Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5106 Staff AnalysisJanuary 3, 1989 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. D NAME: Highway 10 Daycare Conditional Use Permit (Z-5106) LOCATION: The south side of Highway 10 just east of Ives Street OWNER/APPLICANT: Rose N. Bicker"staff/Laurnetta R. Bickerstaff PROPOSAL: To reconstruct and convert an existing 2800 square feet building to a daycare center (45 child capacity) and to pave a drop-off and parking area (13 spaces) on 0.30 + acres of land that is zoned "R-2." Ordinance Design Standards: 1. Site Location Adjacent to an arterial street (Highway 10). 2. Co_mp_at.ibi._I._ity with Neigh4.grho_o_d. This site is abutted by single family uses located on the north, east and west. The property located to the south is vacant. The proposed use, property sized (capacity), located on an arterial street should be compatible with the surrounding area. 3. On -Site Drives and _Parking The applicant has proposed 13 parking spaces with access to be taken from Highway 10. 4. Screening andByffers __ . The applicant is proposing a privacy fence to be constructed along the sides of the building and along the rear property line to enclose the playground area. January 3, 1989 SUBDIVISIONS I tem Nom WD (Cont i_nued )_ 5. Analysis The Staff feels that a daycare use is potentially compatible with the surrounding area. The Staff does feel that the proposed capacity is excessive. The applicant needs to submit a revised site plan which -is shown on the survey drawing and includes a proper parking layout and drop-off area. The properly drawn parking and drop-off area will dictate the proper capacity for the daycare center. The revised drawing should also show the location of the proposed screening fence. 6. City Engineer_Comments None 7. Staff Recommendation The Staff reserves its recommendation pending the submittal of a revised site plan as outlined in the analysis section. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW: The applicant was not present. The Staff stated that they had received a letter requesting deferral of the item until the January 3, 1989 Planning Commission meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (November 15, 1988) The applicant was not present. The Commission voted 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent to defer the application as requested by the applicant until the January 3, 1989 Planning Commission meeting. SUBDI,VISION_COMMITTEE.REVIEW: The applicant was not present. The Staff stated that the applicant had submitted a letter requesting withdrawal of the item. The item was not discussed. January 3, 1989 SUBDIVISIONS Item.. No. D (Continued) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: PLANNING ........... ...... .. ..... ........ . ... ... .­ COMMISSION . . ...... .. I ­ ACTION: ... .- The applicant was not present. There were no objectors. The Commission voted 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent—to accept withdrawal of the item as requested by the applicant. I