Boston Chicken-CS 931216 CITY OF COPPELL
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
CASE #S-1076. S.U.P. (LI to LI. SUP) Boston Chicken Restaurant
P & Z HEARING DATE: December 16, 1993
C. C. HEARING DATE: January 11, 1994
LOCATION: East side of MacArthur Blvd., just south of Mobil Oil service
station
SIZE OF AREA: .448 acres
CURRENT
ZONING: LI-- Light Industrial
REQUEST: Special Use Permit for a Boston Chicken Restaurant
APPLICANT: Beltline/MacArthur Ranch Winklemann and Associates
Limited Partnership (Engineer)
7001 Preston Road, Suite 222 12800 Hillcrest, Suite 200
Dallas, TX 75205 Dallas, TX 75230
(214) 490-7090
HISTORY: In September of 1993 this same applicant requested a SUP across
MacArthur Blvd. from the subject request. Because of a
parking problem, and the inability to resolve it to the satisfaction
of the Boston Chicken people, that case was asked to be denied.
Council took formal action on Dec. 14, and this re-submittal is the
result of that action.
TRANSPORTATION: Macarthur is a six-lane divided thoroughfare which has been built
to standard, contained within a 110 foot right-of-way. Beltline
Road is proposed to be a six lane thoroughfare similar to
MacArthur, but is currently not improved on the west side of
MacArthur.
Item 13
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North -Mobil Oil service station; LI
South - existing shopping center; LI
East - vacant parcel; LI
West - developing parcel; LI
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive shows a mixed use area with no apartments
ANALYSIS: Our analysis of this request is similar to the first one we did on this same
applicant when located across the street. Basically, the site is too small for a
3000 square foot restaurant and the attendant parking required. As clearly stated
in the zoning ordinance, required parking must be provided on the same site as
the main use. This applicant was aware of the requirement but will make a case
involving the number of parking spaces provided by the Valley Ranch Center, the
fact that there are more spaces provided than required, and this applicant's ability
to use those overage spaces for this use. We also understand that this applicant
may approach the Board of Adjustment to gain a variance from the required
spaces needed to serve this restaurant use--which is legally questionable. We
have also heard that the applicant might replat adjacent land on the east, bring it
into this parcel, and thereby meet the provisions of the Ordinance.
Staff is not objecting to the use being proposed here. We do believe that the
method utilized to make a legal site is somewhat unusual, and would not condone
this procedure in the city. The basic issues we were concerned with in the first
submittal--namely traffic circulation--works much better on the east side of
MacArthur. The applicant must still procure a variance from the monument sign
guidelines to place his identification sign on site, his landscaping plan must
comply with the Streetscape ordinance, and it appears he will eventually provide
enough parking for this use, with 6' fire lanes constructed.
In the best sense, staff would recommend that a replat occur to insure enough
legal on-site parking is being provided before recommending approval of this
request. Whether the applicant can live with that or not is to be determined; we
do know that this application has been around in some form of evaluation for the
last three months--it appears that something tangible is on the horizon.
ALTERNATIVES: 1) Approve the zoning request
2) Deny the zoning request
3) Modify the zoning request
ATTACHMENTS: 1) SUP Site Plan
2) Perspective Drawing
3) Landscape Plan