Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-3792-A Staff AnalysisFILE NO.: Z -3792-A NAME: Sysco -- Long -Form PD -I LOCATION: 5800 Frozen Road DEVELOPER: Sysco Food Services of Ark. 5800 Frozen Road Little Rock, AR 72209 AREA: Approx. 20.60 Acres FT. NEW STREET: 0 ENGINEER: McGetrick Engineering 319 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 ZONING: I -2/R -2/R-4 ALLOWED USES: Light industrial, single-family, two-family PROPOSED USE: Warehouse and office space VARIANCES/WAIVERS „REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL RE VEST: The applicant proposes to rezone the property from I -2/R - 2/R -4 to PD -I to allow the phased expansion of the existing Sysco Foods Warehouse and Office Development. The applicant notes that Phase I will consist of an 80,000 square foot building expansion, Phase II will consist of a 11,750 square foot building expansion and Phase III will include a 103,600 square foot building expansion and additional parking near West 65th Street. The building expansion will be primarily warehouse and dock space with a small amount of additional office space. The applicant also notes that after Phase III, additional parking will be developed on property along the east side of Battle Road which is owned by Sysco Foods. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: Single-family residences exist across Battle Road to the east and along Battle Road to the south. There is a mixture of commercial and industrial uses and a mobile home park along West 65th Street to the south. Railroad right-of-way is located immediately north of the site. FILE NO.: Z -3792-A (Cont.) C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received no neighborhood comment as of this writing. The Wakefield and Geyer Springs Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Proposed addition is not permitted to encroach on right- of-way of Battle Road. Relocate building with building setback. 2. Dedicate 30 feet from centerline on Battle Rock and construct 36 feet wide pavement to 65th Street with cul- de-sac at terminus. 3. Provide design of streets of conforming to "MSP" (Master Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvements to these streets including 5 foot sidewalks with planned development. 4. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 5. A sketch grading and drainage plan, a special flood hazard permit, and a special grading permit for flood - hazard areas are required. Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology (ADPCE) and NPDES permit are also required. 6. Stormwater detention Ordinance applies to this property. 7. Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities are required. 8. On site striping and signage plans should be forwarded to Public Works, Traffic Engineering for approval with the site development package. 9. Street improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Completed plans must be approved by Traffic Engineering prior to construction. 10. Geyer Springs Road has a 1995 average daily traffic count of 9,800 vehicles. 11. 65th Street has a 1995 average daily traffic count of 17,000. 12. Obtain permits (barricade/street cut) for improvements within proposed or existing right-of-way from Traffic Engineering prior to construction in right-of-way. 13. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code. All requests should be forwarded to Traffic Engineering. 14. Utility excavation within proposed rights-of-way shall be per Article V of Sec. 30. 15. Dedicate additional 5 feet right-of-way for Geyer Springs Road. 2 FILE NO • Z -3792-A (Cont.) E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main relocation required prior to construction. AP&L: No Comment received. ARKLA: No Comment. Southwestern Bell: No Comment received. Water: The Little Rock Fire Department needs to review this site plan to determine if additional fire protection will be required. Contact the Water Works if larger and/or additional meter(s) are required. Fire Department: Private fire hydrants may be required. Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 for details. County Planning: No Comment received. LATA: CATA does not currently serve the area. There might be a connection in the future from Mabelvale Pike to Geyer Springs rather than the current Route #17A on University. Frozen Road PDI would need to leave Geyer Springs connection as is. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planninq Division: The site is in the 65th Street East District. The Plan recommends Mixed Commercial Industrial (MCI). There is no on going neighborhood plan effort in the area. The site is an existing business, which wishes to expand. While the application does not meet the letter of the Land Use definition of MCI. Staff believes the application is not in conflict with the Plan. However the Plan does show Single Family to the east (R-2 zoning is in place), thus care should be given to the eastern edge treatment of the PID. This should include considerations of the effect of the massing, landscape, truck loading, etc. Landscape Issues: Screening of this proposed development from the residential property to the east is required unless the proposed structure will not have doors or windows on its east side other than those doors required by the Fire Department. The existing paved area between the proposed Phase 3 expansion and the right-of-way of Geyer Springs should be maintained as a buffer area. 3 FILE NO.: Z -3792-A (Cont.) Buildinq Codes: It appears that the existing building may be over area (maximum square footage) as allowed by the State Building and Fire Code. The building addition(s) would be an intensification of a nonconforming use. The additions may be allowed if proper setbacks can be maintained or firewalls are built. Please consult Table 400 of the 1992 Arkansas Fire Prevention Code, volume II. Fire sprinkling protection will be required. Staff suggest that the designer submit a codes analysis to the City plans review staff as soon as possible. Further administrative approval could require activity by the Building Board Code of Appeals. G. ANALYSIS• The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on May 27, 1998. The revised plan addresses most of the concerns raised by the Subdivision Committee and staff. In staff's opinion the key issue remaining to be resolved relates to Battle Road. The revised plan is unclear as to the exact treatment of Battle Road. Staff feels that the following issues relating to Battle Road warrant discussion by the full Commission: 1. How much of the north section of Battle Road will be abandoned to accommodate Phase I building expansion which extends into the right-of-way? 2. Where will cul-de-sac be constructed? 3. Will Sysco continue to rent single-family residences along the east side of Battle Road? If so what arrangement will be made for access after Battle Road abandonment? H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the proposed PD -I with the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the conditions noted in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. 2. Resolve Battle Road issues. 3. All vehicular use areas must be paved. 4. Any site lighting must be low-level and directed away from adjacent property. 5. Staff recommends approval of the abandonment of a portion of Battle Road. 4 ILE NO.: Z -3792-A (Cont. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MAY 21, 1998) Pat McGetrick was present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the proposed rezoning. The majority of the discussion related to the proposed treatment of Battle Road. Public Works staff noted that Battle Road would need to be improved with a cul-de-sac. Planning Staff noted that the applicant should show the property to the east of Battle Road as future development and abandon the north section of Battle Road and construct a cul-de-sac further south, all as part of this proposed development. Mr. McGetrick noted that none of the parking area along Frozen Road would be retained with Phase III construction. He noted that the area along Geyer Springs Road would be landscaped. Staff noted that all vehicular use areas (including parking areas) must be paved. After further discussion, the Committee forwarded the rezoning to the full Commission for resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 11, 1998) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted a letter requesting that the item be deferred to the July 23, 1998 agenda. Staff noted that the letter was received less than five (5) business days prior to the public hearing, and therefore, a waiver of the bylaws was in order. Staff supported the deferral request. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the July 23, 1998 agenda. A motion was made to waive the bylaws and accept the deferral request as made by the applicant. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. A motion was made to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on June 29, 1998. The revised plan shows the proposed cul-de-sac location for Battle Road and indicates the area of Battle Road to be abandoned. The revised plan also shows the proposed building addition being moved back away from Battle Road and meeting a 25 foot setback. The applicant has also noted that there will be 17,000 square feet of office and 338,350 square feet of warehouse space (existing and proposed). Typical parking requirements for this development would be 98 spaces. The existing car and truck 5 FILE NO.: Z -3792-A (Cont. parking in addition to the phase 3 parking lot expansions equal well over 100 spaces. There are issues relating to Battle Road which need to be resolved. 1. Will Sysco continue to rent the single-family residences along Battle Road? If so, what arrangement will be made for access after Battle Road abandonment. 2. Public Works has recommended that Battle Road be improved from 65th Street to the cul-de-sac due to the heavy truck traffic that will be generated. 3. Street improvements to Battle Road must be done with Phase I construction or a portion of Battle Road must be abandoned and cul-de-sac constructed with Phase I. With these issues resolved, staff recommends approval of the PD -I subject to the conditions noted in the previous staff recommendation (paragraph H of this report). SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JULY 2, 1998) Bob Lowe, of McGetrick Engineering, was present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the revised site plan. Staff noted that the revised site plan shows a cul-de-sac at the end of Battle Road and that the building addition has been set back further from Battle Road (25 feet). The applicant noted that the required street improvements to Geyer Springs Road would be made. Staff noted that the future parking areas would need to be paved. After the brief discussion, the Committee forwarded the issue to the full Commission for resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 23, 1998) Staff presented a positive recommendation on this application, as there were no further issues for resolution. There were no objectors to this matter. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff. A motion to that effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes, and 0 nays. 6 July 23, 1998 ITEM NO.: F NAME: Sysco -- Long -Form PD -I LOCATION: 5800 Frozen Road DEVELOPER: Sysco Food Services of Ark. 5800 Frozen Road Little Rock, AR 72209 AREA: Approx. 20.60 Acres FT. NEW STREET: 0 LE NO.: Z -3792-A ENGINEER• McGetrick Engineering 319 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 ZONING: I -2/R -2/R-4 ALLOWED USES: Light industrial, single-family, two-family PROPOSED USE: Warehouse and office space VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: None requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: The applicant proposes to rezone the property from I -2/R - 2/R -4 to PD -I to allow the phased expansion of the existing Sysco Foods Warehouse and Office Development. The applicant notes that Phase I will consist of an 80,000 square foot building expansion, Phase II will consist of a 11,750 square foot building expansion and Phase III will include a 103,600 square foot building expansion and additional parking near West 65th Street. The building expansion will be primarily warehouse and dock space with a small amount of additional office space. The applicant also notes that after Phase III, additional parking will be developed on property along the east side of Battle Road which is owned by Sysco Foods. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: Single-family residences exist across Battle Road to the east and along Battle Road to the south. There is a mixture of commercial and industrial uses and a mobile home park along West 65th Street to the south. Railroad right-of-way is located immediately north of the site. July 23, 1998 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F Cont. FILE NO.: Z -3792-A C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received no neighborhood comment as of this writing. The Wakefield and Geyer Springs Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Proposed addition is not permitted to encroach on right- of-way of Battle Road. Relocate building with building setback. 2. Dedicate 30 feet from centerline on Battle Rock and construct 36 feet wide pavement to 65th Street with cul- de-sac at terminus. 3. Provide design of streets of conforming to "MSP" (Master Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvements to these streets including 5 foot sidewalks with planned development. 4. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 5. A sketch grading -and drainage plan, a special flood hazard permit, and a special grading permit for flood hazard areas are required. Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology (ADPCE) and NPDES permit are also required. 6. Stormwater detention Ordinance applies to this property. 7. Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities are required. 8. On site striping and signage plans should be forwarded to Public Works, Traffic Engineering for approval with the site development package. 9. Street improvement plans shall include signage and striping. Completed plans must be approved by Traffic Engineering prior to construction. 10. Geyer Springs Road has a 1995 average daily traffic count of 9,800 vehicles. 11. 65th Street has a 1995 average daily traffic count of 17,000. 12. Obtain permits (barricade/street cut) for improvements within proposed or existing right-of-way from Traffic Engineering prior to construction in right-of-way. 13. Prepare a letter of pending development addressing street lights as required by Section 31-403 of the Little Rock Code. All requests should be forwarded to Traffic Engineering. 14. Utility excavation within proposed rights-of-way shall be per Article V of Sec. 30. 15. Dedicate additional 5 feet right-of-way for Geyer Springs Road. 2 July 23, 1998 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cant.) FILE NO.: Z -3792 -A E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main relocation required prior to construction. AP&L: No Comment received. ARKLA: No Comment. Southwestern Bell: No Comment received. Water: The Little Rock Fire Department needs to review this site plan to determine if additional fire protection will be required. Contact the Water Works if larger and/or additional meter(s) are required. Fire Department: Private fire hydrants may be required. Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 for details. County Plannin : No Comment received. CATA: CATA does not currently serve the area. There might be a connection in the future from Mabelvale Pike to Geyer Springs rather than the current Route #17A on University. Frozen Road PDI would need to leave Geyer Springs connection as is. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: The site is in the 65th Street East District. The Plan recommends Mixed Commercial Industrial (MCI). There is no on going neighborhood plan effort in the area. The site is an existing business, which wishes to expand. While the application does not meet the letter of the Land Use definition of MCI. Staff believes the application is not in conflict with the Plan. However the Plan does show Single Family to the east (R-2 zoning is in place), thus care should be given to the eastern edge treatment of the PID. This should include considerations of the effect of the massing, landscape, truck loading, etc. Landscape Issues: Screening of this proposed development from the residential property to the east is required unless the proposed structure will not have doors or windows on its east side other than those doors required by the Fire Department. 3 July 23, 1998 SUBDIVISION G. KM NO-: F (Cont. FILE NO.: Z -3792-A The existing paved area between the proposed Phase 3 expansion and the right-of-way of Geyer Springs should be maintained as a buffer area. Building Codes: It appears that the existing building may be over area (maximum square footage) as allowed by the State Building and Fire Code. The building addition(s) would be an intensification of a nonconforming use. The additions may be allowed if proper setbacks can'be maintained or firewalls are built. Please consult Table 400 of the 1992 Arkansas Fire Prevention Code, volume II. Fire sprinkling protection will be required. Staff suggest that the designer submit a codes analysis to the City plans review staff as soon as possible. Further administrative approval could require activity by the Building Board Code of Appeals. ANALYSIS• The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on May 27, 1998. The revised plan addresses most of the concerns raised by the Subdivision Committee and staff. In staff's opinion the key issue remaining to be resolved relates to Battle Road. The revised plan is unclear as to the exact treatment of Battle Road. Staff feels that the following issues relating to Battle Road warrant discussion by the full Commission: 1. How much of the north section of Battle Road will be abandoned to accommodate Phase I building expansion which extends into the right-of-way? 2. Where will cul-de-sac be constructed? 3. Will Sysco continue to rent single-family residences along the east side of Battle Road? If so what arrangement will be made for access after Battle Road abandonment? STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the proposed PD -I with the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the conditions noted in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. 2. Resolve Battle Road issues. 4 July 23, 1998 SUBDIVISION F (Cont. FILE NO.: Z -3792-A 3. All vehicular use areas must be paved. 4. Any site lighting must be low-level and directed away from adjacent property. 5. Staff recommends approval of the abandonment of a portion of Battle Road. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (MAY 21, 1998) Pat McGetrick was present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the proposed rezoning. The majority of the discussion related to the proposed treatment of Battle Road. Public works staff noted that Battle Road would need to be improved with a cul-de-sac. Planning Staff noted that the applicant should show the property to the east of Battle Road as future development and abandon the north section of Battle Road and construct a cul-de-sac further south, all as part of this proposed development. Mr. McGetrick noted that none of the parking area along Frozen Road would be retained with Phase III construction. He noted that the area along Geyer Springs Road would be landscaped. Staff noted that all vehicular use areas (including parking areas) must be paved. After further discussion, the Committee forwarded the rezoning'to the full Commission for resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JUNE 11, 1998) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted a letter requesting that the item be deferred to the July 23, 1998 agenda. Staff noted that the letter was received less than five (5) business days prior to the public hearing, and therefore, a waiver of the bylaws was in order. Staff supported the deferral request. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the July 23, 1998 agenda. A motion was made to waive the bylaws and accept the deferral request as made by the applicant. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. A motion was made to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. 5 ' July 23, 1998 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont. -I FILE NO.: Z -3792-A STAFF UPDATE• The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on June 29, 1998. The revised plan shows the proposed cul-de-sac location for Battle Road and indicates the area of Battle Road to be abandoned. The revised plan also shows the proposed building addition being moved back away from Battle Road and meeting a 25 foot setback. The applicant has also noted that there will be 17,000 square feet of office and 338,350 square feet of warehouse space (existing and proposed). Typical parking requirements for this development would be 98 spaces. The existing car and truck parking in addition to the phase 3 parking lot expansions equal well over 100 spaces. There are issues relating to Battle Road which need to be resolved. 1. Will Sysco continue to rent the single-family residences along Battle Road? If so, what arrangement will be made for access after Battle Road abandonment. 2. Public Works has recommended that Battle Road be improved from 65th Street to the cul-de-sac due to the heavy truck traffic that will be generated. 3. Street improvements to Battle Road must be done with Phase I construction or a portion of Battle Road must be abandoned and cul-de-sac constructed with Phase I. With these issues resolved, staff recommends approval of the PD -I subject to the conditions noted in the previous staff recommendation (paragraph H of this report). SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (JULY 2, 1998) Bob Lowe, of McGetrick Engineering, was present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the revised site plan. Staff noted that the revised site plan shows a cul-de-sac at the end of Battle Road and that the building addition has* been set back further from Battle Road (25 feet). The applicant noted that the required street improvements to Geyer Springs Road would be made. Staff noted that the future parking areas would need to be paved. After the brief discussion, the Committee forwarded the issue to the full Commission for resolution. 6 July 23, 1998 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: F (Cont. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: FILE NO.: Z -3792 - (JULY 23, 1998) Staff presented a positive recommendation on this application, as there were no further issues for resolution. There were no objectors to this matter. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval as recommended by staff. A motion to that effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes, and 0 nays. tl