HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6740 Staff AnalysisSeptember 24, 2001
Item No.: 6
File No.
Owner:
Address:
Descriptio
Zoned:
Variance Requested:
Present Use of Proper:
Proposed Use of Property:
Staff Re ort:
A. Background:
Z-6740
Nolan and Barbara Rushing
4907 Country Club Blvd.
Lot 3, Block 15, Newton's
Addition
R-2
A two-year time extension for
previously approved reduced
rear yard setback and
increased fence/wall height
variances for a proposed
single family residence.
Vacant lot
New Single Family residence
On September 27, 1999, the Board of Adjustment voted
unanimously to approve a'reduced yard setback variance
and an increased fence/wall height variance for a
proposed new single family residence at 4907 Country
Club Blvd. The proposed single family residence was
approved for a rear yard setback of 17 feet. Wing -
walls, which are to extend out from the front wall of
the proposed house to the side property lines and down
each side line for a short distance were approved for a
height of 9 feet - 6inches. The setback and fence/wall
height variances were approved subject to a
stormwater/drainage plan being approved by the City and
that the City contact Ashley Rankin, a nearby neighbor,
for her input on the drainage issue.
September 24, 2001
Item No.: 6
B. Proposal:
According to Article IV, Section 2 of the Little Rock
Board of Adjustment Bylaws, "If an application is
approved by the Board, all permits necessary for the
initiation of work shall be obtained within two (2)
years from the date of approval, unless an extension of
time is granted by the Board." The previously approved
application will expire on September 27, 2001. The lot
is currently vacant.
Therefore, the applicants, Nolan and Barbara Rushing,
request a two-year time extension for the previously��
approved application. The applicants have noted that
they hope to begin construction on the new single
family residence later this fall.
C. Staff Analysis:
The applicants are requesting a two-year time extension
on the previously approved application for reduced rear
yard setback and increased fence/wall height variances
for a proposed new single family residence. To staff's
knowledge there are no new circumstances concerning
this property and staff can see no reason why the
application should not be extended.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the two-year time
extension as requested.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(SEPTEMBER 24, 2001)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval.
The applicant offered no additional comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 nays, and
0 absent.
E
September 27, 1999
Item No.: 2
File No.
Owner:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Variance Requested:
Justification:
Present Use of Property:
Z-6740
Nolan and Barbara Rushing
4907 Country Club Blvd.
Lot 3, Block 15, Newton's Addition
R-2
Variances are requested from
the area regulations of Section
36-254 and the fence/wall height
provisions of Section 36-516.
Applicant's Statement: My wife
and I have engaged Lewis Graber,
an architect from Jackson,
Mississippi, to design a 2,900 -
3,000 square foot French city house
on a small 50 foot lot in the
Heights area. The plans have been
completed and in order to achieve
the specific design concept, it is
necessary to request a 8 foot
variance on the rear yard setback
for 25 feet to 17 feet and a
request for height variance on the
front and side fence area.
This house is very design specific
as we will lose the integrity of
the design if the fence is not at
the proper height. We feel this
design will be welcomed by this
neighborhood and the improvements
certainly will be well sized for
the lot.
Vacant lot
Proposed Use of Proper : New single family residence
September 27, 1999
Item No.: 2 (Cont.)
Staff Re ort:
A. Public Works Issues:
No comments.
B. Staff Analvsis:
The applicant proposes to build a 2,900 - 3,000 square foot
house on this R-2 zoned lot. The house is designed along
the lines of a French city house and will have a rear yard
setback of 17 feet. The Code requires a rear yard setback
of 25 feet for this lot. Additionally, wing -walls will
extend out from the front wall of the house to the side
property lines and down each side property line for a short
distance creating a courtyard effect. The wing -walls will
match the eave line of the first floor in height and will be
916" tall. Section 36-516 of the code limits the height of
fences/walls within the required setbacks to 6 feet.
Staff is supportive of the requested variances. The
proposed house meets all other required setbacks, front and
sides. Allowing the reduction in the rear yard from 25 feet
to 17 feet should not impact adjacent properties. The lot
directly to the rear is occupied by a house which fronts
onto Stonewall. This Stonewall house has a rear yard
setback closer to 50 feet, providing adequate separation
between structures. Additionally, a 6 foot tall privacy
fence will be erected on the rear property line of the
applicant's property, further reducing the visual impact of
the reduced setback.
The concept of the wing -wall as proposed by the applicant is
not all that common in Little Rock. Similar designs are
seen in: older, southern cities such as New Orleans and
Natchez. Staff is supportive of the requested height
variance for these architectural elements but believes it is
prudent to be sensitive to any concerns which might be
raised by the abutting property owners.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the setback and fence/wall
height variances as requested.
PA
September 27, 1999
Item No.: 2 (Cont.)
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
The applicant was not present.
neighborhood resident present.
recommendation of approval.
(SEPTEMBER 27, 1999)
There was one concerned
Staff presented the item and a
Ashley Rankin, of 4922 Stonewall, addressed the Board. She
stated that she was not opposed to the item but she did have
concerns about drainage and stormwater run-off.
Tad Borkowski, of Public Works, responded that the Heights area
was developed many years ago and many of the area's drainage
structures were undersized and insufficient. Mr. Borkowski noted
that there was no Public Works review of stormwater or drainage
for individual single family home construction.
Cindy Dawson, of the City Attorney's Office, stated that one
property owner may bring legal action against another if that
second property owner causes or creates a nuisance.
Mr. Borkowski commented that the Board of Adjustment could
require approval of a stormwater detention plan as a condition of
approving the variances.
Ms. Rankin agreed to that concept and asked that Public Works
coordinate the stormwater review with the neighbors. A board
member remarked that it would be more appropriate to have Public
Works get the neighbor's input and comments rather than
" coordinate" the review with the neighbors.
A motion was made to approve the requested setback and fence/wall
height variances subject to a stormwater detention/drainage plan
being approved by the City and that the City contact Ms. Rankin
for her input on the drainage issue. The motion was approved by
a vote of 4 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
3