Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5964 Staff AnalysisFILE Z-5964 DAME: DONAHUE -- SHORT -FORM PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATION: On the north side of Simpson Street, north of the Milburn Lane intersection DEVELOPER: Etq(31 "EER : Ben Rittler, Jr. Ms. Juanita Donahue BEN RITTLER, JR. LAND SURVEYOR 1010 S. Hughes St. 6133 Dena Dr. Little Rock, AR 72204 Little Rock, AR 72206 664-0865 888-3960 AREA: 0.86 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: R-2 REPOSED USES: Multi -Family Residential and Beauty Salon PLANNING DISTRICT: 24 CENSUS TRACT: 40.01 VARIANCES REQUESTED: Approval of a waiver of the requirement to construct a sidewalk along the street frontage of the site is requested. STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes a Planned Residential Development to develop the 0.86 acre site to include the construction of a 4 -unit multi -family building and a beauty salon building. The multi -family building is proposed to be a single -story facility with four 1,580 square foot dwelling units, with a total square footage of 6,320 square feet. The beauty shop building is proposed to be 1,364 square feet. Parking for 12 vehicles is proposed for the multi -family units; parking for 6 persons is proposed for the beauty shop. The applicant proposes that employees of the beauty shop are to be the residents of the multi -family units to provide affordable housing for these employees, and to provide work in close proximity to their residence and to area child care. No improvements to the street bordering the site and no sidewalk construction are proposed. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Review by the Planning Commission and a recommendation for approval by the Board of Directors for establishment of the PRD is requested. Approval of a waiver of the requirement to construct a sidewalk along the Simpson St. frontage of the site is requested. FILE NO. Z- 4(Cont B. EXT TING CONDITION $: The site is vacant. It has been cleared of most trees. The site is zoned R-2, with R-2 zoned property on all sides. There is a church located on the property immediately to the east, and a single-family residence stands immediately to the east of the tract. C. ENGINEERING/UTILITY COMMENTS: Public Works comments: 1) The driveways are not in conformance with the Ordinance. Only one driveway is allowed per 300 feet of street frontage. A concrete apron will be required within the right-of-way. 2) A sidewalk will be required to --be constructed along the_ street frontage of the site. 3) A stormwater detention analysis may be required. A grading permit will be required. Water Works had no comments on this item. Wastewater comments that sewer is available. Arkansas Power and Light Co. provided no comments. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. provided no comments. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. provided no comments.._ The Fire Department approved the submittal without comment. D. ISSUES LEGAL TECHNICAL DESIG : Landscape review comments that the required buffer width south of the proposed parking lot is 7 1/2 feet (The minimum requirement with allowed transfers is 6 feet.) The Landscape Ordinance requirement is 6 feet. The plan submitted provides from zero to 4 feet. A 6 foot high opaque screen is required along the northern and western site perimeters. This screen may be a wooden fence with its face directed outward or be dense evergreen planting. A 3 foot wide building landscape strip between the public parking areas and the buildings is required. If a dumpster is to be used, its location should be identified and then be screened on 3 sides with an 8 foot high opaque wood fence or wall. 2 FILE N Z-5964 C n . Sec. 36-452(1)b. permits incidental commercial and office uses in a PRD. Beauty shops are conditional or accessory uses in the three office zoning districts. Parking for office uses is to be one space for each 400 square feet of floor area; for commercial uses, one for each 300 square feet of gross floor area; and, for multi -family residential uses, 1.5 spaces per dwelling. The Planning Division comments that the proposed development is in the College Station District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends single family uses for the area. A Planned Residential District with primarily a residential character and "incidental" non-residential uses may be compatible in the area. E. ANALYSIS• The mixture of residential and "office"/beauty shop uses is appropriate in a PRD, since the non-residential use -is "incidental" to the primary residential use of the property. The access to the off-street parking areas will need to be re -designed to provide the single access point to the site. Simpson St. is a recently completed CDBG-funded street project. When Simpson St. was constructed, no sidewalks were provided. There is scattered development in the area, with a great deal of vacant property. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the PRD, and the Planning Staff recommends approval of the waiver of the sidewalk requirement for the Simpson Rd. frontage of the property. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MARCH 16, 1995) Ms. Juanita Donahue, the applicant, and Mr. Ben Kittler, the project surveyor, were present. Staff outlined the proposed development and reviewed with Ms. Donahue and Mr. Kittler the various comments contained in the discussion outline. Ms. Donahue said that the size of the proposed beauty shop would be reduced by one-half in order for the beauty shop use to be secondary, or "incidental" to the residential use of the property. Mr. Kittler reported that the original plan included purchasing the church property to the east, and that the site plan included this area. A revised site plan would be provided, he said, to eliminate the church site. The Committee confirmed with the applicant that all staff comments would be addressed, then forwarded the item to the full Commission for the public hearing. tI FILE N Z-5264 . PLANNING COMM-155IONACTION: (APRIL 4, 1995) Staff outlined the proposal, indicating that the applicant was applying for a planned development in order to construct a 4-plex and a 1300 square foot beauty shop, and that the applicant is requesting a wavier of the requirement to construct a sidewalk along the Simpson St. frontage of the site. Ms. Linda Parham, identifying herself as residing a block and a half from the proposed development site, spoke in opposition to the proposed development. She said that the area where the proposed development is to be located is totally single-family in character, and that the proposed development would increase vehicle and pedestrian traffic. She expressed concern that the development would cause an in crease in drug traffic, relating that just a few blocks away is an apartment project which has a substantial drug problem and much violence. She related that her family had sold the property to Ms. Donahue, and that the sale had been with the understanding that Ms. Donahue would build a beauty shop and a duplex. Mr. Ben Kittler, representing Ms. Donahue, said that Ms. Donahue is a disabled school teacher, and that she proposed to construct the 4-plex and beauty shop as a means of providing employment to local young persons and a nice home for persons who would be working in the beauty shop. She is, he said, to be the manager of the beauty shop, and that her daughter, who is a beautician, would operate the shop and live in one of the units. He said that the hours of operation would be form 10:00 AM to 9:00 PM, Tuesdays through Saturdays. He said that the entire site would be fenced; there would be a security system in the beauty shop; and, that the site would be monitored by Ms. Donahue's daughter. Commissioner Willis asked for clarification on the signage proposed and on the number of off-street parking spaces. Mr. Kittler replied that whatever signage is permitted in the office zoning district would be agreeable, and that he would re- design the site to eliminate one of the curb cuts and provide the necessary off-street parking. Staff pointed out that, in lieu of the site plan showing one single lot containing both the apartments and beauty shop, the site plan could be amended to show splitting the site into two lots, one for each of the uses. This, staff explained, would permit the two driveways off Simpson St., one for the apartment use area and one for the beauty shop use. Commissioner Adcock asked for clarification on the rationale for the Planning staff's recommendation for approval of the waiver of the sidewalk requirement. 4 FILE NO_; Z- 4 (C n ) Staff explained that streets in the area had recently been constructed with curb and gutter by the City thorough the Block Grant program, and that a sidewalk had been constructed along Simpson St. on the south side of the street; that, if the applicant were required to construct a sidewalk in front of her property on the north side of Simpson St., the length of sidewalk would be the only sidewalk on that side of the street and the sidewalk would not extend beyond the boundary of the applicant's property. Commissioner McCarthy asked for clarification on the number of employees of the beauty shop, to which Mr. Kittler responded that there would be six. Commissioner McCarthy then observed that five parking spaces are shown, with six employees being proposed, to which Mr. Kittler responded that the employees would be living and parking in the adjoining apartments; that the five parking spaces would be for clients. Commissioner McCarthy pointed out, though, that six operators are proposed to be employed, and that each operator would have one client with home she would_be_____ working and one client waiting. Chairperson Walker inquired of the Commission members if it was the desire of the Commission to deal with the incomplete site plan and permit the applicant and staff to "flesh -out" the details prior to the item being heard by the Board of Directors, or whether it should be deferred to permit the applicant to present an amended application to the full Commission. A motion was made and seconded to defer the item until the May 16, 1995 Commission meeting, and the motion carried with the vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions, and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 16, 1995) Staff reported that all issues had been resolved; that the applicant had submitted a revised site plan which addressed the parking concerns expressed at the April 4, 1995 Commission hearing. Staff reported that Public Works was in support of the requested waiver of the sidewalk along the Simpson St. frontage. Staff recommended approval of the PRD and of the requested waiver. The item was included on the Consent Agenda for approval, and was approved with the approval of the Consent Agenda with the vote of 11 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions, and 0 absent. 67 FILE NO.• Z-5 4 NAME: DONAHUE -- SHORT -FORM PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATION: On the north side of Simpson Street, north of the Milburn Lane intersection DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: Ben Kittler, Jr. Ms. Juanita Donahue BEN KITTLER, JR. LAND SURVEYOR 1010 S. Hughes St. 6133 Dena Dr. Little Rock, AR 72204 Little Rock, AR 72206 664-0865 888-3960 AREA: 0.86 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW -STREET: 0 ZONING: R-2 REPOSED USES: Multi -Family Residential and Beauty Salon PLANNING DISTRICT: 24 CENSUS TRACT• 40.01 VARIANCES REQUESTED: Approval of a waiver of the requirement to construct a sidewalk along the street frontage of the site is requested. STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes a Planned Residential Development to develop the 0.86 acre site to include the construction of a 4 -unit multi -family building and a beauty salon building. The multi -family building is proposed to be a single -story facility with four 1,580 square foot dwelling units, with a total square footage of 6,320 square feet. The beauty shop building is proposed to be 1,364 square feet. Parking for 12 vehicles is proposed for the multi -family units; parking for 6 persons is proposed for the beauty shop. The applicant proposes that employees of the beauty shop are to be the residents of the multi -family units to provide affordable housing for these employees, and to provide work in close proximity to their residence and to area child care. No improvements to the street bordering the site and no sidewalk construction are proposed. A. PROPOSAL RE EST: Review by the Planning Commission and a recommendation for approval by the Board of Directors for establishment of the PRD is requested. Approval of a waiver of the requirement to construct a sidewalk along the Simpson St. frontage of the site is requested. FILE NO.: Z-5964 Con B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is vacant. It has been cleared of most trees. The site is zoned R-2, with R-2 zoned property on all sides. There is a church located on the property immediately to the east, and a single-family residence stands immediately to the east of the tract. C. ENGINEERING UTILITY COMMENTS: Public Works comments: 1) The driveways are not in conformance with the Ordinance. Only one driveway is allowed per 300 feet of street frontage. A concrete apron will be required within the right-of-way. 2) A sidewalk will be required to be constructed along the street frontage of the site. 3) A stormwater detention analysis may be required. A grading permit will be required. Water Works had no comments on this item. Wastewater comments that sewer is available. Arkansas Power and Light Co. provided no comments. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. provided no comments. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. provided no comments. The Fire Department approved the submittal without comment. D. ISSUES I LEGAL TECHNICAL DESIGN: Landscape review comments that the required buffer width south of the proposed parking lot is 7 1/2 feet (The minimum requirement with allowed transfers is 6 feet.) The Landscape Ordinance requirement is 6 feet. The plan submitted provides from zero to 4 feet. A 6 foot high opaque screen is required along the northern and western site perimeters. This screen may be a wooden fence with its face directed outward or be dense evergreen planting. A 3 foot wide building landscape strip between the public parking areas and the buildings is required. If a dumpster is to be used, its location should be identified and then be screened on 3 sides with an 8 foot high opaque wood fence or wall. 2 FILE NO.: Z-5964 Cont.) Sec. 36-452(1)b. permits incidental commercial and.office uses in a PRD. Beauty shops are conditional or accessory uses in the three office zoning districts. Parking for office uses is to be one space for each 400 square feet of floor area; for commercial uses, one for each 300 square feet of gross floor area; and, for multi -family residential uses, 1.5 spaces per dwelling. The Planning Division comments that the proposed development is in the College Station District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends single family uses for the area. A Planned Residential District with primarily a residential character and "incidental" non-residential uses may be compatible in the area. E_ ANALYSIS• The mixture of residential and "office"/beauty shop uses is appropriate in a PRD, since the non-residential use is "incidental" to the primary residential use of the property. The access to the off-street parking areas will need to be re -designed to provide the single access point to the site. Simpson St. is a recently completed CDBG-funded street project. When Simpson St. was constructed, no sidewalks were provided. There is scattered development in the area, with a great deal of vacant property. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the PRD, and the Planning Staff recommends approval of the waiver of the sidewalk requirement for the Simpson Rd. frontage of the property. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MARCH 16, 1995) Ms. Juanita Donahue, the applicant, and Mr. Ben Kittler, the project surveyor, were present. Staff outlined the proposed development and reviewed with Ms. Donahue and Mr. Kittler the various comments contained in the discussion outline. Ms. Donahue said that the size of the proposed beauty shop would be reduced by one-half in order for the beauty shop use to be secondary, or "incidental" to the residential use of the property. Mr. Kittler reported that the original plan included purchasing the church property to the east, and that the site plan included this area. A revised site plan would be provided, he said, to eliminate the church site. The Committee confirmed with the applicant that all staff comments would be addressed, then forwarded the item to the full Commission for the public hearing. 3 FILE NO.: Z-5264 (Cont. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 4, 1995) Staff outlined the proposal, indicating that the applicant was applying for a planned development in order to construct a 4-plex and a 1300 square foot beauty shop, and that the applicant is requesting a wavier of the requirement to construct a sidewalk along the Simpson St. frontage of the site. Ms. Linda Parham, identifying herself as residing a block and a half from the proposed development site, spoke in opposition to the proposed development. She said that the area where the proposed development is to be located is totally single-family in character, and that the proposed development would increase vehicle and pedestrian traffic. She expressed concern that the development would cause an in crease in drug traffic, relating that just a few blocks away is an apartment project which has a substantial drug problem and much violence. She related that her family had sold the property to Ms. Donahue, and that the sale had been with the understanding that Ms. Donahue would build a beauty shop and a duplex. Mr. Hen Kittler, representing Ms. Donahue, said that Ms. Donahue is a disabled school teacher, and that she proposed to construct the 4-plex and beauty shop as a means of providing employment to local young persons and a nice home for persons who would be working in the beauty shop. She is, he said, to be the manager of the beauty shop, and that her daughter, who is a beautician, would operate the shop and live in one of the units. He said that the hours of operation would be form 10:00 AM to 9:00 PM, Tuesdays through Saturdays. He said that the entire site would be fenced; there would be a security system in the beauty shop; and, that the site would be monitored by Ms. Donahue's daughter. Commissioner Willis asked for clarification on the signage proposed and on the number of off-street parking spaces. Mr. Kittler replied that whatever signage is permitted in the office zoning district would be agreeable, and that he would re- design the site to eliminate one of the curb cuts and provide the necessary off-street parking. Staff pointed out that, in lieu of the site plan showing one single lot containing both the apartments and beauty shop, the site plan could be amended to show splitting the site into two lots, one for each of the uses. This, staff explained, would permit the two driveways off Simpson St., one for the apartment use area and one for the beauty shop use. Commissioner Adcock asked for clarification on the rationale for the Planning staff's recommendation for approval of the waiver of the sidewalk requirement. 4 FILE NO._; Z-5964 Cont. Staff explained that streets in the area had recently been constructed with curb and gutter by the City thorough the Block Grant program, and that a sidewalk had been constructed along Simpson St. on the south side of the street; that, if the applicant were required to construct a sidewalk in front of her property on the north side of Simpson St., the length of sidewalk would be the only sidewalk on that side of the street and the sidewalk would not extend beyond the boundary of the applicant's property. Commissioner McCarthy asked for clarification on the number of employees of the beauty shop, to which Mr. Kittler responded that there would be six. Commissioner McCarthy then observed that five parking spaces are shown, with six employees being proposed, to which Mr. Kittler responded that the employees would be living and parking in the adjoining apartments; that the five parking spaces would be for clients. Commissioner McCarthy pointed out, though, that six operators are proposed to be employed, and that each operator would have one client with home she would be working and one client waiting. Chairperson Walker inquired of the Commission members if it was the desire of the Commission to deal with the incomplete site plan and permit the applicant and staff to "flesh -out" the details prior to the item being heard by the Board of Directors, or whether it should be deferred to permit the applicant to present an amended application to the full Commission. A motion was made and seconded to defer the item until the May 16, 1995 Commission meeting, and the motion carried with the vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions, and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 16, 1995) Staff reported that all issues had been resolved; that the applicant had submitted a revised site plan which addressed the parking concerns expressed at the April 4, 1995 Commission hearing. Staff reported that Public Works was in support of the requested waiver of the sidewalk along the Simpson St. frontage. Staff recommended approval of the PRD and of the requested waiver. The item was included on the Consent Agenda for approval, and was approved with the approval of the Consent Agenda with the vote of 11 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions, and 0 absent. 5