Loading...
Dickey's BBQ-CS 981217CITY OF COPPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT CASE NO.: S-1155, DICKEY'S BARBECUE RESTAURANT P & Z HEARING DATE: C.C. HEARING DATE: LOCATION: SIZE OF AREA: CURRENT ZONING: REQUEST: APPLICANT: HISTORY: December 17, 1998 January 12, 1999 Along the west side of Denton Tap Road, south of the St. Louis Railroad right-of-way and east of Bullock Drive. 4,000 square foot restaurant on two parcels totaling 1.2 acres; parcel 1 contains .775 acres, parcel 2 contains .36 acres C (Commercial) C-S.U.P. (Commercial, Special Use Permit) Owner: Dickey's Barbecue Pit T. D. Dickey, Chairman 7770 Forest Lane Dallas, TX. 75230 (214) 691-5659 Fax: (214) 691-6162 Architect: Burson and Williams, Inc. David Williams, AIA 3838 Oak Lawn, Suite 1505 Dallas, TX. 75219 (214) 520-2221 Fax: (214) 528-6820 There has been no recent zoning or platting history on the subject tract, although the applicant postponed this case from our November docket in an attempt to address staff concerns. TRANSPORTATION: Denton Tap Road is a P6D, six-lane divided thoroughfare built to standard within a 120 foot right-of-way. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: North- vacant, owned by First Baptist Church; PD 108 (LI) South-vacant; "C', Commercial East - self-storage warehousing; "LI", Light Industrial and "C', Commercial West -existing single-family and commercial uses; "C', Commercial Item # 4 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan shows the property as suitable for mixed commercial/retail use DISCUSSION: This case is problematic from at least two angles. First, the site appears too small for the use that is proposed and the traffic circulation/parking plan/landscaping being provided in strategic locations requires redesign. The building needs to be reduced in size or the site needs to be expanded to the south to comply with our development requirements. Second, the building does not lend itself to complementing the tenets of our streetscape plan as related to Primary Image zones, nor our desire to, promote a distinctive architectural style in Coppell. Regarding the site plan, by utilizing property directly behind the proposed restaurant (the lot/house on Bullock) the applicant secures the required amount of parking and technically meets our landscaping requirements. Before gaining staff support--if we could endorse this request--substantial improvement to the landscape plan would be required. Berms, low-level lighting, additional landscaping, greater tree caliper sizes are some examples of what would be minimal requirements. Landscaping guidelines are drafted to compliment buildings being constructed in the community, and the additional landscaping behind the restaurant does nothing to enhance the aesthetic quality of the development nor promote street-side landscaping. In addition, there is concern regarding the house on Bullock. What becomes of it? Is it viable for continued residential use with an 18 space, lighted parking lot directly behind it? Can it be adaptively re-used for another activity? What impact will it have on the families currently living on Bullock? There are many unanswered questions regarding this proposal. In evaluating the building design itself, although the architectural style might be frae for Old Coppell, at this location the building needs to be redesigned to better fit with our more traditional architecture along Denton Tap Road. Dark red brick, perhaps cast stone quoins at coruers, metal awnings replaced with a "softer" shape and of fabric material as suggested by CIVIC, less and more muted signage, a roof line that is more uniform, a redesign of windows and doors, less wood and more brick detailing are all suggestions which would make this restaurant more compatible with what has already been developed in Coppell. If the applicant insists upon this design, then a location in Old Coppell would be more appropriate. RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: Item # 4 Although the applicant postponed this case in November in an attempt to address staff concerns, and recognizing that several modifications have been made to the plan, in the final analysis, there are too many unanswered questions remaining, several elaborated above. The ultimate development of parcel two and the impact it can have on the surrounding neighborhood, a restaurant design that is not in keeping with the design guidelines we have implemented in several other restaurants along Denton Tap, and the fact that the site under consideration is just too small to accommodate a 4000 square foot restaurant leads us to recommend denial of this request. The site is too small, the parking extended across an alley r.o.w, and into a different neighborhood setting is troubling, and the inappropriate design of the structure lead us to the denial conclusion. , ALTERNATIVES: 1) Recommend approval of the request 2) Recommend disapproval of the request ATTACHMENTS: 1) Site Plan 2)Landscape Plan Item # 4