Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-1575-B Staff AnalysisITEM NO.: 4. S-1575-B NAME: Broadway Subdivision Site Plan Review LOCATION: located at 3315 West Roosevelt Road Planning Staff Comments: 1. Provide notification of abutting property owners 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 December 3, 2008. The Office of Planning and Development must receive the proof of notice no later than December 12, 2008. 2. Provide the parking agreement from the adjoining property owner indicating the total number of spaces, any conditions of the agreement and a survey of the property identifying the parking and the total square footage of the structure, if applicable. Variance/Waivers: A variance to allow in excesses the allowance of 25 percent of the required parking to be satellite parking (Section 36-507). 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. 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 Item # 4. 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. Planninq 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 Monday, December 1, 2008. Item # 4 January 8, 2009 ITEM NO.: G 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 CURRENT ZONING: C-3, General Commercial District PLANNING DISTRICT: 9 — 1-630 CENSUS TRACT: 12 FILE NO.: S-1575-B FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF VARIANCESIWAIVERS REQUESTED: A variance from Section 36-502 to allow a reduced number of parking spaces to serve 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 rehabilitated. 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 49 parking spaces. Of the 49 spaces, the restaurant and lounge would require 40 of the spaces leaving 9 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. January 8, 2009 ITEM NO.: G (Cont. FILE NO.: S-1575-B On October 30, 2008, the Little Rock Planning Commission denied a request to allow the developer a parking variance for 34 of the required parking spaces. The developer proposed to utilize 6,024 square feet of the front structure as a private club/lounge and the 2,360 square foot rear building as a restaurant. The two uses would alternate business hours and the use of the restaurant during the private club/lounge hours would only be to provide food service to the private club/lounge. Based on the typical ordinance requirements for a private club/lounge, a total of 60 parking spaces is required for the front building and 23 spaces for the rear building. The site plan indicated 49 on -site parking spaces resulting in the request for a parking variance for the additional 34 spaces. A. PROPOSAUREQUEST: The applicant is now requesting a revised parking variance to allow less parking spaces than typically required per Section 36-502. The rear building is a one-story restaurant building containing 2,360 square feet. The front building is a two-story building rehabbed for a private club/lounge. The owner has committed to limiting the useable space within the front building for customers to the ground floor, which contains 5,124 square feet. According to the owner, the only portion of the second floor to be used is an office area, which will be used as the administrative offices for these two businesses. The two businesses will alternate times of usage and the restaurant will only serve bar food during the hours the private club/lounge is open. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: 9 There are two commercial buildings located on the site. The required street construction from the previous approval has been completed along Roosevelt Road. The required parking has been installed but the landscaping has not been installed. Both buildings have been renovated with a private club/lounge 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. 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. Public Hearing. 2 January 8, 2009 ITEM NO.: G (Cont.) D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: FILE NO.: S-1575-B 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. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING Wastewater: Sewer available to this project. Enter : No comment received. Center -Point Enercl , 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- F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN- Planning Division: No comment. Landscape: All landscaping must be installed as per the approved landscape plan. 3 January 8, 2009 ITEM NO.: G Cont. FILE NO.: S-1575-B G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 20, 2008) The applicant was not present. Staff presented an overview of the request stating the item was before the Commission for a parking variance at their October 30, 2008, public hearing and was denied. Staff stated the previous application request was 34 parking spaces short of the typically required parking for a private club/lounge. Staff stated with the current application request, the applicant had indicated in their cover letter that only the ground floor of the private club/lounge building would be used for customers. Staff stated customers would not be allowed access to the upper floor and the only portion of the upper floor that would be used would be an office area to serve the two businesses. 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 items in need of addressing raised at the November 20, 2008, Subdivision Committee meeting. The request is a parking variance to allow less parking spaces than typically required per Section 36-502 for this site containing a private club/lounge and restaurant. The restaurant is located within the rear building which is a one-story building containing 2,360 square feet. The front building is two -stories and was rehabilitated for a private club/lounge. The total square footage of the two story building is approximately 8,000 square feet. The owner has committed in writing to limiting the useable space for customers to the ground floor. The ground floor area contains 5,124 square feet. In the revised cover letter, the applicant states the only portion of the second floor which will be used is an office area which will function as the administrative offices for these two businesses. The two businesses will alternate times of usage and the restaurant will only serve bar food during the hours the private club/lounge is open. Based on the typical ordinance standard for the proposed private club/lounge, 51 parking spaces would typically be required. The 2,360 square foot restaurant would require 23 parking spaces. There are 49 parking spaces located on the site resulting in less parking than the typical ordinance standard. Staff is supportive of the requested variance. Staff does not feel the lack of the parking spaces will significantly impact the development as long as the business hours are alternated so that the uses are not open at the same time. To staffs knowledge there are no outstanding technical issues associated with the request. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. El January 8, 2009 ITEM NO.: G (Cont. FILE NO.: S-1575-B Staff recommends the hours of the two businesses be staggered so that the private club/lounge are not open during the same hours. Staff recommends approval of the variance request from Section 36-502 to allow less parking than the typical ordinance standard for the proposed site based on the two businesses alternating hours of operation. Staff recommends that use of the restaurant building during the hours the private club/lounge is open be limited to providing bar food to the private club/lounge with no other customer traffic being permitted. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 18, 2008) The applicant was present. There were registered objectors present. Chairman Taylor stated when there were eight (8) or fewer Commissioners present the practice of the Commission had been to allow the applicant the option of deferral of an item to a subsequent meeting. He questioned if the applicant desired a deferral of the item to the January 8, 2009, public hearing. Mr. Ron Wood stated his desire was to defer the item to the January 8, 2009, public hearing. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion of approval of the item for deferral to the January 8, 2009, public hearing. The motion carried by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent and 3 open positions. STAFF UPDATE: This item was deferred from the December 18, 2008, public hearing due to the number of Commissioners present. There has been no change to the application request since the previous staff write-up and recommendation. Staff continues to recommend approval of the request to allow a parking variance for this site. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 8, 2009) Mr. Ron Woods and Mr. Herbert Broadway were present representing the request. There was one registered objector present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval. Commissioner Yates questioned how the current request was substantially different than the request denied by the Commission at their October 30, 2008, public hearing. Staff stated the current request limited the use of the front building for the private club/lounge to first floor containing 5,100 square feet with the exception of an administrative office located on the second floor. Staff stated the rear building contained 2,360 square feet and was proposed as a restaurant. Staff stated the applicant had provided in writing a commitment that the two businesses would not k" January 8, 2009 ITEM NO.: G (Cont. FILE NO.: S-1575-B be open to the public during the same hours. Staff stated based on raw numbers the site would require 74 on -site parking spaces to allow both businesses to operate during the same business hours. Staff stated the site contained 49 spaces resulting in a parking variance of 25 spaces if the two businesses were open during the same business hours. Staff stated limiting the hours of operation for the private club/lounge to only operate during the hours the restaurant was closed would create a parking variance of two spaces. Staff stated the previous request created a raw number parking variance of 34 spaces and with the alternation of uses a parking variance of eleven spaces was created. Through a general discussion of the Commission they determined the application was substantially different and prepared to hear the remainder of the item. Mr. Kaderick Jones addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he was the pastor of the church located directly north of the property. He stated the church began operating in January of 2007 at their current location. He stated Mr. Broadway began his renovations in July of 2007 and he was told Mr. Broadway was renovating the property for use as a restaurant. He stated the church was not notified of the potential for a club on the property or the church would have been present to oppose the request. He stated he had previously provided the Commission with a City ordinance which prohibited the sale of alcohol within 300 feet of a church or school. He stated the church was located within 300 feet of the proposed club. Mr. Jones stated there were a number of private clubs located in the area. He stated he did not feel this was the proper location for a private club. Ms. Cindy Dawson, Deputy City Attorney, provided the Commission with a summary of City Code 4-93 the sale of alcohol near churches and schools. She stated the ordinance stated it was unlawful to sell beer or light wines within three hundred (300) feet of any church in the residential section of the City. She stated the residential section of the City was any part of the City located outside of the fire zone. She stated the business section of the City was that part of the City within the fire zone. She stated the distance would be measured from the nearest point of the church or school to the nearest point of the building or place where beer or light wine was sold. She provided the Commission with the definition of beer and light wine. There was a general discussion concerning the volume of alcohols and the alcohols that could be sold from the property. Ms. Dawson stated the application request was not a use issue. She stated there was an ordinance adopted by the Board of Directors which regulated the sale of alcohol near a school or church. She stated the Commission could not waive this ordinance as a part of the review and approval process. She stated the application request before the Commission was a request to allow a parking variance. There was a general discussion concerning the proposed parking variance request. A motion was made to approve the request. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes, 1 no and 1 absent. 101