HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-9301 Staff AnalysisFEBRUARY 26, 2018
ITEM NO.: 4
File No.: Z-9301
Owner/Applicant- Jason Williams
Address: 12800 Ridgehaven Road
Description: Lot 2, Cheairs Addition
Zoned: R-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the fence provisions of Section
36-516 to allow 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:
The Cheairs Addition subdivision plat indicates the presence of utility and
drainage easements on the northern and western boundaries of the property.
CLR Code of Ordinances § 29-127 prohibits the placement of obstructions within
drainage easements, including fences. Any enclosure of drainage easements
by fences or other obstructions will limit the ability of the Public Works to maintain
drainage infrastructure. With the fence existing today, staff does not object to
the variance for replacement of the existing fence.
B. Staff Analysis -
The R-2 zoned property at 12800 Ridgehaven Road is occupied by a one-story brick
and frame single family residence. The property is located on the north side of
Ridgehaven Road, west of Napa Valley Drive. The lot contains a "pipestem" which
extends from Ridgehaven Road and contains the access drive to the property.
There is existing six (6) foot high wood fences along the east and west side property
lines. Chain -link fencing exists along the north and south property lines. Jason
Williams is the property owner and applicant.
The applicant proposes to construct an eight (8) foot high wood fence along the north
(rear) property line of the overall property, as noted on the attached site plan. The
wood fence will replace an existing chain -link fence. The applicant is requesting the
eight (8) foot high fence to provide additional privacy for a swimming pool area which
is being constructed in the rear yard.
FEBRUARY 26, 2018
ITEM NO.: 4 ICON'T.
Z-9301
Section 36-516(e)(1)a. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum fence
height of six (6) feet for interior fences in residential zoning. Therefore, the applicant
is requesting a variance to allow the wood fence along the north (rear) property line
with a height of eight (8) feet.
Staff is supportive of the requested fence height variance. Staff views the request
as reasonable. The applicant is requesting the increased fence height in order to
provide additional privacy for a pool which is under construction. The subject
property backs up to a patio house type subdivision where the homes have rear
access, with an access driveway located between the homes and the common rear
property line. Eight (8) foot high fences have become increasingly popular in single
family areas throughout Little Rock. Staff believes the proposed eight (8) foot high
fence along the rear property line will have no adverse impact on the adjacent
properties or the general area.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested fence height variance, as filed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
(February 26, 2018)
Jason Williams was present, representing the application. There were several persons
present in opposition. Staff presented the application with a recommendation of approval.
Jason Williams addressed the Board in support of the application. He explained that the
pool area within his rear yard is at a higher elevation than the property to the north. He
explained that an eight (8) foot high fence is needed for privacy because of the grade
change.
Robert Tucker asked about the vertical distance between the pool and the rear property
line. Mr. Williams stated that he did not know the distance. Mr. Tucker asked about the
distance from the property line to the nearest edge of the pool. Mr. Williams stated that
the pool was set back 30 to 40 feet. Vice -Chair Lindsey Polk asked if the new fence
would be in the same location as the old fence. Mr. Williams noted that it would be at the
same location.
Loren Samons addressed the Board in opposition. He explained that he had no objection
to a six (6) foot high fence, but that an eight (8) foot high fence was too tall. He noted
that other neighbors were also in opposition. He noted that there were no other higher
fences in the area. He presented letters of opposition to the Board.
Jeff Yates asked why an eight (8) foot high fence was a problem. Mr. Samons explained
that the taller fence was too much of a visual barrier. Mr. Yates noted that eight (8) foot
high fences were very common in residential areas.
2
FEBRUARY 26, 2018
ITEM NO.: 4 CON'T. Z-9301
Helen Baldwin also spoke in opposition. She stated that eight (8) foot high fencing would
be unusual for the neighborhood.
Mr. Williams explained that his property was part of a different subdivision than the
properties to the north.
There was a motion to approve the application as recommended by staff. The motion
passed by a vote of 3 ayes, 2 noes and 0 absent. The application was approved.