HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-9758 Staff Report revised DONOTUSE
File No.: Z-9758
Owners: Chattanya Musham
Applicant: Markus Homes Inc – Melinda Markus
Address: 93 Orle Circle
Legal Description: Lot 43, Block 113, Chenal Valley, an addition to the City of Little Rock
Zoned: R-2
Present Use: Single-family Residence
Proposed Use: Single-family Residence
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 dated January 12, 2023.
STAFF REPORT:
Planning and Development Civil Engineering Comments:
An easement of 5’ on either side of the wall for a total of a 10’ easement shall be provided for the wall(s).
A signed affidavit must be provided from each of the adjacent property owners in acknowledgment that the easement is only for access/ease of maintenance that could ever be needed for
the wall.
Plans, Profiles, Calculations, and Section Views must be provided for the permit when pulled for said wall(s). This will be classified as a structure by Arkansas Fire Prevention Code
and City Codes which state that a wall with retainage of 4ft or greater measured from the bottom of the footing/leveling layer shall be engineered and be permitted.
Landscape and Buffer Comments:
No Comments
C. Building Codes Comments:
No comments required.
D. Staff Analysis:
The site at 93 Orle Circle contains and recently constructed single-family dwelling with a paved access drive extending north to Orle Circle. The lot has been mostly cleared and slopes
downward from east to west.
The applicant also proposes to construct a forty-two (42) inch high masonry wall starting at the northeast edge of the dwelling and proceed east twenty-seven (27) feet to the eastern
property line. The masonry wall then proceeds south along the eastern perimeter of the property to the south property line. The applicant proposes to construct an additional retaining
wall (accessory structure) which will be offset to the west three (3) feet from the east property line. The retaining wall (accessory structure) will extend from north to south along
the eastern side of the property to the south property line and proceed on the property line west one-hundred twenty feet (120) to the west property line.
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, which is considered an accessory structure, with reduced rear yard setback.
The applicant provided responses and additional information to all issues raised during the staff’s review of the application. To the staff’s knowledge, there are no outstanding issues.
Staff is supportive of the reduced rear yard setback variance. The wall will be
located mainly at the southern end of the property adjacent to the open tract, and
staff views this request as minor in nature and feels that the reduced rear setback
will have no adverse impact on the surrounding properties.
E. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested side setback variance, subject to the
descriptions and any conditions in the “staff analysis,” and the following conditions:
A building permit being obtained for all construction.
Abide by all site development requirements for R-2 zoned properties.
Board of Adjustment (MARCH 16, 2023)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the application to the Commission and stated it recommended deferral of a variance request from the area
provisions of 36-156 to allow a retaining wall (Accessory structure) with reduced setbacks from side and rear yard property lines. There was a consent motion to defer the application.
The application was deferred on consent. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent.