HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6876 Staff AnalysisAugust 3, 2000
ITEM NO.: 11 FILE NO.: Z-6876
NAME: Fina Convenience Store - Conditional Use
Permit
T.nr-ATTM: 7200 West 12th Street
OWNER/APPLICANT: R.J. Properties, LLC/Doug Hendrix
PROPOSAL: To obtain a conditional use permit to build
a car wash in combination with a gas station
and convenience store facility on property
zoned C-3, General Commercial, located at
7200 West 12th Street.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1. SITE LOCATION:
This 2.1 acre site is located at the northeast corner of
the intersection of Rodney Parham Road and 12th Street.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This site is zoned C-3, General Commercial, and is
surrounded by commercial and industrial zoned properties.
To the east the zoning is R-2, Single Family Residential,
and contains a cemetery. The properties to the north,
northwest, immediate west and southwest are zoned C-3,
General Commercial. They all have commercial uses on them
except to the north, which is vacant. To the southeast and
further to the=west the zoning is I-2.
Staff believes the proposed use would be compatible with
the neighborhood.
The University Park Neighborhood Association, all property
owners within 200 feet, and all residents within 300 feet
that could be identified, were notified of the public
hearing.
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
The proposal contains one driveway onto 12th Street and two
onto Freeway Drive. Parking spaces required for the gas and
convenience store part of the facility would be 4 plus 1
August 3, 2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.)
FILE NO.: Z-6876
per 300 square feet of floor area. That results in 14
required spaces. Those would be provided when counting the
spaces at the fuel pumps. The proposed plan includes two
stacking spaces for each of the two auto washes, and one or
two for each of the self -serve and vacuum bays, which
should be adequate.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
The proposed six foot wide street buffer along 12t' Street
meets the requirement when averaged out. However, it drops
six.feet below the full width requirement without transfers
most of the way.
A three foot wide building landscape strip between the
public parking area and building is required. Some
flexibility with this requirement is allowed.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
a.Easements shown for proposed storm drainage are required.
b.Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities
are required.
c. Sidewalks shall be shown conforming to Sec. 31-175 and
the "MSP".
d.Driveways shall conform to Sec. 31-210 or Ordinance
18,031.
e. Stormwater Detention per Ordinance 14,787 and the
"Drainage Manual" is required.
f. Prepare letter for streetlights as required by Sec.
31-403.
g. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for
approval prior to start of work.
h. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec. 29-186 (e) is
required.
i . A grading Permit per Secs. 29-186 ( c) & (d) is required.
j. Construct a right -turn -lane on 12th Street for efficient
movement of traffic.
k. Make the driveway on 12th Street right -in -right -out only
by constructing a triangular island.
1. Current ordinance does not allow two driveways on the
north side of the property. Close driveway closer to the
Northwest corner of the property or request a variance.
FA
August 3, 2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.)
6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT., AND CATA COMMENTS:
FILE NO.: Z-6876
Water: Contact the Water Works regarding meter size and
location. A RPZ backflow preventer is required prior to
the first outlet on the waterline serving the carwash.
Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected.
Southwestern Bell: No comments received.
ARKLA: No comments received.
Entergy: Approved as submitted.
Fire Department: Check with water works for location of
nearest fire hydrant and include it on site plan.
CATA: No comments.
7. STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has requested a conditional use permit to
build a combination gas station, convenience store, and car
wash facility on 2.1 acres of property zoned C-3, General
Commercial. The facility would be open 24 hours per day.
The car wash along the east side of the site necessitated
the need for the conditional use permit request. It would
consist of two automatic wash bays, plus six self -serve and
three vacuum bays.
The proposed plan meets all siting, parking, and
landscaping requirements except for the second driveway on
Freeway Drive. The justification the applicant provided for
the second driveway was for ease and safety of movement for
the 18 -wheel tanker servicing the fuel pumps. The proposed
plan would allow the tanker to come to the site straight
from I-630 and allow it to enter and exit the site from
Freeway Drive without ever having to enter 12th Street.
Staff does support a variance to allow that second
driveway.
The applicant proposes one pole sign located as shown on
the site plan, sized within C-3 sign criteria. It would be
35 feet tall and contain a sign area of 147 square feet or
3
August 3, 2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.)
FILE NO.: Z-6876
less compared to ordinance maximums of 36 feet tall and 160
square feet respectively.
This site is located in an area of mixed uses including a
cemetery, offices, commercial, and industrial.
Staff believes the proposed use would be compatible with
the area.
8. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit
subject to compliance with the following conditions:
a. Comply with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances.
b. Comply with Public Works Comments, but with a variance
for the driveways onto Freeway Drive.
c. All exterior lighting must be low intensity and directed
downward and inward to the property.
Staff also recommends approval of the variance to allow two
driveways along Freeway Drive.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS:
(JULY 13, 2000)
James Huff and Doug Hendricks were present representing the
application. Staff gave a brief description of the proposal.
Public Works review%d their comments. A short discussion took
place regarding justification of the two driveways on Freeway
Drive. Staff also explained the screening and buffer
requirements, and asked for clarification of some of the lines
and notes on the site plan and survey.
There being no further issues, the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for final
action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(AUGUST 3, 2000)
Ronald Madding was present representing the application. There
were three registered objectors present. Staff presented the
4
August 3, 2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.)
FILE NO.: Z-6876
item with a recommendation for approval subject to compliance
with the conditions listed under "Staff Recommendation,"
paragraph 8 above.
Ronald Madding briefly reviewed the proposal, commented on the
upscale nature of the proposed development, and a few comments
about how the exterior would look. He stated that the size of
the convenience store would be approximately 3,177 square feet.
It would include a Deli and a Baskin Robbins.
Commissioner Lowry asked about the hours of operation, for an
estimate -of the number of customers expected daily, what made
this a good location for this type of use, and he asked if
Public Works saw any traffic problems and if a traffic signal
was projected for the exit off of I-630 near this site. Mr.
Madding stated that it would be open 24 hours per day, but he
wasn't sure about the traffic volume. He estimated maybe about
1000 cars per month just for gas. He felt it would be a good
location because it's close to I-630, and there aren't any other
gas stations or convenience stores nearby. Public Works stated
they did not see this use causing any particular traffic
problems, but they weren't sure if the exit asked about was on
the list for a traffic signal.
Commissioner Rector commented that the proposed uses were
allowed by right except for the car wash, and asked if the owner
would go ahead and build even if he couldn't have the car wash.
Mr. Madding said he didn't know for sure, but he expected that
he would since the applicant had already bought the property.
Commissioner Muse asked if there would be a drive-through for
the Deli. Mr. Madding stated there would not be a drive-through.
The opposition began with Mr. Ralph White, President of the
University Park Neighborhood Association, speaking. He stated
that their Association was 100% against this project, which
would be backed up by a signed petition. Their main concerns
were: increased traffic which they feel is already terrible; the
proposed uses attracting drug activity; the car wash attracting
loitering; and that the uses would decrease the safety of the
University Park neighborhood. Mr. White also stated that the
projected usage mentioned by Mr. Madding would generate about
10,000 not 1000 car trips per month.
5
August 3, 2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 11 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6876
Estelle Matthis spoke in opposition making the added point that
they felt that the convenience store and gas station were not
needed at the proposed site and would be out of synch and
character with the area. She stated that there were enough of
the proposed services already near by, and the competition from
this location would cause some of the others to. have to close
down, especially at Asher and University, creating vacant
businesses. She also brought up the safety concern and agreed
that the car wash would create a place to "hang out" and lead to
a drug problem.
Madame Chair Adcock complimented the quality of the University
Park neighborhood and how she felt they looked at issues very
carefully and weren't quick to oppose everything.
Commissioner Berry acknowledged the heartfelt concern of the
members of the neighborhood. He then reviewed the type of uses
that were already allowed "By Right" with the current zoning. He
stated he felt it would be "arbitrary and capricious" to deny
the car wash when the gas station and convenience store are
allowed "By Right" already. He also commented that he felt the
car wash aspect of this proposal wasn't related to the concerns
and feelings of the neighborhood.
Commissioner Lowery disagreed with Commissioner Berry that a
denial would be "arbitrary and capricious", primarily because of
the traffic he believes would be added to an area already
congested.
Commissioner Earnest brought up a concern that many of these
type of uses install much too much lighting and he hoped the
applicant would be sensitive to that lighting excess. He also
stated that he was against the car wash.
The applicant stated that they planned to use downward directed
lighting that contains a feature that does focus the lighting
downward very tightly. So he was sensitive to that concern.
A motion was made to approve the application as submitted. The
motion failed by a vote of 0 ayes, 8 nays and 3 absent.