HomeMy WebLinkAbout1458-ZPWaal
Pro
DATE: July 19,1999
TO: Planning Commission and City Council
FROM: Stephen C. Richardson, Planning Director
SUBJECT: Consider a request for a zone change from RS (Residential Single Family Dwelling)
to NC (Neighborhood Commercial) or a more restrictive district with a specific use
permit for a day care center on Agnes between Gill and LaSalle, east of Grand Street.
MILE: 1458-Z/P
STAFF REPORT
Mary Elizabeth Grant wishes to open a day care center in a frame house at 4050 Agnes Street
in the north end for 40 children. The neighborhood is now zoned for single: family homes
only.
The applicant will need a zone change to NC to allow the day care as a permitted use or a
zone change to RM-M, RM-H or RCR and a specific use permit.
Rezoning this property will result in a "spot" zone change. The specific use permit
application is in compliance with four of the required eight conditions.
Exhibits are attached.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
Notices Mailed to Property Owners: 25
Responses in Favor: Responses in Opposition:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ORDINANCE PURPOSES
Lots 14 and 15, Block 2, Dixie Addition, Beaumont, Jefferson County, Texas containing 0.29
acres, more or less.
Planning Division (City Hall):
Working as a residential licensed Child, Care Provider has been my life for the past eight
years. During these eight years in my occupation I have seen mothers that go though chaos to
get their child to my home. I help when I can, but the fact that I can't leave my home, most of
the time , sometimes hinders me from helping the mothers get their child safely to, my home.
What I'm trying to say is, I don't want the house I'm trying to get zoned as commercial to be a
nuisance to the community, but a blessing. A daycare is needed in the community. Mothers in
the community often get discourage from becoming employed because of the circumstances
they sometimes find themselves in. They either don't have a car or the daycare is out of their
way. It could be a number of things. The home I have chosen is encompassed just right for
the community. Martin Elementary is not far away. Mothers might want their children to be in
daycare until they are able to come and get them . In a licensed residential home no more than
six children can be kept at one time. The compensation of six children isn't enough to take care
of my family after the overhead is paid. Which is, why I strongly believe that the house would be
perfect for myself and the community.
Sincerely,
Mary Grant
TVIJA-
d -
MU 1458-za: Request for a zone change from RS (Residential Single Family NORTH
Dwelling) to NC (Neighborhood Commercial) or a more restrictive district and a
specific use permit to allow a day care center. A
Location: 4050 Agnes SCALE
Applicant: Mary Elizabeth Grant 1"=200'
I A
me
14
—
Is
W
>;
to 91 Waii la
GCM
la
4'
EPeMM':'v04 ",,fr
9 PEMBROKE ST.
Ir
low
qs A
131 41
A5dj
4kZ
r4j /4
ao J9 Jos, J.A
ff
No I 111Z 143
YP
4 To
R0 9 a 1 '4
it
t
44
A '0-k
D—ly
Is
If /
sit
El
io -0 4
a
W
/W
WAS
It
Z
N
0
3
1" 8
Is
a
Fal
1: s
a r
41
8
a
36!
LA� 64CLE
/2
"S 0 r4 lip
LqSUBJECT
lip1 4 - "A
OIL
Iy.. w
o a Svc
3
3 too
JV,
Joe
3
4 011.
Q
Z.
Z
If W.
a
to
GILL STREET-
50
$0 1pZ
D.
1'1 `
w
, •
w
Iai so
ai
so.
al
o -10
W
3;.172
30*8
Ilt-3,
3
0
LiA
If �ao !11 0,118
"
! I
0
'j 949 it a
0
- .
; <.
ST
�t EVAte jS::1:1.
All
5C 50
2 1 30
it !It
20
,
.
1
4 1
i's
1
'01
17
1,171
106411
GA SIP
IT
41,1
J75 11
El
S
60
MORNING'SIDE
so
0-20
If I
k
�n iris—z A P
C
4t�
a
--�,4� e-Po\,o
a
LI
Aoso
Vcc.T
. C•P{a?w'Cwr/� L Jjw��1 `��yC.r_ aibY \L-\'� 5iC!�-c T. 1,"� 4.4�'P
V\YV.i.'.F1MV �. G• "�w .aw44 �vPV*.r 4"� ``�..�wlNa 1..61.�t.
"j 5'CvwC.Ke+.�t ' rirGiL 6'Carw 4\e' kn Sect TO I.it1L
,,, p ?k.,a %.� �Tc 1�at S A�`''�, ►�c, �'v a ate �,�..
EDUCAT-10NAL WORKSHOJ!
TOPIC: SPOT ZONING
Spot zoning is defined as amending the basic zoning, ordinance so as to reclassify
one or more tracts of land where the conditions occurring since the original
enactment of the zoning ordinance do not justify the change.' According to the
City Attorney, Lane Nichols, spot zoning connotes an unacceptable zone change
that singles out a single tract for treatment that differs from that accorded similar
surrounding land without proof of changes and conditions. Whatever definition is
used, there is no room for "valid" spot zoning. When reviewing zoning amendments
under the spot zoning doctrine, courts reverse the presumption of validity and
require the city to justify its rezoning.
Spot zoning is criticized because it is discriminatory. The only valid reason for
regulation of property is to preserve the general welfare of the public. Once a city
starts making exceptions to its general zoning scheme, many of the benefits of the
general plan are lost. if zoning is to work effectively the citizens of the
community must cooperate in seeing that the provisions of the ordinance are
enforced.
Spot zoning cases ordinarily deal with rezoning that benefits'a specific tract with
a use classification that is less restrictive than provided by the original zoning
ordinance. One theory of spot zoning is that when the legislative body departs
from its comprehensive plan and rezones especially to benefit a small tract, it
violates the enabling aces requirements that zoning be "in accordance with a
comprehensive plan". Thus stated, spot zoning is a problem of enabling authority
and does not raise constitutional issues.2
Spot zoning can be considered constitutionally defective as well. The departure
from the legitimate goals of comprehensive zoning make the action arbitrary and
therefore not within police power authority.
Texas courts have applied inconsistently a rule that invalidates specific tract
rezoning as spot zoning unless the municipality shows that rezoning is justified by
a "change of conditions that occurred between adoption of the original ordinance
and the rezoning". This approach injects the courts into the very heart of local
zoning decisions and reflects a basic distrust of municipalities when they amend
zoning ordinances to respond to particular landowner and neighborhood interests
instead of general community interests
Courts look much more carefully at zoning amendments than at original enactments.
Ordinarily, the review of amendments is focused on a favorable reclassification that
allows an unwelcome commercial or high -density residential use in a previously
restricted residential neighborhood. Favorable spot zoning can be constitutionally
defective from departing legitimate police power goals and for discriminating in
favor of the rezoned district.4
1McCoy and Butler, "A Constitutional Basic For Zoning;" The Texas Supreme
Court Page 7
2Mixon, John "Texas Municipal Zoning Law" Sec. 3.12.
31bid
4 Ibid
Spot zoning can ,be detrimental to the rezoned tract instead of beneficial. If the
legislative body singles out a tract and increases the burden of regulation that apply
to it, the owner may seek to invalidate the amendment on grounds that it
unconstitutionally deprives him of property by departing from the legitimate goals
of comprehensive zoning, or by applying zoning regulations in a discriminatory
fashion, or by confiscating his property by denying all uses that would produce a
reasonable rate of return.
The case that introduced the spot zoning doctrine to Texas, Barrington v. City of
Sherman, invalidated reverse spot zoning that discriminated against the rezoned
tract. A similar case, City of Beaumont v. Salhab applied the spot zoning rule to
invalidate a zoning amendment that imposed greater restrictions on a small tract.
Both cases stated that the ordinary presumption does not protect spot zoning and
that the city did not justify its action on the basis of changed conditions.
The City Attorney suggests that when we find ourselves faced with a spot zoning
situation, the following issues should be carefully considered:
1) The law demands that the approved zoning plan should be respected and not
altered for the special benefit of the landowner when the change will cause
substantial detriment to the surrounding land or serve no substantial public
purpose. Would the zone change be in compliance with the adopted
comprehensive plan?
2) Will this change adversely impact the surrounding properties? The nature
and degree of an adverse impact upon neighboring lands is important. Lots
that are rezoned in a way that is substantially inconsistent with the zoning
of the surrounding area, whether more or less restrictive, are likely to be
invalid.
3) 1s the tract of land suitable or unsuitable for use as presently zoned? This
is a factor. The size, shape and location of a tract of land or lot may
render it unusable or even confiscatory as zoned.
4) noes the proposed zone change bear a substantial relationship to the public
health, safety, morals or general welfare or protect and preserve historical
and cultural places and areas. The amendatory ordinance must bear a
substantial relationship to the aforementioned considerations.
ANALYSIS
CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC USE PERMIT
(SECTION 30-26.E, ZONING ORDINANCE
Application
is in
Compliance
CONDITIONS:
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;
1 That the establishment of the
specifie use will not impede the
normal and orderly development and
improvement of surrounding vacant
property; x
1 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 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;
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 property; and
8. That the proposed use is in accordance
with the Comprehensive Platt. x
Application
is not in Comments
Compliance Attached
ANALYSIS continued
This application for a specific use permit is in compliance with four (4) of the required eight
(8) conditions. Comments on conditions 1, 4, 5 and 7 follow:
1) The applicant proposes to operate a day care center with 40 children as clients. The
existing residential structure contains only 1,200 square feet. There is a small yard
on the north side of the house but there is no parking or screening proposed. The lot
measures 117' x I 10'.
4) The site plan was rejected by the Traffic and Transportation Division due to the
absence of a parking and driveway scheme to accommodate a day care center. The
street right-of-way width is only 34'with open ditches and an 18'wide pavement,
5) This is a neighborhood of single family frame homes. The outdoor activities and play
of up to 40 children could pose a noise problem for the neighbors in the immediate
vicinity.
7) The applicant has not proposed to construct the required 8' tall privacy fence nor the
required landscaping buffer. Neither has she requested modification to the
landscaping regulations.
GENERAL INFORMATION/PUBLIC UTILITIES
APPLICANT:
PROPERTY OWNER:
STATUS OF APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
PROPERTY SIZE:
EXISTING LAND USES:
FLOOD HAZARD ZONE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
NORTH:Residence
EAST: Residence
SOUTRIZesidence
WEST: Residence
Mary Elizabeth Grant
Annie Bell Roper
Prospective Buyer
4050 Agnes Street
RS (Residential Single Family Dwelling)
0.29 acres, more or less
Vacant house
"C" - (Minimal Hazards)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
RS(Residential Single Family Dwelling)
W
RS
RS
GENERAL INFORMATION/PUBLIC UTILITIES continued
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
OTHER PHYSICAL FEATURES:
STREETS:
DRAINAGE:
WATER:
SANITARY SEWER SERVICE:
FIRE PROTECTION:
ADEQUACY OF SERVICE:
Conservation and Revitalization
None
Agnes is a 34' wide residential right-of-way
with an 18'wide asphalt pavement,
Open ditches in Agnes.
There is a 2" water line in the street right-of-
way.
There is an 6" sanitary sewer in the, street.
Fire protection is provided by Station #2,
Wilson at Ironton.
Existing services and utilities are adequate but
the street right-of-way width and the pavement
are substandard.