Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4784 Staff AnalysisFebruary 24, 1987 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. B NAME: South Battery Day -Care Conditional Use Permit (Z-4784) LOCATION: The Southwest Corner of West 17th and South Battery St. (1702 South Battery) OWNER/APPLICANT: Nathaniel and Marion L. McGee PROPOSAL: To convert an existing two-story single family structure to a day-care center with a capacity of 35 children on two lots that are zoned "R-4." There will be three employees and only the 2,100 square feet downstairs portion of the structure will be utilized for the day-care use. ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS: 1. Site Location Adjacent to two residential streets (West 17th Street on the north and South Battery Street on the east). 2. Compatibility with Neighborhood This property is surrounded on all sides by residential uses. Two duplex uses are located across Battery Street. The close proximity of the adjacent residential structures makes this site a less than desirable land use and would not be compatible with the surrounding area. 3. On -Site Drives and Parking No on-site drives or parking currently exist, and there are none proposed. February 24, 1987 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. B - Continued 4. Screening and Buffers The site contains a six feet board screening fence that surrounds the entire rear yard. 5. Analysis The staff is not convinced that this site is an appropriate location for a day-care use with 35 children capacity. In addition, the applicant has failed to provide three paved parking spaces for employees as well as a drop-off area for the children. 6. City Engineering Comments The applicant needs to provide three paved parking spaces as well as a drop-off area. 7. Staff Recommendation Denial as filed. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW: The applicant was not present: The staff stated its recommendation. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (1-13-87) The applicant, Marion McGee, was present as were five objectors. The staff stated its recommendation of denial and that the applicant had failed to meet the notice requirements. The staff also stated that the applicant had submitted a letter requesting deferral and that they had received three phone calls in opposition. The City Attorney stated that even though the applicant had failed to meet all February 24, 1987 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. B - Continued the notice requirements, the fact that objectors were present indicated that notice had occurred and that the Commission could suspend the rules and hear the matter. The Commission voted 8 ayes and 3 noes on a motion to suspend the rules and hear the item. The motion failed due to a vote equal to less than 75 percent which the bylaws require. The item was deferred until the February 24, 1987, Planning Commission meeting. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW: (2-5-87) The applicant was present. The staff stated that the applicant had submitted a revised site plan that included two proposed parking spaces located in the northwest corner of the property adjacent to the alley. The staff also stated that the applicant proposed: (1) to use the alley as the drop off point; (2) reduce the capacity to 15 from the original proposal of 35 children; and (3) to limit the outside activities from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. There was a brief discussion about the proposed drop off and parking area. Staff advised the applicant to meet with the City Traffic Engineer to review the proposed parking and drop off area. The applicant agreed to comply. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (2-24-87) The applicant was present as were two supporters. Five objectors were also present. The staff stated that they had received a revised site plan that showed a 20' access/drop off area and two parking spaces located in the northwest corner of the property adjacent to West 17th Street. The staff also stated that the applicant had revised their proposal to allow a 15 child capacity and would limit the outside play time from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. Finally, the staff stated that they had received two letters of opposition and reiterated their recommendation of denial. The City Traffic Engineer stated that the applicant had not met with him and that the proposed revised site plan was not drawn to scale February 24, 1987 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. Bim_ Continued so he therefore could not make a recommendation on the proposal. Major Marion McGee, the applicant, spoke in behalf of the proposal and submitted a petition with 20 signatures of neighbors in support of a day-care use. Mr. McGee stated that his revised proposal would be compatible with the neighborood and that two employees would work at the day-care. Dr. Alice Frakin and Sarah Harris spoke in favor of the project. They stated that a day-care was needed in the area. Mr. Jim Norcross and August White spoke in objection to the proposal. They -stated that a day-care operation would be a detriment to the neighborhood and that a Montessori School located at 16th and Marshall Streets could serve the neighborhood. They also presented a petition with 30 signatures of objectors. The Commission then voted 7 ayes, 1 no, and 3 absent to deny the application.