Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4665-B Staff AnalysisDecember 12, 1995 ITEM NO.: 16 FILE NO.: Z -4662-B NAME: BOEN ADDITION, LOT 2 -- ZONING SITE PLAN REVIEW LOCATION: On the north side of Col. Glenn Road, approximately 0.2 mile west of Shackleford Road DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: Pat McGetrick LEONARD BOEN MCGETRICK ENGINEERING 11600 Otter Creek South 11225 Huron Ln., Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72103 Little Rock, AR 72211 455-0004 223-9900 AREA: 4.51 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: I-1 PROPOSED USES: Office warehouse PLANNING DISTRICT: 11 CENSUS TRACT: 24.05 VARIANCES REQUESTED: None STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: A site plan review is proposed for development of a 4.51 acre lot for use as an office warehouse facility. The development consists of a single, 63,000 square foot office warehouse building and parking for 83 vehicles, plus a service area. The building is proposed to be located 30 feet off the front property line, 130 feet off the east line, 85 feet off the west lot line, and 49 feet off the rear property line. Dedication of right-of- way for and construction of one-half of Principal Arterial road requirements for Col. Glenn Rd. are proposed. No variances are requested. A. PROPOSAWREQUE_S_T: Review and approval by the Planning Commission is requested for a site plan. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is undeveloped and wooded. The site rises in topography from an elevation of 320 feet, MSL (Mean Sea Level) at the southeast corner of the tract, to 340 feet, MSL, at the northwest corner, a 20 foot differential within 650 feet, or a 3% average grade across the site. December 12, 1995 BDIVI IO ITEM NO.: 16 Continued) FILE _NQ.:_ 2-4652-B The site is zoned I-1. The Lot 1 area of the subdivision of which the subject site is a part is immediately to the west, in the same I-1 zone. The property to the east, south, and north is zoned R-2. C. ENGINEERING/UTILITY COMMENTS: Public Works comments: Proper grading plans and erosion cdiitz63 Flans .are required prior to construction. Col. Glenn Rd. is a Principal Arterial, and dedication of right-of-way to 55 feet form centerline is required. Construct one-half street improvements, in including a sidewalk, on Col. Glenn Rd. to Principal Arterial standards. Stormwater detention analysis is required. open ditches are generally not permitted by the Stormwater Management and Drainage Manual. If ditches are planned, they must be shown on the preliminary plat and must be approved by the City Engineer prior to Planning Commission approval of the plat [Ref. Sec. 311-89(9)]. Show water courses entering the plat area, and the planned exit points for drainage. Little Rock Water works comments that on-site fire protection will be required. Little Rock Wastewater Utility comments that sewer main extensions, with easements, will be required. Arkansas Power and Light Co. did not provide comments. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. approved the submittal, with the stipulation that ARKLA has no objection to the layout, provided that no ARKLA facilities are disturbed. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. approved the submittal. The Little Rock Fire Department approved the submittal. D. ISSgES LEGAL/TECHNICAL/D9SIGN: Sec. 36-127 requires that, among other zoning districts, sites in I-1 zoned areas are subject to site plan review by the Planning Commission. 2 December 12, 1995 e�xvz z - FILE NO.: Z-45 2-B Sec. 36-319 requires that the front building setback line on I-1 zoned lots be set at least 70 feet off the right-of-way; that the side yards are to be at least 30 feet in width; and that the rear yard setback be at least 40 feet from the lot line. The shown front building line is 30 feet; 70 feet is required. Other setback requirements are met. The Commission can, as part of the site plan review, approve variance, but the applicant must re rianca No variance has been, as this time, requested. such a variance. quested. The provisions of Sec. 31-210 are applicable to this development. Commercial properties abutting arterial streets shall be limited to 1 driveway or access point for each 300 feet of lot frontage. Shared or common access Points are encouraged. If the two drives, as shown, are desired, a variance from this restriction must be sought. This variance must be approved by the City Board of Directors. In order to determine the required parking for the building, it must be determined how much of the building space is allotted to office use and how much to the warehouse use. The ratio of office to warehouse uses, then, needs to be specified. Warehousing requires 1 space for each 2000 square feet of gross floor area up to 50,000 square feet, then, in addition, 1 space for every 10,000 square feet, Plus 5 spaces. Office uses require 1 space for each 400 square feet up to 10,400 square feet; then, for areas between 10,001 and 20,000 square feet, 950 of the basic requirement; then, for areas between 20,001 and 30,000 square feet, 90% of the basic requirement; then, for areas of 30,001 to 40,000 square feet, 85% of the basic requirement; then, for areas of 40,001 square feet and above, 80% of the basic requirement. The parking requirements can range of from 31 spaces if the whole building is warehousing to 139 if the whole building is office. Parking for 83 vehicles is provided.. The location of and provision for dumpsters is re quireto be shown on the plan. No dumpster locations are identified. The Site Plan Review Specialist notes that the full buffer requirement along Col. Glenn Rd. is 25 1/2 feet (or, 17 feet minimum with transfer to another area of the site). The front buffer requirements appears to be met. 3 December 12, 1995 a9BDLUT SIQN E- AA ALYSIS;��- The 2-1 zoning requires a 70 line. The preliminaryfoot front building setback Of front building setba k Line to the easub ivision shows the he for Lot 2 shows the front building setback linetobetatp30n feet. The applicant, however, has not requested a variance from the 70 foot requirement; yet the site plan is not in conformance with the Ordinance requirement. when the preliminary pkat and site plan were submitted site was designed under the belief that Col, Glenn Rd. isha Minor Arterial roadway; it is not, , Principal Arterial, and the though. applicant had tolagree t is ato dedicate an additional 10 feet of right-of-way over and above what he had anticipated dedicatin front yard ❑£ the already designed g• This reduced the ding to the 30 feet shown on the revisedbdrawing,by 10 feet, down The building, set just 30 feet roadway, off a Principal Arterial the lot, occupying nearly half of the length of the front of will loom over the roadway this is too much mass. too close to'thetstreet uld Seem The t7Qtfoot however setback line, . is an arbitra afor variance from this number may be number, and some zoom 2 zoning district, the front setback isp50pfeet.e. In the I - commercial zoning, it can be 25 feet. Staff can sun variance to permit a 40 or 50 rant setback, foot (PPort a 3Q foot setback. but not a The ratio of office to warehouse uses has not been specified, and, at this point, a determination whether adequate parking has been furnished can not be made. There are other minor deficiencies in the site plan which can be remedied. The question of the building size on the lot, though, is the overriding issue. F• STAFF RECOMMENz}ATInNS: Staff recommends approval of the site Plan, variance from the front building setbaccklineubeiect ng to a approved. Staff recommends that a variance to foot front building setback be denied. Permit a 30 5�7H17TVI ION OMMITTEE CQMMENT: (NOVEMBER 22, 1995) Mr. Pat McGetrick, the project engineer, was present. outlined the nature of the project and reviewed with Mrstaff 4 December 12, 1995 SUBDIVISION �- McGetrick and the Committee members the concerns in the discussion. outline. It was noted that the site plan, as presented, had shown Col. Glenn Rd. to be a Minor Arterial, and that there was inadequate right-of-way and improvements shown to meet the requirement of the Principal Arterial, which it is. Mr. McGetrick responded that the appropriate right-of-way and improvements would be shown on the drawing. The fact that, once the additional right-of-way is dedicated, the too close to Col. Glenn Rd., and that the front landscaping be buffer would be inadequate, was discussed. Mr. McGetrick indicated that all Public Works and Neighborhoods and Planing issues would be addressed. The committee forwarded the item to the frill Commission for review of the site plan. PLANNING rnMMI SIQN ACTION; (DECEMBER 121 1995) Staff reported that the proposed site plan was based on approval of a preliminary plat being considered as Item 4 on the agenda, and that the Commission, in approving the Boen Addition Preliminary Plat, approved a 50 foot building setback line in lieu of the 70 foot required by the Ordinance for in I--1 zoning district. Staff pointed out that the siteperty plan whiche had been submitted shows the building being located 30 feet off the front property line, and explained that the building would have to be reduced in size to conform to the 50 foot building setback established for the site. Staff also pointed out that the site plan of Lot 2 shows two access points within the 365.57 foot frontage of the lot; that Public Works would not normally approve two drives within this frontage, but had agreed to the arrangement due to the entire frontage of the Boen Addition being a total of 776.77 feet, with the drive access point to Lot 1 being located at the west side of the property, thus ng the necessary separation of the drives from each other. Staff Pointed out that the Public works a Staff arrangement was predicated on the two rsites obeing developed as shown on the two site plans presented. Mr. Pat McGetrick, the project engi1eer, was present. He presented the applicant's requested site plan, and stipulated that the building would be reduced in size to conform to the 50 foot front building setback established for the preliminary plat. Staff mentioned that the front Landscaping buffer requirements would have to be met. Commissioner Lichty pointed out that the agenda 'write-up° had noted that the applicant had not specified the amount of office versus warehouse floor areas, and that parking requirements would 5 vecember 12, 1995 QBnzvx x depend upon this ratio. issue. He -questioned Mr. McGetrick on this Mr. McGetrick responded that, when a building permit is requested, the ratio would be stipulated and the parking requirements staff: versus the parking Provided would be reviewed b that sufficient parking to meet Ordinance requirements would be provided. Interim Chairperson Ball called the the Plat, as amended, was approved with thesvote, ofn9 ayes, 0 nays, Preliminary 1 abstention (Chachere), and 1 absent. I' 0 nays, 6