Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5178-A Staff AnalysisAugust 22, 1989 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO. C NAME: Capital Keyboard PCD FILE NO.: Z -5178-A LOCATION: Southwest corner of Chenal Parkway and Old Town Road. DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: Maury Mitchell The Wilcox Group 212 Center Street Suite 100, Riverside Building Suite 400 2228 Cottondale Lane Little Rock, AR Little Rock, AR 374-2231 666-4546 AREA: 0.76 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: 110-3" PROPOSED USES: Retail sales & service of pianos and organs PLANNING DISTRICT: 17 CENSUS TRACT: 42.03 VARIANCES REQUESTED: None STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: The Capital Keyboard business is a locally owned business dealing in retail sales, service and rental of pianos, organs, electronic keyboards, theatrical lighting and related products. Capital Keyboards is presently located in the Asher and University area and would like to relocate their business to this neighborhood. The site that has been selected is a highly visible location at the corner of Old Town Road and Rock Creek Parkway. The property is currently zoned "0-3," General Office. The zoning ordinance would permit this use as a conditional use under "C-1," Neighborhood Commercial. However, the applicant feels that the Planning Commission and Staff would be more receptive to a PCD over a "C-1" application. 1 August 22, 1989 SUBDIVISION Item No..0 (Continued)_ The application also includes a request that other uses as listed within the "C-1," Neighborhood Commercial District, be allowed by right. Although the intended use is for Capital Keyboard, the owner believes it is reasonable to have the flexibility of other uses should something unforeseen happen to this proposed user. The project schedule includes a completion date of early 1990. There will be a single building on the site with a single user proposed. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: This application involves a single lot which is proposed for use as a retail sales outlet for pianos and organs. Although the application does not fully clarify the use composition of the building, there appears to be one element of the proposed use not clearly identified with respect to effect on the site. This use would be theatrical lighting. Further, there is the possibility of music schools being operated from this facility. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: This site currently is covered with scrub brush and several small trees. The adjacent streets are developed, on the north to City standard and on the east to a residential standard. C. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Sidewalks should be provided on Old Town Road and the northernmost driveway onto Old Town should be moved to a point 100 feet south of the parkway. D. ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: The staff would point out one significant issue concerning this proposal, that is its nonconformity with the adopted land use plan for the area. This subdivision plat, when approved by the Planning Commission, was approved for office development. In recent months, one lot at the southeast corner of this intersection was reclassified "C-1" for purposes of a wallpaper store. Planning Staff felt that that zoning action was a recognition of a need to move the PJ August 22, 1989 SUBDIVISION Item No. C (Continued) commercial zoning line on the plan from its old location to Old Town Road as a new west boundary. The approval of this project would extend retail sales activity west of Old Town Road. E. ANALYSIS: The Planning Staff view of this proposal is that it is entirely inappropriate given the land use plan for this area. Staff feels that approval of this PCD would only continue the striping out of the parkway as retail activity. Currently, this parkway plan is threatened at several points with commercial expansion and eliminating the various office nodes which separated the large commercial pockets. We feel there is sufficient commercial zoning in this area that would accommodate this use. Such areas are located at the intersection of the Chenal Parkway and Parkway Place Drive, as well as the area of Bowman and West Markham. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of this application. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (July 27, 1989) Mr. Maury Mitchell was present. Mr. Mitchell addressed the concerns of staff. Staff pointed out that it felt this issue was a land use matter and that the site plan presented was a good design, given the property access and configuration, but that it was inappropriately located. The only items of a design nature discussed were the Public Works Department requests that the curb cuts be reduced on the Old Town Road frontage and that the use mix within the structure be clarified with respect to the piano and organ business, specifically dealing with classes for music instruction or the actual business activities of the lighting company occupying part of the structure. There being no further discussion on this item, the matter was forwarded to the full Commission for resolution. I August 22, 1989 SUBDIVISION Item No. C (Continued) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (August 8, 1989) Staff recommendation on this item remains the same and is denial due to incompatibility with neighborhood plans. Mr. Mitchell who was representing the Danny Thomas Company and the developer said that they made an effort to design a building that would fit in with the low traffic generating business. He also said that after the Subdivision Committee meeting, he and Mr. Darrell Rich, the owner, had met with Richard Wood and Jim Lawson to discuss other "C-1" uses that they had applied for. Mr. Mitchell also said they had increased landscaping and cut down on the parking spaces. Mr. Darrell Rich requested that the Committee ask him a question as he was unsure about what information to get. Commissioner Bill Rector asked why he wanted to build the property there and not where it was zoned commercial. Mr. Rich replied that they were going where the availability was. He added that they preferred a building with high ceilings and most of the locations available have low ceilings. Mr. Mitchell said the primary reason for building was cost. He said that they had taken note of the Staff's previous recommendation and that the piano business wouldn't generate more traffic than an office. Commissioner Kathleen Oleson stated that Mr. Mitchell had chosen land that was zoned for offices, not commercial use, and that the Land Use Plan was to prevent people from buying land that was cheaper than commercially zoned property. Mr. Darrell Rich said that they are a distributor for three states and a large part of the building will be an office, and part of the building will be other types of repair business. Commissioner Oleson questioned Mr. Mitchell about other business he suggested. He replied that he thought that they would be suitable in that area. Mr. Lawson said that it still remained unclear how much Mr. Mitchell intended to use as commercial and how much space would be used for office. 4 August 22, 1989 SUBDIVISION Item No. C (Continued A lengthy discussion of the proposal followed with comments from Darrell Rich, Mr. ,Mitchell and several of the Commissioners. The result of this discussion was the determination by the Commission that a deferral of this matter would be in order. A motion was made to defer this application to August 22, 1989, and the vote was 4 ayes, 3 noes, 4 absent. (Commissioner Martha Miller explained that 6 votes were needed to pass an application and that any less than that resulted in an automatic deferral until the next meeting.) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (August 22, 1989) Staff did not have any additional comments. The recommendation on this item remains the same and is denial due to incompatibility with the neighborhood plan. Mr. Maury Mitchell, who was representing the Danny Thomas Company and the developer, reminded the Planning Commission what changes he has done with the PCD. He stated that the rezoning from "0-3" to "C-1" would be very minor and would allow the Capital Keyboard business to operate on this property. He said that neighborhood properties are zoned commercial and it wouldn't be detrimental to have quality development. Ms. Ruth Bell from the Women's League spoke in opposition. She said that this land is office zoned even though it is across the street from heavy commercial use that has just been approved. She pointed out the difference between office and commercial uses. She suggested utilizing all land zoned commercial before impacting different zoning at this point. Mr. Bob Boyd spoke in favor of the application. He stated that most of the land around had been zoned commercial and it should not make any difference if this piece of property is zoned commercial. The result of this discussion was to accept the applicant's amendment. A motion was made to this effect and ailed by a vote of 4 ayes, 2 noes, 2 absent and 3 abstentions. (Staff explained the second split vote, and for the record stated the application will be forwarded to the City Board of Directors with a recommendation of denial due to Bylaw requirements.) 5