HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5803-A Staff AnalysisFILE NO.: Z -5803-A
NAME: Little Rock Auto Group Revised Short -form PCD
LOCATION: located at 12601 West Markham Street
DEVELOPER:
Little Rock Auto Group, Inc.
12601 West Markham Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
FNC;INFFR-
Development Consultants, Inc.
2200 North Rodney Parham Road, Suite 220
Little Rock, AR 72212
AREA: 3.31 Acres
CURRENT ZONING:
ALLOWED USES:
PROPOSED ZONING:
NUMBER OF LOTS: 1
PCD
Automobile Dealership
Revised PCD
FT. NEW STREET: 0
PROPOSED USE: Automobile Dealership — Placement of banners on utility
poles within the development
Variance/Waivers:
BACKGROUND:
None requested.
On March 22, 1994, The Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed a request to rezone
the site from C-2, Shopping Center District to PCD to allow an automobile display, sales
and service business on the site located at the southwest corner of Chenal Parkway
and West Markham Street. The proposal involved the development of 3.31 acres and a
preliminary plat to subdivide 16.44 acres into two non-residential lots. The second lot
was to remain zoned C-2, Shopping Center District.
The PCD application proposed the construction of a 19,340 square foot building to
house the show room, offices and administration area, service area, and parts area; and
a 2,440 square foot sales office building. The building coverage was proposed at 15.11
percent of the land area and parking for 269 vehicles was proposed with the largest
FILE NO.: Z -5803-A (Cont.
majority being for display of vehicles. The main sales -service building was indicated as
an inverted "V" shaped building, and the two end points were proposed to be located
33.1 feet from the south property line.
The site plan included a primary sign to be a pole mounted sign no greater than
standard sign regulations for free-standing commercial signs (i.e. 36 feet in height and
160 square feet in area) and a monument sign which was to conform to the standards
set forth in the Design Overlay District for Chenal Parkway (i.e. 8 feet in height and 100
square feet in area). No additional right-of-way dedication was proposed along Chenal
Parkway. Construction of an additional traffic lane for Chenal Parkway was not
proposed; however construction of a deceleration lane on Chenal Parkway to the entry
drive off Chenal Parkway and the required sidewalk was to be built. The proposal
included Master Street Plan improvements to Atkins Road and West Markham Street.
During the Public Hearing process the applicant indicated to the Commission several
concessions were being offered to ease the area residents' concerns. The developer
indicated a neighborhood meeting was held and several concerns were raised. The
developer stated there would be no body shop constructed as a part of the
development; there would be no outdoor paging of employees; there would be no off-
site parking of vehicles; there would be no on -street loading of vehicles being delivered;
there would be no circus tents, flashing lights, search lights, pendants or carnival type
promotions; test drive routes would be defined and not allowed through the Timber
Ridge neighborhood, and customers would be accompanied by sales representative
during test drives; and site lighting would be directional and controlled to light only the
site, and site lighting would be reduced after hours by two-thirds. The applicant offered
a second assurance he would not return to the Commission at a later time with a
request for tents or banners.
A. PROPOSAUREQUEST:
The applicant is interested in placing flags on approximately 17 light poles on the
Gwatney Pontiac Buick GMC Automobile dealership located at 12601 West
Markham Street. The flags would be approximately 3 'h foot by 7 foot and
consist of 2 panels that are 21 inches wide and 7 feet long. The applicant has
indicated the flags are substantially similar to the ones that the City of Little Rock
uses for advertising activities at the zoo. The applicant has indicated the flags
will be used to differentiate the areas of the dealership between the different
brands of cars and also between the new and used cars sections.
EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site has a ownership different than the firm approved in 1994. The site is
now home to Gwatney Pontiac Buick GMC automobile dealership formerly
known as Dick Layton Buick GMC. To the south and east of the site are
commercial nodes including restaurants, furniture stores, fuel station, general
retail and a drycleaners to name a few. To the west of the site, across Atkins
Road, there is property zoned 0-3 and PCD. The PCD zoned property is
2
FILE NO.: Z -5803-A (Cont.
developing as an office park. There is a branch bank proposed for the 0-3
zoned property located at the corner of West Markham and Atkins Road.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from an area resident
concerning the proposed use of the property. All residents who could be
identified located within 300 -feet of the site, the Parkway Place Property Owners
Association, the Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood
Association and all owners of property located within 200 -feet of the site were
notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works: No comment regarding the placement of banners.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: No comment regarding the placement of banners.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center -Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: No objection to banners on light poles or other display
paraphernalia.
Fire Department: No comment regarding the placement of banners.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAUDESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District.
The land use plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has
applied for a Revised PCD to allow the placement of banners on the property's
exterior light poles.
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
Master Street Plan: Chenal Parkway is shown as a Principal Arterial and West
Markham Street is shown as a Collector on the Master Street Plan. Chenal
Parkway is built to Principal Arterial standards and West Markham Street is built
to Collector Street standards adjacent to the property. The primary function of a
3
FILE NO.: Z -5803-A (Cont.
Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and connect major traffic generators or
activity centers within urbanized areas and the primary function of a Collector
Street is to provide a connection from local streets to arterials.
A Class I bikeway is identified on the 2004 Bicycle Plan on Chenal Parkway from
Bowman Road to Highway 10. The Chenal Parkway Class I Bikeway bypasses
the section of Chenal Parkway adjacent to the property and connects with West
Markham Street at Bowman Road and will not be affected by this case.
Cily Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the
area covered by the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan. The Office and
Commercial Development goal listed one objective relevant to this case. The
first objective is "Encourage all commercial and office development in the
community to be subject to neighborhood input prior to City approval." This
objective consists of an action statement indicating the need to "Aggressively use
Planned Zoning Districts (PZDs) to influence more neighborhood -friendly and
better quality developments." This application is an example of the how the
neighborhood's input and concern can be expressed to the developer.
Landscape: No comment
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 28, 2004)
The applicant was not present. Staff stated the request was to place banners on
light poles within the automobile dealership. Staff presented a visual of the
requested banners and the proposed placement of the banners. Staff indicated
there were seventeen locations being requested on the site. There was no
further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full
Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant's request is to place banners on seventeen light poles within the
existing automobile dealership. The flags are proposed at approximately 3 Y2
feet by 7 feet and consist of 2 panels that are 21 inches wide and 7 feet long.
The proposal includes banners that are substantially similar to the ones that the
City of Little Rock uses for advertising activities at the zoo. The request includes
the placement of banners to differentiate the areas of the dealership between
various brand names of automobiles and between the new and used car section.
Per Section 36-543 of the City of Little Rock Code of Ordinances banners,
pennants, festoons, searchlights are prohibited signs and sales promotional
devices except as allowed in Section 36-557, subsection (d). In this Section
temporary special event on -premises banners are allowed for a maximum of six
weeks per occasion, not to exceed four events per year.
Staff is not supportive of the applicant's request. Typically in the past staff has
supported the placement of banners and pendants within shopping centers to
0
FILE NO.: Z -5803-A (Cont.
identify the shopping center and not individual businesses. Staff has also
supported the placement of banners along corridors and areas of special interest,
such as the River Market District, to publicize the area of interest. Staff is not
supportive of the placement of banners with business logos and names to
advertise specific businesses. Staff feels to allow the advertisement banners for
this automobile dealership is out of character with previous allowances and
should not be allowed in this case. In addition, the previous owner made
specific assurances to the neighborhood and the Commission this form of
advertisement would not be requested or allowed. Staff does not feel the change
in ownership should negate the previous commitments.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
Mr. Bill Gwatney and Mr. Ron Hope were present representing the request. There was
one registered objector present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of
denial.
Mr. Bill Gwatney addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated his
firm leased the site from the owner and was not aware of previous commitments made
regarding the placement of banners on the site. He stated the site held three lines of
automobiles and was a difficult site to market due to ingress and egress problems. He
stated he was agreeable to amending his request to allow the placement of banners on
a reduced number of light poles. He stated it was important to allow banners for the
three franchises held for the site and a banner for the used automobile section.
Commissioner Rector questioned if he was requesting to be able to place banners in
four locations for a total of eight banners. Mr. Gwatney stated this was his amended
request or four poles each containing two banners.
Mr. Ron Hope addressed the Commission. He stated he was not aware of any
neighborhood opposition to the request. He stated the banners would be tastefully
constructed and properly maintained, He stated the request was very similar to the'
banners used by the City to advertise Boo at the Zoo.
Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition to the proposed request. She
stated she was around when the sign ordinance was amended in 1994 to eliminate the
placement of banners on poles. She stated by allowing the banners to advertise special
events or to advertise neighborhoods was acceptable but to allow the banners to
advertise merchandise was not acceptable. She stated the dealership could
accomplish the same goal with the placement of ground -mounted signage directing
customers to particular areas. She stated the placement of banners on the poles was
commercial advertisement beyond the scope of what was acceptable. She stated the
61
FILE NO.: Z -5803-A (Cont.
neighborhood was not in attendance because the owner and the City made
commitments when the PCD was approved to not allow the placement of this form of
advertisement.
There was a general discussion by the Commission concerning the site and the need
for the placement of this advertisement mechanism to direct customers on the site. It
was stated typically on a lot the sales representatives directed customers to particular
areas and signage was not necessary. It was also suggested that if the automobile
dealerships were allowed to use this form of advertisement other businesses such as
Home Depot would also want to use banners to advertise their goods. Commissioner
Rector stated he did not feel this was the same since automobiles were located outside
and other businesses merchandise was located in doors. He stated he did not view this
as the same request.
A motion was made to approve the request as amended to allow the placement of
banners on four light poles with two banners per pole for a total of eight banners. The
motion carried by a vote of 7 ayes, 2 noes and 2 absent.
December 2, 2004
ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z -5803-A
NAME: Little Rock Auto Group Revised Short -form PCD
LOCATION: located at 12601 West Markham Street
DEVELOPER:
Little Rock Auto Group, Inc.
12601 West Markham Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
ENGINEER:
Development Consultants, Inc.
2200 North Rodney Parham Road, Suite 220
Little Rock, AR 72212
AREA: 3.31 Acres
CURRENT ZONING:
ALLOWED USES:
PROPOSED ZONING:
NUMBER OF LOTS: 1
PCD
Automobile Dealership
Revised PCD
FT. NEW STREET: 0
PROPOSED USE: Automobile Dealership — Placement of banners on utility
poles within the development
Variance/Waivers: None requested.
BACKGROUND:
On March 22, 1994, The Little Rock Planning Commission reviewed a request to rezone
the site from C-2, Shopping Center District to PCD to allow an automobile display, sales
and service business on the site located at the southwest corner of Chenal Parkway
and West Markham Street. The proposal involved the development of 3.31 acres and a
preliminary plat to subdivide 16.44 acres into two non-residential lots. The second lot
was to remain zoned C-2, Shopping Center District.
The PCD application proposed the construction of a 19,340 square foot building to
house the show room, offices and administration area, service area, and parts area; and
a 2,440 square foot sales office building. The building coverage was proposed at 15.11
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.
FILE NO.: Z -5803-A
percent of the land area and parking for 269 vehicles was proposed with the largest
majority being for display of vehicles. The main sales -service building was indicated as
an inverted "V" shaped building, and the two end points were proposed to be located
33.1 feet from the south property line.
The site plan included a primary sign to be a pole mounted sign no greater than
standard sign regulations for free-standing commercial signs (i.e. 36 feet in height and
160 square feet in area) and a monument sign which was to conform to the standards
set forth in the Design Overlay District for Chenal Parkway (i.e. 8 feet in height and 100
square feet in area). No additional right-of-way dedication was proposed along Chenal
Parkway. Construction of an additional traffic lane for Chenal Parkway was not
proposed; however construction of a deceleration lane on Chenal Parkway to the entry
drive off Chenal Parkway and the required sidewalk was to be built. The proposal
included Master Street Plan improvements to Atkins Road and West Markham Street.
During the Public Hearing process the applicant indicated to the Commission several
concessions were being offered to ease the area residents' concerns. The developer
indicated a neighborhood meeting was held and several concerns were raised. The
developer stated there would be no body shop constructed as a part of the
development; there would be no outdoor paging of employees; there would be no off-
site parking of vehicles; there would be no on -street loading of vehicles being delivered;
there would be no circus tents, flashing lights, search lights, pendants or carnival type
promotions; test drive routes would be defined and not allowed through the Timber
Ridge neighborhood, and customers would be accompanied by sales representative
during test drives; and site lighting would be directional and controlled to light only the
site, and site lighting would be reduced after hours by two-thirds. The applicant offered
a second assurance he would not return to the Commission at a later time with a
request for tents or banners.
A. PROPOSAUREQUEST:
The applicant is interested in placing flags on approximately 17 light poles on the
Gwatney Pontiac Buick GMC Automobile dealership located at 12601 West
Markham Street. The flags would be approximately 3 '/ foot by 7 foot and
consist of 2 panels that are 21 inches wide and 7 feet long. The applicant has
indicated the flags are substantially similar to the ones that the City of Little Rock
uses for advertising activities at the zoo. The applicant has indicated the flags
will be used to differentiate the areas of the dealership between the different
brands of cars and also between the new and used cars sections.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site has a ownership different than the firm approved in 1994. The site is
now home to Gwatney Pontiac Buick GMC automobile dealership formerly
known as Dick Layton Buick GMC. To the south and east of the site are
2
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -5803-A
commercial nodes including restaurants, furniture stores, fuel station, general
retail and a drycleaners to name a few. To the west of the site, across Atkins
Road, there is property zoned 0-3 and PCD. The PCD zoned property is
developing as an office park. There is a branch bank proposed for the 0-3
zoned property located at the corner of West Markham and Atkins Road.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from an area resident
concerning the proposed use of the property. All residents who could be
identified located within 300 -feet of the site, the Parkway Place Property Owners
Association, the Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge Neighborhood
Association and all owners of property located within 200 -feet of the site were
notified of the public hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Public Works
No comment regarding the placement of banners.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
Wastewater: No comment regarding the placement of banners.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center -Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: No objection to banners on light poles or other display
paraphernalia.
Fire Department: No comment regarding the placement of banners.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: No comment received.
F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planning Division: This request is located in the Ellis Mountain Planning District.
The land use plan shows Commercial for this property. The applicant has
applied for a Revised PCD to allow the placement of banners on the property's
exterior light poles.
3
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont) FILE NO.: Z -5803-A
The request does not require a change to the Land Use Plan.
Master Street Plan: Chenal Parkway is shown as a Principal Arterial and West
Markham Street is shown as a Collector on the Master Street Plan. Chenal
Parkway is built to Principal Arterial standards and West Markham Street is built
to Collector Street standards adjacent to the property. The primary function of a
Principal Arterial is to serve through traffic and connect major traffic generators or
activity centers within urbanized areas and the primary function of a Collector
Street is to provide a connection from local streets to arterials.
A Class I bikeway is identified on the 2004 Bicycle Plan on Chenal Parkway from
Bowman Road to Highway 10. The Chenal Parkway Class I Bikeway bypasses
the section of Chenal Parkway adjacent to the property and connects with West
Markham Street at Bowman Road and will not be affected by this case.
City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the
area covered by the Rock Creek Neighborhood Action Plan. The Office and
Commercial Development goal listed one objective relevant to this case. The
first objective is "Encourage all commercial and office development in the
community to be subject to neighborhood input prior to City approval." This
objective consists of an action statement indicating the need to "Aggressively use
Planned Zoning Districts (PZDs) to influence more neighborhood -friendly and
better quality developments." This application is an example of the how the
neighborhood's input and concern can be expressed to the developer.
Landscape: No comment.
G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (October 28, 2004)
The applicant was not present. Staff stated the request was to place banners on
light poles within the automobile dealership. Staff presented a visual of the
requested banners and the proposed placement of the banners. Staff indicated
there were seventeen locations being requested on the site. There was no
further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full
Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS:
The applicant's request is to place banners on seventeen light poles within the
existing automobile dealership. The flags are proposed at approximately 3Y2
feet by 7 feet and consist of 2 panels that are 21 inches wide and 7 feet long.
The proposal includes banners that are substantially similar to the ones that the
City of Little Rock uses for advertising activities at the zoo. The request includes
the placement of banners to differentiate the areas of the dealership between
various brand names of automobiles and between the new and used car section.
E
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -5803-A
Per Section 36-543 of the City of Little Rock Code of Ordinances banners,
pennants, festoons, searchlights are prohibited signs and sales promotional
devices except as allowed in Section 36-557, subsection (d). In this Section
temporary special event on -premises banners are allowed for a maximum of six
weeks per occasion, not to exceed four events per year.
Staff is not supportive of the applicant's request. Typically in the past staff has
supported the placement of banners and pendants within shopping centers to
identify the shopping center and not individual businesses. Staff has also
supported the placement of banners along corridors and areas of special interest,
such as the River Market District, to publicize the area of interest. Staff is not
supportive of the placement of banners with business logos and names to
advertise specific businesses. Staff feels to allow the advertisement banners for
this automobile dealership is out of character with previous allowances and
should not be allowed in this case. In addition, the previous owner made
specific assurances to the neighborhood and the Commission this form of
advertisement would not be requested or allowed. Staff does not feel the change
in ownership should negate the previous commitments.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 2, 2004)
Mr. Bill Gwatney and Mr. Ron Hope were present representing the request. There was
one registered objector present.' Staff presented the item with a recommendation of
denial.
Mr. Bill Gwatney addressed the Commission on the merits of the request. He stated his
firm leased the site from the owner and was not aware of previous commitments made
regarding the placement of banners on the site. He stated the site held three lines of
automobiles and was a difficult site to market due to ingress and egress problems. He
stated he was agreeable to amending his request to allow the placement of banners on
a reduced number of light poles. He stated it was important to allow banners for the
three franchises held for the site and a banner for the used automobile section.
Commissioner Rector questioned if he was requesting to be able to place banners in
four locations for a total of eight banners. Mr. Gwatney stated this was his amended
request or four poles each containing two banners.
Mr. Ron Hope addressed the Commission. He stated he was not aware of any
neighborhood opposition to the request. He stated the banners would be tastefully
constructed and properly maintained. He stated the request was very similar to the
banners used by the City to advertise Boo at the Zoo.
5
December 2, 2004
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) _ FiLE NO.: Z -5803-A
Ms. Ruth Bell addressed the Commission in opposition to the proposed request. She
stated she was around when the sign ordinance was amended in 1994 to eliminate the
placement of banners on poles. She stated by allowing the banners to advertise special
events or to advertise neighborhoods was acceptable but to allow the banners to
advertise merchandise was not acceptable. She stated the dealership could
accomplish the same goal with the placement of ground -mounted signage directing
customers to particular areas. She stated the placement of banners on the poles was
commercial advertisement beyond the scope of what was acceptable. She stated the
neighborhood was not in attendance because the owner and the City made
commitments when the PCD was approved to not allow the placement of this form of
advertisement.
There was a general discussion by the Commission concerning the site and the need
for the placement of this advertisement mechanism to direct customers on the site. It
was stated typically on a lot the sales representatives directed customers to particular
areas and signage was not necessary. It was also suggested that if the automobile
dealerships were allowed to use this form of advertisement other businesses such as
Home Depot would also want to use banners to advertise their goods. Commissioner
Rector stated he did not feel this was the same since automobiles were located outside
and other businesses merchandise was located in doors. He stated he did not view this
as the same request.
A motion was made to approve the request as amended to allow the placement of
banners on four light poles with two banners per pole for a total of eight banners. The
motion carried by a vote of 7 ayes, 2 noes and 2 absent.
ITEM NO.: 5
FILE NO.: Z -5803-A
NAME: Little Rock Auto Group Revised Short -form PCD
LOCATION: located at 12601 West Markham Street
Planning Staff Comments:
1. Provide notification of property owners located within 200 -feet of the site, complete
with the certified abstract list, notice form with affidavit executed and proof of
mailing.
Variance/Waivers- None requested.
Public Works: - No comment regarding the placement of banners.
Utilities and Fire Department/County Planning:
Wastewater: No comment regarding the placement of banners.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center -Point Energy: No comment received.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: No objection to banners on light poles or other display
paraphernalia.
Fire Department: No comment regarding the placement of banners.
County Planninn : No comment.
CATA: No comment received.
Planning Division:
Landscape: No comment regarding the placement of banners
Revised plat/plan: Submit four (4) copies of a revised preliminary plan (to include the
additional information as noted above) to staff on Wednesday, November 3, 2004.
ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z -5803-A
NAME: Little Rock Auto Group Revised Short -form PCD
LOCATION: located at 12601 West Markham Street
Planning Staff Comments:
1. Provide notification of property owners located within 200 -feet of the site, complete
with the certified abstract list, notice form with affidavit executed and proof of
mailing.
Variance/Waivers: None requested.
Public Works: - No comment regarding the placement of banners.
Utilities and Fire Department/County Planning:
Wastewater: No comment regarding the placement of banners.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center -Point Ener : No comment received.
SBC: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: No objection to banners on light poles or other display
paraphernalia.
Fire Department: No comment regarding the placement of banners.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: No comment received.
Planning Division:
Landscape: No comment regarding the placement of banners
Revised plat/plan: Submit four (4) copies of a revised preliminary plan (to include the
additional information as noted above) to staff on Wednesday, November 3, 2004.