Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7800 Staff AnalysisMarch 17, 2005 ITEM NO.: 1 _ FILE NO.: Z-7 Name: Badgett Day Care Family Home — Special Use Permit Location: 4120 West Drive Owner: Rotekia Badgett Applicant: Rotekia Badgett Proposal: A Special Use Permit is requested to allow a Day Care Family Home to be operated in the single family residence located on the R-2 zoned property at 4120 West Drive. A. Public Notification: All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within 300 feet who could be identified, and the Upper Baseline and SWLR United for Progress Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. B. Staff Analysis: 4120 West Drive is located on the north side of West Drive, east of Reck Road. All surrounding properties are zoned R-2 and contain single family residences. The large single family lot contains approximately 1.5 acres. The applicarrt's home is a one-story frame structure, and is typical of those in the general area. The entire yard is fenced and should provide a safe play area. The applicant has noted that she will separately fence a smaller play area, within the fenced yard. The applicant proposes to operate the day care from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. The applicant has noted that she will have no employees initially. Her mother, who also lives at 4120 West Drive, will help care for the children in the future. There is a two -car wide driveway from West Drive, with parking for five (5) vehicles (including the carport). Staff feels that this will allow sufficient space for drop-off and pick-up of children. On inspection of the site, staff observed no vehicles parked on unpaved areas. Staff also observed no vehicles on the site, which were not operational. The applicant is not currently operating a day care use at this location, as she is in the process of becoming licensed by the State Department of Human Services. March 17, 2005 ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7800 The principal use of the property will remain single family residential. No signage beyond that allowed in single family zones will be permitted. The applicant submitted a copy of the Bill of Assurance for this neighborhood, which was recorded in 1950 and addresses no use issues. Section 36-54(e)(3) of the City of Little Rock Zoning Ordinance establishes the site and location criteria for day care family homes as follows: Day care family home: a. This use may be located only in a single family home, occupied by the care giver and which is the full time residence of the care giver. b. Must be operated within licensing procedures established by the State of Arkansas. State regulations shall control the number of employees residing off premises. c. The use is limited to ten (10) children including the care givers. d. The minimum to qualify for special use permit is six (6) children from households other than the care givers. e. This use must obtain a special use permit in all districts where day care centers are not allowed by right. After the effective date of this subsection, no Special Use Permit will be approved for a day care family proposed to be located within 300 feet of a licensed day care center or an operating day care family home for which a Special Use Permit has previously been approved. For the purposes of this subsection, the distance between properties shall be measured in a straight line without regard to intervening structures or objects, from property line to property line. g. All day care family homes located in the City of Little Rock are required to obtain a City of Little Rock business license and to pay an annual business tax as specified in Chapter 17. of the Code. h. A copy of the day care family home's current State of Arkansas license must be submitted to the City Collector's Office each year at the time of payment of the annual business tax. i. All vehicles must be parked on an on-site paved surface. 2 March 17, 2005 ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7800 j. All vehicles located on the site must be operational. k. All pick-up and drop-off of children shall be on the property's driveway and not on the public right-of-way unless otherwise approved by the Planning Commission. I. Special Use Permits for day care family homes shall be reviewed by staff every three (3) years for compliance with the development criteria and Planning Commission approval. m. The Fire Marshall must approve use of the residence for the proposed day care family home. Special Use Permits are not transferable in any manner. Permits cannot be transferred from owner to owner, location to location or use to use. To staff's knowledge, there are no outstanding issues associated with this application. Staff feels that the proposed day care family home at this location will have no adverse impact on the general area. Based on information provided by the State, there are no permitted/licensed day care family homes or day care centers within 300 feet of the site. C. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (FEBRUARY 24, 2005) Rotekia Badgett was present, representing the application. Staff presented the proposed special use permit request. Staff noted that inspection of the property revealed no violations of the ordinance requirements for day care family homes. Staff noted that the proposed day care family home was not located within 300 feet of another day care family home or day care center. After the discussion, the Committee forwarded the application to the full Commission for final action. D. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Special Use Permit to allow a day care family home at 4120 West Drive, subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the site and location criteria established in Section 36-54(e)(3). 2. There is to be no signage beyond that permitted in single family zones. 3 March 17, 2005 ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7800 ' 3. Outdoor activities, including playground use, are to be limited to day- light hours. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 17, 2005) Rotekia Badgett was present, representing the application. There were five (5) objectors present and one (1) person in support. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in support of the application. She noted that the application met City and State requirements. Janet Berry addressed the Commission in opposition. She noted that she supported Upper Baseline Neighborhood Association's opposition to the day care use. Pat Gee addressed the Commission in opposition. She described the neighborhood and how it had been cleaned up over the years. She stated that she would like to keep West Drive a residential area. Sally Majors also spoke in opposition. She stated that business uses should not be allowed in residential areas. She expressed concern that the house was not large enough for the day care use. R.M. Foster also spoke in opposition. He described the neighborhood, noting that West Drive was a narrow street. He noted that West Drive was not a suitable location for a day care use. Troy Laha also addressed the Commission in opposition. He explained that business uses should not be allowed in residential areas. Rotekia Badgett addressed the Commission in support of the application. She noted that the State Department of Human Services had approved her for a day care family home. She explained that her mother would help care for the children. She also explained that the large yard area would provide a good play area which should create little noise. Commissioner Adcock asked Ms. Badgett if she wanted to own her own business. Ms. Badgett stated that she did. Commissioner Adcock asked Ms. Badgett if she considered the day care use a business. Ms. Badgett stated 51 March 17, 2005 ITEM NO.: 1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7800 that it was employment for herself and family. Commissioner Floyd asked if Ms. Badgett was in the process of buying the home. Ms. Badgett stated that she was. There was a brief discussion of the parking required for a day care family home. There was additional discussion of the State's license requirements for day care family homes. There was a motion to approve the application as recommended by staff. The motion failed by a vote of 3 ayes, 6 nays and 2 absent. The application was denied. 5