HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5179 Staff AnalysisMay 16, 1989
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 18.
Name:
Location:
Owner/Applicant:
Mr. Tidy Conditional Use Permit
(Z-5179)
The south side of Markham Park
Drive just east of Bowman Road.
Gary and Linda Pitts
Proposal:
To construct a 5,416 +/- square foot full service car wash
and automobile lubrication facility and 10 paved parking
spaces on 0.658 +/- acres of land.that is zoned "C-3."
Ordinance Desiqn Standards:
1. Site Location
Adjacent to a collector street (Markham Park Drive).
2. Compatibility with Neighborhood
The site is abutted on three sides by commercial uses
with vacant land (creek) located to the south. The
proposed use should be compatible with the surrounding
area.
3. On -Site Drives and Parking
The proposal contains two access drives (24 feet and
20 feet in width) which provide ingress and egress onto
Markham Park Drive, and 10 paved parking spaces.
4. Screening and Buffers
The site plan contains landscaped areas.
May 16, 1989
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 18
5. Analysis
The Staff does not foresee any adverse impact to the
surrounding area as a result of this proposed use. The
Staff does, however, have some reservations about the
ability of the site to accommodate the proposed
intensity of the use. The ordinance requirements for
parking would be 26.6 parking spaces. The site plan
contains 10 parking spaces plus room for 4 cars in the
lubrication facility and 3 cars in the wash facility.
Finally, the applicant should submit a revised site
plan detailing the vacuuming area, gasoline facilities
(if any), and one point of access as outlined by the
City Engineer.
6. City Engineer Comments
Recommend only one drive (40 feet in width) onto
Markham Park Drive.
7. Staff Recommendation
Approval, subject to the applicant: (1) illustrating
the ability of the site to accommodate the intensity of
the use as proposed; and (2) providing a revised site
plan as outlined in the Analysis Section.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
.. .... ............. _ .
The applicant was present and pre tinted a revised site plan
that illustrated the site's ability to accommodate what was
proposed. The applicant also sta+teLl that when they had
purchased the site, a conditional ui-.e permit was not
required for their proposed use and that they had met with
and received approval from the City Engineer for two access
drives. The applicant was asked tv provide a copy of the
revised site plan as well as proof that the City Engineer
had approved two access drives for pie site.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There :re ,me objectors. The
Commission voted 9 ayes, 0 noes am.d 2 L:IDsent to approve the
application as recommended by the .Miff,, reviewed by the
Subdivision Committee and agreed eco b--- vtfte applicant.