Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6149-C Staff AnalysisJuly 12, 2001 ITEM NO.: H FILE NO.: Z -6149-C NAME: Fellowship Bible Church Parking Lot - Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: 1701-1811 Napa Valley Drive nFvELOPER: ENGINEER: Fellowship Bible Church Carter -Burgess 12601 Hinson Road 10809 Executive Center, Suite 204 Little Rock, AR 72211 Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 4.38 acres ZONING: R-2 NUMBER OF LOTS: 5 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ALLOWED USES: Single Family Residential PROPOSED USE: Parking lot for church VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance to allow a 10 foot high privacy fence. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Fellowship Bible Church requests a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a parking lot on the five (5) R-2 zoned lots along the east side of Napa Valley Drive, north of Rainwood Drive. The proposed parking lot will consist of 385 parking spaces which will serve the Fellowship Bible Church campus to the northwest across Napa Valley Drive and the proposed administrative office building to the north (Item 7.1. on this agenda). The site will have two (2) access points from Napa Valley Drive, one (1) driveway near the center of the property and one (1) drive at the north property line between this property and the proposed administrative office building property. The applicant is requesting one (1) variance with the proposed conditional use permit. The variance is to allow a privacy fence along the east property line which is in excess of the maximum allowed height of six (6) feet. The July 12, 2001 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6149-C proposed site plan shows a 10 foot privacy fence along this property line (two foot concrete block wall with an 8 foot wood privacy fence on top). The applicant has noted that the 10 foot fence height was at the request of the abutting neighbors to the east. The applicant also notes that the privacy fence will be finished on both sides. The applicant has noted that site lighting will be low- level (maximum 12 foot poles) and directed away from adjacent property. The lighting will be phased for minimal lighting during non-event periods. The applicant also notes that landscaping will meet and exceed the requirements of the Little Rock landscape ordinance. The applicant has designed the parking lot to preserve many of the existing trees on the site. The proposed site plan shows the existing trees to remain. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The area proposed for the parking lot currently contains four (4) single family residences. There are single family residences to the east and south across Rainwood Drive. There is an existing Fellowship Bible Church parking area on the 0-2 zoned lot immediately to the north. This 0-2 zoned property is proposed for an administrative office building for the church (Item 7.1 on this agenda). The Terry Library and a clinic are located further north. The Fellowship Bible Church main campus and the Asbury United Methodist Church are located across Napa Valley Drive to the west. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: The Rainwood Cove, Glen Eagles and Pleasant Valley Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. As of this writing, staff has received no comment from the neighborhood. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Napa Valley Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way 45 feet from centerline will be required. 2. Rainwood Drive is classified on the Master Street Plan as a collector street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 3. Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP" (Master 2 July 12, 2001 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6149-C Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvements to these streets including 5 -foot sidewalks with planned development (or pay in -lieu of construction cost). 4. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 5. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 6. Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities are required. 7. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan, per Sec. 29-186(e), will be required. 8. A Grading Permit, per Sec. 29-186(c)(d), will be required. E. UTILITIES, FIRE DEPARTMENT AND CATA: Wastewater: Sewer not required for parking lot. No comment. Entergy: No Comment. ARKLA: No Comment received. Southwestern Bell: No Comment. Water: No Comment. Fire Department: No Comment. CATA: Project site is not located on a dedicated bus route and has no effect on bus radius, turnout and route. F. Landscape -Issues: Areas set aside for landscaping and buffers meet and exceed ordinance requirements. An irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. Temporary fencing must be installed to protect the critical root zone of the trees to be preserved. The face side of the proposed screening fence must be directed outward. It is recommended that slats be placed on both sides of the fence. Shrubs can help soften its impact. If brick or rock were to be used for screening, then vines could be used to soften the impact. July 12, 2001 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6149-C Prior to obtaining a building permit, it will be necessary to provide landscape plans with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MAY 24, 2001) Mike Cruse and Randy Frazier were present, representing the application. Staff briefly described the proposed conditional use permit. Staff noted that the proposed privacy fence along the east property line needed to be finished on both sides. Mr. Cruse noted no issue with this recommendation. Tad Borkowski, of Public Works, noted that the block base for the fence needed to have drains to allow water run-off from the east. The Public Works requirements were discussed. This discussion included the required street improvements along Napa Valley Drive. The landscape requirements were also discussion. Bob Brown, of the Planning Staff, noted that the street buffer along Rainwood Drive needed to be increased. After the discussion, conditional use permit action. H. ANALYSIS: the Committee forwarded the to the full Commission for final The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on May 30, 2001. The revised plan addresses the issues as raised by staff at the Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has noted that the 10 foot privacy fence along the east property line will be finished on both sides. The revised plan also provides the increased street buffer along Rainwood Drive. The revised site plan also shows a ground -mounted sign at the entrance drive near the center of the property. The sign will have a maximum height of six (6) feet and a maximum area of 64 square feet. This is the typical ground -mounted sign size allowed for church developments. As noted in paragraph A., the applicant is requesting a variance to allow a privacy fence along the east property line in excess of the maximum allowed height of six (6) feet. The proposed fence is 10 feet in height. The applicant notes that the 10 foot height was requested by 4 July 12, 2001 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6149-C the abutting neighbors to the east. Staff feels that the proposed fence height is reasonable and will provide adequate screening for the residences to the east. Otherwise, to staff's knowledge there are no outstanding issues associated with this application. With the screening of this property from the residents to the east, low-level/phased lighting and preservation of existing trees, staff feels that the proposed parking area should have no adverse impact on the general area. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs D and F of this report. 2. Any site lighting must be low-level, directed away from adjacent property and phased for minimal lighting during non-event periods. 3. Staff recommends approval of the variance to allow the 10 foot high privacy fence along the east property line. 4. The 10 foot high privacy must be finished on both sides and have drains to allow water run-off from the east Pfoperties. 5... -'The ground -mounted sign is to have a maximum height of - six (6) feet and a maximum area of 64 square feet. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 14, 2001) The applicant requested at the public hearing that the application be deferred to the July 12, 2001 Planning Commission agenda. This was due to the fact that only seven (7) planning commissioners were present at the public hearing. There was a motion to defer the application to the July 12, 2001 agenda. The motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 nays, 3 absent and 1 open position. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 12, 2001) Item H. Fellowship Bible Church parking lot - Conditional Use Permit (Z -6149-C) and Item I. Fellowship Bible Church - Zoning Site Plan Review (Z -6149-D) were discussed simultaneously at this public hearing. 5 July 12, 2001 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont. FILE NO.: Z -6149-C Randy'Frazier, Mike Cruse, Rick Sowell and Pat McGetrick were present, representing the application. Staff briefly described the proposed applications with recommendations of approval with conditions. There were several persons present with concerns. Randy Frazier addressed the Commission in support of the application. Mr. Frazier noted that the church had met with the neighborhood, individuals and neighborhood associations and that there was no organized opposition to the proposed applications. Mr. Frazier explained the current parking situation for the church and the need for additional parking. He noted that the church has 3 current needs. 1. Office space 2. Space for learning center with construction of a new office building 3. Parking Mr. Frazier noted that the church currently has 1,174 parking spaces and that 421 of these spaces are leased and not owned by the church. Mr. Frazier explained the landscape plan for the proposed parking lot. He noted that 55 existing trees would be preserved on the site. He also noted that the landscaping for the parking lot would exceed the City of Little Rock Landscape Ordinance requirements. He noted a two-sided privacy fence would be constructed along the east property line and that there would be a minimum 25 -foot buffer along this property line. Mr. Frazier also discussed the lighting plan for the proposed parking lot, noting that the lighting would be phased and not on at late hours. Beverly Lindburg addressed the Commission in opposition to the proposed applications. She explained the history of the past Fellowship Bible Church requests for parking and office building space on this property. Ms. Lindburg explained that members of the neighborhood had felt threaten by the church in the past and made allegations regarding how the church had previously dealt with the neighborhood representatives. She further explained that the homes along Napa Valley Road which would be removed with proposed parking lot were the only buffer that her neighborhood had. She stated that she had met with an appraiser and was told that development of a parking lot on this property 6 July 12, 2001 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6149-C would lower the property values for the homes in Rainwood Cove. She also discussed concerns relating to traffic, lighting, hours, and noise. Commissioner Lowery asked the church for assurance that they would not be back before the Commission in the future with further requests for this property. Mr. Frazier noted that the construction of the proposed parking lot would cap the church's plan at this location. Mr. Cruse noted that the church now has a master plan. He stated that the church would cap growth at 7,500 members. He noted that the church would not move from its current location but would start another church further west when the membership reaches the 7,500 member point. Commissioner Lowery asked a general question about the compatibility of a church development to a neighborhood, specifically about the church's proposed office building. Mr. Frazier responded that the City of Little Rock's Zoning Ordinance considered churches compatible with adjacent or nearby residential neighborhoods. This issue was briefly discussed. Commissioner Adcock asked how long the church plans to be at this location and why there was a need for the large amount of office space. Mr. Cruse responded that the church plans to stay at this location forever and had no plans to move. He explained the need for office space for the church. Commissioner Berry asked questions pertaining to the 0-2 zoning district and office uses. He also asked about the previous Fellowship Bible Church request for parking and office space. Mr. Cruse addressed these questions and explained further. Commissioner Rahman asked about the height restrictions and 0-2 zoning. Staff briefly explained and outlined the specific height requirements for the 0-2 zoning district. Mr. Frazier noted that the office building was proposed on office zoned property and that the proposed office building was compatible with the existing zoning. Commissioner Rahman expressed concern about the proposed office building not being compatible with the adjacent neighborhood. He made additional comments on this issue. 7 July 12, 2001 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont. FILE NO.: Z -6149-C Commissioner Floyd asked about the existing sanctuary seating for the church and the existing church parking. Mr. Cruse responded that the existing sanctuary seating was 1,825 seats and that the church currently had 1,174 total parking spaces: Commissioner Floyd asked how the church would cap the membership at 7,500 members. Mr. Cruse explained that when there is a need for a fourth church service at Fellowship, the membership would split and a new church site will be formed further west. Commissioner Adcock asked if an office building could be built on the 0-2 zoned property without the parking lot on the property to the south. Mr. Frazier explained that there is church -owned property to the east with parking, which could serve the office building. Commissioner Faust noted that she had no problem with the variances for the office building. She made comments about the conditional use permit and noted that the property would remain zoned R-2. She asked that if the church were allowed to develop the parking lot on the R-2 zoned property what the probability would be that the property would ever revert back to single family residential. Tony Bozynski, Assistant Director of Planning and Development, noted that if the property were developed as a parking lot it probably would never be reverted back to single family residential. He explained that it would probably not be financially feasible for a developer to take the property as a parking lot and convert it back to a single family use. Commissioner Faust made additional comments on this issue. Mr. Frazier explained that the church would have no intent to ever leave the site after developed as a parking lot. He noted that there were no other single family homes along Napa Valley Road that faced the street. This issue was briefly discussed. Commissioner Rahman asked if the proposed parking lot would be needed without construction of the proposed office building. Mr. Frazier explained that additional parking is currently needed to serve the current church services. Chairman Downing asked the church representatives about Ms. Lindburg's allegations. Mr. Frazier noted that the allegations were unsubstantiated and not true, and he explained this. Mr. Cruse noted that the church had never called neighborhood representatives and requested meetings nor intimidated the neighbors in any way. This issue was briefly 8 July 12, 2001 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont. FILE NO.: Z -6149-C discussed with additional comments by Commissioners Adcock and Lowery. Chairman Downing asked about security for the proposed parking lot. Mr. Cruse noted that the parking lot would be gated at night from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. He noted that the church had never received a complaint about activity on other church parking lots at night. Chairman Downing asked if the church would make the gated times a condition of their application. Mr. Cruse responded that they would. Chairman Downing asked if the church employed a security firm for their church property. Mr. Cruse responded that the church has never had a need to employ a security firm. Chairman Downing asked if there was a guarantee that the church would maintain the landscaping in and around the proposed parking area. Mr. Cruse responded that the landscaped areas would be maintained as per the City Landscape Ordinance maintenance provisions. Chairman Downing asked if this would be made a condition of the application. Mr. Cruse responded that it would. Mr. Frazier noted that the office part of the development would not be gated, only the parking areas. Commissioner Berry asked if any of the existing homes along Napa Valley proposed to be removed with the construction of the new parking area were on septic systems. Mr. Cruse responded that the two of the homes were on septic systems. Commissioner Berry noted that septic systems are not ecologically friendly. Commissioner Allen asked if the proposed parking lot would be restricted only to Fellowship Bible Church use. Mr. Cruse responded that the parking lot would be used specifically for Fellowship Bible Church functions, but also Pulaski Academy might park on the church lot. Commissioner Faust asked if other Rainwood Cove residents were present at the public hearing. Ms. Lindburg noted that there were five persons present from the Rainwood Cove neighborhood. Mr. Cruse noted that the church had researched property values in the Rainwood Cove neighborhood and that they had increased since the church development to the north. Commissioner Rahman asked why there were only five members of the Rainwood Cove neighborhood present at the public hearing. Ms. Lindburg explained that some of the residents were 0 July 12, 2001 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: H (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6149-C intimidated by the church, and therefore did not want to attend the meeting. She made additional comments in opposition to the proposed application for the parking lot. There was a motion to approve the conditional use permit, Item H (Z -6149-C), subject to the conditions as recommended by staff and the additional conditions placed on the application by the applicant at this meeting. The motion failed by a vote of 4 ayes, 4 nays and 3 absent. The application was denied. There was a second motion to approve the site plan review, Item I (Z -6149-D), as recommended by staff. Commissioner Adcock asked about the parking variance associated with the proposed office building. Staff explained that the off-site parking could be provided on the existing church property to the east. This issue was briefly discussed. The Chairman called for a vote on the second motion. The motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes, 1 nay and 3 absent. The application was approved. 10