STAFF REPORT PARISH COUNCIL Docket No. ES-99-21 Summary …

PAB Planning Department | clm Page 1 of 9 10/7/2021 Jefferson Parish, Louisiana ES-99-21

Planning Department

Bessie L. Renfrow Director

STAFF REPORT

Docket No. ES-99-21 Summary No.Major Subdivision

PARISH COUNCIL A: Ricky J. Templet

B: Scott Walker 1: Marion F. Edwards

2: Deano Bonano 3: Byron Lee

4: Dominick Impastato 5: Jennifer Van Vrancken

Cynthia Lee Sheng Parish President

504-736-6320 | Yenni Building, 1221 Elmwood Park Blvd, Ste 601, Jefferson, LA 70123 | [email protected]

Subdivision: Green Acres Subdivision Location: 816 Colony Pl.; bounded by Eddy Rd., Marguerite Rd., and W. Metairie Ave. (Figure 1) Owner: Investment Holdings, LLC Applicant: Fred Mesa

Council District: 2 PAB Hearing: 10/21/2021 Last Meeting Date for Council Action: 2/16/2022

CURRENT ZONING/FUTURE LAND USE (Figures 2 and 3)

Zoning: R-1A Single Family Residential

FLU: SUB Suburban Residential

REQUEST Subdivide Lots 25 and 26, Sq. B, Green Acres Subdivision into Lots 25A and 26A, Sq. B, Green Acres Subdivision (Table 2)

RECOMMENDATIONS Planning Department: Denial for the following reasons:

• Proposed Lots 25A and 26A do not meet the neighborhood norm.• Although proposed Lot 25A would represent an increase in conformance, the

resulting buildable area would still be significantly more constrained thandevelopment sites within the area.

• The proposed re-subdivision is a violation of Sec. 40-740, Sub-standard Lots ofRecord, of the Jefferson Parish Code of Ordinances.

Planning Advisory Board: to be determined

CONSISTENCY WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The proposal is not consistent with the following goal and objective of the Land Use


element: • Goal 3: “New development and redevelopment are compatible with established

residential, commercial, or industrial areas.”

FINDINGS 1. The petitioned property consists of Lots 25 and 26 within Square B of Green Acres

Subdivision at the corner of Colony Place and W. Metairie Ave. The lots are currently undeveloped, but were previously developed with a single-family dwelling as a single development site. That dwelling was demolished under Permit No. 15-330318.

2. Existing Lot 25 has a frontage of 15 feet, a depth of 119 feet and an area of 4,392 square feet. Existing Lot 26 has a frontage of 60 feet, a depth of 115 feet and an area of 5,750 square feet. The purpose of this request is to shift the interior lot line 10 feet south, thus reducing 10 feet of frontage from Lot 26 (new lot 26A) and increasing 10 feet of frontage for Lot 25 (new lot 25A). Both new lots will be developed as two independent development sites. (Figure 4)

3. The R-1A Single Family Residential district requires a minimum width of 50 ft., depth of 100 ft., and area of 5,000 sq. ft. Current Lot 26 meets all district requirements; however current Lot 25 is deficient in lot area and lot width. Thus, Lot 25 is a sub-standard lot.

4. Pursuant to Sec. 40-740, where two (2) or more adjoining and vacant lots with continuous frontage are in a single ownership at the time of passage of Ordinance No. 5687, and such lots have a frontage or lot area less than is required by the district in which they are located, such lots shall be re-platted or re-subdivided so as to create one (1) or more lots which conform to the minimum lot area requirements of the district.

5. Pursuant to Sec. 40-94(b), the lot area requirements for the R-1A district mandate that every lot have an area of not less than 5,000 square feet, a width of not less than 50 feet and a depth of not less than 100 feet. While the proposed lots meet the minimum lot depth and area requirements of the R-1A district and proposed Lot 26A meets the minimum width requirement of the district, proposed Lot 25A does not. Jefferson Parish code defines lot width as the average horizontal distance between side lot lines (Sec. 40-3). Proposed Lot 25A contains a width of 48.2 ft., which is 1.8 feet short of the required 50 feet. Thus, the proposed re-subdivision is in violation of Sec. 40-740 of the Jefferson Parish Code of Ordinances.

6. Per Sec. 33-6.6.4, to maintain the stability and uniqueness of residential neighborhoods, the Parish Council, may consider neighborhood norm in granting or denying a request for subdivision approval where the lots to be created are not in conformity with the characteristics of the existing lots in the immediate area. Sec. 33-2.31.2 of the Unified Development Code requires subdivisions which the Planning Director has determined to differ substantially from the neighborhood norm to be reviewed by the Jefferson Parish Council.


7. The Planning Department conducted a neighborhood norm analysis for the proposed subdivision to determine consistency with the existing lot and development pattern for the immediate area. Per Sec. 33-6.6.4, the immediate area is defined as the area that consists of two street blocks on either or both sides of a street and not less than 600 ft. from subject property. The immediate area for the current proposal extends south along both sides of Colony Pl. for approximately 1200 ft. until the end of the block, and residential development sites 600 ft. extending both east and west along W. Metairie Ave. from Haring Rd. to Darlene Ave. (Figure 5)

8. Neighborhood norm is determined based, in part, on the following factors: the general purpose or intent of the original lot layout within the immediate area of the proposed re-subdivision; predominant front footage or lot width within the immediate area of subject property; the predominant square footage (lot area) of the lots within the immediate area of subject property; the average lot area and/or lot frontage within the immediate area of subject property; neighborhood stability relative to the frequency of re-subdivision of lots within the immediate area of subject property.

a. The neighborhood norm analysis revealed that 48 of the 51 lots within the immediate area contain a width of at least 60 ft.

i. In comparison, proposed Lot 26A would only have a width of 50 ft. while proposed Lot 25A would have a width of 48.2 ft. The site has historically functioned as a single development site with a combined width of 98.2 ft. and frontage of 75.72 ft. (Figure 5)

ii. Additionally, the neighborhood norm analysis revealed that 44 of the lots within the immediate area contain a lot frontage of 60 ft. In comparison, proposed Lot 26A would have a frontage on Colony Pl. of 50 ft. and Lot 25A would only have a frontage on Colony Pl. of 25.72 ft. which is a difference of 34.28 ft.

b. Currently, corner lots along West Metairie Ave. similar in pattern to Lot 25, including Lot 24 to the west, as well as Lots 22 and 23 on the block to the east, are all incorporated into a development site with the abutting lot just as Lot 25 had been previously with Lot 26. These development sites all meet the district requirements. (Figure 5)


Table 1 – Neighborhood Norm Analysis

Lots Frontage (ft.)

Area (sq. ft.)

Average for the 39 development sites (not including corner sites along W. Metairie) in

the immediate area along Colony Pl. 63.08 7,253.85

Average for the seven corner residential sites on the south side of West Metairie Ave.

91.86 (on respective

side streets) 10,420.06

Proposed Lot 25A 25.72 5,542.43 Proposed Lot 26A 50 5,750

9. The general purpose or intent of the layout of the corner lots in the immediate area

of the proposed re-subdivision was for these lots to function as a single development site. This is clear from the fact that the corner lots along West Metairie Ave. in the immediate area, Lots 23 and 24 to the west and Lots 22, 21, 23 and 34 to the east, have a similar layout to that of Lots 25 and 26, and are all developed as a single development site. These development sites all meet the district requirements. (Figure 5)

10. Thus, the neighborhood norm analysis clearly shows that the proposed lots are not in conformity with the characteristics of the existing lots in the immediate area and do not serve to maintain the stability of this residential neighborhood.

11. The UDC has established a set of review criteria for preliminary and final plats, which have been applied to the proposed subdivision (Table 4). Additional criteria for “Block and Lot Standards” have also been applied (Table 5). The proposed subdivision does not comply with the criteria


DEPARTMENT COMMENTS

Table 2: Land Use Review Technical Committee (LURTC) Comments Department Position Comment/Stipulation

Public Works Not Opposed

ES-99-21 the Department of Public Works (on 06/08/2021) this 'no objection' statement/letter is strictly based on technical issue(s). It does not address any potential Code of Ordinance violations/regulations. Such regulations shall be addressed by other departments such as Code Enforcement, Planning, etc' prior to the granting of a permit. Requires the Planning Department to place the general stamp on the plan. Both lots have access to sewer connections and water. The 6' servitude shown on the survey is not a Parish servitude. Streets Department has no objections. Sewer Department has no comment. Traffic Engineering Division finds that the sight triangles are not an issue at this time and a TIA is not required. Parkways has no comment, no landscape plan submitted. If the existing house connection cannot be located or not usable, a new connection will be required at the property owner's expense.

ICE-Building Not Opposed

As per Sec. 40-94. Area Regulations. (b) Lot Area. Lot 25A will not meet the area requirement of 5000 sq. ft., the lot will be 4392.43 sq. ft., short 606.57 per requirement. Also the lot will not meet the minimum width requirement of 50', the average width will be 48.21', short 1.79'.


Table 2: Land Use Review Technical Committee (LURTC) Comments Department Position Comment/Stipulation

Engineering-Site Plan Not Opposed

1) The property owner is responsible for any damage to right of way improvements (including the existing sidewalks or driveways) during or after the construction of any new structure(s) or demolition of any existing structure(s). Any damage must be repaired, or improvements replaced in accordance to the Jefferson Parish Engineering standards. Any existing driveway apron for any new residential construction will not be permitted to remain and must be replaced to comply with those standards. Please contact the department of Engineering at (504) 349-5173 or (504) 736-6793 prior to beginning any sidewalk / driveway apron construction. 2) Further comments will be made at the permit stage. Contact Site Plan Review at: (504) 736-6397 for more information and a complete list of requirements.

Parish Attorney Not Opposed We will defer to the other departments for comments.

Fire Not Opposed Acceptable 911 Not Opposed

TABLES

Lot #

Primary Frontage

Avg. Width (ft.)

Avg. Depth (ft.)

Area (sq. ft.)

Existing 25 Colony Pl. 38.20 119.24 4,392.43 Existing 26 Colony Pl. 60 115 6,900 Proposed 25A Colony Pl. 48.20 115 5,542.43 Proposed 26A Colony Pl. 50 119.24 5,750


Table 4: Major subdivision review criteria for preliminary/final plats

[Section 33-2.32]

Criteria Compliance

Yes | No Comments Consistent with Comprehensive Plan No See above Consistent with existing or proposed zoning of property No Lot 25A does not meet the

minimum lot width Availability of adequate facilities and services Yes See Public Works comment Suitability of site for proposed development No Lot 25A results in a

constrained buildable area

Compatibility of development with existing and planned land use pattern No

Other corner lots such as 25 are in a single

development site with abutting lot

Compatibility of development with neighborhood norm No

Development sites in proximity are at least 60 ft

in width. Development is within reasonable distance to public facilities and access Yes Public access and facilities

are provided Consistent with adopted design for lots and blocks See Table 4

Adequate rights-of-way and servitudes provided, and consistent with adopted plans N/A

Adequate traffic impact mitigation in accordance with Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), if required

N/A

Consistent with applicable Concept Plan N/A Consistent with approved Preliminary Plat N/A LURTC process complete Yes See Table 1

Table 5: Block and lot standards [Sections 33-6.5 and 33-6.6]

Standards Compliance

Yes | No Comments

Adequate Building Sites No Proposed Lot 25A represents a buildable area far more constrained than the neighborhood norm

No Unusable Remnants Created Yes No remnants created


Table 5: Block and lot standards [Sections 33-6.5 and 33-6.6]

Standards Compliance

Yes | No Comments Block Depth N/A Block Length N/A

Lot Area Yes Proposed lots meet the minimum required area

Lot Arrangement No

Does not provide a satisfactory building site property related to character of surrounding development

Lot Frontage Yes Lot front on a public right-of-way

Lot Lines Yes Side lot lines are perpendicular to the right-of-way

Lot Orientation Yes

Table 6: Development Sites Evaluated for Neighborhood Norm

Development Site Frontage (ft.) Area (sq. ft.)

Lot 12, Sq. 2, Orlando Subdivision 154.30 9790

Lots 11A & 11B, Sq. 6, Grand Drive Subdivision 149.8 11021.54

Lot X, Sq. 5, Grand Drive Subdivision 134.60 8932.88

Lot 19, Marguerite Place Subdivision 105.7 16194.93

Lots 23 & 24, Sq. B, green Acres Section 1 Subdivision

105.50 9551.56

Lots 21 & 22, Sq. C, Green Acres Sect. 1 Subdivision 116.3 10777


Table 6: Development Sites Evaluated for Neighborhood Norm

Lots 23 & 24, Sq. C, Green Acres Section 1 Subdivision

86.35 12512

Sites on Colony Place

Lots 40, 41, & 42, Sq. B, Green Acres Section 1 Subdivision

180 20700

All others 60 6900

10/7/2021

All users acknowledge that the content of these graphics were submitted and/or created specifically as demonstrative aides for the related land use matter being presented by the Jefferson Parish Planning Departmentidentified with the appropriate docket number provided above. As such, Jefferson Parish makes no warranty as to the reliability or accuracy of the maps, their associated data tables and/or any graphics included in thispresentation. Furthermore, Jefferson Parish is not responsible for the inaccuracies that could have occurred due to errors in the original data input or subsequent update process. All users of these graphics produced inconnection with the related land use matter identified above specifically acknowledge, agree and accept that any zoning and/or land uses identified in said graphics are solely intended to be a demonstrative aide in therelated land use matter and, as such, should not be relied upon outside of said related land use matter. User assumes all responsibility for verifying accuracy of data for any intended use.

Aerial

816 Colony Pl.Subdivision of

Lots 25 & 26 into25A & 26A, Green Acres

Subdivision

Docket No. ES-99-21Summary No.

Council District 2

FIGURE 1

PetitionedProperty

10/7/2021


Zoning


Lots 25 & 26 into25A & 26A, Green Acres Subdivision


Council District 2

FIGURE 2

PetitionedProperty

10/7/2021


Future Land Use




Council District 2

FIGURE 3

PetitionedProperty

10/7/2021


Plat




Council District 2

FIGURE 4

Marguerite R

d. (side)

Colony Pl.

Eddy Rd. (side)

115 ft.

115 ft.

50 ft.25.72 ft.

50 ft

.70

.67

ft.

Former Lot Line

6 ft. servitude

10/7/2021


Neighborhood Norm Analysis




Council District 2

FIGURE 5

PetitionedProperty

Lots with width of 60 ft.

Lots with width greater than 60 ft.

600 ft.

Similar single development sites

Lots with width less than 60 ft.

Documents

STAFF REPORT PARISH COUNCIL Docket No. ES-99-21 Summary …