Loading...
Item 6B13 SOUTHLAI<,,E CITY OF Department of Planning & Development Services '�a drill 0 =:7No 1•] :aI February 9, 2011 CASE NO: ZA11 -001 PROJECT: Toys "R" Us / Babies "R" Us EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Casco Corp. is requesting approval of a Revised Site Plan to modify the east building fagade for Toy "R" Us/ Babies "'R" Us who is proposing to occupy the former Circuit City space located near the southwest corner of State Highway 114 and N. Kimball Avenue at 250 N. Kimball Avenue. SPIN #8 DETAILS: Casco Corp. is requesting a revised site plan approval to modify the east building fagade for Toys "R" Us / Babies "R" Us who is proposing to occupy the former Circuit City tenant space. The applicant is proposing to reconfigure the front entry of the building which will include installation of additional store front aluminum framed glass panels, new roof cornice material and removal of a portion of the cultured stone wainscot. The vertical wall surrounding the main entry door and glass panels will be reconstructed at an approximate 7 degree angle extending away from the main building wall. Additionally, the plans show a portion the cornice and parapet wall along the north fagade being removed. Variances A variance is being requested to the Masonry Ordinance No. 557 -A, as amended, under Section 1, Exterior Masonry Construction Requirements. The Masonry Ordinance requires for the applicant to have at least eighty percent (80 %) of all exterior walls, excluding doors, constructed of masonry materials or glass. When the site plan for Southlake Corners was originally approved, the Corridor Overlay and Masonry regulations allowed up to 80% of a building fagade (excluding doors and windows) to consist of synthetic masonry material such as EIFS/ synthetic stucco. The regulations for both the Corridor Overlay and the Masonry Ordinance have since been revised and will allow only up to 20% of a fagade to consist of synthetic masonry products or other non - masonry materials. Because the applicant is proposing to increase the percentage of synthetic stucco and non - masonry surface area (excluding doors and windows) from what is currently in place, a variance to the Masonry Ordinance is needed. Due to the limited scope of the request, no site plan review summary was created for this proposal. However, with the proposed modification of the parapets and cornice along the east and north facades, the applicant must maintain the screening of the mechanical units from Southlake Boulevard and SH 114. ACTION NEEDED: 1) Conduct Public Hearing 2) Consider Revised Site Plan Approval Request ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information Case No. ZA11 -001 (B) Vicinity Map (C) Plans and Support Information — Link to PowerPoint Presentation (D) Surrounding Property Owners Map (E) Surrounding Property Owners Responses (F) Full Size Plans (for Commission and Council Members Only) STAFF CONTACT: Ken Baker (817) 748 -8067 Daniel Cortez (817) 748 -8070 Case No. ZA11 -001 BACKGROUND INFORMATION OWNER: Inland W Southlake Corners, Ltd APPLICANT: Casco Corp., Patrick Moore PROPERTY SITUATION: 250 N. Kimball Ave. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 2A, Block 1, Farrar Addition LAND USE CATEGORY: Regional Retail CURRENT ZONING: "C -3" General Commercial Zoning District HISTORY: - The C -3 Zoning was designated on the property with the approval of the Zoning Ordinance No. 480 on September 19, 1989. - A preliminary plat was approved by City Council on September 7, 1993 under Planning Case ZA93 -060. - A revised preliminary plat was approved on May 31, 1994 under Planning Case ZA94 -029. - A final plat was approved for Lot 2, Block 1, Farrar Addition on May 19, 1994 under Planning Case ZA94 -043. - A Site Plan for Southlake Corners was approved by City Council on April 15, 2003 under Planning Case ZA03 -011. - A Revised Site Plan was approved by City Council on September 1, 2004 to permit a bank and to create the building pad site for Building `H' under Planning Case ZA04 -056. WATER & SEWER: Water & Sewer currently serve this site. TREE PRESERVATION: No trees will be affected by the proposal. I Kill 01l0ll0CCIF-1 ZONING COMMISSION: February 3, 2011; Motion to approve subject to the mechanical equipment being screened as noted per the staff report and the Zoning Ordinance, the applicant provide a color scheme for the white to be a shade which is not stark, a line of sight analysis and a rendering or exhibit showing the entire elevation of the building be provided by the City Council meeting. Motion failed to receive second. New motion made to deny passed (3 -2); Commissioner Lancor and Vice Chairman Hudson dissented. STAFF COMMENTS: Due to the limited scope of the request, no site plan review summary was created for this proposal. However, with the proposed modification of the parapets and cornice along the east and north facades, the applicant must maintain the screening of the mechanical units from Southlake Boulevard and SH 114. N.ICommunity DevelopmentlMEMO12011 Cases1001 - SP - Toys R Us - Babies R UslStaff Report Case No. Attachment A ZA11 -001 Page 1 Vicinity Map Toys "R" Us / Babies "R" Us STATE HIGHWAY 114 2 3 r r �L m E SOUTHLAKE BLVD (FM 1709) ZA11 -001 ..., , �. Revised Site Plan Masonry Ordinance Variance 250 N. Kimball Ave. N 0 300 600 1,200 Feet S Case No. Attachment B ZA11 -001 Page 1 D� j N j (D o z 00 j a1 n S 2) ( (a 3 (D '* L L �1 PC; � 3e �_ r •, — Y VM.INNY MAP 4 Lu mmn.wex.aeu .••� _ Imo' z ul W i w s2 j Z \' SITE DATA SUMMARY CHART = O O -. _- T - f i,n Draw O Ll � >I W c hx �l ,�1 h V VV h hh l h 8M PLAN 4ft -'. EXISTING SUMMARY CHART SUMNMY CHMT- BUFFFRYA OS Iy � CCNCF.PfU PARIUHG I6LAWS SffE ffJ N FOR WALMART REDEVELOPMENT RECD MICR 12 21 m -- Z 2 w Oz * 4� O � 0, U z r !! +x Uls f� c r SP -3U Li N s � s � i Cl) L � �O t � � O 0 J rh J O� s 0 N 0 > (D 6 z 0 A . as 0 =r (D rr ........... rN� �r� ` ., ,` � i■�■■ =� u = r'�'�""it "_ .� 0111111111 roe/ : � i� - . • . - � ����.. - . - a Dumlm VIII: w ,am to _ - -- ' � ° 7111111111 I . hlllllllll D �! " 'E - � _ JIIIIIIIII 0 ° 7111111111 -!�� OBY OTWJW F.F.E 51407 ANCHOR 'C' 25,000 SF w All Rk 70 ro 0 N 0 > (D 6 z 0 0 9 6 ) ( D (a m (D l* EIF9 M1 t 5W 0 5 p4r —, EIF5 &k% 5W mx pnz - N4. me[CF Center j y 1 s, ,q , u ,, F115 - P 5. 0OIXF—IN4, AWOa.w I Ip. J Plan I 1 '/,S.QL 5; GAP't".qu.i. O Proosed Rear Elevation Wcf DATE: 12121/2010 Added rear elev. I w 0 Photo - Existing Conditions D� j N j (D o z 00 j D rt a1 0 S v m 3 .r FRONT ELEVATIOtr � 0 SIDE ELEVATION MATERIAL LEGEND Y Q (� M". 71, a — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — .. a , a .. m . REAR ELEVATION I WPiSQ M P1,7 SRO; MMIACERS ^ �� /1 SOUTHLAKE CORNERS SHOPPING CENTER SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS �Oys ja �WZJ�O JG'B NO.: !11!41 - � 0 Surrounding Property Owners Toys "R" Us / Babies "R" Us 5 13 3 6 7 9 8 4 1 2 15 14 12 117, 10 SPO # 1. Owner Ethan Allen Retail Inc Zoning sP1 Land Use Retail Commercial Acreage 2.06 Response NR 2. Greenway- 1709 /Eleven II Lp SP1 Retail Commercial 1.75 NR 3. Inland W Southlake Corners Ltd C3 Regional Retail 16.71 NR 4. Gateway Church CS Office Commercial 13.66 NR 5. McDonald's Corp C3 Regional Retail 1.06 NR 6. Dn Kingston Southlake Lp C3 Regional Retail 0.66 F 7. Dn Kingston Southlake Lp C3 Regional Retail 1.13 F 8. Marshall Descendants 2006 Trst C3 Regional Retail 0.92 NR 9. Stagliano, Vincent J Etal C3 Regional Retail 0.39 NR 10. Church Of Christ Our King CS Retail Commercial 2.34 NR 11. Southlake Plaza 11 Ltd Prtn B1 Retail Commercial 0.83 NR 12. Southlake Plaza 11 Ltd Prtn 61 Retail Commercial 0.91 NR 13. Eqyinvest Owner II Ltd Up C3 Town Center 13.15 NR 14. Southlake Plaza 11 Ltd Prtn 61 Retail Commercial, Office Commercial 8.48 NR 15. Greenway- 1709 /Eleven Partners B1 Retail Commercial, Office Commercial 9.39 NR Responses: F: In Favor O: Opposed To U: Undecided Notices Sent: Fifteen (15) Responses Received: One (1) Case No. ZA11 -001 NR: No Response Attachment D Page 1 Surrounding Property Owner Responses Notification Response Form P.0 cerKe ZA11 -001 Dn Kingston Southlake Lp 27 Woodcrest Irvine Ca, 92603 22605 1 2 PLEASE PROVIDE COMPLETED FORMS VIA MAIL, FAX OR HAND DELIVERY BEFORE THE START OF THE SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING. Being the owner(s) of the property so noted above, are hereby in favor of opposed to undecided about (circle or underline one) the proposed Revised Site Plan referenced above. Space for comments regarding your position: ffj 1� U �t 6 6s? LL Signature: Additional Signature: Printed Name(s): _ Must be property owner(s) whose Date: Date: 1 2 A (�r (? d ti are printed at top. Otherwise conta t the Planning Department. One form per property. Phone Number (optional): Case No. Attachment E ZA11 -001 Page 1