Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6765 Staff AnalysisDecember 2, 1999 ITEM NO.: H FILE NO.: Z-6765 NAME: Beard - Short -Form PCD LOCATION: 2311 Spring Street DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: J. C. and Brinda Beard Marlar Engineering Co., Inc. P. O. Box 165055 5318 J.F.K. Blvd. Little Rock, AR 72206 No. Little Rock, AR 72116 AREA: 0.172 acre NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: R-4 ALLOWED USES Single Family and Two Family Residential PROPOSED USE: Beauty Salon and Single Family Residential VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to rezone the property at 2311 Spring Street from R-4 to PCD to allow for conversion of the 1,185 square foot single family residences to a beauty salon. An existing 378 square foot accessory dwelling on the site will continue to be used as a single family residence. The applicant has also filed a minor Land Use Plan amendment for this property (Item 14.1 on this agenda). The proposed beauty salon will have two (2) operators. The proposed hours of operation are as follows: 8:00 a.m. - 8:00 p.m., Tuesday - Friday 6:00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m., Saturday B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: There is an existing one-story frame (1,185 square feet) single family residence on the property as well as a 378 December 2, 1999 ITEM NO.: H (Cont. FILE NO.: Z-6765 square foot, one-story frame accessory dwelling. The larger dwelling is located within the west one-half of the property with the accessory dwelling in the rear yard. There is also a metal carport canopy near the northeast corner of the property. There are existing single-family residences to the north, south and east, with an AP&L substation to the west across Spring Street. There is a large commercial building to the southwest and other commercial uses one block further west along Broadway. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one (1) letter supporting the proposed rezoning. The Downtown, Meadowbrook, East of Broadway and South Little Rock Community Development Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Spring Street is listed on the Master Street Plan as a collector street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 2. Dedication of right-of-way is required to 10 feet from centerline of alley. 3. Show parking and construct sidewalk with proposed development. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. AP&L: No Comment received. Arkla: No Comment. Southwestern Bell: No Comment. Water: No Comment. Fire Department: No Comment. County Planning: No Comment. CATA: Site is served by CATA Route #11; approved as submitted for transit purposes. Pa December 2, 1999 ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6765 F ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is in the Central City Planning District. The Land Use Plan currently shows Single Family for this location. There is pending Land Use Plan Amendment on this agenda for this property. city -Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The Downtown Neighborhoods Plan for the Future encourages mixed uses in small commercial structures but also recommends maintaining restrictions to protect homeowners from increased traffic and noise. Landsca a Issues: A 6 foot high opaque screen is required along the southern, northern and western perimeters of the property. This screen may be a wooden fence with its face side directed outward or dense evergreen plantings. G. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan and additional information to staff on October 28, 1999. The revised plan shows a proposed parking plan for the property, as noted on the attached site plan. The applicant proposes to use the existing carport canopy as one space, with two spaces (one behind the other) along the north side of the structure on the existing concrete drive. A fourth space is proposed in the grass covered area along the south side of the existing concrete drive. The applicant has noted that there is also on -street parking in the area that could also be utilized. The parking plan as proposed would not conform to typical ordinance standards, with respect to space size, maneuvering area, pavement, etc. The ordinance would typically required six (6) spaces for the proposed uses, five (5) for the beauty salon and one (1) for the accessory dwelling. Aside from the parking issue, staff cannot support the proposed use of the property. Based on the fact that the proposed use is not consistent with the current Land Use Plan nor the recently adopted Downtown Neighborhood Plan, staff feels that the proposed commercial use will not be compatible with the surrounding single family uses. 3 December 2, 1999 ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: FILE NO.: Z-6765 Staff recommends denial of the proposed PCD rezoning. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 21, 1999) The applicant was not present. Staff gave a brief description of the proposed PCD. Staff noted that additional information was needed from the applicant regarding the proposed commercial operation. Staff also noted that a parking plan was needed for the property. After the brief discussion, the Committee forwarded the PCD to the full Commission for resolution. Staff noted that the applicant would be contacted and the additional information would be obtained. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 11, 1999) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant was seven (7) days late in sending the required notification to surrounding property owners. The Commission determined that the item needed to be deferred. J. C. and Brinda Beard were present, representing the application. There was a brief discussion relating to the required notification and the deferral of this item. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the December 2, 1999 agenda. A motion to that effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 1999) J. C. and Brinda Beard were present, representing the application. A procedural motion was made to waive the staff presentation on this application. The motion was seconded and passed. Commissioner Nunnley asked staff about the parking issues associated with this site plan. 4 December 2, 1999 ITEM NO.: H (Cont. FILE NO.: Z-6765 Monte Moore, of the Planning Staff, noted that the parking issue was the main technical concern. He explained that the parking issue was discussed by the Subdivision Committee and that the applicant had submitted a parking plan for the property. He explained that the parking plan proposed, which included on - street parking, did not conform to the typical ordinance requirements for parking (space size, maneuvering area, etc.) Commissioner Nunnley asked if the proposed parking plan would cause any problems for the adjacent residential property. Mr. Moore noted that the proposed parking plan would probably not cause any problems for the adjacent single family property. He noted that the property immediately north of this property was vacant and that there was probably enough room to park several vehicles along the street and not block any of the residential driveways in the immediate area. A motion was made to approve the PCD rezoning as filed. The motion was seconded and passed with a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. 5 FILE NO.: Z-6765 NAME: Beard - Short -Form PCD LOCATION: 2311 Spring Street DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: J. C. and Brinda Beard Marlar Engineering Co., Inc. P. O. Box 165055 5318 J.F.K. Blvd. Little Rock, AR 72206 No. Little Rock, AR 72116 AREA: 0.172 acre NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: R-4 ALLOWED USES: Single Family and Two Family Residential PROPOSED USE: Beauty Salon and Single Family Residential VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to rezone the property at 2311 Spring Street from R-4 to PCD to allow for conversion of the 1,185 square foot single family residences to a beauty salon. An existing 378 square foot accessory dwelling on the site will continue to be used as a single family residence. The applicant has also filed a minor Land Use Plan amendment for this property (Item 14.1 on this agenda) . The proposed beauty salon will have two (2) operators. The proposed hours of operation are as follows: 8:00 a.m. - 8:00 p.m., Tuesday - Friday 6:00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m., Saturday B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: There is an existing one-story frame (1,185 square feet) single family residence on the property as well as a 378 square foot, one-story frame accessory dwelling. The FILE NO.: Z-6765 (Cont.) larger dwelling is located within the west one-half of the property with the accessory dwelling in the rear yard. There is also a metal carport canopy near the northeast corner of the property. There are existing single-family residences to the north, south and east, with an AP&L substation to the west across Spring Street. There is a large commercial building to the southwest and other commercial uses one block further west along Broadway. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one (1) letter supporting the proposed rezoning. The Downtown, Meadowbrook, East of Broadway and South Little Rock Community Development Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Spring Street is listed on the Master Street Plan as a collector street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 2. Dedication of right-of-way is required to 10 feet from centerline of alley. 3. Show parking and construct sidewalk with proposed development. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. AP&L: No Comment received. Arkla: No Comment. Southwestern Bell: No Comment. Water: No Comment. Fire Department: No Comment. Counter Planning : No Comment. CATA: Site is served by CATA Route #11; approved as submitted for transit purposes. 2 FILE NO.: Z-6765 (Cont.) F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is in the Central City Planning District. The Land Use Plan currently shows Single Family for this location. There is pending Land Use Plan Amendment on this agenda for this property. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The Downtown Neighborhoods Plan for the Future encourages mixed uses in small commercial structures but also recommends maintaining restrictions to protect homeowners from increased traffic and noise. Landscape Issues: A 6 foot high opaque screen is required along the southern, northern and western perimeters of the property. This screen may be a wooden fence with its face side directed outward or dense evergreen plantings. G. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan and additional information to staff on October 28, 1999. The revised plan shows a proposed parking plan for the property, as noted on the attached site plan. The applicant proposes to use the existing carport canopy as one space, with two spaces (one behind the other) along the north side of the structure on the existing concrete drive. A fourth space is proposed in the grass covered area along the south side of the existing concrete drive. The applicant has noted that there is also on -street parking in the area that could also be utilized. The parking plan as proposed would not conform to typical ordinance standards, with respect to space size, maneuvering area, pavement, etc. The ordinance would typically required six (6) spaces for the proposed uses, five (5) for the beauty salon and one (1) for the accessory dwelling. Aside from the parking issue, staff cannot support the proposed use of the property. Based on the fact that the proposed use is not consistent with the current Land Use Plan nor the recently adopted Downtown Neighborhood Plan, staff feels that the proposed commercial use will not be compatible with the surrounding single family uses. 3 FILE NO.: Z-6765 (Cont.) H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the proposed PCD rezoning. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 21, 1999) The applicant was not present. Staff gave a brief description of the proposed PCD. Staff noted that additional information was needed from the applicant regarding the proposed commercial operation. Staff also noted that a parking plan was needed for the property. After the brief discussion, the Committee forwarded the PCD to the full Commission for resolution. Staff noted that the applicant would be contacted and the additional information would be obtained. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 11, 1999) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant was seven (7) days late in sending the required notification to surrounding property owners. The Commission determined that the item needed to be deferred. J. C. and Brinda Beard were present, representing the application. There was a brief discussion relating to the required notification and the deferral of this item. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the December 2, 1999 agenda. A motion to that effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent and 1 open position. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 1999) J. C. and Brinda Beard were present, representing the application. A procedural motion was made to waive the staff presentation on this application. The motion was seconded and passed. Commissioner Nunnley asked staff about the parking issues associated with this site plan. 4 FILE NO.: Z-6765 (Cont.) Monte Moore, of the Planning Staff, noted that the parking issue was the main technical concern. He explained that the parking issue was discussed by the Subdivision Committee and that the applicant had submitted a parking plan for the property. He explained that the parking plan proposed, which included on - street parking, did not conform to the typical ordinance requirements for parking (space size, maneuvering area, etc.) Commissioner Nunnley asked if the proposed parking plan would cause any problems for the adjacent residential property. Mr. Moore noted that the proposed parking plan would probably not cause any problems for the adjacent single family property. He noted that the property immediately north of this property was vacant and that there was probably enough room to park several vehicles along the street and not block any of the residential driveways in the immediate area. A motion was made to approve the PCD rezoning as filed. The motion was seconded and passed with a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. 5