HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4137 Staff AnalysisJanuary 31, 1984
Item No. 5 - Z-4137
Owner: Helen McDonald
Applicant: Same
Location: Geyer Springs at Judy Lane -
Northwest Corner
Request: Rezone from "R-2" Single Family
to "C -I" Neighborhood Commercial
Purpose: Beauty Shop
Size: 8,900 square feet +
Existing Use: Single Family
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Single Family, Zoned "R-2."
South - Single Family, Zoned "R-2"
East - Single Family, Zoned "R-2"
West - Single Family, Zoned "R-2"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
1. The request is to permit the expansion of a
nonconforming use in an "R--2" district. Currently, the
property is occupied by single family residence with a
portion of the structure being utilized for a beauty
shop. The applicant would like to expand the beauty
shop operation, but because of its nonconformity
status, the property must first be rezoned to the
appropriate classification. The beauty shop must have
commercial zoning if more than one chair will be in
operation. This application is the result of the
Zoning Enforcement Office determining that the proposed
expansion cannot first occur without the proper zoning.
2. The site is a typical residential lot with one single
family structure on it. One unique feature of the lot
is that it has a curved driveway which takes access
both Geyer Springs and Judy Lane.
3. Additional dedication of right-of-way on Geyer Springs
Road will be necessary because it is classified as
principal arterial which requires a minimum of a
100 -foot right-of-way. The existing right-of-way is
deficient.
January 31, 1984
Item No. 5 - Continued
4. There have been no adverse comments received from the
reviewing agencies at this time.
5. The request appears to be spot zoning in nature. The
immediate vicinity is zoned 11R-2" except for a "C-2"
tract at the intersec�iayr2rnt
Mabelvale Cutoff, app�vmtelyll/blockso the
south.
(. There have been some neighborhood complaints about the
existing beauty shop. The property was part of a large
annexation that occurred in 1981. The beauty shop was
in operation at the time the property was annexed
according to the applicant. Some of the neighbors have
stated otherwise and this disagreement is becoming a
major issue.
7. Staff views the request as spot zoning and as
inappropriate for the area. The lot is part of a well
established single family area with good housing. The
"C-1" district does permit other uses which may have a
negative impact on the stable single family area. A
spot zoning, such as this one, may cause disruption of
a good neighborhood. The request is also in conflict
with the Suburban Development Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant, Helen McDonald, was present. Mrs. McDonald
requested for a deferral because her attorney
r had
not
was not
proper time to prepare for the hearing. ort of her
granted. Mrs. McDonald then spoke in suPe
request. There were 13 persons in attendance objecting to
the application. Mr. C.L. Griff and Mr. Robert Burns spoke
for the residents present and the entire neighborhood. A
petition with 213 signatures opposing the request was
presented to the Commission. Ken Scott of the City's Zoning
Enforcement Office gave the Commission a history of the
various issues and violations associated with the
application. The case was discussed at length by
ytheof the
Commission. A motion was made to recommend app
rovalrequest as filed. The motion failed for lack of an
affirmative vote. The vote: 0 ayes, 11 noes and 0 absent.
The application was denied.