Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2233-P DATE: June 15, 2015 TO: Planning Commission and City Council FROM: Chris Boone, Director of Planning and Community Development SUBJECT: Consider a request for a specific use permit to allow a law office in an RM-H (Residential Multiple Family Dwelling - Highest Density) District. FILE: 2233-P ___ STAFF REPORT The Planning staff recommends denial. The applicant would like to use the property at 2226 Hazel Avenue, to house his law firm. The office is to house two licensed lawyers and one assistant. Office hours would be from 8:00am - 5:00pm, Monday through Friday. Normal business would involve no more than two scheduled clients visiting the office for consultation at the same time. During an initial review, it might appear that a professional office in a block containing multiple apartment complexes and bordered by blocks containing a professional office and restaurants, might be acceptable. However, in determining whether or not this application for a new business, in this particular block should be approved, it is important to consider that the commercial uses in the adjacent blocks were established many years ago, at a time when this area was declining and conditions were different. Now, in 2015, in reviewing whether this particular Specific Use Permit (SUP) should be approved, it is important to consider several specific factors. First, it is important to consider the overall purpose of the Specific Use Permit process, which the Zoning Ordinance states as: Purpose. This section provides the City Council the opportunity to deny or to conditionally approve those uses for which specific use permits are required. These uses generally have unusual nuisance characteristics or are of a public or semi-public character often essential or desirable for the general convenience and welfare of the community. Because, however, of the nature of the use, the importance of the use’s relationship to the comprehensive plan, or possible adverse impact on neighboring properties of the use, review, evaluation, and exercise of planning judgment relative to the location and site plan of the proposed use are required.” In addition to the Purpose, described above, the Zoning Ordinance states that an SUP “shall be granted only if all of the eight (8) Conditions of Approval have been met. The summary analysis of these eight conditions is enclosed. However, below is a more detailed analysis of the three conditions that are most relevant. They are: (1) That the specific use will be compatible with and not injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property, nor significantly diminish or impair property values within the immediate vicinity; (2) That the establishment of the specific use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property; (3) That the proposed use is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. In the analysis of the Purpose as well as these three Conditions, it is important to first consider the Comprehensive Plan and what it calls for in this area of the Oaks District. In the Plan, this area is designated as a Stable Area—an area considered “free from blighted influences such as incompatible land uses…vacant parcels which may exist are good to excellent development sites”. As such, extra care should be given in allowing varying land uses. As a result, the question then becomes what would be considered the most appropriate action as specified by the Comprehensive Plan and most sound planning judgement as required by the Zoning Ordinance? To answer this, it is important to also consider the 2007 Oaks District Rezoning Study. This study sought to analyze which areas of the Oaks District had sufficiently stabilized to warrant rezoning to then further limit commercial and multi-family encroachment. The purpose was also meant to better align the zoning of the neighborhood with what was called for in the Comprehensive Plan. The action taken then as part of the study was to rezone some areas to R-S (Residential-Single-Family) (including the area across the street from this site), create a new type of zoning district, known as RCR-H (Residential Conservation and Revitalization-Historic) to further restrict commercial encroachment, and change the zoning of several blocks of RM-H (Residential Multi-Family-Highest Density) to R-S (Residential-Single-Family) zoning. It should be noted that while the south side of this block of Hazel was rezoned to R-S (Residential-Single-Family) zoning, the north side of this block remained RM-H. This and other areas were not changed, not necessarily due to a desire to allow and encourage commercial uses, through an SUP approval, but due to the prevalence of multi-family structures that would be very difficult or impossible to revert to back to single-family residences. For this SUP application, it is important to consider whether now, some eight years after the rezoning study, is this block still in need of commercial investment and mixed uses or whether, in 2015, this block continues to be stable or improving and still in need of being free from incompatible land uses? In order to answer this, we should look to such factors as rate of vacancies in the immediate area, the number of recent SUP applications for conversion to commercial use in the recent past and finally, trends in property values. First, research shows that currently, there are almost no vacancies that exist in this immediate area and other than this application, no applications for new commercial uses, via the SUP process, have been recently submitted within this block. An SUP was approved for a barber shop on the south side of Hazel, but this was in 1992. It is also worth noting that this application comes soon after this property was occupied as a residence for many years, which would indicate that a residence would be a viable use. With regard to trends in property values, our research showed that of the seventeen (17) structures in this thth block of Hazel (excluding those along 7 and 6), sixteen (16) showed significant increases in value (as appraised by the Jefferson County Appraisal District)-significant evidence of stabilization. In 2003, the value of these seventeen (17) properties was $931,490, in 2007 the value was $1,292,640, and in 2014, the total value was $1,424,830. Not only did all but one of the structures increase in value, the increase in value from 2003 to 2014 was greater than fifty percent (50%). This rate compares to an increase rate of only 12.4% in another more traditionally stable part of Old Town, 20% in an area on the south side of Calder Avenue in Old Town, as well as an increase in value of 13% at a randomly selected, but similar RM-H property in another part of the city (Please see attached chart for property value data). Finally, it is important to consider the non-residential nature of the business itself. This would include the daytime-only occupancy as well as the traffic associated with employees and clients. While it could be argued that the impact of the use would be somewhat limited compared to other commercial uses and might be appropriate in areas of the Oaks District that continue to struggle, it can also be argued that this type of use is substantially different than that of residential uses and would be considered incompatible. In summary, cities with declining historic neighborhoods often turn to light commercial uses—especially professional offices to help stabilize an area. While it can be argued that certain blocks in the Oaks District continue to struggle to stabilize and may continue to need a variety of uses, their RCR-H zoning specifically calls for this and allows it if granted an SUP. This particular block of Hazel, while maintaining its RM-H zoning due to the prevalence of multi-family structures and uses, has stabilized in the eight (8) years since the last zoning study and is designated as a Stable Area in the Comprehensive Plan. As such, adding this new office in this established residential block would not be compatible and would be considered injurious to adjacent properties and would impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant and improved properties. Exhibits are attached. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Notices mailed to property owners 30 Responses in Favor Responses in Opposition LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ORDINANCE PURPOSES BEING Lot 23 and the east 8' of Lot 22, Block 7, Averill Addition, Beaumont, Jefferson County, Texas, containing 0.16 Acres, more or less. ANALYSIS CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT (SECTION 28-26.E, ZONING ORDINANCE) Application Application is in is not in Comments compliance compliance Attached Conditions: 1. That the specific use will be compatible with and not injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property, or significantly diminish or impair property values X X within the immediate vicinity; 2. That the establishment of the specific use will not impede the normal and orderly development and X X improvement of surrounding vacant property; 3. That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary supporting facilities have been or will be provided; X 4. The design, location and arrangement of all driveways and parking spaces provides for the safe and convenient movement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic without adversely affecting the general public or X X adjacent developments; 5. That adequate nuisance prevention measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise and vibration; X 6. That directional lighting will be provided so as not to disturb or adversely affect neighboring properties; X 7. That there are sufficient landscaping and screening to insure harmony and compatibility with adjacent X X property; and, 8. That the proposed use is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. X X ANALYSIS continued This application is in conformance with three of the eight conditions necessary for approval. Comments on Conditions 1, 2, 4, 7 and 8 follow: 1. Due to the increasing stability of this area and the lack of other commercial uses in this immediate area and designation as “Stable” in the Comprehensive Plan, allowing professional offices would be considered injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property and could significantly diminish or impair property values within the immediate vicinity. 2. Due to the increasing stability of this area and the lack of other commercial uses in this immediate area, the establishment of the specific use will impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property. 4. The applicant proposes to expand parking in the rear yard to add 3 parking spaces, including an ADA compliant parking space. 7. Applicant is requesting a waiver to the buffer requirement as existing buildings, driveway and proposed parking encroach into the required ten (10) feet. Applicant wishes to keep existing fencing in an attempt to maintain the residential nature of the property as much as possible. 8. The Comprehensive Plan identifies this block as a Stable Area. GENERAL INFORMATION/PUBLIC UTILITIES APPLICANT: Audwin M. Samuel PROPERTY OWNER: Norris and Gwendolyn Turner LOCATION: 2226 Hazel Avenue EXISTING ZONING: RM-H (Residential Multiple Family Dwelling - Highest Density) District PROPERTY SIZE: ~0.16 acres EXISTING LAND USES: Vacant Residential FLOOD HAZARD ZONE: X – Area determined to be outside the 500 year flood plain SURROUNDING LAND USES: SURROUNDING ZONING: NORTH: Residential RM-H (Residential Multiple Family Dwelling - Highest Density) District EAST: Multi-Family RM-H SOUTH: Residential RS (Residential Single Family Dwelling) WEST: Residential RM-H COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Stable Area STREETS: Hazel Avenue: Local street with 60’ right-of-way and 30’ pavement width. DRAINAGE: Curb and gutter WATER: 2” Water line SANITARY SEWER SERVICE: 6” Sanitary Sewer line PROPERTY OWNERS NOTIFIED HOFFPAUIR MARCIE K BYERLY JESSICA BRAMBLE ROXANNE N BUEHRLE PATSY COOPER DARRELLA TALLEY MICHAEL FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSN BROUSSARD BRIAN KEITH O'NEIL CYNTHIA F FINICAL TONY A ELLIS ORA ESTATE HOBSON HERSCHEL L ET UX DOTY ROY R & AUDREY J DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST JEPSON BARRY & MARY DELL BEAUMONT ISD PLATINUM PROSPECT LTD SESMAS MACEDONIA ALBARRAN BROUSSARD BRIAN & CULLEN SMITH INVESTMENTS LLC WILLIAMS VANESSA TURNER NORRIS & GWENDOLYN COLORADO RIVER PROPERTIES LLC OLD TOWN INVESTORS JORDAN JOE JACKSON TRUST WILLIAMS DONALD LEWIS MARK & SUZANNE S JORDAN RALPH & VIRGINIA FERNANDEZ GREGORY & CAROLYN JONES PAUL DATE: June 15, 2015 TO: Planning Commission and City Council FROM: Chris Boone, Director of Planning and Community Development SUBJECT: Consider a request for a specific use permit to allow a law office in an RM-H (Residential Multiple Family Dwelling - Highest Density) District. FILE: 2233-P ___ STAFF REPORT The Planning staff recommends 1. Parking shall be paved and striped as per the plan. Audwin M. Samuel would like to use the property at 2226 Hazel Avenue, to house his law firm. The office is to house two licensed lawyers and one assistant. Office hours would be from 8:00am - 5:00pm, Monday through Friday. Normal business would involve no more than two scheduled clients visiting the office for consultation at the same time. Please note that final occupancy approval is subject to review and acceptance of submitted plans and field inspections to verify compliance with applicable codes. Exhibits are attached. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Notices mailed to property owners 30 Responses in Favor Responses in Opposition LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ORDINANCE PURPOSES BEING Lot 23 and the east 8' of Lot 22, Block 7, Averill Addition, Beaumont, Jefferson County, Texas, containing 0.16 Acres, more or less. ANALYSIS CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT (SECTION 28-26.E, ZONING ORDINANCE) Application Application is in is not in Comments compliance compliance Attached Conditions: 1. That the specific use will be compatible with and not injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property, or significantly diminish or impair property values within the immediate vicinity; X 2. That the establishment of the specific use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding vacant property; X 3. That adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary supporting facilities have been or will be provided; X 4. The design, location and arrangement of all driveways and parking spaces provides for the safe and convenient movement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic without adversely affecting the general public or X X adjacent developments; 5. That adequate nuisance prevention measures have been or will be taken to prevent or control offensive odor, fumes, dust, noise and vibration; X 6. That directional lighting will be provided so as not to disturb or adversely affect neighboring properties; X 7. That there are sufficient landscaping and screening to insure harmony and compatibility with adjacent X X property; and, 8. That the proposed use is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. X ANALYSIS continued This application is in conformance with six of the eight conditions necessary for approval. Comments on Conditions 4 and 7 follow: 4. The applicant proposes to expand parking in the rear yard to add 3 parking spaces, including an ADA compliant parking space. 7. Applicant is requesting a waiver to the buffer requirement as existing buildings, driveway and proposed parking encroach into the required ten (10) feet. Applicant wishes to keep existing fencing in an attempt to maintain the residential nature of the property as much as possible. GENERAL INFORMATION/PUBLIC UTILITIES APPLICANT: Audwin M. Samuel PROPERTY OWNER: Norris and Gwendolyn Turner LOCATION: 2226 Hazel Avenue EXISTING ZONING: RM-H (Residential Multiple Family Dwelling - Highest Density) District PROPERTY SIZE: ~0.16 acres EXISTING LAND USES: Vacant Residential FLOOD HAZARD ZONE: X – Area determined to be outside the 500 year flood plain SURROUNDING LAND USES: SURROUNDING ZONING: NORTH: Residential RM-H (Residential Multiple Family Dwelling - Highest Density) District EAST: Multi-Family RM-H SOUTH: Residential RS (Residential Single Family Dwelling) WEST: Residential RM-H COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Stable Area STREETS: Hazel Avenue: Local street with 60’ right-of-way and 30’ pavement width. DRAINAGE: Curb and gutter WATER: 2” Water line SANITARY SEWER SERVICE: 6” Sanitary Sewer line PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 200 FEET HOFFPAUIR MARCIE K BYERLY JESSICA BRAMBLE ROXANNE N BUEHRLE PATSY COOPER DARRELLA TALLEY MICHAEL FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSN BROUSSARD BRIAN KEITH O'NEIL CYNTHIA F FINICAL TONY A ELLIS ORA ESTATE HOBSON HERSCHEL L ET UX DOTY ROY R & AUDREY J DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST JEPSON BARRY & MARY DELL BEAUMONT ISD PLATINUM PROSPECT LTD SESMAS MACEDONIA ALBARRAN BROUSSARD BRIAN & CULLEN SMITH INVESTMENTS LLC WILLIAMS VANESSA TURNER NORRIS & GWENDOLYN COLORADO RIVER PROPERTIES LLC OLD TOWN INVESTORS JORDAN JOE JACKSON TRUST WILLIAMS DONALD LEWIS MARK & SUZANNE S JORDAN RALPH & VIRGINIA FERNANDEZ GREGORY & CAROLYN JONES PAUL