Z-5684 Staff AnalysisJune 15, 1993
ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: Z-55$4
NAME: MISS SELMA'S SCHOOLS - SHORT -FORM POD
LOCATION: 7819 "T" Street
DEVELOPER:
ARCHITECT:
MICHAEL B. AND ROBIN R. SMITH ELLEN POWELL YEARY
7819 "T" Street 1012 West 2nd
Little Rock, AR 72207 Little Rock, AR 72201
225-0123 372-5940
AREA: 1.93 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
ZONING: R-2 to POD PROPOSED USES: Private preschool and
R-4 elementary school
O-3
PLANNING DISTRICT: 3
CENSUS TRACT: 22.03
VARIANCES REOUESTED: None
STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes the establishment of a POD to encompass
the site presently occupied by the applicant's "Miss Selma's
Schools"; the abandonment of the "T" Street right-of-way from
where "T" Street enters the boundary of the applicant's property
to its dead-end; and, the abandonment of two fragments of the
Glover Street right-of-way which were retained when the remainder
of Glover Street was abandoned to provide "hammer -head" turn-
arounds at the end of "T" Street. The applicant proposes to
construct one new single -story multi-purpose building and one
two-story classroom building, and eliminate four older buildings
which are converted residential structures. It is proposed to
provide on-site faculty and staff parking, and to design for
adequate traffic circulation to the facilities and for a "queing"
(pick-up/drop-off) area. The new facilities are proposed to
retain the small-scale residential character of the present
campus. It is proposed that the multi-purpose building be
constructed in the summer of 1993, with the remainder of the
improvements to follow in 1994 or 1995.
June 15, 1993
ITEM NO.: A Continued FILE NO.: Z-5584
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Review and approval by the Planning Commission of the site
development plan and a recommendation to the Board of
Directors of the POD with the abandonment of "T" and Glover
Streets is requested.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The existing site consists of nine lots (six in Block 18 and
three in Block 19 of Bellevue Addition), plus the abandoned
right-of-way of Glover Street. There are presently eight
residential structures and four former accessory buildings
all being used as classrooms, storage, and office
facilities. There is an unimproved alley right-of-way along
the south property line. One adjacent property owner has
included this alley right-of-way into his/her fenced and
landscaped yard. Portions of the alley right-of-way are
overgrown with heavy underbrush and weeds. There is a metal
storage building on alley right-of-way in one location. The
remainder of the alley is grass and trees.
The site presently consists of three different zones: R-2,
R-4, and 0-3. To the west and south are R-2 and R-4 zoned
properties. To the north is 0-3 property. Immediately to
and contiguous with the site to the east is an R-2 property,
with C-3 and 0-3 properties beyond and across Watt Street.
C. ENGINEERING/UTILITY COMMENTS:
Little Rock Engineering Division comments that "T" Street
needs to be closed, but that an in -lieu contribution for the
upcoming improvements to Watt Street need to be assessed.
Engineering also notes that the on -street parking on Watt
Street needs to be eliminated.
It is observed that the diagonal parking along the west
property line must be 90 degree parking with adequate
maneuvering space.
The traffic circulation pattern needs thought to eliminate
cross-over traffic from the parking area north of the "T"
Street right-of-way conflicting with traffic to and from the
"queing" pick-up/drop-off drive.
The drive from the drop-off/pick-up area cannot enter "T"
Street as shown. It is suggested that, if this drive is
desired, additional length of "T" Street should be abandoned
to include the area lying between Lots 3 and 10.
2
June 15, 1993
ITEM NO.: A Continued FILE NO.: Z-55$4
E.
Little Rock Wastewater Utility reports that sewer mains are
located in "T" Street and along the west property line.
They caution that no structures may be constructed over the
existing sewer mains.
Little Rock Water Works states that there is a 2 inch water
main in "T" Street, so the right-of-way will have to be
retained as an easement or the main will have to be
abandoned. They state that on-site fire protection may be
required, in which case an 8 inch main will have to be
extended to the fire hydrant.
Southwestern Bell Telephone Company has approved the plat.
The Fire Department requests a 20 foot minimum clearance for
the width of the turnaround at the island.
ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
An application to abandon "T" and Glover Streets must be
properly completed and filed with the City Clerk and with
the Planning Office.
In order to plan the driveway from the "queing" (pick-
up/drop-off) area as shown, the Lot 10 property owner must
agree to abandon her right-of-way in front of her residence.
Otherwise, as noted in the Engineering comments, the
driveway as shown is not permitted.
The landscaping/buffer plan must be prepared and submitted
to the Planning staff.
ANALYSIS•
The applicant proposes a development which, if not for the
availability of a PUD ordinance, would have involved
rezoning, street closing, building setback variances,
conditional uses, and site plan review, and which would have
required multiple reviews by the Planning Commission and
Board of Directors. To deal with the complex and varied
components of the proposed development, the PUD was selected
whereby all the aspects could be considered as a unit.
The school is an institution of long standing and, in this
application, an attempt is being made to improve the
facility, traffic circulation, and parking. The proposal is
for the new buildings to be consistent with and retain the
small-scale "neighborhood" style and "feeling" of the
present campus. The new classroom building which is
designated as "two-story" is, in reality, a story -and -a -
half, utilizing floor area under the roof of the first floor
3
June 15, 1993
ITEM NO.: A Continued FILE NO.: Z-5684
and dormers. Both proposed buildings would be constructed
to blend with the residential character of the other
buildings on site and in the neighborhood and would utilize
residential exterior materials.
The new multi-purpose building is shown to be eight feet
from the south property line. Recalling that there is a
twenty foot alley to the south, there is actually more
distance between the building and the neighbor's property
line than is represented by the eight foot dimension.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the site plan and of the
abandonment of the street right-of-way for "T" and Glover
Streets. A utility easement should be retained on each
right-of-way. Approval is conditioned on gaining signatures
from all affected property owners for the abandonment of the
street right-of-way for the two streets, including the owner
of Lot 10, and approval by the Board of Directors.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MAY 13, 1993)
The architect, Ms. Yeary, was present to represent the applicant.
The site plan and survey were presented by Staff. Ms. Yeary
outlined the request. The Engineering comments regarding the
driveway from the "queing" area was discussed. Ms. Yeary
reported that the required Lot 10 property owner was being
contacted to include her in the request to abandon "T" Street
from her east property line to the west. Also, the Engineering
comment regarding the deficiency of the traffic circulation
pattern involving the parking lot and the "queing" area was
discussed. Ms. Yeary explained that the parking lot is for
faculty and staff who are not arriving and leaving when the
parents are bringing their children. Traffic circulation, then,
is not the problem is might appear to be. A question was raised
concerning the unimproved alley along the south property line.
Ms. Yeary explained that since the school does not need the half
of the right-of-way which would revert to them, and since at
lease one neighbor has fenced the alley, the applicant does not
want to raise this issue at this time.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant owns all the property on the south side of "T"
Street from Watt Street west to the dead end. The applicant also
owns all but three lots on the north side; a car wash occupies
the two corner lots at the north-west corner of "T" Street and
4
June 15, 1993
ITEM NO.: A (Continued) FILE NO..: Z-56$4
Watt Street, and Mrs. Louise Norton owns the third lot west of
the corner. There are two properties facing Del Ray Street which
are affected, the property lines of which adjoin the right-of-way
line of "T" Street at its dead-end and the remaining fragments of
Glover Street.
According to the applicant, Mr. Norton had promised in the past
to sell her property to the applicant upon her, Mrs. Norton's,
death. Therefore, the applicant felt that Mrs. Norton would be
amenable to participating in abandoning the right-of-way of that
portion of "T" Street which lies in front of her property. The
Site Plan which had been submitted by the applicant showed a
drop-off/pick-up area with a traffic island in front of the
proposed building which fronted on the "T" Street right-of-way.
A portion of the drive way of the drive-thru and a portion of the
island extended to that part of the right-of-way in front of Mrs.
Norton's property. It was necessary, in order for the Site Plan
to be approved as submitted, for Mrs. Norton to agree to the
abandonment of the right-of-way in front of her property.
The initial plans for abandonment, then, involved getting the
signatures of the owners of the two properties on Del Ray Street
which back onto "T" Street, and of Mrs. Norton. A deadline was
immanent to get these signatures on the petition and to the City
Clerk. When it was found that Mr. Norton and her two sons were
unwilling to agree to the abandonment of the right-of-way in
front of Mrs. Nortons residence, and when one of the property
owners on Del Ray Street refused to sign the petition, the
applicant felt that there was insufficient time to re -group and
pursue a different course. Accordingly, on May 24, 1993, the
applicant submitted a letter requesting deferral of the item
until the July 13, 1993, Planning Commission hearing. This
would, from information related by the applicant, cause a
one-year delay in being able to build the first phase of the
proposed development, since construction could not be under way
during the school year.
It was realized, however, that there was an alternative means of
pursuing the abandonment of "T" Street and Glover Street: the
process for adversarial abandonment whereby a Board of Directors
member sponsors the abandonment and the matter is considered by
the Board of Directors without it having been considered and
recommended by the Planning Commission. The applicant appeared
at the Board of Directors Agenda meeting on May 26, 1993, and at
least one Board member agreed to be the sponsor of the
abandonment request at the Board of Directors level. It was
agreed by the Board that the matter would be on the June 1, 1993
agenda to set a public hearing for the June 15, 1993, meeting.
5
June 15, 1993
ITEM NO.: A Continued FILE NO.: Z-5684
Since the application to abandon the "T" Street and Glover Street
rights-of-way was being deleted from the POD application, the POD
application, it was realized, could proceed to the Planning
Commission as originally scheduled. Since no formal notification
of a change had been undertaken, the matter was left on the
agenda for the June 1, 1993, Planning Commission hearing. At
this hearing, however, Mr. Joe Norton, the son of Mrs. Louise
Norton who owns the property on "T" Street, and Mrs. Danna Davis,
the owner of the property on Del Ray who had refused to sign the
petition to abandon the right-of-way at her back property line,
related that there had been some confusion among neighbors as to
the correct date for hearing of this item. Mr. Norton and Ms.
Davis indicated that reports were circulating among the neighbors
that the matter had been deferred. Ms. Ellen Yeary, the
architect on the project who was representing the applicant,
admitted that the applicant had told various neighbors, when that
seemed the only course, that the matter would be deferred. After
the Planning Commission hearing, Staff received a call from a
neighbor to the south who also wanted to know why the hearing had
been conducted despite being told by staff that the hearing was
to have been deferred. This particular neighbor, a Mr. Rick
Jones, had, indeed called on May 24, 1993, after the request had
been received to defer the matter and before the decision was
made to leave the item on the agenda, and had been told that the
item was to be deferred. Mr. Jones indicated that all the
neighbors on the south of the applicant's property had been
planning to attend the hearing and would be in attendance at the
next scheduled hearing date on this matter.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 1, 1993)
Ms. Ellen Yeary, architect, was present to represent the
applicant. Staff outlined the request and made the explanation
that the right-of-way abandonment issue had been separated from
the request and was being taken directly to the Board of
Directors. Staff added that the Planning Commission may wish to
make a recommendation to the Board of Directors, but that the
matter was on the Board's agenda of June 1 to set a public
hearing to abandon the rights-of-way of "T" and Glover Streets at
the June 15, 1993, meeting date.
Ms. Yeary explained that Glover Street had been abandoned in
1958, but that fragments of Glover street had been retained at
the end of "T" to provide a turn -around. These fragments, plus
180 feet of "T" Street were included in the request for
abandonment. Ms. Yeary explained that in the original scheme
considered, more of "T" Street, an additional 50 feet to the east
lying in front of Mrs. Louise Norton's home, was shown on the
6
June 15, 1993
ITEM NO.: A (Continued FILE NO.: Z-5584
plan to be abandoned. When Mrs. Norton and her sons rejected the
plan, the site plan was amended to delete that portion. The
proposed classroom building facing the "T" Street right-of-way
has a drop-off drive-thru and traffic island in front of it, and
a portion of the drive and island extended into the right-of-way
in front of Mrs. Norton's. This drive and island had to be moved
further west when Mrs. Norton would not agree to the street
abandonment.
Mr. Joe Norton, one of Mrs. Norton's sons, addressed the
Commission. He responded that he and the family do not object to
what Miss Selma's is trying to do, but he did have some concerns
which he wanted "on the record". He related that he wanted to be
sure that there was proper fencing and landscaping between his
mother's property and the playground to the west. He wanted to
be sure that Mrs. Selma's would maintain "T" Street after the
right-of-way was abandoned. He related that traffic is a problem
on "T" Street and the surrounding streets; that Miss Selma's
blocks off "T" Street to use the street as a playground causing
people arriving at the school to use his mother's driveway as a
turn -around; and, that a church congregation is apparently using
Miss Selma's facility as a meeting place on Sundays and these
people use the area in front of his mother's home for parking, as
well as other area properties, and this causes a great deal of
inconvenience and difficulty on his mother's part in accessing
her property. Mr. Norton also commented that there had been some
mis-information circulated as to the hearing date.
Ms. Donna Davis addressed the Commission. She identified herself
as a property owner at #5 Del Ray St. which backs up to the
dead-end of "T" Street and to the Glover Street right-of-way.
She reported that the privacy fence which separates her property
from Miss Selma's is her fence which she maintains. She
complained that "kids" and cars damage the fence which she then
has to repair. Ms. Davis expressed concern that she would loose
her privacy with a two-story building looming over the fence at
her back yard. Additionally, she was concerned about the amount
of traffic on the area streets which the school generates and the
vandalism and noise which the school attendees cause.
Ms. Yeary explained that Miss Selma's owners had, at the point in
time when it was felt that the application would have to be
deferred, related that information to some of the neighbors.
Some, then, might not have know that the matter was back on the
originally scheduled agenda. She reported that, when Ms. Davis
had refused to sign the application to abandon "T" and Glover
Street rights-of-way, and when the recourse was made known to her
to pursue the adverserial abandonment route, she had attended the
May 26 Board of Directors agenda meeting to make the situation
known to the Board and to request being able to pursue that
route. The Board had expressed agreement to permit that route
7
June 15, 1993
ITEM NO.: A Continued FILE NO.: 2-5684
and a Board member agreed to sponsor the application to place the
request on the June 1 agenda to set a public hearing for the
abandonment for the June 15 meeting. Ms. Yeary responded to
Ms. Davis' concern about the two-story building overlooking
Ms. Davis' back yard with the explanation that the building is
designed as a story and a half, with a hip roof and dormers to
retain the one-story look of the neighborhood.
Deputy City Attorney Giles and Neighborhoods and Planning
Director Lawson confirmed the process of adverserail abandonment
and the setting of the dates cited.
Ms. Yeary concluded her remarks by indicating that the applicant
was attempting to "get it done right" in the application to deal
with a complex site plan involving proposed buildings which would
cross platted property lines. Commissioners, however, expressed
concerns about the "two-story" building and asked if Ms. Yeary
had any exterior elevations of the building. Ms. Yeary responded
that she did have the elevations, but that she had not brought
them to the hearing. Commissioners indicated that it would be
important to them to view the elevations, and asked if Ms. Yeary
would consider a deferral to the June 15, 1993 Planning
Commission hearing in order for her to both present the
elevations and to meet with neighbors to try to resolve their
concerns. Ms. Yeary indicated that she would make the request to
defer the matter to the June 15 hearing date. It was moved and
seconded to accept this request, and the motion was approved by a
vote of nine ayes and no nays.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 15, 1993)
Ms. Yeary, the architect for the development, and the applicants,
Michael and Robin Smith, were present.
Staff indicated that the item had been deferred from the
June 1, 1993, hearing in order for the architect to prepare and
present exterior elevations of the proposed buildings, and to
allow time for the applicants and the architect to meet with
concerned neighbors. Staff related that there had been a meeting
on Thursday evening, June 10, to which all adjoining property
owners had been invited. Staff also reported that the applicant
had indicated that the property owner of the one remaining
residential property on "T" Street, Mrs. Norton, who had
appeared, along with her two sons, in objection to the project at
the previous Planning Commission hearing, had agreed to sell her
property to the applicant. Accordingly, the site plan and the
amount of "T" Street which would be included in the request to
the Board of Directors for abandonment would be amended.
8
June 15, 1993
ITEM NO.: A Continued FILE NO.:—Z-5684
Mrs. Yeary presented the renderings which she had prepared. She
presented the exterior elevations of each of the two proposed
buildings and an overlay showing the view of the buildings from
the adjoining properties with the existing trees in place. She
reiterated the proposals indicated in site development plan and
related that the applicants would be willing to construct an
eight (8) foot privacy fence along the south property line and
along a portion of the west property line to include that part of
the property line lying south of the north "T" Street
right-of-way line.
Mrs. Donna Davis, who resides on Del Ray and whose rear property
line abuts the Miss Selma's property, and who spoke in objection
to the proposal at the June 1 hearing, addressed the Commission.
She indicated that she had been present at the neighborhood
meeting, but that she still objected to the proposal. She
related that she objected to the additional loss of privacy for
herself and to the increased traffic in the area.
Mrs. Smith, the applicant, reported that there is a McDonalds
restaurant a block away at Watt St. and Cantrell Road and another
private school a block to the south. She reported that Watt
Street was being used as a "cut -through" for traffic going into
the areas to the south; that not all the traffic, then, is being
generated by her facility. She concurred with Mrs. Yeary's
statement that she would be willing to construct an eight (8)
foot privacy fence, and that the solid board facing could be on
her side, or on the adjoining property owner's side, or on both
sides, as required by the neighbors.
Staff reported that Watt Street was scheduled for reconstruction
in the current street improvement program, and would be build to
collector standards.
The motion was made and seconded to recommend approval of the
establishment of the Planned Office Development. The motion
carried by a unanimous vote of the members present with 9 ayes
and 0 nays.
64
June 1, 19 9 3
.ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: 2-5584
DAME: MISS SELMA'S SCHOOLS - SHORT -FORM POD AND ABANDONMENT OF
PORTIONS OF "T" STREET AND GLOVER STREET
LOCATION: 7819 "T" Street
DEVELOPER:
ARCHITECT:
MICHAEL B. AND ROBIN R. SMITH ELLEN POWELL YEARY
7819 "T" Street 1012 West 2nd
Little Rock, AR 72207 Little Rock, AR 72201
225-0123 372-5940
AREA: 1.93 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: I FT. -NEW STREET: 0
ZONING: R-2 to POD PROPOSED USES: Private preschool and
R-4 elementary school
O-3
PLANNING DISTRICT: 3
CENSUS TRACT: 22.03
VARIANCES REOURSTED: None
STATEMENT OF PRQPO�9,AL:
The applicant proposes the establishment of a POD to encompass
the site presently occupied by the applicant's "Miss Selma's
Schools"; the abandonment of the "T" Street right-of-way from
where "T" Street enters the boundary of the applicant's property
to its dead-end; and, the abandonment of two fragments of the
Glover Street right-of-way which were retained when the remainder
of Glover Street -was abandoned to provide "hammer -head" turn-
arounds at the end of "T" Street. The applicant proposes to
construct one new single -story multi-purpose building and one
two-story classroom building, and eliminate four older buildings
which are converted residential structures. It is proposed to
provide on-site faculty and staff parking, and to design for
adequate traffic circulation to the facilities and for a "queing"
(pick-up/drop-off) area. The new facilities are proposed to
retain the small-scale residential character of the present
campus. It is proposed that the multi-purpose building be
constructed in the summer of 1993, with the remainder of the
improvements to follow in 1994 or 1995.
June 1, 1993
SUBDIVISIQ
ITEM NO.: 2 Continued FILE NO.: Z-5684
A. PROPOSAL/REQUE$T:
Review and approval by the Planning Commission of the site
development plan and a recommendation to the Board of
Directors of the POD with the abandonment of "T" and Glover
Streets is requested.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The existing site consists of nine lots (six in Block 18 and
three in Block 19 of Bellevue Addition), plus the abandoned
right-of-way of Glover Street. There are presently eight
residential structures and four former accessory buildings
all being used as classrooms, storage,` and office
facilities. There is an unimproved alley right-of-way along
the south property line. One adjacent property owner has
included this alley right-of-way into his/her fenced and
landscaped yard. Portions of the alley right-of-way are
overgrown with heavy underbrush and weeds. There is a metal
storage building on alley right-of-way in one location. The
remainder of the alley is grass and trees.
The site presently consists of three different zones: R-2,
R-4, and 0-3. To the west and south are R-2 and R-4 zoned
properties. To the north is 0-3 property. Immediately to
and contiguous with the site to the east is an R-2 property,
with C-3 and 0-3 properties beyond and across Watt Street.
C. ENGINEERING/UTILITY COMMENTS:
Little Rock Engineering Division comments that "T" Street
needs to be closed, but that an in -lieu contribution for the
upcoming improvements to Watt Street need to be assessed.
Engineering also notes that the on -street parking on Watt
Street needs to be eliminated.
It is observed that the diagonal parking along the west
property line must be 90 degree parking with adequate
maneuvering space.
The traffic circulation pattern needs thought to eliminate
cross-over traffic from the parking area north of the "T"
Street right-of-way conflicting with traffic to and from the
"queing" pick-up/drop-off drive.
The drive from the drop-off/pick-up area cannot enter "T"
Street as shown. It is suggested that, if this drive is
desired, additional length of "T" Street should be abandoned
to include the area lying between Lots 3 and 10.
2
June 1, 1993
SUBDIVISION
ITEM N Continued FILE NO.: Z-5584
Little Rock Wastewater Utility reports that sewer mains are
located in "T" Street and along the west property line.
They caution that no structures may be constructed over the
existing sewer mains.
Little Rock Water Works states that there is a 2 inch water
main in "T" Street, so the right-of-way will have to be
retained as an easement or the main will have to be
abandoned. They state that on-site fire protection may be
required, in which case an 8 inch main will have to be
extended to the fire hydrant.
Southwestern Bell Telephone Company has approved the plat.
The Fire Department requests a 20 foot minimum clearance for
the width of the turnaround at the island.
D. ISSUES LEGAL TECHNICAL DESIGN:
An application to abandon "T" and Glover Streets must be
properly completed and filed with the City Clerk and with
the Planning Office.
In order to plan the driveway from the "queing" (pick-
up/drop-off) area as shown, the Lot 10 property owner must
agree to abandon her right-of-way in front of her residence.
Otherwise, as noted in the Engineering comments, the
driveway as shown is not permitted.
The landscaping/buffer plan must be prepared and submitted
to the Planning staff.
E. ANALYSIS•
The applicant proposes a development which, if not for the
availability of a PUD ordinance, would have involved
rezoning, street closing, building setback variances,
conditional uses, and site plan review, and which would have
required multiple reviews by the Planning Commission and
Board of 'Directors. To deal with the complex and varied
components of the proposed development, the PUD was selected
whereby all the aspects could be considered as a unit.
The school is an institution of long standing and, in this
application, an attempt is being made to improve the
facility, traffic circulation, and parking. The proposal is
for the new buildings to be consistent with and retain the
small-scale "neighborhood" style and "feeling" of the
present campus. The new classroom building which is
designated as "two-story" is, in reality, a story -and -a -
half, utilizing floor area under the roof of the first floor
01
June 1, 1993
ITEM NO.: 2 ( Cont injigd ) FILE NO _Z - 5.5_$4
and dormers. Both proposed buildings would be constructed
to blend with the residential character of the other
buildings on site and in the neighborhood and would utilize
residential exterior materials.
The new multi-purpose building is shown to be eight feet
from the south property line. Recalling that there is a
twenty foot alley to the south, there is actually more
distance between the building and the neighbor's property
line than is represented by the eight foot dimension.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the site plan and of the
abandonment of the street right-of-way for "T" and Glover
Streets. A utility easement should be retained on each
right-of-way. Approval is conditioned on gaining signatures
from all affected property owners for the abandonment of the
street right-of-way for the two streets, including the owner
of Lot 10, and approval by the Board of Directors.
,SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MAY 13, 1993)
The architect, Ms. Yeary, was present to represent the applicant.
The site plan and survey were presented by Staff. Ms. Yeary
outlined the request. The Engineering comments regarding the
driveway from the "queing" area was discussed. Ms. Yeary
reported that the required Lot 10 property owner was being
contacted to include her in the request to abandon "T" Street
from her east property line to the west. Also, the Engineering
comment regarding the deficiency of the traffic circulation
pattern involving the parking lot and the "queing" area was
discussed. Ms. Yeary explained that the parking lot is for
faculty and staff who are not arriving and leaving when the
parents are bringing their children. Traffic circulation, then,
is not the problem is might appear to be. A question was raised
concerning the unimproved alley along the south property line.
Ms. Yeary explained that since the school does not need the half
of the right-of-way which would revert to them, and since at
lease one neighbor has fenced the alley, the applicant does not
want to raise this issue at this time.
STAFF UPDATE:
The applicant owns all the property on the south side of "T"
Street from Watt Street west to the dead end. The applicant also
owns all but three lots on the north side; a car wash occupies
the two corner lots at the north-west corner of "T" Street and
4
June 1, 1993
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Continued) FILE NO.: Z-5684
Watt Street, and Mrs. Louise Norton owns the third lot west of
the corner. There are two properties facing Del Ray Street which
are affected, the property lines of which adjoin the right-of-way
line of "T" Street at its dead-end and the remaining fragments of
Glover Street.
According to the applicant, Mr. Norton had promised in the past
to sell her property to the applicant upon her, Mrs. Norton's,
death. Therefore, the applicant felt that Mrs. Norton would be
amenable to participating in abandoning the right-of-way of that
portion of "T" Street which lies in front of her property. The
Site Plan which had been submitted by the applicant showed a
drop-off/pick-up area with a traffic island in front of the
proposed building which fronted on the "T" Street right-of-way.
A portion of the drive way of the drive-thru and a portion of the
island extended to that part of the right-of-way in front of Mrs.
Norton's property. It was necessary, in order for the Site Plan
to be approved as submitted, for Mrs. Norton to agree to the
abandonment of the right-of-way in front of her property.
The initial plans for abandonment, then, involved getting the
signatures of the owners of the two properties on Del Ray Street
which back onto "T" Street, and of Mrs. Norton. A deadline was
immanent to get these signatures on the petition and to the City
Clerk. When it was found that Mr. Norton and her two sons were
unwilling to agree to the abandonment of the right-of-way in
front of Mrs. Nortons residence, and when one of the property
owners on Del Ray Street refused to sign the petition, the
applicant felt that there was insufficient time to re -group and
pursue a different course. Accordingly, on May 24, 1993, the
applicant submitted a letter requesting deferral of the item
until the July 13, 1993, Planning Commission hearing. This
would, from information related by the applicant, cause a
one-year delay in being able to build the first phase of the
proposed development, since construction could not be under way
during the school year.
It was realized, however, that there was an alternative means of
pursuing the abandonment of "T" Street and Glover Street: the
process for adversarial abandonment whereby a Board of Directors
member sponsors the abandonment and the matter is considered by
the Board of Directors without it having been considered and
recommended by the Planning Commission. The applicant appeared
at the Board of Directors Agenda meeting on May 26, 1993, and at
least one Board member agreed to be the sponsor of the
abandonment request at the Board of Directors level. It was
agreed by the Board that the matter would be on the June 1, 1993
agenda to set a public hearing for the June 15, 1993, meeting.
5
June 1, 1993
SDIVI 1 N
ITEM N 2 Continued FILE NO.: Z-5684
Since the application to abandon the "T" Street and Glover Street
rights-of-way was being deleted from the POD application, the POD
application, it was realized, could proceed to the Planning
Commission as originally scheduled. Since no formal notification
of a change had been undertaken, the matter was left on the
agenda for the June 1, 1993, Planning Commission hearing. At
this hearing, however, Mr. Joe Norton, the son of Mrs. Louise
Norton who owns the property on "T" Street, and Mrs. Danna Davis,
the owner of the property on Del Ray who had refused to sign the
petition to abandon the right-of-way at her back property line,
related that there had been some confusion among neighbors as to
the correct date for hearing of this item. Mr. Norton and Ms.
Davis indicated that reports were circulating among the neighbors
that the matter had been deferred. Ms. Ellen Yeary, the
architect on the project who was representing the applicant,
admitted that the applicant had told various neighbors, when that
seemed the only course, that the matter would be deferred. After
the Planning Commission hearing, Staff received a call from a
neighbor to the south who also wanted to know why the hearing had
been conducted despite being told by staff that the hearing was
to have been deferred. This particular neighbor, a Mr. Rick
Jones, had, indeed called on May 24, 1993, after the request had
been received to defer the matter and before the decision was
made to leave the item on the agenda, and had been told that the
item was to be deferred. Mr. Jones indicated that all the
neighbors on the south of the applicant's property had been
planning to attend the hearing and would be in attendance at the
next scheduled hearing date on this matter.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 1, 1993)
Ms. Ellen Yeary, architect, was present to represent the
applicant. Staff outlined the request and made the explanation
that the right-of-way abandonment issue had been separated from
the request and was being taken directly to the Board of
Directors. Staff added that the Planning Commission may wish to
make a recommendation to the Board of Directors, but that the
matter was on,the Board's agenda of June 1 to set a public
hearing to abandon the rights-of-way of "T" and Glover Streets at
the June 15, 1993, meeting date.
Ms. Yeary explained that Glover Street had been abandoned in
1958, but that fragments of Glover street had been retained at
the end of "T" to provide a turn -around. These fragments, plus
180 feet of "T" Street were included in the request for
abandonment. Ms. Yeary explained that in the original scheme
considered, more of "T" Street, an additional 50 feet to the east
lying in front of Mrs. Louise Norton's home, was shown on the
6
June 1, 1993
SUBDIVTSTON
ITEM NO.: 2 [Continued] FILE NO.: Z-5684
plan to be abandoned. When Mrs. Norton and her sons rejected the
plan, the site plan was amended to delete that portion. The
proposed classroom building facing the "T" Street right-of-way
has a drop-off drive-thru and traffic island in front of it, and
a portion of the drive and island extended into the right-of-way
in front of Mrs. Norton's. This drive and island had to be moved
further west when Mrs. Norton would not agree to the street
abandonment.
Mr. Joe Norton, one of Mrs. Norton's sons, addressed the
Commission. He responded that he and the family do not object to
what Miss Selma's is trying to do, but he did have some concerns
which he wanted "on the record". He related that he wanted to be
sure that there was proper fencing and landscaping between his
mother's property and the playground to the west. He wanted to
be sure that Mrs. Selma's would maintain "T" Street after the
right-of-way was abandoned. He related that traffic is a problem
on "T" Street and the surrounding streets; that Miss Selma's
blocks off "T" Street to use the street as a playground causing
people arriving at the school to use his mother's driveway as a
turn -around; and, that a church congregation is apparently using
Miss Selma's facility as a meeting place on Sundays and these
people use the area in front of his mother's home for parking, as
well as other area properties, and this causes a great deal of
inconvenience and difficulty on his mother's part in accessing
her property. Mr. Norton also commented that there had been some
mis-information circulated as to the hearing date.
Ms. Donna Davis addressed the Commission. She identified herself
as a property owner at #5 Del Ray St. which backs up to the
dead-end of "T" Street and to the Glover Street right-of-way.
She reported that the privacy fence which separates her property
from Miss Selma's is her fence which she maintains. She
complained that "kids" and cars damage the fence which she then
has to repair. Ms. Davis expressed concern that she would loose
her privacy with a two-story building looming over the fence at
her back yard. Additionally, she was concerned about the amount
of traffic on the area streets which the school generates and the
vandalism and noise which the school attendees cause.
Ms. Yeary explained that Miss Selma's owners had, at the point in
time when it was felt that the application would have to be
deferred, related that information to some of the neighbors.
Some, then, might not have know that the matter was back on the
originally scheduled agenda. She reported that, when Ms. Davis
had refused to sign the application to abandon "T" and Glover
Street rights-of-way, and when the recourse was made known to her
to pursue the adverserial abandonment route, she had attended the
May 26 Board of Directors agenda meeting to make the situation
known to the Board and to request being able to pursue that
route. The Board had expressed agreement to permit that route
7
June 1, 1993
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 2 (Continued) FILE NO.: Z-5.684
and a Board member agreed to sponsor the application to place the
request on the June 1 agenda to set a public hearing for the
abandonment for the June 15 meeting. Ms. Yeary responded to
Ms. Davis' concern about the two-story building overlooking
Ms. Davis' back yard with the explanation that the building is
designed as a story and a half, with a hip roof and dormers to
retain the one-story look of the neighborhood.
Deputy City Attorney Giles and Neighborhoods and Planning
Director Lawson confirmed the process of adverserail abandonment
and the setting of the dates cited.
Ms. Yeary concluded her remarks by indicating that the applicant
was attempting to "get it done right" in the application to deal
with a complex site plan involving proposed buildings which would
cross platted property lines. Commissioners, however, expressed
concerns about the "two-story" building and asked if Ms. Yeary
had any exterior elevations of the building. Ms. Yeary responded
that she did have the elevations, but that she had not brought
them to the hearing. Commissioners indicated that it would be
important to them to view the elevations, and asked if Ms. Yeary
would consider a deferral to the June 15, 1993 Planning
Commission hearing in order for her to both present the
elevations and to meet with neighbors to try to resolve their
concerns. Ms. Yeary indicated that she would make the request to
defer the matter to the June 15 hearing date. It was moved and
seconded to accept this request, and the motion was approved by a
vote of nine ayes and no nays.
8