HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5472-A Staff AnalysisFebruary 8, 1994
ITEM NO. A FILE NO.: Z -5472 -
NAME:
NAME: CENTRAL PROPERTIES -- SHORT -FORM PCD
LOCATION: At the north-west corner of Hinson Road and Rodney
Parham Road
DEVELOPER:
CENTRAL PROPERTIES
c/o John Flake
425 W. Capitol, Suite 300
Little Rock, AR 72203
376-8005
AREA: 4 ACRES ± NUMBER OF LOTS: 1
ZONING: R-2 to PCD
PLANNING DISTRICT: 1
CENSUS TRACT: 42.06
VARIANCES REOUESTED: None
STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL:
ARCHITECT•
CROMWELL FIRM
One Spring Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
372-2900
FT. NEW STREET: 0
PROPOSED USES: Office & Commercial
The applicant proposes the establishment of a Planned Commercial
Development District in order to develop a 4 acre tract with
mixed office and commercial uses. The proposed buildings are
planned to be oriented toward Rodney Parham and Hinson Roads,
with an Applebee's restaurant planned at the north extremity of
the property facing Rodney Parham, a Walgreen's store at the
corner of Rodney Parham and Hinson Roads, and an office building
at the western edge of the property facing Hinson Road. Two
access drives are proposed off Rodney Parham; one off Hinson
Road. No drive accesses are proposed off the three residential
streets to the north, north-west, or west; a 30 foot landscape
buffer is proposed along these three streets. Parking for 205
cars is indicated.
A. PROPOSAL/REOUEST:
Review by the Planning Commission and approval by the Board
of Directors is requested for the establishment of a PCD on
a 4 acre tract at the corner of Rodney Parham and Hinson
Roads. The requested PCD orients the buildings towards
these two minor arterial roadways, with access being derived
only from these two streets. Two access points are proposed
on Rodney Parham; one on Hinson. No access is proposed to
the three residential streets to the north, north-west, and
west, and a 30 foot landscape buffer is proposed along the
February 8, 1994
ITEM NO.: A Continued FILE NO.: Z -5482-A
length of these three streets. The applicant proposes to
retain many of the existing trees in this 30 foot area and
to add additional trees and evergreen landscaping to provide
an all -season buffer which will, "in time", obscure the
buildings and parking from view from the residential area
beyond. Earth berms are proposed to be placed in the
"greenbelt" to protect existing trees and to maintain the
wooded appearance in this area. New landscaping is proposed
to be provided which, a related by the applicant, will
exceed City landscaping requirements. On -premise signs will
be designed and placed in conformance with the City Sign
Ordinance requirements.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is, for the most part, heavily wooded. There are
two residences on the site, one facing Rodney Parham; one
facing Hinson. A log cabin and barn stand behind/to the
west of the residence which faces Rodney Parham and lie
along the north property line of the site. Buff Lane,
Valley Club Circle, and Wendy Lane border the site on the
north, north-west, and west respectively. The current
zoning of the site is R-2. Property to the north and west
is zoned R-2. Property to the north-west is zoned R-2 and
R-4. Property across Rodney Parham is zoned PCD. Property
across Hinson is R-5, R-2, and 0-3. Diagonally across the
intersection of Rodney Parham and Hinson is C-2 zoned
property.
C. ENGINEERING UTILITY COMMENTS:
The City Engineering office indicates that right-of-way must
be dedicated for Rodney Parham and Hinson Roads which is
consistent with Master Street Plan requirements. Additional
right-of-way is, therefore needed. Improvements on Rodney
Parham must be constructed, and conformance to traffic
engineering design requirements must be met for the Rodney
Parham -Hinson intersection. The northern -most access drive
on Rodney Parham must be abandoned. The Detention and
Excavation Ordinances are applicable.
Water Works indicates that on-site fire protection may be
required. A water main extension may be required.
Wastewater reports that sewer is available on Hinson Road,
Wendy Lane, and on Buff Lane. The developer will be
required to extend service to the property.
Site Plan review reports that the required average buffer
width along Hinson Road is 21 feet. The requirement along
Rodney Parham Road is 20 feet. The minimum requirements are
14 feet and 13 feet respectively. The buffer width
2
February 8, 1994
ITEM NO.: A Continued FILE Na.: Z -54'12-A
indicated on the plan submitted drops below the 6 foot
minimum allowed at any given point. The Landscape Ordinance
requires a 6 foot wide perimeter landscape strip separating
lot lease line unless an access easement is provided.
Arkansas Power and Light Co. will require easements.
Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. and Southwestern Bell Telephone
Co. each approved the submittal without comment.
The Fire Department approved the submittal without comment.
D. ISSUES LEGAL TECHNICAL DESIGN:
The application cites "Applebee's" and "Walgreen s" by name,
along with the "office building" use, and, as presently
proposed, the PCD, if established, would provide for these
two specific uses plus the office use. If the applicant
wishes to retain the option of having alternate tenants in
the two commercial building, then this must be requested.
Otherwise, only these two tenants will be permitted without
amending the PCD. Additionally, the applicant needs to be
more specific in the uses requested in the "office"
building.
The survey and plan which have been submitted are deficient.
The Subdivision Ordinance requires the site plan be
submitted on a sheet not to exceed 24" by 3611, or less than
121, by 2411, be to scale, and contain a vicinity map. The
plan is to show the proposed treatment of the perimeter of
the property (e.g., the materials and techniques for
screening and fencing) and contain a schematic landscaping
plan. The survey and plan is to show all existing and
proposed easements, the location and dimensions of
buildings, parking, etc. A preliminary plat is to be
furnished which meets all the requirements of the Ordinance:
the name of the proposed subdivision; name, address, and
source of title of the owner; name of the subdivider; legal
description; source of water and means of wastewater
disposal; vicinity map; contours at 2 foot intervals;
boundary street design and right-of-way dedication; building
set -back lines; location and description of monuments; metes
and bounds legal description; present zoning classification
of the site and of abutting properties; and inclusion and
execution of the preliminary surveying and engineering
certifications. A preliminary Bill of Assurance is to be
provided. None of this has been submitted.
Any anticipated signage needs to be shown and described.
Location(s) and size of the signs must be dealt with in the
approval of the PCD.
A development schedule is to be furnished.
3
February 8, 1994
ITEM NO.: A (Continued) FILE NO.: Z -54112--A
E. ANALYSIS•
The submittal is deficient in critically important ways, and
review cannot proceed without adequate documents being
submitted.
As far as the land use element is concerned, the Planning
staff indicates that the City Land Use Plan recommends
office use for the site, and that, while some commercial
uses might be appropriately mixed in with an office
development, the proposal is primarily a commercial
development. If a mixed office and commercial development
is pursued, then the proportion of each use must be
specified and approved and must be in conformance with the
land use plan.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends deferral of the application until adequate
design documents and submittals are supplied. It is
recommended that the applicant confer with staff to
determine appropriate exhibits and design requirements. It
is also recommended that the applicant confer with the
Planning staff to bring the requested uses into conformance
with the Land Use Plan.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:
(DECEMBER 9, 1993)
The applicant, Mr. John Flake, was present, as were
representatives of the architectural firm and of the proposed
tenants. Staff presented the request and outlined the
deficiencies noted in the discussion outline. The applicant and
architect reviewed the planned improvements and discussed the
staff's observations and requirements. After a lengthy
discussion involving the Committee members, applicant, and staff,
the Committee forwarded the request to the Commission for the
hearing.
STAFF UPDATE
A letter has been received from the applicant dated
December 15, 1993, seeking to defer the hearing of this
item until the February 8, 1994 hearing.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(JANUARY 4, 1994)
Staff reported that the item could be included on the Consent
Agenda for deferral to the February 8, 1994 hearing. The
4
February 8, 1994
ITEM NO.: A Continued FILE NO.: Z -54 -12 -
deferral was approved with the vote of 7 ayes, no nays, 4 absent,
and no abstentions.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JANUARY 20, 1994)
Mr. Joe Johnson, with Cromwell Firm Architects, was present, as
was Mr. Frank Riggins with the Mehlburger Firm. Staff reported
that the only submittals to staff, since the preceding Planning
Commission date when a deferral had been requested by the
applicant, was a revised site plan which had been delivered the
preceding evening. Staff presented this revised site plan which:
1) retains the Walgreen's store, but rotates the building on the
site and designates the building as simply "commercial"; 2)
retains the office building along the west property line, but
changes it to a two-story building with 25,000 square feet in
lieu of the one-story, 10,000 square foot building submitted
originally; and, 3) substitutes a one-story, 16,000 square foot
office building along the north property line in lieu of the
Applebee's restaurant originally submitted.
Staff reviewed with the Committee and applicants' representatives
the discussion outline items. Staff noted that the required
changes to street rights-of-way, provision for additional traffic
lanes, and revisions to landscape buffers were made. Staff
pointed out, however, that no amended application or amended
project narrative had accompanied the revised drawing. Although
the drawings denote the generic "Office" and "Commercial"
designations for the building uses, a project narrative does not
address the uses requested for these buildings. No provision has
been made for the lease lot line landscape buffers, or,
alternatively, easements at these lease lot lines. A landscape
plan has not been submitted. The requested signage has not been
submitted. The preliminary plat has not been furnished.
Mr. Johnson indicated that the needed information was
forthcoming. Staff responded that the completed submittal and
the revised information needed to be furnished by Thursday,
January 27. After a brief review by the Committee, the Committee
referred the item to the Commission for the hearing.
STAFF UPDATE.
The applicant has submitted plans which portray a changed site
plan from the one furnished at the Subdivision Committee meeting:
the northern -most 16,000 square foot office building has been
eliminated; however, the lot line separating it from the other
uses and the space on the site plan for this building have been
retained. There has been no change in the application or in the
narrative description of the development to confirm the indicated
5
February 8, 1994
ITEM NO.: A Continued FILE NO.: z--5412-
changes. The required preliminary plat has been submitted, as
has the preliminary Bill of Assurance; however, the required
landscape plan has not been furnished. Signage drawings for the
proposed Walgreen's were submitted.
Since the needed project narrative has not been furnished which
would allow staff to evaluate the proposed uses and character of
the site, and, because exhibits are incomplete and in an evident
state of flux due to changes in the character and make-up of the
project, staff recommends this item be deferred. If, between
preparation on this writing and the Planning Commission hearing,
the remainder of the documents are submitted, based on the site
plan which has been submitted, staff recommends denial of the
request. Staff will not support a two-story, 25,000 square foot
office building on the west property line which is just 30 feet
from the west property line. Staff will not support leaving the
lot line for a third use along the north property line and the
"hole" in the site plan for such a building. Staff can support
the one commercial use at the corner and one office use on the
site. The one office use should be one story, or, if two story,
then the lower level must be below the grade of the side
residential street so that the building appears to be one story
from the residential area. This building should be 10,000 square
feet per floor as was shown on the original site plan. Staff
does not support the signage plans for the Walgreen's store.
Item A, Central Properties (Z-5722)
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 8, 1994)
Staff reported that a letter had been received from the
applicant's representative, dated February 2, 1994, asking that
the item be withdrawn. The request to withdraw the item was
included in the Consent Agenda, and the approval of the
withdrawal was approved with the vote of 9 ayes, no nays, one
open position, no abstentions, and one open position.
January 4, 1994
ITEM NO.: 5 FILE NO.: Z -54'12 -
NAME: CENTRAL PROPERTIES -- SHORT -FORM PCD
LOCATION: At the north-west corner of Hinson Road and Rodney
Parham Road
DEVELOPER:
ARCHITECT:
CENTRAL PROPERTIES CROMWELL FIRM
c/o John Flake One Spring Street
425 W. Capitol, Suite 300 Little Rock, AR 72201
Little Rock, AR 72203 372-2900
376-8005
AREA: 4 ACRES ± NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0
ZONING: R-2 to PCD PROPOSED USES: Office & Commercial
PLANNING DISTRICT: 1
CENSUS TRACT: 42.06
VARIANCES RE UESTED: None
STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes the establishment of a Planned Commercial
Development District in order to develop a 4 acre tract with
mixed office and commercial uses. The proposed buildings are
planned to be oriented toward Rodney Parham and Hinson Roads,
with an Applebee's restaurant planned at the north extremity of
the property facing Rodney Parham, a Walgreen's store at the
corner of Rodney Parham and Hinson Roads, and an office building
at the western edge of the property facing Hinson Road. Two
access drives are proposed off Rodney Parham; one off Hinson
Road. No drive accesses are proposed off the three residential
streets to the north, north-west, or west; a 30 foot landscape
buffer is proposed along these three streets. Parking for 205
cars is indicated.
A. PROPOSAL RE UEST:
Review by the Planning Commission and approval by the Board
of Directors is requested for the establishment of a PCD on
a 4 acre tract at the corner of Rodney Parham and Hinson
Roads. The requested PCD orients the buildings towards
these two minor arterial roadways, with access being derived
only from these two streets. Two access points are proposed
on Rodney Parham; one on Hinson. No access is proposed to
the three residential streets to the north, north-west, and
west, and a 30 foot landscape buffer is proposed along the
January 4, 1994
ITEM Q_.:_ f Qopj inked) FELE NO. Z -5412-A
length of these three streets. The applicant proposes to
retain many of the existing trees in this '30 foot area and
to add additional trees and evergreen landscaping to provide
an all -season buffer which will, "in time", obscure the
buildings and parking from view from the residential area
beyond. Earth berms are proposed to be placed in the
"greenbelt" to protect existing trees and to maintain the
wooded appearance in this area. New landscaping is proposed
to be provided which, as related by the applicant, will
exceed City landscaping requirements. On -premise signs will
be designed and placed in conformance with the City Sign
Ordinance requirements.
--�Leiril,!■S�•Js[�
The site is, for the most part, heavily wooded. There are
two residences on the site, one facing Rodney Parham; one
facing Hinson. A log cabin and barn stand behind/to the
west of the residence which faces Rodney Parham and lie
along the north property line of the site. Buff Lane,
Valley Club Circle, and Wendy Lane border the site on the
north, north-west, and west respectively. The current
zoning of the site is R-2. Property to the north and west
is zoned R-2. Property to the north-west is zoned R-2 and
R-4. Property across Rodney Parham is zoned PCD. Property
across Hinson is R-5, R-2, and 0-3. Diagonally across the
intersection of Rodney Parham and Hinson is C-2 zoned
property.
C. ENGINEERING/UTILITY COMMENTS:
The City Engineering office indicates that right-of-way must
be dedicated for Rodney Parham and Hinson Roads which is.
consistent with Master Street Plan requirements. Additional
right-of-way is, therefore needed. Improvements on Rodney
Parham must be constructed, and conformance to traffic
engineering design requirements must be met for the Rodney
Parham -Hinson intersection. The northern -most access drive
on Rodney Parham must be abandoned. The Detention and
Excavation Ordinances are applicable.
Water Works indicates that on-site fire protection may be
required. A water main extension may be required.
Wastewater reports that sewer is available on Hinson Road,
Wendy Lane, and on Buff Lane. The developer will be
required to extend service to the property.
Site Plan review reports that the required average buffer
width along Hinson Road is 21 feet. The requirement along
Rodney Parham Road is 20 feet. The minimum requirements are
14 feet and 13 feet respectively. The buffer width
2
January 4, 1994
ITEM NOS • 5 (Continued) FILE NO.: Z -5412-A
indicated on the plan submitted drops below the 6 foot
minimum allowed at any given point. The Landscape Ordinance
requires a 6 foot wide perimeter landscape strip separating
lot lease line unless an access easement is provided.
Arkansas Power and Light Co. will require easements.
Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. and Southwestern Bell Telephone
Co. each approved the submittal without comment.
The Fire Department approved the submittal without comment.
D. ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
The application cites "Applebee's" and "Walgreen's" by name,
along with the "office building" use, and, as presently
proposed, the PCD, if established, would provide for these
two specific uses plus the office use. If the applicant
wishes to retain the option of having alternate tenants in
the two commercial building, then this must be requested.
Otherwise, only these two tenants will be permitted without
amending the PCD. Additionally, the applicant needs to be
more specific in the uses requested in the "office"
building.
The survey and plan which have been submitted are deficient.
The Subdivision Ordinance requires the site plan be
submitted on a sheet not to exceed 24" by 3611, or less than
12" by 2411, be to scale, and contain a vicinity map. The
plan is to show the proposed treatment of the perimeter of
the property (e.g., the materials and techniques for
screening and fencing) and contain a schematic landscaping
plan. The survey and plan is to show all existing and
proposed easements, the location and dimensions of
buildings, parking, etc. A preliminary plat is to be
furnished which meets all the requirements of the Ordinance:
the name of the proposed subdivision; name, address, and
source of title of the owner; name of the subdivider; legal
description; source of water and means of wastewater
disposal; vicinity map; contours at 2 foot intervals;
boundary street design and right-of-way dedication; building
set -back lines; location and description of monuments; metes
and bounds legal description; present zoning classification
of the site and of abutting properties; and inclusion and
execution of the preliminary surveying and engineering
certifications. A preliminary Bill of Assurance is to be
provided. None of this has been submitted.
Any anticipated signage needs to be shown and described.
Location(s) and size of the signs must be dealt with in the
approval of the PCD.
A development schedule is to be furnished.
3
January 4, 1994
ITEM NO • 5 Continued) FILE NO.: z -5412-A
E. ANALYSIS:
The submittal is deficient in critically important ways, and
review cannot proceed without adequate documents being
submitted.
As far as the land use element is concerned, the Planning
staff indicates that the City Land Use Plan recommends
office use for the site, and that, while some commercial
uses might be appropriately mixed in with an office
development, the proposal is primarily a commercial
development. If a mixed office and commercial development
is pursued, then the proportion of each use must be
specified and approved and must be in conformance with the
land use plan.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends deferral of the application until adequate
design documents and submittals are supplied. It is
recommended that the applicant confer with staff to
determine appropriate exhibits and design requirements. It
is also recommended that the applicant confer with the
Planning staff to bring the requested uses into conformance
with the Land Use Plan.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (DECEMBER 9, 1993)
The applicant, Mr. John Flake, was present, as were
representatives of the architectural firm and of the proposed
tenants. Staff presented the request and outlined the
deficiencies noted in the discussion outline. The applicant and
architect reviewed the planned improvements and discussed the
staff's observations and requirements. After a lengthy
discussion involving the Committee members, applicant, and staff,
the Committee forwarded the request to the Commission for the
hearing.
STAFF UPDATE
A letter has been received from the applicant dated
December 15, 1993, seeking to defer the hearing of this
item until the February 8, 1994 hearing.
N
January 4, 1994
zTEM NO.: 5 Continued FILE N Z -5412 -
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
Staff reported that the item could
Agenda for deferral to the February
deferral was approved with the vote
and no abstentions.
5
(JANUARY 4, 1994)
be included on the Consent
8, 1994 hearing. The
of 7 ayes, no nays, 4 absent,