Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5799 Staff Analysis1. Meeting Date: April 19, 1994 2. Case No.: Z-5799 3. Request: Appeal of the Planning Commission recommendation of denial of the request for the establishment of COULSON OIL CO. SHORT -FORM PCD 4. Location: On the no;north side of Highway 10, southeast of the Southridge Dr. intersection 5. Owner/Applicant: Coulson Oil Co. 6. Existing Status: R-2, Single -Family 7. Proposed Use: Convenience store, restaurant, fuel service, and automated car wash 8. Staff Recommendation: Denial 9. Planning Commission Recommendation: Denial 10. Conditions or Issues Remaining t❑ be Resolved: None 11. Right -of -Way_ Issues: Additional right-of-way required 12. Recommendation Forwarded With: A vote of 2 ayes, 7 nays, 2 absent, and 0 abstentions 13: Objectors: Edgar Tyler, Larry Mabry, Mina Drause, Donald Glowen, Ruth Bell 14. Neighborhood Plan: River Mountain (1) .......... FILE NG_: Z-5799 NAME: COULSON OIL CO. -- SHORT -FORM PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATION: On the north side of Highway 10, southeast of the Southridge Dr. intersection DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: COULSON OIL COMPANY DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS, INC. 1434-38 Pike Ave. 10411 W. Markham St., Suite 210 North Little Rock, AR 72114 Little Rock, AR 72205 376-4222 221-7880 AREA: 2.19 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING• R-2 PROPOSED USES: Commercial PLANNING DISTRICT: 1 CENSUS TRACT: 42.05 VARIANCES RE UESTEiJ: None STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes a PCD in order to develop a combined convenience store and restaurant use on the site. The concept involves the combination of a convenience store outlet with fuel sales and accompanying enclosed car wash, and a restaurant with drive-through service. This concept, explains the applicant, "is a relatively new idea that is appearing in other parts of the country"; that "the combined usage is logical because restaurants with drive-through service exist for the same reason of convenience as (does) the convenience store"; and, that "they both serve the demand for quickly accessible goods and service at 'convenient' locations to residents and passing traffic". The applicant proposes to own and operate both uses and will purchase a restaurant franchise for "name brand" food service. The location on Highway 10 was selected, explains the applicant, because it has good accessibility to present and future customers in a growing area, and it is adjacent to other existing and pending commercial developments. The proposed site, states the applicant, is large enough to accommodate the proposed development program and to provide substantial landscape space, building setback, and buffering. There is proposed to be a large area along the northern boundary that will be undisturbed and existing trees will be preserved. Additional trees will be planted in this area to create a lower canopy of trees to enhance the screening effect. A privacy fence is planned to be set along the limits of the site dividing the developed and undisturbed areas. FILE NO.: Z-5799 (Continued) The site is a 2.1887 acre tract consisting of two existing parcels which will be combined into a one -lot subdivision. A one-story, 6,000 square foot building will be occupied by the convenience store and the restaurant. The drive-through service for the restaurant will be located on the west face of the building. To the east of the convenience store, and separated by approximately 60 feet, is the fuel pump canopy which measures 47 feet by 84 feet. An enclosed, automated car wash is located east of the canopy and will serve convenience store customers following their fuel purchase. The main building and car wash are located 108 feet off Highway 10. The south edge of the fuel pump canopy is located 91 feet off the right-of-way. Building coverage is proposed to be 11.19% of the land area. Access to the site is proposed to be limited to one two-way curb cut on Highway 10 and one two-way curb cut on Southridge Dr. The Southridge Dr. access is intended to provide service to the site from the Walton Heights customers without forcing traffic around the site and onto Highway 10; and, it is located on Southridge in order for customers who wish to travel east on Highway 10 to have the benefit of the signal light at the Southridge Dr. -Highway 10 intersection in order to turn left. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Review by the Planning Commission and approval by the Board of Directors is requested for a PCD for the development of a 2.1887 acre site for a combined convenience store with fuel sales -restaurant with drive-through service -and automated car wash. The proposal involves construction of a 6,000 square foot building in which the restaurant and convenience store would be located; a 47 foot by 84 foot fuel pump canopy; a 20 foot by 36 foot automated car wash building; a drive-through service window and order board; parking for 49 vehicles; and access drives. The area abutting Southridge Dr. forms an undisturbed landscaped buffer area which ranges from a maximum width of 50 feet at the eastern edge of the site to 15 feet wide at the access drive onto Southridge Dr. A privacy fence is to be located at the perimeter of the undisturbed buffer to provide visual screening of the site from persons driving down Southridge Dr. from the north. The requirements of the Highway 10 Overlay are proposed to be met. Primary signage for the project will be located at the Highway 10 entry and will adhere to the Design Overlay District guidelines. No variances or waivers are requested. B. EXISTING C NDITIONS: The site is currently made up of two tracts which are to be combined. The site is vacant, except for a one story home located at the southeast corner of the property. There are 2 C. M NO.: Z-5799 (Continued many trees on the site, especially along the north property line. The site has a 40 foot elevation differential across it, with the low point being at the southwest corner of the site. Half of that differential occurs in the northwest 120 feet of the property. The current zoning is R-2. A Little Rock Fire Department Station is located immediately to the west in R-2 property. All the surrounding property north of Highway 10 is zoned R-2. South of Highway 10 is R-2 and 0-3 property. ENGINEERING/UTILITY COMMENTS: Engineering reports that a sidewalk will be required to be constructed along Highway 10 and along the Southridge Dr. frontage of the site. The Stormwater Detention and Excavation Ordinances are applicable. Water Works reports that the details of the water main relocation will need to be more specific, and the layout will vary from that shown. The water main will need to be laid outside of the highway right-of-way and Water Works will need a 10 foot wide easement adjoining the back side of the 20 foot permanent construction easement for construction of this main. Wastewater indicated that sewer is available. Arkansas Power & Light Co. and Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. will require easements. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. approved the submittal without comment. Landscape review reports that the Highway 10 Overlay Ordinance required additional screening and trees along Highway 10 above those required by the Landscape Ordinance. A lawn sprinkler system to water the plants will be required. ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: All required exhibits and information have been submitted. There are no issues remaining as far as the needed plans and information to meet the requirements for PCD submittals. The Planning staff reports that the site is in the River Mountain District, and the Land Use Plan recommends Transition zone for the area. There have been no changes to justify amending the Plan to allow commercial uses. FILE NO.: Z-5799 (Continued) E. ANALYSIS: The site planning has attempted to deal with the need to provide landscape buffering of the proposed use from the residential area beyond, especially to the north in Walton Heights. A large natural and landscape buffer is proposed along Southridge Dr. The fence, retaining wall, and existing and proposed trees are said to provide a canopy of trees which are to enhance the screening effect. The matter of site lighting has not been addressed. Buffering of the sound from the order board/intercom must be adequately addressed; fire fighters live and sleep in the fire station immediately to the west. The proposed use is in conflict with the Land Use Plan, and there is not sufficient justification to amend the Plan to allow commercial use of the site. F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the request. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MARCH 3, 1994) Mr. Robert Brown, representing the applicant, was present. Staff presented an overview of the proposal and the Committee reviewed with Mr. Brown the items contained in the discussion outline. Mr. Brown responded that he would made the needed corrections or provide the additional information requested. The Committee forwarded the request to the Commission for the public hearing. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 22, 1994) Staff reported that the applicant had submitted a letter, dated March 4, 1994, asking that the item be deferred to the April 5, 1994 Planning Commission hearing. The item was included on the Consent Agenda for deferral to the April 5 meeting, and was approved with the vote of 10 ayes, no nays, 1 absent, and no abstentions. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 5, 1994) Staff reported that all required exhibits have been submitted, and there are no outstanding technical issues to be resolved. The staff recommendation, however, was reported as being unchanged: denial due to conflict of the use with the Land Use Plan. 4 FILE NO.: Z-5799 (Continued The applicant was represented by David Jones of Vogel Realty. Mr. Jones introduced Mr. Ray Coulson, of Coulson Oil Co. and Mr. Robert Brown, of Development Consultants, the project engineer. Mr. Jones introduced the project, indicating that the submittal was for a PCD. Mr. Jones related that he was no stranger to Highway 10 development or to the Highway 10 Land Use Plan; that he had been on the Planning Commission when the Plan was developed and represents a number of clients who own property on Highway 10. He related that Coulson Oil had given him an assignment to find two sites: one on Highway 10 and one on Chenal Parkway., Both were to be beyond I-430, but close to I-430 for accessibility to "going -home traffic", and on the north side of the road on the "going -home" side of the road. The sites must be at least 2 acres in size. On Highway 10, though, except for the proposed site, there is no other site which meets those parameters. Across Highway 10 from the proposed site is a liquor store, a Phillips Petroleum store, a cleaners, and a convenience store. Next to the Phillips site is a 5 -acre site which is already zoned for commercial uses which is ready for development. On the north side of Highway 10, and immediately to the west of the proposed site, is a fire station. The Southridge-Highway 10 intersection, with its concentration of commercial and other non-residential uses, forms a commercial "node" which qualifies this site for other commercial development. From this location, to the west, there is the "node" where the Kroger store is located, with the strip center directly across the street; at east Taylor Loop Road, there is the "node" where Harvest Foods is located; next, there is Johnson Ranch; then there is the Highway 10-Chenal Parkway intersection. In the 4 1/2 miles from 2-430 to the Highway 10-Chenal Parkway, there are no sites which meet the parameters which Coulson Oil must have except for the one chosen and which is represented by the application. Mr. Jones explained that the reason for the greater development along Chenal Parkway, as opposed to along Highway 10, is the more strict regulations imposed on developments along Highway 10; that developers do not want to have to go to the Supreme Court every time they want to try to re -zone a piece of property along Highway 10. He pointed out that there are only 2 corridors along which development can take place in west Little Rock, and, since there is no commercial zoning along Highway 10, the Chenal Parkway corridor is getting all the development. Mr. Jones related that the Coulson's are prominent persons in the community and heavily involved in community affairs, and said that they want to develop a quality project that is sensitive to the area and to the neighbors. Consequently, he and the Coulson's met with the neighbors who would be most directly affected, the owners of the two homes across Southridge Dr., with 5 FILE NO_: Z-5799 (Continued Winrock and Don Schickel who own lots in the subdivision, and with the Walton Heights Property Owners' Association board. One of the homeowners across the street wrote a letter expressing no objections to the proposed development. The other homeowner was just starting construction on his home when contacted, and he decided that he was not concerned about the proposed development and decided not to delay construction. Winrock and Schickel expressed no objections. The Property Owners' Association expressed concerns, and there was an attempt by the developer to address these concerns in the site development plan. Robert Brown presented the specific proposal from a technical aspect. He presented the site plan and explained the various uses which are proposed, their relationship to one another, the traffic flow into, out of, and within the site, and the landscaping -buffering accommodations. Mr. Jones pointed out that it is normal for commercial zoning to be located at major intersections, and that the Highway 10- Southridge Dr. intersection should not be different. He said that it is not unusual for commercial zoning to exist at entrances to residential neighborhoods. Mr. Coulson addressed the Commission and public, saying that Coulson Oil is a good corporate citizen and wanted to maintain the good will of the citizens no matter how the vote came out. Chairperson Chachere asked if there were a spokesperson for those in opposition to the development. Ed Tyler indicated that he would address the issues, that he had been asked by Larry Mabry, president of the Walton Heights Property Owners' Association and Gene Hindershot to speak. He stated that the proposed use is not appropriate; that the neighborhood is concerned about the impact on traffic at the intersection, on Southridge Dr., and into the Walton Heights neighborhood; about getting in and out of the neighborhood through the one -and -only intersection serving the neighborhood; and, about the proximity of the development to the fire station. Larry Mabry introduced himself as a resident and president of the property owners' association. He related that, indeed, Mr. Jones and representatives of Coulson Oil had visited with the board of directors. Concerns expressed by the board are: 1) a park designed for children is proposed to be built a short way up the hill from the proposed development at the first hairpin curve, and increased traffic will be a problem; 2) the property owners' association currently maintains the land at the northeast corner of the Highway 10-Southridge Dr. intersection, and the development will cause an increase in litter; 3) the development will cause an increase in traffic which will make it next to 3 FILE NO.: Z-579.9 Continued impossible to turn left onto Highway 10 from Southridge Dr.; 4) it will be impossible for Walton Heights residents to get through the traffic signal at Highway 10 and Southridge Dr.; 5) the noise from the development will be a problem to the fire fighters trying to sleep. Mina Drause introduced herself as a realtor, a residential builder, and a resident of Walton Heights. She said, responding to Mr. Jones' complaint about the lack of commercially zoned or available property along Highway 10, that Highway 10 has practically no commercial development because it has always been designated for residential development. She said that it is not appropriate to put the proposed type development at the entrance to an old, established neighborhood. She explained that the Walton Heights neighborhood is a very large neighborhood, but has only the one way in and one way out: through the Highway 10- Southridge Dr. intersection. There are, she said, 450 homes in the neighborhood, representing 1000 persons; there are 1000 cars per day going in and out; so, Southridge Dr. and the intersection are very congested. She related that the neighborhood is a very good neighborhood that "works", where children play and neighbors help one another. More traffic will adversely affect property values, will cause the neighborhood to be unable to keep the land at the entrance to the neighborhood picked up, and the neighbors will "loose" their neighborhood. She stated that all the residents are opposed to the development. Mr. Donald Glowen addressed the Commission. He explained that a park is supposed to be built to the east of the proposed site and abutting it, and that beer sold at the proposed convenience store and consumed at the park would be unacceptable; the cited the problem of the one-way-in/one-way-out to the neighborhood, and the problem with additional traffic; he cited the potential problem with the Southridge Dr. access to and from the proposed development site being located in close proximity to a blind curve, and the problem with sight distance for people on Southridge Dr. and entering or exiting the site; he cited the problem to the fire fighters with the noise from the 24-hour operation of the convenience store -restaurant -gas station; he complained about the additional traffic which would be generated causing back-ups for persons trying to get through the traffic signal; he was concerned about the fire equipment not being able to respond to emergencies due to traffic backed up on Southridge, or the danger of fire equipment having to use the wrong side of the road to by-pass the traffic being met by persons at the blind curves; and, he explained that the center lane on Highway 10 is currently used as a left -turn lane, and that the addition of another use so close to the others will increase the incidence of head-on collisions in the center lane. Ruth Bell, identifying herself as spokesperson for the League of Women voters of Pulaski County, reported that the League had 2 concerns: 1) that the existing Land Use Plan be supported; and, 7 ILE UC.: Z-5799 Continued 2) that the proposal contained the added nuisance factor of a fast food component with its message board and unpredictable and on-going noise. She expressed concern that the loud speaker noise would travel over the ridge to the neighborhood beyond. Mr. Jones responded to the concerns. He related that the current owner had received a letter from the City Parks and Recreation Department in which a plan for a neighborhood park had been outlined and in which a request for the sale or donation of land was proposed. Mr. Jones related that Mr. Coulson, if the PCD is approved, would donate the land outlined for the park. He also commented that Mr. Coulson would assume the responsibility for mowing and picking up litter at the entrance site to Walton Heights. Mr. Jones reiterated that the proposed site is not in a residential neighborhood. It is, he said, at a major intersection, with commercial uses similar to the ones proposed and undeveloped, commercially zoned land just across the street. He stated that there is a ridge which separates the residential neighborhood from Highway 10, and that the sound would not be a problem to the neighborhood. Mr. Jones contended that, if the site were zoned for office development, as was deemed a better choice by some of the neighbors, the traffic problem at the going -to-work and coming home time would be compounded, since office workers are coming and going at the same time. A commercial use would not, he said, add to the existing traffic problem of the neighborhood residents trying to go to or come home from work. Mr. Jones contended that there are no blind curves which would cause a problem for customers or residents entering or leaving the site. He stated that the current traffic count along Highway 10 at the site's location is 25,000 vehicles per day, and it will continue to increase; that the area is in transition and the intersection meets the requirements for commercial development. With the development approach which the current developer has taken, he contended, the proposal is the best and highest use for the site. Jim Lawson addressed the Commission. He maintained that the current application could "break the dyke" in the long-standing attempt to hold back "stipping out" Highway 10 like Rodney Parham or Asher Ave. and other arterials. He said that if the current rezoning request is granted, the Highway 10 will become another commercial corridor. The Land Use Plan shows the site under consideration to be for an office use, and if it is rezoned for commercial use, then land to the east, between the site and the church, and across the street to the south would logically need to be rezoned for commercial uses. He pointed out that Highway 10 does not control access, as Chenal Parkway does; so, commercial development along Chenal Parkway was planned. The Commission and the Board of Directors had decided years earlier that Highway 10 was going to be done differently, that it was not going to be "stripped out". Just as the Plan had anticipated, office development is taking place along Highway 10. The available commercial land is limited and, consequently, A FILE NO.: Z-5799 _(Continued expensive, but it is available. The applicant has other choices, but the alternatives are expensive. If he can rezone property and achieve his objective, then others can assume that they also have this alternative. The staff recommendation, then, is to reject the application. Commissioner Wyrick asked if the neighborhood would be amenable to the proposal if there were no access onto Southridge. A resident, identifying herself as living in the eleventh house up the hill, said that it would make no difference; she can hear the noise from the commercial development across Highway 10 all night as it is, and opposes the extension of commercial development to the north side of Highway 10. , Mr. Jones responded, saying that there are office developments which have destroyed neighborhoods. Look at Birchwood and the office development at the end of Wilbur Mills, he said. On the other hand, there are commercial developments which have not harmed the abutting residential neighborhoods. The buffering and landscaping are the important determinant; so, if the design overlay requirements are imposed and the site is well landscaped and buffered, then the use can be compatible. Public planning needs to allow the private market place to operate, and the proposed site is the site the private market place has chosen as the place which is best suited for the applicant's development. The applicant, he said, has made extensive concessions to make the use compatible, and it is, he concluded, a good use for the site. Commissioner Walker pointed out that there is insufficient right- of-way to meet Master Street Plan requirements. Mr. Lawson said that the required right-of-way would have to be dedicated. Mr. Bill Henry, City Traffic Engineer, agreed. Commissioner Putnam asked for clarification on the need for amending the Land Use Plan prior to acting on rezoning the property. Deputy City Attorney, Steve Giles, said that amending the Land Use Plan is required. Mr. Lawson responded that Plan amendments are prepared and accompany rezonings to the Board. A motion was made and seconded to approve the request. The motion, however, failed, with the vote of 2 ayes, 7 nays, 2 absent, and 0 abstentions. E