Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5651 Staff AnalysisManch 9. 1993 ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: Z-5651 NAME: Simmons Beauty Shop - Conditional, Use Permit LOCATION: 2301 Gaines Street OWNER/APPLICANT: Betty Ann Simmons PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to convert this vacant 0-3 zoned structure into a beauty shop with seven operators, later expanding to ten. ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS: 1. Site Location The property is located on the southeast corner of West 23rd and Gaines Streets. 2. Compatibility_ with_ Neighborhood This site backs up to a large commercial node with a variety of retail commercial uses. The block on which this property sits forms an 0-3 buffer between that commercial node and the large residential neighborhood extending to the north and west. A beauty shop with up to ten operator stations is a commercial operation of such intensity that it could damage the integrity of that buffer protecting the residential neighborhood. Staff feels that a beauty shop of lesser intensity would perhaps be more appropriate at this location. 3. On -Site Drives_ and Parking The structure in question is approximately 1,200 square feet. Ordinance requirement for parking for a 1,200 square foot beauty shop is six spaces. Realistically though, a beauty shop with 7 to 10 operators and the associated customer traffic will generate the need for more than six parking spaces. The applicant is proposing no on-site parking, but is instead proposing to utilize on -street parking. There are other businesses in the immediate vicinity (23rd and Arch) that utilize on -street parking. It does not appear that their on -street parking extends to this intersection. Marr -h 9, 1993 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Continued) FILE NO.: Z-5651 4. Screening and Buffers There are no screening and buffer requirements. 5. City Engineer_ Comments Off-street parking is required. 6. Utility Comments None as of this writing. 7. Analysis The block on which this property sits forms an 0-3 buffer between a large commercial node and the adjacent residential neighborhood. Allowing a commercial operation of such intensity as is proposed would damage the integrity of that buffer. The lack of on-site parking would require the customers and employees of this proposed use to park on the street and could have a negative impact on the residential neighborhood, which begins directly across Gaines Street and across West 23rd. 8. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends denial of this application. It is felt that a commercial operation of this intensity is inappropriate for this location. The application cannot be supported as submitted. Staff feels that a beauty shop of less intensity, limited to no more than five operator stations, would be a more suitable use of the property. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JANUARY 7, 1993) The applicant was present. Staff presented the item and outlined the concerns noted above. Ms. Simmons addressed the Committee and informed them that she is currently operating a beauty shop located just northeast of this site, across West 23rd Street. She stated that she currently has seven operators and no on-site parking. Staff informed the Committee that there were concerns not only about parking, but also about allowing an intense commercial operation on this 0-3 zoned site. Staff stated that this 2 March 9., 1993 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C C ntinu d FILE NO.: Z-5651 proposal could be supported if it were reduced to a maximum of five operator stations. Ms. Simmons agreed to this proposal. The Committee told Ms. Simmons that if there were no problems created for the neighborhood, perhaps she could come back at a later date (one to two years) and request approval to expand beyond five operator stations. The Committee forwarded this item to the full Commission for final resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 26, 1993) The applicant was present. There were no objectors present. Dana Carney of the Planning staff informed the Commission that an improper notice had been sent and this item needed to be deferred to allow for the proper notice requirement to be met. As part of the Consent Agenda, this item was deferred to the March 9, 1993 Planning Commission meeting. The vote was 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (FEBRUARY 18, 1993) The applicant was not present. Staff informed the Committee that Ms. Simmons had amended her application and was now requesting a beauty shop with five operator stations. The Committee was also informed that staff was recommending approval of this amended application. There being no further discussion, this item was forwarded to the full Commission for final resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 9, 1993) The applicant was not present. There were several objectors present. Dana Carney, of the Planning staff, presented the item. He informed the Commission that the applicant had amended her application to a beauty shop with five operator stations, and that the staff was recommending approval of the amended application. Beverly Jones,of 2222 Gaines Street, addressed the Commission in opposition to the application. She read a lengthy statement concerning various issues of concern to the neighborhood, and urged the Commission not to approve a further commercial encroachment into the residential neighborhood. Among the 3 March 9,4 1993 SDHDIVIS ISI ITEM O.: C Contin ed FILE NO.: Z-5651 various issues raised by Ms. Jones was the lack of on-site parking for the proposed use, and the possible congestion which could be caused by on -street parking. A discussion then followed between the Commission and Ms. Jones concerning the zoning of the property. It was pointed out that there are many byright uses that could use this 0-3 zoned site. Ms. Jones stated that she would prefer the property to remain residential, but she could accept a quiet office use at this location rather than the proposed beauty shop. Wilma Darling then addressed the Commission. She stated she was representing the estate of her deceased aunt, Marie Jones, who owned the property at 2223 Gaines Street and the property where Ms. Simmons' shop is currently located at 620 West 23rd Street. Ms. Darling stated that she was not sure if she was for or against the proposed beauty shop, but is concerned about what her aunt's property will be used for in the future. Delbra Stewart,of 2300 State Street, the president of the Downtown Neighborhood Association, then addressed the Commission in opposition to the proposed beauty shop. She listed several commercial businesses in the immediate vicinity that she felt were having a negative impact on the neighborhood. She also presented a broad list of other issues of concern to the neighborhood. Ms. Stewart stated that the neighborhood needed a buffer between the residential properties and the commercial zoning along Arch Street. Cheryl Nichols,of 1721 Gaines Street,then addressed the Commission. Ms. Nichols stated that she did an architectural survey of this neighborhood several years ago, and came to the conclusion that the area south of West 23rd Street is overzoned. She stated that the area along Arch and Gaines Streets needs to be downzoned or that the Capitol Zoning District needs to be extended south to Roosevelt Road. Ms. Nichols stated that Gaines Street, south of West 23rd Street, is ripe for redevelopment as a residential area and the proposed beauty shop would be detrimental to those efforts. Kathy Wells,of 2121 Gaines Street, Vice President of the Downtown Neighborhood Association, then addressed the Commission. She expressed concern that the Commission be aware of efforts to rehabilitate and revitalize the neighborhood. Ms. Wells stated that this property should be used as residential, and not as commercial. After further discussion, staff suggested to the Commission that the application might be withdrawn. Discussion then followed between the Commission and staff concerning the implication of withdrawing the application. 4 MaFch 9, 1993 �UBDIVTSION e ITEM NO.: C (Continued) FILE NO.: Z-5651 Commissioner Putnam made a motion to withdraw the application. If Ms. Simmons chooses to refile, she might petition the Commission to waive the filing fee but all other elements of the filing would be met, including the property owners' list from an abstract company and the proper notice. The vote was 9 ayes, 1 noe and 1 absent. The item was withdrawn. 5