Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6003-A Staff AnalysisJune 30, 1997 No.. H File No.: Owner: Address: Description: Zoned Variance Requested: Justification: Present Use of Propert : Proposed Use of Property: Staff Report: A. Public Works Issues: No issues Z -6003-A Emmett and Patricia Jones 5724 Hawthorne Lot 12, Forest Heights Place i+M variances are requested from the building line provisions of Section 31-12 and the area regulations of Section 36-254 to permit steps and landing which have been built across building lines and which have reduced front and side yard setbacks. Applicant's Statement: On March 26, 1996, a set of plans was viewed and approved by the City of Little Rock for a residence to be constructed at 5724 Hawthorne (Heights Area). We asked all of the pertinent questions such as air conditioning units, fireplace, and set backs. We complied with all of the set backs and thought we were complying with all city ordinance, but apparently we did not, as we were later informed, the front steps are over the building set back. We did not do this on purpose, and we already had the house and steps built before we were informed of this. We, therefore, ask for the necessary variance for these steps. Single Family Single Family June 30, 1997 Item No.: B (Cont.) _ B. Staff Analysis: The applicant is nearing completion of a new 4,800 square foot residence on the R-2 zoned lot located at 5724 Hawthorne Road. The front wall of this two-story home has a setback of 25 feet from the front property line. The home has a side yard setback of 7.5 feet on the west side. Front and side yard setbacks of 25 feet and 6 feet respectively are required for this lot. After the biggest part of the house was built, it was determined that steps were necessary to access the front and side doors since the house was built 4-5 feet above grade. Due to the existing house's setbacks, any steps would have to be built into the required front and side yard setbacks. In response to neighborhood concerns, a code enforcement officer visited the site, prior to the construction of steps. The contractor was advised that any steps would encroach into required setbacks and a variance from the Board of Adjustment would be necessary. The steps were built and the applicant subsequently filed for variances from the Board. The side stoop and steps encroach 2.5 feet into the required side yard setback. This particular construction is relatively small and the encroachment is minor. Staff does not believe the side yard variance will have a negative impact on adjacent properties. The curb of Pierce Street is approximately 12-13 feet from the stoop/steps. Pierce Street is not a heavily traveled street at this point and the construction should not impact traffic on the street. The steps on the front of the house extend approximately 9 feet into the front yard setback. They end at a brick walk way which extends with additional steps down to Hawthorne Street. The applicant proposes to fill and landscape the yard so that the walk way will be at or near grade. The steps leading up to the house are a fairly substantial construction, being constructed of brick with decorative banisters. They create a appreciable visual impact but they are architecturally compatible with the large house. It is unfortunate that this issue was not resolved prior to the house being constructed. Staff wonders if it is realistic to require the steps to be removed, limiting access to the house. Perhaps the best that can be hoped for is to mitigate the visual impact by requiring foundation type planting around the steps to soften the impact. The steps on both the front and side are shown to cross "Building lines." If these are platted building lines, the applicant will have to do a one lot replat reflecting the change if approved by the Board. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk to 2 June 30, 1997 Item No.: B (Cont.) determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested side and front yard setbacks subject to the following conditions: 1. The grade of the front yard should be raised so that the walkway is at or near grade. 2. Foundation type planting should be planted around the front steps to soften the visual impact. 3. If the building lines are platted building lines, on one lot replat to reflect the change as approved by the Board. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (MAY 19, 1997) Prior to presentation of this item, Chairman Alderfer noted that there were only 6 Board members present. Since it takes 5 votes to either approve or disapprove an item, he announced that any person desiring a deferral could request one at this time. Mark Riable, representing the applicant, requested a deferral. Mr. Riable made note of the number of persons present to speak on the issue and stated that he was agreeable to allowing them to speak at this meeting but he stated he would be requesting a deferral. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. It was noted that Mr. Jones had submitted a landscape plan in response to staff's recommendation. Mr. Riable addressed the Board in support of Mr. Jones' application. He stated that Mr. Jones was not aware of the violation until the home was constructed. Mr. Riable stated that the home is different from others in the area and he conjectured that the difference might be of some concern to the neighbors. He stated that the lot has a fall of approximately 4 feet from rear to front, resulting in the front entrance being 4-5 feet above grade. Mr. Riable stated that Mr. Jones had presented a landscape plan which would result in approximately $30,000.00 worth of landscaping being installed on the property. Pat Raines, of 5720 Hawthorne, addressed the Board in opposition to the item. She presented a petition signed by several persons in opposition to the item (staff did not receive a copy of that petition). Ms. Raines stated that she was concerned about the impact of Mr. Jones' home on the neighborhood. Kathleen Oleson, of 5717 Hawthorne, addressed the Board in opposition to the item. She stated that she had maintained contact with City Staff throughout construction of Mr. Jones' house and questioned how it was allowed to reach this point. 3 June 30, 1997 Item No.: B (Cont. Robert Oleson, also of 5717 Hawthorne, spoke in opposition to the item. He stated that he was offended by Mr. Jones' "in your face" tactics. Mr. Oleson stated that Mr. Jones never worked with the neighbors. He stated that the neighbors wanted nothing more than compliance with city code. Mr. Riable stated that the approved plans show the front of the house at the setback line and that it was obvious stairs would have been necessary. He stated that Mr. Jones was not aware that stairs were required to meet setback requirements. He reminded the Board that Mr. Jones was willing to install $30,000.00 worth of landscaping to soften the visual impact of the stairs. Mark Alderfer asked staff if it was possible for Mr. Jones to "birm-up" his whole front yard so that the front door would be at grade. Staff responded that it would be possible. If Mr. Jones satisfied code requirements for any needed retaining walls, he could raise the level of the yard to the level of the front entrance. At the Board's request, Mr. Riable presented a copy of the approved plans for the house. Mr. Alderfer stated that the Board was going to vote on Mr. Riable's request for deferral. He stated that he wanted to see a copy of the approved plan and a copy of the as -built survey to compare. A motion was made to defer the item to the June 30, 1997 meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 ayes, 1 noe and 3 absent. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JUNE 30, 1997) The applicant, Emmett Jones, was present. There were several interested parties present. Staff presented the item and informed the Board that Mr. Jones had installed landscaping as was discussed at the last meeting. Nevil Withrow asked Mr. Jones what he had done to protect the neighbor to the east from water run-off since he had raised the level of his yard. Mr. Jones stated that the grade of his property was the same as it was prior to construction. Sterling Tucker, of 5821 N. Country Club Blvd., spoke in support of the variance. He stated that he did not want the Board to get the impression that the whole neighborhood was opposed to Mr. Jones. James Lasley, of 5600 Country Club Blvd., also spoke in favor of the variance. 4 June 30, 1997 Item No.: B (Cont. Ginger McEntire, of 5806 Hawthorne, spoke in opposition to the item. She stated that the zoning regulations should be more restrictive and that Mr. Jones' house was too large for the lot. Ms. McEntire stated that she would like Mr. Jones to plant larger trees to soften the appearance of the site. Pat Raines, of 5720 Hawthorne, spoke in opposition to the issue. She read from a prepared statement and made reference to a petition signed by 15-20 persons opposed to the variance (staff did not received the petition). She disagreed with Mr. Jones' statement that he was not aware of the requirements at the time the house and steps were built. Ms. Raines discussed the problem of people overbuilding the lots in the neighborhood. She asked the Board to support the City ordinances and to deny the request. Robert Oleson, of 5717 Hawthorne, spoke in opposition to the item. He stated that Mr. Jones submitted elevations of the house, showing the steps, at the time of building permit. Mr. Oleson stated that there was a failure in the system that let the steps slip by. Kathleen Oleson, of 5717 Hawthorne, spoke in opposition to the item. She asked staff to discuss the timing of the City's actions throughout the process of Mr. Jones building his house. She asked the Board to restrict Mr. Jones from lighting the exterior of the house. Chairman Alderfer reminded everyone that the issue before the Board was the stairs, not the other issues raised by the neighbors. He called the question on the variance requests subject to compliance with the conditions recommended by staff. The vote was 6 ayes, 2 noes and 1 absent. 5