HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-1575-A Staff AnalysisITEM NO.: 5. S-1575-A
NAME: Broadway Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION: located at 3315 West Roosevelt Road
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. The notices must be mailed no later than October 15, 2008. The Office of
Planning and Development must receive the proof of notice no later than October
24, 2008.
2. Based on the proposed use of the property 74 parking spaces are required. The site
plan indicates the placement of 49 parking spaces.
3. The cover letter indicates the uses will be staggered. Specify the hours of operation
for the proposed uses.
4. Will the restaurant be used to provide food service to the lounge? If the hours are
staggered the restaurant cannot offer take-out and may only provide food service to
the patrons of the lounge.
Variance/Waivers: A variance from Section 36-502 to allow a reduced number of
parking spaces for the proposed use mix of the site.
Public Works Conditions:
1. Roosevelt Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial with a
special design standard. Dedication of right-of-way to 35 feet from centerline will be
required.
2. With site development, provide the design of street conforming to the Master Street
Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Roosevelt Road including 5-foot
sidewalks with the planned development. The one-half street improvements have
been installed.
3. The driveways are proposed to be one-way. Proper signage and directional arrows
to reflect this condition shall be provided at these driveways.
4. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-
of-way prior to occupancy.
Utilities and Fire Department/County Planning:
Wastewater: Sewer available to this project.
Entergy: No comment received.
Center -Point Energy: No comment received.
Item # 5.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or additional
water meter(s) are required. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site
to determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If
additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the Developer's expense.
Fire Department: No comment.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #14 — the Rosedale Route.
Plannina Division: No comment.
Landscape: All landscaping must be installed as per the approved landscape plan.
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, October 15, 2008.
Item # 5.
October 30, 2008
ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: S-1575-A
NAME: Broadway Subdivision Site Plan Review
LOCATION: Located at 3315 West Roosevelt Road
DEVELOPER:
Herbert Broadway
1921 West 16th Street
Little Rock, AR 72202
SURVEYOR:
Donald Brooks Surveying
20820 Arch Street Pike
Hensley, AR 72065
AREA: 1.01 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF
CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District
PLANNING DISTRICT: 9 — 1-630
CENSUS TRACT: 12
VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from Section 36-502 to allow a
reduced number of narkina spaces for the proposed use mix of the site.
BACKGROUND:
On July 5, 2007, the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a Subdivision Site Plan
Review to allow the existing buildings located on the site to be rehabbed. The rear
building was to become a restaurant and lounge. The approval also required the front
building to comply with the available parking on -site or return to the Planning
Commission for site plan review. The site plan indicated 48 parking spaces. Of the 48
spaces the restaurant and lounge would require 40 of the spaces leaving eight spaces
available for the front building. During the renovation process of the front building the
applicant added a second floor to the building containing approximately 3,000 square
feet. This area was added without proper permits or inspections.
October 30, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.)
A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
FILE NO.: S-1575-A
The developers have rehabbed the buildings converting the front building into a
private club/lounge and the rear building as a restaurant. The rear building is a
one-story building containing 2,360 square feet. The front building is a two story
building containing approximately 8,000 square feet with a building envelope of
5,124 square feet.
The request includes a variance from Section 36-502 to allow a reduced number
of parking spaces for the proposed use mix. The site plan indicates the
placement of 49 parking spaces to serve the development. The applicant has
proposed in their cover letter to only operate one facility at a time until additional
parking can be obtained. By limiting the hours to only operate one facility at a
time the front building remains approximately 30 parking spaces short of the
ordinance standard.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
There are two commercial buildings located on the site. The required street
construction from the previous approval has been completed along Roosevelt
Road. Both buildings have been renovated with a private club in the front
building and a restaurant in the rear building. There are a number of industrial,
commercial and office uses in the area. To the west of the site is a vacant
property and further west a nursing home. The Pulaski County Detention Center
is located to the east of the site. North of the site is vacant property. Further
north of the site are single-family homes.
C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS:
As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from area
residents. All owners of property located within 200-feet of the site along with the
Love and Goodwill Neighborhood Associations were notified of the Public
Hearing.
D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS:
1. Roosevelt Road is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial
with a special design standard. Dedication of right-of-way to 35 feet from
centerline will be required.
2. With site development, provide the design of street conforming to the Master
Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvement to Roosevelt Road
2
October 30, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5
FILE NO.: S-1575-A
including 5-foot sidewalks with the planned development. (The one-half
street improvements have been installed.)
3. The driveways are proposed to be one-way. Proper signage and directional
arrows to reflect this condition shall be provided at these driveways.
4. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the
public right-of-way prior to occupancy.
E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING:
F
G
Wastewater: Sewer available to this project.
Enter : Approved a submitted.
Center -Point Ener : No comment received.
AT & T: No comment received.
Central Arkansas Water: Contact Central Arkansas Water if larger and/or
additional water meter(s) are required. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to
evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire
hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be
installed at the Developer's expense.
Fire Department: No comment.
County Planning: No comment.
CATA: The site is located on CATA Bus Route #14 — the Rosedale Route.
ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
Planninq Division: No comment.
Landscape: All landscaping must be installed as per the currently approved
landscape plan.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:
(October 9, 2008)
The applicant was not present. Staff stated the site had previously been
considered for site plan review. Staff stated the approval allowed the renovation
of the rear building for a restaurant and the front building was to be used by a
user which matched the available parking. Staff stated the developer had
renovated both buildings. Staff stated the front building had been renovated for a
3
October 30, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.) FILE NO.: 5-1575-A
lounge and the rear building renovated for a restaurant. Staff stated the request
before the Commission was for a parking variance. Staff stated the parking
variance was required to allow the two uses on the site as proposed.
There being no further issues for discussion, the Committee then forwarded the
item to the full Commission for final action.
H. ANALYSIS -
There were no outstanding issues in need of addressing raised at the October 9,
2008, Subdivision Committee meeting. The request is to allow a parking
variance for the two uses located on this site. The developers have rehabbed
the two (2) buildings converting the front building into a private club/lounge and
the rear building into a restaurant. The paving for the parking lot has not been
completed but curbs have been installed and the sub -base appears to be in
place. The rear building is a one-story building containing 2,360 square feet
which is proposed as the restaurant. The front building is a two story building
containing approximately 8,000 square feet with a building envelope of
5,124 square feet and is proposed as a private club/lounge.
The request includes a variance from Section 36-502 to allow a reduced number
of parking spaces for the proposed use mix. The site plan indicates the
placement of 49 parking spaces to serve the development. Based on the
minimum parking requirements for a restaurant and private club/lounge a total of
103 parking spaces is required. The applicant has proposed in their cover letter
to only operate one facility at a time until additional parking can be obtained. The
restaurant would provide bar food service for the private club/lounge during the
hours the club is operational. The restaurant requires 23 parking spaces. The
private club/lounge requires 80 parking spaces. By limiting the hours to only
operate one facility at a time the front building remains approximately 30 parking
spaces short of the typical ordinance standard.
Staff has concerns with the parking variance as proposed. The request is
providing less than 50 percent of the required parking to allow the two uses to
operate simultaneously and only 61 percent of the required parking required to
serve the private club/lounge if the uses vary their hours. The site plan indicates
a 5,124 square foot building envelope for the private club/lounge with the
remaining area on the second floor. If the applicant were to commit to only using
the first floor area of the private club/lounge area staff would support the parking
variance to allow 49 spaces as opposed to the 51 spaces which would be
required by the ordinance. Based on the current application, staff is opposed to
the parking variance request.
51
October 30, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends denial of the request as proposed.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
FILE NO.: S-1575-A
(OCTOBER 30, 2008)
The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Staff presented
the item stating the applicant had amended the request to limit the square footage used
in the front building to just over 6,000 square feet. Staff stated the remainder of the
upstairs area would be secured to ensure the owner did not allow access to the space
for additional floor area. Staff stated the applicant was also proposing to alternate the
uses. Staff stated based on the current proposal 60 parking spaces would typically be
required for the front building if the two uses were alternated. Staff stated the site
contained 49 parking spaces. Staff stated this left the development 11 spaces short of
the typical requirement and the developer was seeking a parking variances for the
lesser number of spaces. Staff stated they were supportive of the variance as
proposed.
Mr. Ron Wood addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant. He stated the
owner had taken to eye sore buildings and rehabbed the buildings into an asset to the
community and the area. He stated to owner had taken the project out of order but was
not trying to follow the rules and get appropriate approvals for the new businesses to
locate on the property.
Andre Jones, Pastor of New Perspective Christian Church addressed the Commission
in opposition of the request. He stated his church was located directly north of the
property. He stated his concern was with a club or lounge on the site. He stated the
church had activities on Friday and Saturday nights and the youth had a number of
activities during the week. He stated he was concerned with the patrons of the club and
he was also concerned with the patrons utilizing the church's parking lot and leaving
debris on the lot. He questioned how a club could locate in such close proximity to a
church. He stated the City had an ordinance which did not allow a bar or club to
operate within 1000 feet of a church or school.
The Commission questioned the City Attorney on the City ordinance refereed to by Mr.
Jones. Ms. Cindy Dawson, Deputy City Attorney stated she did not have the ordinance
in front of her and was not sure of the restrictions within the ordinance. Staff stated the
proposal before the Commission was a parking variances. Staff stated the property was
zoned C-3, General Commercial District which allowed a restaurant and a bar as an
allowable use. Staff stated if there were conflicts this would be addressed by the
department or agency responsible for administering the ordinance.
5
October 30, 2008
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 5 (Cont.
FILE NO.: S-1575-A
Mr. Kadrick Jones addressed the Commission in opposition. He stated he was also
associated with the church. He stated the youth frequently had lock -ins at the church.
He stated he did not feel a bar across the street was a good neighbor to the church.
There was a general discussion concerning the proposed request. Staff noted the
request was a subdivision site plan review and an associated parking variance. Staff
stated the item was originally reviewed by the Commission because of the multiple
structures on a single parcel of property. Staff stated the request before the
Commission was a parking variance and the appropriateness of the parking variance.
Mr. Wood stated the owner was working to secure additional parking on an adjacent
site. He stated he felt the owner would be successful in providing the parking.
The Commission question how the staggering of uses and the limitation of the square
footage on the second floor would be policed. Staff stated they relied on the owner and
if there were complaints then staff would take appropriate action for enforcement.
A motion was made to approve the request. The motion failed by a vote of 5 ayes, 5
noes, 0 absent and 1 open position.
VI