HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-3459-A Staff Analysisi November 16, 1993
MM
N
FILE NO.: Z -3459--A
NAME: MABELVALE BUSINESS PARK - SITE PLAN REVIEW
LOCATION: At the south-east corner of I-30 and Mabelvale
Pike.
DEVELOPER: ENGINEER:
CONSERVATIVE DEVELOPMENT CO. WHITE-DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
2649 Pike Ave. 401 Victory St.
North Little Rock, AR 72114 Little Rock, AR 72201
758-7745 374-1666
AREA:
61.57 ACRES
NUMBER OF LOTS: 1
FT. NEW
STREET: 0
ZONING:
C-3
PROPOSED USES:
Commercial
Development
PLANNING DISTRICT: 15
CENSUS TRACT: 41.05
VARIANCES REQUESTED: None
STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes a site plan review for Phase I of what
is proposed to be a major commercial and shopping center
development. The Phase I site involves 13.22 acres of a
61.57 acre tract, the construction of approximately 2,200 feet of
internal drives, and approval of the first building "foot print"
and its associated parking.
A. PROPOSAL RE UEST:
Site plan review is requested for Phase I of Mabelvale
Business Park. Phase I involves 13.22 acres out of a total
tract of 61.57 acres, and the construction of approximately
2,200 feet of internal drives for access to the future
development of the Phase I site. The first building "foot
print" with associated parking is included for review.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is currently zoned C-3 along the north part of the
tract and I-2 along the south. The new Wal-Mart is located
to the east in a C-3 zone. Property to the south is zoned
I-2, to the west is R-2 property. At the north-west corner
of the tract is a C-4 zoned parcel. To the north is I-30.
November 16, 1993
ITEM NO_: C (Continued) FILE NO.: z -3459-A
The site is heavily wooded and undeveloped. The terrain is
fairly level, with a maximum differential in topography of
approximately 10 feet. There is a pond located at the rear
of the Phase I tract.
C. ENGINEERING/UTILITY COMMENTS_:
Engineering recommends deferral of the application because
there is insufficient information available on which to
comment. There are questions on the traffic which will be
generated, on the internal street system, on the tie-in to
the Wal-Mart site, and on the tie-in to the I-30 service
road system.
Water Works reports that water mains and on-site fire
protection service will be required. Wal-Mart will have to
complete deficiencies on the existing main before service
can be extended to this property. The easement shown
adjoining the east property line is a water line easement,
not a utility easement.
Wastewater Utility reports that a sewer main extension, with
easements, will be required.
Plans Review indicates that there is insufficient
information for review. A schematic landscaping plan is
required, as is an appropriate site plan.
The Fire Department approved the submittal without comment.
Southwestern Bell approved the submittal without comment.
D. ISSUES/LEGAL/TECHNICAL/DESIGN:
All buildings proposed for the site are to be shown.
Building dimensions and dimensions between buildings and to
property lines are to be shown.
All parking areas proposed for the site are to be shown.
The availability of public utilities is to be addressed; the
line size and locations are to be shown.
All on-site fire hydrants are to be shown.
Dimensions of existing rights-of-way of abutting streets are
to be shown.
Landscaping areas are to be shown. The proposed perimeter
treatments are to be shown and described. A schematic
landscaping plan is to be provided.
OA
November 16, 1993
ITEM NO.: C (Continued) FILE NO.: z -3459-A
Quantitative data is to be furnished reporting the proposed
building coverages, the parcel size, the proposed floor area
of buildings, and the proposed number of parking spaces.
E. ANALYSIS•
A site plan review in a C-3 zone is, by definition, a review
for multiple buildings on the site. The plan submitted
included only the "footprint" for one building. It is,
therefore, an inappropriate submittal for the request.
There are still major concerns expressed by the Engineering
Division concerning traffic, driveways, and access to the
freeway access roads.
F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends deferral of the item until complete plans
and required documents have been submitted, and until Staff
has had time to review documents submitted after the filing
date.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT:
(September 16, 1993)
The applicant and a representative of the project engineering
firm were present. The staff presented the request, and Mr. Joe
White reviewed with the Committee and staff the items included in
the discussion outline. Mr. White indicated that the State
Highway Department had approved the access points to the freeway
access roadways. Mr. White and Engineering Division personnel
plan to have further conversations in the next few days. The
Committee then referred the item to the Commission for final
resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 5, 1993)
Staff reported that Engineering had not completed its review of
the proposed interior drive design nor the proposed drive access
to public rights-of-way and to the driveway of the abutting Wal-
Mart property. Staff further reported that the purpose of "site
plan review" was the review of multiple buildings on a site, and
that the plan which had been submitted for review contained only
the one proposed building site. The plan which had been
submitted for review, by not showing a design for the multiple
building sites which would eventually be proposed, did not
conform to the requirements for site plan review. However, in
order to facilitate the applicant's immediate need for approval
of the site plan in order to proceed with negotiations with a
W
November 16, 1993
ITEM NO.: C (Continued) FILE NO.: Z -3459-A
proposed restaurant tenant at the north-east corner of the site,
staff recommended approval of the site plan for the one proposed
restaurant site located at the north-east corner of the site, but
recommended deferral of consideration of the remainder of the
site until an approved preliminary plat and a site plan which
shows the proposed location and site design for multiple
buildings is submitted. The item, as amended and with the
concurrence of the applicant, was included on the consent agenda
for approval, and was approved by the Planning Commission with
the vote of 8 ayes, no nays, 2 absent, no abstentions, and 1 open
position.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT (October 28, 1993)
The applicant, Mr. Rick Ashley, and his engineer, Mr. Joe White,
were present. The Planning staff indicated that a site
development plan for each of the proposed lease sites within the
designated development area needs to be submitted for review. It
was pointed out to the applicant that, because the proposed
development is one lot, the landscape buffer along Baseline Road
is based on the entire depth of the lot, and does not take into
account out -parcels along the Baseline Road frontage. The
Baseline Road buffer requirement, then, is 50 feet. It was also
pointed out that the required 6 foot wide side landscape strip is
applicable to lease lot lines. Since the plan indicates that, in
some instances, common drives will serve two abutting lease lots,
and no landscaping strip can be provided, staff suggested that
access easements be noted on the plan at these common drives.
With this discussion, the Committee forwarded the item to the
Commission for final resolution.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (November 16, 1993)
Staff presented the item and recommended approval of the request.
It was pointed out that, where more than one business is on one
"block" and a common drive serves these businesses, an access
easement must be provided to encompass the common drive;
otherwise, the required landscaping at the lease lot line will
be applicable. The item was included on the consent agenda for
approval and was approved with the vote of 8 ayes, no nays,
2 absent, no abstentions, and 1 open position.
4
October 5, 1993
ITEM NQ,: $ _ FILE NO.: Z -3459-A
DAME: MABELVALE BUSINESS PARK - SITE PLAN REVIEW
LOCATION: At the south-east corner of I-30 and Mabelvale
Pike.
DEVELOPER:
ENGINEER:
CONSERVATIVE DEVELOPMENT CO. WHITE-DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
2649 Pike Ave. 401 Victory St.
North Little Rock, AR 72114 Little Rock, AR 72201
758-7745 374-1666
AREA: 61.57 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEWSTREET: 0
ZONING: C-3 PR POSED ]7SES: Commercial Development
PLANNING DISTRICT: 15
CENSUS TRACT: 41.05
VARIANCES REQUESTED: None
STATEMENT QF PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes a site plan review for Phase I of what
is proposed to be a major commercial and shopping center
development. The Phase I site involves 13.22 acres of a
61.57 acre tract, the construction of approximately 2,200 feet of
internal drives, and approval of the first building "foot print"
and its associated parking.
A. PROPQSALIREQUEST:
Site plan review is requested for Phase I of Mabelvale
Business Park. Phase I involves 13.22 acres out of a total
tract of 61.57 acres, and the construction of approximately
2,200 feet of internal drives for access to the future
development of the Phase I site. The first building "foot
print" with associated parking is included for review.
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
The site is currently zoned C-3 along the north part of the
tract and I-2 along the south. The new Wal-Mart is located
to the east in a C-3 zone. Property to the south is zoned
I-2, to the west is R-2 property. At the north-west corner
of the tract is a C-4 zoned parcel. To the north is I-30.
October 5, 1993
BDIVI I
ITEM NQ,: $(Continued) fILE NO.-, _7m_ -_3459 -
The site is heavily wooded and undeveloped. The terrain is
fairly level, with a maximum differential in topography of
approximately 10 feet. There is a pond located at the rear
of the Phase I tract.
C. ENGINEERINGIUTILITY COMMENTS:
Engineering recommends deferral of the application because
there is insufficient information available on which to
comment. There are questions on the traffic which will be
generated, on the internal street system, on the tie-in to
the Wal-Mart site, and on the tie-in to the I-30 service
road system.
Water Works reports that water mains and on-site fire
protection service will be required. Wal-Mart will have to
complete deficiencies on the existing main before service
can be extended to this property. The easement shown
adjoining the east property line is a water line easement,
not a utility easement.
Wastewater Utility reports that a sewer main extension, with
easements, will be required.
Plans Review indicates that there is insufficient
information for review. A schematic landscaping plan is
required, as is an appropriate site plan.
The Fire Department approved the submittal without comment.
Southwestern Bell approved the submittal without comment.
D. ISSUES/LEGALITECHNICAL(DESIGN:
Al buildings proposed for the site are to be shown.
Building dimensions and dimensions between buildings and to
property lines are to be shown.
All parking areas proposed for the site are to be shown.
The availability of public utilities is to be addressed; the
line size and locations are to be shown.
All on-site fire hydrants are to be shown.
Dimensions of existing rights-of-way of abutting streets are
to be shown.
Landscaping areas are to be shown. The proposed perimeter
treatments are to be shown and described. A schematic
landscaping plan is to be provided.
2
October 5, 1993
SVEDIVI�ION
ITEM 8 (Continued) FILE _Nn Z-3�35y A
Quantitative data is to be furnished reporting the proposed
building coverages, the parcel size, the proposed floor area
of buildings, and the proposed number of parking spaces.
E. ANALYSIS•
A site plan review in a C-3 zone is, by definition, a review
for multiple buildings on the site. The plan submitted
included only the "footprint" for one building. It is,
therefore, an inappropriate submittal for the request.
There are still major concerns expressed by the Engineering
Division concerning traffic, driveways, and access to the
freeway access roads.
F. STAFF RE MME DATI
Staff recommends deferral of the item until complete plans
and required documents have been submitted, and until Staff
has had time to review documents submitted after the filing
date.
SUBDIVISION MMITTEE MME T: (September 16, 1993)
The applicant and a representative of the project engineering
firm were present. The staff presented the request, and Mr. Joe
White reviewed with the Committee and staff the items included in
the discussion outline. Mr. White indicated that the State
Highway Department had approved the access points to the freeway
access roadways. Mr. White and Engineering Division personnel
plan to have further conversations in the next few days. The
Committee then referred the item to the Commission for final
resolution.
3