Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7471 Staff Analysism FILE NO.: Z-7471 NAME: Elliott Short -form PD -O LOCATION: 1313 South Tyler Street DEVELOPER: Walthall, Elliott, More and Associates, Inc. 1313 South Tyler Street Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: Donald Brooks Surveying P.O. Box 166047 Little Rock, AR 72206 AREA: 0.32 Acres CURRENT ZONING: ALLOWED USES PROPOSED ZONING NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 R-3, Single-family Single-family residential PROPOSED USE: Physical Therapy Base Office VARIANCESMIAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAUREQUEST: FT. NEW STREET: 0 The applicant proposes to rezone these two single-family lots from R-3, Single- family District to PD -O (Planned Development — Office) to allow a therapy business to house their base operation. The applicant proposes to utilize an existing single-family home located on the southern lot and the additional of a two car parking pad on a vacant lot located north of the home. The use will strictly be an office use only with the employees accessing the site only to retrieve patient files, to check out equipment and/or materials or drop off files FILE NO.: Z-7471 {Cont. after a therapy session. The site will also be used for administrative purposes such as patient billing. The applicant has stated occasionally occupational, physical as well as speech and language evaluations will be conducted on site. The applicant has indicated there will be no more than three full time employees reporting to 1313 South Tyler Street on a daily basis. The applicant has indicated there will be a total of seven employees of the business. Leaving four of the employees to only access the site when patient files are needed. The applicant has indicated all traffic will access the site by the alleyway located along the rear of the lots. The applicant proposes the hours of operation to be from 7:30 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday. The applicant has proposed the structure will remain residential in character with placement of signage on the rear of the lot adjacent to the alley. This will identify the structure for employees and the occasional patient. The applicant is also requesting signage at the alley and 13th Street and 14th Street (off -premise signage) to direct traffic to the rear entrance. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing single-family structure and a vacant lot to the north. The vacant lot is surrounded by a six foot wooden fence adjoining the rear of the house and extending to the alleyway. There is a double gate located at the alleyway. The single family structure has a three car garage accessed by the alley. There are single family homes located in the immediate area with all the non- residential uses appearing to be located north of West 12th Street. Along West 13th Street fronting on South Tyler Street is a daycare and a vacant dilapidated single-family home. Other non-residential uses along Fair Park Boulevard stop at West 13t Street. There is a elementary school and an City Park located on Harrison Street approximately two blocks to the southeast. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received two phone calls in opposition of the proposed development and one phone call in support. The Oak Forest and the War Memorial Neighborhood Associations along with all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. 2 FILE NO.: Z-7471 Cont. X E F. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. The proposed land use would classify Tyler Street on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 2. Any future construction must be in compliance with boundary street and stormwater detention ordinance. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENTICOUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Ener : No comment received. SBC: Approved as submitted. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire De artment: Approved as submitted. Counfy Planning: No comment received. CATA: No comment received. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the 1-630 Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a Plan Development -Office to establish an office for a physical therapy group. A land use plan amendment for a change to Suburban Office is a separate item on this agenda (LU03-09-02 Item #5). City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Oak Forest Area Neighborhood Action Plan "A Guide to Achieve Our Vision". The Housing objectives states to "Encourage more home ownership" and to "Enhance and maintain all housing stock". This conversion of a single-family residential unit to an office use is counter to those goals. Landscape: Landscaping and associated screening will be required if a new parking area is to be developed. 3 FILE NO.: Z-747 G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 14, 2003) The applicants were present representing the request. Staff stated the request was to allow the use of an existing single-family residence as a base office for a occupational and physical therapy business. Staff requested additional information from the applicant to include any proposed signage along with the location and the sign area. Staff suggested the applicant add two additional parking spaces on the vacant lot to the north. Staff stated the spaces would be required to be hard surface and should be installed in a manner that should someone desire to build a residential structure in the future the parking could serve as the driveway and/or parking for the new home. Staff also requested the applicant provide details on the revised site plan to include the proposed parking. Public works comments were addressed. Staff stated dedication of right-of-way would be required along South Tyler Street per the Master Street Plan. Staff stated no widening would be required. Staff noted the applicant would be allowed to back into the alley to help maintain the residential character. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the applicant would be required to screen any and all new parking areas. Staff stated a landscape strip would be required along the northern property line of the vacant lot. There were no further items for discussion and the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 14, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a directional sign will be placed at each end of the alley to direct traffic to the site. The applicant has also indicated a wall sign will be placed on the garage to identify the business. The applicant has requested a wall sign not to exceed twenty-four square feet in aggregate sign area. The applicant has also revised the site plan to include a two car parking pad on the vacant lot to the north. The parking pad is proposed as twenty feet in width and twenty-four feet in depth. This would allow for cars to comfortably pull into the site and not block the alley. The applicant has indicated all customer traffic will access the site from the alley and there will be no clients or employees parking in the front drive or the street adjoining the structure. 4 FILE NO.: Z-7471 {Con The applicant has submitted a Bill of Assurance, which is dated April 19, 1926. The Bill of Assurance addresses the division of the land into lots and blocks and the dedication of streets and alleys for public use. There does not appear to be a conflict with the proposed use and the Bill of Assurance submitted. Although the proposed office use is relatively small in scale, staff does have concerns that lead to staff's non-support of the request. First, the proposal is to convert the residence into a office use. Although the structure will remain residential in character, there will be an increase in traffic to the site. The property is located mid -block in a neighborhood that, from all appearances, is solely single family. Staff believes the proposed use would be better located at the fringe of the neighborhood, in an area of mixed uses or where it could serve as a transition from intensive non-residential uses to residential uses. Staff is concerned that placing this use at this location could negatively impact adjacent residential properties. In the past, staff has drawn a hard line at West 13th Street and has taken the stand that non-residential uses should not cross any further into the neighborhood. Staff feels to allow this use into the neighborhood would be introducing non-residential activities into an area the neighborhood and the city has worked to revitalize and protect. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the application. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 4, 2003) The applicant was present representing the request. There were objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Ms. Janelle Romandia addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated the Commission had been handed a petition with the neighbors in the area signing in opposition of the proposed development. She stated the neighborhood had worked to keep non-residential activities along West 12th Street. She stated the location was in the heart of a single-family neighborhood. Ms. Romandia stated the request was not in keeping with the Neighborhood Action Plan supported by the Commission and the Board of Directors. She stated the applicant was requesting to utilize the alleyway for access to the site and the alley was not designed to handle commercial traffic. She stated the site was located only one block from 12th Street, the area identified for commercial uses in the area. Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated the use was inappropriate for the site. She stated the applicant had indicted the use of the alleyway for access to the site and questioned who maintained the alley and who would be responsible for repairing the alley when the alley deteriorated from commercial use. It P FILE NO.: Z-7471 (Cont was noted the City did not maintain alleys and the maintenance was the responsibility of the property owners. Ms. Deborah White addressed the Commission in opposition of the development. She stated she had lived in the neighborhood for 15 years and was requesting the Commission deny the request since the request was not in keeping with the neighborhood. Mr. Joe White addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated he had lived in the 1300 block of South Tyler Street for over 20 years. Mr. White stated the non-residential uses should be limited to 12th Street and University Avenue. He stated the homes located behind the site also used the alley to access their homes and most had small children. Mr. White stated the property owners were concerned with the use of the alley by a commercial business for safety reasons. Mr. William Shepard addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated he lived next door to the site on the south at 1315 South Tyler Street. He stated he shared a driveway with 1313 South Tyler Street. Mr. Shepard stated there was no parking on the street along the east side of South Tyler Street. He stated on separate occasions during the past month the applicant was parking on the street and there were commercial vehicles parked in the drive where he could not access his home. Mr. Robert Hooks addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated UALR was chipping away the homes to the south and 12th Street was the dividing line to the north. He stated the Stephens Neighborhood was a fragile area and the City should work to continue to ensure the neighborhoods vitality. He stated parking was a concern and the use of the alley a second concern. He stated the neighborhood had signed a petition stating their opposition and the use was not in keeping with the neighborhood. Ms. Elliot, co-owner of the company, addressed the Commission with the proposed development plan. She stated the use of the site was for administrative purposes only. She stated the site would be used for billing purposes, payroll and scheduling. She stated the therapist would only report to the site once a week to drop off files, make copies and secure additional files. She stated there would be little to no customer traffic to the site and if it was the desire of the Commission she would agree to no customer traffic to the site. Ms. Moore, co-owner of the company, stated once the parking problems were brought to their attention she had worked to ensure the commercial vehicles, the pest control company, phone company etc. were not parking in areas not designated for parking. Ms. Moore stated the business was not using the site for the business only getting the site ready for use should the application be approved. Ms. Walthall, co-owner of the business, stated there were two employees who would report to the site daily with two other employees part of the day or every other day. She stated there were five therapists who would access the site once a week. 0 FILE NO.: Z-7471 (Cont. There was a general discussion of how to structure the proposed request to be the least intrusive to the neighborhood. The Commission questioned if the applicant would be willing to revise the request to allow no customer traffic to the site. Ms. Elliot stated this was acceptable. She stated if any clients could not be evaluated on the site where they were located then the therapist could find an alternate location to evaluate the clients. There was a general discussion concerning the use noting the use was similar to a home occupation use. The Commission agreed the difference was none of the applicants were going to live on the site. A motion was made to approve the application as amended to include limiting the site to no customer traffic, no deliveries, and no parents bring their children to the site for evaluation and including all staff comments and recommendations included in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. The motion failed by a vote of 4 ayes, 5 noes and 2 absent. rl September 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 5.1 FILE NO.: Z-7471 NAME: Elliott Short -form PD -O LOCATION: 1313 South Tyler Street DEVELOPER: Walthall, Elliott, More and Associates, Inc. 1313 South Tyler Street Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: Donald Brooks Surveying P.O. Box 166047 Little Rock, AR 72206 AREA: 0.32 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-3, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PD -O PROPOSED USE: Physical Therapy Base Office VARIANCESNVAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to rezone these two single-family lots from R-3, Single- family District to PD -O (Planned Development — Office) to allow a therapy business to house their base operation. The applicant proposes to utilize an existing single-family home located on the southern lot and the additional of a two car parking pad on a vacant lot located north of the home. The use will September 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5.1 Cont. FILE NO.: Z-7471 strictly be an office use only with the employees accessing the site only to retrieve patient files, to check out equipment and/or materials or drop off files after a therapy session. The site will also be used for administrative purposes such as patient billing. The applicant has stated occasionally occupational, physical as well as speech and language evaluations will be conducted on site. The applicant has indicated there will be no more than three full time employees reporting to 1313 South Tyler Street on a daily basis. The applicant has indicated there will be a total of seven employees of the business. Leaving four of the employees to only access the site when patient files are needed. The applicant has indicated all traffic will access the site by the alleyway located along the rear of the lots. The applicant proposes the hours of operation to be from 7:30 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday. The applicant has proposed the structure will remain residential in character with placement of signage on the rear of the lot adjacent to the alley. This will identify the structure for employees and the occasional patient. The applicant is also requesting signage at the alley and 13th Street and 14th Street (off -premise signage) to direct traffic to the rear entrance. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing single-family structure and a vacant lot to the north. The vacant lot is surrounded by a six foot wooden fence adjoining the rear of the house and extending to the alleyway. There is a double gate located at the alleyway. The single family structure has a three car garage accessed by the alley. There are single family homes located in the immediate area with all the non- residential uses appearing to be located north of West 12th Street. Along West 13th Street fronting on South Tyler Street is a daycare and a vacant dilapidated single-familhome. Other non-residential uses along Fair Park Boulevard stop at Vilest 13t Street. There is a elementary school and an City Park located on Harrison Street approximately two blocks to the southeast. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received two phone calls in opposition of the proposed development and one phone call in support. The Oak Forest and the War Memorial Neighborhood Associations along with all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. September 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5.1 Cont. FILE NO.: Z-7471 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. The proposed land use would classify Tyler Street on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 2. Any future construction must be in compliance with boundary street and stormwater detention ordinance. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: Approved as submitted. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUESITECHNICAUDESIGN: Planninq Division: This request is located in the 1-630 Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a Plan Development -Office to establish an office for a physical therapy group. A land use plan amendment for a change to Suburban Office is a separate item on this agenda (LU03-09-02 Item #5). City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicants property lies in the area covered by the Oak Forest Area Neighborhood Action Plan "A Guide to Achieve Our Visiorf'. The Housing objectives states to "Encourage more home ownership' and to "Enhance and maintain all housing stocW- This conversion of a single-family residential unit to an office use is counter to those goals. 3 September 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION NO.: 5.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7471 Landscape: Landscaping and associated screening will be required if a new parking area is to be developed. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 14, 2003) The applicants were present representing the request. Staff stated the request was to allow the use of an existing single-family residence as a base office for a occupational and physical therapy business. Staff requested additional information from the applicant to include any proposed signage along with the location and the sign area. Staff suggested the applicant add two additional parking spaces on the vacant lot to the north. Staff stated the spaces would be required to be hard surface and should be installed in a manner that should someone desire to build a residential structure in the future the parking could serve as the driveway and/or parking for the new home. Staff also requested the applicant provide details on the revised site plan to include the proposed parking. Public works comments were addressed. Staff stated dedication of right-of-way would be required along South Tyler Street per the Master Street Plan. Staff stated no widening would be required. Staff noted the applicant would be allowed to back into the alley to help maintain the residential character. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the applicant would be required to screen any and all new parking areas. Staff stated a landscape strip would be required along the northern property line of the vacant lot. There were no further items for discussion and the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 14, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a directional sign will be placed at each end of the alley to direct traffic to the site. The applicant has also indicated a wall sign will be placed on the garage to identify the business. The applicant has requested a wall sign not to exceed twenty-four square feet in aggregate sign area. The applicant has also revised the site plan to include a two car parking pad on the vacant lot to the north. The parking pad is proposed as twenty feet in width and twenty-four feet in depth. This would allow for cars to comfortably pull into the site and not block the alley. 4 September 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5.1 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z-7471 The applicant has indicated all customer traffic will access the site from the alley and there will be no clients or employees parking in the front drive or the street adjoining the structure. The applicant has submitted a Bill of Assurance, which is dated April 19, 1926. The Bill of Assurance addresses the division of the land into lots and blocks and the dedication of streets and alleys for public use. There does not appear to be a conflict with the proposed use and the Bill of Assurance submitted. Although the proposed office use is relatively small in scale, staff does have concerns that lead to staffs non-support of the request. First, the proposal is to convert the residence into a office use. Although the structure will remain residential in character, there will be an increase in traffic to the site. The property is located mid -block in a neighborhood that, from all appearances, is solely single family. Staff believes the proposed use would be better located at the fringe of the neighborhood, in an area of mixed uses or where it could serve as a transition from intensive non-residential uses to residential uses. Staff is concerned that placing this use at this location could negatively impact adjacent residential properties. In the past, staff has drawn a hard line at West 13th Street and has taken the stand that non-residential uses should not cross any further into the neighborhood. Staff feels to allow this use into the neighborhood would be introducing non-residential activities into an area the neighborhood and the city has worked to revitalize and protect. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the application. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 4,-2003) The applicant was present representing the request. There were objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Ms. Janelle Romandia addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated the Commission had been handed a petition with the neighbors in the area signing in opposition of the proposed development. She stated the neighborhood had worked to keep non-residential activities along West 12th Street. She stated the location was in the heart of a single-family neighborhood. Ms. Romandia stated the request was not in keeping with the Neighborhood Action Plan supported by the Commission and the Board of Directors. She stated the applicant was requesting to utilize the alleyway for access to the site and the alley was not designed to handle commercial traffic. She stated the site was located only one block from 12th Street, the area identified for commercial uses in the area. September 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5.1 Cont. FILE NO.: Z-7471 Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated the use was inappropriate for the site. She stated the applicant had indicted the use of the alleyway for access to the site and questioned who maintained the alley and who would be responsible for repairing the alley when the alley deteriorated from commercial use. It was noted the City did not maintain alleys and the maintenance was the responsibility of the property owners. Ms. Deborah White addressed the Commission in opposition of the development. She stated she had lived in the neighborhood for 15 years and was requesting the Commission deny the request since the request was not in keeping with the neighborhood. Mr. Joe White addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated he had lived in the 1300 block of South Tyler Street for over 20 years. Mr. White stated the non-residential uses should be limited to 12th Street and University Avenue. He stated the homes located behind the site also used the alley to access their homes and most had small children. Mr. White stated the property owners were concerned with the use of the alley by a commercial business for safety reasons. Mr. William Shepard addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated he lived next door to the site on the south at 1315 South Tyler Street. He stated he shared a driveway with 1313 South Tyler Street. Mr. Shepard stated there was no parking on the street along the east side of South Tyler Street. He stated on separate occasions during the past month the applicant was parking on the street and there were commercial vehicles parked in the drive where he could not access his home. Mr. Robert Hooks addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated UALR was chipping away the homes to the south and 12th Street was the dividing line to the north. He stated the Stephens Neighborhood was a fragile area and the City should work to continue to ensure the neighborhoods vitality. He stated parking was a concern and the use of the alley a second concern. He stated the neighborhood had signed a petition stating their opposition and the use was not in keeping with the neighborhood. Ms. Elliot, co-owner of the company, addressed the Commission with the proposed development plan. She stated the use of the site was for administrative purposes only. She stated the site would be used for billing purposes, payroll and scheduling. She stated the therapist would only report to the site once a week to drop off files, make copies and secure additional files. She stated there would be little to no customer traffic to the site and if it was the desire of the Commission she would agree to no customer traffic to the site. D September 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7471 Ms. Moore, co-owner of the company, stated once the parking problems were brought to their attention she had worked to ensure the commercial vehicles, the pest control company, phone company etc. were not parking in areas not designated for parking. Ms. Moore stated the business was not using the site for the business only getting the site ready for use should the application be approved. Ms. Walthall, co-owner of the business, stated there were two employees who would report to the site daily with two other employees part of the day or every other day. She stated there were five therapists who would access the site once a week. There was a general discussion of how to structure the proposed request to be the least intrusive to the neighborhood. The Commission questioned if the applicant would be willing to revise the request to allow no customer traffic to the site. Ms. Elliot stated this was acceptable. She stated if any clients could not be evaluated on the site where they were located then the therapist could find an alternate location to evaluate the clients. There was a general discussion concerning the use noting the use was similar to a home occupation use. The Commission agreed the difference was none of the applicants were going to live on the site. A motion was made to approve the application as amended to include limiting the site to no customer traffic, no deliveries, and no parents bring their children to the site for evaluation and including all staff comments and recommendations included in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. The motion failed by a vote of 4 ayes, 5 noes and 2 absent. 7 September 4, 2003 ITEM NO.: 5.1 FILE NO.: Z-7471 NAME: Elliott Short -form PD -O LOCATION: 1313 South Tyler Street DEVELOPER: Walthall, Elliott, More and Associates, Inc. 1313 South Tyler Street Little Rock, AR 72204 ENGINEER: Donald Brooks Surveying P.O. Box 166047 Little Rock, AR 72206 AREA: 0.32 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 2 FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: R-3, Single-family ALLOWED USES: Single-family residential PROPOSED ZONING: PD -O PROPOSED USE: Physical Therapy Base Office VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to rezone these two single-family lots from R-3, Single- family District to PD -O (Planned Development — Office) to allow a therapy business to house their base operation. The applicant proposes to utilize an existing single-family home located on the southern lot and the additional of a two car parking pad on a vacant lot located north of the home. The use will September 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5.1 Cont. FILE NO.: -Z-7471 strictly be an office use only with the employees accessing the site only to retrieve patient files, to check out equipment and/or materials or drop off files after a therapy session. The site will also be used for administrative purposes such as patient billing. The applicant has stated occasionally occupational, physical as well as speech and language evaluations will be conducted on site. The applicant has indicated there will be no more than three full time employees reporting to 1313 South Tyler Street on a daily basis. The applicant has indicated there will be a total of seven employees of the business. Leaving four of the employees to only access the site when patient files are needed. The applicant has indicated all traffic will access the site by the alleyway located along the rear of the lots. The applicant proposes the hours of operation to be from 7:30 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday. The applicant has proposed the structure will remain residential in character with placement of signage on the rear of the lot adjacent to the alley. This will identify the structure for employees and the occasional patient. The applicant is also requesting signage at the alley and 13th Street and 14th Street (off -premise signage) to direct traffic to the rear entrance. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site contains an existing single-family structure and a vacant lot to the north. The vacant lot is surrounded by a six foot wooden fence adjoining the rear of the house and extending to the alleyway. There is a double gate located at the alleyway. The single family structure has a three car garage accessed by the alley. There are single family homes located in the immediate area with all the non- residential uses appearing to be located north of West 12th Street. Along West 13th Street fronting on South Tyler Street is a daycare and a vacant dilapidated single-familx home. Other non-residential uses along Fair Park Boulevard stop at West 13t Street. There is a elementary school and an City Park located on Harrison Street approximately two blocks to the southeast. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received two phone calls in opposition of the proposed development and one phone call in support. The Oak Forest and the War Memorial Neighborhood Associations along with all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. 2 September 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5.1 (Cont.)FILE NO.: Z-7471 D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. The proposed land use would classify Tyler Street on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 2. Any future construction must be in compliance with boundary street and stormwater detention ordinance. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENTICOUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: Approved as submitted. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire De artment: Approved as submitted. County Planni: No comment received. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the 1-630 Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a Plan Development -Office to establish an office for a physical therapy group. A land use plan amendment for a change to Suburban Office is a separate item on this agenda (LU03-09-02 Item #5). City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicants property lies in the area covered by the Oak Forest Area Neighborhood Action Plan 'A Guide to Achieve Our Visiorf. The Housing objectives states to 'Encourage more home ownership' and to "Enhance and maintain all housing stock'. This conversion of a single-family residential unit to an office use is counter to those goals. 3 September 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5.1 Contj FILE NO.: Z-7471 Landscape: Landscaping and associated screening will be required if a new parking area is to be developed. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (August 14, 2003) The applicants were present representing the request. Staff stated the request was to allow the use of an existing single-family residence as a base office for a occupational and physical therapy business. Staff requested additional information from the applicant to include any proposed signage along with the location and the sign area. Staff suggested the applicant add two additional parking spaces on the vacant lot to the north. Staff stated the spaces would be required to be hard surface and should be installed in a manner that should someone desire to build a residential structure in the future the parking could serve as the driveway and/or parking for the new home. Staff also requested the applicant provide details on the revised site plan to include the proposed parking. Public works comments were addressed. Staff stated dedication of right-of-way would be required along South Tyler Street per the Master Street Plan. Staff stated no widening would be required. Staff noted the applicant would be allowed to back into the alley to help maintain the residential character. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the applicant would be required to screen any and all new parking areas. Staff stated a landscape strip would be required along the northern property line of the vacant lot. There were no further items for discussion and the Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised plan to staff addressing most of the issues raised at the August 14, 2003 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated a directional sign will be placed at each end of the alley to direct traffic to the site. The applicant has also indicated a wall sign will be placed on the garage to identify the business. The applicant has requested a wall sign not to exceed twenty-four square feet in aggregate sign area. The applicant has also revised the site plan to include a two car parking pad on the vacant lot to the north. The parking pad is proposed as twenty feet in width and twenty-four feet in depth. This would allow for cars to comfortably pull into the site and not block the alley. 4 September 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5.1 Cont. FILE NO.: Z-7471 The applicant has indicated all customer traffic will access the site from the alley and there will be no clients or employees parking in the front drive or the street adjoining the structure. The applicant has submitted a Bill of Assurance, which is dated April 19, 1926. The Bill of Assurance addresses the division of the land into lots and blocks and the dedication of streets and alleys for public use. There does not appear to be a conflict with the proposed use and the Bill of Assurance submitted. Although the proposed office use is relatively small in scale, staff does have concerns that lead to staffs non-support of the request. First, the proposal is to convert the residence into a office use. Although the structure will remain residential in character, there will be an increase in traffic to the site. The property is located mid -block in a neighborhood that, from all appearances, is sorely single family. Staff believes the proposed use would be better located at the fringe of the neighborhood, in an area of mixed uses or where it could serve as a transition from intensive non-residential uses to residential uses. Staff is concerned that placing this use at this location could negatively impact adjacent residential properties. In the past, staff has drawn a hard line at West 13th Street and has taken the stand that non-residential uses should not cross any further into the neighborhood. Staff feels to allow this use into the neighborhood would be introducing non-residential activities into an area the neighborhood and the city has worked to revitalize and protect. 1. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the application. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 4,•2003) The applicant was present representing the request. There were objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial. Ms. Janelle Romandia addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. She stated the Commission had been handed a petition with the neighbors in the area signing in opposition of the proposed development. She stated the neighborhood had worked to keep non-residential activities along West 12th Street. She stated the location was in the heart of a single-family neighborhood. Ms. Romandia stated the request was not in keeping with the Neighborhood Action Plan supported by the Commission and the Board of Directors. She stated the applicant was requesting to utilize the alleyway for access to the site and the alley was not designed to handle commercial traffic. She stated the site was located only one block from 12th Street, the area identified for commercial uses in the area. 5 September 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5.1 Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7471 Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated the use was inappropriate for the site. She stated the applicant had indicted the use of the alleyway for access to the site and questioned who maintained the alley and who would be responsible for repairing the alley when the alley deteriorated from commercial use. It was noted the City did not maintain alleys and the maintenance was the responsibility of the property owners. Ms. Deborah White addressed the Commission in opposition of the development. She stated she had lived in the neighborhood for 15 years and was requesting the Commission deny the request since the request was not in keeping with the neighborhood. Mr. Joe White addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated he had lived in the 1300 block of South Tyler Street for over 20 years. Mr. White stated the non-residential uses should be limited to 12th Street and University Avenue. He stated the homes located behind the site also used the alley to access their homes and most had small children. Mr. White stated the property owners were concerned with the use of the alley by a commercial business for safety reasons. Mr. William Shepard addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated he lived next door to the site on the south at 1315 South Tyler Street. He stated he shared a driveway with 1313 South Tyler Street. Mr. Shepard stated there was no parking on the street along the east side of South Tyler Street. He stated on separate occasions during the past month the applicant was parking on the street and there were commercial vehicles parked in the drive where he could not access his home. Mr. Robert Hooks addressed the Commission in opposition of the proposed request. He stated UALR was chipping away the homes to the south and 12th Street was the dividing line to the north. He stated the Stephens Neighborhood was a fragile area and the City should work to continue to ensure the neighborhoods vitality. He stated parking was a concern and the use of the alley a second concern. He stated the neighborhood had signed a petition stating their opposition and the use was not in keeping with the neighborhood. Ms. Elliot, co-owner of the company, addressed the Commission with the proposed development plan. She stated the use of the site was for administrative purposes only. She stated the site would be used for billing purposes, payroll and scheduling. She stated the therapist would only report to the site once a week to drop off files, make copies and secure additional files. She stated there would be little to no customer traffic to the site and if it was the desire of the Commission she would agree to no customer traffic to the site. M September 4, 2003 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 5.7 Cont. FILE NO.: Z-7471 Ms. Moore, co-owner of the company, stated once the parking problems were brought to their attention she had worked to ensure the commercial vehicles, the pest control company, phone company etc. were not parking in areas not designated for parking. Ms. Moore stated the business was not using the site for the business only getting the site ready for use should the application be approved. Ms. Walthall, co-owner of the business, stated there were two employees who would report to the site daily with two other employees part of the day or every other day. She stated there were five therapists who would access the site once a week. There was a general discussion of how to structure the proposed request to be the least intrusive to the neighborhood. The Commission questioned if the applicant would be willing to revise the request to allow no customer traffic to the site. Ms. Elliot stated this was acceptable. She stated if any clients could not be evaluated on the site where they were located then the therapist could find an alternate location to evaluate the clients. There was a general discussion concerning the use noting the use was similar to a home occupation use. The Commission agreed the difference was none of the applicants were going to live on the site. A motion was made to approve the application as amended to include limiting the site to no customer traffic, no deliveries, and no parents bring their children to the site for evaluation and including all staff comments and recommendations included in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. The motion failed by a vote of 4 ayes, 5 noes and 2 absent. 7 Subdivision Committee Comments August 14, 2003 ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z-7471 NAME: Elliott Short -form PD-OLOCATION: 1313 1313 South Tyler Street J n . Planning -Staff Comments: 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. The applicant has indicated there will be no more than seven (7) employees of the company including all therapists, all office personnel and any owner who may participate in the operation of the business. 3. Provide two parking (hard surface parking spaces) off the alley on the adjacent lot to the north. All employees of the business are to use the ally for access to the site and parking is to be off the alley only. There are to be no employees parking on Tyler Street or in the front driveway. 4. The hours should be limited to normal operational hours of 7:30 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Friday. 5. Provide any details of proposed signage, (height/area/location). Variance/Waivers: J Sul 1. None requested.' Public Works:t,J 1. The proposed land use would classify Tyler Street on the Master Street Plan as a commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 2. Any future construction must be in compliance with boundary street and stormwater detention ordinance. Utilities and Fire Department/County Planning: ] Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.�,,r� Entergy Center -Point EneW: �° s ►� SBC: Approved as submitted. Central Arkansas Water: No objection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: No comment received Planning Division_ This request is located in the 1-630 Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Single Family for this property. The applicant has applied for a Plan Development -Office to establish an office for a physical therapy group. A land use plan amendment for a change to Suburban Office is a separate item on this agenda. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Oak Forest Area Neighborhood Action Plan "A Guide to Achieve Our Vision". The Housing objectives states to "Encourage more home ownership" and to "Enhance and maintain all housing stock". This conversion of a single-family residential unit to an office use is counter to those goals. Landscape: Landscaping and associated screening will be required if a new parking area is to be developed. Revised plat/plan: Submit four (4) copies of a revised preliminary plan (to include the additional information as noted above) to staff on Wednesday, August 20, 2003.