HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOA Minute RecordDECEMBER 15, 2022
ITEM NO.: 3
File No.:
Owners:
Applicant:
Address:
Legal Description:
Zoned:
Z-9195-B
Jeff Fuller Homes, LLC
Jeff Fuller
2821 N. Pierce Street
Lot 1 R, Replat of Lots 1, 2 & 3 Block 15
-W
195-B
Variance(s) Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of 36-156 to
allow a retaining wall (accessory structure) with reduced
setbacks from side and rear yard property lines.
Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter.
Present Use: Single-family Residence
Proposed Use: Single-family Residence
STAFF REPORT:
V
1-1
C
IC
Planning and Development Civil En ineerin Comments:
No Comments.
Landscape and Buffer Comments:
In October 2020 the City adopted the "Heights Landscape Design Overlay District,"
requiring installation of one (1) tree per forty (40) linear feet of street frontage within
the Heights District Boundary, applicable to [among other types] residential
construction in excess of 600 square feet.
Buildin Codes Comments:
No comments required.
Staff Analysis.
The site was previously platted as Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 15, Parkview Addition to
the City of Little Rock, Pulaski County Arkansas These parcels were zoned R-3 and
occupied by a single-family home that spanned over the three lots. In 2017 the owner
of the properties petitioned the Little Rock Planning Commission to rezone the
properties to PD-R to allow for the construction of a new home on each of the
individual parcels. The original home was removed, and the owner constructed one
1
DECEMBER 15, 2022
ITEM NO.: 3 CON'T. Z-9195-B
home on Lot 3 but did not develop the remaining two lots as planned. Lots 1 and 2
have since been sold and a new single-family home was constructed which currently
occupy both Lots. The new residence contains a four (4) car driveway taking access
from Ampersand Street.
The applicant recently obtained a building permit to build a wall approximately three
(3) feet from the rear (east) property line. The applicant now proposes to build and
expand the retaining wall to sit on the property line.
The applicant also proposes to extend the retaining wall to extend along the side
(south) property line. The proposed retaining wall will have a setback of zero (0) feet
from the rear and side property lines.
Section 36-156(f) of the City's Zoning Ordinance states, "accessory buildings shall
maintain at least a three (3) foot setback from any side or rear yard property line
except where said rear yard abuts on a dedicated alley. No setbacks shall be
required for an accessory building upon an alley." Therefore, the applicant is
requesting a variance to allow the retaining wall with reduced rear and side yard
setbacks.
Staff is supportive of the reduced side and rear yard setback variance. Staff views
the request as reasonable. By building the retaining wall along the rear (east)
property line and side (south) will allow the slope of the property to take advantage
of the topography of the lot's natural drainage towards the southeast corner of the
property and enable a resolution to divert the stormwater to Pierce Street via a
drainage system to be installed by the contractor. This will allow the property owner
to resolve all of the current stormwater issues instead of a partial fix. Staff views the
variance as very minor in nature and feels the reduced side and rear yard setbacks
will have no adverse impact on the surrounding properties.
E. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested side and rear yard variance, subject to
the descriptions and any conditions in the "staff analysis," and the following
conditions:
1. A building permit being obtained for all construction.
2. Install trees, if deemed applicable at the time of building permit, in
accordance with the Heights Design Overlay District requirements.
Board of Adjustment
(DECEMBER 15, 2022)
The applicant was present. There were no persons present registered in opposition. Staff
presented the application to the Commission and stated it recommended the rear and
side yard setback variance be approved with conditions as per the staff report. There
was a consent motion to approve the application. The application was approved on
consent. The vote was 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent.
2