HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-3955 Staff AnalysisNovember 12, 1985
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. •16
NAME:
LOCATION:
OWNER/APPLICANT:
PROPOSAL:
Thurmond Development Corporation
Site Plan Review (Z -3599-A)
The East Side of Napa Valley Rd.
230 feet South of Hinson Rd.
Roger Thurmond/Terry Rasco of
Witsell, Evans, and Rasco
To construct four, two-story office buildings (17,200 square
feet and four carports which equal 3,080 square feet) and 54
parking spaces on 1.65 acres of land that is zoned "0-2."
Analysis:
The staff views this proposal as compatible with the
surrounding area. The staff does, however, feel that a
slight revision in the proposed plan would make it more
compatible with the surrounding area. The staff feels that
the site plan should be revised by placing the dumpsters on
the interior portion of the site. The revised site plan
should also show the front 25 feet of the property as an
undisturbed landscaped buffer area. The Fire Department has
also requested that all drives and access points be shown as
a minimum of 20 feet in width.*
*Note: Applicant needs to be advised that platting of the
property will be required to sell offices as condominiums.
City Engineering Comments:
(1) Dedicate necessary right-of-way on Napa Valley Road to
equal a total of 40 feet; (2) construct one-half boundary
street improvements (one-half of 48 feet) on Napa Valley
Road; (3) provide centerline vertical profile to determine
the best location for driveway to verify sight distance; and
(4) provide preliminary detention calculations and area
locations.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval, provided the applicant agrees to: (1) submit a
revised site plan that relocates dumpsters toward the
interior of the site, illustrates a 25 -foot landscape buffer
area on Napa Valley Road and redesigns all drives and access
to meet a minimum 20 feet in width; (2) comply with City
engineering comments Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4.
November 12, 1985
SUBDIVISIONS
Item No. 16 - Continued
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The applicant was present and agreed to comply with staff's
recommendations. The staff informed the applicant that
Southwestern Bell required an easement, and that the Water
Works required an on-site fire protection system.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present. There were no objectors. The
Commission voted 11 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent to approve the
application as recommended by staff, reviewed by the
Subdivision Committee and agreed to by the applicant.
1