Loading...
Item 8 - ZA05-104 Approved Memo & PlansCase No. ZA05-104 S T A F F R E P O R T October 19, 2005 CASE NO: ZA05-104 PROJECT: Concept Plan for Lot 13, Block 3R, Cimmarron Acres Addition REQUEST: On behalf of the City of Southlake, Hopkins Commercial is requesting approval of a concept plan. The applicant is proposing an 18,000 s.f. retail building on the site. A variance for driveway spacing along Pearson Lane is requested. ACTION NEEDED: Final Memo ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information (B) Vicinity Map (C) Plans and Support Information (D) Concept Plan Review Summary No. 2 dated September 30, 2005 (E) Surrounding Property Owners Map (F) Surrounding Property Owners Responses (G) Full Size Plans (for Commission and Council Members Only) STAFF CONTACT: Ken Baker (748-8067) Dennis Killough (748-8072) City of Southlake Department of Planning Case No. Attachment A ZA05-104 Page 1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION OWNER: City of Southlake APPLICANT: Hopkins Commercial PROPERTY SITUATION: The property is located at the northeast corner of Pearson Lane and W. Southlake Blvd. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 6R2, Block 3 (replatted to Lot 13, Block 3R, Cimmarron Acres Addition) LAND USE CATEGORY: Retail Commercial CURRENT ZONING: “C-2” Local Retail Commercial District HISTORY: -A final plat was approved by the City Council for Cimmarron Acres on July 3, 1984. -“C-2” zoning was placed on the lots with frontage on W. Southlake Blvd with approval of Zoning Ordinance No. 480 on September 19, 1989. -City Council approved a plat revision of Lots 5 & 6 on October 15, 1996. -City Council approved a plat revision involving lots for lots 5R1-5R5 and 6R1 & 6R2, Block 3 in May 2005.. TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT: See Attachment ‘C’ Pages 5-7. TREE PRESERVATION: There are three cedar elm trees on-site which are designated for removal. Although these trees might be saved with the placement of landscape islands and minimal site grading in the area, the trees are in poor condition. New trees planted as part of the required landscape and bufferyard will be of a higher quality. P&Z ACTION: October 6, 2005; Approved (6-0) subject to Concept Plan Review Summary No. 2, dated September 30, 2005, granting the variance outlined in paragraph 3b regarding minimum spacing from the intersection on Pearson Lane and recognizing the following: o Applicant’s agreement to place a monument saying “Southlake” at the Southwest corner of the property o Applicant’s agreement to maintain the ditch that runs along the west property line; o Applicant’s agreement to work with staff on the location of a property line wall, considering the sewer/water line along the north side of the property; o The final decision on the exact number of parking spaces is deferred until site plan approval; o This concept plan approval does not grant final approval of the Case No. Attachment A ZA05-104 Page 2 proposed building elevations and design; o Applicant’s agreement to move the dumpster location to the northeast side of the property. COUNCIL ACTION: October 18, 2005; Approved (7-0) subject to Concept Plan Review Summary No. 2, dated September 30, 2005; subject to the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission; asking the applicant to take Council’s comments into consideration when bringing a site plan back for approval; and giving the city final approval of any Southlake monument placed at the corner. STAFF COMMENTS: Attached is Concept Plan Review Summary No. 2 dated September 30, 2005. N:\Community Development\MEMO\2005cases\05-104CP.doc Case No. Attachment C ZA05-104 Page 1 Case No. Attachment C ZA05-104 Page 2 Case No. Attachment C ZA05-104 Page 3 Case No. Attachment C ZA05-104 Page 4 Case No. Attachment C ZA05-104 Page 5 Case No. Attachment C ZA05-104 Page 6 Case No. Attachment C ZA05-104 Page 7 Case No. Attachment D ZA05-104 Page 1 CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY Case No.: ZA05-104 Review No.: Two Date of Review: 9/30/05 Project Name: Concept Plan – Pearson Retail, Lot 13, Block 3R, Cimmarron Acres Addition APPLICANT: Steve Gregory ARCHITECT: Hopkins Commercial Good Fulton & Farrell Phone (214) 956-7881 Phone (214) 303-1500 CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 09/28/05AND WE OFFER THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT DENNIS KILLOUGH AT (817) 748-8072 OR BEN BRYNER (817) 748-8602. 1. Extend the 5’ type ‘A’ bufferyard, located on the eastern portion of the lot, all the way to the north boundary line. 2. An additional landscape island at least 12’ in width is needed along the row of parking on Southlake Boulevard. 3. The following changes are needed regarding driveways: a. Show existing driveways across adjoining rights-of-way. b. Minimum spacing from the intersection along Pearson Lane is 250 feet for a full access driveway. (A Variance is Requested) c. A variance was granted for the existing common driveway located along the eastern boundary as part of the ground storage tank site plan approval. d. Staff recommends removal of the median in the east driveway. The location of this median will achieve required stacking depth for inbound traffic but will also make left turning movements difficult. Staff recommends that the whole pavement and building portion of the site be shifted north. This revision should bring the site into compliance with stacking requirements. 4. Although not required with a concept plan, elevations of the building have been provided for review. The following changes are needed: a. Because this building is with 400 feet of residential property, the north façade also requires articulation. No articulation is provided on the rear portion of the building. b. Label the exterior building materials to be used. Case No. Attachment D ZA05-104 Page 2 * Staff has recommended to the applicant that a site plan be submitted, rather than a concept plan, due to the size and single phase development of this project. However, the applicant has specifically requested approval of a concept plan for the purpose of marketing the site and deferring the expense of required site grading and engineering plans. The applicant has been specifically made aware that a site plan must be approved by the City Council following a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to submitting construction documents for building permit approval. * A fully corrected plan that includes all associated support plans/documents and conditions of approval is required before any ordinance or zoning verification letter publication or before acceptance of any other associated plans for review. Plans and documents must be reviewed and stamped “approved” by the Planning Department. * All development must comply with the City’s Drainage Ordinance No. 605 and detain all post development run-off. * Any variance requests have to be documented in writing and fully justified. * If individual tenants desire to sell alcoholic beverages that a specific use permit must be processed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. * The applicant should be aware that prior to issuance of a building permit a site plan must be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. Following approval a fully corrected plan set must be submitted and approved by the planning department and then a full construction plan set must be submitted to the building department. All fees must be paid including but not limited to water sewer and street impact fees, park dedication fees and permit and inspection fees. * This site falls within the applicability of the residential adjacency standards as amended by Ordinance 480-CC, Section 43, Part III “Residential Adjacency Standards” as well as the Corridor Overlay Zone regulations in Section 43, Part II. Although no review of the following issues is provided with this concept plan, the applicant must evaluate the site for compliance prior to submittal of the site plan. A Site Plan must be submitted and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council prior to issuance of a building permit. Note that these issues are only the major areas of site plan review and that the applicant is responsible for compliance with all site plan requirements: • Masonry requirements per §43.13a, Ordinance 480, as amended and Masonry Ordinance No. 557, as amended. • Roof design standards per § 43.13b, Ordinance 480, as amended • Mechanical Equipment Screening • Vertical and horizontal building articulation (required on all building facades) per §43.13d, Ordinance 480, as amended. Case No. Attachment D ZA05-104 Page 3 • Building setback standards as per § 43.13h and as shown in exhibit 43-E, Ordinance 480, as amended. • Spill-over lighting and noise per §43.13i and §43.13j, Ordinance 480, as amended. • Off-street parking requirements per §35, Ordinance 480, as amended. All areas intended for vehicular use must be of an all weather surface material in accordance with the Ordinance No. 480, as amended. • Screening as per §39.4, Ordinance 480, as amended. • Interior landscaping per Landscape Ordinance No. 544. • Fire lanes must be approved by the City Fire Department. * Denotes Informational Comment Case No. Attachment E ZA 05-104 Page 1 Surrounding Property Owner Map Cimmarron Acres Addition – Pearson Retail Owner Zoning Land Use Acreage 1. City of Southlake “SF-1A” Low Density Residential 1.292 2. City of Southlake “SF-1A” Low Density Residential 1.015 3. City of Southlake “SF-1A” Low Density Residential 1.023 4. City of Southlake “SF-1A” Low Density Residential 1.046 5. City of Southlake “CS” Public / Semi-Public 3.807 6. Southlake Pse Inc “C-2” Retail Commercial 1.760 7. Lee, Wayne “R-PUD” Retail Commercial 0.189 8. Lee, Wayne “AG” Retail Commercial 0.556 9. Lenna Llc “C-2” Retail Commercial 0.652 10. City of Keller N/A N/A N/A 11. City of Southlake “C-2” Retail Commercial 2.743 Case No. Attachment F ZA 05-104 Page 1 Surrounding Property Owner Responses Cimmarron Acres Addition -- Pearson Retail Notices Sent: Four (4) Responses: None (0)* * One response was received September 30, 2005, from Jean Steele, a citizen outside the 200-feet buffer, and has been forwarded to P&Z Commission members and other relevant staff.