Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-3606-A Staff AnalysisFILE NO.: Z -3606 - NAME: PARKER CADILLAC BODY SHOP -- SHORT -FORM PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATION: On the south side of Rainwood Road, across the street from the intersection of Wickford Lane, approximately 300 feet west of Merrell Drive DEVELOPER: ENGINEER• Parker Luxury Automobiles Norris Jerald Sparks Architect 1700 N. Shackleford Road 62 Berkshire Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 Little Rock, AR 72204 224-2400 660-4268 AREA: 0.857 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: C-3 PROPOSED USES: Automobile Paint and Body Shop PLANNING DISTRICT: 2 CENSUS TRACT: 22.05 VARIANCES REQUESTED: None STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes the construction of a paint and body repair facility to consolidate the repair facilities for the Cadillac, Lexus, and Saturn automobile dealerships owned by the applicant in the greater Little Rock area. The applicant maintains that the facility will house "state -of -the art" automobile paint and repair equipment and processes that are the most technically advanced in the industry. The applicant proposes to construct a building that is compatible with the "superior character and appearance that he has achieved in the architectural contribution of his Cadillac and Lexus dealership buildings." He continues that he is "most dedicated to not only crating a positive architectural statement..., but to maintaining his previously established standard for aesthetic character and quality image in all facilities." The applicant, "plans to invest in a handsome building with abundant landscaping and street appeal...." A. PROPOSALIREQUEST: Review by the Planning Commission and approval by the Board of Directors is sought for a PCD for a paint and body repair facility to consolidate the Cadillac, Lexus, and Saturn paint and body repair facilities of the greater Little Rock area. In addition to the paint and body repair use proposed, the applicant seeks approval of all other uses by right listed in the C-3 zoning district use category. FILE NO.: Z -3606-A Continued The applicant maintains that a "handsome building with abundant landscaping and street appeal" is proposed, and one that is in keeping with the architectural and aesthetic standards previous buildings for the applicant's Cadillac and Lexus dealerships have established. No waivers or variances are requested. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is undeveloped and heavily wooded, and the topography is fairly level. The site is currently zoned C-3, with C-3 zoned land on all other tracts to the east and west on the south side of Rainwood Dr. Across Rainwood, directly across the street from the proposed development, is an R-5 tract. Diagonally to the northwest from the site is a C-4 tract. C. ENGINEERING UTILITY COMMENTS: Engineering reports that the driveway width must be reduced to 22 feet. The parking space at the far east edge of the front of the building will have to be eliminated. Sidewalks will be required to be constructed along the Rainwood Dr. frontage. Water Works has no objections to the development. Wastewater reports that sewer is available, and that there is no adverse effect to be considered. Existing manholes which are located on the property must be adjusted during construction to remain exposed at all times. Wastewater should be contacted for details. Arkansas Power and Light Co. will require easements. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. approved the submittal without comment. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. will require easements. The Fire Department approved the submittal without comment. Landscape review reports that the buffer width proposed along Rainwood Rd. is 3 feet short of the full requirement of 9 feet. D. ISSUESILEGALITECHNICALIDESIGN: The Planning staff reports that the site is located in the Rodney Parham District. The adopted plan recommends commercial for the site. The proposed commercial use is 2 FILE NO.: Z -3606-A Continued questionable for this location, since the proposal is for a C-4 use. The type of C-4 use proposed must be carefully reviewed, with the negative impacts considered. E. ANALYSIS• Although the adopted Land Use Plan recommends commercial uses of the subject tract, the proposed use is a C-4, Open Display district use, the most intense zoning category for commercial uses. The remainder of the property south of Rainwood Dr. is C-3, and the uses are retail stores. Directly across the street from the proposed site is R-5, containing an established townhome development. To the northwest is a C-4 area which contains a mini -storage facility. The mini -storage C-4 use can be seen as an accessory use to the area residential uses. A paint and body shop, then, is much more intensive a use than anything else in the area, and is not in keeping with the types of uses which should be located directly across the street from a residential community. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the application. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 14, 1994) A representative of the applicant and the project architect were present. Staff presented the request and the Committee reviewed the items contained in the discussion outline. The applicant's representatives stated that the front overhead door was to remain closed at all times, unless a vehicle to be repaired was to be admitted. The vehicles to be repaired would be checked -in inside the building, then removed to the rear parking lot. With no other issues to be resolved, the Committee forwarded the item to. the commission for the public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 3, 1994) Staff presented the request, and indicated that revised drawings had been submitted which addressed all technical concerns of staff. Mr. Fred Mosley introduced himself as the representative of the applicant in making the presentation of the request to the Commission. He stated that the new facility would combine all the paint and body shop activities of the three Parker dealerships in the greater Little Rock area, the Cadillac, the Lexus, and the Saturn dealerships. He explained that the new shop would include state -of -the art processes and equipment. 3 FILE NO.: Z -3606-A Continued Landscaping would be extensive. a 6 foot masonry and wood fence at the perimeter of the rear of the site would restrict both access and the view of the automobile storage area from neighbors. The front automobile access door would be closed at all times, except when an automobile were being delivered. He estimated that, on the average, there would be 10 vehicles brought to the facility on The only doors which are open for service are at the rear. From the front, he stated, the building would look like an office building. He recalled that the proposed site is the only remaining vacant commercial site in the area; that the existing zoning is C-3; and, that there are other C-4 uses in close proximity. Mr. -Rick Farnan, a representative of the paint spray boot manufacturer, stated that the paint booth would comply with all national standards. Mr. Mosley went on to say that, as far as noise is concerned, the fact that most parts are replaced rather than re -used should alleviate this concern. Further, the front of the building would have an exterior insulations system applied as the finish, and this system involves foam insulation with a cement -like stucco coating. The time of operation would be 7:30 AM to 5:30 PM. There will be no delivery trucks to bring parts; the parts would be delivered by pick-up truck from the various dealerships. Trash would be picked up 3 times weekly, and would be retrieved from interior bins. There is no litter, as would be expected from C-3 businesses such as a restaurant. The Parker family has been in the area for 20 years, and attempts to be both a good neighbor and to maintain handsome buildings which are superior in appearance. Commissioner Nicholson asked where the body shop work is now performed. Mr. Mosley replied that the work is done at each of the dealerships. Commissioner Nicholson observed that the new facility would be no worse or no better than the existing sites. Mr. Mosley explained that the new facility should be better than the existing facilities, since there would be state -of -the art equipment and processes employed. Commissioner Nicholson asked for clarification as to the number of vehicles which would be repaired at any given time. Mr. Mosley said that there are 12 repair bays and 6 paint bays, with 22 holding spaces at the rear. Commissioner Nicholson observed that the usual concern is for battered and banged -up cars sitting around a paint and body shop. 4 FILE NC.: Z -3606-A Continued Mr. Mosley replied that with the service door opened only to admit a car for repair, and the fence at the rear holding area, the cars to be repaired would not normally be visible to the neighbors. He also said that the security lights at the rear holding area have limited spread and the standards are not as high as the building, so the night lighting should not be a problem to the neighbors. Mr. Chris Peek addressed the Commission, saying that he was on the Board of Directors of the Birkshire Park Townhomes Property owners' Association; that the Board had authorized him to speak for the Association in presenting its opposition to the proposed development. Mr. Peek presented photos of the existing Parker paint and body shop holding yards, showing stacked up bumpers and other parts, as well as damaged autos. He expressed concern about possible noise and the unsightly view. He was concerned about the paint spray booth and who monitors its performance in emission control. He stated that 10 wreckers per day, day after day, bringing wrecked cars, would be very visible evidence that the building is a paint and body shop. Ms. Ruth Kent stated that she has a breathing problem, and is concerned about the spray booth emissions. She related that she has talked with a number of persons in the real estate business and has been told that the proximity of the paint and body shop to her home would lower the value of her home. She observed that one such person was incredulous that a paint and body shop would be considered for such a location as this one is proposed. The Parker Body Shop would be immediately across the street from her home. Commissioner Willis asked Ms. Kent for her reaction to the possibility of C-3 uses being constructed across from her home. Ms. Kent replied that there is a stigma attached to having a paint and body shop across the street from one's home; that she realized that there are many C-3 uses that can be constructed, but they would not have the same negative impact as a paint and body shop. She went on to say that if Parker were to sell the shop, another owner might not have the same commitment to aesthetics as the Parkers. various comments involving Commissioner Nicholson, Commissioner Willis, and Commissioner Putnam attempted to clarify the requested uses of the PCD application. Staff indicated that the request is for a "paint and body shop" and for "all C-3 uses by right". Therefore, any paint and body shop would be permitted, as well as any C-3 uses, without amending the PCD. Commissioner Nicholson stated that if Parker were going to own the facility, and if it were limited to "Parker Body Shop", this might make a difference. 61 FILE NO.: Z -3606-A Continued Ms. Tess Peek stated that she had visited the existing Parker body shop site, and said that it is just a body shop, "forget that it is a Cadillac body shop" . There are wrecked cars stored on the site and body parts lying around, and the existing facility is just like any other paint and body shop. Mr. Mosley stated that Parker intends to purchase the property and to operate the body shop. As far as the chain link fencing and razor wire at the existing facility, the new facility is not going to have this type fencing; it will be the board and masonry fence, and neighbors will not have a view of the holding area unless they climb the fence. As far as the paint booth is concerned, Pollution Control and Ecology will monitor the paint booth emissions. He stated that in the application, he and the Parker's had hoped that the townhome owners would view the application as a chance to determine the use which would be across the street from them, and that the use would be viewed as a benefit to the area. Commissioner Nicholson, reacting to the latter comment, stated that since the application seeks approval of all C-3 uses, then, if Parker ceases operation of the body shop, then the neighbors do not have the chance of determining the use, as stated. Mr. Mosely replied that Parker intends to operate the facility, but that if, in the future, the facility could not contain the activity, then it was felt that the building use should be able to be converted to another use. An office building would be at that time, he said, a possibility. Commissioner Nicholson reminded Mr. Mosley that an office building would not be allowed in a C-3 zoning district; that, if an office building as an alterative use were anticipated, then the zoning should be an 0-1, 0-2, or even 0-3. She added, that a stated concern of the neighbors was the convertibility aspect. Mr. Mosley stated that the PCD application could be modified to provide for only the Parker Body Shop use, and not for any of the other uses continued in the original application. Commissioner Putnam reaffirmed that the application should be amended to restrict the use to the Parker Body Shop only, and that if that use ceases, any other use would have to come back to the Commission and Board for an amendment to the PCD. Mr. Mosley stated that the application was amended to reflect this restriction. Commissioner Oleson asked for the reaction of the neighbors to the amended application, with the restrictions imposed. Mr. Peek voiced the neighbors' rejection of the application for any paint and body shop use on the site, despite the amendment of the application. Ms. Kent agreed with the stated objection. 11 FILE ATO_: Z -3606-A _(Continued) Commissioner Nicholson stated that, in her opinion, a lot of the C-3 uses which can go in on the site without any review are much worse than the applicant's proposal as amended, and, with the change in technology of body shops, the Parker Body Shop will not have the negative impact which the neighbors anticipate. She added that, the body shop which is anticipated in this application is not a C-4 type activity. A motion was made and seconded to approve the Parker Cadillac Body Shop PCD. The vote was 4 ayes, 5 nays, 2 absent, and 0 abstentions. Without the required 6 votes to recommend approval of the PCD, the matter was deferred until the May 17, 1994 Commission hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 17, 1994) Staff presented the request. Mr. Dave Parker, who identified himself as part owner of Parker Cadillac, Parker Lexus, and Saturn of Greater Little Rock, outlined the changes which had been made in the application since the previous Commission meeting: 1) have agreed to purchase state -of -the art emission control ec expensive equipment would meet regul make do with less than desirable pax building; 3) have agreed to a narrc comply with the City Engineering rec construct an 8 foot high decorative rear service area; 5) will provide increase street appeal of the site; nvarhAad door closed at all times, E aipment, even though less ations; 2) have agreed to king at the front of the wer drive than desirable to airements; 4) have agreed to fence at the perimeter of the extensive landscaping to 6) will keep the front xcept when vehicles enter; 7) will have low level parking lot lighting which will restrict bleedover beyond the property; 8) have designed the building so that the service doors are at the rear; 9) have agreed to construct wooden gates at the drives which will be closed off at night; and, 10) will have the landscaping maintained on a weekly basis by a professional landscaping business. Noise, Mr. Parker noted, is not a problem in a modern facility, since parts are normally replaced and uni-body frames are straightened by a pulling process. Mr. Parker reported that he had two noise level engineers make noise tests at his present location and at the proposed site, and that their report indicated that the noise would not be a problem and would not be increased beyond normal street level noise. Mr. Parker reiterated that the PCD was for Parker Cadillac Body Shop only. After a conversation with a resident on Wickford Lane, Mr. Parker related that he had agreed to park only finished cars at the southeast corner of the lot. A list of the concessions was distributed. Mr. Tom Sullivan, a resident of the Birkshire Townhomes, addressed the Commission and voiced his and the Property owners' 7 FILE NO.; z -3606-A (Continued Association's concerns regarding the proposed body shop. He indicated that the concerns had not changed since the previous Commission meeting. He maintained that the request for the rezoning was for the convenience of the Parkers, as opposed to the expectations of the neighbors for the residential character of their neighborhood. He expressed concern for the 10 to 12 wrecked vehicles per day which would be coming to the facility, and for the wreckers which would be a hazard to the many elderly drivers in the Townhome community. He distributed photographs of the existing Parker body shop facility, showing the razor wire at the top of the chain link fencing, and expressed concern about the apparent need for security which is indicated by the need for razor wire. Ms. Brenda Germann reiterated the residents' position that they would rather take their chances with C-3 uses which might be developed on the site than have a body shop at the location. Ms. Ruth Kent asked the Commissioners to do what was in the best interest for the City and the citizens, and not vote according to apparent vested interests. Mr. Parker responded that on an average, only 2 wreckers per day would bring cars to the shop. He reported that he had asked the Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology to meet with him to determine the best equipment to install to control emissions, and to monitor the equipment and shop on an annual basis. He indicated that, no matter what happened, no razor or barbed wire would be installed on the fence. He stated that the front of the new Parker Body Shop would look better than other C-3 uses that are or have been located in the neighborhood. Commissioner Putnam asked Mr. Parker to comment on the noise level concern which had been voiced at the previous Commission meeting. Mr. Parker indicated that Scott Foster and Sherman Smith of the City Engineering staff had made noise level studies at the present location and at the proposed site. Mr. Sherman Smith confirmed the information that the noise level at the existing site was not grater than normal conversation levels or the levels produced by normal traffic. He stated that the noise from the proposed use would not be able to be heard even as far as beyond the street in front of the facility. Commissioner Oleson asked Mr. Smith to comment on the noise levels of drive-thru speakers. Mr. Smith responded that he would do some studies of the noise levels at drive-thrus and report back at the next Commission hearing. A motion was then made and seconded to recommend approval of the PCD. The motion carried with the vote of 6 ayes, 4 nays, 1 absent, and 0 abstentions. A 1. Meeting Date: June 21, 1994 2. Case No.: Z -3606-A 3. Request: Establish PARKER CADILLAC BODY SHOP -- SHORT -FORM PCD 4. Location: On the south side of Rainwood Drive, across the street from the intersection of Wickford Lane, approximately 300 feet west of Merrill Drive 5. Owner A licant: Parker Luxury Automobiles 6. Existing Status: Vacant; zoned C-3 7. Pro osed Use: Automobile paint and body shop 8. Staff Recommendation: Denial 9. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval 10. Conditions or Issues Remaining to be Resolved: None 11. Right -of -Way Issues: None 12. Recommendation Forwarded With: A vote of 6 ayes, 4 nays, 1 absent, and 0 abstentions 13. Objectors: Lorene Allen, #4 Wickford Ln.; Ruth Bray, #2 Hampshire Circle; J. C. Eason and Ed Brigman, #12 Wickford Ln.; Mrs. Ray Blackburn, #6 Wickford Ln.; Brenda Germann, #2 Wickford Ln.; Ruth Kent, #3 Wickford Ln.; Dr. Kathleen Jones, M. D., #10 Wickford Ln.; Gene Hall, #1 Wickford Ln.; Mrs. J. R. Holcomb, #7 Wickford Ln.; Tom Sullivan, #30 Hampshire Circle; R. M. Randolph, #38 Hampshire Circle; Amelia Leung, #18 Wickford Ln.; Martin Reynolds, #25 Hampshire Circle; Ruth Vanderburg and Dorothy Price, #5 Wickford Ln.; and, Chris Peek representing the Board of Directors of the Birkshire Park Townhomes Property Owners, Association. 14. Neighborhood Contact Person/Others: Mrs. Ray Blackburn, #6 Wickford Lane, contact person for the Birkshire Park Townhomes; Mr. Chris Peek, #9 Wickford Lane, contact person for the Birkshire'Park Townhomes; and, Ron Jack, #26 Hampshire Circle, contact person for the Birkshire Park Townhomes. All objectors and all neighborhood contact persons have been notified of the date of the Board of Directors hearing concerning this matter. 15. Neighborhood Flan: Rodney Parham (2) ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND ESTABLISHING A PLANNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TITLED PARKER CADILLAC BODY SHOP SHORT -FORM PCD (Z -3606-A), AND LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RAINWOOD ROAD APPROXIMATELY 300 FEET WEST OF MERRILL DRIVE, IN THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS, AMENDING CHAPTER 36 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS. SECTION 1. That the zone classification of the following described property be changed from C-3 to PCD. A parcel of land in the SW 1/4, NE 1/4, Section 33, T -2-N, R -13-W, and located on the south side of Rainwood Drive, approximately 300 feet west of Merrill Drive, Little Rock, Arkansas, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a found 5/8" rebar as the northeast corner of the Lot 1 replat of the Southall Subdivision (#83-47140), said point being approximately 209.98 feet west and approximately 210.44 feet south of the NW corner of the said SW 1/4, NE 1/4, Section 33; thence N 01027137" W 178.801, approximately parallel with the west line of the said SW 1/4, NE 1/4 to a set 1/2" rebar which is 30.89' south of the centerline of Rainwood Road; thence N 88059'171, E 207.961, approximately along the south ROW line of Rainwood Road, to a found 5/8" rebar which is 30.10 feet south of the centerline of Rainwood Road, 2.89' north of the NW corner of Lot 38 of the Charles Valley Subdivision (#84-12356), and along a line of Berkshire Park Horizontal Property Regime (76-53122); thence S 01019'40" E 180.511, parallel with and along the west line of said Lot 38 of Charles Valley, to a found 1/21, rebar as the NE corner of Lot 40 of Charles Valley Subdivision (#87-59440), thence S 89027'36" W 207.561, parallel with and along the north line of the said Lot 40 of Charles Valley, to the POB, which is also the NW corner of the said Lot 40 of Charles Valley, containing 0.857 acres, more or less.