Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6481-D Staff AnalysisNAME: Breshears Revised Short -form PD -C LOCATION: Located at 600 N. Tyler Street DEVELOPER: Nancy Johnson Poncho's Villa Restaurant 600 North Tyler Street Little Rock, AR 72205 ENGINEER: Donald Brooks Surveying 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.14 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 CURRENT ZONING- PD -C FT. NEW STREET: 0 ALLOWED USES: Restaurant with a mixture of 36 seats; a catering -commercial use; C-1 permitted uses. PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD -C PROPOSED USE: Revision to the PCD to allow extended hours of operation and allow additional seating within the existing building VARIANCESMAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On September 15, 1998, the City of Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,820, rezoning the site from R-3, Single-family to PD -C. Ordinance No. 17,821, which was also approved on September 15, 1998, deferred the right-of-way dedication on Tyler Street and Woodlawn Avenue for five years. The approved PD -C allowed the continuing use of the building as a deli/restaurant with seating for a maximum of 36 persons, allowing seating on a proposed 20 foot by 17 foot deck with proper screening and no outside speakers. C-1 permitted uses were FILE NO.: Z -6481-D (Cont. approved as alternative uses. The hours of operation were from 11:00 am to 6:30 pm Monday through Saturday. On February 16, 1999, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,933, approving two (2) minor revisions to the previously approved PD -C. The applicant was allowed to add "catering -commercial" as a permitted use of the property, in conjunction with the approved restaurant use. The applicant indicated there would be no expansion of the existing kitchen facility or additional employees required. There would also be no changes to the previously approved site plan. The applicant also requested a modification to the hours of operation. The applicant requested the daily hours of operation to be 10:30 am to 6:30 pm, Monday through Saturday. The applicant indicated the delivery vehicle for the catering operation would be a mini -van, the restaurant owner/manager's personal vehicle, which he would drive to the restaurant daily. On May 17, 2001, staff approved a revision to the hours of operation allowing a restaurant to be open from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm. The applicant proposed to revise the previously approved PD -C and was scheduled to be heard before the Little Rock Planning Commission on February 20, 2003. The applicant withdrew his request prior to the Public Hearing. The request was to allow construction of a second structure on the site near the western property line adjacent to the alley. The applicant proposed to use the building as a contractor's storage shed. The applicant was not proposing any plumbing to be located in the storage building. On April 4, 2003, staff rescinded their approval of the extended hours of operation. On June 12, 2003, the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to extend the hours of operation for the site. The requested hours for the site were to be as approved at staff level on May 17, 2001. The applicant proposed the hours of operation to be from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm, Monday through Saturday. The applicant indicated all other terms of the PD -C would remain in effect. The applicant appealed the Planning Commission's recommendation of denial to the Board of Directors. The Little Rock Board of Directors also denied this request at their July 15, 2003, public hearing. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant now proposes to revise the previously approved PD -C to allow the hours of operation to be extended and to increase the number of allowable seats. The applicant is requesting the closing hour to be extended from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm remaining Monday through Saturday. The applicant is also requesting to increase the number of seats from 36 seats to 56 seats. Poncho's Villa Restaurant is the current lessor of the property. The applicant has indicated the property was formerly occupied by Cafe Percito, which according to the applicant operated from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm. The applicant has indicated the hours of operation were curtailed and the applicant is trying to avoid being penalized for the conduct of the previous operator. The applicant states to their 2 FILE NO.: Z -6481-D Cont. understanding, the primary complaints against Cafe Percito were noise, alcohol, condition of the structure, live music and entertainment, outside speakers with amplified noise, drunken late-night encounters, and late -hour parties. The applicant has indicated these problems have been eliminated and will not be permitted to exist in the future. The applicant states Poncho's does not serve beer or alcohol and will not permit them to be brought on the premises. The applicant states Poncho's Villa Restaurant's desire is to fill a legitimate need in the neighborhood. The applicant has indicated restaurants in residential neighborhoods have not been uncommon for many years in the Heights and Hillcrest areas. Repairs to the building were conducted by the applicant to "bring the building up to code". The applicant has also indicated they will police the area daily to remove any litter and they will encourage customers to not park in areas that will interfere with the residents parking. The applicant states discussions have taken place with the school located across North Tyler Street and a near -by church to allow customers to utilize their parking facilities when there are not activities taking place at each of these facilities. The applicant has indicated the Bill of Assurance is outdated and does not prohibit the use of the site as proposed. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a one-story 1,373 square foot frame commercial building with a 16 foot by 10 foot deck on the rear corner. There are single-family residences to the north, west and south. Fairpark Elementary School is located to the east, across Tyler Street. There is a church located one block west of the site on the corner of Taylor, Polk and Woodlawn Streets. There is an existing wood fence running approximately %2 the distance of the north property line. Woodlawn Street has been constructed with curb and gutter but no sidewalk adjacent to the site. Tyler Street has not been constructed to Master Street Plan Standards and has open ditches for drainage. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls many indicating opposition and many indicating support from area residents. The Hillcrest Residents Associations was notified of the public hearing along with all property owners located within 200 -feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 -feet of the site. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. Per City of Little Rock Ordinance No. 17821 passed on September 15, 1998, a 5 -year deferral was granted to this property for dedication of 5 feet of 3 FILE NO.: Z -6481-D (Cont.) right-of-way on Tyler Street and Woodlawn Avenue, including a 20 feet radial dedication at intersection. Since 5 years has passed, the right-of-way must be dedicated or a second deferral requested from the Board of Directors. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING`. Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Enter. : No comment received. Center -Point Ener�c y: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located near a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHN ICAUDESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to the Planned Commercial development to expand operating hours and dining area. This is the location of an old (mid 20th century) commercial structure, which has been various businesses in the past. The proposal does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan, which would necessitate a Plan Amendment. Master Street Plan: Tyler and Woodlawn Streets are shown as a Local Streets on the Master Street. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. Bicycle Plan: The closest bikeway is along "H" Street, three blocks to the north. It is a Class Three bikeway, which shares the pavement with the automobiles and only has special signage designating the route. CityReco nized Nei hborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Action Plan. Most fitting goal is in the Zoning and Lad Use section that states, "The City's land use and zoning policies should be enforces to preserve Hillcrest's unique neighborhood scale." Further definition of the goal states, "The scale, density, and commercial/residential mix of Hillcrest were conceived and built long before the existence of the post -World War II suburb and prior to the emergence of modern 0 FILE NO.: Z -6481-D zoning and lad use practices. The look and feel of its neighborhoods and commercial centers results from an earlier paradigm of development that ranked the pedestrian over the car, mixed land use over separated uses and proximity over sprawl. Landscape: Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 20, 2005) The applicant was not present. Staff presented an overview of the proposed request to the Committee members present. Staff stated there were few outstanding technical issues associated with the proposed request. There was no further discussion of the item and the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: There were no additional items necessary to complete the review process raised at the October 20, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant is requesting to extend the hours of operation and the number of allowed seats for the site located at 600 North Tyler Street. The applicant's request includes extending the closing hour from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm. The applicant has also indicated the number of seats are proposed to be increased from 36 seats to 56 seats. Staff is not supportive of the applicant's request. The original approval, allow for the reuse of an existing non-residential building as a restaurant/deli with a limited number of seats. Staff feels with the original approval the primary users of the business were neighborhood residents. With the proposed expansion of the seating capacity, the use is no longer a neighborhood establishment and becomes a restaurant drawing from areas outside the neighborhood. Drawing of customers from outside the neighborhood creates a parking concern. The site does not contain any on-site parking and is served by on street parking only. Without parking available and customers driving to the site, the number of vehicles accessing the site creates a hardship on the existing residents, many with single car drives and also trying to utilize street parking. Typically a restaurant use is required to provide on-site parking at a rate of one space per 100 square feet of gross floor area. The building contains approximately 1550 square feet of gross floor area, which would typically require the placement of 15 on-site parking spaces. As indicated, no on-site parking is provided or proposed. In addition, the original approval limited the hours of operation to hours, which typically did not interfere with the surrounding residents. The original closing was 6:30 pm, the time when most residents are arriving home from work. Staff feels by increasing the hours of operation until 9:00 pm this will infringe into the residents "quiet time" and quality of life. 5 FILE NO.: Z -6481-D Cont. As previously stated, staff is not supportive of the applicant's request. Staff feels the proposed use is too intense for the site. Staff feels the hours of operation should remain as previously approved and the number of seats remain as was previously approved. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 10, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial of the request. Mr. Sam Laser addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated the applicant was a hard working person who had been misguided by staff and the owner. He stated the applicant was told prior to leasing the building the hours of operation were from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm six days per week. He stated the applicant had invested a great deal of her own money in the building restoring the site and bringing the building up to code. Ms. Jane Krutz addressed the Commission in support of the request. She stated the site had historically been used as a business since construction. She stated part of the charm of the neighborhood was the small businesses and residential homes all located in close proximity. She stated the school was now a pre -k, which reduced the amount of traffic to the area. Ms. Krutz stated she felt the development an asset to the community and allowed the neighborhood a good clean business to enjoy. Mr. Brad Reed addressed the Commission in support of the request. He stated he walked his dog in the area and did not feel there was a traffic problem in the area. He stated the restaurant was a high quality restaurant and reasonably priced. He stated he did not feel the restaurant was a negative on the neighborhood. Ms. Johnson stated she had made improvements to the building totaling $30,000. She stated if the restaurant were forced to close at 6:30 she would lose her "dinner run". She stated without the "dinner run" she would not be able to meet her overhead. Mr. Laser stated the site was zoned in 1998 for a deli. He stated later a restaurant was allowed to locate on the site, which was not neighborhood friendly. He stated the current business did not the problems with the neighborhood. He stated the problems were with the previous tenant. Ms. Amanda Prince addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated her home was located at 501 N. Tyler Street. She stated she went home for lunch and parking was a problem. She stated cars were double parked on Woodlawn Street and encroaching into the intersection. She stated with the way cars parked it was [:1 FILE NO.: Z-6481 -D (Cont.) impossible to see around the cars and one was forced to enter the intersection causing a traffic concern. She stated the restaurant did cause a problem in the neighborhood. She stated the dinner hour interfered with the resident's quiet time. Ms. Kathleen Oleson addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated the development did not comply with the City's minimum ordinance requirements. with regard to parking and hours of operation. She stated the site was granted an extension of the hours of operation and the extended hours did not work with the neighborhood. She stated with the expanded seating the parking problem would only be increased. Mr. Joe Justus addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated his home was located at 420 N. Tyler Street. He stated the hours and seating were a problem for the neighborhood. Ms. Sandi Formica addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated her home was directly across the street from the restaurant. She stated the hours of operation and the number of seats were creating a hardship on area residents. She stated she felt the applicant should be required to immediately comply with the previous approval. She stated the property values in the area had increased from $60,000 to $100,000 with minimal improvements. She stated with the restaurant she felt property values would be decreased. She stated she was the most impacted since she lived next door to the business. Mr. James Robinette addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated his home was located at 500 N. Tyler Street. He questioned if the Commissioners had received an e-mail he sent earlier in the day. He stated a brief overview of the power point related to the impact traffic would have on the neighborhood. He stated the area was not appropriate for a commercial development of the intensity being proposed. He stated the 56 seats increased the commercial aspect of the development. He stated the applicant had moved from a four -lane roadway in North Little Rock to this quiet residential neighborhood. He stated with the restaurant the residents of the area were not able to fully utilize their property. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed request and the extended hours of operation and the increased number of seats. The Commission questioned Ms. Johnson as to if the number of seats was critical to her business. Ms. Nancy Johnson stated it was important she have the number of seats and the hours of operation to meet her overhead. The Commission questioned where the break down occurred concerning the hours of operation. Staff stated the zoning enforcement desk did not fully review the files and did not see the letter, which resend the hours of operation nor the file, which denied the extended hours by the Planning Commission and the Board of Directors previously. Staff stated this was an oversight and once the oversight was caught Ms. Johnson was issued a notice immediately. Staff stated there was no more than one week between the issuance of the privilege license and the notice of violation. 7 FILE NO.: Z -6481-D A motion was made to approve the request as filed. The motion failed by a vote of 3 ayes, 6 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: As indicated in the above minute record the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request at its November 10, 2005, Public Hearing to revise this previously approved PCD. This recommendation of denial was appealed to the Little Rock Board of Directors and on January 3, 2006, the Little Board of Directors was scheduled to hear the appeal request. At the Board meeting, the owner of the property, Mr. Don Breshears stated Ms. Nancy Johnson was no longer occupying the building. He requested the application be amended. His request was to revise the PCD to include the hours of operation only and eliminate the request to increase the number of seats. The Little Rock Board of Directors determined a modification would first require Planning Commission review and a recommendation be presented based on the current application request. The Board of Directors has requested the Commission review and provide a recommendation for the current application request. The previous request included extending the hours of operation from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm and allowing the total seating capacity to be increased to 56 seats. The owner of the property has amended his request to remove the request for an increase in the number of seats and has is now seeking approval to extend the hours of operation to the 9:00 pm closing time. Staff was not supportive of extending the hours of operation in the original Commission review and continues to not support the extended hours of operation. With the current closing of 6:30 pm, most residents are arriving home from work as the commercial activity on the site is ceasing. Staff feels increasing the hours of operation will interfere with the surrounding residents; intruding into their quiet time, thus interfering with their quality of life. Staff continues to recommend denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the item had been referred back to the Commission for a recommendation of hours of operation only. Staff presented a recommendation of denial of the extended hours of operation. Mr. Don Breshears addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated street construction adjacent to the site had been going on for the past five months. He stated the construction was causing a parking problem in the area not the retail business. He stated the property values in the area had only increased from 1991 to 2005 to $130.00 per square foot. He stated the last four homes that sold had sold for FILE NO.: Z -6481-D Cont. $142.00 per square foot. He stated his request was to increase the hours of operation to allow a small restaurant to stay open until 9:00 pm. He stated the limited number of seats would not generate a great number of cars. He stated his goal was to get the hours approved and then write into the lease the hours of operation and the number of seats available to avoid any future confusion as to what was allowed on the site. Mr. Mark Robinette addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated the neighborhood did not benefit from the development only the property owner. He stated the purpose and intent section of the planned zoning district outlined the requirements for the planned development process and the proposed development did not meet the requirement. He stated the parking problem with the previous restaurant was well documented. He stated a restaurant use would generate a parking demand on the neighborhood which needed most of the available parking for the residences. Mr. Scott Smith addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he was representing the Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association and they were strongly opposed to the request. He stated the site had a history as a small grocery store and as a deli. He stated the use of the site as a restaurant was a more intense use and a nuisance to the neighborhood. Mr. Joe Justus addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated. his home was located near the site and he was opposed to increasing the hours of operation. Ms. Julie Ahrend addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated she was opposed to extending the hours of operation as well. Ms. Sandi Formica addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated the site did not have any off: street parking which was a problem for the area. She stated there was not a location for dumpster which was not located adjacent to a single-family home. She stated she had lived in the area for 15 plus years and was in her home when the site was used as a grocery store and a deli when the hours were limited to daytime hours. She stated those two uses were not a nuisance to the neighborhood. She stated the streets were narrow and safety was a concern. She stated with the placement of a restaurant on the site the customers were forced to park on the street which removed available parking for the residences. There was a general discussion between the Commission's and the applicant concerning the potential uses of the site. Mr. Don Breshears stated a grocery store was not economically feasible for the location. He stated the site could potentially be developed as residential. He stated his concern was once the site was no longer commercial he would lose his non -conforming status. A motion was made to approve the request. The motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes, 11 noes and 0 absent. D February 16, 2006 ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: Z -6481-D NAME: Breshears Revised Short -form PD -C LOCATION: Located at 600 N. Tyler Street DEVELOPER: Nancy Johnson Poncho's Villa Restaurant 600 North Tyler Street Little Rock, AR 72205 ENGINEER: Donald Brooks Surveying 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.14 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD -C ALLOWED USES: Restaurant with a mixture of 36 seats; a catering -commercial use; C-1 permitted uses. PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD -C PROPOSED USE: Revision to the PCD to allow extended hours of operation and allow additional seating within the existing building VARIAN CESMAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On September 15, 1998, the City of Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,820, rezoning the site from R-3, Single-family to PD -C. Ordinance No. 17,821, which was also approved on September 15, 1998, deferred the right-of-way dedication on Tyler Street and Woodlawn Avenue for five years. The approved PD -C allowed the continuing use of the building as a deli/restaurant with seating for a maximum of 36 persons, allowing seating on a proposed 20 foot by 17 foot deck with proper screening and no outside speakers. C-1 permitted uses were February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6481-D approved as alternative uses. The hours of operation were from 11:00 am to 6:30 pm Monday through Saturday. On February 16, 1999, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,933, approving two (2) minor revisions to the previously approved PD-C. The applicant was allowed to add "catering-commercial" as a permitted use of the property, in conjunction with the approved restaurant use. The applicant indicated there would be no expansion of the existing kitchen facility or additional employees required. There would also be no changes to the previously approved site plan. The applicant also requested a modification to the hours of operation. The applicant requested the daily hours of operation to be 10:30 am to 6:30 pm, Monday through Saturday. The applicant indicated the delivery vehicle for the catering operation would be a mini-van, the restaurant owner/manager's personal vehicle, which he would drive to the restaurant daily. On May 17, 2001, staff approved a revision to the hours of operation allowing a restaurant to be open from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm. The applicant proposed to revise the previously approved PD-C and was scheduled to be heard before the Little Rock Planning Commission on February 20, 2003. The applicant withdrew his request prior to the Public Hearing. The request was to allow construction of a second structure on the site near the western property line adjacent to the alley. The applicant proposed to use the building as a contractor's storage shed. The applicant was not proposing any plumbing to be located in the storage building. On April 4, 2003, staff rescinded their approval of the extended hours of operation. On June 12, 2003, the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to extend the hours of operation for the site. The requested hours for the site were to be as approved at staff level on May 17, 2001. The applicant proposed the hours of operation to be from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm, Monday through Saturday. The applicant indicated all other terms of the PD-C would remain in effect. The applicant appealed the Planning Commission's recommendation of denial to the Board of Directors. The Little Rock Board of Directors also denied this request at their July 15, 2003, public hearing. A. PROPOSAUREQUEST: The applicant now proposes to revise the previously approved PD-C to allow the hours of operation to be extended and to increase the number of allowable seats. The applicant is requesting the closing hour to be extended from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm remaining Monday through Saturday. The applicant is also requesting to increase the number of seats from 36 seats to 56 seats. Poncho's Villa Restaurant is the current lessor of the property. The applicant has indicated the property was formerly occupied by Cafe Percito, which according to 2 February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: Z -6481-D the applicant operated from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm. The applicant has indicated the hours of operation were curtailed and the applicant is trying to avoid being penalized for the conduct of the previous operator. The applicant states to their understanding, the primary complaints against Cafe Percito were noise, alcohol, condition of the structure, live music and entertainment, outside speakers with amplified noise, drunken late-night encounters, and late -hour parties. The applicant has indicated these problems have been eliminated and will not be permitted to exist in the future. The applicant states Poncho's does not serve beer or alcohol and will not permit them to be brought on the premises. The applicant states Poncho's Villa Restaurant's desire is to fill a legitimate need in the neighborhood. The applicant has indicated restaurants in "residential neighborhoods have not been uncommon for many years in the Heights and Hillcrest areas. Repairs to the building .were conducted by the applicant to "bring the building up to code". The applicant has also indicated they will police the area daily to remove any litter and they will encourage customers to not park in areas that will interfere with the residents parking. The applicant states discussions have taken place with the school located across North Tyler Street and a near -by church to allow customers to utilize their parking facilities when there are not activities taking place at each of these facilities. The applicant has indicated the Bill of Assurance is outdated and does not prohibit the use of the site as proposed. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a one-story 1,373 square foot frame commercial building with a 16 foot by 10 foot deck on the rear corner. There are single-family residences to the north, west and south. Fairpark Elementary School is located to the east, across Tyler Street. There is a church located one block west of the site on the corner of Taylor, Polk and Woodlawn Streets. There is an existing wood fence running approximately % the distance of the north property line. Woodlawn Street has been constructed with curb and gutter but no sidewalk adjacent to the site. Tyler Street has not been constructedt to Master Street Plan Standards and has open ditches for drainage. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls many indicating opposition and many indicating support from area residents. The Hillcrest Residents Associations was notified of the public hearing along with all property owners located within 200 -feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 -feet of the site. 3 February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6481-D D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. Per City of Little Rock Ordinance No. 17821 passed on September 15, 1998, a, 5 -year deferral was granted to this property for dedication of 5 feet of right-of-way on Tyler Street and Woodlawn Avenue, including a 20 feet radial dedication at intersection. Since 5 years has passed, the right-of-way must be dedicated or a second deferral requested from the Board of Directors. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located near a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUESITECHN ICALIDESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to the Planned Commercial development to expand operating hours and dining area. This is the location of an old (mid 20t' century) commercial structure, which has been various businesses in the past. The proposal does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan, which would necessitate a Plan Amendment. Master Street Plan: Tyler and Woodlawn Streets are shown as a Local Streets on the Master Street. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. 4 February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) _ FILE NO.: Z -6481-D Bicycle Plart: The closest bikeway is along "H" Street, three blocks to the north. It is a Class Three bikeway, which shares the pavement with the automobiles and only has special signage designating the route. CRY Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Action Plan. Most fitting goal is in the Zoning and Lad Use section that states, "The City's land use and zoning policies should be enforces to preserve Hillcrest's unique neighborhood scale." Further definition of the goal states, "The scale, density, and commercial/residential mix of Hillcrest were conceived and built long before the existence of the post -World War II suburb and prior to the emergence of modern zoning and lad use practices. The look and feel of its neighborhoods and commercial centers results from an earlier paradigm of development that ranked the pedestrian over the car, mixed land use over separated uses and proximity over sprawl. Landscape: Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 20, 2005) The applicant was not present. Staff presented an overview of the proposed request to the Committee members present. Staff stated there were few outstanding technical issues associated with the proposed request. There was no further discussion of the item and the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: There were no additional items necessary to complete the review process raised at the October 20, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant is requesting to extend the hours of operation and the number of allowed seats for the site located at 600 North Tyler Street. The applicant's request includes extending the closing hour from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm. The applicant has also indicated the number of seats are proposed to be increased from 36 seats to 56 seats. Staff is not supportive of the applicant's request. The original approval, allow for the reuse of an existing non-residential building as a restaurant/deli with a limited number of seats. Staff feels with the original approval the primary users of the business were neighborhood residents. With the proposed expansion of the seating capacity, the use is no longer a neighborhood establishment and becomes a restaurant drawing from areas outside the neighborhood. Drawing of customers from outside the neighborhood creates a parking concern. The site 5 February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6481-D does not contain any on-site parking and is served by on street parking only. Without parking available and customers driving to the site, the number of vehicles accessing the site creates a hardship on the existing residents, many with single car drives and also trying to utilize street parking. Typically a restaurant use is required to provide on-site parking at a rate of one space per 100 square feet of gross floor area. The building contains approximately 1550 square feet of gross floor area, which would typically require the placement of 15 on-site parking spaces. As indicated, no on-site parking is provided or proposed. In addition, the original approval limited the hours of operation to hours, which typically did not interfere with the surrounding residents. The original closing was 6:30 pm, the time when most residents are arriving home from work. Staff feels by increasing the hours of operation until 9:00 pm this will infringe into the residents "quiet time" and quality of life. As previously stated, staff is not supportive of the applicant's request. Staff feels the proposed use is too intense for the site. Staff feels the hours of operation should remain as previously approved and the number of seats remain as was previously approved. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 10, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial of the request. Mr. Sam Laser addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated the applicant was a hard working person who had been misguided by staff and the owner. He stated the applicant was told prior to leasing the building the hours of operation were from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm six days'per week. He stated the applicant had invested a great deal of her own money in the building restoring the site and bringing the building up to code. Ms. Jane Krutz addressed the Commission in support of the request. She stated the site had historically been used as a business since construction. She stated part of the charm of the neighborhood was the small businesses and residential homes all located in close proximity. She stated the school was now a pre -k, which reduced the amount of traffic to the area. Ms. Krutz stated she felt the development an asset to the community and allowed the neighborhood a good clean business to enjoy. E" February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: Z -6481-D Mr. Brad Reed addressed the Commission in support of the request. He stated he walked his dog in the area and did not feel there was a traffic problem in the area. He stated the restaurant was a high quality restaurant and reasonably priced. He stated he did not feel the restaurant was a negative on the neighborhood. Ms. Johnson stated she had made improvements to the building totaling $30,000. She stated if the restaurant were forced to close at 6:30 she would lose her "dinner run". She stated without the "dinner run" she would not be able to meet her overhead. Mr. Laser stated the site was zoned in 1998 for a deli. He stated later a restaurant was allowed to locate on the site, which was not neighborhood friendly. He stated the current business did not the problems with the neighborhood. He stated the problems were with the previous tenant. Ms. Amanda Prince addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated her home was located at 501 N. Tyler Street. She stated she went home for lunch and parking was a problem. She stated cars were double parked on Woodlawn Street and encroaching into the intersection. She stated with the way cars parked it was impossible to see around the cars and one was forced to enter the intersection causing a traffic concern. She stated the restaurant did cause a problem in the neighborhood. She stated the dinner hour interfered with the resident's quiet time. Ms. Kathleen Oleson addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated the development did not comply with the City's minimum ordinance requirements with regard to parking and hours of operation. She stated the site was granted an extension of the hours of operation and the extended hours did not work with the neighborhood. She stated with the expanded seating the parking problem would only be increased. Mr. Joe Justus addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated his home was located at 420 N. Tyler Street. He stated the hours and seating were a problem for the neighborhood. Ms. Sandi Formica addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated her home was directly across the street from the restaurant. She stated the hours of operation and the number of seats were creating a hardship on area residents. She stated she felt the applicant should be required to immediately comply with the previous approval. She stated the property values in the area had increased from $60,000 to $100,000 with minimal improvements. She stated with the restaurant she felt property values would be decreased. She stated she was the most impacted since she lived next door to the business. Mr. James Robinette addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated his home was located at 500 N. Tyler Street. He questioned if the Commissioners had received an e-mail he sent earlier in the day. He stated a brief 7 February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6481'-D overview of the power point related to the impact traffic would have on the neighborhood. He stated the area was not appropriate for a commercial development of the intensity being proposed. He stated the 56 seats increased the commercial aspect of the development. He stated the applicant had moved from a four -lane roadway in North Little Rock to this quiet residential neighborhood. He stated with the restaurant the residents of the area were not able to fully utilize their property. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed request and the extended hours of operation and the increased number of seats. The Commission questioned Ms. Johnson as to if the number of seats was critical to her business. Ms. Nancy Johnson stated it was important she have the number of seats and the hours of operation to meet her overhead. The Commission questioned where the break down occurred concerning the hours of operation. Staff stated the zoning enforcement desk did not fully review the files and did not see the letter, which resend the hours of operation nor the file, which denied the extended hours by the Planning Commission and the Board of Directors previously. Staff stated this was an oversight and once the oversight was caught Ms. Johnson was issued a notice immediately. Staff stated there was no more than one week between the issuance of the privilege license and the notice of violation. A motion was made to approve the request as filed. The motion failed by a vote of 3 ayes, 6 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: As indicated in the above minute record the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request at its November 10, 2005, Public Hearing to revise this previously approved PCD. This recommendation of denial was appealed to the Little Rock Board of Directors and on January 3, 2006, the Little Board of Directors was scheduled to hear the appeal request. At the Board meeting, the owner of the property, Mr. Don Breshears stated Ms. Nancy Johnson was no longer occupying the building. He requested the application be amended. His request was to revise the PCD to include the hours of operation only and eliminate the request to increase the number of seats. The Little Rock Board of Directors determined a modification would first require Planning Commission review and a recommendation be presented based on the current application request. The Board of Directors has requested the Commission review and provide a recommendation for the current application request. The previous request included extending the hours of operation from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm and allowing the total seating capacity to be increased to 56 seats. The owner of the property has amended his request to remove the request for an increase in the number of seats and has is now seeking approval to extend the hours of operation to the 9:00 pm closing time. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F ILE NO.: Z -6481-D Staff was not supportive of extending the hours of operation in the original Commission review and continues to not support the extended hours of operation. With the current closing of 6:30 pm, most residents are arriving home from work as the commercial activity on the site is ceasing. Staff feels increasing the hours of operation will interfere with the surrounding residents; intruding into their quiet time, thus interfering with their quality of life. Staff continues to recommend denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 16, 2006) The applicant was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the item had been referred back to the Commission for a recommendation of hours of operation only. Staff presented a recommendation of denial of the extended hours of operation. Mr. Don Breshears addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated street construction adjacent to the site had been going on for the past five months. He stated the construction was causing a parking problem in the area not the retail business. He stated the property values in the area had only increased from 1991 to 2005 to $130.00 per square foot. He stated the last four homes that sold had sold for $142.00 per square foot. He stated his request was to increase the hours of operation to allow a small restaurant to stay open until 9:00 pm. He stated the limited number of seats would not generate a great number of cars. He stated his goal was to get the hours approved and then write into the lease the hours of operation and the number of seats available to avoid any future confusion as to what was allowed on the site. Mr. Mark Robinette addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated the neighborhood did not benefit from the development only the property owner. He stated the purpose and intent section of the planned zoning district outlined the requirements for the planned development process and the proposed development did not meet the requirement. He stated the parking problem with the previous restaurant was well documented. He stated a restaurant use would generate a parking demand on the neighborhood which needed most of the available parking for the residences. Mr. Scott Smith addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he was representing the Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association and they were strongly opposed to the request. He stated the site had a history as a small grocery store and as a deli. He stated the use of the site as a restaurant was a more intense use and a nuisance to the neighborhood. Mr. Joe Justus addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated his home was located near the site and he was opposed to increasing the hours of operation. February 16, 2006 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6481-D Ms. Julie Ahrend addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated she was opposed to extending the hours of operation as well. Ms. Sandi Formica addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated the site did not have any off street parking which was a problem for the area. She stated there was not a location for dumpster which was not located adjacent to a single-family home. She stated she had lived in the area for 15 plus years and was in her home when the site was used as a grocery store and a deli when the hours were limited to daytime hours. She stated those two uses were not a nuisance to the neighborhood. She stated the streets were narrow and safety was a concern. She stated with the placement of a restaurant on the site the customers were forced to park on the street which removed available parking for the residences. There was a general discussion between the Commission's and the applicant concerning the potential uses of the site. Mr. Don Breshears stated a grocery store was not economically feasible for the location. He stated the site could potentially be developed as residential. He stated his concern was once the site was no longer commercial he would lose his non -conforming status. A motion was made to approve the request. The motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes, 11 noes and 0 absent. 10 FILE NO.: Z -6481-D NAME: Breshears Revised Short -form PD -C LOCATION: Located at 600 N. Tyler Street DEVELOPER: Nancy Johnson Poncho's Villa Restaurant 600 North Tyler Street Little Rock, AR 72205 ENGINEER: Donald Brooks Surveying 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.14 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD -C ALLOWED USES: Restaurant with a mixture of 36 seats; a catering -commercial use; C-1 permitted uses. PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD -C PROPOSED USE: Revision to the PCD to allow extended hours of operation and allow additional seating within the existing building VARIANCESMAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On September 15, 1998, the City of Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,820, rezoning the site from R-3, Single-family to PD -C. Ordinance No. 17,821, which was also approved on September 15, 1998, deferred the right-of-way dedication on Tyler Street and Woodlawn Avenue for five years. The approved PD -C allowed the continuing use of the building as a deli/restaurant with seating for a maximum of 36 persons, allowing seating on a proposed 20 foot by 17 foot deck with proper screening and no outside speakers. C-1 permitted uses were FILE NO.: Z -6481-D (Cont. approved as alternative uses. The hours of operation were from 11:00 am to 6:30 pm Monday through Saturday. On February 16, 1999, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,933, approving two (2) minor revisions to the previously approved PD -C. The applicant was allowed to add "catering -commercial" as a permitted use of the property, in conjunction with the approved restaurant use. The applicant indicated there would be no expansion of the existing kitchen facility or additional employees required. There would also be no changes to the previously approved site plan. The applicant also requested a modification to the hours of operation. The applicant requested the daily hours of operation to be 10:30 am to 6:30 pm, Monday through Saturday. The applicant indicated the delivery vehicle for the catering operation would be a mini -van, the restaurant owner/manager's personal vehicle, which he would drive to the restaurant daily. On May 17, 2001, staff approved a revision to the hours of operation allowing a restaurant to be open from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm. The applicant proposed to revise the previously approved PD -C and was scheduled to be heard before the Little Rock Planning Commission on February 20, 2003. The applicant withdrew his request prior to the Public Hearing. The request was to allow construction of a second structure on the site near the western property line adjacent to the alley. The applicant proposed to use the building as a contractor's storage shed. The applicant was not proposing any plumbing to be located in the storage building. On April 4, 2003, staff rescinded their approval of the extended hours of operation. On June 12, 2003, the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to extend the hours of operation for the site. The requested hours for the site were to be as approved at staff level on May 17, 2001. The applicant proposed the hours of operation to be from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm, Monday through Saturday. The applicant indicated all other terms of the PD -C would remain in effect. The applicant appealed the Planning Commission's recommendation of denial to the Board of Directors. The Little Rock Board of Directors also denied this request at their July 15, 2003, public hearing. A. PROPOSAUREQUEST: The applicant now proposes to revise the previously approved PD -C to allow the hours of operation to be extended and to increase the number of allowable seats. The applicant is requesting the closing hour to be extended from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm remaining Monday through Saturday. The applicant is also requesting to increase the number of seats from 36 seats to 56 seats. Poncho's Villa Restaurant is the current lessor of the property. The applicant has indicated the property was formerly occupied by Cafe Percito, which according to the applicant operated from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm. The applicant has indicated the hours of operation were curtailed and the applicant is trying to avoid being penalized for the conduct of the previous operator. The applicant states to their 2 FILE NO.: Z -6481-D understanding, the primary complaints against Cafe Percito were noise, alcohol, condition of the structure, live music and entertainment, outside speakers with amplified noise, drunken late-night encounters, and late -hour parties. The applicant has indicated these problems have been eliminated and will not be permitted to exist in the future. The applicant states Poncho's does not serve beer or alcohol and will not permit them to be brought on the premises. The applicant states Poncho's Villa Restaurant's desire is to fill a legitimate need in the neighborhood. The applicant has indicated restaurants in residential neighborhoods have not been uncommon for many years in the Heights and Hillcrest areas. Repairs to the building were conducted by the applicant to "bring the building up to code". The applicant has also indicated they will police the area daily to remove any litter and they will encourage customers to not park in areas that will interfere with the residents parking. The applicant states discussions have taken place with the school located across North Tyler Street and a near -by church to allow customers to utilize their parking facilities when there are not activities taking place at each of these facilities. The applicant has indicated the Bill of Assurance is outdated and does not prohibit the use of the site as proposed. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a one-story 1,373 square foot frame commercial building with a 16 foot by 10 foot deck on the rear corner. There are single-family residences to the north, west and south. Fairpark Elementary School is located to the east, across Tyler Street. There is a church located one block west of the site on the corner of Taylor, Polk and Woodlawn Streets. There is an existing wood fence running approximately Y2 the distance of the north property line. Woodlawn Street has been constructed with curb and gutter but no sidewalk adjacent to the site. Tyler Street has not been constructed to Master Street Plan Standards and has open ditches for drainage. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls many indicating opposition and many indicating support from area residents. The Hillcrest Residents Associations was notified of the public hearing along with all property owners located within 200 -feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 -feet of the site. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. Per City of Little Rock Ordinance No. 17821 passed on September 15, 1998, a 5 -year deferral was granted to this property for dedication of 5 feet of 3 FILE NO.: Z -6481-D Cont. right-of-way on Tyler Street and Woodlawn Avenue, including a 20 feet radial dedication at intersection. Since 5 years has passed, the right-of-way must be dedicated or a second deferral requested from the Board of Directors. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Ener: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located near a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISS U ES/ TEC H N I CAUDES I G N: Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to the Planned Commercial development to expand operating hours and dining area. This is the location of an old (mid 20t' century) commercial structure, which has been. various businesses in the past. The proposal does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan, which would necessitate a Plan Amendment. Master Street Plan: Tyler and Woodlawn Streets are shown as a Local Streets on the Master Street. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. Bicycle Plan: The closest bikeway is along "H" Street, three blocks to the north. It is a Class Three bikeway, which shares the pavement with the automobiles and only has special signage designating the route. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Action Plan. Most fitting goal is in the Zoning and Lad Use section that states, "The City's land use and zoning policies should be enforces to preserve Hillcrest's unique neighborhood scale." Further definition of the goal states, "The scale, density, and commercial/residential mix of Hillcrest were conceived and built long before the existence of the post -World War II suburb and prior to the emergence of modern 0 FILE NO.: Z -6481-D (Cont. zoning and lad use practices. The look and feel of its neighborhoods and commercial centers results from an earlier paradigm of development that ranked the pedestrian over the car, mixed land use over separated uses and proximity over sprawl. Landscap : Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 20, 2005) The applicant was not present. Staff presented an overview of the proposed request to the Committee members present. Staff stated there were few outstanding technical issues associated with the proposed request. There was no further discussion of the item and the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: There were no additional items necessary to complete the review process raised at the October 20, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant is requesting to extend the hours of operation and the number of allowed seats for the site located at 600 North Tyler Street. The applicant's request includes extending the closing hour from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm. The applicant has also indicated the number of seats are proposed to be increased from 36 seats to 56 seats. Staff is not supportive of the applicant's request. The original approval, allow for the reuse of an existing non-residential building as a restaurant/deli with a limited number of seats. Staff feels with the original approval the primary users of the business were neighborhood residents. With the proposed expansion of the seating capacity, the use is no longer a neighborhood establishment and becomes a restaurant drawing from areas outside the neighborhood. Drawing of customers from outside the neighborhood creates a parking concern. The site does not contain any on-site parking and is served by on street parking only. Without parking available and customers driving to the site, the number of vehicles accessing the site creates a hardship on the existing residents, many with single car drives and also trying to utilize street parking. Typically a restaurant use is required to provide on-site parking at a rate of one space per 100 square feet of gross floor area. The building contains approximately 1550 square feet of gross floor area, which would typically require the placement of 15 on-site parking spaces. As indicated, no on-site parking is provided or proposed. In addition, the original approval limited the hours of operation to hours, which typically did not interfere with the surrounding residents. The original closing was 6:30 pm, the time when most residents are arriving home from work. Staff feels by increasing the hours of operation until 9:00 pm this will infringe into the residents "quiet time" and quality of life. I.1 FILE NO.: Z -6481-D (Cont) As previously stated, staff is not supportive of the applicant's request. Staff feels the proposed use is too intense for the site. Staff feels the hours of operation should remain as previously approved and the number of seats remain as was previously approved. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 10, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial of the request. Mr. Sam Laser addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated the applicant was a hard working person who had been misguided by staff and the owner. He stated the applicant was told prior to leasing the building the hours of operation were from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm six days per week. He stated the applicant had invested a great deal of her own money in the building restoring the site and bringing the building up to code. Ms. Jane Krutz addressed the Commission in support of the request. She stated the site had historically been used as a business since construction. She stated part of the charm of the neighborhood was the small businesses and residential homes all located in close proximity. She stated the school was now a pre -k, which reduced the amount of traffic to the area. Ms. Krutz stated she felt the development an asset to the community and allowed the neighborhood a good clean business to enjoy. Mr. Brad Reed addressed the Commission in support of the request. He stated he walked his dog in the area and did not feel there was a traffic problem in the area. He stated the restaurant was a high quality restaurant and reasonably priced. He stated he did not feel the restaurant was a negative on the neighborhood. Ms. Johnson stated she had made improvements to the building totaling $30,000. She stated if the restaurant were forced to close at 6:30 she would lose her "dinner run". She stated without the "dinner run" she would not be able to meet her overhead. Mr. Laser stated the site was zoned in 1998 for a deli. He stated later a restaurant was allowed to locate on the site, which was not neighborhood friendly. He stated the current business did not the problems with the neighborhood. He stated the problems were with the previous tenant. Ms. Amanda Prince addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated her home was located at 501 N. Tyler Street. She stated she went home for lunch and parking was a problem. She stated cars were double parked on Woodlawn Street and encroaching into the intersection. She stated with the way cars parked it was D FILE NO.: Z -6481-D Cont. impossible to see around the cars and one was forced to enter the intersection causing a traffic concern. She stated the restaurant did cause a problem in the neighborhood. She stated the dinner hour interfered with the resident's quiet time. Ms. Kathleen Oleson addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated the development did not comply with the City's minimum ordinance requirements with regard to parking and hours of operation. She stated the site was granted an extension of the hours of operation and the extended hours did not work with the neighborhood. She stated with the expanded seating the parking problem would only be increased. Mr. Joe Justus addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated his home was located at 420 N. Tyler Street. He stated the hours and seating were a problem for the neighborhood. Ms. Sandi Formica addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated her home was directly across the street from the restaurant. She stated the hours of operation and the number of seats were creating a hardship on area residents. She stated she felt the applicant should be required to immediately comply with the previous approval. She stated the property values in the area had increased from $60,000 to $100,000 with minimal improvements. She stated with the restaurant she felt property values would be decreased. She stated she was the most impacted since she lived next door to the business. Mr. James Robinette addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated his home was located at 500 N. Tyler Street. He questioned if the Commissioners had received an e-mail he sent earlier in the day. He stated a brief overview of the power point related to the impact traffic would have on the neighborhood. He stated the area was not appropriate for a commercial development of the intensity being proposed. He stated the 56 seats increased the commercial aspect of the development. He stated the applicant had moved from a four -lane roadway in North Little Rock to this quiet residential neighborhood. He stated with the restaurant the residents of the area were not able to fully utilize their property. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed request and the extended hours of operation and the increased number of seats. The Commission questioned Ms. Johnson as to if the number of seats was critical to her business. Ms. Nancy Johnson stated it was important she have the number of seats and the hours of operation to meet her overhead. The Commission questioned where the break down occurred concerning the hours of operation. Staff stated the zoning enforcement desk did not fully review the files and did not see the letter, which resend the hours of operation nor the file, which denied the extended hours by the Planning Commission and the Board of Directors previously. Staff stated this was an oversight and once the oversight was caught Ms. Johnson was issued a notice immediately. Staff stated there was no more than one week between the issuance of the privilege license and the notice of violation. A motion was made to approve the request as filed. The motion failed by a vote of 3 ayes, 6 noes and 2 absent. 7 November 10, 2005 ITEM NO.: 13 _ FILE NO.: Z -6481-D NAME: Breshears Revised Short -form PD -C LOCATION: Located at 600 N. Tyler Street DEVELOPER: Nancy Johnson Poncho's Villa Restaurant 600 North Tyler Street Little Rock, AR 72205 ENGINEER: Donald Brooks Surveying 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.14 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD -C ALLOWED USES: Restaurant with a mixture of 36 seats; a catering -commercial use; C-1 permitted uses. PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD -C PROPOSED USE: Revision to the PCD to allow extended hours of operation and allow additional seating within the existing building VARIAN CESM/AIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On September 15, 1998, the City of Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,820, rezoning the site from R-3, Single-family to PD -C. Ordinance No. 17;821, which was also approved on September 15, 1998, deferred the right-of-way dedication on Tyler Street and Woodlawn Avenue for five years. The approved PD -C allowed the continuing use of the building as a deli/restaurant with seating for a maximum of 36 persons, allowing seating on a proposed 20 foot by 17 foot deck with proper screening and no outside speakers. C-1 permitted uses were November 10, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6481-D approved as alternative uses. The hours of operation were from 11:00 am to 6:30 pm Monday through Saturday. On February 16, 1999, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,933, approving two (2) minor revisions to the previously approved PD -C. The applicant was allowed to add "catering -commercial" as a permitted use of the property, in conjunction with the approved restaurant use. The applicant indicated there would be no expansion of the existing kitchen facility or additional employees required. There would also be no changes to the previously approved site plan. The applicant also requested a modification to the hours of operation. The applicant requested the daily hours of operation to be 10:30 am to 6:30 pm, Monday through Saturday. The applicant indicated the delivery vehicle for the catering operation would be a mini -van, the restaurant owner/manager's personal vehicle, which he would drive to the restaurant daily. On May 17, 2001, staff approved a revision to the hours of operation allowing a restaurant to be open from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm. The applicant proposed to revise the previously approved PD -C and was scheduled to be heard before the Little Rock Planning Commission on February 20, 2003. The applicant withdrew his request prior to the Public Hearing. The request was to allow construction of a second structure on the site near the western property line adjacent to the alley. The applicant proposed to use the building as a contractor's storage shed. The applicant was not proposing any plumbing to be located in the storage building. On April 4, 2003, staff rescinded their approval of the extended hours of operation. On June 12, 2003, the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to extend the hours of operation for the site. The requested hours for the site were to be as approved at staff level on May 17, 2001. The applicant proposed the hours of operation to be from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm, Monday through Saturday. The applicant indicated all other terms of the PD -C would remain in effect. The applicant appealed the Planning Commission's recommendation of denial to the Board of Directors. The Little Rock Board of Directors also denied this request at their July 15, 2003, public hearing. A. PROPOSAUREQUEST: The applicant now proposes to revise the previously approved PD -C to allow the hours of operation to be extended and to increase the number of allowable seats. The applicant is requesting the closing hour to be extended from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm remaining Monday through Saturday. The applicant is also requesting to increase the number of seats from 36 seats to 56 seats. Poncho's Villa Restaurant is the current lessor of the property. The applicant has indicated the property was formerly occupied by Cafe Percito, which according to 2 November 10, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6481-D the applicant operated from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm. The applicant has indicated the hours of operation were curtailed and the applicant is trying to avoid being penalized for the conduct of the previous operator. The applicant states to their understanding, the primary complaints against Cafe Percito were noise, alcohol, condition of the structure, live music and entertainment, outside speakers with amplified noise, drunken late-night encounters, and late -hour parties. The applicant has indicated these problems have been eliminated and will not be permitted to exist in the future. The applicant states Poncho's does not serve beer or alcohol and will not permit them to be brought on the premises. The applicant states Poncho's Villa Restaurant's desire is to fill a legitimate need in the neighborhood. The applicant has indicated restaurants in residential neighborhoods have not been uncommon for many years in the Heights and Hillcrest areas. Repairs to the building were conducted by the applicant to "bring the building up to code". The applicant has also indicated they will police the area daily to remove any litter and they will encourage customers to not park in areas that will interfere with the residents parking. The applicant states discussions have taken place with the school located across North Tyler Street and a near -by church to allow customers to utilize their parking facilities when there are not activities taking place at each of these facilities. The applicant has indicated the Bill of Assurance is outdated and does not prohibit the use of the site as proposed. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains a one-story 1,373 square foot frame commercial building with a 16 foot by 10 foot deck on the rear corner. There are single-family residences to the north, west and south. Fairpark Elementary School is located to the east, across Tyler Street. There is a church located one block west of the site on the corner of Taylor, Polk and Woodlawn Streets. There is an existing wood fence running approximately '/2 the distance of the north property line. Woodlawn Street has been constructed with curb and gutter but no sidewalk adjacent to the site. Tyler Street has not been constructed to Master Street Plan Standards and has open ditches for drainage. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls many indicating opposition and many, indicating support from area residents. The Hillcrest Residents Associations was notified of the public hearing along with all property owners located within 200 -feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 -feet of the site. 3 November 10, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -6481-D D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: Per City of Little Rock Ordinance No. 17821 passed on September 15, 1998, a 5 -year deferral was granted to this property for dedication of 5 feet of right-of-way on Tyler Street and Woodlawn Avenue, including a 20 feet radial dedication at intersection. Since 5 years has passed, the right-of-way must be dedicated or a second deferral requested from the Board of Directors. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. 'Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located near a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHN ICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to the Planned Commercial development to expand operating hours and dining area. This is the location of an old (mid 20th century) commercial structure, which has been various businesses in the past. The proposal does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan, which would necessitate a Plan Amendment. Master Street Plan: Tyler and Woodlawn Streets are shown as a Local Streets on the Master Street. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. 2 November 10, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z -6481-D Bicycle Plan: The closest bikeway is along "H" Street, three blocks to the north. It is a Class Three bikeway, which shares the pavement with the automobiles and only has special signage designating the route. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Action Plan. Most fitting goal is in the Zoning and Lad Use section that states, "The City's land use and zoning policies should be enforces to preserve Hillcrest's unique neighborhood scale." Further definition of the goal states, "The scale, density, and commercial/residential mix of Hillcrest were conceived and built long before the existence of the post -World War II suburb and prior to the emergence of modern zoning and lad use practices. The look and feel of its neighborhoods and commercial centers results from an earlier paradigm of development that ranked the pedestrian over the car, mixed land use over separated uses and proximity over sprawl. Landscape: Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 20, 2005) The applicant was not present. Staff presented an overview of the proposed request to the Committee members present. Staff stated there were few outstanding technical issues associated with the proposed request. There was no further discussion of the item and the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: There were no additional items necessary to complete the review process raised at the October 20, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant is requesting to extend the hours of operation and the number of allowed seats for the site located at 600 North Tyler Street. The applicant's request includes extending the closing hour from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm. The applicant has also indicated the number of seats are proposed to be increased from 36 seats to 56 seats. Staff is not supportive of the applicant's request. The original approval, allow for the reuse of an existing non-residential building as a restaurant/deli with a limited number of seats. Staff feels with the original approval the primary users of the business were neighborhood residents. With the proposed expansion of the seating capacity, the use is no longer a neighborhood establishment and becomes a restaurant drawing from areas outside the neighborhood. Drawing of customers from outside the neighborhood creates a parking concern. The site 5 November 10, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 [Cont. FILE NO.: Z -6481-D does not contain any on-site parking and is served by on street parking only. Without parking available and customers driving to the site, the number of vehicles accessing the site creates a hardship on the existing residents, many with single car drives and also trying to utilize street parking. Typically a restaurant use is required to provide on-site parking at a rate of one space per 100 square feet of gross floor area. The building contains approximately 1550 square feet of gross floor area, which would typically require the placement of 15 on-site parking spaces. As indicated, no on-site parking is provided or proposed. In addition, the original approval limited the hours of operation to hours, which typically did not interfere with the surrounding residents. The original closing was 6:30 pm, the time when most residents are arriving home from work. Staff feels by increasing the hours of operation until 9:00 pm this will infringe into the residents "quiet time" and quality of life. As previously stated, staff is not supportive of the applicant's request. Staff feels the proposed use is too intense for the site. Staff feels the hours of operation should remain as previously approved and the number of seats remain as was previously approved. STAFF RECOMMENDATION - Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 10, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial of the request. Mr. Sam Laser addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated the applicant was a hard working person who had been misguided by staff and the owner. He stated the applicant was told prior to leasing the building the hours of operation were from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm six days per week. He stated the applicant had invested a great deal of her own money in the building restoring the site and bringing the building up to code. Ms. Jane Krutz addressed the Commission in support of the request. She stated the site had historically been used as a business since construction. She stated part of the charm of the neighborhood was the small businesses and residential homes all located in close proximity. She stated the school was now a pre -k, which reduced the amount of traffic to the area. Ms. Krutz stated she felt the development an asset to the community and allowed the neighborhood a good clean business to enjoy. November 10, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13(Cont.)FILE NO.: Z -6481-D Mr. Brad Reed addressed the Commission in support of the request. He stated he walked his dog in the area and did not feel there was a traffic problem in the area. He stated the restaurant was a high quality restaurant and reasonably priced. He stated he did not feel the restaurant was a negative on the neighborhood. Ms. Johnson stated she had made improvements to the building totaling $30,000. She stated if the restaurant were forced to close at 6:30 she would lose her "dinner run". She stated without the "dinner run" she would not be able to meet her overhead. Mr. Laser stated the site was zoned in 1998 for a deli. He stated later a restaurant was allowed to locate on the site, which was not neighborhood friendly. He stated the current business did not the problems with the neighborhood. He stated the problems were with the previous tenant. Ms. Amanda Prince addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated her home was located at 501 N. Tyler Street. She stated she went home for lunch and parking was a problem. She stated cars were double parked on Woodlawn Street and encroaching into the intersection. She stated with the way cars parked it was impossible to see around the cars and one was forced to enter the intersection causing a traffic concern. She stated the restaurant did cause a problem in the neighborhood. She stated the dinner hour interfered with the resident's quiet time. Ms. Kathleen Oleson addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated the development did not comply with the City's minimum ordinance requirements with regard to parking and hours of operation. She stated the site was granted an extension of the hours of operation and the extended hours did not work with the neighborhood. She stated with the expanded seating the parking problem would only be increased. Mr. Joe Justus addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated his home was located at 420 N. Tyler Street. He stated the hours and seating were a problem for the neighborhood. Ms. Sandi Formica addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated her home was directly across the street from the restaurant. She stated the hours of operation and the number of seats were creating a hardship on area residents. She stated she felt the applicant should be required to immediately comply with the previous approval. She stated the property values in the area had increased from $60,000 to $100,000 with minimal improvements. She stated with the restaurant she felt property values would be decreased. She stated she was the most impacted since she lived next door to the business. Mr. James Robinette addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated his home was located at 500 N. Tyler Street. He questioned if the Commissioners had received an e-mail he sent earlier in the day. He stated a brief 7 November 10, 2005 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -6481-D overview of the power point related to the impact traffic would have on the neighborhood. He stated the area was not appropriate for a commercial development of the intensity being proposed. He stated the 56 seats increased the commercial aspect of the development. He stated the applicant had moved from a four -lane roadway in North Little Rock to this quiet residential neighborhood. He stated with the restaurant the residents of the area were not able to fully utilize their property. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed request and the extended hours of operation and the increased number of seats. The Commission questioned Ms. Johnson as to if the number of seats was critical to her business. Ms. Nancy Johnson stated it was important she have the number of seats and the hours of operation to meet her overhead. The Commission questioned where the break down occurred concerning the hours of operation. Staff stated the zoning enforcement desk did not fully review the files and did not see the letter, which resend the hours of operation nor the file, which denied the extended hours by the Planning Commission and the Board of Directors previously. Staff stated this was an oversight and once the oversight was caught Ms. Johnson was issued a notice immediately. Staff stated there was no more than one week between the issuance of the privilege license and the notice of violation. A motion was made to approve the request as filed. The motion failed by a vote of 3 ayes, 6 noes and 2 absent. 0 FILE NO.: Z -6481-D NAME: Breshears Revised Short -form PD -C LOCATION: Located at 600 N. Tyler Street DEVELOPER: Nancy Johnson Poncho's Villa Restaurant 600 North Tyler Street Little Rock, AR 72205 ENGINEER - Donald Brooks Surveying 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 AREA: 0.14 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PD -C ALLOWED USES: Restaurant with a mixture of 36 seats; a catering -commercial use; C-1 permitted uses. PROPOSED ZONING: Revised PD -C PROPOSED USE: Revision to the PCD to allow extended hours of operation and allow additional seating within the existing building VARIANCESMAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: On September 15, 1998, the City of Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,820, rezoning the site from R-3, Single-family to PD -C. Ordinance No. 17,821, which was also approved on September 15, 1998, deferred the right-of-way dedication on Tyler Street and Woodlawn Avenue for five years. The approved PD -C allowed the continuing use of the building as a deli/restaurant with seating for a maximum of 36 persons, allowing seating on a proposed 20 foot by 17 foot deck with proper screening and no outside speakers. C-1 permitted uses were FILE NO.: Z -6481-D (Cont. approved as alternative uses. The hours of operation were from 11:00 am to 6:30 pm Monday through Saturday. On February 16, 1999, the Little Rock Board of Directors adopted Ordinance No. 17,933, approving two (2) minor revisions to the previously approved PD -C. The applicant was allowed to add "catering -commercial" as a permitted use of the property, in conjunction with the approved restaurant use. The applicant indicated there would be no expansion of the existing kitchen facility or additional employees required. There would also be no changes to the previously approved site plan. The applicant also requested a modification to the hours of operation. The applicant requested the daily hours of operation to be 10:30 am to 6:30 pm, Monday through Saturday. The applicant indicated the delivery vehicle for the catering operation would be a mini -van, the restaurant owner/manager's personal vehicle, which he would drive to the restaurant daily. On May 17, 2001, staff approved a revision to the hours of operation allowing a restaurant to be open from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm. The applicant proposed to revise the previously approved PD -C and was scheduled to be heard before the Little Rock Planning Commission on February 20, 2003. The applicant withdrew his request prior to the Public Hearing. The request was to allow construction of a second structure on the site near the western property line adjacent to the alley. The applicant proposed to use the building as a contractor's storage shed. The applicant was not proposing any plumbing to be located in the storage building. On April 4, 2003, staff rescinded their approval of the extended hours of operation. On June 12, 2003, the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to extend the hours of operation for the site. The requested hours for the site were to be as approved at staff level on May 17, 2001. The applicant proposed the hours of operation to. be from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm, Monday through Saturday. The applicant indicated all other, terms of the PD -C would remain in effect. The applicant appealed the Planning Commission's recommendation of denial to the Board of Directors. The Little Rock Board of Directors also denied this request at their July 15, 2003, public hearing. A. PROPOSAUREQUEST: The applicant now proposes to revise the previously approved PD -C to allow the hours of operation to be extended and to increase the number of allowable seats. The applicant is requesting the closing hour to be extended from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm remaining Monday through Saturday. The applicant is also requesting to increase the number of seats from 36 seats to 56 seats. Poncho's Villa Restaurant is the current lessor of the property. The applicant has indicated the property was formerly occupied by Cafe Percito, which according to the applicant operated from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm. The applicant has indicated the hours of operation were curtailed and the applicant is trying to avoid being penalized for the conduct of the previous operator. The applicant states to their 6 FILE NO.: Z -6481-D (Cont. understanding, the primary complaints against Cafe Percito were noise, alcohol, condition of the structure, live music and entertainment, outside speakers with amplified noise, drunken late-night encounters, and late -hour parties. The applicant has indicated these problems have been eliminated and will not be permitted to exist in the future. The applicant states Poncho's does not serve beer or alcohol and will not permit them to be brought on the premises. The applicant states Poncho's Villa Restaurant's desire is to fill a legitimate need in the neighborhood. The applicant has indicated restaurants in residential neighborhoods have not been uncommon for many years in the Heights and Hillcrest areas. Repairs to the building were conducted by the applicant to "bring the building up to code". The applicant has also indicated they will police the area daily to remove any litter and they will encourage customers to not parkin areas that will interfere with the residents parking. The applicant states discussions have taken place with the school located across North Tyler Street and a near -by church to allow customers to utilize their parking facilities when there are not activities taking place at each of these facilities. The applicant has indicated the Bill of Assurance is outdated and does not prohibit the use of the site as proposed. B. EXISTING_ CONDITIONS: The site contains a one-story 1,373 square foot frame commercial building with a 16 foot by 10 foot deck on the rear corner. There are single-family residences to the north, west and south. Fairpark Elementary School is located to the east, across Tyler Street. There is a church located one block west of the site on the corner of Taylor, Polk and:Woodlawn Streets. There is an existing wood fence running approximately Y2 the distance of the north property line. Woodlawn Street has been constructed with curb and gutter but no sidewalk adjacent to the site. Tyler Street has not been constructed -to Master Street Plan Standards and has open ditches for drainage. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls many indicating opposition and many indicating support from area residents. The Hillcrest Residents Associations was notified of the public hearing along with all property owners located within 200 -feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 -feet of the site. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Public Works Conditions: 1. Per City of Little Rock Ordinance No. 17821 passed on September 15, 1998, a 5 -year deferral was granted to this property for dedication of 5 feet of 3 II>A:1i+�•IS• - :Je ic•M right-of-way on Tyler Street and Woodlawn Avenue, including a 20 feet radial dedication at intersection. Since 5 years has passed, the right-of-way must be dedicated or a second deferral requested from the Board of Directors. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Enerq No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. Counjy Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located near a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAUDESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a revision to the Planned Commercial development to expand operating hours and dining area. This is the location of an old (mid 20th century) commercial structure, which has been, various businesses in the past. The proposal does not have a significant impact on the Land Use Plan, which would necessitate a Plan Amendment. Master Street Plan: Tyler and Woodlawn Streets are shown as a Local Streets on the Master Street. These streets may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements. Bicycle Pian: The closest bikeway is along "H" Street, three blocks to the north. It is a Class Three bikeway, which shares the pavement with the automobiles and only has special signage designating the route. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Action Plan. Most fitting goal is in the Zoning and Lad Use section that states, "The City's land use and zoning policies should be enforces to preserve Hillcrest's unique neighborhood scale." Further definition of the goal states, "The scale, density, and commercial/residential mix of Hillcrest were conceived and built long before the existence of the post -World War II suburb and prior to the emergence of modern 4 FILE NO.: Z-6481 -D (Cont. zoning and lad use practices. The look and feel of its neighborhoods and commercial centers results from an earlier paradigm of development that ranked the pedestrian over the car, mixed land use over separated uses and proximity over sprawl. Landscape: Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 20, 2005) The applicant was not present. Staff presented an overview of the proposed request to the Committee members present. Staff stated there were few outstanding technical issues associated with the proposed request. There was no further discussion of the item and the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: There were no additional items necessary to complete the review process raised at the October 20, 2005, Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant is requesting to extend the hours of operation and the number of allowed seats for the site located at 600 North Tyler Street. The applicant's request includes extending the closing hour from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm. The applicant has also indicated the number of seats are proposed to be increased from 36 seats to 56 seats. Staff is not supportive of the applicant's request. The original approval, allow for the reuse of an existing non-residential building as a restaurant/deli with a limited number of seats. Staff feels with the original approval the primary users of the business were neighborhood residents. With the proposed expansion of the seating capacity, the use is no longer a neighborhood establishment and becomes a restaurant drawing from areas outside the neighborhood. Drawing of customers from outside the neighborhood creates a parking concern. The site does not contain any on-site parking and is served by on street parking only. Without parking available and customers driving to the site, the number of vehicles accessing the site creates a hardship on the existing residents, many with single car drives and also trying to utilize street parking. Typically a restaurant use is required to provide on-site parking at a rate of one space per 100 square feet of gross floor area. The building contains approximately 1550 square feet of gross floor area, which would typically require the placement of 15 on-site parking spaces. As indicated, no on-site parking is provided or proposed. In addition, the original approval limited the hours of operation to hours, which typically did not interfere with the surrounding residents. The original closing was 6:30 pm, the time when most residents are arriving home from work. Staff feels by increasing the hours of operation until 9:00 pm this will infringe into the residents "quiet time" and quality of life. 5 FILE NO.: Z -6481-D (Cont. As previously stated, staff is not supportive of the applicant's request. Staff feels the proposed use is too intense for the site. Staff feels the hours of operation should remain as previously approved and the number of seats remain as was previously approved. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 10, 2005) The applicant was present representing the request. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial of the request. Mr. Sam Laser addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated the applicant was a hard working person who had been misguided by staff and the owner. He stated the applicant was told prior to leasing the building the hours of operation were from 10:30 am to 9:00 pm six days per week. He stated the applicant had invested a great deal of her own money in the building restoring the site and bringing the building up to code. Ms. Jane Krutz addressed the Commission in support of the request. She stated the site had historically been used as a business since construction. She stated part of the charm of the neighborhood was the small businesses and residential homes all located in close proximity. She stated the school was now a pre -k, which reduced the amount of traffic to the area. Ms. Krutz stated she felt the development an asset to the community and allowed the neighborhood a good clean business to enjoy. Mr. Brad Reed addressed the Commission in support of the request. He stated he walked his dog in the area and did not feel there was a traffic problem in the area. He stated the restaurant was a high quality restaurant and reasonably priced. He stated he did not feel the restaurant was a negative on the neighborhood. Ms. Johnson stated she had made improvements to the building totaling $30,000. She stated if the restaurant were forced to close at 6:30 she would lose her "dinner run". She stated without the "dinner run" she would not be able to meet her overhead. Mr. Laser stated the site was zoned in 1998 for a deli. He stated later a restaurant was allowed to locate on the site, which was not neighborhood friendly. He stated the current business did not the problems with the neighborhood. He stated the problems were with the previous tenant. Ms. Amanda Prince addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated her home was located at 501 N. Tyler Street. She stated she went home for lunch and parking was a problem. She stated cars were double parked on Woodlawn Street and encroaching into the intersection. She stated with the way cars parked it was A FILE NO.: Z -6481-D !Cont. impossible to see around the cars and one was forced to enter the intersection causing a traffic concern. She stated the restaurant did cause a problem in the neighborhood. She stated the dinner hour interfered with the resident's quiet time. Ms. Kathleen Oleson addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated the development did not comply with the City's minimum ordinance requirements with regard to parking and hours of operation. She stated the site was granted an extension of the hours of operation and the extended hours did not work with the neighborhood. She stated with the expanded seating the parking problem would only be increased. Mr. Joe Justus addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated his home was located at 420 N. Tyler Street. He stated the hours and seating were a problem for the neighborhood. Ms. Sandi Formica addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated her home was directly across the street from the restaurant. She stated the hours of operation and the number of seats were creating a hardship on area residents. She stated she felt the applicant should be required to immediately comply with the previous approval. She stated the property values in the area had increased from $60,000 to $100,000 with minimal improvements. She stated with -the restaurant she felt property values would be decreased. She stated she was the most impacted since she lived next door to the business. Mr. James Robinette addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated his home was located at 500 N. Tyler Street. He questioned if the Commissioners had received an e-mail he sent earlier in the day. He stated a brief overview of the power point related to the impact traffic would have on the neighborhood. He stated the area was not appropriate for a commercial development of the intensity being proposed. He stated the 56 seats increased the commercial aspect of the development. He stated the applicant had moved from a four -lane roadway in North Little Rock to this quiet residential neighborhood. He stated with the restaurant the residents of the area were not able to fully utilize their property. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed request and the extended hours of operation and the increased number of seats. The Commission questioned Ms. Johnson as to if the number of seats was critical to her business. Ms. Nancy Johnson stated it was important she have the number of seats and the hours of operation to meet her overhead. The Commission questioned where the break down occurred concerning the hours of operation. Staff stated the zoning enforcement desk did not fully review the files and did not see the letter, which resend the hours of operation nor the file, which denied the extended hours by the Planning Commission and the Board of Directors previously. Staff stated this was an oversight and once the oversight was caught Ms. Johnson was issued a notice immediately. Staff stated there was no more than one week between the issuance of the privilege license and the notice of violation. A motion was made to approve the request as filed. The motion failed by a vote of 3 ayes, 6 noes and 2 absent. 7 ITEM NO.: 13, NAME: Breshears Revised Short -form PD -C LOCATION: located at 600 N. Tyler Street Plannin _Staff Comments: FILE NO.: Z -6481-D 1. Provide notification of property owners located within 200 -feet of the site, complete with the certified abstract list, notice form with affidavit executed and proof of mailing. 2. Have any agreements been reached to provide off street parking with neighboring facilities. If so provide letters of commitment for the use of parking areas. Variance/Waivers: None requested. Public Works Conditions: 1. Per City of Little Rock Ordinance No. 17821 passed on September 15, 1998, a 5 - year deferral was granted to this property for dedication of 5 feet of right-of-way on Tyler Street and Woodlawn Avenue, including a 20 feet radial dedication at intersection. Since 5 years has passed, the right-of-way must be dedicated or a second deferral requested from the Board of Directors. Utilities and Fire Department/County Planning: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: Center -Point Energy: SBC: Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located near a dedicated CATA Bus Route. Pianning_Division: Landscape_ 1. Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. 2. Because of the size of the building expansion proposed, an upgrade in landscaping in the amount of twenty-three percent (23 %), toward compliance with the landscape ordinance will be required. Revised plat/plan: Submit four (4) copies of a revised preliminary plan (to include the additional information as noted above) to staff on Wednesday, October 26, 2005.