Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-8893 Staff AnalysisNOVEMBER 25, 2013 ITFM NO. - 2 File No.: Z-8893 Owner: Flora Coldicott Applicant: Stanley Schulte Address: 5624 N. Grandview Road Description: West half of Lots 4-6, Block 8, Parkview Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-254 to enclose an existing carport and cover and screen -in an existing deck with a reduced side setback. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: No Comments. Single Family Residential B. Building Codes Comments: The required fire separation distance (building to property line) prescribed by the building code terminates at five (5) feet. Buildings are allowed to be closer than five (5) feet if they have properly constructed fire walls which provide the requisite one (1) hour fire resistance rating. When buildings are five (5) feet or more from the property line, the requirement no longer applies to the wall itself, only the projections such as eaves or overhangs. Openings such as doors and windows are limited when the exterior wall is three (3) feet from the property line, and are prohibited when the exterior wall is less than three (3) feet from the line. There is no restriction on openings when the exterior wall is more than three (3) feet from the property line. Contact the City of Little Rock Building Codes at 371-4832 for additional details. NOVEMBER 25, 2013 ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.' C. Staff Analysis: The R-3 zoned property at 5624 N. Grandview Road is occupied by a one-story brick and frame single family residence. A one -car wide driveway from N. Grandview Road is located at the southeast corner of the property. The driveway leads to a one -car carport at the southeast corner of the house. The carport is unenclosed on its north and south ends. A small raised deck area (approximately 12 feet by 12.5 feet) is located on the north end of the carport. The property slopes downward from front to back. The front (southeast) corner of the carport is approximately three (3) feet above grade, with the back (northeast) corner of the deck being approximately seven (7) feet above grade. The existing carport and raised deck have a three (3) foot setback from the east side property line. The applicant proposes to enclose the existing carport to create additional living space. The applicant is also proposing to cover and screen in the existing deck structure. The proposed construction will maintain the existing three (3) foot side setback. Section 36-255(d)(2) of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side setback of five (5) feet for this R-3 zoned lot. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to enclose the existing carport, and cover and screen in the existing deck area while maintaining the existing reduced side setback of three (3) feet. Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff views the request as reasonable. The alterations the applicant is proposing are relatively minor and will come no closer to the east side of the property line than the existing three (3) foot setback. There is approximately ten (10) feet of separation between the house in question and the adjacent house to the east. Staff feels that the separation is adequate. Staff believes the proposed alterations to the existing carport and deck structures will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested side setback variance, subject to compliance with the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the Building Code requirements as noted in paragraph B. of the staff report. 2. Guttering must be provided to prevent water run-off onto the adjacent property to the east. NOVEMBER 25, 2013 ITEM NO.: 2 (CON'T.) BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (November 25, 2013) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the application with a recommendation of approval. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent. The application was approved.