HomeMy WebLinkAboutboa_11 30 2009LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SUMMARY OF MINUTES
NOVEMBER 30, 2009
2:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being three (3) in number.
II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meetings
The Minutes of the October 26, 2009 meeting were
approved as mailed by unanimous vote.
III. Members Present:
Members Absent:
Robert Winchester, Vice Chairman
Leslie Greenwood
Scott Smith
David Wilbourn, Chairman
James Van Dover
City Attorney Present: Debra Weldon
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
AGENDA
NOVEMBER 30, 2009
2:00 P.M.
I. OLD BUSINESS:
No Old Business
II. NEW BUSINESS:
1.
Z -5850-A
3318 Mary Street
2.
Z-8504
21 Longwell Loop
3.
Z-8505
9 Silver Birch Court
4.
Z-8506
4 Longlea Drive
5.
Z-8507
814 W. 7t" Street
Mill � •girl..
x wil~
3NId
LU ' 1
Q� 0
i l C'7
•nom W
NIGHWPY✓��/--
1 ^1
w j •J• w•1 N W
ON SbWOH1 NVO >
J _ Q
S
i X
1 °
0ES 31b1Sa31N1 .. ' .
I 0ES 31tllSa I
W �.t9' � cy
Oa
S 1SHOatlS •� p _ -
3 w ¢ 5.., NO1NOa1
x
3 0°
ARCH ST
" M a000M N _
SDNIadS ab71H
. - Alb Natld altla ¢� •�
a 7 1 pm m •• r,
AI.IS83AINn s c3 w.• f.
z oa sSNlad a3A3� "'x—'` fi
.'�'.`' 3 � LLQ' W' ■�1r
1S IddISSISSIW N ti Y .. > ••
MOaatlB NHO - .
Oa HIOAa3s3a
r I
oa sloatls -
°
_ w
� w
d' z a vim as Sa31N1 m ¢
. N t '..... /'•�•' Ob Oa 3'JORIA IA
'• z
............�,
` � r m oa as vxaiv
0 ^,
LU ' Y New z W
w - 1 Cl W/UnnS' m '�^/
v J
latlM31S
°
% HSatl
I• • -1
00£AVMH`JIH �....n�..�•� • �/ P�� O� Pie O
O O
4—
.�
'�• oa sHatlds
3p ° d1O 3W,NryJ d
M0
NOVEMBER 30, 2009
ITEM NO.: 1
File No.: Z -5850-A
Owner: Flynn Remodeling and Construction, Inc.
Applicant: Gary Flynn
Address: 3318 Mary Street
Description: Lots 16-18, Block 6, Intercity Addition
Zoned: 1-2
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the parking provisions of Section 36-
502 and 36-508 to allow a reduced number of required parking spaces and the use of a
gravel parking area.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Undeveloped
Proposed Use of Property: Construction Storage Building
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B. Landscape and Buffer Issues:
1. The site must comply with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances.
2. A land use buffer will be required along the west property line, where
adjacent to residential use. The land use buffer must remain 70 percent
undisturbed. Screening will also be required along the west property line.
C. Staff Analysis:
The 1-2 zoned property at 3318 Mary Street is currently undeveloped and
mostly grass covered. The property is located at the northwest corner of Mary
Street and W. 34th Street. There is a paved alley along the north (rear) property
line. There is a small metal storage building near the northwest corner of the
property. The property is enclosed with a six (6) foot high chain link security
fence. The fence contains vehicular gates along the Mary Street frontage.
There is a partially paved driveway from Mary Street.
NOVEMBER 30, 2009 (
ITEM NO.: 1 (Con't.)
The applicant proposes to construct a 40 foot by 60 foot metal building on the
property, as noted on the attached site plan. The building will be located within
the east half of the property. An asphalt driveway from Marty Street will serve
the rear (north) of the building. A small gravel parking area for 3 to 4 vehicles is
proposed at the rear of the building on the north side of the paved driveway.
The applicant notes that the building will only be used as a storage building for
construction materials for a home contracting business. The applicant also
notes that only employees of the business will be visiting the site.
Section 36-502(b)(4)b. of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum of
six (6) off-street parking spaces for this proposed storage use. Section 36-508
requires that vehicular use areas be paved. Therefore, the applicant is
requesting variances from these ordinance standards to allow a reduced
number of gravel parking spaces for the proposed storage building.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Given the proposed use of the
property, staff believes the requested parking variances are reasonable. The
applicant is proposing to use the new building only for storage, with employees
of the contracting business being the only persons to visit the site to drop-off or
pick-up supplies. Staff's support is only for this proposed use of the property. If
the use of the building ever changes, a paved parking lot which complies with
City code must be constructed, or the new user must address the issue before
the Board of Adjustment. Additionally, there are other properties within this
immediate area which have unpaved or partially paved parking/vehicular use
areas. Staff believes the requested parking variances will have no adverse
impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested parking variances, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Use of the new building is limited to storage for Flynn Remodeling and
Construction only. Any change in use will require paving of vehicular use
area as per City code or review by Board of Adjustment.
2. Compliance with the Landscape and Buffer comments as noted in
paragraph B. of the staff report.
3. The driveway apron from Mary Street must be constructed and paved as
per City code.
NOVEMBER 30, 2009
ITEM NO.: 1 (Con't.)
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(NOVEMBER 30, 2009)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The Chairman placed the item on the Consent Agenda for approval, as recommended
by staff. The Consent Agenda was approved with a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2
absent. The application was approved.
NARI'
M E M B E R
EO�LING & CONSTR�CTT®c
17 Nob View Circle a Little Rock, AR 72205
(501) 224-0226
October 8, 2009
Department of Planning and Development
City of Little Rock
723 West Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
Gentlemen:
HOME EIUILl7E R5.
_Z- 45-s5r, W 4
This correspondence is to provide justifications and reasoning for requesting a variance
from the zoning ordinance in regard to parking and landscaping at 3318 Mary Street in
Little Rock.
This property will be used as a construction storage building for our home contracting
business. The building will be separate and apart from our office, and will not have any
public activity. The only individuals coining and leaving the proposed building will be
our employees. We are a small, family-owned business with approximately four
employees. We are requesting a variance so that the parking area may be graveled.
Enclosed is a landscape survey noting the location and size of trees that will remain on
this property, and request that this complete our landscaping requirements. We know we
will have to plant a vinage buffer between our property and the neighbor to the west.
There are an additional three trees on the property that are not listed, but are in the
easement around the property. All trees listed will remain and will not be disturbed.
We trust this will provide sufficient information to justify our requests.
Sinc ely,
C�
GFlynn
Pr` sident
GEF/mhf
NOVEMBER 30, 2009
ITEM NO.: 2
File No.: Z-8504
Owner: Kumudini VardLineni
Applicant: Nader Abou-Diab, MSA Construction, Inc.
Address: 21 Longwell Loop
Description: Lot 55, Block 23, The Villages of Wellington
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-
254 to allow a deck and stairs with reduced side and rear setbacks.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 21 Longwell Loop is occupied by a 1 '/2 story brick
and rock single family residence which was recently constructed. There is a
circular driveway from Longwell Loop which serves as access. The property
slopes downward from front to back (west to east). The rear property line is
approximately 20 feet below the grade of the front property line. The rear of the
lot backs up to a platted open space area which is approximately 120 feet wide.
The open space area is wooded and contains a creek.
As part of the new home construction, a new two (2) tier deck was constructed
on the rear of the residence, as noted on the attached site plan. The upper
level of the deck is approximately 20 feet above grade. The deck is located
approximately 19 feet back from the rear (east) property line. Steps to the deck
which run along the south side of the residence are located approximately 5.5
feet from the south side property line. The deck and step structures are
uncovered and unenclosed.
NOVEMBER 30, 2009 (
ITEM NO.: 2 (Con't.)
Section 36-254(d)(3) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum rear
setback of 25 feet for R-2 zoned lots. Section 36-254(d)(2) requires a minimum
side setback of eight (8) feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances
from these ordinance requirements to allow the deck/step structure with a rear
setback of 19 feet and a side setback of 5.5 feet.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff views the request as
reasonable, given the excess slope of the property and the fact that the lot
backs up to a platted open space area which will remain undeveloped. The
proposed deck/step structure will not be out of character with the area. Several
other reduced rear setbacks have been allowed within this neighborhood for
rear decks on lots which back up to platted open space areas. Staff believes
the deck/step structure with reduced rear and side setbacks will have no
adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested setback variances, subject to the
deck/step structure remaining uncovered and unenclosed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(NOVEMBER 30, 2009)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The Chairman placed the item on the Consent Agenda for approval, as recommended
by staff. The Consent Agenda was approved with a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2
absent. The application was approved.
MSA CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.
701 PARLIAMENT ST.
LITTLE ROCK, AR. 72211
Tel -:501-749-6773
MSA CONSTRUCTION CO. INC.
�--i4 z -
October 1, 2009 g LL
To: Board of Adjustment _
Reference: 21 Longwell Loop
Subject: Back deck and staircase variance
Dear Sir or Madam:
This is a letter concerning an approval for of a variance on the above referenced address_ Due to an
error on our part the end of back deck is approximately 19' from the property line where the building
line on the back should have been 25'. Also, the staircase is 5'8" from the property line on the south
side of the house (attached is a survey plan), where it should have been 8'0".
We do regret our mistake but unfortunately the deck is finished and the property is under contract.
The new owner has signed and notarized the letter allowing us to proceed with the request on their
behalf (Attached).
Thank you for your consideration, please feel free to contact me for any additional info or questions
Sincerely,
Nader Abou-Diab
President
NOVEMBER 30, 2009
ITEM NO.: 3
File No.: Z-8505
Owner: Gabor and Mary Anne Kovats
Applicant: Gabor Kovats
Address: 9 Silver Birch Court
Description: Lot 319, Pleasant View Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section of
36-156 and the fence provisions of Section 36-516 to allow an accessory building with
reduced front setback and a fence which exceeds the maximum height allowed.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Fenced Single Family Lot
Proposed Use of Property: Fenced Single Family Lot with Pool House
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 9 Silver Birch Court is currently undeveloped, with
the owner in the process of constructing a indoor pool house on the property.
The property owner also owns the lot immediately to the west and the two (2)
lots immediately to the north, for a total of four (4) lots. The owner's residence
is on the lot immediately to the north at 14419 White Fir Lane. The four (4)
contiguous lots with one (1) residence is considered a single zoning lot and
ownership. The ordinance definition of a zoning lot is as follows:
"Zoning lot means a parcel of land that is designated by its owner or
authorized agent as a tract, all of which is to be used, developed or built
upon as a unit under a single ownership. A zoning lot may consist of any
standard lot or a combination of a lot and any legally recorded portion of a
lot that existed prior to the passage of this chapter. When determining the
NOVEMBER 30, 2009 (
ITEM NO.: 3 (Con't.)
front, rear and side yard setbacks for a zoning lot, the required distance
shall be measured from the exterior boundaries of the zoning lot."
The applicant recently began construction of an accessory indoor pool house
building on the lot at 9 Silver Birch Court, the lot immediately south of the
residence. A single family house which burned was removed from the property.
The pool house is located approximately 48 feet from the lot's front (south)
property line at its closest point. There is a driveway from Silver Birch Court
which serves as access to the south lot. The south lot slopes downward from
back to front (north to south).
The applicant has also constructed a new wood fence which encloses a large
portion of the four (4) lots. The wood fence is six (6) feet in height, with the
exception of a section which is eight (8) feet high running across the driveway
and along a portion of the east side property line of the south lot (pool house
lot). The fence which is located along the south portion of the property is
located between the 25 foot front platted building lines of the southern lots and
the Silver Birch Court right-of-way.
Section 36-156(a)(2)c. of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum front
setback of 60 feet for accessory buildings in R-2 zoning. Section 36-
516(e)(1)a. allows a maximum fence height of four (4) feet for fences located
between a platted building line and street right-of-way, and a maximum fence
height of six (6) feet for fences along interior lot lines. Therefore, the applicant
is requesting variances from these ordinance standards to allow the accessory
pool house building with a reduced front setback and the fence along the south
and east property lines with an increased height.
Staff is not entirely supportive of the application. Staff is supportive of the
requested front setback variance for the accessory pool house structure.
Staff's support is based on the fact that the structure is not visible from the area
to the south, outside the fenced yard area. Although the placement of the
accessory structure on the platted lot south of the residence is unusual, it
requires only a minor front setback variance (48 feet instead of 60). The
structure exceeds all of the setbacks required for construction of a principal
structure on the lot. Staff believes construction of an accessory building on the
platted lot south of the residence will have no adverse impact on the adjacent
properties or the general area.
Although staff has no problem with the fence heights as proposed, staff
believes it would be appropriate to move the fence back on the lot at least to
the front 25 foot platted building line. This will bring the six (6) foot high section
into compliance with the ordinance, leaving only the eight (8) foot section
needing a height variance. Additionally, moving the fence back on the lot, and
further up the slope of the lot, will make the accessory pool house structure
even less visible from the south. Staff believes that if the fence is moved back
to the building line it will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or
general area.
NOVEMBER 30, 2009
ITEM NO.: 3 (Con't.)
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested accessory building setback and
fence height variances, subject to the following conditions:
The fence must be moved back to at least the 25 foot front platted
building line on the two (2) southern lots.
2. The accessory pool house structure must be finished as to match the
exterior of the principal structure on the north lot.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (NOVEMBER 30, 2009)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The Chairman placed the item on the Consent Agenda for approval, as recommended
by staff. The Consent Agenda was approved with a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2
absent. The application was approved.
October 14, 2009 % 3
RE: Application for Zoning Variance /
9 Silver Birch Court { P
Little Rock, AR 72212
Dear Board of Adjustment Members:
My wife, Mary Anne, and I are requesting four residential zoning variances. We will
address each variance request on page 2 but would first like to provide you a little
background.
About five years ago, Mary Anne and I purchased a vacant wooded lot next to our
residence at 14419 White Fir Lane. Since we were never going to develop this property
and for safety concerns, we joined both lots by fencing them together. We also contacted
the county and combined both lots with them. Also about this same time, the property
owners vacated the house behind us located at 9 Silver Birch Court. During those five
years, the owners made no improvements or repairs even though they were only able to
rent the house for two months. The house was falling apart, and it was a safety and fire
hazard. We have attached three pictures of the house taken in March 2009. When the
owners of this residence decided to sell the property earlier this year, my wife and I
feared who might purchase or what might become of this dilapidated structure.
Therefore, we decided to buy the property, had the house torn down and again joined all
properties by fencing them together and contacting the county as we did before.
Mary Anne has numerous medical conditions. Since she cannot perform any impact
exercises and is not allowed to drive due to her epilepsy, her doctor suggested we get a
pool for non -impact physical exercise. This would help to alleviate some of her muscle
weakness, which is caused by Lupus. In addition, the multiple lesions in the deep white
matter of her brain are suggestive of Multiple Sclerosis, which would also contribute to
her muscle weakness. She would be unable to clean and maintain an outdoor pool, so we
are constructing a small building to enclose it. The pool is only 9'x27' and does not have
a diving board. It will be used only for swimming laps and callisthenic exercises. We
will have locked metal doors on the building and because the structure is in our
`backyard', the new fence will serve as our back fence. We keep the gate locked and the
driveway is not used. If you request, we will gladly post an `In Case of Emergency' sign
on the outside of the gate for any emergency vehicles that would need access. A 3'
wooden picket fence will enclose the pool house area and serve as a pet enclosure. We
will landscape the area with cypress mulch, railroad ties and pea gravel. We will also
plant rocky terrain, drought -resistant plants interspersed with ground cover. We feel
these additions will not only add value to and visually enhance bur neighborhood, but
also will naturally flow and become a part of our backyard environment.
Letter to Board of Adjustment Members
Page 2
October 14, 2009
Two variance requests are for the fence at the front of the property.
1) One variance request is for building line setback of the fence.
As shown in three attached pictures, we have begun the process of enhancing the street
view by adding twenty tons of decorative stone. In order to protect any children from
possibly climbing the fence and getting into the pool area, we placed the fence close to
the edge of the 'cliff. I measured the distance from the street to maintain the 25'
building line but did not account for the 10' easement. Thus, twenty feet of the fence is
25' from the street (15' building line); the remainder of the fence is further back.
2) The other variance request is for height of the fence.
As shown in the next two attached pictures, the slope of the land towards the driveway
drops dramatically. We asked the fence company to slope the decline in grade to
maintain an even look, which would be more aesthetically pleasing. We now have about
20' of fence from 6' to 8' in height.
Two variance requests are for the pool building.
1) One variance request is for the building line setback.
We initially wanted to place the building further back (closer to our house), but because
the mountain ridge is at the back of the property, we were forced to place the building
where the prior house had been. We were unaware of a different setback requirement for
a non -occupied building.
2) The other variance request is for a non -occupied building on a vacant lot.
As stated earlier, we had combined this property and our home property with the county
and enclosed all of it with a fence. We did not know the city considers this property
separate from our home property.
We appreciate your time and consideration and hope you will grant us these requests. If
we can provide any additional information or you have any questions prior to our meeting
on November 30th, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Gabor Kovats
14419 White Fir Lane
Little Rock, AR 72212
(501) 831-0309
Attachments
NOVEMBER 30, 2009
ITEM NO.: 4
File No.: Z-8506
Owner: Steven and Julie Greathouse
Applicant: Julie Greathouse
Address: 4 Longlea Drive
Description: Lot 190, Longlea Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the fence provisions of Section 36-
516 to allow a fence which exceeds the maximum height allowed.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 4 Longlea Drive is occupied by a two story brick and
frame single family residence. The property is located on the west side of
Longlea Drive, between EI Dorado Drive and Pebble Beach Drive. A two -car
wide driveway from Longlea Drive serves as access to the property.
The single family lot immediately to the south is located several feet in elevation
above the applicant's lot at 4 Longlea Drive. The lot owner immediately to the
south recently constructed a new six (6) foot high fence on top of a retaining
wall which separates the properties. The new fence, as viewed from the south,
has an overall height approximately three (3) feet higher than the applicant's
older six (6) foot high wood fence along the south side property line. The
applicant is proposing to construct a new eight (8) foot high wood fence along
the south property line, as noted on the attached site plan, to screen the
majority of the back side of the neighbor's new fence structure.
NOVEMBER 30, 2009 (
ITEM NO.: 4 (Con't.)
Section 36-516(e)(1) of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum
residential fence height of six (6) feet. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a
variance to allow an eight (8) foot high wood fence to hide/screen the
neighbor's retaining wall and structural fence features.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the request as
reasonable, given the grade difference between the two properties and the fact
that the applicant is attempting to hide the structural supports of the
neighboring fence, which includes metal poles. For the most part, the
increased fence height will be only as viewed from inside the applicant's rear
yard area, with a short eight (8) foot high section tying into the south side of the
residence. Staff believes the applicant's requested fence height variance is
justified and should have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the
general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested fence height variance, as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (NOVEMBER 30, 2009)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The Chairman placed the item on the Consent Agenda for approval, as recommended
by staff. The Consent Agenda was approved with a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays and 2
absent. The application was approved.
PERKINS & TROTTER, PLLC
A PROFESSIONAL LIMTI'F,D LIABMY COMPANY
Attorneys and Counselors
JULIE D. GREATHOUSE POST OFFICE Box 251618
jareathouse@perk--instrotter.com LITTLE RocK, ARKANSAS 72225-1618
TEL 501-603-9000
FAX 501-603-0556
www.perkinstrotter.com
October 23, 2009
Mr. Monty Moore
Little Rock Planning Department
723 West Markham
Little Rock, AR
Street Address
101 Morgan Keegan Drive, Suite A
Little Rock, Arkansas 72202
(z
Re: Residential Zoning Variance Application for 4 Longlea Drive
Dear Mr. Moore:
Enclosed are the following: (1) completed Application for Zoning Variance, (2) six
copies of a recent survey of my property, certified by a registered land surveyor, showing the
existing and proposed improvements, and (3) the $85 filing fee ($80 for single family & $5 sign
fee) that must accompany the application.
I am requesting a variance from the fence height restriction of 6' so that I may place an 8'
fence on a portion of my property that adjoins my uphill neighbor. My street is on a hill, and my
uphill neighbor's property is several feet higher than mine. My neighbor's back yard is terraced
and supported by several feet of retaining wall running parallel to my existing fence. My
neighbor recently replaced a portion of her 6' fence that runs parallel to my property with a new
6' fence. Because her property is already higher than mine and the bottom of her fence is
positioned atop her retaining wall area, her fence is more than 8' high when looking at it from
my property. My fence which runs parallel to my uphill neighbor's backyard is rotten and needs
to be replaced. This portion of the fence is rotten largely because it has had a vine growing on it
for many years before we bought the house. The vine was recently removed revealing the
weakness and unattractiveness of the rotten fence. We have obtained an estimate to replace the
fence and are seeking a variance to install an 8' fence to replace the 6' fence that will be taken
down. Even with my 8' fence, my neighbor's fence will still be slightly taller than mine. An 8'
fence would help, however, to obscure the majority of the view of the back of her fence, some of
which was recently replaced and supported by metal posts which are visible from the back of the
fence and some of which has not been replaced.
I intend to take the additional steps mandated for making application for a residential
zoning variance including notice, affidavit and sign postage. I look forward to answering any
questions you may have at the November 30, 2009, meeting which is when I understand my
application will be considered. If I can provide additional information prior to that time, please
feel free to call.
PERKINS & TROTTER, Pl
October 23, 2009
Page 2
Sincerely,
PERKTNS & TROTTER, PLLC
add -`
Julie D. Greathouse
JDG/j as
Enclosures
NOVEMBER 30, 2009
ITEM NO.: 5
File No.: Z-8507
Owner: Robert Berry
Applicant: Terry Burruss
Address: 814 West 7th Street
Description: North side of West 7th Street, between State and Izard Streets.
Zoned: UU
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-553
to allow a projecting sign which exceeds the maximum area allowed.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Vacant Commercial Building
Proposed Use of Property: Tattoo Shop
Staff Note:
The sign as proposed by the applicant is considered a "roof sign" by ordinance
definition based on the fact that it extends above the roofline of the building.
According to ordinance, a "roof sign" is a prohibited sign type. As such, the
applicant cannot request a variance for the proposed sign.
Staff suggests that the applicant develop an alternate signage plan and present it
to the Board of Adjustment at the December 21, 2009 meeting. Therefore, staff
recommends this application be deferred to the December 21, 2009 Agenda.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(NOVEMBER 30, 2009)
The applicant was not present. Staff recommended the application be deferred to the
December 21, 2009 agenda, to allow the applicant time to address the "roof sign"
issue.
The Chairman placed the item on the Consent Agenda for deferral to the December
21, 2009 agenda. The Consent Agenda was approved with a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays
and 2 absent. The application was deferred.
614C '.ST.
LITTL �;K, AR 72201
�@ 501-376-3676 FAX 376-3766
DU17ry uss
A r c h i t e c t design, planning and interiors
October 23, 2009
Mr. Monte Moore
Zoning and Enforcement Administrator
Department of Planning & Development
City of Little Rock
723 W. Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
RE: Seventh Street
Sign Variance
814 7th Street
Little Rock, Arkansas
A/E # 0933
Dear Mr. Moore:
Attached please find 6 copies of the Site Plan on the above referenced project. We are
proposing to install a projecting sign above the existing canopy. Overall sign dimensions will be
approximately be 5' wide by 12' tall "(60 square feet). The ordinance would allow us to have
wall signage of approximately 82 square feet. We are requesting permission to install the
projected sign in lieu of larger wall signage.
We appreciate your consideration on this request. If there are any questions or additional
information is needed, please call. We can also be reached by email at
tbadesignplanning@sbcglobal. net.
Yours very truly,
Terry G. Burruss, AIA
0
•
0
0
U
W
W
0
F—
W
m
N
D
B
LL
0
D r
0
e�
~
w
0
J
ie
r
m
uj
w_
IINd
J
CO
>
m
LLJQ
J
>
m
OU
LIJ
Z
Q
0
Z
L
>
LLJ
�
3:
U)
Lu
>
W
m LLJ
w
0
=
U
�
Lli
C12
z
Z
2
0
cn
>
S'
~
w
0
J
m
uj
Li
_Q
J
>
m
OU
LIJ
Z
Q
Q
Z
L
>
CO
Z
U)
LU
w
O
m
=
I-
�
z
Z
F-
C�
co
>
S'
v,
is
ol
w
Q
z
M
W
d
November 30, 2009
There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 2:05 p.m.
Date:
Vice -Chairman