HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7610 Staff AnalysisApril 26, 2004
ITEM NO.: 5
File No.:
Owner:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Z-7610
Beth Leake
4820 Country Club Blvd.
North side of Country Club Blvd.; between
Jackson and Spruce Streets
R-2
Variance Requested: An appeal is requested from the Home
Occupation standards of Section 36-253 to
allow a catering business with the addition
of a duplicate kitchen.
Justification:
Present Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments
B. Staff Analysis:
sis:
The applicant's justification is presented
in an attached letter.
Single Family Residence
Single Family Residence, with home
occupation
The R-2 zoned property at 4820 Country Club Blvd. is occupied by a one-
story frame single family residence. There is a one -car driveway from
Country Club Blvd. which serves as access.
On July 23, 2003 the Department of Planning and Development issued a
Home Occupation/Privilege License permit to Jacquelyn Compton and
Jeremy Pittman for the operation of a home catering business within the
residence. The home occupation was issued based on the fact that there
would be no off-site employees, no customer traffic and no signage. The
privilege license application does note that "additional kitchen equipment"
April 26, 2004
ITEM NO.: 5
would be installed, however staff was never under the impression that a
second duplicate kitchen was being constructed. If so, staff would not
have issued the Home Occupation Permit. When staff became aware of
the construction of a duplicate kitchen in February, 2004, by way of the
building codes staff, the property owner was notified of the violation.
According to Section 36-253(b)(6)9. of the City's Zoning Ordinance, home
occupations will be permitted that will not "require the construction of, or
the addition to, the residence of duplicate kitchens." The Planning and
Development staff issued the Home Occupation/Privilege License permit
with no knowledge of the second duplicate kitchen. The business owner,
Jacquelyn Compton and Jeremy Pittman contend that staff was aware of
the second kitchen, and are requesting an appeal of staff's determination
that one (1) of the two (2) kitchens must be' removed from the site.
The Board of Adjustment is asked to determine whether it will be
necessary for the business owners to remove one (1) of the two (2)
kitchens. Attached is the applicant's letter giving a more detailed
description of their appeal. Also attached are the Home Occupation and
Privilege License applications as completed by Jacquelyn Compton and
submitted to staff on July 21, 2003.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 26, 2004)
Jeremy Pittman and Jacquelyn Compton were present, representing the
application. There were several persons present in opposition. Staff presented
the application.
Jeremy Pittman addressed the Board in support of the requested appeal. He
stated that he was not aware of the requirement not to create a second kitchen
when the home occupation application was filed. He stated that he became
aware of the requirement in February of this year. He stated that he would like to
not remove the original kitchen. He noted that the catering business would be
located at 4820 Country Club Blvd. on a temporary basis. He stated that he was
looking for a commercial location. He stated that the new kitchen would be
removed when the business moves.
David Wilbourne asked if services to the original kitchen could be disconnected.
Mr. Pittman noted that they could. Staff noted that at a minimum the stove would
need to be removed and the gas capped off. There was a brief discussion of this
issue.
Trudie Levy, of the Heights Neighborhood Association, addressed the Board in
opposition. She noted that an action plan for the neighborhood had been
FA
April 26, 2004
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.
completed. She stated that she wished not to have the zoning changed in the
neighborhood, opening the door for other commercial businesses in residential
zoning. There was a general discussion related to ordinance requirements for
home occupations.
Mike Mayton also spoke in opposition. He noted that the ordinance
requirements existed to protect property owners, and that two (2) kitchens in a
residence went beyond the intent of the ordinance. He asked the Board to
enforce the ordinance as intended and not approve the second kitchen. He also
discussed the area and traffic patterns in the neighborhood.
Vice Chairman Francis asked if the original kitchen were removed, could the
household function with the new kitchen only. Mr. Pittman indicated that it could.
There was a motion to approve the applicant's appeal and allow the second,
duplicate kitchen. The motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes, 3 nays and 2 absent.
The appeal was denied.
Mr. Pittman noted that the original kitchen would be removed.
C1