Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-8620 Staff AnalysisDECEMBER 20, 2010 lita &1 03 File No.: Z-8620 Owner: Harry and Vicki Rollins Applicant: Harry Rollins Address: 1624 N. Hughes Street Description: Lot 45, Hall Cove No. 2 Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36- 156, the building line provisions of Section 31-12, the easement provisions of Section 36- 11 and the fence provisions of Section 36-516 to allow construction of an accessory building with reduced street side setback and which encroaches across a platted building line and into an easement; and a fence which exceeds the maximum height allowed. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: Encroachments to the City's right-of-way are prohibited. Sight distance at this intersection is currently a concern. The proposed fence addition could worsen the problem. Public Works does not recommend approval for the fence addition in the right-of-way. Public Works does recommend approval of the garden shed within the easement. B. Utility Issues: Central Arkansas Water — no objection to location of accessory building within easement. Little Rock Wastewater - no objection to location of accessory building within easement. Centerpoint Energy - no objection to location of accessory building within easement. DECEMBER 20, 2010 ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T.) Entergy — no objection to location of accessory building within easement. The accessory building is to have a height not to exceed eight (8) feet at its peak and six (6) feet on the north building wall. AT&T - no objection to location of accessory building within easement. C. Staff Analysis: The R-2 zoned property located at 1624 N. Hughes Street is occupied by a one- story brick and frame single family residence. The property is located at the northeast corner of N. Hughes Street and Florida Avenue. There is a two -car wide driveway from Florida Avenue which accesses a carport on the west end of the residence. The rear yard is fenced with a six (6) foot high wood fence. The fence runs along the west (Florida Avenue) property line and ties into the northwest corner of the residence. The lot contains a 25 foot platted building line along both street frontages (south and west property lines), and a 14 foot wide utility easement along the north (rear) property line. The applicant is proposing to construct a 10 foot by 16 foot accessory building (garden shed) near the northwest corner of the property, as noted on the attached site plan. The building will be located nine (9) feet back from the west (street side) property line and approximately six (6) feet back from the rear (north) property line, extending into the utility easement by approximately eight (8) feet. The applicant is also proposing to move a portion of the six (6) foot high wood fence along the west (Florida Avenue) property line to approximately four (4) feet into the Florida Avenue right-of-way. The portion of the fence to be moved is proposed in order to fence two (2) mature oak trees into the rear yard area. The trees are currently located just outside the existing fence. The applicant is requesting four (4) variances with the proposed project. The first variance is from Section 36-156(a)(2)c. of the City's Zoning Ordinance. This section requires a minimum street side setback of 15 feet for accessory buildings. The proposed building will be located nine (9) feet back from the west street side property line. The second variance is from Section 36-11(f). This section requires that building encroachments into utility easements be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. As noted earlier, the proposed accessory building will encroach approximately eight (8) feet into the existing utility easement located along the north property line. The third variance is from Section 31-12(c ) of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. This section requires that building line encroachments be reviewed and approved by the Board of Adjustment. The proposed accessory building will be located between the 25 foot street side building line and the west property line. The last variance is from Section 36-516(e)(1)a. This section allows a maximum fence height of four (4) feet between a building setback line and a street right-of-way. DECEMBER 20, 2010 ITEM NO.: 3 (CON'T. The applicant is proposing to bump -out the existing six (6) foot high wood fence approximately four (4) feet into the Florida Avenue right-of-way. Staff is supportive of the requested variances associated with the accessory building (garden shed) construction. As noted in paragraph B. of the staff report, all of the utility companies support the encroachment into the utility easement. The other setbacks proposed for the accessory building are fairly typical. The proposed accessory building will not be out of character with other accessory buildings in this neighborhood. The structure will occupy a very minimal area within a rather large back yard area. The single family lot backs up to a rather large multifamily development. Staff believes the proposed accessory structure will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. Staff does not support the requested fence variance. As noted in paragraph A. of the staff report, the Public Works Department does not support relocation of the fence section into the Florida Avenue right-of-way. Public Works notes that sight distance is presently a concern at the intersection of Florida Avenue and N. Hughes Street/Missouri Avenue, and the fence encroachment could worsen the situation. If the Board approves the building line variance, the applicant will have to complete a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the platted street side building line for the accessory building. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the Circuit Clerk's office to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested setback, easement and building line variances associated with the accessory building, subject to the following conditions: 1. Completion of a one -lot replat reflecting the change in the side platted building line as approved by the Board. 2. Compliance with the Entergy requirement as noted in paragraph B. of the staff report. Staff recommends denial of the requested fence variance. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (DECEMBER 20, 2010) Harry Rollins was present, representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the application with a recommendation of approval of the variances associated with the accessory building and denial of the fence height variance. Harry Rollins addressed the Board in support of the application. He discussed the proposed fence encroachment into the Florida Avenue right-of-way and presented DECEMBER 20, 2010 ITEM NO.: 3 CON'T, photos to the Board in support of his application. He explained that in his opinion there would be no sight -distance problem with the proposed fence. The issue was discussed further. Vice -Chairman Smith explained that Public Works had reviewed the fence issue and determined the proposed fence to be a potential sight -distance problem. He stated that he would have to side with the Public Works assessment. The fence issue was discussed further. Mr. Rollins explained that he wanted to incorporate the trees in the Florida Avenue right-of-way into a flower bed in the rear yard area. The maintenance of the existing fence was also discussed. There was a motion to approve the variances associated with the proposed accessory building, as recommended by staff. The motion passed by a vote of 3 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent and 1 open position. There was a second motion to approve the fence height variance, as filed. The motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes, 3 noes, 1 absent and 1 open position.