Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4300-A Staff AnalysisMarch 30, 1998 Item No.: B File No.- Owner- Address - Description Zoned: Variance Reauested: Justification: Present Use of Property: Proposed Use of Pro ert : Staff Report: A. Public Works Issues: Z -4300-A Wali Caradine 1001 Cumberland Street Lots 1 and 2, except the south 10 feet of Lot 2, Block 45, Original City of Little Rock M;11RA A variance is requested from the bulk and area provisions of Section 36-418 to permit construction of an accessory building with reduced setbacks. The structure is designed to fit within the historic context of the MacArthur Park Historic District as a detached or accessory building. Changing the setback requirements would allow this building to align with other structures in the area which have reduced setbacks. Single Family residential Single Family residential 1. Repair any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 2. Construct a concrete apron, 6 inches thick, in the right-of-way of north end of the alley. B. Staff Analysis: The HDR (High Density Residential) zoned property at 1001 Cumberland Street is currently occupied by an historic, two- story residential structure. Although zoned to allow multifamily use, the structure is occupied by the applicant as a single family residence. The property has no covered parking or garage. The applicant proposes to construct a two-story accessory structure which will have a 3 -car garage on the ground floor and a studio on the second floor. The applicant is an architect and the studio will be used as a March 30, 1998 Item No.: B(Cont.) personal work space. He has a business location elsewhere and the property at 1001 Cumberland will not be used for any business purpose. The proposed detached garage structure will have a rear yard setback of 4 feet from the alley and a side yard setback of 2 feet from the 10th Street side property line. There are not separate setback standards established for accessory structures in the HDR district as in the other residential districts of the City. The Ordinance requires that all structures on HDR zoned properties have minimum rear yard and exterior side yard setbacks of 20 feet and 10 feet respectively. Staff believes the variance requests to be reasonable. The 4 foot rear yard setback off of the alley exceeds that required in the other single family residential districts of the City. Since this property is occupied by a single family residence, staff believes it is reasonable to treat this issue in a manner similar to other single family properties. In the other single family districts of the City, accessory structures are permitted to have a setback of 0 feet from an alley. The reduced setback off of the alley is not out of character with other structures in the area. There are many other properties in the vicinity which have structures built on or very near the alley. The reduced exterior side yard setback of 2 feet is also reasonable and not out of character with other development in the area. There is no direct access from the street to the structure. Access is either from the alley on the rear or from the front (west) of the structure. The structure has a setback of 17-18 feet from the curb of 10th Street and should not create a sight -distance hazard. There are only two issues related to this application which create any potential problem. The site plan shows a 2nd floor projection which extends across the property line on the 10th Street side. The applicant has been advised of this issue and will revise the plan to either eliminate that projection or move the entire structure to the south, away from the 10th Street property line. The site plan also shows a new iron and brick fence to be built in the public right-of-way on the 10th Street side. The applicant has also been advised of this issue and has been told that a franchise would be required for the fence. The Little Rock Historic District Commission has issued a Certificate of Appropriateness for the structure. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested rear yard and exterior side yard setback variances subject to the following conditions: K March 30; 199.8 Item No.: B Cont. 1. There is to be no business activity conducted in the second floor "studio" of the proposed accessory structure. 2. The structure is to be redesigned or relocated so that a minimum exterior side yard setback of 2 feet is provided from the closest edge of the structure, including any second floor projections. 3. There is to be no direct vehicle entry to the structure from the north (10th Street) side. 4. A franchise must be obtained for the proposed brick and iron fence which is shown in the public right-of-way. 5. Compliance with Little Rock Historic District Commission requirements. 6. Compliance with Public Works Comments. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (FEBRUARY 23, 1998) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the Board that the applicant had failed to follow proper notice procedure in that most of the persons within 200 feet had not been notified and of those who were, approximately half were notified late. Wali Caradine stated that most of the properties within 200 feet were occupied by apartments. He stated that most of the buildings had a secured entry that prohibited him from having access to the apartments. Mr. Caradine stated that he had sent notices via certified mail to all property owners within 200 feet when he went before the Historic District Commission in early 1997. Willie Lee Brooks asked Mr. Caradine if persons within 200 feet were notified of the Board of Adjustment meeting. Mr. Caradine responded that he had put up the sign as required and reiterated that everyone around was aware of his plans through the 1997 Historic District Commission meeting. In response to a question from Assistant City Attorney Cindy Dawson, Mr. Caradine stated that he had gone to the Historic District Commission in February or March of 1997. Ms. Dawson asked if those same persons had been made aware of the Board of Adjustment meeting. Mr. Caradine responded that they had not but that the issue was exactly the same as was reviewed and approved by the Historic District Commission. Kirby Rowland asked what would happen if a waiver of the notice requirement were not granted. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, responded that the item would be deferred and the applicant instructed to perform the required notice procedure. Mr. Caradine interjected that it was difficult to notify persons in his area. 3 March 30, 1998 Ms. Dawson noted that Mr. Caradine could send the notices via certified mail. Mr. Caradine stated that the notices would just go to the same people he notified of the Historic District Commission meeting. Ms. Dawson responded that those persons needed to be made aware of the Board of Adjustment meeting, that adequate notice was an important element of due process. In response to a question from Mr. Carney, Mr. Caradine stated that he still had the list of persons that he used when he went to the Historic District Commission. The Chairman called the question on the issue of waiving the bylaws and accepting the notices as done by Mr. Caradine. The vote was 0 ayes, 5 noes, 1 absent and 3 open positions. The applicant was instructed to notify persons as required and to come to the March 30, 1998 meeting. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (MARCH 30, 1998) The applicant's representative was present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the Board that all required notices had been sent via certified mail. Staff recommended approval of the requested rear yard and exterior side yard setback variances subject to the following conditions: 1. There is to be no business activity conducted in the second floor "studio" of the proposed accessory structure. 2. The structure is to be redesigned or relocated so that a minimum exterior side yard setback of 2 feet is provided from the closest edge of the structure, including any second floor projections. 3. There is to be no direct vehicle entry to the structure from the north (10th Street) side. 4. A franchise must be obtained for the proposed brick and iron fence which is shown in the public right-of-way. 5. Compliance with Little Rock Historic District Commission requirements. 6. Compliance with Public Works Comments. The applicant's representative offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. Ell March 30, 1998 Item No.: B File No.: Z -4300-A Owner: Wali Caradine Address: 1001 Cumberland Street Description: Lots 1 and 2, except the south 10 feet of Lot 2, Block 45, Original City of Little Rock Zoned• HDR Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the bulk and area provisions of Section 36-418 to permit construction of an accessory building with reduced setbacks. Justification: The structure is designed to fit within the historic context of the MacArthur Park Historic District as a detached or accessory building. Changing the setback requirements would allow this building to align with other structures in the area which have reduced setbacks. Present Use of Property: Single Family residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family residential Staff Report• A. Public Works Issues: 1. Repair any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 2. Construct a concrete apron, 6 inches thick, in the right-of-way of north end of the alley. B. Staff Analysis: The HDR (High Density Residential) zoned property at 1001 Cumberland Street is currently occupied by an historic, two- story residential structure. Although zoned to allow multifamily use, the structure is occupied by the applicant as a single family residence. The property has no covered parking or garage. The applicant proposes to construct a two-story accessory structure which will have a 3 -car garage on the ground floor and a studio on the second floor. The applicant is an architect and the studio will be used as a March 30, 1998 No.: B (Cont. personal work space. He has a business location elsewhere and the property at 1001 Cumberland will not be used for any business purpose. The proposed detached garage structure will have a rear yard setback of 4 feet from the alley and a side yard setback of 2 feet from the 10th Street side property line. There are not separate setback standards established for accessory structures in the HDR district as in the other residential districts of the City. The ordinance requires that all structures on HDR zoned properties have minimum rear yard and exterior side yard setbacks of 20 feet and 10 feet respectively. Staff believes the variance requests to be reasonable. The 4 foot rear yard setback off of the alley exceeds that required in the other single family residential districts of the City. Since this property is occupied by a single family residence, staff believes it is reasonable to treat this issue in a manner similar to other single family properties. In the other single family districts of the City, accessory structures are permitted to have a setback of 0 feet from an alley. The reduced setback off of the alley is not out of character with other structures in the area. There are many other properties in the vicinity which have structures built on or very near the alley. The reduced exterior side yard setback of 2 feet is also reasonable and not out of character with other development in the area. There is no direct access from the street to the structure. Access is either from the alley on the rear or from the front (west) of the structure. The structure has a setback of 17-18 feet from the curb of 10th Street and should not create a sight -distance hazard. There are only two issues related to this application which create any potential problem. The site plan shows a 2nd floor projection which extends across the property line on the 10th Street side. The applicant has been advised of this issue and will revise the plan to either eliminate that projection or move the entire structure to the south, away from the 10th Street property line. The site plan also shows a new iron and brick fence to be built in the public right-of-way on the 10th Street side. The applicant has also been..advised of this issue and has been told that a franchise would be required for the fence. The Little Rock Historic District Commission has issued a Certificate of Appropriateness for the structure. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested rear yard and exterior side yard setback variances subject to the following conditions: E March 30, 1998 Item No.: B (Cont. 1. There is to be no business activity conducted in the second floor "studio" of the proposed accessory structure. 2. The structure is to be redesigned or relocated so that a minimum exterior side yard setback of 2 feet is provided from the closest edge of the structure, including any second floor projections. 3. There is to be no direct vehicle entry to the structure from the north (10th Street) side. 4. A franchise must be obtained for the proposed brick and iron fence which is shown in the public right-of-way. 5. Compliance with Little Rock Historic District Commission requirements. 6. Compliance with Public Works Comments. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (FEBRUARY 23, 1998) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the Board that the applicant had failed to follow proper notice procedure in that most of the persons within 200 feet had not been notified and of those who were, approximately half were notified late. Wali Caradine stated that most of the properties within 200 feet were occupied by apartments. He stated that most of the buildings had a secured entry that prohibited him from having access to the apartments. Mr. Caradine stated that he had sent notices via certified mail to all property owners within 200 feet when he went before the Historic District Commission in early 1997. Willie Lee Brooks asked Mr. Caradine if persons within 200 feet were notified of the Board of Adjustment meeting. Mr. Caradine responded that he had put up the sign as required and reiterated that everyone around was aware of his plans through the 1997 Historic District Commission meeting. In response to a question from Assistant City Attorney Cindy Dawson, Mr. Caradine stated that he had gone to the Historic District Commission in February or March of 1997. Ms. Dawson asked if those same persons had been made aware of the Board of Adjustment meeting. Mr. Caradine responded that they had not but that the issue was exactly the same as was reviewed and approved by the Historic District Commission. Kirby Rowland asked what would happen if a waiver of the notice requirement were not granted. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, responded that the item would be deferred and the applicant instructed to perform the required notice procedure. Mr. Caradine interjected that it was difficult to notify persons in his area. 3 March 30, 1998 Item No.: B (Cant. Ms. Dawson noted that Mr. Caradine could send the notices via certified mail. Mr. Caradine stated that the notices would just go to the same people he notified of the Historic District Commission meeting. Ms. Dawson responded that those persons needed to be made aware of the Board of -Adjustment meeting, that adequate notice was an important element of due process. In response to a question from Mr. Carney, Mr. Caradine stated that he still had the list of persons that he used when he went to the Historic District Commission. The Chairman called the question on the issue of waiving the bylaws and accepting the notices as done by Mr. Caradine. The vote was 0 ayes, 5 noes, 1 absent and 3 open positions. The applicant was instructed to notify persons as required and to come to the March 30, 1998 meeting. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (MARCH 30, 1998) The applicant's representative was present. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the Board that all required notices had been sent via certified mail. Staff recommended approval of the requested rear yard and exterior side yard setback variances subject to the following conditions: 1. There is to be no business activity conducted in the second floor "studio" of the proposed accessory structure. 2. The structure is to be redesigned or relocated so that a minimum exterior side yard setback of 2 feet is provided from the closest edge of the structure, including any second floor projections. 3. There is to be no direct vehicle entry to the structure from the north (10th Street) side. 4. A franchise must be obtained for the proposed brick and iron fence which is shown in the public right-of-way. 5. Compliance with Little Rock Historic District Commission requirements. 6. Compliance with Public Works Comments. The applicant's representative offered no additional comments. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. 4