Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-8472-B Staff AnalysisFILE NO.: Z-8472-B NAME: Mid -Towne at Fair Park Revised Long -form PCD LOCATION: Located on the Southwest corner of 1-630 and Fair Park Boulevard DEVELOPER: AA Development Attn. Scott Richburg 12911 Cantrell Road, Suite 7-118 Little Rock, AR 72223 ENGINEER: Richburg Services Group Attn. Scott Richburg 12911 Cantrell Road, Suite 7-118 Little Rock, AR 72223 Crafton Tull Sparks Attn. Barry Williams 10825 Financial Center Parkway, Suite 300 Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 6.31 acres CURRENT ZONING: ALLOWED USES. PROPOSED ZONING PROPOSED USE: NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 Lots PCD Hotel, Restaurant, Parking lot Revised PCD FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF Add convenience store with gas pumps VARIANCESfWAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND - Ordinance No. 20,150 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on September 1, 2009, rezoned an overall development plan for this site from R-3, R-6, 0-1 and C-3 to PCC. T;+6 project consisted of a redevelopment of a number of blocks located within FILE NO.: Z-8472-B Cont. the Perry Heights Subdivision. The abandonment of right of way for a portion of Maryland Avenue, South Taylor Street and Fillmore Street along with the alleys within the area was also approved by the Board of Directors through the adoption of Ordinance No. 20,151. The developers reconstructed portions of Maryland Avenue and South Taylor Street and created a five lot subdivision. The approved uses were a hotel, a drive-in restaurant, a drive -through restaurant and two new parking facilities to support St. Mark's Baptist Church. The building proposed for Lot 5 contained approximately 4,000 square feet with 61 parking spaces. The building was proposed as a drive -through restaurant. The building proposed for Lot 4 contained approximately 1,200 square feet and 39 parking spaces. The development was proposed as a drive-in restaurant. The building proposed for Lot 3 was proposed as a four (4) story 81-room hotel with 90 parking spaces. The request included the allowance of C-3, General Commercial District uses as allowable alternative uses for the site. The maximum building height approved as 55 feet. Lot 2 was proposed containing 67 parking spaces and Lot 1 containing 158 parking spaces to serve the church. The new parking areas have been constructed. The remainder of the development as not occurred. The signage plan was approved with 36-foot tall pylon signs containing 160 square feet in area for Lots 3 — 5 (individual signs) adjacent to 1-630. A single ground mounted monument sign was approved for each of the lots along Maryland Avenue/South Taylor Street. The monument signs approved allowed a maximum height of ten (10) feet and 100 square feet in area. Building signage approved was on the facades of the buildings with street frontages. A wall sign was proposed on the western fagade of the proposed hotel building. This fagade did not have public street frontage. The maximum wall signage coverage approved was ten (10) percent of the fagade area. A variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow grading of the entire five (5) lot development with the issuance of a building permit for one or more lots was approved by the Planning Commission on July 23, 2009. The grading of the lots did occur with the development of the parking lots serving St. Mark's Church. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT'S STATEMENT The applicant is now requesting an amendment to the previously approved PCD zoning for Lots 3, 4 and 5 of the Mid -Town at Fair Park Subdivision. The amendment is to allow the development of Lot 5 with a convenience store with gas pumps, a sit-down restaurant on Lot 4 and a four (4) story hotel on Lot 3 containing 62 rooms. The lots sizes have been reduced for Lots 3 and 4 to accommodate the land area required for Lot 5. A shared parking and access agreement between the three (3) lots will serve the development. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: This area of the City contains a mixture of uses including commercial, residential, warehouse, church activities and a cemetery. Across Fair Park Boulevard is a property zoned PCD which contains a restaurant building, a hotel and a convenience store.. South of the site on the west side of Fair Park Boulevard St. Mark's Church as removed a number of buildings to allow for future 2 FILE NO.: Z-8472-B (Cont. expansion of the church. On the east side of Fair Park Boulevard are vacant and occupied single-family residences. Along West 10`h Street on the north side is a refrigeration company, a plumbing warehouse, mini -storage a multi -story office building and a hotel. On the south side of West 10;" Street are church related uses, the sanctuary of St. Mark's Baptist Church, a cemetery and a multi -story office building. Both West 10th Street and Fair Park Boulevard appear to have been constructed to Master Street Plan standard. Maryland Avenue has been reconstructed to City standards complete with curb, gutter and sidewalk extending from Fair Park Boulevard to West 10tt' Street. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from the area property owners. All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site, the Fair Park Residents Association, the Oak Forest Initiative Collation and the War Memorial Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 2. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES stormwater permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 3. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. Driveway spacing on a minor arterial street is 300 feet from other street and driveways and 150 feet from the property line. The proposed driveway off Fair Park Boulevard does not meet those standards and cannot be installed. The width of driveway must not exceed 36 feet. 4. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner). 5. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show proposed location of the detention facility. 6. On site striping and signage plans should be forwarded to Public Works, Traffic Engineering for approval with the site development package. 3 FILE NO.: Z-8472-B(Cont.) E. UTILITIES AND FIRE ❑EPARTMENTICOUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer is available to this project. Enter - Easements are required around the sites perimeters. Contact Entergy for additional information. Center -Point Ener : No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: A water main extension will be required to provide water service to this property. All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Due to the nature of this facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly (RPS) is required on the domestic water service. This assembly must be installed prior to the first point of use. Central Arkansas Water (CAW) requires that upon installation of the PRZ assembly, successful tests of the assembly must be completed by a Certified Assembly Tester licensed by the State of Arkansas and approved by CAW. The test results must be sent to CAW's Cross Connection Section within ten days of installation and annually thereafter. Contact the Cross Connection Section at 377-1226 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the developer's expense. Please submit plans for water facilities to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revisions may be required after additional review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of water facilities. Approval of plans by Central Arkansas Water, the Department of Health Engineering Division and the Little Rock Fire Department is required. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding the size and location of the water meter. A Capital Investment Change based on the size of meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all connections including metered connections off the private fire system. 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. 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 Owned Line Agreement is required. Fire Department, Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional information. County Planninq: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. 0 FILE NO.: Z-8472-B Cont. Parks and Recreation: No comment. F. ISS UESITECH N I CALID ESI GN : Planning Division: This request is located in the 1-630 Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use for this property. Mixed Use allows any combination of residential, office or commercial use or just one of these uses as long as a Planned Zoning District is used for the review of the application. The applicant has applied for a revision to an existing Planned Commercial District to change the uses from Hotel and two restaurants to Hotel, restaurant and convenience store. Master Street Plan: The application is along Fair Park Boulevard, which is a Minor Arterial. A Minor Arterial provides connections to and through an urban area and their primary function is to provide short distance travel within the urbanized area. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Fair Park Boulevard since it is a Minor Arterial. The street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bicycle Plan: A Class III bike route is shown along Fair Park Boulevard. A Class III bikeway is a signed route on a street shared with traffic. No additional paving or right-of-way is required. Class III bicycle route signage may be required. Landscape: 1. The site plan must comply with the City's landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. The development was reviewed as an overall development plan containing a five -lot development requiring each of the individual lots to contain an automatic irrigation system at the time of development. 3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit a landscape plan must be submitted to the City. The development is being reviewed as an overall development plan therefore each of the lots will require a landscape plan stamped with the seal of a registered landscape architect at the time of building permit. 4. The landscape ordinance requires a nine (9) foot wide perimeter landscape strip around the sites entirety. A variance from the City Beautiful Commission must be obtained prior to the issuance of a building permit. 5. Interior landscape islands are required to be provided. The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of eight percent (8%) of the paved areas be landscaped with interior islands of at least 7 '/2 feet in width and 150 square feet in area. The interior islands must be evenly distributed throughout the site. 6. building landscaping will be required with the proposed development. 5 FILE NO.: Z-8472-B Cont. 7. Dumpster, loading docks, heating and air conditioning units, external storage of materials, communications equipment and similar outside activities and appurtenances must be screened from abutting properties and streets. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 17, 2011) Mr. Scott Richberg and Mr. Frank Riggins were present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the development stating there were a number of outstanding technical issues in need of addressing prior to the Commission acting on the request. Staff stated the site plan for the hotel did not allow for adequate parking to serve an 81 roo[ri hotel. Staff also stated the previous approval provided for enhanced landscaping and features along Fair Park Boulevard that the current site plan did not indicate. Staff questioned the proposed signage stating the previous approval allowed monument signage along Maryland Street and pole signage along 1-630. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the drive on Fair Park Boulevard did not meet the spacing requirement of the ordinances and would not be allowed. Staff stated the stormwater detention ordinance would apply to the development of the site. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the development was reviewed as an overall development plan therefore a landscape plan and irrigation would be required with the development. Staff stated interior landscape islands were required with the development. Staff stated the islands should be evenly distributed throughout the site. Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (March 31, 2011) Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request. Mr. Daters stated he wanted to provide the Commission with an update on the plan. He stated the engineer, and developers had been working to develop a site plan which limited the lines of sight into the development and provided sufficient landscaping along Fair Park Boulevard to screen the use from the street. There was no further discussion of the item. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan addressing a number of the issues raised at the February 17, 2011, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised plan has removed the drive from Fair Park Boulevard, reduced the number of rooms for the proposed hotel and identified the signage plan. 0 FILE NO.: Z-8472-B(Cont.) The request is an amendment to the previously approved PC❑ zoning for Lots 3, 4 and 5 of the Mid -Town at Fair Park Subdivision. The amendment is to allow the development of Lot 5 with a convenience store with gas pumps, a sit-down restaurant is proposed for Lot 4 and a four (4) story hotel containing 62 rooms is proposed for Lot 3. The lots sizes have been reduced for Lots 3 and 4 to accommodate the land area required for Lot 5. Lot 3 is proposed containing 1.74 acres, Lot 4 containing 0.67 acres and Lot 5 containing 1.60 acres. A shared parking and access agreement between the three (3) lots will serve the development. The hotel is proposed containing 62 rooms and 66 parking spaces. The building area is 16.000 square feet. The hotel is proposed with a maximum building height of 55-feet. Parking for a hotel is based on one space per room plus ten (10) percent for ancillary services. Based on the typical ordinance standards 68 parking spaces would typically be required. The site will develop with cross access and cross parking. Based on this fact staff does not feel the reduced number of spaces will significantly impact the development. The restaurant is indicated with 2,000 square feet and 39 parking spaces. Based on the typical parking required for a restaurant use a total of 20 parking spaces would typically be required. The parking as proposed is more than adequate to serve the use. The site plan indicates a maximum building height of 35-feet. The convenience store is proposed containing 4,958 square feet and 37 parking spaces. Based on the typical parking required for a commercial use a total of 16 parking spaces would typically be required. The parking as proposed is more than adequate to serve the development. The site plan indicates a maximum building height of 35-feet. As per the originally approved PCD each of the lots will be served by a pole sign located along 1-630 and a monument sign located on Maryland Avenue. The pole signs are proposed with a maximum height of 36-feet and a maximum sign area of 160 square feet. The monument signs are proposed with a maximum height of ten feet and a maximum sign area of one hundred square feet. The development is proposed with enhanced landscaping along Fair Park Boulevard. Three inch caliper trees will be planted as required by the original approval and the shrub count will be increased by fifty percent. A sign easement will be provided at the intersection of Fair Park Boulevard and 1-630 to allow for future installation of a gateway feature. The applicant has provided staff with a line of sight from Fair Park Boulevard into the site. The plan indicates the placement of a berm along Fair Park Boulevard with shrubs located on top of the berm to aid in creating a visual barrier from the street into the site. Within the 12th Street Corridor Plan redevelopment areas with specific development criteria are identified. The intersection of Fair Park Boulevard and 1-630 is identified as a primary gateway into the 12th Street Corridor area. According to the plan primary gateways are to include additional streetscape and 7 FILE NO.: Z-8472-B (Cont. enhancements such as street trees, enhanced pedestrian crossings and special paving. This site is also identified as a T3 Non-residential Corridor. Within the plan the redevelopment criteria outlines the architectural character as low rise commercial scale buildings. The plan recommends softening building facades with mechanical equipment concealed. The building setback is proposed as a five (5) foot minimum and a thirty (30) foot maximum front setback and front parking lots discouraged. The applicant is continuing to work on a landscape plan and line of sight plan to address staffs concerns related to the views into the site from Fair Park Boulevard. Staff will provide a recommendation at the Public Hearing. I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommendation forthcoming. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 10, 2011) The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request on March 1, 2011, requesting deferral of the item to the April 21, 2011, public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 21, 2011) Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates and Mr. Dave Lemons of Kum and Go Convenience Stores were present representing the request. Staff presented the item stating the developers had provided them with a plan indicating berming and additional landscaping along Fair Park Boulevard. Staff stated based on the proposed enhanced landscaping along Fair Park Boulevard they were in support of the development as proposed. Mr. Tim Daters addressed the Commission stating the original PCD was to allow the creation of five (5) lots three (3) of which were proposed for development with structures and two (2) with parking to serve an adjacent church. Mr. Daters presented to Commission a line of sight from Fair Park Boulevard into the site. He stated sitting on Fair Park Boulevard the view of the gas pumps would be limited. He stated the berm would be two (2) feet above the pavement and a minimum of twenty -for (24) inch shrubs would be placed on top of the berm. M3 FILE NO.: Z-8472-B Cont. Mr. Lemons stated the company was a national company with stores In a number of states. He stated the company was in an expansion mode in Arkansas and planned to build twenty (20) to twenty-five (25) stores in the next five (5) years in Central Arkansas. He stated the company intended to construct four (4) to five (5) in Little Rock in the next nine (9) months. Mr. Lemons stated the store was a four (4) sided store constructed of brick or block. He stated the development would provide a gateway entrance sign into the neighborhood identifying the 12th Street Corridor. He stated the company would pay for the construction of the gateway entrance sign. Senator Joyce Elliot spoke in opposition of the request. She stated her home was on Fair Park Boulevard. She stated she chose to move into the neighborhood to be a part of living in a older area and aiding in the comeback of the Oak Forest Neighborhood. She stated the neighborhood did not want to become fast food or convenience store row. She stated the residents of Oak Forest felt as strongly of their neighborhood as the Kum and Go folks felt about their stores. She stated she did not feel a convenience store at the entrance to the neighborhood would be an attraction. She stated the residents of Oak Forest wanted the area to be a place for everyone to come. She stated the traffic at the 1-630 and Fair Park was very congested. She stated events at War Memorial only increased traffic in the area. She questioned the impact of the convenience store on traffic in the area. She stated she and the residents of Oak Forest were working to bring back a legacy to the City. She stated the placement of a convenience store at the entrance to the neighborhood would detract from the area. She questioned if alcohol would be sold at this location. Mr. Joe Busby addressed the Commission on behalf of the Fair Park Residents Association. He stated the residents had met with the developers and more than seventy (70) members were present. He stated after the presentation the members voted unanimously to oppose the development. He stated the change was a fundamental change from the originally approved PCD. He stated St. Mark's had provided the Commission with a letter of opposition to the request. He stated the current request was not in conformance with the 12th Street Corridor Plan nor the University District Plan. He stated within the area there were four (4) convenience stores within one mile of the current location. He stated there was one (1) store located directly across the street from the proposed development. He stated the development did not comply with the landscape requirements along 1-630. He stated the development would have a direct impact on traffic in the area. He stated the residents of Oak Forest did not want a fuel canopy as the gateway entrance to their neighborhood. He stated the residents supported Kum and Go at Colonel Glenn and South University Avenue. He stated the residents supported the company but did not support a convenience store at this location. Mr. Joe Monagle addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he welcomed the neighbor and job creation but did not support the development at this location. He stated there were a number of places along West 12th Street where a convenience store would be more appropriate. He stated the residents felt this location 9 FILE NO.: Z-8472-B(Cont.) better served by high end retail. He stated it was not a case of lets build first and see what will come. He stated it was important to raise the bar for developments within the neighborhood. Ms. Karen Walls addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated the residents were fully in support of development but not of the development proposed. She stated the development was a great development for Colonel Glenn and South University Avenue. She stated she did not want to see this as the gateway into the neighborhood. Mr. Jay Miller addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he had lived in the neighborhood for fifteen (15) plus years and did not intent to move. He stated the development was not in keeping with the 12`h Street Corridor plan. He stated the neighborhood did not need another late night congregating location. He stated the neighborhood did not need another place to sell alcohol. He stated he was not opposed to development, just this development at this location. Ms. Elizabeth Mackense addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated she had been working with the University District and the task force for the 12'h Street Corridor plan to develop improvements which were beneficial to the area as a whole. She stated the development as proposed was not an improvement to the area. Ms. Glenda Eddins addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated from what she could determine Kum and Go was a well run operation and had a lot to offer as far as convenience stores and gas pumps. She questioned why they would want to bring a store to this location given the current problems in the area. She stated currently there were persons who would hang around the two (2) existing stores and panhandle customers visiting the stores. She stated the new store would be increased competition to the existing stores and it was possible one (1) of the two (2) would go out of business causing yet another boarded store in the neighborhood. She stated the residents and St. Mark's Church were shown grand plans for the future development of the site. She stated she realized the unfortunate changes in the economy but did not feel the residents should suffer or lower their expectations. She stated she recently read an enlightening article which indicated 1-630 had split the haves from the have-nots. She stated at War Memorial and West Markham there was a stunning park like entrance to War Memorial Stadium. She requested the Commission not deny the residents of Oak Forest the opportunity to have a respectable business operation that would be an asset to one of the oldest neighborhoods in the City. She stated the members of the Fair Park Residents Association had apprehensions about granting a zoning change which would give the go-ahead to construct an unwanted and unneeded business that would most certainly apply for a license to sell alcohol. Mr. Joe Busby stated to the Commission that the residents had tried to work with the developers. He stated the residents requested the building be flipped and to place the gas canopy at the rear of the building. He stated the developer were not interested in this concept. He stated the residents requested changes in the design. He stated the company was not interested in changing the design to make the development more appealing to the neighborhood. 10 FILE NO_- Z-8472-B Cont. Mr. Tim Daters provided the Commission with the 2009 approved site plan. He stated the site plan approved in 2009 allowed a buffer along 1-630 and the abutting streets of nine (9) feet. He stated the development as proposed increased the buffers significantly. Mr. Lemons stated the development would sell alcohol but had committed to not sell singles. He stated the developers had agreed to limit signage on the building and to construction of a gateway entrance sign for the neighborhood. He stated the development would incorporate stone into the materials of the building. He stated the development had also agreed to berming to aid in screening the fueling area of the development. Mr. Ernie Peters addressed the Commission concerning the traffic. He stated based on the currently approved plan for restaurants and a hotel the placement of a convenience store would not greatly increase traffic in the area. He stated based on the currently approved plan and the proposed plan during the am peak there would be a slight reduction in traffic and during the pm peak there would be a slight increase. He stated there would be 49 less trips during the am peak and 29 additional trips during the pm peak. He stated this was based on the currently approved plan. He stated based on the existing conditions of the site, which was a vacant site, there would be an appreciable increase in traffic in the area. The Commissioners questioned the developer, Mr. Eric Heizman, about the previous marketing attempts. Mr. Heizman stated his company had contacted a number of national retailers to look at the site for potential development and none were interested. He stated typical fast food chains were looking for arterial site which had a great number of cars traveling at a much lower speed. He stated he and his partners intended to participate in the hotel construction so they would have a vested interest in the long term development of this site. He stated a number of efforts had been made to locate a bank or restaurant on the site but no takers had come forward. The Commission questioned what the University District plan had intended for this site. Mr. Ron Copeland indicated the original plan indicated residential for the site since at the time the plan was development the site contained a number of single-family homes. He stated the revised plan indicated the development as approved by the 2009 PCD. There was a general discussion by the Commission concerning traffic in the area. Commissioner Nunnley questioned if staff had looked at placing a traffic light at the intersection of loth and Fair Park. Staff stated a traffic signal would most likely not be warranted at this location. Staff stated based on the signals at 12th and Fair Park and 1-630 and Fair Park a signal at 10th would most likely not function properly. There was a general discussion concerning alcohol sales in proximity to the church. Staff stated there were both State and City ordinances regulating alcohol sales. Staff stated the sale of alcohol was not a land use issue. The Commission questioned Mr. Lemons why this site was chosen as a potential location. Mr. Lemons stated the site was chosen due to the traffic patterns in the area, 11 FILE NO.: Z-8472-B (Cont-) the resident population and the daytime population. He stated visibility to 1-630 was an added advantage but the site was not chosen strictly on visibility to 1-630. Mr. Lemons stated his company wanted the ability to complete on a local level with the businesses in the area. He stated he felt this was a good location for his company to build a new store. Staff stated the developers had indicated a number of modifications to the development which had not been included in the original submission. Mr. Daters stated the developers would not install building signage on the north facade of the building, would pay to construct the entrance sign, would incorporate stone in the construction materials of the site, save a tree located on 1-630 and one on Maryland Avenue, place trees and shrubs at one and one-half times the typical ordinance requirements within the street buffer. The trees to be planted would be three (3) inch caliper trees. He stated the development would not sell single servings of beer. Mr. Daters stated this was an amendment to the application request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff and as amended by the applicant. The motion failed by a vote of 5 ayes, 5 noes and 1 absent. 12 April 21, 2011 ITEM NO.: E FILE NO.: Z-8472-B NAME: Mid -Towne at Fair Park Revised Long -form PCD LOCATION: Located on the Southwest corner of 1-630 and Fair Park Boulevard DEVELOPER: AA Development Attn. Scott Richburg 12911 Cantrell Road, Suite 7-118 Little Rock, AR 72223 Cnl(_'IAICCR• Richburg Services Group Attn. Scott Richburg 12911 Cantrell Road, Suite 7-118 Little Rock, AR 72223 Crafton Tull Sparks Attn. Barry Williams 10825 Financial Center Parkway, Suite 300 Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 6.31 acres CURRENT ZONING ALLOWED USES PROPOSED ZONING: PROPOSED USE: NUMBER OF LOTS: 3 Lots PCD Hotel, Restaurant, Parking lot Revised PCD FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF Add convenience store with gas pumps VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 20,150 adopted by the Little Rock Board of Directors on September 1, 2009, rezoned an overall development plan for this site from R-3, R-6, 0-1 and C-3 to PCD. The project consisted of a redevelopment of a number of blocks located within__ April 21, 2011 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8472-B the Perry Heights Subdivision. The abandonment of right of way for a portion of Maryland Avenue, South Taylor Street and Fillmore Street along with the alleys within the area was also approved by the Board of Directors through the adoption of Ordinance No. 20,151. The developers reconstructed portions of Maryland Avenue and South Taylor Street and created a five lot subdivision. The approved uses were a hotel, a drive-in restaurant, a drive -through restaurant and two new parking facilities to support St. Mark's Baptist Church. The building proposed for Lot 5 contained approximately 4,000 square feet with 61 parking spaces. The building was proposed as a drive - through restaurant. The building proposed for Lot 4 contained approximately 1,200 square feet and 39 parking spaces. The development was proposed as a drive-in restaurant. The building proposed for Lot 3 was proposed as a four (4) story 81-room hotel with 90 parking spaces. The request included the allowance of C-3, General Commercial District uses as allowable alternative uses for the site. The maximum building height approved as 55 feet. Lot 2 was proposed containing 67 parking spaces and Lot 1 containing 158 parking spaces to serve the church. The new parking areas have been constructed. The remainder of the development as not occurred. The signage plan was approved with 36-foot tall pylon signs containing 160 square feet in area for Lots 3 — 5 (individual signs) adjacent to 1-630. A single ground mounted monument sign was approved for each of the lots along Maryland Avenue/South Taylor Street. The monument signs approved allowed a maximum height of ten (10) feet and 100 square feet in area. Building signage approved was on the facades of the buildings with street frontages. A wall sign was proposed on the western facade of the proposed hotel building. This facade did not have public street frontage. The maximum wall signage coverage approved was ten (10) percent of the facade area. A variance from the Land Alteration Ordinance to allow grading of the entire five (5) lot development with the issuance of a building permit for one or more lots was approved by the Planning Commission on July 23, 2009. The grading of the lots did occur with the development of the parking lots serving St. Mark's Church. A. PROPOSAUREQUEST/APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: The applicant is now requesting an amendment to the previously approved PCD zoning for Lots 3, 4 and 5 of the Mid -Town at Fair Park Subdivision. The amendment is to allow the development of Lot 5 with a convenience store with gas pumps, a sit-down restaurant on Lot 4 and a four (4) story hotel on Lot 3 containing 62 rooms. The lots sizes have been reduced for Lots 3 and 4 to accommodate the land area required for Lot 5. A shared parking and access agreement between the three (3) lots will serve the development. 2 April 21, 2011 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E Cont. FILE NO.: Z-8472-B B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: This area of the City contains a mixture of uses including commercial, residential, warehouse, church activities and a cemetery. Across Fair Park Boulevard is a property zoned PCD which contains a restaurant building, a hotel and a convenience store. South of the site on the west side of Fair Park Boulevard St. Mark's Church as removed a number of buildings to allow for future expansion of the church. On the east side of Fair Park Boulevard are vacant and occupied single-family residences. Along West 10th Street on the north side is a refrigeration company, a plumbing warehouse, mini -storage a multi -story office building and a hotel. On the south side of West 10th Street are church related uses, the sanctuary of St. Mark's Baptist Church, a cemetery and a multi -story office building. Both West 10th Street and Fair Park Boulevard appear to have been constructed to Master Street Plan standard. Maryland Avenue has been reconstructed to City standards complete with curb, gutter and sidewalk extending from Fair Park Boulevard to West 10" Street. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: As of this writing, staff has received several informational phone calls from the area property owners. All property owners located within 200 feet of the site, all residents, who could be identified, located within 300 feet of the site, the Fair Park Residents Association, the Oak Forest Initiative Collation and the War Memorial Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS- 1. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 2. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES stormwater permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 3. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. Driveway spacing on a minor arterial street is 300 feet from other street and driveways and 150 feet from the property line. The proposed driveway off Fair Park Boulevard does not meet those standards and cannot be installed. The width of driveway must not exceed 36 feet. 3 April 21, 2011 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.- E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8472-B 4. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner). 5. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show proposed location of the detention facility. 6. On site striping and signage plans should be forwarded to Public Works, Traffic Engineering for approval with the site development package. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer is available to this project. Enter : Easements are required around the sites perimeters. Contact Entergy for additional information. Center -Point Energy: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: A water main extension will be required to provide water service to this property. All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Due to the nature of this facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly (RIPS) is required on the domestic water service. This assembly must be installed prior to the first point of use. Central Arkansas Water (CAW) requires that upon installation of the PRZ assembly, successful tests of the assembly must be completed by a Certified Assembly Tester licensed by the State of Arkansas and approved by CAW. The test results must be sent to CAW's Cross Connection Section within ten days of installation and annually thereafter. Contact the Cross Connection Section at 377-1226 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the developer's expense. Please submit plans for water facilities to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revisions may be required after additional review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of water facilities. Approval of plans by Central Arkansas Water, the Department of Health Engineering Division and the Little Rock Fire Department is required. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding the size and location of the water meter. A Capital Investment Change based on the size of meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all connections including metered connections off the private fire system. This development will have minor impact on the existing E April 21, 2011 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) __ FILE NO.: Z-8472-B water distribution system. Proposed water facilities will be sized to provide adequate pressure and fire protection. 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 Owned Line Agreement is required. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. Parks and Recreation: No comment. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division- This request is located in the 1-630 Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use for this property. Mixed Use allows any combination of residential, office or commercial use or just one of these uses as long as a Planned Zoning District is used for the review of the application. The applicant has applied for a revision to an existing Planned Commercial District to change the uses from Hotel and two restaurants to Hotel, restaurant and convenience store. Master Street Plan: The application is along Fair Park Boulevard, which is a Minor Arterial. A Minor Arterial provides connections to and through an urban area and their primary function is to provide short distance travel within the urbanized area. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Fair Park Boulevard since it is a Minor Arterial. The street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bic cle Plan: A Class III bike route is shown along Fair Park Boulevard. A Class III bikeway is a signed route on a street shared with traffic. No additional paving or right-of-way is required. Class III bicycle route signage may be required. Landscape: 1. The site plan must comply with the City's landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. April 21, 2011 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E Cont. FILE NO.: 7-8472-B 2. The development was reviewed as an overall development plan containing a five -lot development requiring each of the individual lots to contain an automatic irrigation system at the time of development. 3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit a landscape plan must be submitted to the City. The development is being reviewed as an overall development plan therefore each of the lots will require a landscape plan stamped with the seal of a registered landscape architect at the time of building permit. 4. The landscape ordinance requires a nine (9) foot wide perimeter landscape strip around the sites entirety. A variance from the City Beautiful Commission must be obtained prior to the issuance of a building permit. 5. Interior landscape islands are required to be provided. The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of eight percent (8%) of the paved areas be landscaped with interior islands of at least 7 Yz feet in width and 150 square feet in area. The interior islands must be evenly distributed throughout the site. 6. Building landscaping will be required with the proposed development. 7. Dumpster, loading docks, heating and air conditioning units, external storage of materials, communications equipment and similar outside activities and appurtenances must be screened from abutting properties and streets. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (February 17, 2011) Mr. Scott Richberg and Mr. Frank Riggins were present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the development stating there were a number of outstanding technical issues in need of addressing prior to the Commission acting on the request. Staff stated the site plan for the hotel did not allow for adequate parking to serve an 81 room hotel. Staff also stated the previous approval provided for enhanced landscaping and features along Fair Park Boulevard that the current site plan did not indicate. Staff questioned the proposed signage stating the previous approval allowed monument signage along Maryland Street and pole signage along 1-630. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the drive on Fair Park Boulevard did not meet the spacing requirement of the ordinances and would not be allowed. Staff stated the stormwater detention ordinance would apply to the development of the site. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated the development was reviewed as an overall development plan therefore a landscape plan and irrigation would be required with the development. Staff stated interior landscape islands were required with the development. Staff stated the islands should be evenly distributed throughout the 1-Aa. n April 21, 2011 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E(Cont.)FILE NO.: Z-8472-B Staff noted comments from the other reporting departments and agencies suggesting the applicant contact them individually for additional clarification. There was no further discussion of the item. The Committee then forwarded the item to the full Commission for final action. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (March 31, 2011) Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request. Mr. Daters stated he wanted to provide the Commission with an update on the plan. He stated the engineers and developers had been working to develop a site plan which limited the lines of sight into the development and provided sufficient landscaping along Fair Park Boulevard to screen the use from the street. There was no further discussion of the item. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan addressing a number of the issues raised at the February 17, 2011, Subdivision Committee meeting. The revised plan has removed the drive from Fair Park Boulevard, reduced the number of rooms for the proposed hotel and identified the signage plan. The request is an amendment to the previously approved PCD zoning for Lots 3, 4 and 5 of the Mid -Town at Fair Park 4;ubdivision. The amendment is to allow the development of Lot 5 with a convenience store with gas pumps, a sit-down restaurant is proposed for Lot 4 and a four (4) story hotel containing 62 rooms is proposed for Lot 3. The lots sizes have been reduced for Lots 3 and 4 to accommodate the land area required for Lot 5. Lot 3 is proposed containing 1.74 acres, Lot 4 containing 0.67 acres and Lot 5 containing 1.60 acres. A shared parking and access agreement between the three (3) lots will serve the development. The hotel is proposed containing 62 rooms and 66 parking spaces. The building area is 16,000 square feet. The hotel is proposed with a maximum building height of 55-feet. Parking for a hotel is based on one space per room plus ten (10) percent for ancillary services. Based on the typical ordinance standards 68 parking spaces would typically be required. The site will develop with cross access and cross parking. Based on this fact staff does not feel the reduced number of spaces will significantly impact the development. The restaurant is indicated with 2,000 square feet and 39 parking spaces. Based on the typical parking required for a restaurant use a total of 20 parking spaces would typically be required. The parking as proposed is more than adequate to serve the use. The site plan indicates a maximum hUilding height of 35-feet. 7 April 21, 2011 SUBD1ViSION ITEM NO.: E Cont. FILE NO.: Z-8472-B The convenience store is proposed containing 4,958 square feet and 37 parking spaces. Based on the typical parking required for a commercial use a total of 16 parking spaces would typically be required. The parking as proposed is more than adequate to serve the development. The site plan indicates a maximum building height of 35-feet. As per the originally approved PCD each of the lots will be served by a pole sign located along 1-630 and a monument sign located on Maryland Avenue. The pole signs are proposed with a maximum height of 36-feet and a maximum sign area of 160 square feet. The monument signs are proposed with a maximum height of ten feet and a maximum sign area of one hundred square feet. The development is proposed with enhanced landscaping along Fair Park Boulevard. Three inch caliper trees will be planted as required by the original approval and the shrub count will be increased by fifty percent. A sign easement will be provided at the intersection of Fair Park Boulevard and 1-630 to allow for future installation of a gateway feature. The applicant has provided staff with a line of sight from Fair Park Boulevard into the site. The plan indicates the placement of a berm along Fair Park Boulevard with shrubs located on top of the berm to aid in creating a visual barrier from the street into the site. Within the 12" Street Corridor Plan redevelopment areas with specific development criteria are identified. The intersection of Fair Park Boulevard and 1-630 is identified as a primary gateway into the 12t" Street Corridor area. According to the plan primary gateways are to include additional streetscape and enhancements such as street trees, enhanced pedestrian crossings and special paving. This site is also identified as a T3 Non-residential Corridor. Within the plan the redevelopment criteria outlines the architectural character as low rise commercial scale buildings. The plan recommends softening building facades with mechanical equipment concealed. The building setback is proposed as a five (5) foot minimum and a thirty (30) foot maximum front setback and front parking lots discouraged. The applicant is continuing to work on a landscape plan and line of sight plan to address staff's concerns related to the views into the site from Fair Park Boulevard. Staff will provide a recommendation at the Public Hearing. 1. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommendation forthcoming. 0 April 21, 2011 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: FILE (MARCH 10, 2011) .: Z-8472- The applicant was not present. There were no registered objectors present. Staff presented the item stating the applicant had submitted a request on March 1, 2011, requesting deferral of the item to the April 21, 2011, public hearing. Staff stated they were supportive of the deferral request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff. The motion carried by a vote of 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 21, 2011) Mr. Tim Daters of White-Daters and Associates and Mr. Dave Lemons of Kum and Go Convenience Stores were present representing the request. Staff presented the item stating the developers had provided them with a plan indicating berming and additional landscaping along Fair Park Boulevard. Staff stated based on the proposed enhanced landscaping along Fair Park Boulevard they were in support of the development as proposed. Mr. Tim Daters addressed the Commission stating the original PCD was to allow the creation of five (5) lots three (3) of which were proposed for development with structures and two (2) with parking to serve an adjacent church. Mr. Daters presented to Commission a line of sight from Fair Park Boulevard into the site. He stated sitting on Fair Park Boulevard the view of the gas pumps would be limited. He stated the berm would be two (2) feet above the pavement and a minimum of twenty -for (24) inch shrubs would be placed on top of the berm. Mr. Lemons stated the company was a national company with stores in a number of states. He stated the company was in an expansion mode in Arkansas and planned to build twenty (20) to twenty-five (25) stores in the next five (5) years in Central Arkansas. He stated the company intended to construct four (4) to five (5) in Little Rock in the next nine (9) months. Mr. Lemons stated the store was a four (4) sided store constructed of brick or block. He stated the development would provide a gateway entrance sign into the neighborhood identifying the 12th Street Corridor. He stated the company would pay for the construction of the gateway entrance sign. Senator Joyce Elliot spoke in opposition of the request. She stated her home was on Fair Park Boulevard. She stated she chose to move into the neighborhood to be a part of living in a older area and ,:;&-g in the comeback of the Oak Forest Neighborhood. 9 April 21, 2011 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8472-B She stated the neighborhood did not want to become fast food or convenience store row. She stated the residents of Oak Forest felt as strongly of their neighborhood as the Kum and Go folks felt about their stores. She stated she did not feel a convenience store at the entrance to the neighborhood would be an attraction. She stated the residents of Oak Forest wanted the area to be a place for everyone to come. She stated the traffic at the 1-630 and Fair Park was very congested. She stated events at War Memorial only increased traffic in the area. She questioned the impact of the convenience store on traffic in the area. She stated she and the residents of Oak Forest were working to bring back a legacy to the City. She stated the placement of a convenience store at the entrance to the neighborhood would detract from the area. She questioned if alcohol would be sold at this location. Mr. Joe Busby addressed the Commission on behalf of the Fair Park Residents Association. He stated the residents had met with the developers and more than seventy (70) members were present. He stated after the presentation the members voted unanimously to oppose the development. He stated the change was a fundamental change from the originally approved PCD. He stated St. Mark's had provided the Commission with a letter of opposition to the request. He stated the current request was not in conformance with the 121h Street Corridor Plan nor the University District Plan. He stated within the area there were four (4) convenience stores within one mile of the current location. He stated there was one (1) store located directly across the street from the proposed development. He stated the development did not comply with the landscape requirements along 1-630. He stated the development would have a direct impact on traffic in the area. He stated the residents of Oak Forest did not want a fuel canopy as the gateway entrance to their neighborhood. He stated the residents supported Kum and Go at Colonel Glenn and South University Avenue. He stated the residents supported the company but did not support a convenience store at this location. Mr. Joe Monagle addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he welcomed the neighbor and job creation but did not support the development at this location. He stated there were a number of places along West 12th Street where a convenience store would be more appropriate. He stated the residents felt this location better served by high end retail. He stated it was not a case of lets build first and see what will come. He stated it was important to raise the bar for developments within the neighborhood. Ms. Karen Walls addressed the Commission in opposition. She stated the residents were fully in support of development but not of the development proposed. She stated the development was a great development for Colonel Glenn and South University Avenue. She stated she did not want to see this as the gateway into the neighborhood. 10 April 21, 2011 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E Cont. FILE NO.: Z-8472-B Mr. Jay Miller addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. He stated he had lived in the neighborhood for fifteen (15) plus years and did not intent to move. He stated the development was not in keeping with the 12th Street Corridor plan. He stated the neighborhood did not need another late night congregating location. He stated the neighborhood did not need another place to sell alcohol. He stated he was not opposed to development, just this development at this location. Ms. Elizabeth Mackense addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated she had been working with the University District and the task force for the 12tn Street Corridor plan to develop improvements which were beneficial to the area as a whole. She stated the development as proposed was not an improvement to the area. Ms. Glenda Eddins addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated from what she could determine Kum and Go was a well run operation and had a lot to offer as far as convenience stores and gas pumps. She questioned why they would want to bring a store to this location given the current problems in the area. She stated currently there were persons who would hang around the two (2) existing stores and panhandle customers visiting the stores. She stated the new store would be increased competition to the existing stores and it was possible one (1) of the two (2) would go out of business causing yet another boarded store in the neighborhood. She stated the residents and St. Mark's Church were shown grand plans for the future development of the site. She stated she realized the unfortunate changes in the economy but did not feel the residents should suffer or lower their expectations. She stated she recently read an enlightening article which indicated 1-630 had split the haves from the have-nots. She stated at War Memorial and West Markham there was a stunning park like entrance to War Memorial Stadium. She requested the Commission not deny the residents of Oak Forest the opportunity to have a respectable business operation that would be an asset to one of the oldest neighborhoods in the City. She stated the members of the Fair Park Residents Association had apprehensions about granting a zoning change which would give the go-ahead to construct an unwanted and unneeded business that would most certainly apply for a license to sell alcohol. Mr. Joe Busby stated to the Commission that the residents had tried to work with the developers. He stated the residents requested the building be flipped and to place the gas canopy at the rear of the building. He stated the developer were not interested in this concept. He stated the residents requested changes in the design. He stated the company was not interested in changing the design to make the development more appealing to the neighborhood. Mr. Tim Daters provided the Commission with the 2009 approved site plan. He stated the site plan approved in 2009 allowed a buffer along 1-630 and the abutting streets of nine (9) feet. He stated the development as proposed increased the buffers significantly. 11 April 21, 2011 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-8472-B Mr. Lemons stated the development would sell alcohol but had committed to not sell singles. He stated the developers had agreed to limit signage on the building and to construction of a gateway entrance sign for the neighborhood. He stated the development would incorporate stone into the materials of the building. He stated the development had also agreed to berming to aid in screening the fueling area of the development. Mr. Ernie Peters addressed the Commission concerning the traffic. He stated based on the currently approved plan for restaurants and a hotel the placement of a convenience store would not greatly increase traffic in the area. He stated based on the currently approved plan and the proposed plan during the am peak there would be a slight reduction in traffic and during the pm peak there would be a slight increase. He stated there would be 49 less trips during the am peak and 29 additional trips during the pm peak. He stated this was based on the currently approved plan. He stated based on the existing conditions of the site, which was a vacant site, there would be an appreciable increase in traffic in the area. The Commissioners questioned the developer, Mr. Eric Heizman, about the previous marketing attempts. Mr. Heizman stated his company had contacted a number of national retailers to look at the site for potential development and none were interested. He stated typical fast food chains were looking for arterial site which had a great number of cars traveling at a much lower speed. He stated he and his partners intended to participate in the hotel construction so they would have a vested interest in the long term development of this site. He stated a number of efforts had been made to locate a bank or restaurant on the site but no takers had come forward. The Commission questioned what the University District plan had intended for this site. Mr. Ron Copeland indicated the original plan indicated residential for the site since at the time the plan was development the site contained a number of single-family homes. He stated the revised plan indicated the development as approved by the 2009 PCD. There was a general discussion by the Commission concerning traffic in the area. Commissioner Nunnley questioned if staff had looked at placing a traffic light at the intersection of 10th and Fair Park. Staff stated a traffic signal would most likely not be warranted at this location. Staff stated based on the signals at 12th and Fair Park and 1-630 and Fair Park a signal at 10th would most likely not function properly. There was a general discussion concerning alcohol sales in proximity to the church. Staff stated there were both State and City ordinances regulating alcohol sales. Staff stated the sale of alcohol was not a land use issue. The Commission questioned Mr. Lemons why this site was chosen as a potential location. Mr. Lemons stated the site was chosen due to the traffic patterns in the area, the resident population and the daytime population. He stated visibility to 1-630 wag an 12 April 21, 2011 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: E (Cont. E NO.: Z-8472-B added advantage but the site was not chosen strictly on visibility to 1-630. Mr. Lemons stated his company wanted the ability to complete on a local level with the businesses in the area. He stated he felt this was a good location for his company to build a new store. Staff stated the developers had indicated a number of modifications to the development which had not been included in the original submission. Mr. Daters stated the developers would not install building signage on the north fagade of the building, would pay to construct the entrance sign, would incorporate stone in the construction materials of the site, save a tree located on 1-630 and one on Maryland Avenue, place trees and shrubs at one and one-half times the typical ordinance requirements within the street buffer. The trees to be planted would be three (3) inch caliper trees. He stated the development would not sell single servings of beer. Mr. Daters stated this was an amendment to the application request. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as presented by staff and as amended by the applicant. The motion failed by a vote of 5 ayes, 5 noes and 1 absent. 13 ITEM NO.: 10. Z-8472-B NAME: Mid -Towne at Fair Park Revised Long -form PCD LOCATION: located on the Southwest corner of 1-630 and Fair Park Boulevard Planning Staff Comments: 1. Provide notification of property owners located within 200-feet of the site, complete with the certified abstract list, notice form with affidavit executed and proof of mailing. The notice must be mailed no later than February 23, 2011. The Office of Planning and Development must receive the proof of notice no later than March 4, 2011. 2. The approved PCD allow for ground signage along Maryland Avenue and pole signage long 1-630. The current site plan does not including signage for Lots 3 and 4. A pole sign is indicated at the intersection of Maryland Avenue and Fair Park Boulevard. The ground signage was limited to ten feet in height and one hundred square feet in area. 3. The previously approved plan allowed for the placement of "enhanced streetscape" along Fair Park Boulevard. The site plan indicated an area for the placement of a decorative embellishment adjacent to Fair Park Boulevard and 1-630 to serve as a gateway into the neighborhood. Decorative lighting and fixtures were to be placed along Fair Park Boulevard. The landscape strip along Fair Park Boulevard would include trees placed as typically required by the landscape ordinance but the size would be 3-inch caliper trees. The developers also committed to increasing the shrub count by 50 percent with one shrub every three feet. The effect was to be in some areas of the street buffer would be a double row of shrub plantings. 4. The site plan indicates the building on Lot 4 as a drive-in restaurant. There does not appear to be a pick-up window. 5. The site plan for the hotel indicates the placement of a four-story building containing 81 rooms with 66 parking spaces. The previous approval allowed for 90 spaces. 89 spaces would typically be required to serve a hotel with 81 rooms. The previous write-up indicated there would not be a meeting room, restaurant or lounge with the hotel. 6. Fair Park Boulevard has been identified as a gateway to the 12th Street area. Staff has concerns with the placement of the fuel canopy abutting Fair Park Boulevard and the potential impact of the fueling station on the gateway entrance. Staff feels the building should be placed along Fair Park Boulevard and the fueling center be placed behind the building. 7. Will the site be served by cross access and cross parking? If so note on the site plan cross access and parking. If there will not be cross access and parking a minimum landscape strip of nine feet will be required along the common lot lines of the development. Variance/Waivers: None requested. Item # 10. Public Works Conditions: 1. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right- of-way prior to occupancy. 2. If disturbed area is one (1) or more acres, obtain a NPDES stormwater permit from the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. 3. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. Driveway spacing on a minor arterial street is 300 feet from other street and driveways and 150 feet from the property line. The proposed driveway off Fair Park Boulevard does not meet those standards and cannot be installed. The width of driveway must not exceed 36 feet. 4. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. Obtain barricade permit prior to doing any work in the right-of-way from Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner). 5. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show proposed location of the detention facility. 6. On site striping and signage plans should be forwarded to Public Works, Traffic Engineering for approval with the site development package. 7. Obtain permits for improvements within State Highway right-of-way from AHTD, District VI. Utilities and Fire Department/County Planning: Wastewater: Sewer is available to this project. Entergy: Approved as submitted. Center -Point Enerav: No comment received. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: A water main extension will be required to provide water service to this property. All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. Due to the nature of this facility, installation of an approved reduced pressure zone backflow preventer assembly (RPS) is required on the domestic water service. This assembly must be installed prior to the first point of use. Central Arkansas Water (CAW) requires that upon installation of the PRZ assembly, successful tests of the assembly must be completed by a Certified Assembly Tester licensed by the State of Arkansas and approved by CAW. The test results must be sent to CAW's Cross Connection Section within ten days of installation and annually thereafter. Contact the Cross Connection Section at 377-1226 if you would like to discuss backflow prevention requirements for this project. The Little Rock Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional public and/or private fire hydrant(s) will be required. If additional fire hydrant(s) are required, they will be installed at the developer's expense. Please submit plans for water facilities to Central Arkansas Water for review. Plan revisions may be required after additional review. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding procedures for installation of water facilities. Approval of plans by Central Arkansas Water, the Department of Health Item # 10. Engineering Division and the Little Rock Fire Department is required. Contact Central Arkansas Water regarding the size and location of the water meter. A Capital Investment Change based on the size of meter connection(s) will apply to this project in addition to normal charges. This fee will apply to all connections including metered connections off the private fire system. 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. 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 Owned Line Agreement is required. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional information. County Planning: No comment. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. Parks and Recreation: No comment. Planning Division: This request is located in the 1-630 Planning District. The Land Use Plan shows Mixed Use for this property. Mixed Use allows any combination of residential, office or commercial use or just one of these uses as long as a Planned Zoning District is used for the review of the application. The applicant has applied for a revision to an existing Planned Commercial District to change the uses from Hotel and two restaurants to Hotel, restaurant and convenience store. Master Street Plan: The application is along Fair Park Boulevard, which is a Minor Arterial. A Minor Arterial provides connections to and through an urban area and their primary function is to provide short distance travel within the urbanized area. Entrances and exits should be limited to minimize negative effects of traffic and pedestrians on Fair Park Boulevard since it is a Minor Arterial. The street may require dedication of right-of-way and may require street improvements for entrances and exits to the site. Bicycle Plan: A Class III bike route is shown along Fair Park Boulevard. A Class III bikeway is a signed route on a street shared with traffic. No additional paving or right- of-way is required. Class III bicycle route signage may be required. Landscape: 1. The site plan must comply with the City's landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. The development was reviewed as an overall development plan containing a five -lot development requiring each of the individual lots to contain an automatic irrigation system at the time of development. 3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit a landscape plan must be submitted to the City. The development is being reviewed as an overall development plan therefore Item # 10. each of the lots will require a landscape plan stamped with the seal of a registered landscape architect at the time of building permit. 4. The landscape ordinance requires a nine (9) foot wide perimeter landscape strip around the sites entirety. A variance from the City Beautiful Commission must be obtained prior to the issuance of a building permit. 5. Interior landscape islands are required to be provided. The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of eight percent (8%) of the paved areas be landscaped with interior islands of at least 7'/z feet in width and 300 square feet in area. The interior islands must be evenly distributed throughout the site. 6. Building landscaping will be required with the proposed development. 7. Dumpster, loading docks, heating and air conditioning units, external storage of materials, communications equipment and similar outside activities and appurtenances must be screened from abutting properties and streets. Revised plat/plan: Submit four (4) copies of a revised preliminary plat/plan (to include the additional information as noted above) to staff on Wednesday, February 23, 2011. Item # 10.