Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0216 Staff AnalysisMarch 9, 1982 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 4 - Snider Commercial Park - PCD Site Plan Review LOCATION: I-630 at Pine and Cedar DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: Ted L. Snider Wittenburg, Delony and Davidson 4021 W. 8th Street 840 Savers Building Little Rock, AR Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: 376-6681 AREA: .569+ Acres NO. OF LOTS: 1 FT. OF NEW ST.: 0 ZONING: "0-311/11R-4" PROPOSED USES: Commercial Office/Multifamily PLANNING DISTRICT: CENSUS TRACT: REQUEST: To reclassify an area from 110-3" and "R-3" to PCD. DEVELOPMENT PHILOSOPHY This is a plan submitted by the applicant, to construct a mixed used development including commercial/office and residential uses on approximately 3.569 acres. The character of this proposal has been influenced by the existing intersection of parallel one-way collector streets (Cedar and Pine) with I-630, and its related access ramps at 8th Street. This intersection is the southeast approach to the University of Arkansas Medical Center Campus and the Veterans Administration Hospital, which is presently under construction. In the preparation of this packet, several design purposes have been stated for various components: 1. Hotel - Provides special emphasis on catering to families of hospital patients utilizing the Med Center Complex, including designated guest rooms specifically designed for handicapped individuals. March 9, 1982 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 4 - Continued 2. Restaurant - Primarily intended to serve the hotel, adjacent office/commercial areas and the immediate neighborhood. 3. Apartment Units (Phases II and III) - Intended to reinforce the adjacent neighborhood and the Med Center area. 4. Snyder Corporation Office Building - Will continue in its present capacity. The applicant has indicated that particular attention has been given to siting the mixed uses within the development in a manner that will "minimize adverse impacts on the surrounding residential area." This is illustrated•by the following: 1. Restaurant (a) Sited at a central location on north boundary at intersection of Cedar and 8th Streets. (b) Landscaped buffer on north and east which will provide a "transition" from I-630 to residential streets adjacent to development. 2. Existing Snyder Corporation Office Buildin2 (a) Provision of landscaped parking in two separate areas in order to "blend" the parking into the environment. 3. Apartment Units (a) Location along Maryland Street at south and west border'of development in order to shield the commercial activities from existing residential areas south and west of the property. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS I. Phase I - A - Proposed restaurant and parking to serve existing office building. March 9, 1982 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 4 - Continued A. Parcel size - 1.098 Acres (47,840 square feet) B. Existing zoning - "O-3"/"R-4" Ca Development according to the following: Use Area Site Coverage Restaurant 1,571 3.3% Office Bldg. 6,120 12.8% Parking 21,537 45.0% Sidewalks 2,569 5.4% Landscaped Areas 16,043 33.5% D. Parking (1) Restaurant - 22 spaces (2) Office Building - 42 spaces II. Phase I B Proposed five -story hotel and parking A. Parcel size Part "A" - 1.737 acres (73,698 square feet) Part "B" - 1.647 acres (71,760 square feet) B. Development according to the following: Use Area Site Coverage Hotel 12,230 16 .6% Parking 48,040 55.1% Sidewalks 5,800 7.9% Landscaped Areas 4,712 6.5% Open Areas 22,960 3.9% C. Site Density - 87.5 Units per Acre Parking Motel - 167 Spaces March 9, 1982 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 4 - Continued III. Phase II -A Proposed two-story apartments, two buildings with 10 units each. A. Parcel size - .824 acres (35,880 square feet) B. Existing zoning - "R-4" C. Development according to the following: Use Area Site Coverage Apartments 8,000 22.3% Parking 11,900 33.2% Sidewalks 1,672 4.7% Landscaped Area 14,308 39.8% D. Site Density - 27 Units per Acres E. Parking - 30 Spaces IV. Phase III -A Proposed two-story apartments, one building with 10 units and additional parking for existing office building. A. Parcel size - .442 Acres (19,240 square feet) B. Existing zoning - "R-4" C. Development according to the following: Use Area Site Coverage Apartments 4,000 20.8% Parking 5,950 30.9% Sidewalks 836 4.3% Landscaped Area 8,450 44,0% Da Site Density - 22.6 Units per Acres E. Parking - 15 Spaces - March 9, 1982 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 4 - Continued SPECIAL GUIDELINES I< Site considered according to PUD concept must be 2.0 acres or greater. This plan complies. 2. A minimum of 10 percent of gross PCD areas shall be designated as landscaped open space, not to be used for streets or parking. 3. A detailed landscaping plan must be submitted before a building permit is obtained. This plan complies. ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS A. Cedar Street: (1) 8th to Maryland: Widen both sides to 36' width. Provide sidewalks on both sides. (2) Maryland to one-half block south: Widen west side of street to one-half of 36' alignment. (3) Provide sidewalks along west side of street. B. Pine Street, west side, 8th to Maryland (1) Widen street to alignment of one-half of 36' street. (2) Provide sidewalks. C. Elm Street, east side, Maryland to one-half block north. (1) Widen street to alignment of one-half of 27' street. (2) Provide sidewalk. D. Maryland Avenue, north side, Cedar to Pine: (1) Provide pavement widening and curb/gutter aligned for one-half of 271'street. March 9, 1982 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 4 - Continued (2) Provide sidewalk. E. Traffic Analysis: Submit a traffic study which reflects the impact of this development. If this study indicates that Maryland Street should be wider than 271, the developer will be required to widen it to 361. The developer may be required to make contribution to traffic signal installation at 8th and Cedar and 8th and Pine based on traffic study.. F. Alley between Elm and Cedar south of Maryland. If apartment access is provided via this alley, the alley should be paved. STAFF ANALYSIS Staff finds this proposal to be compatible with the basics of the proposed Stephens School Neighborhood Plan. The plan shows nonresidential/office uses along the first block of I-630 and Pine/Cedar. Also, a mix of low to medium density multifamily from Elm to Oak is shown. Staff's major concern is that the restaurant be constructed in such a way as to blend in with the rest of the development, so as to minimize adverse impacts to the area. If possible, staff suggests that in light of the current shortage of affordable houses, that some of the existing structures on the site be salvaged and relocated instead of demolished. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approval, subject to comments made. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: This application was represented by three persons: Mr. Jack See, the Architect; Mr. Bill Terry, the Attorney; and Mr. Ted Snider, the Owner. In response to staff's concerns about the "blending" of the restaurant into the total development, the applicants submitted a proposed addition to the Bill of Assurance, which would limit exterior colors of the restaurant to earth tones, i.e., browns, tans, beiges, etc. This was viewed as acceptable. The applicant did state that they had some concerns about the Engineering Considerations, especially the traffic signals. They were instructed by the Committee to get together with the City Engineers before the Public Hearing so that an agreement could be reached. A motion was made for approval, subject to the comments made. The vote - 4 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent. March 9, 1982 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 4.- Continued PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The applicant was present. There were no objectors. Engineering reported that: (1) the traffic study indicated that no traffic signals were needed, and (2) that the applicant had agreed to widen Maryland Street between Pine and Cedar to one-half of a 36' street. The applicant requested that the wording on the plat be changed to read "landscaped buffer," instead of the present "buffer zone." A motion for approval, subject to the agreement, was made and passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent. March 9, 1982 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 4-A (Addendum REQUEST: Closure of alleys in Blocks 3 and 4, Forest Hills Addition to the City of Little Rock. nvvT.TrANT s Ted L. Snider PURPOSE: Replat of Blocks 3 and 4 for a planned commercial development. STAFF COMMENT: While replatting of the Property provides for the removal of existing lot lanes within these blocks, the alleys were dedicated as public right-of-way requiring separate action by the Little Rock Board of Directors for their elimination. As a part of the Snider Commercial Park, the alley in Block 4 will become a public access easement and a 16' utility easement will be retained in Block 3 for a large water line. Closures of these alleys will permit their replat in the proper form for the purposes outlined on the plat. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends closure of both alleys subject to the usual utility easement clause. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The Commission voted to approve the closures subject to retention of utility easements. The motion passed. The vote - 9 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent.