HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4714-A Staff Analysis1*1 - JA�,�, t)o. I(_ �)+�� Pa)�, (7--4714-4)
101
( Svl cen.ti.
1-T --F is t,1-
4,e(
Ile
..........
- nr_
(T. erl-
In the event that any structure that is devoted in
whole or in part to a nonconforming use is destroyed by
fire, explosion Or other casualty, or the public enemy,
to the extent Of more than fifty percent (50%) of the
current replacement value immediately prior to such
damage, such structure shall not be restored unless
such structure and use thereof shall thereafter conform
to all regulations of the zoning district in which such
structure and use are located. When such damage or
destruction is fifty Percent (50%) or less of the
reasonable replacement value of the structure
immediately prior to such damage, such structure may be
repaired and reconstructed and used for the same
Purposes as it was before the damage or destruction;
provided that such repair or reconstruction is
commenced and completed within twelve (12) months of
the date Of such damage or destruction.
Structures which were developed prior to the passage
of this Ordinance that complied with the then existing
standards for development and which now have been
rendered substandard by these new regulations shall be
termed "pre-existing conforming structures" and, in the
event of damage or destruction, may be allowed to build
back to their original placement.
E
vi'd
wry/ -e 1- A_-' d 1�- M
Pre-""
Owl p
.. Wc�-
G �
l
n
November 17, 1986
Item No. 11
Other Matters
Owner: {Z -4714-A)
Address: Laurie Dwyer
905 or 911 West
(SW Corner 14th
Request: of West 14th and Izard)
Rec-ns deration of a
approval,
STAFF REPPrevious oar an
ORT: 4--
In August of t
to allow reduced year, the owner was
The 80ard of Add front and side granted two
West loth d7ustment Yards for variances
Street Street and approved a new building.
a 28- a 5 -foot setback for
south Side with a privac foot frratbeYard f and
Property Line. Y fence or the Iz
a duplex and a s At that time constructed
removed to mall commercial theoccupied
aloe
allow buildin lat was occu 9 the
f°�' construction of t g• The duplexpied by
After he new strutue was
application the
pplication was necessary approvals
made to the Al colfrom the
or the new building, The Bevera CitYr
Philander distance a license was 9e commis s f
Smith between a building
because of
campus and g loco t
On October 15 the proposed structure on the
damaged b 1986, the existin
the Y a fire. After 9 commercial
Y ran into some difficult. owners building
entire struct hies began the was
using
structure. W°r1c was and decided to repair work,
the same slab without Viten initiated on tear down the
City stopped the irst a new
Of a nonconforminw°rk for obtaining a building
Ming structure. reasons Permit. The
ure. The a • includin
"In the event th oning Ordinanceg removal
or at states:
in Part any structur
explosion to a nonconf°rmin e that is devoted
extent of
or
Other casualt g use is dextro in whole
value ore than 54 Y or the Public Yee by fire,
immediately priortosuc of enemy to the
shall. not be restored tO Such the Current re
thereof unless dama9e, such.-sstru'ctureent
shall thereafte such structure
zoning district r conform and
located. in which
to all
regulations
Iess of t When such dams such Structure and of the
he reasonable re a or.deStruction use are
immediately Prior. to Placement �s 50
repaired value Percent or
it reconstructedcanaamage, such of the structure
such repair bed Ore the dam. dear for to structure may be
With- or con 9e or destruction Same purposes
in 12 construction Provide as
destruction.
of the date is comm
d that
ction. such and completed
damage or
. 'j
�i
November 17, 1986
Item No. 11 -_Continued
Structures which are developed prior to the passage of
this ordinance that complied with the then existing
standards for development and which now have been rendered
substandard by these new regulations shall be termed
"preexisting conforming structures," and in the event of
damage or destruction, may be allowed to build back to the
original placement."
If the building was in place and in use
prior
adoption of zoning regulations by the City o£ Little7Rock,
then the building would be "a preexisting conforming
structure." At the suggestion of the_staff, the owner
researched this and could only find records verifying a
commercial use datinq back to 1942.
The issue before the Board is to determine whether the
building can be finished and occupied by applying the
previous variance approval to the new location. The
structure does not meet the setback requirements for the
side and rear yards with the West 14th Street side having a
greater setback than what was initially approved.
Staff feels comfortable with the new proposal and can
support a restructuring of a variance approval with no
modification made to the privacy fence requirement. Also,
the owner should review the parking layout and circulation
with the City's traffic engineer.
(Attached is a sequence of events as outlined by
Laurie Dwyer.)
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION:
The owner, Laurie -Dwyer, was present. There were eight
interested residents in attendance.
issue and the request before the Boards. Dwyer discussed the
Philander Smith College addressed the sstatedentative
the record that the College did not support any; -waiver of
the ABC regulations. Hazel Bowers, a resident on Izard
Street, then spoke. She expressed concerns with traffic
circulation and parking on Izard. Mrs. Bowers said that
traffic in the neighbor.hood.,would increase and that could
have a real impact on Izard Street. Jewel Williams also
discussed traffic movement and potential loitering problems.
Mildred Branson, operator of a beauty shop across Izard,
said that she was concerned with the congestion in the
immediate area, Tommy Davis, property owner directly to the
south, suggested that the alley should be one -way -'to the
south and that he wanted a real privacy fence. Another
resident discussed parking problems on Izard and traffic.
November 17, 1986
' Item No. 11 - Continued
Mrs. Bowers spoke again and made the Suggestion
be prohibited along Izard at certain times ofthehdayparking
There were several other comments made by the various
individuals. A motion was then made which stated that the
original Board of Adjustment approval
side and rear yard encroachmenfor the building to allow
construction with no waiver of the six foot g under
requirement and that the City's Traffic Engineer fence
circulation, access, and parkin g� ed by
vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes, 3 absent, and The
open passed by a
P Position.
1�.
November 17, 1986
Item No. 7 - Other Matters (Z -4645-A)
Owner: Holly Springs Brick and Tile Company
Address: 5705 Patterson Road
Description: To reconsider and modify
Board of Adjustment a a previous
_ approval.
STAFF REPORT:
In April of 1986, the Board of Adjustment approved a
variance for this location to waive some of the screening
requirements. The property is zoned "I-2" which requires
all outdoor storage to be screened by a 6 -foot opaque area.
The Board of Adjustment allowed the owners to have a
non-opaque fence along the rear of the property line
adjacent to some railroad tracks. An opaque fence was
required to be constructed along the two streets, Patterson
and Freezer Roads. After reviewing some crime reports and
discussing security for the site with the police, the owners
are now requesting that they be allowed to place a chain
Zink fence along some of the Freezer Road frontage. (A
graphic will be available at the hearing that shows the
exact location.) The chain link fence would make the rear
of the site more visible and easi.e.r for the police to
control. If the opaque fence is constructed, it would be
very difficult to see any questionable activity taking place
on the site.
Staff feels this is'a reasonable request and sees no problem
with modifying the approval.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION:
Henry Fullmer, manager of the proposed bri:dk yard, was ----
present. iThere was a long discussion about the request and
Mr. Fullmer reviewed the reasons for needing thechainlink
fence along Freezer Road. He said that the Poli.`ce had
recommended it to make the rear yard more visible. A motion
was then made to modify the previous Board of Adjustment
approval to allow a chain link fence along a portion of the
Freezer Road frontage. The motion was approved by a vate-of
5 ayes, 0 noes, 3 absent, and 1 open position.
November 17, 1986
Item No. 11 - Other Matters (Z -4714-A)
Owner: Laurie Dwyer
Address: 905 or 911 West 14th
(SW Corner of West 14th and Izard)
Request: Reconsideration of a previous variance
approval.
STAFF REPORT:
In August of this year, the owner was granted two -variances
to allow reduced front and side yards for a new building.
The Board of Adjustment approved a 5 -foot setback for
West 14th Street and a 20 -foot front yard for the Izard
Street side with a privacy fence to be constructed along the
south property line. At that time, the lot was occupied by
a duplex and a small commercial building. The duplex was
removed to allow for construction of the new structure.
After receiving the necessary approvals from the City,
application was made to the Alcoholic Beverage Commission
for the new building. The license was denied because of
insufficient distance between a building located on the
Philander Smith campus and the proposed structure.
On October 15, 1986, the existing commercial building was
damaged by a fire. After the owners began the repair work,
they ran into some difficulties and decided to tear down the
entire structure. Work was then initiated on a new building
using the same slab without first obtaining a permit. The
City stopped the work for various reasons, including removal
of a nonconforming structure. The Zoning Ordinance states:
"In the event that any structure that is devoted in whole
or in part to a nonconforming use is destroyed by fire,
explosion or other casualty or the public enemy to the
extent of more than 50 percent of the current replacement
value immediately prior to such damage, such structure
shall not be restored unless such structure and use
thereof shall thereafter conform to all regulations of the
zoning district in which such structure and use are
located. When such damage or destruction is 50 percent or
less of the reasonable replacement value of the structure
immediately prior to such damage, such structure may be
repaired, reconstructed and used for the same purposes as
it was before the damage or destruction; provided that
such repair or construction is commenced and completed
within 12 months of the date of such damage or
destruction.
November 17, 1986
Item No. 11 - Continued
Structures which are developed prior to the passage of
this ordinance that complied with the then existing
standards for development and which now have been rendered
substandard by these new regulations shall be termed
"preexisting conforming structures," and in the event of
damage or destruction, may be allowed to build back to the
original placement."
If the building was in place and in use prior to 1937, the
adoption of zoning regulations by the City of Little Rock,
then the building would be "a preexisting conforming
structure." At the suggestion of the staff, the owner
researched this and could only find records verifying a
commercial use dating back to 1942.
The issue before the Board is to determine whether the
building can be finished and occupied by applying the
previous variance approval to the new location. The
structure does not meet the setback requirements for the
side and rear yards with the West 14th Street side having a
greater setback than what was initially approved.
Staff feels comfortable with the new proposal and can
support a restructuring of a variance approval with no
modification made to the privacy fence requirement. Also,
the owner should review the parking layout and circulation
with the City's traffic engineer.
(Attached is a sequence of events as outlined by
Laurie Dwyer.)
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION:
The owner, Laurie,Dwyer, was present. There were eight
interested residents in attendance. Ms. Dwyer discussed the
issue and the request before the Board. A representative of
Philander Smith College addressed the Board and stated for
the record that the College did not support any waiver of
the ABC regulations. Hazel Bowers, a resident on Izard
Street, then spoke. She expressed concerns with traffic
circulation and parking on Izard. Mrs. Bowers said that
traffic in the neighborhood would increase and that could
have a real impact on Izard Street. Jewel Williams also
discussed traffic movement and potential loitering problems.
Mildred Branson, operator of a beauty shop across Izard,
said that she was concerned with the congestion in the
immediate area. Tommy Davis, property owner directly to the
south, suggested that the alley should be one-way to the
south and that he wanted a real privacy fence. Another
resident discussed parking problems on Izard and traffic.
November 17, 1986
Item No. 11 - Continued
Mrs. Bowers spoke again and made the suggestion that parking
be prohibited along Izard at certain times of the day.
There were several other comments made by the various
individuals. A motion was then made which stated that the
original Board of Adjustment approval be modified to allow
side and rear yard encroachments for'the building under
construction with no waiver of the six foot privacy fence
requirement and that the City's Traffic Engineer approve
circulation, access, and parking. The motion passed by a
vote of 5 ayes, O"noes, 3 absent, and 1 open position.