Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-1632-A Staff AnalysisDecember 16, 2010 ITEM NO.: 2 FILE NO.: S-1632-A NAME: The Ridge at Chenal Subdivision Site Plan Review LOCATION: Located on the Northeast corner of Chenonceau Boulevard and Bayonne Drive DEVELOPER: Red Mountain Development 3415 Independence Drive Birmingham, AL 35209 ENGINEER: White-Daters and Associates 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 AREA: 26.0 acres CURRENT ZONING PLANNING DISTRICT NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 LF MF-12 — Multi -family 12 units per acre 19 - Chenal CENSUS TRACT: 42.11 VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. A variance from Section 36-257 (c) to allow an increased height for the structures. 2. A variance from Section 36-552(a)(3) to allow the placement of additional signage identifying the development. 3. A variance from Sections 30-43 and 31-210 to allow the east driveway to be located less than 150 feet from the property line. BACKGROUND: On July 21, 2009, the Little Rock Planning Commission approved a Subdivision Site Plan Review for the development of this property containing 21.5 acres. The property was zoned MF-12 allowing a density of 12 units per acre. The development was approved with 13 buildings containing 256 units or a density of 11.9 units per acre. December 16, 2010 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 Cont. FILE NO.' S-1632-A The site plan indicated 160 one bedroom one bath units and 96 two bedroom two bath units. The site plan indicated the placement of 82 garage units, 48 storage rooms, a clubhouse, maintenance garage and covered mail kiosk. There were 391 parking spaces proposed, including the garage units. A six (6) foot ornamental fence was proposed along Chenonceau Boulevard. The development was proposed as a gated community. Two (2) drives were proposed from Chenonceau Boulevard. The first drive was a full service drive providing access to the clubhouse and gated entrance to the development. The second drive was proposed as an exit only drive located near the eastern perimeter of the site. On July 1, 2010, the Planning Commission approved a variance request from the City's Land Alteration Ordinance to allow grading of this site without a project for development being imminent. The developer proposed to move a portion of the excess dirt from this site to a site located at the intersection of LaGrande Drive and Rahling Road. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST/APPLICANT'S STATEMENT: The proposed site plan now contains 312 units. The project will be gated with a secondary access for emergency services and egress from the site is located along the eastern perimeter. Parking is proposed at 604 spaces for a 1.87 ratio with 44 spaces located in enclosed garages scattered around the site. The project will have a clubhouse with adjacent pool overlooking the green space to the west. A walking trail is proposed within the wooded area west of the clubhouse. The project is proposed with eleven (11) buildings, nine (9) of which are three (3) story with walk -out units on the lower level. The proposed buildings will require a height variance from the MF-12 Zoning District. The height variance will allow the site to develop with two (2) fewer buildings than previously approved. This will allow the developer to maintain significant buffers along Chenonceau Boulevard and to the west adjacent to the Aberdeen Subdivision. A 50-foot land use buffer is provided along the northern property line with the required 70 percent or 35-feet to remain undisturbed. The request includes a variance to allow the driveway located along the eastern perimeter to be located less than 150 feet from the property line. The drive is indicated as an exit only driveway. The request also includes a variance from the City's Sign Ordinance to allow additional signage to serve the development. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS. The property is currently undeveloped and mostly wooded with varying degrees of slope. The dirt moving approved by the Planning Commission in July has not begun. The Aberdeen Court single-family subdivision is located to the west, with the Bayonne neighborhood to the south across Chenonceau Boulevard. Single- 0 December 16, 2010 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1632-A family residences on larger lots are located to the north, with various nonresidential uses and zoning along Highway 10. Undeveloped 0-2, Office and Institutional District and C-3, General Commercial District zoned property is located across Chenonceau Boulevard to the northeast. To the north is undeveloped 0-3, General Office District zoned property. West of the site is a zoned OS, Open Space located adjacent to the Aberdeen Subdivision. There is also a private recreational facility located to the west. Chenonceau Boulevard is a four lane roadway with turn lanes located at major intersections. The street has been constructed with curb, gutter and sidewalk. There are street trees in place along the property frontage. 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, the Coalition of West Little Rock Neighborhoods, the Aberdeen Court Property Owners Association, the Bayonne Place Property Owners Association and the Maywood Neighborhood Association were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. 2. Provide a letter prepared by a registered engineer certifying the sight distance at the driveway intersections comply with 2004 AASHTO Green Book standards. 3. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The east driveway is required to be located 150 feet from the property line. A variance must be requested for the installation of this driveway. 4. Will the east driveway be one way exit only? If the driveway is exit only, signs should be installed at the east driveway to inform drivers. 5. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 6. 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. Other than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. Q December 16, 2010 SUBDIVESION iTFM NO.: 2 (Cont.') FILE NO.: S-1632-A 7. 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). 8. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan. 9. 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. 10. Where is the destination for the cut material from this site? If that destination site does not have a grading permit, one is required to be issued. 11. Turn around must be provided for a SU-30 vehicle attempting to enter the development. A stacking distance of 30 feet from pavement must also be provided. 12. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. 13. Measures to control the increase in stormwater runoff from the increased impervious surface should be implemented to not damage adjacent property. 14. Damage to public and private property due to hauling operations or operation of construction related equipment from a nearby construction site shall be repaired by the responsible party prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements for this project. Capacity Contribution Analysis and Fee will be required for this project. Contact Little Rock Wastewater Utility for additional information. Enter : No comment received. Center -Point Energy: Approved as submitted. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. 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. Please 0 December 16, 2010 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.- 2 Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1632-A submit plans for water facilities and/or fire protection system 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 and/or fire service. Approval of plans by the Arkansas Department of Health Engineering Division and Little Rock Fire Department is required. Fire sprinkler systems which do not contain additives such as antifreeze shall be isolated with a double detector check valve assembly. If additives are used, a reduced pressure zone backflow preventer shall be required. 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. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. All gates must maintain a minimum gate opening of 20-feet. 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. ISSUESITECHNICALIDESIGN: Planning Division: No comment - Landscape: 1. Site plan must comply with the City's landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. A fifty foot (50) wide land use buffer is required to separate this proposed development from the residential property on the northern perimeter of the site. Seventy percent (70%) of these buffers are to remain undisturbed. 3. 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 300 square feet in area. The interior islands must be evenly distributed throughout the site. 4. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. 5. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. 6. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance 5 December 16, 2010 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont. FILE NO.: S-1632-A requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. 7. The property to the north is zoned residential; therefore, a six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the northern perimeter of the site. G. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (November 24, 2010) Mr. Joe White of White-Daters and Associates was present representing the request. Staff presented an overview of the development stating there were a number of technical issues associated with the request in need of addressing prior to the Commission acting on the request. Staff stated a detailed signage plan would be required. Staff also questioned the total height of the proposed building. Public Works comments were addressed. Staff stated the drive located along the eastern perimeter was to be signed as exit only. Staff also stated the sight distance for the drive was to be recertified. Staff stated a grading permit was required prior to the start of construction. Landscaping comments were addressed. Staff stated a land use buffer along the northern perimeter of the site was required. Staff stated within the buffer seventy percent was to remain undisturbed. Staff stated screening would also be required within this area. Staff stated prior to the issuance of a building permit a landscape plan would be required. Staff stated irrigation was required to water landscaped areas. 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. H. ANALYSIS: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff addressing the issues raised at the November 24, 2010, Subdivision Committee meeting. A note has been included on the site plan concerning signage and the total height of the buildings. The site plan also indicates the eastern drive as an exit only drive and the applicant has provided a letter to staff certifying the sight distance of the eastern drive does comply with minimum ASHTO standards. The development is not proposed with dumpsters but a single trash compacting location has been indicated on the site plan. December 16, 2010 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1632-A The property contains 26.0± acres and is zoned MF-12 which allows for the development of multi -family residential units at a density of 12 units per acre. The development is proposed containing 312-units located within eleven (11) buildings. The project will have a clubhouse and pool. A walking trail is proposed within the wooded area west of the clubhouse. The project will be gated with a secondary access for emergency services which will be signed for residents as exit only. The project is proposed with eleven (11) buildings, nine (9) of which are three (3) story with walk -out units on the lower level and a clubhouse house. The buildings are proposed with a maximum height of 52-feet. The maximum height allowed by right in the MF-12 Zoning District is 35-feet. The proposed buildings will require a height variance from the typical ordinance standard. According to the applicant the height variance will allow the site to develop with two (2) fewer buildings which will in -turn allow the developer to maintain additional buffers along Chenonceau Boulevard and to the west adjacent to the Aberdeen Subdivision. A 50-foot land use buffer is indicated along the northern property line with the required 70 percent or 35-feet to remain undisturbed. The applicant has indicated screening will be provided with either vegetation or a six foot (6') opaque screening fence or wall as typically required by the ordinance. Parking is proposed at 604 spaces for a 1.87 ratio. Within the development 44 spaces are located in enclosed garages which are scattered around the site. The ordinance would typically require the placement of 468 parking spaces. The parking as proposed is more than adequate to serve the development. The site plan indicates the placement of a development sign within the front yard landscaped area. The request includes a variance from Section 36-552(a)(3) to allow the placement of additional signage identifying the development. There are two signs proposed along decorative walls located on each side of the driveway at the entrance to the development. The variance is to allow the placement of two sign faces, one on each wall. The sign face will not exceed twenty-four square feet in area as typically allowed in multi -family zones. Staff is supportive of the signage as proposed. There are a number of subdivisions located in this area which have been approved for the placement of signage as proposed by the applicant. A variance from Sections 30-43 and 31-210 to allow the east driveway to be located less than 150 feet from the property line is also proposed. The drive is indicated as an exit only drive. The applicant has provided staff with a sight distance certification for the driveway location. Staff is supportive of the drive as proposed. 0 December 16, 2010 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont. FILE NO.: S-1632-A Staff is supportive of the request. The development is proposed as a multi -family development at a density as allowed under the MF-12 zoning district. Although there is a variance to allow the height to be increased from 35-feet to 52-feet staff does not feel this variance will negatively impact the development or the area. The height variance allows for lesser area to be disturbed. The developer has indicated a desire to work with the terrain of the site eliminating the need to move larger amounts of dirt on the site and hall away from the site. The site plan as proposed allows for buffers and landscaping complying with the typical ordinance standards. The variance request from the City's Land Alteration Ordinance will remain unchanged with this development request. In addition staff does not feel the variance request to allow the exit only driveway to be located along the eastern perimeter will significantly impact the traffic pattern along Chenonceau Boulevard. To staff's knowledge there are no remaining outstanding technical issues associated with the request. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff recommends approval of the variance request from Section 35-257 (c) to allow an increased height for the structures. Staff recommends approval of the variance request from Section 36-552(a)(3) to allow the placement of additional signage identifying the development. Staff recommends approval of the variance request from Sections 30-43 and 31-210 to allow the east driveway to be located less than 150 feet from the property line. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (DECEMBER 16, 2010) Mr. Joe White of White Daters and Associates was present representing the requests. There were two registered objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval of the request subject to compliance with the comments and conditions as outlined in paragraphs D, E and F of the agenda staff report. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the variance request from Section 35-257 (c) to allow an increased height for the .structures. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the variance request from Section 36-552(a)(3) to allow the placement of December 16, 2010 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont.) FILE NO.- S_1632-A additional signage identifying the development. Staff presented a recommendation of approval of the variance request from Sections 30-43 and 31-210 to allow the east driveway to be located less than 150 feet from the property line. Mr. Joe White of White Daters and Associates addressed the Commission. He stated he would yield his time to allow the opposition to speak and hopefully address their concerns with his presentation. Mr. Frank Pohlkamp addressed the Commission in opposition. He stated he wished to thank Mr. White and the Developer, Mr. Crumpton, for meeting with the neighborhoods and presenting their plan. He stated his subdivision, Bayonne Place, was located across the street from the proposed development. He stated there were nearly as many planned apartments within the development as there were single-family homes located in Bayonne Place and Aberdeen Subdivisions combined. He stated the added traffic to Chenonceau would make it more difficult for residents of these subdivision to make left turns on Chenal Parkway from Chenonceau. He stated the residents had requested from the City on a number of occasions a traffic signal at this intersection. Mr. Pohlkamp stated the developers had indicated a minimum street buffer of 120 feet would be maintained along Chenonceau Boulevard. He stated the residents wanted to ensure that was honored. He stated security was important to the residents of the area. He stated if Federal money was used in the project a percentage of the Units would be Federally subsidized. He stated the residents wanted assurances from the developer that no Federal money would be applied for and that there would not be any subsidized units within the development. He stated the residents did not want the apartments to become a breeding ground for crime and vandalism. He stated the residents were not trying to block the development. He stated the residents wanted assurance the development would be constructed in the best, most appropriate manner as promised by Deltic when they enticed residents to purchase homes and/or build homes in the area. Ms. Mary Ryan addressed the Commission in opposition of the request. She stated she had a number of concerns. She stated traffic, the height of the buildings, the number of units and the buffering along the western perimeter were her primary concerns. She stated her home was located adjacent to the western perimeter of the proposed development. She stated the residents of Aberdeen had been assured no development would occur within 300 feet of their common ownership. She questioned who would be responsible to ensure the developer did not get into the buffer area. She stated the development was proposed with 21 acres and 300 plus units. She questioned the density of the development. She also stated the height of the buildings was a concern. She stated her eastern wall was constructed with a number of windows and questioned 9 December 16, 2010 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 2 (Cont. FILE NO.: S-1632-A what her view would be when the units were completed. Ms. Ryan stated it was difficult for residents to turn onto Chenal Parkway from Chenonceau Boulevard. She stated with the additional units this would only increase the traffic concerns. She stated the residents had requested a traffic signal only to be told by the City there was no money to fund a signal. Staff stated the development contained 26 acres and not 21 acres. Staff stated the previous development did not include all the land which was currently zoned for multi -family. Staff stated Ms. Ryan could contact Tony Bozynski, Director of Planning, if she suspected the buffer was being violated. Mr. White stated the developers were committed to developing the site as proposed to the residents at the neighborhood meeting. The Commission questioned the street buffer along Chenonceau Boulevard. Mr. White stated the buffer would average 100 to 110 feet. He stated at a minimum the buffer would be 90 feet. The compactor located within the buffer was questioned. Mr. White stated no one would see the compactor because it would be located below the ground and screened. Commissioner Brock questioned if the developers would commit to making sure the compactor did not get full on weekends and was emptied when it was full. Mr. White stated the developers would commit to this request. He stated the compactor would be larger than most presently being used so he felt this would not be an issue. The Commission questioned the distance between the buildings and Ms. Ryan's house. Mr. White stated there would be 300 feet of buffering and an additional 100 feet of woods that would not be cleared. He stated the walking trail area would be left natural. He stated this developer desired to go vertically which would limit the number of buildings and disturbance to the site. He stated the buildings would not be any taller with the basement units than if the buildings were constructed with a stem wall. He stated within the parking lot area the buildings would appear to be two and three story buildings. He stated the rear units would be constructed as walk -out basement units. When questioned as to the view of Ms. Ryan, Mr. White stated she would be looking mid -point on the building. Mr. White stated the units would all be market rate units. He stated no Federal funding would be used in the construction of the development. He stated the developers were concerned over traffic as well. He stated a traffic signal would cost between $170,000 and $180,000. He stated a temporary light could be installed for $50,000 to $60,000. He stated the developers of the apartments were willing to contribute 15 to 20 percent up to $25,000 toward the cost of installing the traffic signal. There was a general discussion of the item and if Mr. White was making amendments to his application to ensure buffering and the contribution to the traffic signal. Mr. White stated he was amending his application to include a contribution to a traffic signal for 10 December 16, 2010 SUBDIVISION TEM NO.: 2 (Cont. LE NO.: S-1632-A 15 to 20 percent of the cost up to $25,000, He stated he was amending his application to include street buffering along Chenonceau Boulevard to be an undisturbed buffer with a minimum width of 90-feet and an average width of 100 to 110-feet. There was no further discussion of the item. The chair entertained a motion for approval of the item as amended and as presented by_ staff. The motion carried by a vote of 9 ayes 0 noes, 0 absent and 2 open positions. 11 ITEM NO.: 2. _ S-1632-A NAME: The Ridge at Chenal Subdivision Site Plan Review LOCATION: located on the Northeast corner of Chenonceau Boulevard and Bayonne Drive 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 December 1, 2010. The Office of Planning and Development must receive the proof of notice no later than December 10, 2010. 2. Provide in the general notes section of the site plan the maximum building height proposed for the buildings. (52-feet) 3. What is in building G1? 4. The development is proposed with 312 units of multi -family housing. Based on the typical ordinance standards a total of 468 parking spaces would be required. The site plan indicates the placement of 45 garage spaces and 537 parking spaces for a total of 582 parking spaces. 5. Provide details of any proposed signage. Signage typically allowed in multi -family zones is a maximum of six feet in height and thirty-two square feet in area. Variance/Waivers: A variance from Section 36-257 (c) to allow an increased height for the structures. The height allowed in the MF-12 zoning district is a maximum of 35-feet. Public Works Conditions: 1. Sidewalks with appropriate handicap ramps are required in accordance with Section 31-175 of the Little Rock Code and the Master Street Plan. 2. Provide a letter prepared by a registered engineer certifying the sight distance at the driveway intersections comply with 2004 AASHTO Green Book standards. 3. Driveway locations and widths do not meet the traffic access and circulation requirements of Sections 30-43 and 31-210. The east driveway is required to be located 150 feet from the property line. A variance must be requested for the installation of this driveway. 4. Will the east driveway be one way exit only? If the driveway is exit only, signs should be installed at the east driveway to inform drivers. 5. Repair or replace any curb and gutter or sidewalk that is damaged in the public right-of-way prior to occupancy. 6. 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. Other than residential subdivisions, site grading and drainage plans must be submitted and approved prior to the start of construction. 7. 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 Item # 2. Traffic Engineering at (501) 379-1805 (Travis Herbner). 8. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. Show the proposed location for stormwater detention facilities on the plan. 9. 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. 10. Where is the destination for the cut material from this site? If that destination site does not have a grading permit, one is required to be issued. 11. Turn around must be provided for a SU-30 vehicle attempting to enter the development. A stacking distance of 30 feet from pavement must also be provided. 12.All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. 13. Measures to control the increase in stormwater runoff from the increased impervious surface should be implemented to not damage adjacent property. 14. Damage to public and private property due to hauling operations or operation of construction related equipment from a nearby construction site shall be repaired by the responsible party prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Utilities and Fire Department/County Planning: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements for this project. Capacity Contribution Analysis and Fee will be required for this project. Enter : No comment received. Center -Point Energy: Approved as submitted. AT & T: No comment received. Central Arkansas Water: All Central Arkansas Water requirements in effect at the time of request for water service must be met. 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. Please submit plans for water facilities and/or fire protection system 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 and/or fire service. Approval of plans by the Arkansas Department of Health Engineering Division and Little Rock Fire Department is required. Fire sprinkler systems which do not contain additives such as antifreeze shall be isolated with a double detector check valve assembly. If additives are used, a reduced pressure zone backflow preventer shall be required. 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. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. All gates must maintain a minimum gate opening of 20-feet. Contact the Little Rock Fire Department for additional information. County Planning: No comment. Item # 2. CATA: The site is not located on a dedicated CATA Bus Route. Parks and Recreation: No comment. Planning Division: No comment. Landscape'. 1. Site plan must comply with the City's landscape and buffer ordinance requirements. 2. A fifty foot (50) wide land use buffer is required to separate this proposed development from the residential property on the northern perimeter of the site. Currently, the southern perimeter is not meeting this minimum requirement. Seventy percent (70%) of these buffers are to remain undisturbed. 3. The landscape ordinance requires a minimum of eight percent (8%) of the paved areas be landscaped with interior islands of at least 7 Y2 feet in width and 300 square feet in area. Proposed plan does not currently reflect this minimum. 4. The interior islands must be evenly distributed throughout the site. 5. An automatic irrigation system to water landscaped areas will be required. 6. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, it will be necessary to provide an approved landscape plan stamped with the seal of a Registered Landscape Architect. 7. The City Beautiful Commission recommends preserving as many existing trees as feasible on this site. Credit toward fulfilling Landscape Ordinance requirements can be given when preserving trees of six (6) inch caliper or larger. 8. The property to the north is zoned residential; therefore, a six (6) foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward, a wall, or dense evergreen plantings, is required along the northern perimeter of the site. 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, December 1, 2010. Item # 2.