Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7421-A Staff AnalysisApril 22, 20C SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18.1 Coat. FILE NO.: Z-7421 -A feet nine inches. Staff stated any further reductions would take approval of the City Beautiful Commission. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant has submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing issues raised at the April 1, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the buildings will be constructed of brick and painted antique white with cast stone accents. The applicant has also. indicated metal storefronts with canvas awnings will be used. The applicant has indicated signage will be placed on both the front and rear of the buildings. The applicant has indicated facade signage with a maximum letter or logo height no greater than sixty inches. The applicant is also requesting the sign area be allowed at a .factor of .75 square feet for every one -foot of width of the building or lease space per face with a maximum of forty sgu_a_ re_feet. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. i— The applicant has indicated four monument signs will be located on the site. The applicant has indicated the maximum height will be 15 -feet and the maximum area is proposed at 100 square feet. The signs will be located at the entrances to the development along street sides. The applicant would typically be allowed freestanding signs. a maximum of thirty six feet in height and one hundred sixty square feet in area for commercial development. The proposed height of the proposed signage is somewhat less than what is allowable. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated 572 on-site parking spaces. Based on the typical minimum parking requirements for a shopping center development, the proposed parking would also be 572 parking spaces. Staff is supportive of the proposed parking. The applicant has located the dumpsters on the site plan near the streets. Typically the ordinance requires trash receptacles and pickup be oriented away from the street side of the property and adequately screened from residential property. The applicant has indicated screening will be provided with a six foot high opaque fence. Staff has concerns with the placement near the street and the applicant not providing details concerning the proposed screening material. The applicant has indicated an out parcel on the proposed site plan. The applicant has also indicated if the out parcel is not secured, the development will be constructed in phases. The applicant has not provided a site plan to include f�(5� See_� � 4953- 6��=� April 22, 20C j SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18.1 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7421 -A feet nine inches. Staff stated any further reductions would take approval of the City Beautiful Commission. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant has submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing issues raised at the April 1, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the buildings will be constructed of brick and painted antique white with cast stone accents. The applicant has also, indicated metal storefronts with canvas awnings will be used. The applicant has indicated signage will be placed on both the front and rear of the buildings. The applicant has indicated fagade signage with a maximum letter or logo height no greater than sixty inches. The applicant is also requesting the sign area be allowed at a factor of .75 square feet for every one -foot of width of the building or lease space per face with.a maximum of forty square feet. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated four monument signs will be located on the site. The applicant has indicated the maximum height will be 15 -feet and the maximum area is proposed at 100 square feet. The signs will be located at the entrances to the development along street sides. The applicant would typically be allowed freestanding signs a maximum of thirty six feet in height and one hundred sixty square feet in area for commercial development. The proposed height of the proposed signage is somewhat less than what is allowable. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated 572 on-site parking spaces. Based on the typical minimum parking requirements for a shopping center development, the proposed parking would also be 572 parking spaces. Staff is supportive of the proposed parking. The applicant has located the dumpsters on the site plan near the streets. Typically the ordinance requires trash receptacles and pickup be oriented away from the street side of the property and adequately screened from residential property. The applicant has indicated screening will be provided with a six foot high opaque fence. Staff has concerns with the placement near the street and the applicant not providing details concerning the proposed screening material. The applicant has indicated an out parcel on the proposed site plan. The applicant has also indicated if the out parcel is not secured, the development will be constructed in phases. The applicant has not provided a site plan to include 7 April 22, 20C SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18.1 FILE NO.: Z-7421 feet nine inches. Staff stated any further reductions would take approval of the City Beautiful Commission. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant has submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing issues raised at the April 1, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the buildings will be constructed of brick and painted antique white with cast stone accents. The applicant has also. indicated metal storefronts with canvas awnings will be used. The applicant has indicated signage will be placed on both the front and rear of the buildings. The applicant has indicated fagade signage with a maximum letter or logo height no greater than sixty inches. The applicant is also requesting the sign area be allowed at a factor of .75 square feet for every one -foot of width of the building or lease space per face with a maximum of forty square feet. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated four monument signs will be located on the site. The applicant has indicated the maximum height will be 15 -feet and the maximum area is proposed at 100 square feet. The signs will be located at the entrances to the development along street sides. The applicant would typically be allowed freestanding signs a maximum of thirty six feet in height and one hundred sixty square feet in area for commercial development. The proposed height of the proposed signage is somewhat less than what is allowable. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated 572 on-site parking spaces. Based on the typical minimum parking requirements for a shopping center development, the proposed parking would also be 572 parking spaces. Staff is supportive of the proposed parking. The applicant has located the dumpsters on the site plan near the streets. Typically the ordinance requires trash receptacles and pickup be oriented away from the street side of the property and adequately screened from residential property. The applicant has indicated screening will be provided with a six foot high opaque fence. Staff has concerns with the placement near the street and the applicant not providing details concerning the proposed screening material. The applicant has indicated an out parcel on the proposed site plan. The applicant has also indicated if the out parcel is not secured, the development will be constructed in phases. The applicant has not provided a site plan to include 7 April 22, kc- ) SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -7421-A feet nine inches. Staff stated any further reductions would take approval of the City Beautiful Commission. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant has submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing issues raised at the April 1, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the buildings will be constructed of brick and painted antique white with cast stone accents. The applicant has also. indicated metal storefronts with canvas awnings will be used. The applicant has indicated signage will be placed on both the front and rear of the buildings. The applicant has indicated fagade signage with a maximum letter or logo height no greater than sixty inches. The applicant is also requesting the sign area be allowed at a .factor of .75 square feet for every one -foot of width of the building or lease space per face with a maximum of forty square feet. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated four monument signs will be located on the site. The applicant has indicated the maximum height will be 15 -feet and the maximum area is proposed at 100 square feet. The signs will be located at the entrances to the development along street sides. The applicant would typically be allowed freestanding signs a maximum of thirty six feet in height and one hundred sixty square feet in area for commercial development. The proposed height of the proposed signage is somewhat less than what is allowable. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated 572 on-site parking spaces. Based on the typical minimum parking requirements for a shopping center development, the proposed parking would also be 572 parking spaces. Staff is supportive of the proposed parking. The applicant has located the dumpsters on the site plan near the streets. Typically the ordinance requires trash receptacles and pickup be oriented away from the street side of the property and adequately screened from residential property. The applicant has indicated screening will be provided with a six foot high opaque fence. Staff has concerns with the placement near the street and the applicant not providing details concerning the proposed screening material. The applicant has indicated an out parcel on the proposed site plan. The applicant has also indicated if the out parcel is not secured, the development will be constructed in phases. The applicant has not provided a site plan to include 7 April 22, 20C ) SUBDIVISION O.: 18.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7421 -A feet nine inches. Staff stated any further reductions would take approval of the City Beautiful Commission. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant has submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing issues raised at the April 1, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the buildings will be constructed of brick and painted antique white with cast stone accents. The applicant has also, indicated metal storefronts with canvas awnings will be used. The applicant has indicated signage will be placed on both the front and rear of the buildings. The applicant has indicated facade signage with a maximum letter or logo height no greater than sixty inches. The applicant is also requesting the sign area be allowed at a .factor of .75 square feet for every one -foot of width of the building or lease space per face with.a maximum of forty square feet. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated four monument signs will be located on the site. The applicant has indicated the maximum height will be 15 -feet and the maximum area is proposed at 100 square feet. The signs will be located at the entrances to the development along street sides. The applicant would typically be allowed freestanding signs a maximum of thirty six feet in height and one hundred sixty square feet in area for commercial development. The proposed height of the proposed signage is somewhat less than what is allowable. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated 572 on-site parking spaces. Based on the typical minimum parking requirements for a shopping center development, the proposed parking would also be 572 parking spaces. Staff is supportive of the proposed parking. The applicant has located the dumpsters on the site plan near the streets. Typically the ordinance requires trash receptacles and pickup be oriented away from the street side of the property and adequately screened from residential property. The applicant has indicated screening will be provided with a six foot high opaque fence. Staff has concerns with the placement near the street and the applicant not providing details concerning the proposed screening material. The applicant has indicated an out parcel on the proposed site plan. The applicant has also indicated if the out parcel is not secured, the development will be constructed in phases. The applicant has not provided a site plan to include 7 April 22, 20C } SUBDIVISION O.: 18.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-742 feet nine inches. Staff stated any further reductions would take approval of the City Beautiful Commission. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant has submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing issues raised at the April 1, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the buildings will be constructed of brick and painted antique white with cast stone accents. The applicant has also, indicated metal storefronts with canvas awnings will be used. The applicant has indicated signage will be placed on both the front and rear of l the buildings. The applicant has indicated facade signage with a maximum letter or logo height no greater than sixty inches. The applicant is also requesting the sign area be allowed at a .factor of .75 square feet for every one -foot of width of the building or lease space per face with a maximum of forty square feet. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated four monument signs will be located on the site. The applicant has indicated the maximum height will be 15 -feet and the maximum area is proposed at 100 square feet. The signs will be located at the entrances to the development along street sides. The applicant would typically be allowed freestanding signs a maximum of thirty six feet in height and one hundred sixty square feet in area for commercial development. The proposed height of the proposed signage is somewhat less than what is allowable. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated 572 on-site parking spaces. Based on the typical minimum parking requirements for a shopping center development, the proposed parking would also be 572 parking spaces. Staff is supportive of the proposed parking. The applicant has located the dumpsters on the site plan near the streets. Typically the ordinance requires trash receptacles and pickup be oriented away from the street side of the property and adequately screened from residential property. The applicant has indicated screening will be provided with a six foot high opaque fence. Staff has concerns with the placement near the street and the applicant not providing details concerning the proposed screening material. The applicant has indicated an out parcel on the proposed site plan. The applicant has also indicated if the out parcel is not secured, the development will be constructed in phases. The applicant has not provided a site plan to include 7 April 22, 20C SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18.1 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z-7421 -A feet nine inches. Staff stated any further reductions would take approval of the City Beautiful Commission. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant has submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing issues raised at the April 1, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the buildings will be constructed of brick and painted antique white with cast stone accents. The applicant has also. indicated metal storefronts with canvas awnings will be used. The applicant has indicated signage will be placed on both the front and rear of the buildings. The applicant has indicated fagade signage with a maximum letter or logo height no greater than sixty inches. The applicant is also requesting the sign area be allowed at a factor of .75 square feet for every one -foot of width of the building or lease space per face with a maximum of forty square feet. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated four monument signs will be located on the -site. The applicant has indicated the maximum height will be 15 -feet and the maximum area is proposed at 100 square feet. The signs will be located at the entrances to the development along street sides. The applicant would typically be allowed freestanding signs a maximum of thirty six feet in height and one hundred sixty square feet in area for commercial development. The proposed height of the proposed signage is somewhat less than what is allowable. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated 572 on-site parking spaces. Based on the typical minimum parking requirements for a shopping center development, the proposed parking would also be 572 parking spaces. Staff is supportive of the proposed parking. The applicant has located the dumpsters on the site plan near the streets. Typically the ordinance requires trash receptacles and pickup be oriented away from the street side of the property and adequately screened from residential property. The applicant has indicated screening will be provided with a six foot high opaque fence. Staff has concerns with the placement near the street and the applicant not providing details concerning the proposed screening material. The applicant has indicated an out parcel on the proposed site plan. The applicant has also indicated if the out parcel is not secured, the development will be constructed in phases. The applicant has not provided a site plan to include 7 April 22, 20C SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7421 -A feet nine inches. Staff stated any further reductions would take approval of the City Beautiful Commission. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant has submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing issues raised at the April 1, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the buildings will be constructed of brick and painted antique white with cast stone accents. The applicant has also, indicated metal storefronts with canvas awnings will be used. The applicant has indicated signage will be placed on both the front and rear of the buildings. The applicant has indicated fagade signage with a maximum letter or logo height no greater than sixty inches. The applicant is also requesting the sign area be allowed at a factor of .75 square feet for every one -foot of width of the building or lease space per face with a maximum of forty square feet. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated four monument signs will be located on the site. The applicant has indicated the maximum height will be 15 -feet and the maximum area is proposed at 100 square feet. The signs will be located at the entrances to the development along street sides. The applicant would typically be allowed freestanding signs a maximum of thirty six feet in height and one hundred sixty square feet in area for commercial development. The proposed height of the proposed signage is somewhat less than what is allowable. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated 572 on-site parking spaces. Based on the typical minimum parking requirements for a shopping center development, the proposed parking would also be 572 parking spaces. Staff is supportive of the proposed parking. The applicant has located the dumpsters on the site plan near the streets. Typically the ordinance requires trash receptacles and pickup be oriented away from the street side of the property and adequately screened from residential property. The applicant has indicated screening will be provided with a six foot high opaque fence. Staff has concerns with the placement near the street and the applicant not providing details concerning the proposed screening material. The applicant has indicated an out parcel on the proposed site plan. The applicant has also indicated if the out parcel is not secured, the development will be constructed in phases. The applicant has not provided a site plan to include 7 April 22, 20C j SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18.1. (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7421 feet nine inches. Staff stated any further reductions would take approval of the City Beautiful Commission. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant has submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing issues raised at the April 1, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the buildings will be constructed of brick and painted antique white with cast stone accents. The applicant has also, indicated metal storefronts with canvas awnings will be used. The applicant has indicated signage will be placed on both the front and rear of the buildings. The applicant has indicated facade signage with a maximum letter or logo height no greater than sixty inches. The applicant is also requesting the sign area be allowed at a factor of .75 square feet for every one -foot of width of the building or lease space per face with a maximum of forty square feet. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated four monument signs will be located on the site. The applicant has indicated the maximum height will be 15 -feet and the maximum area is proposed at 100 square feet. The signs will be located at the entrances to the development along street sides. The applicant would typically be allowed freestanding signs a maximum of thirty six feet in height and one hundred sixty square feet in area for commercial development. The proposed height of the proposed signage is somewhat less than what is allowable. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated 572 on-site parking spaces. Based on the typical minimum parking requirements for a shopping center development, the proposed parking would also be 572 parking spaces. Staff is supportive of the proposed parking. The applicant has located the dumpsters on the site plan near the streets. Typically the ordinance requires trash receptacles and pickup be oriented away from the street side of the property and adequately screened from residential property. The applicant has indicated screening will be provided with a six foot high opaque fence. Staff has concerns with the placement near the street and the applicant not providing details concerning the proposed screening material. The applicant has indicated an out parcel on the proposed site plan. The applicant has also indicated if the out parcel is not secured, the development will be constructed in phases. The applicant has not provided a site plan to include 7 April 22, 20C J ITEM NO.: 18.1 FILE NO.: Z -7421-A NAME: University Plaza Revised Long -form PCD LOCATION: on the Northeast corner of West Markham Street and North University Avenue DEVELOPER: Strode Property Company 5950 Berkshire Lane #1275 Dallas, TX 75225 FNGINFFR- White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 10.5 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 Zoning Lot FT. NEW STREET: 0 CURRENT ZONING: PCD, R-3, R-4, 0-3 ALLOWED USES: Retail, Single-family and Two -Family Residential and Office PROPOSED ZONING: PCD PROPOSED USE: Retail VARIANCESMAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Several zoning actions have taken place in this area from Board of Adjustment building line variances to actual rezoning action. The most recent was the approval of a PCD for 219 North University Avenue. That request was approved by the Board of Directors on July 16., 2002 (Ordinance No. 18,718). The site was zoned 0-3 and the applicant desired to rezone the site to PCato allow flexibility in order to provide quality tenants to serve the neighborhood area, utilizing the existing building. The PCD outlined specific uses allowed on the site (Z-7233). A second rezoning request was also for a PCD located between "B" and -"C" Streets on the east side of Universiity Avenue. The Board of Directors approved the request on August 29, 200,0 -..with Ordinance No. 18,335. The request was to rezone the site from April 22, 20C j SUBDIVISION ITEM NO_: 18.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -7421-A R -3/R-5 to PCD to allow for the construction of a 25,600 square foot commercial building along with 74 parking spaces. The applicant also proposed to realign "C" Street to line up with the Park Plaza access drive on the west side of University Avenue. The applicant proposed the hours of operation to be from 9:00 am to 9:00 pm Monday through Saturday and from 10:00 am to 8:00 pm on Sunday. The Board of Adjustment approved the use of 5909 and 5911 "C' Street as a commercial parking lot on residentially zoned property on June 17, 1991. The parking lot serves employees and patients of Gastroenterology Associates P.A. The proposed parking lot was not a part of the approved PCD. A rezoning request from various zoning classifications to -PCD to allow a two phases development located between West Markham Street and "C" Street and Pierce Street and University Avenue was approved by the Planning Commission at their June 26, 2003 Public Hearing. The development was proposed as a mixed-use development complete with residential, office and commercial uses. The request reviewed and the area rezoned was the Phase I portion of the development. The Phase II portion of the development was to be reviewed by the Commission -as the development plans become imminent. Phase I consisted of three commercial buildings containing a total of 49,030 square feet of gross floor space. The development also contained 255 parking spaces located on a total of 5.3 acres. The applicant proposed the realignment of "C" Street from the current location to the south to align with the existing traffic signal on University Avenue at the access drive to Park Plaza Mall. The applicant also proposed the abandonment of portions of "A" Street and "B" Street and the portion of "C" Street, which would be realigned. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The proposed development now contains 10.5 acres located at the northeast corner of University Avenue and West Markham Street. The project is proposed with 107,300 square feet of retail space plus 21,800 square feet of restaurant space. Parking will be provided at 586 spaces. Portions of A, B and C Street will be closed with the proposed application. Also, public utilities that lie within these rights-of-way will be relocated to fit the proposed development. Existing utility easements will be abandoned and new easements provided as required. The applicant has indicated necessary Master Street Plan requirements for adjacent streets will be constructed. The applicant has also indicated a right -turn lane will be provided at the West Markham Street entrance. 0r April 22, 20C SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18.1 (Cont. NO.: Z-7421 -A The fronts of the buildings are proposed to face to the interior to create a village type atmosphere. The applicant has indicated the rear of the buildings will be tastefully constructed in brick to provide a pleasing appearance from the adjoining streets. The applicant has indicated four sign locations. The signs are proposed as a maximum of fifteen feet in height and one hundred square feet in area. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The area contains existing single-family, multi -family and non-residential uses. Located in the previous Phase I boundaries the single-family homes, office/retail uses and duplex housing are in the process of being removed. There is a large multi -family complex located on "C" Street just east of the development and the St. Vincent Day Care facility is located on "A" Street just east of the development. Other uses in the area include the Park Plaza Mall, the University Mall, the I -HOP Restaurant and St. Vincent Hospital. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has not received any comment from area residents. The Hillcrest Residents Neighborhood Association along with all owners of property located within 200 feet of the site and all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site were notified of the Public Hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. University Avenue is classified on the Master Street Plan as a principal arterial. An 8 -foot additional dedication is proposed on the southern portion of the project, that new right-of-way line should be extended northward to C Street. 2. The proposed land use would classify C Street and Pierce Street on the Master Street Plan as a commercial Street. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 -feet from centerline. No right-of-way is shown for re -located C Street, and a right-of-way 15 -feet from center is shown for Pierce. These streets will function as major commercial access points for the development. 3. The proposed land use would classify B Street on the Master Street Plan as a minor commercial street. Dedicate right-of-way 25 -feet from centerline. In addition, a tee or ell turn -around should be dedicated as this street will still serve other property. 4. Provide design of street conforming to the Master Street Plan. Construct one-half street improvements to the street including 5 -foot sidewalk with the 3 April 22, 20C SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -7421-A planned development. Pierce and C Street should be constructed to commercial street standards, B Street to a minor commercial street standard. 5. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk this is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 6. Plans for all work in the right-of-way shall be submitted and approved prior to the start of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from Traffic Engineering (501) 379-1817 (Derrick Bergfield). 7. A grading permit in accordance with Section 29-186 (c) and (d) will be required prior to any land clearing or grading activities at the site. Site grading and drainage plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 8. Storm water detention ordinance applies to this property. Detention design will also need to consider down -stream drainage capacity. 9. Plans for street improvements, traffic signal modifications, signage and striping must be approved by Traffic Engineering prior to construction. 10. Because of the volume of traffic and number lanes at this location, the new driveway on Markham Street will need to be built with an directional island for right turn out only. Pierce Street should have a 36 -foot minimum width, three lane section at the intersection. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required, with easements, if service is required for the project. Existing sewer mains shall be relocated at the developer's expense. Contact Little Rock Wastewater at 688-1414 for additional details. Entergy: No comment received. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. SBC: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Central Arkansas Water requests that the existing right-of-way of C Street be retained as a utility easement to accommodate and existing 3 -inch water main. All other existing on- site public water facilities will be abandoned. If there are facilities that need to be adjusted and/or relocated, contact Central Arkansas Water. That work would be done at the expense of the developer. Central Arkansas Water may salvage some items. The facilities on-site will be private. When meters are planned off private lines, private facilities shall be installed to Central Arkansas Water's material and construction specifications and installation will be inspected by an engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Arkansas. Execution of Customer 51 April 22, 20C } SUBDIVISION EM NO.: 18.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -7421-A Owned Line Agreement is required. Additional fire hydrant(s) will be required. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department to obtain information regarding the required placement of the hydrant(s) and contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of the hydrant(s). This development will have minor impact on the existing water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. Contact Central Arkansas Water at 992-2438 for additional information. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No comment received. CATA: No comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: This request is located in the Heights Hillcrest Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Multifamily and Office for this property. The applicant has applied for a Planned Commercial Development for a commercial development. A land use plan amendment for a change to Community Shopping is a separate item on this agenda. City Recognized Nei hborhood Action Plan: The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Action Plan. The applicant's property lies in the area covered by the Hillcrest Neighborhood Plan a "Blueprint" of our Community. The list of supplemental issues listed a land use objective of encouraging new buildings to relate to the architecture of the neighborhood and a community development objective stating that commercial uses should not be open later than midnight. The Zoning & Land Use chapter listed a goal of enforcing the city's land -use and zoning policies to preserve the unique scale of the neighborhood. Landscape: The street buffer width proposed along a portion of "C" Street is less than the 13 -foot minimum ordinance standard. Additionally, the street buffer width along a portion of Pierce Street is less than the 11 -foot minimum. It is also below the 6 -foot 9 -inch minimum allowed by the Landscape Ordinance. Portions of the proposed land use buffer width along the eastern perimeter and around the perimeters of the outparcels is less than the 6 -foot 9 -inch minimums required by zoning and landscaping ordinances. A 6 -foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is a requirement that goes with the land use buffers. IR April 22, 20C SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18.1 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -7421-A An irrigation system to water landscape areas will be required. Prior to obtaining a construction permit, it will be necessary to provide landscape plans stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. All these requirements take into account the reductions allowed within the designated mature area of the city. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (April 1, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. Staff stated the request was to revise a previously approved PCD to allow an expansion of the proposed site plan. Staff stated the development included the previously indicated Phase II portion of the site plan. Staff requested additional information be included to complete the review. Staff requested the applicant provide locations for pedestrian access points through the parking areas. Staff also requested the applicant indicate on the site plan all proposed signage. Staff stated typically signage was only allowed on the fronts of buildings and if the applicant was requesting signage along North University Avenue a request to place the signage would be required. Staff also stated the sign area was required. Staff requested building elevations both front and rear. Staff stated the proposed building materials were also required. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the proposed development would require dedication of right-of-way consistent with the Master Street Plan for Pierce and B Street. Staff stated they were supportive of a reduced standard along North University Avenue as indicated on the site plan. Staff stated the indicated street closures would require total ownership of all abutting parcels. Staff stated with the indicated out parcel, A Street could not be abandoned for the entire length. Staff stated the proposed driveway along West Markham Street should be maintained as a right -in right -out drive. Mr. White stated the desire was for a full access intersection. Staff stated the applicant had to provide information relating to sight distance and turn movements to prove the full access drive was not hazardous. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the indicated areas appeared to meet with the ordinance requirements with a few exceptions. Staff stated the minimum street buffer was six feet nine inches required by the Landscape Ordinance. Staff stated the zoning ordinance required a minimum thirteen foot buffer but the Commission could reduce the required buffer to the six 6 April 22, 20C SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -7421-A feet nine inches. Staff stated any further reductions would take approval of the City Beautiful Commission. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant has submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing issues raised at the April 1, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting. The applicant has indicated the buildings will be constructed of brick and painted antique white with cast stone accents. The applicant has also indicated metal storefronts with canvas awnings will be used. The applicant has indicated signage will be placed on both the front and rear of the buildings. The applicant has indicated facade signage with a maximum letter or logo height no greater than sixty inches. The applicant is also requesting the sign area be allowed at a factor of .75 square feet for every one -foot of width of the building or lease space per face with a maximum of forty square feet. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated four monument signs will be located on the site. The applicant has indicated the maximum height will be 15 -feet and the maximum area is proposed at 100 square feet. The signs will be located at the entrances to the development along street sides. The applicant would typically be allowed freestanding signs a maximum of thirty six feet in height and one hundred sixty square feet in area for commercial development. The proposed height of the proposed signage is somewhat less than what is allowable. Staff is supportive of the proposed signage. The applicant has indicated 572 on-site parking spaces. Based on the typical minimum parking requirements for a shopping center development, the proposed parking would also be 572 parking spaces. Staff is supportive of the proposed parking. The applicant has located the dumpsters on the site plan near the streets. Typically the ordinance requires trash receptacles and pickup be oriented away from the street side of the property and adequately screened from residential property. The applicant has indicated screening will be provided with a six foot high opaque fence. Staff has concerns with the placement near the street and the applicant not providing details concerning the proposed screening material. The applicant has indicated an out parcel on the proposed site plan. The applicant has also indicated if the out parcel is not secured, the development will be constructed in phases. The applicant has not provided a site plan to include 7 April 22, 20C } SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18.1 (Cont.) FILE NO.; Z -7421-A the phasing line. Staff has concerns regarding the phasing plan without first seeing a proposed phase line. The applicant has bordered the out parcel with landscaping and screening as requested by staff. The applicant has indicated the screening will be provided with a six foot high opaque screen and the minimum buffering will be put in place to protect the single-family property. The applicant has indicated on the site plan areas for outdoor dining. The applicant has indicated outdoor dining areas for each of the six restaurants. The outdoor dining is located away from existing residential properties. Staff is supportive of the outdoor dining as proposed. Staff recommends there be no outdoor music which could spill out into the neighborhood. The applicant has indicated a full access drive on West Markham Street. The proposed drive meets the minimum spacing requirement to allow a full service drive in this area but staff has some serious concerns with the placement of a full service drive in this location. Staff feels the placement of a full service drive in this location will cause traffic to back up on east bound West Markham Street. Staff also has concerns with customers exiting the site to travel east bound and sight distance problems. The applicant has not provided to staff the requested sight distance information to allow the drive to provide full service activity. Staff recommends the drive on West Markham Street be a right-in/right-out only driveway or the applicant provide the requested information with regard to sight distance and provide the required additional improvements to not allow the backing of cars on West Markham Street. The applicant has indicated street improvements to Pierce Street will be constructed as requested by staff. Half of a thirty=six foot street will be constructed from the first entrance south and a thirty-one foot street will be constructed from the first entrance north to B Street. The applicant has indicated the streets will be constructed in a fifty -foot right-of-way with a ten foot utility easement. Staff is supportive of this design. The applicant has not increased the right-of-way for B Street. Staff has concerns with the existing right-of-way. Staff does not feel the development of B Street to less than commercial street standard is acceptable. The applicant has indicated landscaped areas on the proposed site plan. The applicant has not indicated the required street buffers or land use buffers with regard to landscaping. The required landscaping along a portion of "C" Street is less than the 13 -foot minimum ordinance standard. Additionally, the street buffer width along a portion of Pierce Street is less than the 11 -foot minimum. The proposed buffer is also below the 6 -foot 9 -inch minimum allowed by the Landscape Ordinance. Staff is not supportive of the reduced landscaping and feels the applicant should adjust the plan to increase the buffers to the minimum required. E:3 April 22, 200• SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 18.1(Cont.)FILE NO.: Z -7421-A The applicant has indicated pedestrian access through the site as requested by staff. The accesses are located at the ends of parking rows and drive isles. The applicant has indicated the pedestrian accesses will be placed in the landscape areas. The islands will be a minimum of 12.7 feet; sufficient for the placement of a sidewalk and landscaping. In addition the applicant has indicated the pedestrian walkways will be elevated to act as traffic claming device within the site. Staff is supportive of the proposed development in basic concept. The developer has worked to meet the intent of the ULI Study recently preformed on the area. Staff feels the proposed development is workable and with minor "tweaking" the development will more closely conform to the minimum requirements of various ordinances. There are outstanding technical issues related to the site staff will continue to work to resolve. Staff is very sensitive to the limitations put in place when redeveloping with an in -fill project. Staff's recommendation is forthcoming. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff is supportive of the basic concept of the proposed development. Staff's final recommendation is forthcoming. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 22, 2004) The applicant was present representing the request. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the above report. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the requested signage plan, a recommendation of approval of the reduced right-of-way for "B" Street, staff recommended there be no outdoor music on the proposed patio and the drive on West Markham Street be dedicated as a right-in/right-:out driveway. Staff also presented a recommendation of approval for the abandonment of portions of "A", "B" and "C" Streets. There was no further discussion of the item. The Chair placed the item on the consent agenda for approval. The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. t