HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-03125-B ApplicationLl
6TH. ST
P
1
N: ST.
ti
�' tZ-ZU3
N
A
�� NW
�O
u
-Zt�q g0
Iz.n
12
e
May 19, 1986
Item No. B - Z -3125-B
Owner: Rick's, Inc./DBA/White Water Tavern
Address: West 7th Street and Thayer Street
Request: To review determination of City staff
that subject site contains a
nonconforming use/structure that cannot
be expanded.
Statement of Petitioner's Attornev:
1. Please be advised that our firm's representative,
Rick's Inc., DBA White Water Tavern, contests the staff
determination in this matter. On March 24, 1986, I was
contacted by Mr. Ken Scott, head of the Enforcement
Division of the City of Little Rock, regarding an
alleged expansion of the nonconforming use at our
client's business located at Test 7th and Thayer
Streets. Mr. Scott informed me that a notice to have
the alleged building addition removed would be issued
unless we took immediate steps to initiate an appeal of
said interpretation or seek a variance.
2. Please accept this as notice of my client's intention
to appeal. The alleged building addition involves a
roofed screened in porch located on the south side of
the building. The screened in area houses a bar-b-que
smoker and was required by the State Health Department.
The porch is located on part of the preexiting slab of
the building and no new slab or concrete was poured for
erection of the porch. All that was done was to erect
a roof and a screen around an area that already
existed. There was no outward expansion of the
building slab in any manner.
Ordinance Provisions at Issue:
"Article V, Section 5-101.c.1
(c) NONCONFORMING USES:
1. Expansions
A nonconforming use shall not be extended,
expanded, enlarged or increased in intensity to
any structure or land area other than that
occupied by such nonconforming use on the
effective date of this ordinance or any amendment
hereto which causes such use to become
nonconforming."-
May 19, 1986
Item No. B - Continued
"Article V, Section 5-101.d.1
ENLARGEMENT, REPAIR OR ALTERATIONS:
Any nonconforming structure may be enlarged,
maintained, repaired or altered provided, however, that
no such enlargement, maintenance, repair or alteration
shall either create an additional nonconformity or
increase the degree of the existing nonconformity for
all or any part of such structure."
STAFF REPORT:
The Planning staff will develop the City staff position
relative to this subject prior to the public hearing
inasmuch as it is an involved issue. We will be prepared to
address this issue at the public hearing. However, there is
one point at this time that we would like to place in the
record. The fact that the State Health Department required
this smoker to be located at this point is not a concern
that we have viewed in the past which abridges or modifies
any of our regulations. It is our understanding from past
opinions of the City Attorney that certain health
regulations of the State of Arkansas did preempt the Zoning
Ordinance. However, that was in instances where the
addition or the proposal was required to meet certain health
standards of an existing activity. The smoker and/or
facility in place here is an expansion of the use was not
formerly in place and is part of the issue at hand.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (4-21-86)
The Chairman offered deferral to those applicants who felt
that the attendance problem impacted their request.
Inasmuch as there were only six members present and five
votes are required for action on any matter, this applicant
chose deferral to May 19, 1986. A motion to this effect was
made and passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and
2 open positions.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (5-19-86)
Larry Garrison of the Whitewater
discussed the request. He said
removed and a new one was added
Mr. Garrison then presented some
issue at length. He pointed out
utilized the existing slab which
a wash area. There had been no
Chief of Signs and Zoning, said
Tavern was present and
that an old porch was
that was screened in.
photos and reviewed the
that the new porch had
had been primarily used for
smoker there. Kenny Scott,
that expansion of a
nonconforming use had occurred because the smoker was new.
May 19, 1986
Item No. B - Continued
He pointed out that the State Health Department required the
addition because the smoker was added. Mr. Scott went on to
say that his office did receive a complaint about the
addition and an investigation was initiated after that.
Mr Garrison spoke again and made some additional comments
about the previous actions before the City and that the
smoker had been in place for about three months. He also
said that the removal of the smoker would cause some
problems. There was a long discussion, and Mr. Scott spoke
again about the parking and several issues. A motion was
then offered which stated that the addition was an expansion
of a nonconforming use which is prohibited by the Zoning
Ordinance. The motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes,
0 noes and 1 absent.
April 21, 1986
Item No. 13 - Z -3125-B
Owner: Rick's, Inc./DBA/White Water Tavern
Address: West 7th Street and Thayer Street
Request: To review determination of City staff
that subject site contains a
nonconforming use/structure that cannot
be expanded.
Statement of Petitioner's Attorney:
1. Please be advised that our firm's representative,
Rick's Inc., DBA White Water Tavern, contests the staff
determination in this matter. On March 24, 1986, I was
contacted by Mr. Ken Scott, head of the Enforcement
Division of the City of Little Rock, regarding an
alleged expansion of the nonconforming use at our
client's business located at West 7th and Thayer
Streets. Mr. Scott informed me that a notice to have
the alleged building addition removed would be issued
unless we took immediate steps to initiate an appeal of
said interpretation or seek a variance.
2. Please accept this as notice of my client's intention
to appeal. The alleged building addition involves a
roofed screened in porch located on the south side of
the building. The screened in area houses a bar-b-que
smoker and was required by the State Health Department.
The porch is located on part of the preexiting slab of
the building and no new slab or concrete was poured for
erection of the porch. All that was done was to erect
a roof and a screen around an area that already
existed. There was no outward expansion of the
building slab in any manner.
Ordinance Provisions at Issue:
"Article V, Section 5-101.c.1
(c) NONCONFORMING USES:
1. Expansions
A nonconforming use shall not be
expanded, enlarged or increased
any structure or land area other
occupied by such nonconforming u
effective date of this ordinance
hereto which causes such use to
nonconforming."
extended,
in intensity to
than that
se on the
or any amendment
become
April 21, 1986
Item No. 13 - Continued
"Article V, Section 5-101.d.1
ENLARGEMENT, REPAIR OR ALTERATIONS:
Any nonconforming structure may be enlarged,
maintained, repaired or altered provided, however, that
no such enlargement, maintenance, repair or alteration
shall either create an additional nonconformity or
increase the degree of the existing nonconformity for
all or any part of such structure."
STAFF REPORT:
The Planning staff will develop the City staff position
relative to this subject prior to the public hearing
inasmuch as it is an involved issue. We will be prepared to
address this issue at the public hearing. However, there is
one point at this time that we would like to place in the
record. The fact that the State Health Department required
this smoker to be located at this point is not a concern
that we have viewed in the past which abridges or modifies
any of our regulations. It is our understanding from past
opinions of the City Attorney that certain health
regulations of the State of Arkansas did preempt the Zoning
Ordinance. However, that was in instances where the
addition or the proposal was required to meet certain health
standards of an existing activity. The smoker and/or
facility in place here is an expansion of the use was not
formerly in place and is part of the issue at hand.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: (4-21-86)
The Chairman offered deferral to those applicants who felt
that the attendance problem impacted their request.
Inasmuch as there were only six members present and five
votes are required for action on any matter, this applicant
chose deferral to May 19, 1986. A motion to this effect was
made and passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and
2 open positions.
Hi-rEA-rER TAVERN
_. 7TH & THAYER
_LITTLE ROCK ... ARKANSAS
REST. - ---- - PLAN
1/4° = 1�-0"
oaoiof on Law 91rm, Lfo(
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
900 WEST FOURTH STREET
P.O. BOX 1300
LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72203
(501)374-9977 June 26, 1986
Mr. Richard Wood
Office of Comprehensive Planning
City Hall
Little Rock, AR 72201
RE: Whitewater Tavern - Intention to
Form Planned Commercial District
Dear Richard:
JUN 27 IW'
'EHARLES DARWIN DAVIDSON
STEPHEN L.GERSHNER
CHARLES PHILLIP BOYD, JR.
THOMAS H. McLAIN, JR
GEOFFREY B.TREECE
Please accept this letter as notice of my clients'
intention to proceed under Article IX of the City of Little
Rock Zoning Ordinance to establish a Planned ,Commercial
District at their current location of Seventh and Thayer
Streets. I understand that the deadline for filing our formal
application is July 14, 1986. Prior to the deadline, we are
required to meet with the staff for a pre -application
conference. My clients and I are currently available to meet
any day of the week of July 7, 1986 except for Thursday, July
10, 1986. It is also my understanding that you will ask Mr.
Kenny Scott of Enforcement to withhold any action related to
the barbecue smoker while our application is pending.
We look forward to working with you and the staff. Thanks
for your help and consideration.
Cordially yours,
A4j&'U.e_
Geoffrey B. Treece
GBT:bs:3016T
cc: Mr. Tony Bozynsky
Mr. Richard Daes
Mr. Larry Garrison
900 WEST FOURTH STREET
P.O. BOX 1300
LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72203
(501)374-9977
Da oio' on Law girm, !6/0(
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
April 8, 1986
Tony Bozynsky
Room 311, City Hall
500 West Markham St.
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
CHARLES DARWIN DAVIDSON
STEPHEN L. GERSHNER
CHARLES PHILLIP BOYD, JR.
THOMAS H. McLAIN, JR.
GEOFFREY B.TREECE
Re: White Water Tavern - Alleged Expansion of Nonconforming Use
Dear Mr. Bozynsky:
Enclosed please find a sketch of the screened in area
which your enforcement division has alleged to be an expansion
of a nonconforming use. You should be advised that this entire
area was previously fenced in by a rather unsightly wooden
fence. The owners have pictures which reflect same and would
be willing to exhibit those upon your request.
If I can be of any assistance, please do not hesitate to
call.
Cordially yours,
GEOFFREY B. TREECE
GBT/kah
Enclosure
2746T
Davro(s on Law 3Irm, Lfo(
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
900 WEST FOURTH STREET CHARLES DARWIN DAVIDSON
P.O. BOX 1300 STEPHEN L. GERSHNER
LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72203 CHARLES PHILLIP BOYD, JR.
(501) 374-9977 THOMAS H. McLAIN, JR.
March 31, 1986 GEOFFREY B. TREECE
HAND DELIVERED
Tony Bozynsky
Room 311
City Hall
500 West Markham St.
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
Re: White Water Tavern - Alleged Expansion of Nonconforming Use
Dear Mr. Bozynsky:
Please be advised that our firm represents Rick's, Inc.,
d/b/a White Water Tavern in the above -captioned matter. On
March 24, 1986, I was contacted by Mr. Ken Scott, head of the
enforcement division of the City of Little Rock regarding an
alleged expansion of a nonconforming use at our client's
business located at 7th and Thayer Streets. Mr. Scott informed
me that a notice to have the alleged building addition removed
would be issued unless we took immediate steps to initiate an
appeal of said interpretation or seek a variance.
Please accept this letter as notice of my client's
intention to appeal the enforcement staff's interpretation that
there has been an expansion of a nonconforming use. The
alleged building addition involves a roofed, screened in porch
located on the south side of the building. The screened in
area houses a barbecue smoker and was required by the State
Health Department. The porch is located on part of the
pre-existing slab of the building and no new slab or concrete
was poured for erection of the porch. All that was done was to
erect a roof and a screen around an area that already existed.
There was no outward expansion of the building slab in any
manner.
I understand from Mr. Richard Wood of the Office of
Comprehensive Planning that for the purposes of this letter and
the appeal, a graphic depicting the alleged building addition
should be forwarded to you. Please be advised that I am
currently attempting to locate a blueprint or some other
drawing from my clients and will forward same to you as soon as
I have received it.
If I can be
enhance the factual
not hesitate to call.
GBT/kah
2719T
of further assistance, or if I need to
matter contained in this letter, please do
C rdially yours,
I--- Q::
GEOFF E B. TREECE