HomeMy WebLinkAboutRP 86-07; Union Oil; Redevelopment Permits (RP)APPLICATION SUBMITTAL DATE:
NOVEMBER ''QQ'=^ ^
STAFF REPORT
DATE: APRIL 23, 1986
TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: RP/CUP 86-7 - UNION OIL - Request for a minor
redevelopment permit/conditional use permit to expand
and renovate a service station at the northwest corner
of Elm Avenue and Harding Street in Subarea 1 of the V-R
zone.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Design Review Board ADOPT Resolution No. 072 DENYING
RP/CUP 86-7, based on the findings contained therein.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant is requesting to expand the usable floor area and
renovate the exterior of a gasoline service station located on
the north side of Elm Avenue, between Harding Street and
Jefferson Street.
The site presently consists of five gasoline pump stations, and a
1,224 square foot building which houses two lube bays, and a
sales/storage/restroom area. The applicant is proposing to
increase the usable floor area by adding 576 square feet which
would provide another lube bay and a new storage room. The
parking area has been striped to provide seven parking spaces and
additional landscaping has been proposed to improve the site
appearance.
III. ANALYSIS
Planning Issues
1) Does the project conform with the goals of Subarea 1 of
the Village Redevelopment area?
2) Does the project conform with the standards of the
Village Design Manual, the Zoning Ordinance, and
engineering standards?
3) Does the proposed project comply with the development
standards required for approval of a conditional use
permit for an automobile service station? (See Exhibit
"X" for details.)
Discussion
V-R Area Goals and Design Manual Standards
The proposed project is located at the eastern end of Subarea 1
in the Village Redevelopment Area. It falls within the Elm
Avenue Special Treatment area which encourages creating
pedestrian traffic spaces, specialized commercial sections and
landscaping along Elm Avenue. Special design criteria are to be
established for developments with high traffic volume and designs
that improved general circulation are to be encouraged.
Because the service station has existed for many years, the
proposal should be reviewed from the standpoint of how well the
renovations and additions comply with the goals of Subarea 1.
Also, because the structure is existing, several design manual
standards are not applicable such as building coverage, setbacks,
and height. Landscape guidelines and parking requirements do
apply.
As stated, this service station has existed for some years and is
in need of renovation. Staff believes this is a desirable goal
but also feels that development and safety standards should not
be sacrificed to facelift the building. Staff has met with the
applicant a number of times and several issues remained
unresolved. The applicant wishes to proceed although staff
cannot support the project. Issues which remain unresolved are
as follows:
1. Expansion of Use
The applicant feels three lube bays are a necessity on
this site. Staff believes the existing service station
is already congested and has a poor site design. Any
further intensification of the use would, at the same
time, intensify the problems.
2. Lack of Parking
The recently revised parking ordinance requires four
parking spaces for each work bay (up through three work
bays). The applicant is required to provide 12 parking
spaces but has provided only seven parking spaces.
Staff believes this is inadequate. In addition, two of
the spaces back into the queuing area at the service
pumps. This situation increases onsite congestion and
hazardous traffic manuevers. Field checks by staff have
indicated an average of 10-12 vehicles onsite
(exclusive of the pump stations) during the day.
-2-
3. Site Design for Onsite Circulation
Engineering staff believes the existing site design does
not provide for safe and adequate traffic circulation.
Stacking area at the service pump stations is poor and,
at peak hours, causes cars to encroach into Elm Avenue.
Truck access for gas delivery onsite is very difficult
and requires numerous maneuvers. Queuing at the Harding
Street driveway encroaches into the stacking area at the
eastern pump stations. Overall, engineering staff
believes the proposed redesign and expansion will
increase unsafe traffic congestion onsite.
Except for item (B)(ii)(I) on Exhibit "X", the applicant can meet
all the requirements for a service station conditional use
permit. This item requires planter areas adjacent to the
structure. Because the building is existing, it would be
difficult for the applicant to meet this requirement without
further congesting the site. All the remaining conditions could
easily be provided by the applicant.
Staff would like to support the remodeling and renovation of this
service station, however, basic design standards and Zoning
Ordinance requirements have not been met. The Zoning Ordinance
stipulates that "standards of development shall apply to existing
service stations when renovated structurally, and any newly
developed service stations". Although renovation of the station
is desirable, staff does not believe it should have a higher
priority than complying with design standards and Zoning
Ordinance requirements. Staff, tiierefore, recommends denial of
RP/CUP 86-7.
ATTACHMENTS
1) Design Review Board Resolution No. 072
2) Vicinity Map
3) Background Data Sheet
4) Disclosure Form
5) Exhibits "A" - "F", dated March 31, 1986.
6) Exhibit "X", dated April 3, 1986
AML:bn
3/27/86
-3-
VICINITY MAP
UNION OIL RP/CUP 86-7