HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-8919 Staff AnalysisFEBRUARY 24, 2014
ITEM NO.: 10
File No.: Z-8919
Owner: Charles and Terri Watkins
Applicant: Rodney Parham
Address: 44 Edgehill Road
Description: Lot 54 and part of Lot 56, Edgehill Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the area provisions of Section 36-156
to allow a detached carport/garage with a reduced side setback.
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:
No Comments.
B. Buildinq Codes Comments:
The required fire separation distance (building to property line) prescribed by the
building code terminates at five (5) feet. Buildings are allowed to be closer than
five (5) feet if they have properly constructed fire walls which provide the requisite
one (1) hour fire resistance rating. When buildings are five (5) feet or more from
the property line, the requirement no longer applies to the wall itself, only the
projections such as eaves or overhangs.
Openings such as doors and windows are limited when the exterior wall is three (3)
feet from the property line, and are prohibited when the exterior wall is less than
three (3) feet from the line. There is no restriction on openings when the exterior
wall is more than three (3) feet from the property line
Contact the City of Little Rock Building Codes at 371-4832 for additional details.
C. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 44 Edgehill Road is occupied by a two-story brick and
frame single family residence. There is a one -car wide driveway at the southwest
corner of the lot. The driveway extends along the west side of the house to the
rear yard area. There is an existing two -car wide detached carport structure at the
FEBRUARY 24, 2014
ITEM NO.: 10 (CON'T.
north end of the driveway. The rear yard area slopes downward to the rear
property line (south to north).
The applicant proposes to remove the existing carport structure and construct a
new one-story detached carport/garage as noted on the attached site plan. The
proposed structure will be 24.3 feet by 49.7 feet in area. The south 20 feet of the
structure will be an unenclosed carport area, with the north 29.7 feet being an
enclosed garage. The structure will be located two (2) feet back from the west side
property line and separated from the house by approximately eight (8) feet.
Section 36-156(a)(2)f. of the City's Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum side
setback of three (3) feet- for detached accessory structures in R-2 zoning.
Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow a side setback of two (2)
feet from the west side property line. The proposed accessory building conforms
to all other setback, coverage and separation requirements.
Staff is supportive of the requested side setback variance. Staff views the request
as reasonable. Given the slope of the rear yard area, the proposed carport/garage
is being pushed to the west and south as far as possible to provide a minimal area
for vehicles to maneuver in and out of the structure. The two (2) foot side yard as
proposed will allow ample space for the construction and maintenance of the
structure. Additionally, ample separation will exist between the accessory structure
and the residence to the west. Staff believes the proposed accessory
carport/garage structure with reduced side setback will have no adverse impact on
the adjacent properties or the general area.
D. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested side setback variance, subject to the
following conditions:
(1) The carport portion of the accessory structure must remain unenclosed
on its east, west and south sides.
(2) Compliance with the Building Codes requirements as noted in
paragraph B. of the staff report.
(3) Guttering must be provided to prevent water run-off onto the adjacent
property to the west.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
(February 24, 2014)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the
application with a recommendation of approval. There was no further discussion.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff.
The vote was 5 ayes, 0 nays and 0 absent. The application was approved.