Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-3425-B Staff AnalysisItem No. 14 - Site Plan Review Name: Executive Park Subdivision Location: West Markham @ I-430 SE Corner l Applicant: Terry Moore, Realtor Proposal: ._ t� 1. Construct a one (1) story office building containing 24,300 sq. ft. of floor space on three (3) acres of land, \,j with + 400 ft. of street frontage. 2. The structure complies with basic bulk and area requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Required Provided s� ) Front Yard 25' 27' Rear Yard 25' 25' � J Side Yard 25' North 70' '' South 207' Height 45' Under 20' Lot Coverage 40% Max. 17% 3. Uses Proposed - The structure will be a single user, insurance company with no accessory uses proposed. Rkr 4. Special Requirements Are: �`— a.) A 25' green strip parallel to the boundary street. This is also a requirement of subdivision ordinance associated with reduction of the 45 ft. building line to 25 ft. b.) A 40' undisturbed buffer strip and a 6 ft. fence are required along the entire east boundary. Staff Analysis: 1. Effect on Environs, Health, Public Safety No adverse effects should be experienced from this de- velopment, due to the location of the building site relative to residential uses the freeway and buffering lots. 2. Conformance to Ordinance Although conforming to intent and purpose generally there are several design problems associated with the Subdivision Ordinance as noted in 4a. and 4b. above. These are not insurmountable. 3. Treatment of Site/Visual Effects The terrain on which this development is to occur is contoured so as to provide the greatest exposure to the interstate side and southwesterly. The provision of and. maintenance of a 40 ft. natural buffer and fence along the east line of this plat will serve to separate the office park from existing or potential residential nearby. A landscape and sign plan is in preparation. December 18, 1979 Item No. 5 - Z-3425 Owner: Mr. & Mrs. Jake Brown and Christian Science Foundation Church Applicant: W. Terry Moore Request: Rezone to "0-2" Office and Institutional Purpose: Office Development Existing Zoning: "R-2" Single Family Location: Southeast Corner Markham at I-430 Site Characteristics: Steeply, sloping Size: 11.07 Acres + Existing Land Use: Residential Abutting Land Use North - Commercial and Vacant and Zoning: Zoned "C-3" and "0-3" South - I-630 Interchange with I-430 East - Single Family Zoned "R-2" West - I-430 Zoning History: None Applicable Regulations: Zoning Ordinance, Subdivison Ordinance and Site Plan Review March 25, 1980 Item No. 14 - SITE PLAN REVIEW Name: Executive Park Subdivision - Lots 3 and 6 Location: West Markham at I-430, southeast corner. Applicant: Terry Moore PPODrlCnr.. 1. Construct a one story office building containing 24,300 square feet of floor space on three acres of land, with 400' + of street frontage. There are two'lots involved: Lot 3, which contains only parking and Lot 6, which is the building site. 2. This structure complies with the basic bulk and area requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Required Provided Front Yard 25' 271 Rear Yard 25' 25' Side Yard 25' North 70' South, 207' Height 45' Under 20' Lot Coverage 40% max. 17% 3. Uses Proposed This structure will be a single user insurance company with no accessory uses proposed. 4. Special Requirements or Variance Issues a) A 25' green strip parallel to the boundary street, along both sides, is required. This requirement is also a requirement of the Subdivision Ordinance associated with reduction of the 45' building line to 25 feet. b) The Subdivision Ordinance requires a 40' undisturbed buffer strip and a 6' fence along the entire east boundary of the property. March 25, 1980 Item No. 14 -- Continued C) The preliminary plat will require modification as to building lines if the 40' buffer is varied. STAFF ANALYSIS: 1. EFFECT ON ENVIRONS, HEALTH, PUBLIC SAFETY No adverse effect should be experienced from this development, due to the location of the building site relative to, residential uses, the freeway and buffering lots. The only questionable issue is the effect on the east, as that property is developed residential, if the 40' buffer is reduced. 2. CONFORMANCE TO ORDINANCE Although conforming to intent and purpose generally, there are several design problems associated with the Subdivision Ordinance as noted in 4-a and 4-b above. We do not believe these to be insurmountable. However, the question of consistency and precedent must be dealt with. 3. TREATMENT OF SITE/VISUAL EFFECTS The terrain on which this development is to occur is contoured so as to provide the greatest exposure to the Interstate 430 side and southwesterly. The provision and maintenance of a 40' natural buffer and fence along the east line of this plat will serve to separate the office park from existing or potential residential uses nearby. A landscape and sign plan is in preparation and appears to be in conformance with the ordinances involved.. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Although no recommendation was presented to the Subdivision Committee in written form, the staff stated for the record that it is imperative that consistency be maintained in dealing with variances. The ordinance is very clear in its dealings with issues such as this site plan presents, and serious questions could be raised concerning arbitrary modification of ordinance requirements. The staff position on variances is one of strict interpretation of the guidelines set forth for exceptions and significant written justification for such exceptions. March 25, 1980 Item No. 14 - Continued u SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The staff presented the site plan and explained the requested variances, which were: 1. To allow a parking lot to intrude into the 25' front yard on Lots 3 and 6, and a third driveway on Lot 6. 2.. To allow intrusion of building, drives and parking to the 40' buffer along the east property line of Lot 6. The applicant and his architect were present and presented their case for approval. A lengthy discussion ensued, involving points of review between the four Committee members, staff and the applicant. The result of the discussion was a motion to approve the site plan as presented, granting the following exceptions: 1. The 25' front yard on Lot 3, to be allowed a variable setback averaging at least 25 feet. 2. The 40' buffer on Lot 6 to be varied to allow its use as shown on the plan, with a 6' board fence along the entire east property line and appropriate landscaping to conform to ordinance. The vote to approve was: 3 ayes, 1 no and 1 absent. The Committee stated, as the principle reason for variance of the 40' buffer, its feeling that the potential for residential use to the east was remote, or at least questionable. They further stated that the tract configuration and the applicant's commitment to the buyer restricted the design flexibility needed. The terrain was also noted as being less than acceptable for optimal design. EDITORIAL NOTE: After the meeting adjourned, the applicant expressed concern for his case relative to the potential for denial, if only six members were present at the March 25 meeting and the lone dissenter in the Subdivision Committee maintained his opposition. A lengthy discussion ensued, involving staff, the applicant and the Planning Commission Chairman. The result of this was that objection to the case as recommended by the Committee would be withdrawn if the applicant agreed to certain changes. These are: March 25, 1980 Item No. 14 - Continued 1. That the fence, as requred by ordinance, be provided. 2. That amendment of 25' of natural green belt be maintained along the east line of Lot 6 from the turning point of the rear driveway to the south property line. 3. That parking be allowed to intrude into the 40' buffer at the northeast corner of Lot 6. March 25, 1980 Item No. 14 - SITE PLAN REVIEW Name: Executive Park Subdivision - Lots 3 and 6 Location: West Markham at I-430, southeast corner. Applicant: Terry Moore DRnDnCAT. • 1. Construct a one story office building containing 24,300 square feet of floor space on three acres of land, with 400' + of street frontage. There are two lots involved: Lot 3, which contains only parking and Lot 6, which is the building site. 2. This structure complies with the basic bulk and area requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Required Provided Front Yard 25' 27' Rear Yard 25' 25' Side Yard 25' North, 70' South, 207' Height 45' Under 20' Lot Coverage 40% max. 17% 3. Uses Proposed This structure will be a single user insurance company with no accessory uses proposed. 4. Special Requirements or Variance Issues a) A 25' green strip parallel to the boundary street, along both sides, is required. This requirement is also a requirement of the Subdivision Ordinance associated with reduction of the 45' building line to 25 feet. b) The Subdivision Ordinance requires a 40' undisturbed buffer strip and a 6' fence along the entire east boundary of the property. March 25, 1980 Item No. 14 - Continued c) The preliminary plat will require modification as to building lines if the 40' buffer is varied. STAFF ANALYSIS: 1. EFFECT ON ENVIRONS, HEALTH, PUBLIC SAFETY No adverse effect should be experienced from this development, due to the location of the building site relative to,residential uses, the freeway and buffering lots. The only questionable issue is the effect on the east, as that property is developed residential, if the 40' buffer is reduced. 2. CONFORMANCE TO ORDINANCE Although conforming to intent and purpose generally, there are several design problems associated with the Subdivision Ordinance as noted in 4-a and 4-b above. We do not believe these to be insurmountable. However, the question of consistency and precedent must be dealt with. 3. TREATMENT OF SITE/VISUAL EFFECTS The terrain on which this development is to occur is contoured so as to provide the greatest exposure to the Interstate 430 side and southwesterly. The provision and maintenance of a 40' natural buffer and fence along the east line of this plat will serve to separate the office park from existing or potential residential uses nearby. A landscape and sign plan is in preparation and appears to be in conformance with the ordinances involved., STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Although no recommendation was presented to the Subdivision Committee in written form, the staff stated for the record that it is imperative that consistency be maintained in dealing with variances. The ordinance is very clear in its dealings with issues such as this site plan presents, and serious questions could be raised concerning arbitrary modification of ordinance requirements. The staff position on variances is one of strict interpretation of the guidelines set forth for exceptions and significant written justification for such exceptions. March 25, 1980 Item No. 14 - Continued SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The staff presented the site plan and explained the requested variances, which were: 1. To allow a parking lot to intrude into the 25' front yard on Lots 3 and 6, and a third driveway on Lot 6. 2. To allow intrusion of building, drives and parking to the 40' buffer along the east property line of Lot 6. The applicant and his architect were present and presented their case for approval. A lengthy discussion ensued, involving points of review between the four Committee members, staff and the applicant. The result of the discussion was a motion to approve the site plan as presented, granting the following exceptions: 1. The 25' front yard on Lot 3, to be allowed a variable setback averaging at least 25 feet. 2. The 40' buffer on Lot 6 to be varied to allow its use as shown on the plan, with a 6' board fence along the entire east property line and appropriate landscaping to conform to ordinance. The vote to approve was: 3 ayes, 1 no and 1 absent. The Committee stated, as the principle reason for variance of the 40' buffer, its feeling that the potential for residential use to the east was remote, or at least questionable. They further stated that the tract configuration and the applicant's commitment to the buyer restricted the design flexibility needed. The terrain was also noted as being less than acceptable for optimal design. EDITORIAL NOTE: After the meeting adjourned, the applicant expressed concern for his case relative to the potential for denial, if only six members were present at the March 25 meeting and the lone dissenter in the Subdivision Committee maintained his opposition. A lengthy discussion ensued, involving staff, the applicant and the Planning Commission Chairman. The result of this was that objection to the case as recommended by the Committee would be withdrawn if the applicant agreed to certain changes. These are: March 25, 1980 Item No. 14 - Continued 1. That the fence, as requred by ordinance, be provided. 2. That amendment of 25' of natural green belt be maintained along the east line of Lot 6 from the turning point of the rear driveway to the south property line. 3. That parking be allowed to intrude into the 40' buffer at the northeast corner of Lot 6. March 25, 1980 Item No. 14 - SITE PLAN REVIEW Name: Executive Park Subdivision Lots 3 and 6 Location: West Markham at I-430, southeast corner. Applicant: Terry Moore vnnDncnr.. 1. Construct a one story office building containing 24,300 square feet of floor space on three acres of land, with 400' + of street frontage. There are two lots involved: Lot 3, which contains only parking and Lot 6, which is the building site. 2. This structure complies with the basic bulk and area requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Required Provided Front Yard 25' 27' Rear Yard 25' 25' Side Yard 25' North, 70' South, 2 07 ' Height 45' Under 20' Lot Coverage 40% max. 17% 3. Uses Proposed This structure will be a single user insurance company with no accessory uses proposed. 4. Special Requirements or Variance Issues a) A 25' green strip parallel to the boundary street, along both sides, is required. This requirement is also a requirement of the Subdivision Ordinance associated with reduction of the 45' building line to 25 feet. b) The Subdivision Ordinance requires a 40' undisturbed buffer strip and a 6' fence along the entire east boundary of the property. PAGG March 25, 1980 Item No. 14 -- Continued C) The preliminary plat will require modification as to building lines if the 40' buffer is varied. STAFF ANALYSIS: 1. EFFECT ON ENVIRONS, HEALTH, PUBLIC SAFETY No adverse effect should be experienced from this development, due to the location of the building site relative to,residential uses, the freeway and buffering lots. The only questionable issue is the effect on the east, as that property is developed residential, if the 40' buffer is reduced. 2. CONFORMANCE TO ORDINANCE Although conforming to intent and purpose generally, there are several design problems associated with the Subdivision Ordinance as noted in 4-a and 4--b above. We do not believe these to be insurmountable. However, the question of consistency and precedent must be dealt with. 3. TREATMENT OF SITE/VISUAL EFFECTS The terrain on which this development is to occur is contoured so as to provide the greatest exposure to the Interstate 430 side and southwesterly. The provision and maintenance of a 40' natural buffer and fence along the east line of this plat will serve to separate the office park from existing or potential residential uses nearby. A landscape and sign plan is in preparation and appears to be in conformance with the ordinances involved.. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Although no recommendation was presented to the Subdivision Committee i°n written form, the staff stated for the record that it is imperative that consistency be maintained in dealing with variances. The ordinance is very clear in its dealings with issues such as this site plan presents, and serious questions could be raised concerning arbitrary modification of ordinance requirements. The staff position on variances is one of strict interpretation of the guidelines set forth for exceptions and significant written justification for such exceptions. 1 March 25, 1980 Item No. 14 - Continued SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The staff presented the site plan and explained the requested variances, which were: 1. To allow a parking lot to intrude into the 25' front yard on Lots 3 and 6, and a third driveway on Lot 6. 2. To allow intrusion of building, drives and parking to the 40' buffer along the east property line of Lot 6. The applicant and his architect were present and presented their case for approval. A lengthy discussion ensued, involving points of review between the four Committee members, staff and the applicant. The result of the discussion was a motion to approve the site plan as presented, granting the following exceptions: 1. The 25' front yard on Lot 3, to be allowed a -MIS variable setback averaging at least 25 feet. tftDIF-Ift 2. The 40- buffer on Lot 6 to be varied to allow its use as shown on the plan, with a 6' board fence along the entire east property line and appropriate landscaping to conform to ordinance. The vote to approve was: 3 ayes, 1 no and 1 absent. The Committee stated, as the principle reason for variance of the 40' buffer, its feeling that the potential for residential use to the east was remote, or at least questionable. They further stated that the tract configuration and the applicant's commitment to the buyer restricted the design flexibility needed. The terrain was also noted as being less than acceptable for optimal design. EDITORIAL NOTE: After the meeting adjourned, the applicant expressed concern Sr for his case relative to the potential for denial, if only six members were present at the March 25 meeting and the lone dissenter in the Subdivision Committee maintained his opposition. A lengthy discussion ensued, involving staff, the applicant and the Planning Commission Chairman. The result of this was that objection to the case as recommended Or'by the Committee would be withdrawn if the applicant agreed to certain changes. These are: March 25, 1980 Item No. 14 - Continued 1. That the fence, as requred by ordinance, be provided. 2. That amendment of 25' of natural green belt be maintained along the east line of Lot 6 from the turning point of the rear driveway to the south property line. 3. That parking be allowed to intrude into the 40' buffer at the northeast corner of Lot 6.