|
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT SUMMARY Regular Agenda -Public Hearing Item
|
ITEM NO 23B: REVISED PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR RIVERRIDGE PCD; SOUTHEAST CORNER OF N. IOWA STREET & RIVERRIDGE ROAD (SLD)
SUMMARY
PDP-09-09-05: Revised Preliminary Development Plan for Riverridge PCD to add a package liquor store in a portion of the existing building which previously was used for office space. This Planned Commercial Development contains 1.53 acres and is located at the southeast corner of N. Iowa Street and Riverridge Road. Submitted by Landplan Engineering, P.A. for BJ Mellmanor Townhouse Apartments, LLC, property owner of record.
|
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning staff recommends approval of the revised Preliminary Development Plan based upon the findings of fact presented in the body of the Staff Report and subject to the following conditions:
1. Provision of a revised Preliminary Development Plan to provide corrected and updated site summary notes as applicable to the current conditions of the site per staff approval; 2. Provision of a revised Preliminary Development to list the approved use restrictions for Lot 2, Chip’s Addition. |
|
Reason for Request: |
Development plan amendments required to add liquor sales to existing commercial building pending approval of rezoning.
|
|
KEY POINT · No changes are proposed to the exterior of the commercial building (Lot 2, Chip’s Addition). · No change are proposed to the residential use. · | |
|
FACTORS TO CONSIDER · Compliance with zoning and development plan requirements
| |
|
ASSOCIATED CASES/OTHER ACTION REQUIRED · Z-11-24-92; RS-1 (Single-Family Residence) District to PCD-2 (Planned Commercial District). · FDP - Chip’s Deli and Food Market – 1993
| |
|
PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED PRIOR TO PRINTING · None received | |
GENERAL INFORMATION | |
|
Current Zoning and Land Use:
|
PCD-2 (Planned Commercial District); existing gas convenience store and apartment uses. |
|
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: |
A and RM-D Residential Duplex) District to the north, developing residential lots.
A-1 (Suburban Home Residential) District to the northeast; existing residential homes.
RS-2 (Single-Family Residence) District to the east; existing residential homes.
PCD-2 (Planned Commercial District) to the south; existing commercial use
M-2 (Limited Industrial District) to the west; existing manufacturing and warehousing uses.
|
|
Site Summary | |
|
Number of Lots |
2 |
|
Gross Area |
1.53 acres per plat |
|
Lot 2 Chip’s Addition |
34,484 SF (Commercial development) |
|
Lot 1 Chip’s Addition |
31,979 SF (Residential development) |
|
Rights-of-way |
No new dedications |
|
Access Easements |
Existing platted easement from N. Iowa Street to share to the south property line. |
|
Commercial Building |
4,430 GSF (2700 NSF) 3,143 GSF (1,799 NSF) Food Market – existing use 1,287 GSF (901 NSF) Liquor Store – proposed use |
|
Number dwelling units |
3 triplex apartment buildings – 9 total units – No changes proposed to residential development. |
|
Density |
12 dwelling units per acre (Lot 1 only) |
|
Total Open Space Required |
13,329 SF (.31 acres) *Plan states .49 acres |
|
Total Open Space Provided |
27,442 (.63 acres) |
|
Parking Required |
14 spaces for commercial use 23 spaces for residential use 37 spaces require for total development |
|
Parking Provided |
25 spaces provided for commercial use 23 spaces provided for residential use 48 spaces provided for total development |
Development History:
The property was rezoned to PCD-2 (Planned Commercial District) in May of 1993. A single phase commercial and apartment development plan was approved in July 1993 with specific land use restrictions (refer to zoning report Z-09-65-05 for detailed discussion).
The property is generally located on the southeast corner of N. Iowa Street and Riverridge Road. The property is developed with a gas convenience store on the western half of the property and a triplex apartment development on the east. No changes are proposed for the residential portion of the development. The proposed Preliminary Development Plan is for the interior remodel of the existing commercial retail space to allow for a liquor store on the east end of the building. Exterior site improvements are not proposed or required for this alteration. The original approval of the development plan included specific use restrictions. The primary purpose of this revised Preliminary Development Plan is to amend the land use restrictions previously set in place because of the location of a former elementary school.
The proposed revised preliminary development plan has been evaluated based upon the following suggested findings of fact and conclusions outlined in Section 20-1010.1 of the Zoning Ordinance for the City of Lawrence.
1) In what respects the plan is or is not in general conformity with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan of the City.
Staff Finding – The proposed development plan is consistent with the commercial recommendations for neighborhood commercial development. The proposed commercial area will not be expanded by this request.
2) In what respects the plan is or is not consistent with the Statement of Objectives of Planned Unit Development. [The statement of objectives of planned unit developments is found in Section 20-1002 of the Zoning Ordinance]
Staff Finding –The existing PCD is a mixed residential and commercial development. Approval of the request will allow for an expansion of uses within an existing commercial retail building serving the general area with no impact on the existing site improvements.
3) The nature and extent of the common open space in the Planned Unit Development, the reliability of the proposals for maintenance and conservation of the common open space, and the adequacy or inadequacy of the amount and function of the common open space in terms of the densities and dwelling types proposed in the plan.
Staff Finding – The proposed development exceeds the minimum required open space standards. There is no proposed change to the existing open space or surface pavement that would result from the addition of the interior remodel.
4) Whether the plan does or does not make adequate provisions for public services, provide adequate control over vehicular traffic, and further the amenities of light and air, recreation and visual enjoyment.
Staff Finding – Access and circulation are not proposed to be altered by this site. There are no comments related to site deficiencies with regard to circulation.
5) Whether the plan will or will not have a substantial adverse effect on adjacent property and the development or conservation of the neighborhood area.
The subject property is an existing mixed use commercial and residential development. The residential uses that surround the subject property are part of a long established neighborhood. Some infill areas are occurring to the north and to the far east of the subject property. No negative impacts are associated with the proposed request.
6) In what respects the plan is or is not in conformance with the development standards and criteria of this article. [The general standards are found in Section 20-1006 and Preliminary Development Plan requirements are listed in Section 20-1010]
Staff Finding –The proposed plan complies with the minimum development standards for a planned unit development and has been updated to reflect the proposed use addition. Staff notes that some notes are as yet outdated, but do not substantially impact the plan. Staff is working with the applicant’s representatives to update applicable notes.
7) In what respects the plan is or is not in compliance with the requirements for application for tentative approval of the Planned Unit Development. [This finding refers to Section 20-1005 of the Zoning Ordinance.]
Staff Finding –The proposed Preliminary Development Plan is in compliance with the zoning code subject to approval of the rezoning to expand the land uses for this PCD.
8) The sufficiency of the terms and conditions proposed to protect the interest of the public and the residents of the Planned Unit Development in the case of a plan that proposes development over a period of years.
Staff Finding – There is no phasing associated with the proposed interior remodeling.
9) Stormwater detention calculations and storage of excess stormwater drainage as per City Policy.
Staff Finding – This item was reviewed and approved by the City Stormwater Engineer. There were no noted improvements associated with this interior remodel.