Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6883 Staff AnalysisFILE NO.: Z-6883 NAME: Gill - Short -Form PRD LOCATION: 5209/5215 "J" Street DEVELOPER: John P. Gill 3801 TCBY Tower Capitol and Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 0.5 acre ZONING: R -2/R-4 SURVEYOR: Donald W. Brooks 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 ALLOWED USES: PROPOSED USE: VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: FT. NEW STREET: 0 Single Family Residential and Two Family Residential Multifamily Waiver of right-of-way dedication and street improvements for "J" and "I" Streets BACKGROUND: The property at 5209 "J" Street contains a six -unit apartment building (40 foot height), with an access drive from "J" Street and a small area of gravel parking in the rear yard. There are four (4) garages within this structure, which are accessed from "J" Street. The property at 5215 "J" Street contains a single family residential structure and the property at 5212 "I" Street contains a duplex (33 foot height). These structures are served by on -street parking. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to rezone the property at 5209/5215 "J" Street and 5212 "I" Street from R -2/R-4 to PRD. The applicant proposes to remove the single family residential FILE NO.: Z-6883 (Cont.) structure at 5215 "J" Street and construct a two-story (30 feet in height), four -unit townhouse structure with associated parking along the proposed building's east side. The applicant also proposes to upgrade the parking for the existing six -unit apartment and duplex structures. The applicant proposes to construct a new parking area behind the six -unit apartment building, with a second access point (from "I" Street). A total of 20 parking spaces is shown on the proposed site plan. There are four (4) existing garage parking spaces on the "J" Street side of the six - unit apartment building. The applicant is also requesting a waiver of right-of-way dedication and street improvements for "J" and "I" Streets. The applicant has noted that a section of sidewalk will be constructed along "J" Street adjacent to where the new townhouse building is proposed. The proposed and existing buildings, access drives and parking plan are noted on the attached site plan, The applicant has submitted an east (front) elevation for Planning Commission review. The applicant has also filed a land use plan amendment for this property (Item 3.1 on this agenda). B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: There are three (3) existing residential structures on this site as explained in the previous "Background" paragraph. There -are single family residential style structures to the east, west, south across "I" Street and north across "J" Street. A number of the residential structures in this area contain more than one dwelling unit. Mount St. Mary's School is located further east across Kavanaugh Blvd. Holy Souls church and school are located further west across Harrison Street. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received two (2) calls from persons expressing concerns with the proposed development. The Hillcrest, Heights and Prospect Terrace Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Right-of-way dedication required on "I" and "J" Streets per the "MSP" (60 feet required.). 2.Easements shown for proposed storm drainage is required. 2 FILE NO.: Z-6883 (Cont.) 3. Proposed design of streets conforming to "MSP" is required. 4. Sidewalks shall be shown conforming to Sec. 31-175 and the "MSP".(Buffered) 5 Driveways shall conform to Sec. 31-210 or Ordinance 18,031. (One way exit to I Street with parking as shown) 6. Prepare a letter for streetlights as required by Sec. 31-403. 7. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 8. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec. 29-186(e) is required. 9. A Grading Permit per Secs. 29-186( c) and (d) is required. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. AP&L: No Comment received. ARKLA: No Comment received. Southwestern Bell: No Comment. Water: :a" is the largest meter size available off the existing 2" water main. Fire Department: Check with Water Works regarding the nearest fire hydrant. Count Plannin : No Comment received. CATA: No effect; Near routes 1, 21 and 22. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights/Hillcrest Planning District. The applicant's property is shown as Single Family and Low Density Residential on the Future Land Use Plan. The request is for a zone change from R-2 Single Family and R-4 Two -Family to a Planned Residential Development. The applicant wishes to add four townhouses on the property in addition to the existing 8 units. This change will require a Land Use Plan Amendment for a change from Single Family and Low Density Residential to Multi -Family. k1 FILE NO.: Z-6883 (Cont. City Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: This request is located in an area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Plan. The chapter on housing issues contains objectives of regulating construction and redevelopment. The objective also contains an action statement of creating a Design Overlay District that would require Planned Unit Development (PUD) for reclassification of land use, density, or other infrastructure improvements. Implementation mechanisms included review by the Board of Adjustment and Planning Commission as well as revision of. Building Codes, Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance, and Environmental Codes. Factors to be considered in reviewing Planned Unit Developments for Hillcrest are listed as construction/property maintenance, density, and character. Landscape: The site plan submitted does not provide for the minimum six foot wide land use zoning buffer nor the minimum four foot wide landscape strip required along the eastern and a portion of the southern perimeters. A six foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the southern, eastern and western perimeters of the site. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JULY 13, 2000) John Gill was present, representing the application. Staff briefly described the PRD. The landscaping and screening requirements were briefly discussed. Mr. Gill noted that he also owned t$e property immediately east of this site and could replat a portion of that property into this property to satisfy the landscape and buffer requirements. The Public Works requirements were also discussed. The required dedication of right-of-way was briefly discussed. It was noted that Mr. Gill could request a waiver of the dedication if desired. Commissioner Berry asked Mr. Gill if he had met with the Hillcrest Neighborhood Association. Mr. Gill responded that he had not yet met with the association. After the discussion, the Committee forwarded the PRD to the full Commission for resolution. 4 FILE NO.: Z-6883 (Cont.) H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on July_.19, 2000. The building heights have been noted on the sNte plan. The applicant also shows a dumpster location behind the existing duplex structure. The dumpster area must be screened on 3 sides with an 8 foot opaque fence or wall. The revised plan also shows a revised parking plan which provides for a four (4) foot landscape strip along a portion of the east property line. The three (3) parking spaces nearest to "I" Street'should be removed from the plan based on the fact that the required landscape strip and maneuvering area cannot be provided. A four (4) foot landscape strip is also required along the west side of the parking space behind the existing duplex unit. The City's Zoning Ordinance would typically require 18 parking spaces for a multifamily development of this size. The revised site plan also shows a'six foot high screening fence along the property lines west and south of the proposed townhouse building. The applicant has noted that there will be no signage on the site. As noted in paragraph A., the applicant is requesting a waiver of right-of-way dedication and street improvements to "J" and "I" Streets. Public Works recommends denial of the requested waiver. Also noted in paragraph A, the applicant has filed a land use plan amendment for this property. Staff believes that the land use plan amendment and the proposed PRD development are not appropriate for this property. Staff feels that the proposed development will result in an increase in use intensity in this area and is in conflict with the scale and character of the neighborhood. In addition, several large mature trees would have to be removed due to the proposed construction. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the proposed PRD rezoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 3, 2000) John Gill was present, representing the application. There were several persons present with concerns. Staff briefly described the proposed PRD, with a recommendation of denial. The PRD and associated Land Use Plan Amendment were discussed simultaneously. 5 FILE NO.: Z-6883 (Cont. John Gill addressed the Commission in support of the applications. He described the general area and explained the proposed development plan for the property. In response to a Tette% submitted by the Hillcrest Residents Association, Mr. Gill stated that he had no problem eliminating the driveway onto "I" Street and decreasing the amount of parking. He noted that the exterior of the structure would look like other structures in the neighborhood. Vice -Chair Berry suggested accessing the property from "J" Street only, with only a residential drive from "I" Street to serve the duplex. Mr. Gill indicated no problem with that suggestion. Keith Thompson addressed the Commission in opposition to the proposed PRD and presented a petition to that effect. He noted concern with the maintenance of the property. He stated that the property is often overgrown with trash on the site. He objected to the removal of the large oak tree next to the existing single family structure. Doug Greenwood also addressed the Commission with concerns. He noted concerns with the drive onto "I" Street and traffic. He was also concerned with the maintenance of the property and property values in the area. Keith -Lynch also addressed the Commission with concerns. He stated that the development was not in character with the neighborhood. He also noted concern with the driveway onto "I" Street. W. M. Robertson also addressed the Commission with concerns. He noted concerns with the driveway onto "I" Street and the removal of trees. Jim Linsky also noted concern with the proposed development. He noted traffic concerns. Neil Dobbins noted concern with the maintenance of rental property in this area. Patricia Thompson presented photos of the property to the Commission. She was also concerned with the maintenance of the property. She also noted concerns with traffic and on -street parking in the immediate area. She noted that the applicant was proposing to overbuild the site and was concerned with the rear and side building facades. 6 FILE NO.: Z-6883 (Cont.) Dewitts Shotts expressed concern with parking in this area. Commissioner Faust asked how many curb cuts there were along this Tock of "I" Street. Bob Turner, of Public Works, noted that t ere were curb cuts, but did not know how many. Commissioner Faust commented on the orientation of the proposed four -unit building (facing the side yard). She noted that the orientation was uncharacteristic of the neighborhood. She stated that she did not agree with the density objection and noted concern with the driveway onto "I" Street. Commissioner Lowry stated that the proposed development would not create a traffic problem. He noted that the complaints were primarily with the maintenance of the property and he discussed this issue. He noted that he supported the application. Mr. Gill noted that the existing six -unit structure housed one - bedroom units. He noted that one of his goals was to have more off-street parking. He discussed the maintenance of the property and noted that some of the responsibility for maintenance is placed on the tenants. Chair Adcock asked Mr. Gill what he would do with the property if this application were not approved. Mr. Gill noted that he would look into building a duplex on each lot and explained. He noted that the four units in one building would be a better solution. Jim Lawson, Director of Planning and Development, noted that the property would have to be rezoned for duplex structures. Commissioner Lowry asked if Mr. Gill would amend the application to have the driveway from "J" Street only serve the 6 -unit and 4 -unit buildings, with the drive from "I" Street only serving the duplex structure. Mr. Gill stated that he would amend the application. Commissioner Berry offered additional comments regarding access and parking. The density for multifamily land use and this property was briefly discussed. Commissioner Muse noted concern with the size of the property and the proposed density. 7 FILE NO.: Z-6883 (Cont.) Commissioner Rector questioned having the drive from "I" Street at all. Commissioner Berry responded that it would provide off- street parking to the duplex structure. This issue was briefly discussed. Commissioner Rector asked if the existing parking area would be improved with adding more parking. Mr. Gill noted that the existing parking would be upgraded. The issue of having more off-street parking was briefly discussed. Commissioner Rector asked Mr. Gill why a four-plex was proposed instead of a duplex. Mr. Gill noted that two units would not be cost effective. He noted that trees would have to be removed regardless of what was constructed on the property. He also noted that he would eliminate the drive onto "I" Street. Commissioner Rector noted that there should be no driveway onto "I" Street. Mr. Gill noted that he would amend the application to remove the driveway onto "I" Street and the three southernmost parking spaces. 1. Mr. Lawson discussed other options that were available to Mr. Gill and discussed the staff concerns with the proposed development (density, building orientation, etc.). The design issues associated with the parking area were briefly discussed. Commissioner Faust -asked the City Attorney if the land use plan amendment was necessary for the PRD rezoning. Stephen Giles, City Attorney, noted that the land use plan would not have to be changed in order to approve the PRD. This issue was briefly discussed. Commissioner Rector -moted that Mr. Gill needed to eliminate the "I" Street driveway and the three southernmost parking spaces from the site plan and work out a turnaround with staff. Mr. Gill agreed to the changes. Mr. Robertson expressed additional concerns with the "I" Street driveway. Mr. Thompson asked what the parking requirements were. Staff noted that the typical parking requirement was 18 spaces and eliminating the three spaces would leave 17 spaces. A motion was made to approve the PRD, with the site plan amendments as agreed to by Mr. Gill. The motion included a waiver of the street improvements to "I" and "J" Streets. Staff 8 FILE NO.: Z-6883 (Cont.) noted that Public Works supported the waiver of street Improvements and that no additional right-of-way dedication was required. The motion passed with a vote of 6 ayes, 3 nays and 2 absent. Q August 3, 2000 ITEM NO.: 3 NAME: Gill - Short -Form PRD LOCATION: 5209/5215 "J" Street n '%TA'T.[1pFR John P. Gill 3801 TCBY Tower Capitol and Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 0.5 acre ZONING: R -2/R-4 FILE NO.: Z-6883 (UMUFvnu Donald W. Brooks 20820 Arch Street Pike Hensley, AR 72065 NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ALLOWED USES: Single Family Residential and Two Family Residential PROPOSED USE: Multifamily VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Waiver of right-of-way dedication and street improvements for "J" and "I" Streets BACKGROUND: The property at 5209 "J" Street contains a six -unit apartment building (40 foot height), with an access drive from "J" Street and a small area of gravel parking in the rear yard. There are four (4) garages within this structure, which are accessed from "J" Street. The property at 5215 "J" Street contains a single family residential structure and the property at 5212 "I" Street contains a duplex (33 foot height). These structures are served by on -street parking. August 3, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: FILE NO.: Z-6883 The applicant proposes to rezone the property at 5209/5215 "J" Street and 5212 "I" Street from R -2/R-4 to PRD. The applicant proposes to remove the single family residential structure at 5215 "J" Street and construct a two-story (30 feet in height), four -unit townhouse structure with associated parking along the proposed building's east side. The applicant also proposes to upgrade the parking for the existing six -unit apartment and duplex structures. The applicant proposes to construct a new parking area behind the six -unit apartment building, with a second access point (from "I" Street). A total of 20 parking spaces is shown on the proposed site plan. There are four (4) existing garage parking spaces on the "J" Street side of the six - unit apartment building. The applicant is also requesting a waiver of right-of-way dedication and street improvements for "J" and "I" Streets. The applicant has noted that a section of sidewalk will be constructed along "J" Street adjacent to where the new townhouse building is proposed. The proposed and existing buildings, access drives and parking plan are noted on the attached site plan. The applicant has submitted an east (front) elevation for Planning Commission review. The applicant has also filed a land use plan amendment for this property (Item 3.1 on this agenda). B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: There are three (3) existing residential structures on this site as explained in the previous "Background" paragraph. There are single family residential style structures to the east, west, south across "I" Street and north across "J" Street. A number of the residential structures in this area contain more than one dwelling unit. Mount St. Mary's School is located further east across Kavanaugh Blvd. Holy Souls church and school are located further west across Harrison Street. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received two (2) calls from persons expressing concerns with the proposed development. The Hillcrest, Heights and Prospect Terrace Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. K% August 3, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: FILE NO.: Z-6883 1. Right-of-way dedication required on "I" and "J" Streets per the "MSP" (60 feet required.). 2. Easements shown for proposed storm drainage is required. 3. Proposed design of streets conforming to "MSP" is required. 4. Sidewalks shall be shown conforming to Sec. 31-175 and the "MSP" . (Buffered) 5.Driveways shall conform to Sec. 31-210 or Ordinance 18,031. (One way exit to I Street with parking as shown) 6. Prepare a letter for streetlights as required by Sec. 31-403. 7. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 8.A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec. 29-186(e) is required. 9. A Grading Permit per Secs. 29-186( c) and (d) is required. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. AP&L: No Comment received. ARKLA: No Comment received. Southwestern Bell: No Comment. Water: V" is the largest meter size available off the existing 2" water main. Fire Department: Check with Water Works regarding the nearest fire hydrant. County Planning: No Comment received. CATA: No effect; Near routes 1, 21 and 22. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights/Hillcrest Planning District. The applicant's property is shown as Single Family and Low Density Residential on the Future Land Use Plan. The request is for a zone change from R-2 Single Family and R-4 Two -Family to a Planned Residential 3 August 3, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6883 Development. The applicant wishes to add four townhouses on the property in addition to the existing 8 units. This change will require a Land Use Plan Amendment for a change from Single Family and Low Density Residential to Multi -Family. Cij�y Recognized Neighborhood Action Plan: This request is located in an area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Plan. The chapter on housing issues contains objectives of regulating construction and redevelopment. The objective also contains an action statement of creating a Design Overlay District that would require Planned Unit Development (PUD) for reclassification of land use, density, or other infrastructure improvements. Implementation mechanisms included review by the Board of Adjustment and Planning Commission as well as revision of Building Codes, Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance, and Environmental Codes. Factors to be considered in reviewing Planned Unit Developments for Hillcrest are listed as construction/property maintenance, density, and character. Landscape: The site plan submitted does not provide for the minimum six foot wide land use zoning buffer nor the minimum four foot wide landscape strip required along the eastern and a portion of the southern perimeters. A six foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the'southern, eastern and western perimeters of the site. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JULY 13, 2000) John Gill was present, representing the application. Staff briefly described the PRD. The landscaping and screening requirements were briefly discussed. Mr. Gill noted that he also owned the property immediately east of this site and could replat a portion of that property into this property to satisfy the landscape and buffer requirements. The Public Works requirements were also discussed. The required dedication of right-of-way was briefly discussed. 4 August 3, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6883 It was noted that Mr. Gill could request a waiver of the dedication if desired. Commissioner Berry asked Mr. Gill if he had met with the Hillcrest Neighborhood Association. Mr. Gill responded that he had not yet met with the association. After the discussion, the Committee forwarded the PRD to the full Commission for resolution. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on July 19, 2000. The building heights have been noted on the site plan. The applicant also shows a dumpster location behind the existing duplex structure. The dumpster area must be screened on 3 sides with an 8 foot opaque fence or wall. The revised plan also shows a revised parking plan which provides for a four (4) foot landscape strip along a portion of the east property line. The three (3) parking spaces nearest to "I" Street should be removed from the plan based on the fact that the required landscape strip and maneuvering area cannot be provided. A four (4) foot landscape strip is also required along the west side of the parking space behind the existing duplex unit. The City's Zoning Ordinance would typically require 18 parking spaces for a multifamily development of this size. The revised site plan also shows a six foot high screening fence along the property lines west and south of the proposed townhouse building. The applicant has noted that there will be--iio signage on the site. As noted in paragraph A., the applicant is requesting a waiver of right-of-way dedication and street improvements to "J" and "I" Streets. Public Works recommends denial of the requested waiver. Also noted in paragraph A, the applicant has filed a land use plan amendment for this property. Staff believes that the land use plan amendment and the proposed PRD development are not appropriate for this property. Staff feels that the proposed development will result in an increase in use intensity in this area and is in conflict with the scale and character of the neighborhood. In addition, several large mature trees would have to be removed due to the proposed construction. 5 August 3, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6883 I. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends denial of the proposed PRD rezoning. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (AUGUST 3, 2000) John Gill was present, representing the application. There were several persons present with concerns. Staff briefly described the proposed PRD, with a recommendation of denial. The PRD and associated Land Use Plan Amendment were discussed simultaneously. John Gill addressed the Commission in support of the applications. He described the general area and explained the proposed development plan for the property. In response to a letter submitted by the Hillcrest Residents Association, Mr. Gill stated that he had no problem eliminating the driveway onto "I" Street and decreasing the amount of parking. He noted that the exterior of the structure would look like other structures in the neighborhood. Vice -Chair Berry suggested accessing the property from "J" Street only, with only a residential drive from "I" Street to serve the duplex. Mr. Gill indicated no problem with that suggestion. Keith Thompson addressed the Commission in opposition to the proposed PRD and presented a petition to that effect. He noted concern with the maintenance of the property. He stated that the property is often overgrown with trash on the site. He objected to the removal of the large oak tree next to the existing single family structure. Doug Greenwood also addressed the Commission with concerns. He noted concerns with the drive onto "I" Street and traffic. He was also concerned with the maintenance of the property and property values in the area. Keith Lynch also addressed the Commission with concerns. He stated that the development was not in character with the neighborhood. He also noted concern with the driveway onto "I" Street. August 3, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6883 W. M. Robertson also addressed the Commission with concerns. He noted concerns with the driveway onto "I" Street and the removal of trees. Jim Linsky also noted concern with the proposed development. He noted traffic concerns. Neil Dobbins noted concern with the maintenance of rental property in this area. Patricia Thompson presented photos of the property to the Commission. She was also concerned with the maintenance of the property. She also noted concerns with traffic and on -street parking in the immediate area. She noted that the applicant was proposing to overbuild the site and was concerned with the rear and side building facades. Dewitts Shotts expressed concern with parking in this area. Commissioner Faust asked how many curb cuts there were along this block of "I" Street. Bob Turner, of Public Works, noted that there were curb cuts, but did not know how many. Commissioner Faust commented on the orientation of the proposed four -unit building (facing the side yard). She noted that the orientation was uncharacteristic of the neighborhood. She stated that she did not agree with the density objection and noted concern with the driveway onto "I" Street. Commissioner Lowry stated that the proposed development would not create a traffic problem. He noted that the complaints were primarily with the maintenance of the property and he discussed this issue. He noted that he supported the application. Mr. Gill noted that the existing six -unit structure housed one - bedroom units. He noted that one of his goals was to have more off-street parking. He discussed the maintenance of the property and noted that some of the responsibility for maintenance is placed on the tenants. Chair Adcock asked Mr. Gill what he would do with the property if this application were not approved. Mr. Gill noted that he would look into building a duplex on each lot and explained. He noted that the four units in one building would be a better solution. 7 August 3, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6883 Jim Lawson, Director of Planning and Development, noted that the property would have to be rezoned for duplex structures. Commissioner Lowry asked if Mr. Gill would amend the application to have the driveway from "J" Street only serve the 6 -unit and 4 -unit buildings, with the drive from "I" Street only serving the duplex structure. Mr. Gill stated that he would amend the application. Commissioner Berry offered additional comments regarding access and parking. The density for multifamily land use and this property was briefly discussed. Commissioner Muse noted concern with the size of the property and the proposed density. Commissioner Rector questioned having the drive from "I" Street at all. Commissioner Berry responded that it would provide off- street parking to the duplex structure. This issue was briefly discussed. Commissioner Rector asked if the existing parking area would be improved with adding more parking. Mr. Gill noted that the existing parking would be upgraded. The issue of having more off-street parking was briefly discussed. Commissioner Rector asked Mr. Gill why a four-plex was proposed instead of a duplex., Mr. Gill noted that two units would not be cost effective. He noted that trees would have to be removed regardless of what was constructed on the property. He also noted that he would eliminate the drive onto "I" Street. Commissioner Rector noted that there should be no driveway onto "I" Street. Mr. Gill noted that he would amend the application to remove the driveway onto "I" Street and the three southernmost parking spaces. Mr. Lawson discussed other options that were available to Mr. Gill and discussed the staff concerns with the proposed development (density, building orientation, etc.). The design issues associated with the parking area were briefly discussed. 8 August 3, 2000 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 3 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6883 Commissioner Faust asked the City Attorney if the land use plan amendment was necessary for the PRD rezoning. Stephen Giles, City Attorney, noted that the land use plan would not have to be changed in order to approve the PRD. This issue was briefly discussed. Commissioner Rector noted that Mr. Gill needed to eliminate the "I" Street driveway and the three southernmost parking spaces from the site plan and work out a turnaround with staff. Mr. Gill agreed to the changes. Mr. Robertson expressed additional concerns with the "I" Street driveway. Mr. Thompson asked what the parking requirements were. Staff noted that the typical parking requirement was 18 spaces and eliminating the three spaces would leave 17 spaces. A motion was made to approve the PRD, with the site plan amendments as agreed to by Mr. Gill. The motion included a waiver of the street improvements to "I" and "J" Streets. Staff noted that Public Works supported the waiver of street Improvements and that no additional right-of-way dedication was required. The motion passed with a vote of 6 ayes, 3 nays and 2 absent.