| Home > Government > Boards and Commissions > Planning Commission > 2000 > Staff Reports > TXT2000-00185 |  |
October 19, 2000
SUBJECT
Text Amendment Application TXT2000-00185
APPLICANT
Mayor and Council of Rockville
111 Maryland Avenue
Rockville, MD 20850
PUBLIC HEARING DATE
Mayor and Council - November 20, 2000
Planning Commission Review - October 25, 2000
REQUEST
The Mayor and Council have submitted this text amendment to modify several sections of the Zoning and Planning Ordinance to add drive-through only restaurant use and accessory drive-through window to Section 25-1, Definitions and to add drive-through only restaurant use to Section 25-296, Table of Uses. In addition, this text amendment proposes to add stacking requirements for all drive-through uses.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Approval of the proposed text amendment with modifications as described on page 5 of this staff report.
BACKGROUND
In December 1997 a text amendment was filed on behalf of Checkers Drive-In Restaurants, Inc. to allow fast food restaurants that provided only take out service (no seating inside the building) as a special exception in the C-2 and RPC Zones subject to certain special development standards. In October 1998 another text amendment was filed on behalf of CVS Pharmacy to add pharmacy drive-through window to the Ordinance and to permit it as an accessory use to a drug store.
The Mayor and Council denied the Checkers text amendment and instructed staff to analyze the issues relating to all drive-through uses comprehensively. Staff prepared a draft of such a text amendment and submitted it to the Mayor and Council in June 2000. Modifications to that draft were suggested and this current text amendment is the result of the previous deliberations undertaken with regard to this subject.
ANALYSIS
Drive-through restaurants - The existing Zoning Ordinance allows restaurants with drive-through by special exception in the C-2 and RPC Zone. There are currently four drive-through restaurants in Rockville including the Kentucky Fried Chicken in College Plaza, and the Wendy's, Taco Bell and McDonald's on Rockville Pike. This use is subject to special development procedures to prevent conflicts with pedestrians and to minimize negative traffic impacts. Special criteria are included in the special exception standards that relate to the record lot on which a restaurant with drive-through is located, as follows:
In addition, the parking standard for a restaurant with drive-through requires a minimum of 50 parking spaces on the site.
The Mayor and Council, in its previous deliberations on this text amendment, has made it clear that it is not eager to welcome drive-through only uses into the City. Therefore, while this text amendment adds the use into the definition, it is subject to the same requirements as restaurants with drive-through in the current Ordinance, including the special development procedures and the parking standard.
Other Retail Drive-through Uses - As mentioned in the History section above, CVS Pharmacy is desirous of building a freestanding pharmacy with a drive-through pick-up window at 1580 Rockville Pike. On March 22, 2000, the Planning Commission approved a Use Permit (USE1999-00597) for a pharmacy on the property. The approval did not include a drive-through window although it was the clear intent of the applicant to incorporate such a window into the development of the property, as had been represented by the applicant since filing its text amendment in 1998. The application for the drive-through window approval was deferred pending further processing of this text amendment.
Representatives of CVS met with the Mayor and Council in April 2000 and were advised to go back to the Planning Commission for further review and approval of the drive-through element of its development proposal. However, the Planning Commission, on its review, deferred the element of the Use Permit that included the drive-through. The Commission was concerned that the site plan did not meet the requirement of the draft text amendment that stated:
The Commission was concerned that the design did not include all the elements in the draft requirement. The Commission interpreted the provision to require that the design of every window shall include sidewalk, crosshatching and other engineering and design techniques to enhance the ease of pedestrian access. The CVS design did not include these elements and therefore the Commission deferred that portion of the Use Permit.
Staff has researched the issue of pedestrian and bicycle access to drive-through windows and finds the experience throughout the country quite limited. One provision for pedestrian accessibility at drive-throughs was included in the City of Berkeley, California Ordinance but upon calling the City and speaking with five staff members, no one was aware of its application in the City. Staff supports the text as shown, with one minor modification. The type of design technique may vary by site; thus staff would propose to substitute the word "or" for "and" in the section on accessibility. By changing the all-inclusive "and" to "or," flexibility is enabled to allow access for all modes.
One situation in which applicants may wish to provide separate pedestrian access is when the pick up window is open after the rest of the store closes. In that case, there is no alternative but to use the drive-through regardless of the mode by which you arrive at the store. A separate sidewalk leading to a pick up window within the same area as the drive-through could be designed for such situations where the pharmacy is open beyond the hours of the retail store, as shown in the sketch below. Staff would further recommend a requirement for placement of bicycle racks at retail stores to meet the intent of allowing bicycle riders access to retail establishments without the threat of their bicycles being stolen.
Pharmacy Drive-through Provisions - With regard to the pharmacy drive-through in particular, the attorney for CVS has submitted information regarding the distinct function of the pick up window. She has written that "the accessory drive-through window for a drug store provides a distinct function (and therefore attracts a distinct type of customer) from the accessory drive-through window for other uses. The primary, and almost exclusive, appeal of a drive-through window for a drug store is for those customers for whom getting out of their vehicle would present a significant hindrance. This type of customer is typically the parent with a sick child, an elderly or handicapped person, or the person who feels too ill to park and enter the store to pick up a prescription. The typical drug store drive-through customer must be distinguished from the young, healthy, or unencumbered customer of other types of accessory drive-through facilities, such as dry cleaners, cigar shops, coffee shops and other retail facilities."
Based on this information, the attorney for CVS has suggested a revision for the retail store drive-through window provision to make the distinction between the pharmacy drive-through and other types of drive-through windows associated with retail uses. She has recommended that two separate definitions be provided. According to her recommendation, the primary distinction between the two definitions is that in the case of the drug store, the requirement that the drive-through window be accessible to pedestrians and bicyclists has been eliminated. The elimination of this requirement is based on the fact that the type of customer utilizing the drug store drive-through will in the vast majority of instances, have no interest or inclination to access the drug store on foot or on bicycle. In order to accommodate the bicyclist, the revised text amendment includes a requirement that a drug store must include a bicycle rack in close proximity to the front door. The language proposed by the CVS attorney is as follows:
Staff believes that the distinction is relevant based on the fact that the drive-through at the pharmacy is for the convenience of people in specific situations with special needs. However, staff would recommend that two definitions not be included. This approach seems to be too complicated for the issue being addressed. Rather than divide the accessory drive-through use into two defined categories, staff would recommend adding a provision that states that the drive-through shall be safely accessible to pedestrians and bicyclists "when feasible." This addition would keep the provision in the definition but provide some flexibility in its application.
Stacking Requirements - The current Zoning Ordinance does not include any stacking requirements for vehicles using the drive-through windows as restaurants with drive-throughs. The proposed text amendment adds a stacking requirement to Section 25-395, Quantity of Parking Spaces Required, as follows:
This requirement is comparable to many others that staff has reviewed and should be adopted as part of this text amendment.
For accessory drive-through windows for both drug stores and other retail uses, the text amendment proposes a separate stacking requirement, as follows, which the staff supports::
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adopting the text amendment as proposed, with the substitution of "or" for "and" in the section that addresses drive-through window service and adding the phrase "where possible" to the requirement for pedestrian and bicyclist accessibility. Based on this change, the definition of Accessory Drive-through Window would read as follows: