Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-1180 Staff AnalysisJune 25, 1998 ITEM NO.: A FILE NO.: S-1180 NAME: Riverview Apartments - Subdivision Site Plan Review LOCATION: North side of North Street, at State Street DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: TAG Properties Wiedower Architects A. J. Gilbert 1012 W. 2nd Street 10800 Financial Ctr. Parkway Little Rock, AR 72201 Little Rock, AR 72211 AREA: 2.8 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 ZONING: R-5 ALLOWED USES: PROPOSED USE• VARIANCES WAIVERS REQUESTED: FT. NEW STREET• 0 Multi -family residential Multi -family residential 1. A variance to allow reduced rear yard setbacks. 2. A variance to allow reduced front yard setbacks. 3. A variance to allow reduced number of off-street parking spaces (108 required, 100 proposed). This 2.8 acre tract is zoned R-5 Urban Residence District. A site plan review is required for this site due to the fact that the applicant is requesting a multiple building development. The 72-unit apartment development is a permitted, by right use. A. PROPOSAL• The applicant is proposing to construct three (3) multifamily residential buildings (72 units on 2.8 acres) on the R-5 zoned property along the north side of North Street at State Street. Each of the three buildings will be three (3) stories in height. The applicant is requesting a reduced rear yard setback variance for buildings B and C. Building B shows a 5 feet rear yard setback and building C shows a 20 foot rear yard setback. A 25 foot rear yard setback is required by June 25, 1998 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO. A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S--1180 Ordinance. A total of 108 off-street parking spaces is required by ordinance . The site plan shows 100 off-street parking spaces, of which 35 spaces will be covered (along North Street). The carport structures do not comply with the minimum 25 foot front yard setback. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance for reduced front yard setbacks for the carport structures. The proposed setbacks for the carport structures range from 11 feet to 21 feet. The carport structures will not be enclosed on any side. As noted above, a total of 100 off-street parking spaces are provided on the site plan (108 required by ordinance). The applicant is requesting a variance for the reduced number of spaces. A portion of undeveloped Izard Street right-of-way runs through the west end of the property. The applicant proposes to abandon the right-of-way as part of their application. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The portion of the property east of State Street is undeveloped. The property west of State Street contains a paved parking lot and 3-4 single-family residential structures. The general area contains a mixture of residential, office and commercial uses. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received no neighborhood comment as of this writing. The Downtown Neighborhood Association was notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS• 1. Dedication of right-of-way is required for turnaround on State Street and a 20 ft. radial dedication at the southeast corner prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. One-half street improvements and sidewalks are required for North Street and construction of turnaround with any planned development. 3. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 4. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 5. Grading permit will be required on this new development, F June 25, 1998 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO • A (Cont.) _ FILE NO.: S-1180 if it disturbs more than one acre. 6. All driveways shall be concrete aprons per City Ordinance. 7. Driveways shall conform to Sec. 31-210. or Ordinance 16,577. 8. Obtain permits (barricade/street cut) for improvements within proposed or existing right-of-way from Traffic Engineering prior to construction in right-of-way. 9. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code. All requests should be forwarded to Traffic Engineering. 10. Utility excavation within proposed right-of-way shall be per Article V of Sec. 30. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer located on property on State Street that may be in conflict with project. Contact L.R. Wastewater Utility for details. AP&L: No comments received. ARKLA: No comments received. Southwestern Bell: No Comment. Water: Contact the Water Works regarding meter size(s) and location(s). Submit two copies of plans for proposed on - site fire protection. Fire Department: If the buildings are sprinkled, an additional on -site fire hydrant may be required. Contact Dennis Free at 371-4796 for details. County Planning: No Comment. CATA: The property is located within one (1) block of Central Arkansas Transit bus route #21. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No Comment. Landscape Issues: The Landscape Ordinance requires a minimum perimeter landscape strip width of 4 feet adjacent to on site vehicular use areas. The plan submitted only provides for a width of 2 1/2 feet west of the proposed 13 space parking lot and south of the proposed 21 space parking lot. Additionally, the minimum buffer width allowed at any given 3 June 25, 1998 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A Cont. FILE NO.: S-1184 point south of the proposed 13 space parking lot is 6 feet. The plan submitted only provides for a width of 2 1/2 feet part of the way. If dumpsters are to be used, they must be shown on the plan and be screened on three sides to a height of 8 feet. Prior to a building permit issued, three copies of a detailed landscape plan must be submitted to and approved by Bob Brown, Plans Review Specialist. He may be reached at 371-4864. G. ANALYSIS• The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on March 9, 1998. The revised plan addresses all of the outstanding issues as raised by the Subdivision Committee. The revised plan shows a turnaround at the end of State Street as required by Public Works. The applicant has noted that all other Public Works requirements will be complied with. The revised plan also shows a ground -mounted sign location. This sign must comply with ordinance standards (setback 5 feet from any property line, maximum height - 6 feet, maximum area 24 square feet). The applicant is requesting the variances as noted in paragraph A. Staff supports the variance requests. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the site plan subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with paragraphs D, E and F 2. Staff recommends approval of the variances as requested. 3. Staff also recommends approval of the abandonment of the undeveloped Izard Street right-of-way. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (FEBRUARY 26, 1998) Bill Wiedower was present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the site plan proposal. Bruce Kemmet, of Public Works, reviewed the Public Works requirements with the Committee. There was a very detailed discussion regarding the required turnaround at the end of State Street. 4 June 25, 1998 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A Cont. FILE NO.: S-1180 Other issues briefly discussed included required off-street parking, Izard Street right-of-way and the variances requested for reduced building setbacks. The Committee then accepted the presentation and forwarded the issue to the full Commission for final action. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (MARCH 19, 1998) Bill Wiedower was present, representing the application. There was one person present with objections. Staff gave a brief description of the proposal and a recommendation of approval with conditions. Bill Wiedower addressed the Commission in support of the application. Mr. Wiedower stated that the site plan had been revised based on Subdivision Committee comments. He stated that he had been working with Public Works on the turn -around at the end of State Street. Carrie Holyfield, of Arkbest Realty, addressed the Commission. She stated that she had 3 objections to the site plan. She stated that the objections are with the turn -around at the end of State Street, the parking variance and the front yard setback variance. She also requested that an 8 foot privacy fence be constructed along the property line between the apartment development and Davidson Law Firm. There was a brief discussion concerning the turn -around at the end of State Street. David Scherer, of Public Works, stated that one of the reasons for the turn -around at the end of State Street was to prevent vehicles from turning around in the Davidson Law Firm parking lot. There was a discussion relating to the parking variance for eight spaces. Mr. Wiedower stated that he was trying to maximize the use of the property. Monte Moore, of the Planning Staff, pointed out that a portion of the property (north of the proposed buildings) was not buildable due to the topography. Commissioner Adcock asked the justification for the front setback variance request. Mr. Moore stated that staff had talked to Mr. Wiedower and suggested moving the covered parking to the next row of parking spaces to the north. Mr. Wiedower stated that the covered parking could be moved to the next row of parking to the north and he had no problem doing that. 5 June 25, 1998 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1180 Commissioner Nunnley asked about Ms. Holyfield's request for a privacy fence and if it was required. Mr. Moore stated that it was not a requirement. There was a general discussion relating to a letter submitted by the Bank of Little Rock and the variances requested. There was also discussion relating to the development and the general area. Mr. Wiedower discussed the possibility of reducing the size of the apartment complex. He stated that the funding of the project was through HUD and to an extent they required a certain number of apartment units. After additional discussion, Mr. Moore explained to the Commission that the applicant mailed the notices as required by the bylaws with one exception. The notices were mailed three days late. Mr. Moore stated that the adjacent property owners received the notices based on conversations with the property owners. Based on this conversation, a motion was made to waive the bylaws and accept the notification as done by the applicant. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes and 1 nay. A second motion was made to approve the application as recommended by staff, including approval of the variance requests. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes and 0 nays. The application was approved. STAFF UPDATE: At the City Attorney's request, staff has placed this item on the agenda for reconsideration in response to a lawsuit which has been filed, objecting to the Planning Commission's previous action in approving the site plan with variances. The applicant has revised the site plan, making several changes. Most notably, the applicant has moved the covered parking (eliminating the front yard setback variance) and has added parking spaces (eliminating the variance for reduced number of parking spaces). A variance for a reduced rear yard setback for the eastern most building is requested as before. Staff and the applicant will present and review the revised site plan at the public hearing. The City Attorney is requesting that the Commission expunge its vote taken on March 19, 1998, approving the site plan for this development. The City Attorney is also requesting that, after review, the Commission approve the revised site plan as submitted by the applicant. 6 June 25, 1998 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: A (Cont.)FILE NO.: S-1180 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 25, 1998) Jim Lawson, Director of Planning and Development, addressed the Commission and reviewed the revised site plan which had been submitted by the applicant. He noted that there were several minor charges in the site plan and that it was within his authority as Planning Director to approve the site plan, which he had already done. He noted the following minor charges in the site plan: 1. A 12 foot easement has been added along the railroad tracks along the north side of the property as part of the parks trail system. 2. A cul-de-sac has been shown at the end of State Street, as required by Public Works. 3. The site plan now meets the requirements for front yard setback and minimum number of parking spaces, thus eliminating those variances as previously granted by the Commission. 4. The site plan continues to show a reduced rear yard setback for the easternmost building, as previously approved by the Commission. Cindy Dawson, City Attorney, noted that Mr. Lawson does have the authority to approve the revised site plan. She noted that the revised site plan supersedes the previously approved site plan. She also noted that if the applicant wishes to request another variance for the site plan in the future, the issue must be brought back before the Commission. David Grace, attorney for the applicant, addressed the Commission. He stated that the applicant understands that the action of Mr. Lawson supersedes the previously approved site plan. Chairman Lichty asked if Mr. Skip Davidson was present, having filled out a card. There was no response. Chairman Lichty concluded that staffs presentation was a review of the revised site plan as approved by Mr. Lawson, and that no commission action was necessary on the item. The Commission accepted the briefing. 7