HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4364-A Staff AnalysisOctober 27, 2003
File No..-
Owner:
o.:Owner:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Z -4364-A
Jerry G. Stevenson and Steve W. Douglas
1720 Beechwood Street
Part of Lots 1 and 2, Cliffewood Addition
R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the fence/wall
provisions of Section 36-516 to allow a
masonry wall which exceeds the maximum
height allowed.
Justification:
Present Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
STAFF REPORT
/0
Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B. Staff AnafVsis:
The applicant's justification is presented in
an attached letter.
Single Family Residential
Single Family Residential
The R-2 zoned property at 1720 Beechwood Street is occupied by a two-
story frame single family residence, with a two -car driveway from
Beechwood Street. There is a one-story frame accessory structure at the
southwest corner of the property, with a swimming pool near the
northwest corner and along the rear property line. There is an existing
rock wall along the north and west property lines which encloses the rear
yard. The existing wall is approximately 5.5 — 7 feet in height (as
measured from outside the rear yard), and is set back approximately five
(5) feet from the rear (west) property line.
The applicant recently added approximately two (2) feet to the height of
the existing wall along the rear property line only. The added wall height
October 27, 2003
II1:11iAIkqlIQll
was to help screen and secure the swimming pool area from the adjacent
property, as the pool area is elevated and approximately 1 — 1.5 feet
above the grade of the rear yard. The overall height of the rear wall as
viewed from the low side (west) is approximately eight (8) feet.
Section 36-516(e)(1)a. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum
fence/wall height of six (6) feet in residential zones, and four (4) feet
between a building setback line and a street right-of-way (within north 5
feet of the lot). Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance from this
ordinance standard for the increased wall height.
Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff feels that the
requested variance is very minor. The requested wall height is not out of
character with other fences and walls in the general area. The existing
fence on the property immediately to the west ranges in height from 6 to
7.5 feet. Staff feels that the added fence height will provide the needed
privacy and security for the pool area, and will have no adverse impact on
the adjacent properties or the general area.
C. Staff Recommendations:
Staff recommends approval of the requested fence/wall height variance,
as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (OCTOBER 27, 2003)
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 5 ayes and 0 nays.
2
Little Rock Board of Adjustment
Department of Planning and Development
723 West Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
September 22, 2003
We live at 1720 Beechwood (southwest comer of Beechwood and Cantrell) in a
two-story frame, single-family residence. For safety concerns, we are requesting
permission to raise the height of the existing rear privacy fence an additional 26 inches to
control access to our swimming pool.
Our immediate neighborhood is home to several small children who occasionally
play in the access alley that separates our property from that of the adjacent neighbors.
The low height and style of the existing rear fence makes it very inviting for children to
climb and play on. In fact, we have witnessed children climbing on the fence in the past
(see attached photograph #1—it is the five-year old neighbor who has pushed a chair
next to his home's rear wall, climbed up and is standing on top of it). Our attorney
advised us to raise the height of our rear fence as the pool is considered to be an
"attractive nuisance" and the existing height and style made it easy to climb on. We are
concerned that a child may get hurt or, even worse, accidentally drown in the pool if they
fell off the wall.
West Property Line. The swimming pool is located right next to the
existing fence that runs along the west property line. There is a 10 foot wide access alley
separating our lot from the neighbor to the rear (photograph 42). From the access alley
side, the 26 inch addition mares our fence eight (8) feet high and thereby less likely to be
climbed on -- there is a seven (7) foot privacy fence that belongs to the neighbor on the
other side of the access alley.
The addition makes the inside height of the wall 6.75 feet high (the property
slopes from west to east. That same fence abuts the pool house, providing a continuous
security barrier along the access alley.
East PropgLine. Access to the swimming pool from the east (Beechwood) is
prevented by the house.
North Property Line. Access to the swimming pool from the north (Cantrell) is
prevented by an existing eight (8) foot high fence (photography #3).
South Prope Line. The driveway along the south property line goes to a 2 -car
carport that is attached to the house and pool house. The rear of the carport is enclosed.
Access to the pool from the south side of the lot through the carport is secured by two
doors with locks (photography #4).
Photo # 5 demonstrates the scale of our fence along the west property line (I'm
six feet tall) compared to the neighbor's fence (photo #6). Photos 7-9 demonstrate the
scale of existing fences in our immediate neighborhood.
Sincerely,
Jeyfy G. Stevenson
20 Beechwood
Little Rock, AR 72207
501-666-0088
Steve W. Douglas
1720 Beechwood
Little Rock, AR 72207
501-666-0088
2
Little Rock Board of Adjustment
Department of Planning and Development
723 West Markham
Little Rock, AR 72201
I am neighbors with Jerry Stevenson and Steve Douglas at 1720
Beechwood. I have no objections to their wish to raise the height of
the fence along the rear of their property.
Sincerely,
ie
/ 7