HomeMy WebLinkAboutboa_12 17 2007LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SUMMARY OF MINUTES
DECEMBER 17, 2007
2:00 P.M.
I. Roll Call and Finding of a Quorum
A Quorum was present being four (4) in number.
II. Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meetings
The Minutes of the November 26, 2007 meeting were
approved as mailed by unanimous vote.
III. Members Present:
Members Absent:
Andrew Francis, Chairman
Terry Burruss, Vice Chairman
James Van Dover
Robert Winchester
David Wilbourn
City Attorney Present: Debra Weldon
LITTLE ROCK BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
AGENDA
DECEMBER 17, 2007
2:00 P.M.
NEW BUSINESS:
1. Z -6732-D 225 E. Markham Street
2. Z-7361 -A 8816 Ranch Blvd.
3. Z-8297 1205 Kavanaugh Blvd.
0
C
0
3NId
N
■
-
d3!ZV213
Lll1VBIH1
'A1
a
a
W
W
Q w
N
s
n w
JQ
W
OONo
z
Ntlrva3�
rl �
e
a
NNi"
AVMOVONB H011tl
�liyp
Q
r�l
'-` MHO
ONIX 1W
N3H3NO
S �i
a MONOOOM o
1
3XId
r��klS
Al
c
x Ntl 30 N0111Wtl llOOS
X21 d NIV3
v°i o
J
r ^ A1I5213hIN
" J
A11S213AINH
S9NI8dS 83A39wu
.-a
S3HOIH , s
IddiSS
IN
6
W
lOOIHO
a
MO8M NHOf
hQ- NIOAN353N 3
cm
3NNI3H
O21O331X3VHS a
31 OV S
z SIONtlS
cT W H21Vd A3NOON
e
T.
—
m
g w
�J
Ntl 08
WIl
�Oj��b1S o � 3OO1N AWN
E
hQ
w
N
Q
�
NVAMOS
1NtlM315
/Y
H-
0
2y
S11WI1 ALIO70
VP
��? o
CIO
�O1OJ 3ltlONN33
0
DECEMBER 17, 2007
ITEM NO.: 1
File No.: Z -6732-D
Owner: River Market Holdings, LLC.
Applicant: Terry Burruss
Address: 225 E. Markham Street
Description: Southwest corner of East Markham Street and Cumberland Street
Zoned: UU
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the sign provisions of Section 36-
557 to allow a wall sign without street frontage.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use of Property: Mixed Office/Commercial
Proposed Use of Property: Mixed Office/Commercial
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B. Staff Analysis:
The UU zoned property at 225 East Markham Street is occupied by a four-
story mixed office/commercial building. The property is located at the
southwest corner of East Markham Street and Cumberland Street. There is a
paved parking lot on the west side of the building with an access drive from
East Markham Street. Two (2) of the building's main entrances are on the
west side of the building from the parking lot.
A new restaurant use, Velo Rouge, is being established within the north
portion of the building's first floor. As part of the new restaurant use, a wall
sign is being proposed on the west building fagade. The proposed sign is 20
square feet in area (2 feet by 10 feet), and is to be located over the
northernmost entry door on the west building fagade. The restaurant also has
wall signs on the north and east fagades.
DECEMBER 17, 2007 (
ITEM NO.: 1 (CON'T.
Section 36-557(a) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires that all on -premise
wall signs face required street frontage. Therefore, the applicant is requesting
a variance to allow the wall sign on the west building fagade with no direct
street frontage.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the request as
reasonable. The sign on the west building fagade will aid in identifying one of
the restaurant's entrances for persons parking in the adjacent lot and traffic
(pedestrian and vehicular) heading east on E. Markham Street. Stone Ward
received a variance to place a wall sign on this west building fagade. Iriana's
Pizza also received a variance to allow an awning sign on the east fagade of the
building directly across the parking lot to the west (201 E. Markham Street).
Staff believes the proposed wall sign without direct street frontage will not be out
of character with other signage in the area and will have no adverse impact on
the adjacent properties.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested sign variance, subject to permits
being obtained for all signage.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(DECEMBER 17, 2007)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant submitted a letter on December 17, 2007,
requesting the application be deferred to the January 28, 2008 agenda. Staff
supported the deferral request.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and deferred to the January 28, 2008
agenda by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 recusal (Burruss).
1202 S .MAIN, SUITE 230
LITTLE ROCK, AR 72202
n C 501-376-3676 FAX376-3766
USS.
�� Architect design, planning and interiors
November 16, 2007
Monte Moore
Zoning and Enforcement Administrator
723 West Markham
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
RE: Sign Variance
Velo Rouge Restaurant
Little Rock, Arkansas
A/E # 0744
Dear Mr. Moore:
22-- 6�73� -�
The applicant requests consideration of signage for the West elevation to allow for vehicular and pedestrian
traffic originating from the downtown hotel district to visually know the location of their establishment. The
signage on the North and East building elevations does not visibly display restaurant location. Attached
please find 3 copies of the Site Plan and West elevation.
We appreciate your consideration on this request. If there are any questions or additional
information is needed, please do not hesitate to call. We can also be reached by email at
tbadesignplanning@sbcglobal.net.
Yours very truly,
Terry Qurruss, AIA
DECEMBER 17, 2007
ITEM NO.: 2
File No.: Z-7361 -A
Owner: Velvin Rob Herndon III and Tami C. Herndon
Applicant: Billy Roehrenbeck/Bryan Mueller
Address: 8816 Ranch Blvd.
Description: Lot 260, Cypress Point Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the building line provisions of
Section 31-12 to allow a new single family residence which crosses a front platted
building line.
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 Analvsis:
The R-2 zoned property at 8816 Ranch Blvd. is occupied by a two-story brick
single family residence. The property is located on the north side of Ranch
Blvd. at its current termination. There is a two -car wide driveway from Ranch
Blvd. at the southeast corner of the property. The lot contains a 30 foot front
platted building line.
On February 24, 2003 the Board of Adjustment granted a variance for a
reduced rear yard setback for the proposed residence. The northeast corner
of the house was to be located 10 feet back from the rear (north) property line.
When the residence was constructed, a mistake was made in laying out the
structure's footprint, rotating the structure slightly clockwise on the lot and
across the front platted building line. A small portion of the front of the house
DECEMBER 17, 2007 (
ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.
is located 27 to 28 feet back from the front property line, crossing the platted
building line by two (2) to three (3) feet. The mistake also pulled the residence
slightly further back from the rear property line (12.5 feet), lessening the
previously approved rear setback variance.
Section 31-12(c) of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that encroachments
across platted building lines be reviewed and approved by the Board of
Adjustment. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance from this
ordinance standard to allow the single-family residence which extends across
the front platted building line.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the encroachment
across the front platted building line as very minimal. The. encroachment being
only two (2) to three (3) feet, combined with the slight curvature of Ranch Blvd.
in front of this lot, does not give the structure the appearance of being out of
alignment with the residences to the west. There is not another single-family
lot east of this property. An access drive to the Cypress Point lake and park is
located immediately east of this lot, with railroad right-of-way further east.
Staff believes the slight building line encroachment will have no adverse
impact on the adjacent properties or the neighborhood.
If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to
complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the platted front building line
for the residence. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the
Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of
Assurance.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance, subject to the
completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the front platted building
line as approved by the Board.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(DECEMBER 17, 2007)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
item and a recommendation of approval.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by
staff by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent.
PULASKI
COUNTY TITLE��
November 16, 2007
Department of Planning and Development
Re: Zoning Variance
To whom it may concern,
-:') - 73 4/-A
We are requesting a variance due to the building encroachment over the 30 foot Building Line.
Please find attached all documentation as requested. Thank you for your consideration for this
matter.
Sincerely,
Bryan Mueller, representative for
Velvin Rob Herndon, III and Tami C. Herndon
12921 CANTRELL ROAD, SUITE 401
LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72223
PHONE (501) 537-3700 • FAX (501) 537-3701
DECEMBER 17, 2007
I���f•��L��C3
File No.: Z-8297
Owner/Applicant: Judith A. O'Connor
Address: 1205 Kavanaugh Blvd.
Description: Part of Lots 9 and 10, Block 9, Midland Hills Addition
Zoned: R-3
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-3 zoned property at 1205 Kavanaugh Blvd. is occupied by a two-story
brick and frame single-family residence. The single-family lot is located on the
west side of Kavanaugh Blvd. and backs up to Charles Street. There is a
driveway from Charles Street which serves as access.
The applicant recently constructed a four (4) foot tall wrought iron fence on top
of an existing masonry wall, enclosing the front yard portion of the lot along
Kavanaugh Blvd. The overall height of the fence/wall ranges from 5.5 to 6 feet
along the west (Kavanaugh Blvd.) property line. The fence/wall along the
north (side) property line ranges from approximately five (5) feet in height at
the northeast corner of the lot to approximately 10 feet in height before it ties
into the northeast corner of the house. The increased height is due to the lot
immediately to the north sloping downward from Kavanaugh Blvd. The
applicant notes that the fence was constructed to protect her grandchild and
dog from the traffic along Kavanaugh Blvd., as the house is located very close
to the street.
DECEMBER 17, 2007
ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T.)
Section 36-516(e)(1)a. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum
fence/wall height of four (4) feet for fence/walls located between a building
setback line and a street right-of-way. Fence/walls with a maximum height of
six (6) feet are allowed elsewhere on single-family lots. Therefore, the
applicant is requesting a variance from this ordinance standard to allow the
taller fence/wall as noted above.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff views the request as
reasonable. There was a tall row of hedges inside the existing masonry wall
which were removed for the fence construction. The wrought iron fence
replaces the hedges which essentially served as screening. As long as the
fence remains wrought iron and not opaque, staff feels that it has no adverse
visual impact on the adjacent properties or the neighborhood. The applicant
also recently constructed an arbor on front of the house, over a portion of the
patio area. Staff views the arbor as an architectural/landscape feature and not
part of the structure based on the fact that it is unenclosed and not roofed.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested fence variance, subject to the
following conditions:
1. The fence must remain non-opaque.
2. The arbor must remain unenclosed and not roofed.
3. A building permit must be obtained for the fence construction.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(DECEMBER 17, 2007)
Staff informed the Board that the applicant completed the notices to surrounding
property owners less than 10 days prior to the public hearing, as required by the
Board. Staff noted that the notices were done seven (7) to eight (8) days prior to the
meeting.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for deferral to the January 28, 2008
agenda due to the late notification. The Consent Agenda was approved by a vote of
4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. The application was deferred.
5 Nov 2007
To Whom It May Concern:_ 9z-1 7
Re: Application for A variance for Improvements
1205 Kavanaugh Blvd Little Rock, Ar 72205
I am happy to apply for this permit and I apologize for submitting this application
after improvements have been completed. I was unaware of the need for this
application and was quite stunned when I received a notice of violation to city
codes.
I recently relocated to Little Rock from Washington State after being recruited by
Arkansas Children's Hospital to establish a pediatric liver transplant program.
When assessing the property at 1205 Kavanaugh, I explained to a very
experienced and native Little Rock realtor that I would need a fence in the front
that would protect my 3 year old grandson and dog from the considerable traffic
on Kavanaugh. She did not mention any need for a permit, nor did I receive any
notification of restrictions or covenants at closing from the title company, Pulaski
County Title. Prior to construction of a non -privacy fence and decorative arbor I
received several bids from licensed contractors in Arkansas and none, including
the company that installed the fence, suggested a permit was needed. Indeed,
the contractors were as surprised as I was and were unaware of any Hillcrest
restriction.
In the surrounding 3 blocks of my property there are several fences of equal
height or greater height and at least one other arbor. The fence, which is a non -
privacy fence and arbor have been completed. We have received many favorable
comments and no negative comments. The fence and arbor are tasteful and in
keeping with preservation of the neighbor charm.
I do sincerely apologize for this violation, which was completely non -intentional,
but simple ignorance of the code.
Sincerely,
Judith A. O'Connor
11
J
W
<
0
V
�
0
LU
w
}
0
m
co
ow
Z
w
�
p
w
�u)c�>�w
F-
Wz�-
w
m
(-)
�
o
O
=
W
¢
�
Z
m
z
LL
m
>
>
>
No
ii
U)
m
z
LU
U)
m
w
z
w
¢
0
LU
LU
of
0
o
ow
-
Qm
o
w
QU)
z
j
December 17, 2007
There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 2:04 p.m.
Date: 0 (/2 31 0C'
Chairman
{
Secretary