Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4997-D Staff AnalysisMay 21, 1991 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E FILE NO.• �-4gg7- NAME: Bale Chevrolet/Honda / Geo - Revised PCD LOC— Ate: SW Corner of Chenal Parkway at Gamble Road DEVELOPER: BALE CHEVROLET COMPANY AREA: 9.24 Ac. NUMBER OF LOTS: ZOO: PCD PLANNING DISTRICT: PROPOSED USES: CENSUS TRACT: 42.03 Ellis Mountain VARIANCES RE UESPED: None STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: ENGINEER: J. WHITE 401 Victory Street Little Rock, AR 72201 374-1666 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 Revised PCD This applicant proposes a revision of the original PCD application. The revision proposes to add a second driveway from Chenal Parkway to the original approval. in order to get to the Honda dealership the At this time, to meander through the Chevrolet site. The addptivnalhdriveway would eliminate this problem. A. 0 C. PROPOSAL'------ : This application Proposes to revise the existing PCD to add the additional driveway on Chenal Parkway frontage. This driveway will accommodate Honda dealership and eliminate a need to use the Chevrolet driveway located 430 ft. east from propose driveway. EXISTING CONDITIONS: This site currently is occupied by a car dealership facility with several buildings in place. All streets are developed to the city standards. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: The proposed additional driveway onto Chenal Parkway has been previously approved by Traffic Engineering. 1 May 21, 1991 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E CONT, FILE NO.: Z- j7 -D D. ISSUES LEGAL TECHNICAL DESIGN: In August 1989 the previous application was approve;. as the existing BC Auto Plaza. The site pian as presented was operated by the Chevrolet dealership in conjunction with the Honda dealership. There has been an open flow of traffic between these two sites thereby eliminating the need for additional curb cut onto any of the adjacent streets. The revised PCD modifies the approved site plan and calls for an additional curb cut from Chenal Parkway. In order to maintain Chenal Parkway as a scenic corridor the staff feels that the applicant should display the lost landscaping to another location and allow only right turns from proposed driveway. E. ANALYSIS: The planning staff view of this proposal is that the placement of the curb cut is adequate for the use and the size property indicated. However, we feel that the proposal eliminates some landscaping which should be placed in another location to preserve the unique scenic corridor - Chenal Parkway. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval subject to applicant agreeing to provide landscape plan and allow the right turn only from propose driveway. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT (April 25, 1991) Mr. Tim Daters was present representing the application. A lengthy discussion was held, primariiy identifying the ,sight distance problems for an existing and proposed driveways. The Committee questioned Staff about a future median on Chenal Parkway and reasons for right turns in and out only for the proposed driveway. The Staff clarified that the-ir Position was based on traffic engineering studies. Mr. Gardner from Engineering also objected to Mr. Dater's request for all four turns from Chenal Parkway. 2 May 21, 1991 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E CONT.) FILE NO.: 2-4gg; It was also determined that the Staff would meet the applicant for an field inspection and identify specific problems with the sight distance as well as look for the possible solutions. There being no further items of discussion this item was forwarded to the full Commission for resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION (May 7, 1991) There were no objectors in attendance. The application was represented by Mr. Joe White. The Planning Staff presented its recommendation of approval for the proposed driveway subject to the applicant reaching an agreement with the Engineering Department on the placement of the median cut for driveways and the Planning Commission's judgement determining if the applicant should or should not send notices. Jerry Gardner, representing Public Works, reported that the Engineering Department inspected the site and determined that the median cut would be acceptable on the western driveway along Chenal Parkway. Steve Giles, City Attorney's office, said the bylaws required notice on the revised PCD. After a brief discussion the Commission determined that the application would be deferred until May 21, 1991 agenda meeting to allow more time to send the notices. The motion was made to suspend the Bylaws 15 day notice before the meeting and allow the applicant 10 days. The motion to that effect was made and passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 abstain, 3 absent and one open position. The second motion was made to defer this item until May 21, 1991 agenda meeting. The motion was made and passed by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 abstain, 3 absent and one open position. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION (May 21, 1991) There was one objector in attendance. The applicant was represented by Mr. Joe White. The Planning Staff recommended approval of the curb cut as presented. Commissioner Oleson stated that she opposes another curb cut on the Parkway. Joe White, representing the applicant, indicated that it is an inconvenience for the Honda dealership not having their own driveway. Commissioner Leek agreed with Mr. White and supported the second driveway. 3 May 21, 1991 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E ._�CCNT.J FILE NO.: L -4997-D Jackie Alexander spoke in behave of L.W.V. She was concerned about losing landscape and requested the curb cut be delayed until overlay for Parkway is completed. There was some questions about the median cut for the future. Mr. Gardner, from public works explained that the applicant agreed to have only one median cut, and it will be located 800 ft. west from Gamble Road. A motion was made to recommend approval of the additional driveway. The vote was 8 ayes, 1 nay, 1 absent and one -open position. 4