Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6096-B Staff AnalysisJune 22, 2000 ITEM NO.: 13 FILE NO.: Z -6096-B NAME: Montessori School - Revised Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: 15717 Taylor Loop Road OWNER/APPLICANT: Montessori School PROPOSAL: To revise an existing conditional use permit to add a building containing a gym, small kitchen, and four elementary classrooms; abandon unused utility easements, and increase the maximum capacity of students to 98, on this R-2, Single Family Residential zoned property at 15717 Taylor Loop Road. ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS: 1. SITE LOCATION: The existing school site is located at the southeast corner of Taylor Loop Road and Montgomery Road. 2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: The proposed total site would include 0.62 acres of property zoned R-2, Single Family Residential. It is surrounded by R-2 properties with single family homes to the south, northeast and west. The properties directly across Taylor Loop to the north and adjacent to the east are vacant. The style of the current school building looks like a large house and blends in well with the area. The new proposed metal building unfortunately would not look the same and would have a more institutional look. The school use should remain compatible with the neighborhood, but the building style would not blend in as well. The Westchester/Heatherbrae Neighborhood Association, all property owners within 200 feet, and all residents within 300 feet that could be identified, were notified of the public hearing. June 22, 2000 SUBDIVISIO14 ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) 3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: FILE NO.: Z -6096-B This site contains two existing drives from Taylor Loop Road which form a one way flow and drop off system in the parking lot in front of the building. The applicant wishes to keep those two drives and add one driveway from Montgomery passing in front of the new building and connecting to the existing parking area along Taylor Loop. The new driveway would be used to drop off the elementary children at the new building and still keep a separate area to drop off the kindergarten children at the current building. A small asphalt area with four additional parking spaces would be added in front of the new building. Public Works believes that the two existing drives onto Taylor Loop should be sufficient, and that the driveway in front of the new building connecting to Montgomery should be eliminated. The existing C.U.P. allows the school to have up to 30 kindergarten children with 4 employees, and up to 48 total children from age 3-9. The new building would have 4 elementary classrooms, which are larger than the existing classrooms. Parking for a school is based on 1 space for each employee and each 10 children for kindergarten, and 1 space for each elementary classroom. That would result in a requirement for 13 spaces. Thirteen spaces exist now and 4 new are proposed, which would be 17 total. 4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS: Areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet with ordinance requirements. A six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wood fence with its face side directed outward or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the southern perimeter. 5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: a. Taylor Loop is listed on the Master Street Plan as a collector street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. b. Montgomery Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 P� June 22, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6096-B feet from centerline. c. A 20 foot radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the corner of Taylor Loop and Montgomery Road. d. Provide design of street conforming to "MSP" (Master Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvement to these streets including 5 -foot sidewalks with planned development. e. Driveways shall conform to Sec. 31-210 or Ordinance 18,031. Eliminate one driveway. f. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. g. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. h. Taylor Loop has a 1998 average daily traffic count of 1,400. 6. UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS: Water: No objection. Contact the Water Works if larger and/or additional water meters are needed. Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Southwestern Bell: No comments received. ARKLA: Approved as submitted. Entergy: No comments received. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. CATA: No affect. Site is not on a dedicated bus route. 7. STAFF ANALYSIS: The applicant has requested to amend an existing conditional use permit to add a second building to house a gymnasium and 4 classrooms, with a small paved area in front containing 4 parking spaces. Included in the request is an increase in the maximum capacity to 98 children. The Montessori school has existed on this site since August 1996. In April 1998 the Planning Commission approved an amended C.U.P. to raise the student capacity from 30 to 48. That was requested to be able to continue to school the children into the elementary grades. The requests for increased enrollment have continued resulting in this 3 June 22, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6096-B request for more space and increased capacity to 98 students. The new two-story building would contain a small gymnasium, kitchen, and four classrooms. The application includes a request to abandon some unused utility easements in the middle of the school property and replace them with perimeter easements. The utility companies approved the abandonment, but that request will have to be forwarded to the City Board of Directors for final approval. All siting requirements are met by the proposal. The owner of the property to the southeast has requested that the screening fence adjacent to his property not be required. He wishes the area to be left open so to provide a more open appearance between his house and the new school building, not divided in half by a fence. A waiver or deferral would be required to accommodate the neighbor's request. At the time of this writing, Staff had not received any written confirmation that the resident did not want the screening. The school would maintain a staggered drop off and pick up schedule to minimize traffic congestion. Operating hours are from 7:15 a.m. to about 6 p.m. Monday through Friday. Staff believes the request is a reasonable use of the property and that it should continue to be compatible with the neighborhood. However, we would encourage the applicant to choose exterior finishes that would blend with the neighborhood to the greatest extent possible. The issue of the third driveway will need to be resolved by the Commission since Public Works still opposes it. 8. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit subject to compliance with the following conditions: a. Comply with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances. b. Comply with Public Works Comments with the driveway issue as decided by the Commission. c. All exterior lighting must be low intensity and directed downward and inward to the property and not towards any residential zoned area. 4 June 22, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6096-B If a written request by the neighbor to the immediate south is received stating he does not want a wooden fence screen, between his property and the new church building, then Staff would support that waiver. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS: (JUNE 1, 2000) Dorothy Moffett, school Director, and Roy West were present representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the proposal. Public Works reviewed their comments and a short discussion occurred regarding the driveways. The Committee asked the applicant to meet with Public Works on the issue. The screening fence on the southeast property line was also discussed and the applicant was instructed to obtain a letter from the neighbor about the fence and the Commission would make a final determination. There being no further issues, the Committee accepted the proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 22, 2000) Dorothy Moffett, school Director, and Roy West were present representing the application. There were two registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation for approval subject to compliance with the conditions listed under "Staff Recommendation," paragraph 8 above including the modifications in the balance of this paragraph. Staff noted that the applicant and Public Works had come to an agreement regarding the driveway question and no driveway would be added on Montgomery. In addition, the Commission was informed that Staff had received a letter from the resident adjacent to the southwest corner of the school's property stating that he did not want a screening fence installed between his property and the proposed new school building. Therefore, Staff stated they were in support of the request to waive that screening requirement. The Chair informed the applicant that the Commission was down to eight members present and stated the Commission's policy to offer applicants the opportunity to defer their application 5 June 22, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6096-B since the applicant must obtain positive votes of six of the eight Commissioners present. The applicant chose to proceed. Mrs. Moffett gave a short summary of the school's request and why the additional building was needed. Jim Nettles spoke in opposition. He stated that the heads of the Heatherbrae and Westchester subdivisions and several people in those neighborhoods told him they did not know of this proposed expansion. He also stated that these same people stated they were not notified when the school was first proposed in 1996. He added that according to his measurement, the Dyer's property at 15800 Taylor Loop Road was 185 feet from the original school site and so they should have been notified of each proposal. He continued by stating that the school added a second driveway since the original construction and felt that permission for that addition should have been obtained from the Commission before it occurred. He felt that was a substantial addition to, and violation of, the original permit. He continued by stating his belief that they should have been more involved in the review process and the development of Staff's recommendations. In addition, he stated concerns over the increase to 98 students and the construction of the gymnasium. He felt those two factors would increase traffic on Taylor Loop significantly. He stated concern that the traffic would be turning around in the neighbor's driveways and pulling onto neighbor's lawns. More over, he stated he couldn't understand how the Planning Commission in 1998 could approve an amendment to the original C.U.P. without, as he claimed, even the immediate neighbors being notified and having input. Deanna Rust, who lives across Taylor Loop to the northwest of the existing school, also spoke in opposition. She passed out a picture to the Commission showing the view taken from her house looking towards the site. She asked the Commissioners to imagine how a two story "gymnasium" would look on the lot she showed in the picture. She stated that the proposed structure would clash with the residential nature of the area and that schools lower the property values of residences in the area. She explained the concerns she had when she originally moved to this area because of the current school, and why she moved there anyway. She felt that the older children being added to the school would bring more activity, noise and traffic, especial at night, to the area and drastically disrupt the peaceful pace and nature of this neighborhood. She did not want a two-story gymnasium built across from her house. Chairperson Adcock asked the school representatives why she didn't find the names or letters from the immediate neighbors among the support petition and letters. She also stated that she found e-mail letters in support to be worthless and like a chain C June 22, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6096-B letter. Therefore, she was discounting those letters. She saw only one letter in support from the immediate neighborhood and that person had a student in the school. Mr. West, from the school, pointed out that there were support letters from all three abutting homeowners and the owner across Taylor Loop to the northeast in the group the Chair had. He also brought to the Chair's attention the support petition with 14 names of people from Taylor Loop and Carter Lane. Commissioner Rahman asked Mr. Turner, Director of Public Works, if the school would be required to make street improvements along the two street frontages. Mr. Turner replied that they would. Commissioner Rahman received clarification that the two existing driveways would remain, a driveway would not be added onto Montgomery, that the new building was about 5200 square feet, the existing building was about 3800 square feet, and that the property size was about 0.63 acres. He then asked how Staff could support the increase in student capacity of what he saw as a commercial business use, and he had a problem with the analysis that Staff had provided. He added that if the school had outgrown its original authorized space it should move, that the scale was out of proportion, and that the application didn't have any merit. Staff was not given the opportunity to respond and explain its analysis. Commissioner Muse stated that he believed that a healthy neighborhood has an elementary school, usually public, this one happens to be private. He then asked about the exterior of the building. Mr. West stated that the original proposal was brick and Dry -Vit with a metal roof, but that they would be willing to make changes to have it look more like a home. Commissioner Muse stated he would support the proposal if the exterior surface and landscaping were made to blend in with the neighborhood. Mr. West stated they would be glad to do that and that they did already intend to use a shingle roof, not a metal surface roof. Commissioner Lowry received clarification that the school currently has 48 students, their full authorized capacity, and that they wanted to raise that maximum capacity to 98, but they do not have 98 enrolled. He asked Mr. West if he didn't believe that increase would impact the neighborhood. Mr. West said he didn't believe that it would because of the staggered drop-off times they used to prevent traffic problems, and that even the noise from the playground is minimal at a Montessori school because of the discipline. Commissioner Nunnley agreed with Commissioner Rahman about the size and asked at what point do we say enough is enough. This started as a small school of 30, went to 48, and now they are asking for 98. He wondered at what point does the Commission say it is time for them to move. He didn't see this as being an asset to the neighborhood. 7 June 22, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6096-B Commissioner Berry stated that schools do go with neighborhoods and that there are many public schools of a much greater scale in residential neighborhoods along collector streets such as Taylor Loop. He added that this is not in the heart of a residential neighborhood and that schools in neighborhoods are part of city life. He also did not agree that the proposed site was over developed. He said that was looked at during the review by the Subdivision Committee and he felt this was probably an ideal site for a school and the size was fine. He also pointed out that the neighbor most impacted by the new building, the one living immediately next to it, not only supported the expansion, but didn't even want a screening fence installed. He continued that if expanding schools aren't located in growing neighborhoods then where do you want them to be. He stated that a school of 98 students is not a large school compared to many of the public schools in Little Rock neighborhoods. He concluded by stating he supported the proposal. He then asked where Mr. Nettles and Ms. Rust lived in relation to the site. It was noted that Mr. Nettles was speaking for Mrs. Dyer and her house was identified along with Ms. Rust's house, to the north, northwest of the school. A motion was made to approve the application as submitted to include staff comments and recommendations. Commissioner Nunnley asked that Commissioner Berry be allowed to finish a point he was trying to make earlier when he was shouted down. He wanted to hear that point. Commissioner Nunnley said that he realized that this was a touchy issue and that he didn't want the Commission to rush to a vote because the hour was late. Chair Adcock called the question and the vote. The motion failed by a vote of 3 ayes, 4 nays, Commissioner Nunnley abstained, and 3 absent. Mr. Lawson, Director of Planning and Development asked that the record reflect that he was not allowed to speak regarding this issue, particularly with regard to Commissioner Rahman's questions regarding Staff's analysis and recommendation. 8