Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7724 Staff AnalysisFebruary 3, 2005 19:11JiI►Lem 91 FILE NO.- Z-7724 NAME. Mae-Mae's Homecare Day Care Center — Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: 3500 Zion Street OWNER/APPLICANT: Mary Morrow PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow a day care center in the existing residence on this R-3 zoned lot. 1. SITE LOCATION: The property is located on the southwest corner of Zion and West 35th Streets. 2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: The property is located within a neighborhood that is almost exclusively single family in zoning and use. A church and a city park are located two blocks to the southeast. Otherwise, all properties in the area around this site appear to be, single family. The proposed use is not a day care family home but a day care center with 24 hour per day operation. Staff does not believe this use is appropriate in this area. All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within 300 feet who could be identified and the John Barrow Neighborhood Association were notified of this request. 3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: The day care center operates in three shifts with 16 children in each of the two daytime shifts and up to 6 overnight. There are 6 employees, 3 who live on-site and 3 off-site. The parking requirement for a day care center is one space per employee on the largest shift plus one space per facility vehicle plus one space per 10 children of licensed capacity. If half the employees work each shift, it appears 4 parking spaces are required; assuming there is no overlap in attendance. The site does have a paved parking — drop-off area on the 35th Street perimeter. The parking area does not appear to be sufficient for the use. The applicant states the employees who live off site live close enough to walk or are dropped off. February 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7724 4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS: The entire rear yard area, including the playground is enclosed by a 6 foot tall, wood privacy fence which is constructed in "good neighbor" fashion; with the finished side facing out. 5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: No Comments. 6. UTILITY FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. Entergy: Approved as submitted. CenterPoint Energy: Approved as submitted. Southwestern Bell: No Comments received. Water: No objection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No Comments. CATA: The site is not located on a CATA bus route. A bus route is located one block to the south, on West 36th Street. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (SEPTEMBER 30, 2004) The applicant was present. Staff presented the item and informed the applicant that additional information was needed including: a copy of the bill of assurance; hours of the "shifts"; number of employees living on-site and off-site; signage; site lighting and a copy of the day care's current DHS license. Staff informed the Committee that the day care was a 24-hour per day operation, with two shifts plus overnight care. Staff asked the applicant of the fenced property adjacent to the west was used for the day care since the fencing was similar and there was playground equipment in the area. Ms. Morrow stated the adjacent property was not used in any way for the day care operation. Staff noted the existing parking design did not comply with code standards since it appeared that vehicles backed into the street. Gary Langlais asked Ms. Morrow what the neighbors felt about the business. She responded that no one seemed to have 2 February 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: D (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7724 any problems. Staff asked Ms. Morrow if this was her only residence; if she lived anywhere else, any other day of the week. Ms. Morrow responded that this was her sole residence. Ms. Morrow stated she had kept children at her home for 17 years but until 6 years ago had not kept more than 5 children. The applicant was advised to respond to staff issues by October 6, 2004. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission. STAFF ANALYSIS: The R-3 zoned property located at 3500 Zion Street is occupied by a one-story, 2,300 square foot, frame, single family residence. The occupant of the home has kept children at the site for 17 years, in some capacity. Six years ago, she received a license from the State as a day care family home and began keeping up to 16 children. Prior to that, she did not keep more than 5 children. During staff's recent review of state licensed day cares, this business was found not to have received a C.U.P. An enforcement notice was issued and the owner subsequently applied for this C.U.P. The day care center operates in three shifts. 16 children are kept from 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.; 16 from 3:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.; and 2 to 6 from 8:00 p.m. to 6:30 a.m. The business has 6 employees; 3 who live in the home. A paved parking/drop-off area is located on the north side of the house. The applicant states parents pull off of 35th Street and park parallel to the house so that they do not back into the street. Staff does not believe the parking area complies with ordinance standards. The rear yard area, including the playground, is enclosed by a 6 foot tall, wood, privacy fence. Lighting consists of porch lights and one night watcher in the yard. The applicant has stated this is her sole residence. The John Barrow bill of assurance does not address use issues. The applicant owns the lots adjacent to the west which are also enclosed by a privacy fence. Staff observed playground equipment in this area, but the applicant stated that area is not used for the day care. Staff does not support the proposed day care center at this location. The property is located within a neighborhood which is almost entirely single family in use. The property is not on the edge or fringe of a neighborhood where it might be more appropriate to have this level of nonresidential use. The operation is 24 hours per day in nature with 2 shifts of 16 children each and a third shift of up to 6 children. The business has 6 employees, 3 of whom live off-site. The applicant has stated she wishes to erect a small (1.5'X 2.5') sign which further adds to the nonresidential nature of the use. Staff believes this use is too intense and is inappropriate for this site. February 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: D Cont. FILE NO.: Z-7724 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the application. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 21, 2004) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant submitted a letter requesting that the application be deferred to the December 16, 2004 agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. With a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent, the Commission voted to waive their bylaws and accept the deferral request less than five (5) days prior to the public hearing. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the December 16, 2004 agenda. A motion to that effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. The application was deferred. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 16, 2004) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. One person was registered in support. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of denial. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, spoke of the history and code requirements of day care family homes and day care centers. The applicant, Mary Morrow, spoke in support of her application. She stated she had three shifts. Ms. Morrow stated she currently had 4 employees and a total of 11, 16 and 5 children on the three respective shifts. She stated there were no objections from her neighbors. She stated she spent $30,000 remodeling her house to comply with DHS requirements for the day care. Doris Wright, president of the John Barrow Neighborhood Association, spoke in support of the application. She stated Ms. Morrow had appeared at the Association's October 2003 meeting. Ms. Wright stated the persons present were in support of the day care but no formal vote was taken. She stated the day care was unobtrusive and not a distraction. Chairman Rahman asked Ms. Morrow if she could reduce the number of children, employees and hours of operation. 4 February 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: D (Cont. FILE NO.: Z-7724 Commissioner Meyer asked Ms. Morrow what DHS had required that cost $30,000. Ms. Morrow responded that they required separate restrooms, new sinks and tile and other improvements. Commissioner Adcock commented that it sounded like the requirements for a commercial day care business. Commissioner Rector asked staff what additional conditions were proposed. Mr. Carney responded that the application was as presented by the applicant, with no additional conditions proposed by staff since staff was recommending denial. Chairman Rahman again asked the applicant to consider what changes could be made. Commissioner Rector told Ms. Morrow that hers was a commercial business, as viewed by the Planning Commission. He stated DHS had issued a license that they should not have issued. He stated there was a problem with setting a negative precedent, if the Commission were to approve her application. Deputy City Attorney Cindy Dawson suggested the applicant consider a deferral to think through the issues raised by staff and the Commission. Doris Wright, asked what the Commission would find acceptable. Chairman Rahman responded that Ms. Morrow should consider reducing the number of employees, number of children and hours of operation. Staff was asked if they would support a day care family home at this location. Dana Carney responded that staff would review any amended application. He noted that staff typically was supportive of day care family homes. Commissioner Rector suggested a 6 -week deferral. Ms. Morrow agreed. A motion was made to defer the item to the February 3, 2005 Agenda. The motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 3 absent. STAFF UPDATE: Since the December 16, 2004 meeting, Mrs. Morrow has amended her application. In an effort to address some of staff's concerns, she is proposing to reduce the number of children and to lessen the days and hours of operation. She now proposes to operate the day care Monday through Friday from 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Sixteen children will be kept from 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Only 10 children will be kept from 3:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. The applicant no longer proposes to have any signage. The number of employees will likely drop with the corresponding reduction in the number of children. 5 February 3, 2005 ITEM NO.: D Cont. FILE NO.: Z-7724 While still clearly a day care center as defined by City Code, the proposed use now more nearly resembles a day care family home in days of operation, the number of children and the lack of signage. Ms. Morrow has been operating her childcare business at a day care level for over 6 years, apparently without any neighborhood complaints. It was only during staffs review of state licensed day cares that this business was found not to have a G.U.P. Additionally, the lack of negative impact seems to be corroborated by the fact that neighborhood association representatives have spoken on behalf of the application. Staff typically would not support a day care center of this scope in the heart of a residential neighborhood. However, in light of the lack of past complaints, the apparent support of the neighborhood and the amendments offered by the applicant; staff will support this particular application. Amended Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the application as amended by the applicant subject to compliance with the following conditions: 1. Days and hours of operation are to be Monday through Friday, 7:00 a.m. through 11:00 p.m. 2. No more than 16 children are to be kept from 7:00 a.m. through 3:00 p.m. and no more than 10 children are to be kept from 3:00 p.m. through 11:00 P.M. 3. There is to be no signage on the site identifying the day care. 4. Outdoor activities including use of the playground are to be limited to day light hours. 5. The lots adjacent to the west of this site are not to be used for -the day care. 6. Drop-off and pick-up of children are to take place on the paved parking area and not in the public right-of-way. 7. The C.U.P. is only for the applicant, Mary Morrow, and her occupancy of this property as her sole residence. The C.U.P. is not transferable to any other individual. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 3, 2005) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the "Staff Recommendation" above. There was no additional discussion. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff; including all staff comments and conditions. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. 1.