Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4336-K Staff AnalysisFebruary 9, 1993 ITEM NO.: Z-4 -R Name: Arkansas Children's Hospital - Site Plan Review for parking Location: The Southwest corner of West 11th Street at Wolfe Street and the Southwest corner of West 9th Street at Barry Street. Owner/Occupant: Arkansas Children's Hospital by William E. Ruck of Garver and Garver Engineers PROPOSAL. To construct two parking lots on two parcels of land recently recommended for rezoning to 0-2 by the Planning Commission. These lots will consist of parking spaces at 164 on the 9th at Battery site and 126 on the 11th at Wolfe site. The applicant indicates that approximately 36 spaces will be lost due to the construction of a building at 9th at Battery recently approved by the Commission. Therefore, 1,877 total parking spaces will be available if these proposed lots are completed as illustrated. This number of spaces encompasses all of the scattered lots now owned and occupied by the hospital plus the two new lots in this application. The applicant owns the block from 9th to 10th on Battery; however, an existing apartment building will be retained and maintained for resident staff members. There is one single family residence not owned by the hospital that will be maintained in the middle of the block fronting Battery. All of the existing residential and commercial structures on these sites will be removed. A small portable structure will be required to house security guards at each of the hospital's parking lots. Security will be enhanced by a chain linked perimeter fencing, approximately 6 feet in height with a single break for parking lot entrance adjacent to the guard house. A wooden privacy fence, 6 feet in height, will be substituted for chain linked for parking lots adjoin residential uses. ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS: 1. Site Location These project sites lay in the west central area of the hospital's ownership, and along the Battery corridor which is a primary traffic artery through the area. February 9, 1993 ITEM N Z-4 -R n . 2. Compatibility with the Neighborhood The parking lots proposed are an extension of existing significant off-street parking owned and operated by Children's Hospital. The Battery at 9th Street location is a southward extension of a large parking lot which runs from 9th Street north to I-630. The site at the corner of West 11th and Wolfe is across the street from several areas now utilized by the hospital, both as parking and as structural involvement. These two parking lots are separated by a large commercial user being an engineering firm along Battery Street. On the east side of Battery between 10th and 11th, a large high-rise building operated by the Housing Authority for elderly housing. The design of the blocks, plus the provision for screening and access control, should make each of these parking lots compatible with their neighbors. 3. On -Site Drives and Parking The parking lots as proposed have a single point of entry to control access as well as security. The design and layout is compatible with minimum ordinance standards for surface parking. 4. Screening and Buffers The projects as proposed include 6 foot opaque screening fences along those boundaries which immediately abut residential occupancy. Both blocks and both parking lots involve the 6 foot screening, but more at the 9th and Battery site than the other. Landscaping within and about both parking lots will meet the minimum standards for the zoning ordinance and buffer ordinance. 5. City Engineer Comments The City Engineer staff has recommended that the Planning Commission disallow the Battery Street access to the northern most parking lot, and recommends that access be retained on West 9th Street. The second lot at 11th and Wolfe is recommended for redesign of the driveway for placement of the drive at approximately midblock on 11th Street in order to move the drive away from the intersection at Wolfe Street. 6. Utility Comments None received at this writing. 6 February 9, 1993 ITEM NO.• Z-4 -R(Cont.) 7. Analysis The staff review produces little or no comment on this proposal. It is an ongoing expansion of the surface parking to support the Children's Hospital and the various allowed functions that are scattered over a 15 or 16 square block area. The development of these sites in the fashion proposed should have little or no adverse impact on the neighborhood. In fact, in several instances, the development as parking will clean up an existing circumstance which is a blight on the neighborhood. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of the zoning site plan review subject to resolution of those driveway issues discussed in the Engineering Comments. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION; (FEBRUARY 9, 1993) Tony Bozynski of the staff presented a brief overview of the proposal on the two parking lots. The Chairman then asked the applicant to come forward and present his application. Mr. Bill Ruck of Garver and Garver Engineers was present representing the Arkansas Children's Hospital. Mr. Ruck identified what he believed to be the single point of discussion for this item. That point being the landscaping required for the project. Mr. Ruck pointed out that he had been discussing this proposal with Bob Brown of staff for sometime. He stated all of the several landscape and buffer requirements had been determined and applied to the plan. Commissioner Oleson asked Mr. Ruck to respond to the question on opaque fencing, adjacent or across from residential. Mr. Ruck responded by saying that the 6 foot board fence, commonly referred to as "a good neighbor fence", would be erected along certain portions of the parking lot perimeter. The balance of the parking lot would be a chain link fence for security purposes. This fence would perhaps be provided with some type of landscaping material which would grow on the fence and provide additional screening. Bob Brown of staff came forward and responded to several questions concerning landscaping. He pointed out the ordinance requirements on the several parking boundaries. 3 February 9, 1993 ITEM N Z-4 -R(Cont Chairman Walker posed a question to Mr. Ruck and Mr. Brown as to where the chain link fence would be located relative to the landscaping strip? The response was that the landscaped area would be predominantly on the street side of the fence, thereby affording landscaping and screening to the residences' side of the security fence. The concern expressed by Commissioner Oleson was the placement of the landscaping and fence would provide more of a screening effect of the vehicles. parking lot and chain link fence. In response to additional questions concerning the fence's location relative to the property line and sidewalk, Mr. Ruck offered a detailed outline of the relationship of the physical elements. He indicated from the curb would be a grass strip as usual to the sidewalk, then the sidewalk and a small strip of grass area to the property where there are retaining walls. Behind the wall and property line, there would be a 15 foot buffer strip as required by ordinance. A 6 foot required landscape strip within that dimension and all of the 15 foot buffer would at least be sodded and grass. A general discussion was held involving several commission members who had expressed concerns about the procedure for voting on this item. A determination was made to vote on the item as presented. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission in this manner, and a vote on the application produced 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. The application was approved. The approval by the amendments required driveways away from Commission accepts by Public Works for intersections. n the several the movement of February 9, 1993 ITEM N 7.-4336-KCont. 7. Analysis The staff review produces little or no comment on this Proposal. It is an ongoing expansion of the surface parking to support the Children's Hospital and the various allowed functions that are scattered over a 15 or 16 square block area. The development of these sites in the fashion proposed should have little or no adverse impact on the neighborhood. In fact, in several instances, the development as parking will clean up an existing circumstance which is a blight on the neighborhood. STAFF RECO MMENi]ATIONS Staff recommends approval of the zoning site plan review subject to resolution of those driveway issues discussed in the Engineering Comments. 3