Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6711 Staff AnalysisJuly 26, 1999 Item No.: 10 File No. Owner: Address: Description: Zoned• Variance Requested: Z-6711 James Adamson 300 McMillen Trail Lot 16, Ranch Hill Addition R-2 A variances is requested from the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to permit a porch addition to be built across a platted building line. Justification: Applicant's Statement: I have recently undertaken the renovation of my 1951 home in the Ranch Hill addition to the city of Little Rock. The architectural plans call for an extension of the original porch across the front of the home and the relocation of the stairs from either side of the porch to the front of the porch. It appears from the survey that the aforementioned original porch is not in conformance with the indicated 35 -foot setback from my front property line. Rather, it protrudes four feet from the front of the house. Thus, it is my understanding that the desired alteration to the porch or steps would constitute further encroachment on the established building line. Please accept this letter as my request to receive clearance for extension of the existing porch across the front of the home and the relocation of the stairs to the front of the porch. July 26, 1999 Item No.: 10 (Cont.) Present Use of Proper : Proposed Use of Propert : Staff Re ort A. Public Works Issues: Single Family Single Family Right-of-way appear to be less than MSP (Master Street Plan), point out for purposes of setback. (Note: that setback is based upon a 40 feet right-of-way versus MSP (Master Street Plan required 50 feet right-of-way). B. Staff Analvsis: The R-2 zoned property located at 300 McMillen Trail is occupied by a one-story, brick and frame, single-family residence. The owner is completely remodeling -the home. A small, uncovered stoop with side loaded steps is located on the front of the house. The stoop is built across a platted building line. The applicant proposes to construct a porch addition across the entire width of the front of the house. The new porch is to be the same depth as the existing stoop and will extend 4 feet across the platted 35 foot building line. The steps will be relocated to the front of the porch and will extend an additional 3 to 4 feet across the building line. Staff is supportive of the requested variance. The 4 foot deep porch addition will result in a front yard setback of 31 feet. The steps will protrude an additional 3 to 4 feet, resulting in a front yard setback of 27 to 28 feet to the bottom of the stairs. The Code requires a front yard setback of 25 feet in the R-2 district. Even with the porch and stairs added to the front, the house will have a setback exceeding code requirements. Staff does not believe the requested variance will result in any effect on neighboring properties. The remodeling of this 50 year old home should be of benefit to the neighborhood. As was noted by Public Works, th based on McMillen Trail having a from the centerline, not 25 feet Master Street Plan. Even if the Master Street Plan requirement, FA e front yard setback is right-of-way of 20 feet as is now required by the right-of-way was at the the porch would have a front July 26, 1999 Item No.: 10 (Cont.) yard setback of 26 feet and the stairs would have a setback of 22-23 feet. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to do a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the building line. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested building line variance subject to a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the building line as approved by the Board. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JULY 26, 1999) The applicant was present. There were no objectors -present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject to a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the building line. In response to a question from the Board, the applicant explained that he was doubling the size of the house but that all of the expansion, other than the porch, met all required setbacks. The applicant stated that he had a building permit for the expansion, other than the porch. A motion was made to approve the item as recommended by staff. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. 3