Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5987-A Staff AnalysisFebruary 20, 1997 ITEM NO.: B Z -5987-A Owner: Janis Morehart Morrow Applicant: Janis Morehart Morrow Location: 10420 Helm Drive Request: Rezone from R-2 to PD -C Purpose: Inside Auto Repair Size: .23 acres Existing Use: vacant building (formerly used as service station) A. PROPOSAL: A single use PD -C to accommodate an inside auto repair business utilizing an existing building on-site. B. BACKGROUND: The property has a history of commercial use which predates annexation. When the property was annexed, it was zoned R-2 and any nonresidential use occupying the site was rendered nonconforming. The C-4 nonconforming status was lost when the last legal permitted occupancy by an auto repair business closed in 1992. In 1995, in response to enforcement action by the City, the applicant attempted to have the property zoned C-4. The Planning Commission voted to approve the C-4 request on May 30, 1995. Staff had recommended denial. On July 18, 1995, the Board of Directors denied the C-4 request. The applicant then appealed that denial to the courts she was unsuccessful in having the Board's action reversed and has exhausted her legal remedies. The applicant filed an identical C-4 rezoning application. This has now been converted to a PD -C request. C. DEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS: In their September 12, 1996 meeting, the Planning Commission indicated that this item should be converted from a straight rezoning to a Planned Development. They also indicated that the proposal did not need be reviewed by the Subdivision Committee. Staff offers the following conditions for this proposed PD -C. February 20, 1997 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B Z -5987-A Cont. Public Works Master Street Plan right-of-way including radial dedication at intersection. With construction a contribution to the widening of the adjacent streets is required by the Boundary Street Ordinance. • Both Helm and Mabelvale are substandard streets and will require widening to 1/2 of 36 foot commercial street section with sidewalk. • Stormwater detention analysis will be required if impervious area is increased by 500 square feet. + Provide status of underground storage tanks before construction permit. + A grading permit for special flood hazard and a development permit are required. ■ Contact ADPC&E for approval prior to starting work. Planning Prior to the item being heard by the City Board, the following items need to be provided on an engineered site plan exhibit. • Signage and lighting plan ■ Paved off-street parking per ordinance ■ Hours of operation • Landscaping plan per ordinance ■ Location and dimensions of all structures a No outside auto repair, vehicle or parts storage, or auto sales is permitted. D. LAND USE ELEMENT The site is located in the Geyer Springs West District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Mixed Office Commercial. If the zoning is not Office, the Plan recommends mixed and/or Planned Development Process. E. STAFF ANALYSIS The property is located in the block bounded by Helm Drive on the south and east, Mabelvale Main on the west and Mabelvale Pike on the north. Most of the properties within this block are still residential, either occupied by a residence or vacant R-2 zoned lots. The C-4 zoned lot adjacent to the north is 2 February 20, 1997 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B Z -5987-A (Cont. vacant. A small, R-2 zoned, nonconforming grocery store is located at the northeast corner of Helm Drive and Mabelvale Main. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION DENIAL of the PD -C request. The proposal is not compatible with the surrounding land uses. If the rezoning is approved, it is subject to the conditions outlined in paragraph C of this report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 12, 1996) Janis Morrow and Herb Wright were present representing the application. There was one objector present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of denial. Mr. Wright addressed the Commission and gave a brief history of the site. He discussed the previous occupancy of the site by several auto related uses and spoke of the past attempt to have the property rezoned. Mr. Wright stated that his client was advised in 1993 that the property was zoned C-4 and had spent money improving the site before being advised that the property was actually zoned R-2. He described other nonresidential uses in the area and asked the Commission to approve the request. Kay Nutt, of 10400 Helm Drive, addressed the Commission in opposition to the rezoning. She stated that the previous use of the property as an auto sales lot was "junky and noisy". Commissioner Adcock asked why the agenda indicated the purpose of the rezoning as "unspecified commercial use". Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, responded that the application did not identify any specific proposed use for the site. Commissioner Adcock asked if the C-4 request, as filed, would allow any use permitted in the C-4 district. Mr. Carney responded that it would. Jim Lawson, Director of Planning and Development, commented that an enclosed retail or office use might be appropriate for the site but that outside uses permitted by C-4 zoning were not. In response to a question from the Commission, Mr. Lawson stated that the Codes Enforcement staff had misinterpreted the zoning map and had incorrectly identified this site as being zoned C-4. Mr. Wright stated that the proposed use of the site was an auto repair garage with occasional car sales. He stated 3 February 20, 1997 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B Z -5987-A Cont. that the building on the site had a garage bay and a vehicle lift. Janis Morrow stated that she was trying to obtain the C-4 zoning to accommodate the present tenant of the building. Commissioner Putnam asked if the tenant could operate the business within the building. Ms. Morrow responded that the tenant needed outside display area for auto sales. After a discussion of various options for the site, Commissioner Putnam asked if the applicant could accept C-3 zoning. Ms. Morrow responded that she could. Commissioner Rahman asked how many parking spaces were on the site. The applicant responded that parking spaces as such are not designated on the property but that there was space for approximately 12 cars. Commissioner Adcock asked how any commercial zoning for the site fit within the Land Use Plan. Mr. Lawson responded that the Plan showed Mixed Office and Commercial for the site and that staff could support a Planned Development which permitted C-1 uses. Kay Nutt stated that she had to live with whatever commercial use goes on the property whereas the people working in the business would leave to go home each day. Commissioner Hawn told Ms. Nutt that the Commission was looking at a zoning that prohibited outside display. Ms. Nutt stated that she would prefer use of the property to be limited to office. Mr. Carney commented that C-1 zoning did not permit auto related uses. Commissioner Putnam asked if there was not the potential for a lawsuit since the City had erroneously informed the applicant that the property was zoned C-4. Mr. Lawson stated that he would rather face the prospect of a lawsuit than rezone the property in violation of the Land Use Plan. Cindy Dawson, of the City Attorney's Office, commented that a Planned Development permitting C-1 and perhaps office uses would not deprive the applicant of the use of her property. Mr. Lawson stated that staff was not comfortable with permitting an auto repair garage on the site at this time. Mr. Wright stated that the building is basically only a mechanic's bay with a 250 square foot office and, as such, was not usable as only office space. He stated that he could accept C-3 zoning. 4 February 20, 1997 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B Z -5987-A Cont. In response to a question from Ms. Dawson, Ms. Morrow stated that she was unfamiliar with the list of permitted C-1 uses. Commissioner Daniel stated that he could not support the application and recommended that it be deferred. Commissioner Putnam stated that movement of Mabelvale Pike changed the neighborhood. He noted that the site is located near a mainline railroad and pointed out other nonresidential uses in the area. In response to a question from Commissioner Adcock, Mr. Lawson discussed why the Plan recommends MOC for the site. Ms. Morrow stated that those commissioners who have been to the site would agree that the property is located in a commercial area. Mr. Wright then stated that the application was amended to a C-3 request. Mr. Lawson stated that the area is changing but that there are still residential uses in the area. He stated that auto repair is too intense a use for the area. Mr. Lawson stated that, whatever use is proposed, it is important to use the existing building. A straight rezoning, he noted, would allow removal of the building. Mr. Wright stated that he agreed to defer the item and amend the application to a Planned Development. In response to a question from Chairman Woods, Mr. Carney stated that October 24, 1996 was the next scheduled rezoning hearing but that it would not allow for Subdivision Committee review of the Planned Development. During the ensuing discussion, the Commission agreed to bring the item back without requiring Subdivision Committee review. A motion was made to defer the item to the October 24, 1996 Commission meeting and not to require Subdivision Committee review. The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 24, 1996) Herb Wright was present representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had failed to submit sufficient documentation to allow for conversion of the item to a Planned Development and, as such, the item needed to be 5 February 20, 1997 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B Z -5987-A (Cont. that the applicant had failed to submit sufficient documentation to allow for conversion of the item to a Planned Development and, as such, the item needed to be deferred. The applicant had been informed of staff's position and had agreed to the deferral. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for deferral to the November 21, 1996 Commission meeting. The vote was 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 21, 1996) This item was included in the Consent Deferral agenda. Deferral to the January 9, 1997 Planning Commission meeting. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda was passed with 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 9, 1997) This item was included in the Consent Deferral Agenda. Deferral to the February 20, 1997 Planning Commission meeting. A motion to approve the Consent Agenda was passed with 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 20, 1997) Janis Morrow and John Ogles were present representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and gave a brief history of the application, beginning with the September 12, 1996 Commission meeting. It was explained that the attorney who had previously been handling the issue had failed to follow through in a timely manner and Ms. Morrow wished to pursue the application. Mr. Ogles handed out photographs of the site and a map of the area with the subject property highlighted. He offered no additional comments. Ms. Morrow addressed the Commission is support of her application. She stated that the auto repair business that was originally interested in the building had relocated and that she was simply seeking some way to utilize the property. She pointed out that the structure was built as a small service station with a garage bay and that it was not feasible to expect it to be used as a residence. 6 February 20, 1997 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: B _ Z_ 5987-A (Cont.) _ A lengthy discussion then followed concerning whether it was appropriate to approve a Planned Zoning District with uses restricted to C-1 or to rezone the site to C-1. It was discussed that the land use plan supported limited commercial uses and that the C-1 neighborhood commercial district was perhaps appropriate for this small site. In response to a question from the Commission, Ms. Morrow stated that she would accept C-1 zoning for the site. A motion was made to approve C-1 zoning for the property. The motion was approved by a vote of 9 ayes, 2 noes and 0 absent. 7