HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6175-A Staff AnalysisMay 11, 2000
ITEM NO.: 27 FILE NO.: Z -6175-A
NAME: Hall Day Care - Revised Conditional Use
Permit
LOCATION: 2723-2725 South Broadway
OWNER/APPLICANT: Bobby & Carol Hall
PROPOSAL: To revise an existing conditional use
permit to increase the capacity of an
existing day care from 20 to 34 children,
located a 2723-2725 South Broadway, on
property zoned R-3, Single Family
Residential.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1. SITE LOCATION:
This existing day care site is located on the east
side of South Broadway near the intersection with 28th
Street.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This site is zoned R-3, Single Family Residential, and
is surrounded by properties zoned R-3 and R-4, Two
Family Residential. This is a well established
neighborhood of one and two family residences.
The original day care had a capacity of 20 children
and Staff believed that could be compatible with the
neighborhood. The proposed new capacity is 34
children. Staff believes that number would overload
the site and no longer be compatible with the
neighborhood because of increased noise, activity and
traffic.
The Meadowbrook Neighborhood Association was notified
of the public hearing.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
This site has two driveways from South Broadway since
each side of the original duplex had a driveway. The
applicant has widened both driveways so that two cars
can park side by side on each driveway. These areas
May 11, 2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 27 (Cont.
FILE NO.: Z -6175-A
are intended to be child drop off areas with
additional parking for two employees behind the house
and next door on the owners property if needed.
Thirty-four children and three staff members would
generate a requirement for six parking spaces. Those
are shown on the site plan. The applicant has also
added to the over all site plan three parking spaces
on his property immediately to the north.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
A six foot screen must be installed south of the
employee parking area.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
a. Driveways shall conform to Sec. 31-210 or Ordinance
18,031 (Close one driveway).
b. Property frontage needs to have the sidewalks and
ramps brought up to the current ADA standards.
c. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk
that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to
occupancy.
d. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted
for approval prior to start of work.
e. Revise parking plan for customers and employees.
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT.AND CATA COMMENTS:
No objections.
7. STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has requested a revision to an existing
conditional use permit to raise the capacity of his
day care center from 20 to 34 children. To qualify for
the higher capacity, two more on site parking spaces
were added. The hours would remain from 6:30 a.m. to
5:45 p.m., Monday -Friday.
Staff has concerns that this proposed increase in
capacity would overload the site due to the increased
activity, noise and traffic, and therefore, have a
negative impact on the neighborhood. This larger number
of children moves the operation into a more commercial
K
May 11, 2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 27 (Cont.)
FILE NO.: Z -6175-A
level of operation and changes requirements and related
impacts.
The lots in this area are narrow, resulting in the
houses being close together. Side yards are very
small. Staff believes that for those reasons the
larger operation would be more likely to have a•
negative impact from the increased activity and
associated noise. The widened front driveways to
accommodate the increased capacity will increase the
number of cars backing out into South Broadway very
close to the intersection with 28th Street. Public
Works believes that would be an undesirable situation
at best, and possibly a dangerous situation at times.
Based on the above comments, Staff believes the
increased capacity would cause the site to have an
adverse impact on this neighborhood.
8. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the increase in capacity of
children from 20 to 34.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS: (APRIL 20, 2000)
Bobby Hall was present representing his application. Staff
gave a brief description of the proposal.
Public Works reviewed their comments and expressed their
concern about the parking arrangement which forces cars to
have to back out into Broadway. They stated they would prefer
the.front parking area be turned 90 degrees and have one
access onto Broadway constructed in a way that allows cars to
pull out, not back out.
Mr. Hall stated he did not feel the parking exiting would be a
problem because of the low volume of traffic on this part of
South Broadway, and so he wanted to -leave the parking as shown
on the site plan.
Staff also reviewed the additional screening that would be
required from the residence to the south.
3
May 11, 2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 27 (Cont.)
FILE NO.: Z -6175-A
There being no further issues, the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for
final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(MAY 11, 2000)
Bobby Hall was present representing his application. There
were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item
with a recommendation for denial based on the belief that the
proposed increase in capacity would overload the site due to
the increased activity, noise and traffic. Therefore, Staff
felt the proposed increase would have a negative impact on the
neighborhood.
Mr. Hall commented that this use would not be incompatible
with the neighborhood, nor have any adverse impact on the
neighborhood. He stated that because of the location of this
site near the end of South Broadway, the traffic is not
through traffic, is very light and mainly only the residents
who live there. Therefore, he felt that there would not be any
problem caused by traffic to his site. He also disagreed that
there would be any noticeable increase in noise from the added
children, and that the times of operation correspond with
times the nearby neighbors are at work. So even if there was
some noise during recess, the neighbors won't be there to hear
it. He mentioned that he had never received any complaints,
nor was he aware of any problems because of his daycare. He
also referred to the letter from the Meadowbrook Neighborhood
Association which endorsed the proposal. He added that he felt
his daycare had improved the neighborhood because he purchased
a run down house, turned it into an attractive facility, and a
daycare to serve the people in the neighborhood. He stated he
has people on a waiting list to use the facility, which shows
the increase in capacity is also wanted by the neighborhood.
Commissioner Earnest commented that he didn't see negative
impacts in this situation and would support the proposal.
Commissioner Berry acknowledged the
comments and conclusions. He added
be evaluated on its own merits and
neighborhood. He agreed that in som
4
reasoning behind the Staff
that each situation has to
on the reaction of the
e locations this size of
May 11, 2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 27 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6175-A
operation could have negative impacts on a neighborhood.
However, based on the particulars of this location, and the
lack of neighborhood opposition, he could support this
particular proposal.
A motion was made to approve the application as submitted with
the requirement to complete the six foot privacy fence on the
south side of the property from the existing fence west to the
back edge of the house. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes,
0 nays, 2 absent, and 1 open position.
5