Z-5558-A Staff AnalysisMarch 22, 2001
ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z -5558-A
NAME: Butler Manufactured Home - Conditional Use
Permit
LOCATION: 12,424 Heinke Road
OWNER/APPLICANT: Philip Butler
PROPOSAL: To obtain a conditional use permit to locate
a single -wide new manufactured home as an
accessory dwelling on property zoned R-2,
Single Family Residential, located at 12,424
Heinke Road.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1. SITE LOCATION:
This 3.76 acre site is located on the west side of Heinke
Road off of Vance Lane, a private road approximately 0.2
mile south of Taliaferro Road.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
The proposed site is zoned R-2, Single Family Residential,
and is surrounded by R-2 zoning. It contains a single -wide,
manufactured house built between 1979 to 1981. The proposed
unit would be the second on this property. The property to
the west and south is vacant. There are single family
houses on the north side of Vance Lane, and to the east
there is a single family house along with a large shed.
This property lies about 500 feet east of Heinke Road, at a
higher elevation, and is not clearly visible from Heinke.
The area surrounding the proposed site is moderately to
heavily wooded.
There are no other manufactured homes along Vance Lane.
This unit would be larger than the first unit, 1152 square
feet versus 910 square feet, and therefore, not meet the
intent of an accessory dwelling. The ordinance maximum
allowed floor area for an accessory dwelling is 700 square
March 22, 2001
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -5558-A
feet. Staff does not believe placing the second single -wide
manufactured home on this property as an accessory dwelling
would be compatible with this area.
The Rolling Pines Neighborhood Association, Southwest
Little Rock United for Progress, all property owners within
200 feet, and all residents within 300 feet that could be
identified, were notified of the public hearing.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
This site would be accessed by way of a gravel driveway
from the private gravel road named Vance Lane. Normal
residential parking would be provided.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
No comments.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
No comments.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS:
Water: This property does not have frontage on a water
main. Water service is not available without a water main
extension.
Wastewater: Sewer not available for this area. Sewer
main extension required with easements to serve property.
Southwestern Bell: No comments received.
ARKLA: Approved as submitted.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
CATA: Site is not on a dedicated bus route and has no
effect on bus radius, turnout and route.
F,
March 22, 2001
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.)
7. STAFF ANALYSIS:
FILE NO.: Z -5558-A
The applicant has requested a conditional use permit for a
1152 square foot, new single -wide manufactured home to be
used as an accessory dwelling on property zoned R-2, Single
Family Residential. The site currently contains a 910
square foot single -wide manufactured home built between
1979 and 1981. The second home is intended for an immediate
family member and not to be used as a rental.
The proposed area is a rural area with large lots and
tracts of land. The proposed site is 3.76 acres and lies
about 500 feet east of Heinke Road, at a higher elevation,
and is not clearly visible from Heinke. The area
surrounding the proposed site is moderately to heavily
wooded. The proposal meets all required setbacks and other
siting requirements. Normal zoning ordinance requirements
as stated in City Ordinance Section 36-254 (d)(5), and
building code requirements for setup and anchoring of
manufactured homes would have to be met. The applicant
intends to use the existing water well and add another
septic system for sewage. The applicant must have the State
Health Department inspect the added services to ensure
adequacy.
There are no other manufactured homes along Vance Lane.
This unit would be larger than the current unit, 1152
square feet versus 910 square feet, and therefore, it would
not meet the intent of an accessory dwelling. The ordinance
maximum allowed floor area for an accessory dwelling is 700
square feet. Staff believes that the intent of the
ordinance with regard to accessory dwellings is for a
smaller home to be placed on a property in support of the
primary home. Garage apartments, a small "mother-in-law"
home, or even small employee quarters would meet that
intent. Staff does not believe placing the second single -
wide manufactured home on this property as an accessory
dwelling would meet the ordinance intent for accessory
dwellings.
The applicant has two other options to pursue placement of
two manufactured homes on this property. The first option
would be to apply for rezoning of the property to R -7A and
subdivide the property into two lots. Then each lot could
contain a single -wide manufactured home "by right" after
3
March 22, 2001
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.
FILE NO.: Z -5558-A
rezoning. The second option would be to subdivide the
property into two lots and then request a conditional use
permit for a double -wide manufactured home on the second
lot as a primary residence. The existing single -wide could
remain on the first lot. Staff would be more receptive to
the second manufactured home if the property was subdivided
and a new double -wide manufactured home placed on its own
lot. A new single -wide unit could not be placed on its own
lot without rezoning the property to R -7A.
8. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the conditional use permit
primarily because Staff believes it does not meet the
ordinance intent for accessory dwellings.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:
(MARCH 1, 2001)
Philip Butler was present representing the application. Staff
gave a brief description of the proposal and briefly reviewed
the comments provided to the applicant.
The applicant was asked how he planned to provide water and
sewage service for the new unit. He stated that his well was
adequate and that he would install a separate septic system for
the new unit. The applicant was reminded to have the State
Health Department inspect the systems for adequacy. Staff also
brought to the applicant's attention the requirements for setup
and anchoring of manufactured homes.
Staff reminded the applicant to provide notification by
certified mail of property owners within 200 feet no later than
March 7, 2000, and that the applicant must provide postmarked
certified outgoing receipts, the abstract list of owners, and a
copy of the notification letter to Staff no later than six days
prior to the public hearing.
There being no further issues, the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for final
action.
4
March 22, 2001
ITEM NO.:
5 (Cont.)
FILE
NO.: Z -5558-A
PLANNING
COMMISSION ACTION:
(MARCH 22,
2001)
Philip Butler, the applicant, and his daughter Lee Butler
Blackwood, who would be living in the proposed manufactured
home, were present representing the application. There were no
registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a
recommendation for denial primarily because Staff believed it
did not meet the ordinance intent for accessory dwellings. Staff
acknowledged the applicant's letter to the Commission which
stated that there are two other manufactured homes on Vance
Lane, contrary to Staff's comment that there were no other
manufactured homes along Vance Lane. Staff stated that the homes
mentioned were not recognized as manufactured homes during the
site visit.
Staff stated that they believe the intent of the ordinance is
that an accessory dwelling be smaller than, and in support of,
the primary dwelling. Since the proposed accessory unit would be
larger than the existing unit, 1152 square feet versus 910
square feet, Staff felt that it would not meet the intent of an
accessory dwelling. In addition, Staff explained that the
ordinance maximum allowed floor area for an accessory dwelling
is 700 square feet. The proposed unit exceeds that by 452 feet,
which is further example of how this proposal does not meet the
intent of the ordinance.
Ms. Blackwood explained that she would be living in the home
with her young son. She further explained the circumstances
that led to the request for the additional manufactured home at
this location on her parents' property. She added that this site
and all the surrounding property belongs to the Butler family,
and the family has no intent to sell the property outside of the
family or rent out any of the land or structures on the land.
She stated that the primary reason for the additional
manufactured home was to provide a place for her and her son to
live so she could move out of her parents' home with minimum
relocation costs.
Janet Berry, President of Southwest Little Rock United for
Progress, spoke in opposition to the proposal. She stated that
the membership had asked her to oppose the proposal because they
are opposed to single -wide manufactured homes being placed on
individual single-family lots anywhere in Little Rock.
Commissioner Adcock asked Staff what conditions had been placed
5
March 22, 2001
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.)
FILE NO.: Z -5558-A
on a similar request in this same area in the recent past. Staff
responded that the conditions placed on the other site were as
follows: the unit could remain for only five years; the C.U.P
was strictly for the current owner and would become void if he
sold the property; they could not rent out the home; and, it
must be used by a family member.
Commissioner Rahman asked Staff if one of primary reasons for
their opposition and concern was the proposed size of the new
home in relation to the existing home. Staff confirmed that
concern. Then he asked if there would be any difference if the
new unit was made the primary dwelling and the existing one
became the accessory dwelling. Mr. Lawson responded that it was
more than just the size, the concern was also regarding the
intent of an accessory dwelling in the ordinance, and concern
about two single -wide units existing on R-2 zoned property. He
added that through the conditional use permit the Commission
could approve just about what ever they felt was acceptable, and
include any reasonable conditions.
Chairman Downing asked Ms. Berry if the conditions outlined
would make the proposal acceptable to her. She said they would
and she reiterated that her opposition was based on the request
from her membership. She added that she lived fairly close to
this area and she felt that the manufactured home would fit in
reasonable well at the proposed location.
A motion was made to approve the application as submitted to
include staff comments and recommendations, less and except
their opposition, and to include the following added conditions:
in the event the land is sold, the conditional use permit will
be revoked; the new unit will be for a Butler family member
only; and, it may not be used as a rental unit. The motion
passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent
71