Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-9840 Final Action LetterDepartment of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501)371-4790 Fax: (501)371-4546 Planning Development Building Codes Mr. Jose Carrera ________________ File No: Z-9840 29 Durham Drive _____ ____ Location: 29 Durham Drive Little Rock AR 72209___________________ Issue: Accessory Structure Variances Date: October 20, 2023____ Dear _Mr. Carrera . This is to advise you that in connection with your application, File No. _Z-9840_, the following action was taken by the Board of Adjustment at its meeting on October 19, 2023_: (a)___ __ Approved the application as filed. (b) X Approved the application with conditions. (c)________ Denied the application. (d) ____ ___ Deferred the application to the __ _ meeting. (e)________ Withdrew the application. (f)________ See attached Board of Adjustment minute record for conditions. (g) ________ Other: ______________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ If a variance application is approved by the Board of Adjustment, 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. Otherwise, the Board’s approval of the application shall be considered void. According to the City’s Zoning Ordinance Section 36-70: “Appeals from the decision of the Board of Adjustment shall be filed with the appropriate court of jurisdiction. This filing must occur within thirty (30) calendar days of the action by the Board of Adjustment.” If you have questions, please call me at (501) 371-6821. Sincerely, _____________________________________________ Romie G. Price, Plans Development Administrator RGP/aa OCTOBER 19, 2023 ITEM NO. 3 Z-9840 1 File No.: Owners: Applicant: Address: Legal Description: Zoned: Z-9840 Jose Rios Carrera Jose Rios Carrera 29 Durham Drive Lot 222, Wakefield Village, an addition to the City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas R-2 Variance(s) Requested: A variance is requested from area regulations of Sec. 36-156 to allow an accessory structure to be located closer than sixty (60) feet to the front property line. A variance is requested from area regulations of Sec. 36-156 to allow an accessory structure to be less than six (6) feet from a residence in the R-2 district. A variance is requested from area regulations of Sec. 36-156 to allow an accessory structure to be located closer than three (3) feet to the side property line. Present Use: Single-family Residence Proposed Use: Single-family Residence Justification: The applicant’s justification is presented as per the attached letter. STAFF REPORT A. Planning and Development Civil Engineering Comments: No Comments. B. Buffering and Landscape Comments: No Comments. C. Building Codes Comments: No Comments D. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property located at 29 Durham Drive is occupied by an existing one- story single-family residence with an existing concrete access drive along the front (north) side of the residence connecting to Durham Drive. OCTOBER 19, 2023 ITEM NO. 3 (CON’T.) Z-9840 2 The applicant is proposing to construct an accessory carport structure at the front (north) side of the existing residence. The applicant has stated that the new structure will occupy a 19-foot x 19-foot footprint on the northwest corner of the lot aligning with the existing paved driveway which accesses Durham Drive to the north. The applicant is proposing to locate the new structure within the front (north) yard area approximately three (3) feet north of the existing residence, approximately one (1) foot from the side (west) property line and approximately twelve (12) feet into the front (north) yard setback. Sec. 36-156(a)(2)(b) states, “All single- and two-family residences shall be separated from accessory structures by a distance of not less than six (6) feet.” Therefore, the applicant requests a variance to allow a reduction of the required accessory structure separation from the primary structure to 3-feet. Section 36-156(a)(2)(f) states “Accessory buildings shall maintain at least a three- foot setback from any side or rear yard property line except where said rear yard abuts on a dedicated alley”. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow an accessory structure to have a reduced side and rear yard setback of less than three (3) feet. Sec. 36-156(a)(2) (c) states, “Accessory buildings or structures in the R-1 through R-4A districts shall not be located closer than sixty (60) feet to the front property line….” Therefore, the applicant requests a variance to allow the accessory structure to be placed 8-feet from the front property line. Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Staff views the request as reasonable. The proposed construction will have front and side yard setbacks relatable to other residences in the immediate area along Durham Drive and the adjacent streets. Staff believes the proposed structure along the front of the house will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. E. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested front yard setback reduction from 25- feet to a minimum of 6-feet and the reduction of the south side yard setback from 5-feet to 2.7-feet as outlined in the staff analysis and indicated on the site plan sketch, subject to the following conditions: 1. A building permit being obtained for all construction. Board of Adjustment (OCTOBER 19, 2023) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the application to the Board and stated it recommended approval of the requested area regulations variance to allow an accessory structure to be located closer than sixty (60) feet to the front property line, less than six (6) feet from a residence and be located closer than three (3) feet to the side property line in an R-2 district per the staff report analysis and report. There was a consent motion to approve the application. The motion was seconded. The application was approved on consent. The vote was 5 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent.