this writing, no adverse comments have been received. B. Staff Analysis The staff feels that the applicant has provided adequate justification for the variance and supports the request. The new construction will do nothing to change the existing setbacks. It appears that the covered porch will improve the existing situation and remove a hazardous condition that occurs during bad weather. The porch will not impact the visual appearance of the structure. The carport is to remain open. March 19, 1984 Item No. 4 - Continued C. Staff Recommendation Approval of the request as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. After a brief discussion, a motion was made to approve the variance with the condition that the porch with the new covering not be enclosed. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 open position. March 19, 1984 Item No. 5 - Z-4197 Owner: Jack Oliver, Sr. Address: 2200 Cantrell Description: Described as being all of that part of Lot 29 of Worthen's Subdivision of the SE fractional quarter, Section 33, T-2-N, R-12-W lying south of the Missouri Pacific Railroad spur track bounded on the east by the Arkansas School for the Deaf, bounded on the south by Old Cantrell Road, bounded on the west by Boyle Park and our outline in red on the attached survey plan of 2200 Cantrell Road, Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas. Zoned: "I-3" Heavy Industrial District Variance Requested: Under the floodplain provisions of Section 13A-16 of the Code of Ordinances to permit construction of a marine workshop in a floodplain below the required elevation of 255.4. (100-Year flood elevation is 257.4.) (Ordinance requires 259.4 feet.) JUSTIFICATION: The nature of the business being a marine workshop and warehouse. Present Use of Property: Tire Warehouse Proposed Use of Property: Boat Maintenance STAFF REPORT: A. Engineering Issues Engineering will support the request providing the following is accomplished: 1. All electrical, plumbing, etc., is flood proof to an elevation 258.4 feet. March 19, 1984 Item No. 5 - Continued 2. All major H.V.A.C. and major motors are placed above floor elevation 258.4. B. Staff Analvsis The site in question is located on the Arkansas River, east of a large warehousing district (where Cajun's Wharf is located). The variance is to permit construction of a marine workshop below the required elevation of 255.4 feet. The 100-Year flood elevation is 257.4 feet and construction is permitted to 2 feet below that elevation, 255.4 feet in this situation. The Army Corps of Engineers supports the request because there will be no filling involved. The site and use seems to be compatible and acceptable with regard to water uses. The current "I-3" zoning does not permit the proposed use, a marina facility, so a reclassification of the property will have to take place. Also, the proposed facility appears to be part of a larger development which will require additional review by the Planning Commission because there will be at least one other building. This is the long-range concept for the property. C. Staff Recommendation Approval of the request as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: Mike Batie of the City's Engineering staff addressed the variance because the request came through his office. He reviewed all the pertinent data and why a variance was needed. Mr. Batie stated that the Army Corps of Engineers supported the request and the proposed use should not create any problems. A motion was made to approve the variance with the condition that all electrical and plumbing be floodproofed to an elevation of 258.4 feet and that all HVAC and major motors be placed above the floor elevation of 258.4 feet. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 open position. March 19, 1984 Item No. 6 - Z-4196 Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: variance Requested: JUSTIFICATION: Carroll and Barbara Ball 2312 West Road Lot 138, Westover Hills Addition "R-2" Single Family Residential District From the side yard setback provisions of Section 7-101.2(d)(2) of the Code of Ordinances to permit construction of an open carport with a 1.1-foot side yard. (Ordinance requires 6.5 feet.) 1. House was constructed in center of lot due to detached garage in rear leaving little room to construct a carport. 2. Heating and cooling unit intrudes in usable area causing supporting posts to be placed closer to the lot line in order to provide 10-foot minimum drive through. 3. Minimum 10-foot is needed to back camping trailer into rear yard. 4. Detached garage is 7 feet lower than the house. 5. Need detached carport for parking out of weather. Present Use of Property: Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT: Single Family Single Family A. Engineering Issues There have been no adverse comments received at this writing. March 19, 1984 Item No. 6 - Continued B. Staff Analvsis The variance does not appear to create problems for the neighborhood or establish new precedent because there are already similar carports in the immediate area. The proposed carport and residential structure to the north will still have good separation. The staff supports the request because the justifications are reasonable, and the existing situation does create a hardship. C. Staff Recommendation Approval of the variance as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant was present. There were no objectors in attendance. After a brief discussion, a motion was made to approve the variance as filed. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 open position. March 19, 1984 Item No. 7 - Z-4197 Owner: Clarence Reed Address: 2420 West loth Description: Lot 6, Block 12, Capitol Hill Extension Addition Zoned: "I-2" Light Industrial District Variance Requested: From the side yard setback provisions of Section 43/7-103.3.D to 5-foot side yard on the north and a 48-inch canopy over the south side walk. JUSTIFICATION: 1. The lot was platted as residential and zoned industrial when there were no side setback requirements. 2. A 15-foot side yard on both side effectively eliminates the buildable lot area. 3. Property on the variance side (north) is occupied by a machinery storage yard. Present Use of Property: Vacant Proposed Use of Property: Office and Warehouse Space STAFF REPORT A. Engineerinq Issues As of this writing, no adverse comments have been received. B. Staff Analvsis This area from West loth to I-630 is no longer a viable residential neighborhood and will probably benefit from this type of investment in the area. It appears that the existing residential uses will be phased out over the next 5 to 10 years; a majority of the property is zoned for industrial uses. A hardship does exist because the property is zoned "I-2," and being a small residential lot, the required side yard setback virtually makes the property unusable for a nonresidential use. The variance should not create March 19, 1984 Item No. 7 - Continued any impacts on the adjacent properties or the neighborhood. The staff supports the request and views the upgrading of the lot and proposed use as being a positive step for the area. Hopefully, it will encourage similar uses to locate in the neighborhood. C. Staff Recommendation Approval of the request as filed. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant, Phil Gilette, was present. Mr. Gilette stated that he was not the owner of the property but will purchase the property if the variance is approved. There were no objectors. A motion was made to approve the variance as filed. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 open position. March 19, 1984 Item No. 8 - Z-4064 (Reconsideration of Prior Action) Owner: William R. Smith Address: #3 Longfellow Lane Description: Lot 1, Block 2, Forbes Place Addition Zoned: "R-2" Single Family District variance Requested: Front, rear and side yard setback provisions of Section 7-101.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. This applicant has requested that he be permitted to adjust the location of his carport from that approved by the Board on August 15, 1984, to a point + 2.0 feet off the property line. The request is made to permit use of the existing driveway as is. In the previous variance hearing, the requests were approved as filed. Staff will offer comment as required at the meeting. See sketch for further clarification. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant was present. The Board discussed the requested change of the approved variance briefly. A motion was made to approve the change in the variance approved by the Board of Adjustment on August 15, 1983. The motion passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 open position. March 19, 1984 There being no further business before the Board, the Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 3:00 p.m. Date q/lz &� Sec _ eta y Chairperson