Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-1540-A Staff AnalysisAugust 7, 2008 ITEM NO.: E NAME: 8622 Chicot Road Subdivision Site Plan Review LOCATION: Located at 8622 Chicot Road DEVELOPER: Manuel Beza Beltran 8622 Chicot Road Little Rock, AR 72209 FNC;INFFR- Troy D. Laha 6602 Baseline Road, Suite E Little Rock, AR 72209 OR(_I-IITFrT- Terry Burruss Architect 1202 South Main Street Little Rock, AR 72202 AREA: 1.01 NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District PLANNING DISTRICT: 15 — Geyer Springs West CENSUS TRACT: 41.03 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: FILE NO.: S-1540-A FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF 1. A variance from Sections 30-43 and 31-210 of the Little Rock code to allow driveway space less than typical ordinance standard. 2. A variance from City's Landscape and Buffer ordinance requirements for landscape installation along Chicot Road. BACKGROUND: On December 7, 2006, the Planning Commission approved a site plan to allow an addition to the restaurant building located at 8622 Chicot Road. The site contained an existing 1,200 square foot restaurant and a 2,622 square foot automobile detail shop August 7, 2008 SUBDIVISIO ITEM NO.: E (Cont. FILE NO.: S-1540-A along with 15 parking spaces. The approval allowed an expansion of the restaurant by adding a 26-foot by 46-foot enclosed dining area and a 12-foot by 46-foot patio area. The request included additional parking for a total of 24 parking spaces located on the site to serve the two businesses. A deferral of the required paving for 18-months was approved. The approval included a variance to allow a reduced number of parking spaces for the site. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant is now proposing a revision to the previously approved site plan to reduce the required landscaping along Chicot Road and to maintain the southern -most drive. The applicant has indicated with the removal of the southern drive, access to the southern most building cannot be achieved because of the location of the building and the closeness of Chicot Road. The developer has also stated due to the existing site paving, the expense of removing the paving to prepare the area for plantings is extremely expansive and based on improvements recently made to the site, the removal of the paving is economically unachievable at this time. The developer is proposing to maintain parking within the paved area along Chicot Road. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is located near the intersection of Baseline and Chicot Roads; a commercial node. At this intersection there are a number of activities including office and retail activities. The site being considered for Subdivision Site Plan Review is located just north of the Baseline/Chicot Roads intersection and contains two buildings; one a restaurant, the second a detail shop. There is a railroad main line located to the west of the site. The Cloverdale Subdivision, a single-family subdivision, is located across Chicot Road to the east. Chicot Road has been constructed to Master Street Plan standard abutting the site. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received one informational phone call from an area property owner. All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, the Cloverdale Neighborhood Association and Southwest Little Rock United for Progress were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. Due to the length of street 2 August 7, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont. IFAW;801[91W�s frontage the property can only have a single driveway. The width of driveway must not exceed 36 feet. On a principal arterial street, the Master Street Plan standards require a minimum driveway spacing of 300 feet between driveways and at least 150 feet from property lines. Therefore, the south driveway does not comply with the Master Street Plan standards and must be removed. 2. Old driveway cuts in the curb must be replaced. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available to this property. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center -Point Ener : No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional meter(s) are needed. If larger and/or additional meter(s) are required, a Capital Investment Charge based on the size of meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: 1. Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. 2. The existing structure is a total of 1,200 square feet in area. The new structure is a total of 1,422 square feet in area. This equates to an eighty-four (84%) upgrade towards the landscape ordinance requirements. 3. The new parking lot must be built in full compliancy with the landscape and buffer ordinance. 3 August 7, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont. FILE NO.: S-1540-A 4. The area along Chicot Road does not reflect the previous approval which included the elimination of the parking area along Chicot Road. The parking along Chicot Road is located within the public right-of-way. A franchise agreement must be obtained for any parking and/or landscaping proposed for this area. 5. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 17, 2008) Mr. Terry Burruss was present representing the request. Staff stated the site plan was approved and the applicant had completed the building expansion but was now requesting a revision to the previously approved site plan in two areas. Staff stated the site plan as submitted included removal of asphalt located along Chicot Road, removal of parking and the installation of landscaping. Staff also stated the approved site plan eliminated the northern and southern drives maintaining one driveway location near the center of the site. Staff stated the applicant was now requesting to maintain two of the three drives. Staff stated the southern -most drive was desired to be retained but the drive would be narrowed per the typical ordinance requirements. Staff questioned if the right of way for Chicot Road was dedicated with the building permit application request. Staff also stated there were automobiles being sold from the site which was not allowed under the current zoning. Staff requested the applicant cease the sale of automobiles immediately. The owner stated the only automobile sales was his personal vehicle which was parked on the site with for sale signs in the windows. He stated there were no other vehicles for sale on the site. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the drive did not meet typical ordinance standards for driveway spacing and the southern drive should be removed to facilitate traffic movement in the area. Staff also stated all old driveway cuts were to be removed. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated with the new construction an 84 percent expansion had taken place. Staff stated a landscaping upgrade to meet the typical landscape ordinance requirements was required. Staff stated the new parking lot was required to fully comply with the Landscape Ordinance standards. Staff also stated the site plan as presented indicated parking along Chicot Road which was not previously approved. Staff noted a portion of the parking was located within the right of way and would require a franchise agreement with the City. 0 August 7, 2008 SUBDIVISION TEM NO.: E (Cont. F11MUS011i1.OiF"[11!_1 Staff noted comments from the various other reporting departments and agencies. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: There were no outstanding technical issues associated with the request in need of addressing. Staff stated the developer desired to amend the previously approved site plan removing two of the previously imposed conditions. The original approval eliminated the southern -most drive which accesses the detail shop. The developer has stated by removing this drive it is difficult for customers to enter the detail shop. The developer desires to maintain this drive and limiting the access to the drive to enter only or exit only. Staff is not supportive of the request. Chicot Road is indicated on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial street. The Master Street Plan standards for this classification require a minimum driveway spacing of 300 feet between driveways and at least 150 feet from property lines. The south driveway does not comply with the Master Street Plan standard and must be removed. The applicant is also requesting to amend the previously approved site plan by placing parking within the front yard area and eliminating the proposed landscaping. The site plan indicates the placement of six (6) parking spaces along Chicot Road and four of the six are indicated in the right of way. To allow the placement of the parking spaces as proposed a franchise agreement with the City must be approved. The developer has indicated a portion of the paving located between the parking and sidewalk will be removed and landscaped. This area is also located within the right of way and will require a franchise agreement to allow the landscaping within the right of way. The previously approved site plan indicated the placement of 24 parking spaces to serve the two (2) businesses. Based on the typical ordinance standards, the typical minimum parking required would be 16 parking spaces for the restaurant and 15 parking spaces for the detail shop. The request included approval of a variance to allow a reduced number of parking spaces for the site. The basis of the approval was the detail shop did not generate a parking demand near the typical number required and the 24 parking spaces as indicated was sufficient to meet the needs of the business. Staff has concerns with the site plan as proposed. Staff does not support the request to allow the drive located in front of the detail shop to remain. The drive does not meet the typical spacing requirement of the Master Street Plan. Chicot 5 August 7, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1540-A Road is a principal arterial street which is designed to handle large volumes of traffic. The intent of the driveway spacing criteria is to limit the number of drives to facilitate traffic flows. Also staff has concerns with the placement of the landscaping and parking within the right of way. Staff feels the parking located within the right of way should be removed and the area landscaped. With the landscaping of this area, the site will more closely comply with the City's landscape and buffer ordinances. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MAY 8, 2008) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated the applicant had submitted a request dated April 21, 2008, requesting a deferral of the item to the June 19, 2008, public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The commission voted to approve the item for deferral on the consent agenda by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 19, 2008) Mr. Terry Burris was present representing the request. Staff stated the developers were requesting an amendment to a previously approved site plan to allow landscaping and parking to remain in the right of way and to allow the southern most drive to remain on the site. Staff stated the site was existing. Staff stated previously the Commission approved a site plan which indicated the removal of these items but the developer was now requesting the improvements in the right of way to remain. Staff stated they were not supportive of the request. Mr. Terry Burruss stated he was not a part of the original request but had been hired for the architectural design of the building expansion. He stated once the expansion was in place the owner determined the parking located in the right of way was necessary parking to serve his restaurant use. He stated the same was true of the drive. He stated the building was being used as a tire store and access was difficult based on the location of the building and the need for a 90 degree turn into the building. He stated the drive would be narrowed and could function as a one way drive either in or out. He stated there were three doors and the three doors would remain. [e August 7, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont. FILE NO.: S-1540-A Commissioner Rector questioned what was different today than when the plan was approved. Mr. Burruss stated he felt it was a misunderstanding between the owner and the previous agent. He stated the landscaping would be installed on the site to meet the typical ordinance standards but the landscaping would be placed in the right of way with a franchise agreement. He stated the drive appeared to not hinder the site but after further research it was determined the closure of the drive would rendered the building unusable or extremely difficult to maneuver into. Commissioner Adcock stated the site was located next to her neighborhood. She stated the neighborhood had tried for a number of years to make the site successful. She stated due to the location and traffic the site was a difficult site to develop. She stated the drives needed to be taken down to one to limit the confusion as to entering and exiting the site. She stated the owner should consider removing the tire building to de -clutter the site. She stated she thought the desire was for a restaurant and the tire store was limiting the restaurant potential. She stated the drives created a safety concern with cars trying to enter the site and exit the site in these areas. Chairman Taylor stated the site was a difficult site and leaving the drives was a safety concern. He questioned if a deferral would allow the applicant and staff time to reach some middle ground. Staff stated they were always willing to meet with an applicant but did not feel there was a middle ground to reach. Staff stated they felt the developer should construct to the plan he presented to the Commission and the Commission approved just over a year ago. Mr. Burruss requested the item be deferred to meet with staff. The Commission noted the deferral would be to the August 7, 2008, meeting. A motion was made to defer the item to the August 7, 2008, public hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: Staff has met with the applicant concerning the proposed request. Staff is now supportive of allowing the southern most drive to remain, closing the northern most drive thus allowing two drives on the property. Staff is also supportive of the applicant's request of allowing the existing parking to remain in the right of way and placing the required street buffer landscape strip within the right of way. These two issues will require a franchise agreement between the applicant and the City. The applicant will install the perimeter landscaping along the northern, southern and western perimeters as per the previously approved plan. The parking lot and building landscaping will also be installed per the previously approved plan. The rear parking area is to be open during business hours. This area is permitted to be gated during non -business hours. 7 August 7, 2008 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: FILE NO.: S-1540-A (AUGUST 7, 2008) The applicant was present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff stated they had met with the applicant concerning the proposed request. Staff stated they were now supportive of allowing the southern most drive to remain, closing the northern most drive resulting in two drives on the property. Staff stated they were also supportive of the applicant's request of allowing the existing parking to remain in the right of way and placing the required street buffer landscape strip within the right of way. Staff stated the parking and landscaping in the right of way would require a franchise agreement between the applicant and the City. Staff stated the applicant would install the perimeter landscaping along the northern, southern and western perimeters per the previously approved plan. Staff stated the parking lot and building landscaping would also be installed per the previously approved plan. Staff stated the rear parking area was to be open during business hours. Staff stated the rear parking area was permitted to be gated during non -business hours. Staff presented a recommendation of approval excepting the items noted above subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair entertained a motion for placement of the item on the Consent Agenda for Approval as recommended by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 1 recusal (Commissioner Laha). 1.1 ITEM NO.: 6, S-1540-A NAME: 8622 Chicot Road Subdivision Site Plan Review LOCATION: located at 8622 Chicot Road Plannina 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. The notice must be mailed no later than April 23, 2008. The Office of Planning and Development must receive the proof of notice no later than May 2, 2008. 2. The property is zoned C-3, General Commercial District with a non -conformity to allow limited auto repair which must all be enclosed. Currently automobiles are being sold from this lot which is not allowed under the current zoning. All automobile sales must be stopped or a rezoning request filed and approved to allow automobile sales on the site. 3. A wall is being constructed eliminating access to the new parking area. The new parking was required to provide adequate parking for the new addition and restaurant seating capacity. What is the purpose of the wall and how will the new parking be accessed? (The previous approval allowed an 18 month deferral of the hard surface construction material.) 4. Provide the total square feet proposed for landscaping along the street frontage. 5. The site plan presented does not match the parking approved from the previous site plan. The plan indicates the placement of parking along Chicot Road much of which is located within the right of way. The parking is not required parking to meet the typical ordinance standards for a restaurant. 6. The site plan indicates right of way dedication for Chicot Road. Was the right of way dedicated to the City as typically required with a building permit? Neiahborhood Associations Notified — Cloverdale Neighborhood Association Southwest Little Rock United for Progress Variance/Waivers: Public Works Conditions: Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. Due to the length of street frontage the property can only have a single driveway. The width of driveway must not exceed 36 feet. On a principal arterial street, the Master Street Plan standards require a minimum driveway spacing of 300 feet between driveways and at least 150 feet from property lines. Therefore, the south driveway does not comply with the Master Item # 6. Street Plan standards and must be removed. 2. Old driveway cuts in the curb must be replaced. Utilities and Fire Department/County Planning: Wastewater: Sewer available to this property. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Enemy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional meter(s) are needed. If larger and/or additional meter(s) are required, a Capital Investment Charge based on the size of meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: 1. Compliance with the City's Landscape and Buffer Ordinances is required. 2. The existing structure is a total of 1,200 square feet in area. The new structure is a total of 1,422 square feet in area. This equates to an eighty-four (84%) upgrade towards the landscape ordinance requirements. 3. The new parking lot must be built in full compliancy with the landscape and buffer ordinance. 4. The area along Chicot Road does not reflect the previous approval which included the elimination of the parking area along Chicot Road. The parking along Chicot Road is located within the public right-of-way. A franchise agreement must be obtained for any parking and/or landscaping proposed for this area. 5. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. Revised plat/plan: Submit four (4) copies of a revised preliminary plat/plan (to include the additional information as noted above) to staff on Wednesday, April 23, 2008. Item # 6.