To: Planning & Zoning Commission
From: Ethan Flanders, Planner I
Subject:
Title
Consider a request for a Site Plan Amendment with variances for an existing 12,017 square-foot multitenant building, on the property legally described as Lot 1R, Block 1 of the Lee Wayne Subdivision, being 1.11-acres, located on the northeast corner of the Keller Parkway and Pate Orr Road intersection, zoned Retail (R) and addressed 901 Keller Parkway. Drew Donosky, Applicant. DW Keller Parkway LLC, Owner. (SITE-2607-0005)
Background:
The property was platted in 1999 and the existing multitenant building was constructed in 1984.
The Applicant intends to modify the site for a new 7 Brew Drive-Thru coffee business. There are eight total lease spaces in the building. There are two lease spaces currently vacant. The other tenants will include the existing Little Caesars, Keller Donuts, and a potential new restaurant on the east side of the building that will expand into the neighboring lease space. The other two existing businesses will be removed after the modifications are complete. 7 Brew is proposed for the western-most lease space, which has been occupied by a Quickway convenience store since 2006.
The Applicant has also applied for a Specific Use Permit for the proposed 7 Brew drive-thru business. That application is on the agenda as a separate item.
Site Layout:
The existing site includes a drive-through circulation lane around the rear of the
building. The proposed project will modernize and improve the existing development by expanding the existing drive-through operation into a double-lane drive-through, rehabilitating the existing parking lot, improving internal circulation, adding landscaping, and updating the building facade through a full exterior reskin to create a more attractive and cohesive appearance along Keller Parkway. The existing fuel pumps and canopy will be removed. This removal can be done during construction if the Fire Department has proper access to the property.
The drive-thru will have two lanes and will provide 12 stacking spaces per lane. There is no kiosk being proposed.
Landscaping/Buffers: Variances Requested
The Applicant is requesting multiple variances related to landscaping and buffer requirements.
UDC Section 9.03(F)(a) requires a “minimum thirty-foot (30') landscape buffer adjacent to all thoroughfares with four (4) or more lanes as classified on the current Comprehensive Thoroughfare Plan. “
Keller Parkway is a six-lane divided roadway according to the city’s Thoroughfare Plan, so a 30’ buffer is required along the south property line.
1. The Applicant requests to not provide the 30’ landscape buffer along Keller Parkway.
The Applicant provided a detailed landscape plan that shows no provided landscaping along Keller Parkway due to existing site constraints.
UDC Section 9.03(F)(b) requires a “minimum fifteen-foot (15') landscape buffer adjacent to all other public streets.”
The subject property borders North Pate Orr Road, a regular public street, on the west.
2. The Applicant requests to provide an 18” buffer along the west property line adjacent to North Pate Orr Road in lieu of the 15’ buffer requirement.
UDC Section 9.03(F)(d) requires a “minimum ten-foot (10') landscape buffer adjacent to side and rear property lines when adjacent to non-residential uses or zoning. This provision does not apply in cases of shared driveways or parking between lots.
3. The Applicant requests to provide an 8’ landscape buffer along the north property line in lieu of the 10’ buffer requirement.
The proposed site plan shows cross access to the east property.
UDC Section 9.03(F)(2)(a) requires four-inch (4”) caliper canopy trees near the center of the thirty-foot (30’) landscape buffer adjacent to thoroughfares with four (4) or more lanes.
4. The Applicant requests to not provide buffer trees along Keller Parkway
UDC Section 9.03(F)(3)(b) requires all parking islands to be a minimum of nine feet (9’) in width and twenty feet (20’) in length. The Applicant proposes to install 5 parking islands. Three (3) parking islands will have a minimum of 9 feet in width and twenty feet in length. Two (2) parking islands in front of the building will measure at 9 feet in width and 18 feet in length.
5. The Applicant requests to install 2 landscape islands that do not meet the UDC.
The Applicant states the variance is requested due to existing site constraints.
Parking: Variance Requested
UDC Section 9.02(G)(50) states the parking ratio for Retail or Personal Establishment is one space per 200 square-feet of gross floor area, which brings the parking requirement for this development to 61 regular spaces. The site plan includes 55 regular and 3 accessible spaces.
If the parking requirement was calculated at the ratios for each type of use proposed for individual lease spaces, excluding the vacant spaces, the requirement would be as follows:
Restaurant with drive thru: 1,500 SF at 1:100 ratio = 15 spaces
Fast Food business: 1,946 SF at 1:100 ratio = 20 spaces
Fast Food business: 954 SF at 1:100 ratio = 10 spaces
Full-service restaurant (includes unassigned lease space): 2,000 SF at 1:150 ratio = 14 spaces
Retail or Personal Service establishment: 5,501 SF at 1:200 ratio = 28
Total: 87
The Applicant intends to construct 55 regular plus 3 accessible spaces on-site.
6. The applicant requests a variance to allow the site to be under parked by 6 spaces
UDC Section 9.02(D)(2) states “each standard off-street surface parking space size shall be in accordance with the City design standards.” UDC Section 9.14 (Figure 14) shows three options for 90-degree parking spaces:
- 18’ length with 2’ overhang
- 20’ length head-in space
- 20’ length with wheel stop - should have 18’ from wheel stop to end of space
7. The Applicant requests to make all parking spaces 18’ in length, without a wheel stop.
Site Layout: Variance Requested
The proposed structure is approximately 12,000 square feet that includes multiple tenant spaces.
UDC Section 9.03(F)(3)(j) states “Foundation planting a minimum of five feet (5') in width shall be provided at the fronts and sides of buildings and shall consist of a combination of groundcovers, shrubs, and ornamental trees.”
8. The Applicant requests to not install any required foundation planting.
The Applicant’s notes state the variance for foundation planting is requested due to existing site constraints.
Fire Lane:
Pursuant to Sections 104.2.3 and 104.2.3.3 of the 2024 International Fire Code, the existing fire-lane width and turning radii are approved as an alternative design and are permitted to remain in their current configuration. Although fire apparatus access roads would ordinarily be required to comply with current dimensional requirements, strict compliance at this property would significantly reduce the available parking area and could substantially limit the reasonable use or future occupancy of the building.
This approval is based on the overall fire-access conditions at the site, including the additional fire-lane access provided on the north side of the building. That access satisfies applicable hose-lay requirements, provides access appropriate to the building’s hazard and anticipated fire-service operations, and includes cross-access to the adjacent property, further improving emergency access and operational flexibility.
Based on these compensating features, the alternative design provides an equivalent level of fire and life-safety protection consistent with IFC Sections 104.2.3 and 104.2.3.3.
This approval applies only to the existing fire-lane configuration and does not authorize future modifications, obstructions, reductions in access, or changes in use or occupancy that could adversely affect fire-department access. Any such changes are subject to additional review and approval by the Fire Code Official.
9. The Applicant requests to not provide a 24’ fire lane adjacent to the front of the existing building.
The Applicant has stated per meeting with the City Fire Marshall, restriping the existing fire lane on the north property line will provide the necessary coverage.
Elevations:
The proposed elevations show a combination of white brick and sandblast finish on all elevations with a black and blue trim finish. A breakdown of the materials used on each elevation is included in the agenda packet.
Roadway Access:
The Applicant intends to maintain the two access points on Keller Parkway and the one access point on N Pate Orr Road. The Applicant is proposing cross access to the east neighboring property. The cross-access connection will be dedicated as an emergency access easement.
Drainage and Utilities:
The applicant has submitted preliminary drainage plans for this development. The applicant did not provide utility plans as the property is already developed.
Zoning:
The subject property is zoned Retail (R). Surrounding zoning is as follows:
North: Town Center
South: Town Center
East: Town Center
West: Retail
Land Use:
The subject property is designated Retail/Commercial (RTC) on the city’s Future Land Use Plan (FLUP). Surrounding land use designations are as follows:
North: Mixed Use (MU)
South: Mixed Use (MU)
East: Mixed Use (MU)
West: RTC
Summary:
Section 2.07(A)(2) of the UDC lists criteria for approval of a Site Plan with variances, the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council shall consider the following factors:
a. That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the land involved such that the strict application of the provisions of this Code would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land.
b. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or injurious to other properties in the area.
c. That the granting of the variance will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of other lands in the area in accordance with the provisions of this Code.
d. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a violation of any other valid ordinance of the City of Keller.
e. That strict compliance with the regulations, and/or that the purpose of the regulations will be served to a greater extent by the alternative proposal.
Citizen Input:
A Site Plan application, even with variances, does not require a public hearing, so no public hearing notifications were sent out to the surrounding property owners for this request. The public will have an opportunity to speak on this agenda item during “Persons To Be Heard.”
Alternatives:
The Planning and Zoning Commission has the following options when considering a site plan with variances:
• Recommend approval as submitted(with requested variances).
• Recommend approval with modified or additional condition(s).
• Table the agenda item to a specific date with clarification of intent and purpose.
• Recommend denial.
City Council Action:
If the Planning and Zoning Commission takes action and makes a recommendation on this agenda item, then this Variance Request will be scheduled for City Council action on October 20, 2026.