Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7083 Staff AnalysisSeptember 6,. 20014. ITEM NO.: 8 FILE NO.: Z-7083 NAME: Sipes Accessory Dwelling - Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: 6609 Honeysuckle Lane DEVELOPER: SURVEYOR: Michael Sipes Donald W. Brooks 6609 Honeysuckle Lane 20820 Arch Street Pike Little Rock, AR Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 3.14 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: R-2 ALLOWED USES: Single Family Residential PROPOSED USE: Accessory Dwelling VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance to allow an accessory dwelling in excess of 700 square feet. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: n The applicant, Michael Sipes, requests a conditional use permit to allow for the placement of a 16 foot by 80 foot (maximum size) manufactured home on the R-2 zoned property at 6609 Honeysuckle Lane. The manufactured home will serve as an accessory dwelling for a disabled parent of the property owner. The accessory dwelling is proposed to be located directly behind (east of) the existing single family house. The property owner, Mr. Sipes, will reside in the existing principal dwelling. He notes that the accessory dwelling will be used only for a family member and not rented. He also notes that there will be no separate utilities. September 6 ,' 2001" ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) B FILE NO.: Z-7083 The property is accessed by way of an existing driveway from Honeysuckle Lane. Adequate parking exists to serve both dwellings. As part of the conditional use permit application, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow an accessory dwelling in excess of 700 square feet, the maximum size allowed by ordinance. The proposed accessory dwelling will have a maximum size of 1,280 square feet (16 feet by 80 feet) . EXISTING CONDITIONS: There is an existing single family residence and an accessory garage located within the western portion of the property. The eastern portion of the property is heavily wooded. The general area is primarily made up of single family residences on large lots. There are several mobile homes and nonconforming commercial buildings in the general area. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several phone calls from persons requesting information on this application. The Stagecoach -Dodd, Pecan Lake and SWLR UP Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: No Comment. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No Comment received. ARKLA : No Comment received. Southwestern Bell: No Comment received. Water: No separate water service will be provided unless approved by the City of Little Rock. Fire Department: No Comment. N September 6,'2001' ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) County Plannin : No Comment. CATA: No Comment received. F. Landscape Issues: No Comment. FILE NO.: Z-7083 G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (AUGUST 16, 2001) The applicant was present. Staff presented the item and noted that a variance would be required since the accessory dwelling exceeds 700 square feet in area. There were no other issues raised by staff. The Committee determined there were no other issues and forwarded the item to the full Commission. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on August 20, 2001. The revised plan addresses the issues raised during the staff review. The revised site plan notes that the maximum size of the accessory dwelling will be 16 feet by 80 feet. As noted in paragraph A., the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the accessory dwelling to be in excess of 700 square feet, the maximum size allowed by ordinance for an accessory dwelling. The proposed accessory dwelling will have a maximum area of 1,280 square feet. The existing principal dwelling is approximately 2,280 square feet in area. Staff feels that the request is reasonable for this 3.14 acre site and supports the variance as requested. To staff's knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with this application. With compliance with the minimum siting standards for manufactured homes and the other conditions as noted in the next paragraph, staff feels that the proposed accessory dwelling will have no adverse impact on the surrounding properties or general area. The proposed building setbacks and height for the accessory dwelling conform to ordinance requirements. 3 September 6,,2001- ITEM ,'2001' ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: FILE NO.: Z-7083 Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit subject to the following conditions: 1. One (1) of the dwelling units must be occupied by the property owner. 2. The accessory dwelling must be used for a family member only and not rented. 3. The accessory dwelling will not have separate utilities. 4. The accessory dwelling (manufactured home) must conform to the following minimum siting standards: u a. A pitched roof of three ( 3 ) in twelve (12 ) or fourteen (14) degrees or greater. b. Removal of all transport elements. c. Permanent foundation. . d. Exterior wall finished so as to be compatible with the neighborhood. e. Orientation compatible with placement of adjacent structures. f. Underpinning with permanent materials. g. Off-street parking per single-family dwelling standard. 5. Staff recommends approval of the variance to allow the accessory dwelling to exceed 700 square feet in area. The accessory dwelling is to have a maximum size of 16 feet by 80 feet (1,280 square feet). PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 6, 2001) Michael Sipes was present, representing the application. Staff briefly described the proposed Conditional Use Permit with a recommendation of approval as noted in paragraph I. of the agenda report. There was one person present in opposition. Michael Sipes addressed the Commission in support of the conditional use permit. He explained the proposed use of the accessory dwelling. He noted that the accessory dwelling was to be for his elderly mother who had recently had several strokes. He noted that the accessory dwelling would be so that she could live independently and have privacy, but live close enough to him to have his help if she needed it. Troy Laha of Southwest Little Rock United for Progress was present and addressed the Commission. He stated that he 4 September 6,'2001' ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7083 understood that there was going to be neighborhood opposition to this application, and the only reason he was at the meeting was to support the neighborhood association. He noted that he would like to see a condition attached to the conditional use permit stating that the accessory dwelling would be removed from the property when Mr. Sipes' mother no longer needed it. Chairman Downing asked Mr. Laha why he felt this condition should be added to staff's conditions of approval. Mr. Laha explained. Commissioner Nunnley also noted that the accessory dwelling should be for Mr. Sipes' mother only and removed from the property when she no longer needs it. Commissioner Berry asked if other like applications had been for family members only in the past. Tony Bozynski, Assistant Director of Planning and Development, noted that these types of applications had been dealt with in many different ways by the Planning Commission in the past. This issue was briefly discussed. , Commissioner Lowry asked Mr. Sipes if he would agree to amend the conditional use permit application and agree to a condition that the application be for his mother only with a 5 -year time limit whichever was longer. Mr. Sipes noted that he agreed to amend the application to include this condition. Commissioner Lowry asked Mr. Laha if he was agreeable to this added condition. Mr. Laha responded that he was in agreement. Commissioner Adcock asked about the location of the proposed accessory dwelling. She asked if it could be moved further back from Honeysuckle Lane. Mr. Sipes explained that the proposed placement of the accessory dwelling would be next to the existing driveway. He noted that this was because his mother was on a walker and could not walk very far. He also noted that the manufactured home was located in this area, due to the fact that the utilities would be tied into the existing single-family structure. This issue was briefly discussed. The issue of who is to live in the accessory dwelling was discussed. Chairman Downing noted that he was against having the conditional use permit for Mr. Sipes' mother only and no other family members. Commissioner Nunnley noted support for the conditional use permit with a condition that it be for Mr. Sipes' mother only, thereby tailoring the application to Mr. Sipes' specific situation and need. Commissioner Faust quoted the definition of an "accessory dwelling" from the Zoning Ordinance. She noted agreement with Chairman Downing. She also noted that the accessory dwelling should be for Mr. Sipes' family members and not just his mother. This issue was further discussed. 5 September 6,'2001' ITEM NO.: 8 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7083 There was a motion to approve the conditional use permit as recommended by staff and with the amendment to the application that the conditional use permit be for Mr. Sipes, mother only or for five years whichever was longer. Commissioner Floyd asked if the manufactured home accessory dwelling was exempt from the minimum siting standards regarding orientation. Staff noted that the manufactured home accessory dwelling was not exempt from the criteria. There was additional discussion pertaining to the placement of manufactured home and the agreed amendment to the application by Mr. Sipes. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, noted that staff would supporta variance to allow the orientation of the proposed manufactured home accessory dwelling to be perpendicular to the street rather than parallel to the street. He noted that staff felt that the proposed location of the accessory dwelling was appropriate. This issue was briefly discussed. Commissioner Lowry added this variance to the previous motion. The Planning Staff asked for clarification on the amendment to the application. Commissioner Lowry stated that the amendment was to have the accessory dwelling on the site for five years or for as long as Mr. Sipes, mother lived there whichever was longer. Commissioner Faust noted support for the application, even though she did not agree with the stated amendment to the application. She stated that the she felt the additional condition should not be placed on the application. Commissioner Nunnley asked to make the issue of accessory dwelling conditional use permits an item to be discussed at the next Planning Commission informal meeting. He asked staff if they would provide some history as to how these types of applications had been handled in the past. Chairman Downing called for a vote on the previous motion. The motion was approved by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. The conditional use permit was approved. 6