Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6019-A Staff AnalysisOctober 31, 1995 ITEM 26 FILE Z- 01 -A NAME: G. M. A. C. OFFICE CENTER -- ZONING SITE PLAN REVIEW LOCATIQN: On the west side of Chenal Parkway, approximately 0.4 mile north of the West Ranis Rd. intersection DEVELOPER: ENGINEER• Jack McCray Joe White DELTIC FARM & TIMBER CO., INC. WHITE-DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. #7 Chenal Club Circle 401 S. Victory St. Little Rock, AR 72211 Little Rock, AR 72201 821-5555 374-1666 AREA: 19 ACRES NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 F T. NEW STREET: 0 _ONING: O-2 PROPOSED 'USES: General Office PLANNING DISTRICT: 19 CEN$]7S TRACT: 42.06 VARIANCE RE VESTED: None STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes the development of a 19-acre tract to contain two, 2-story office buildings with 75,000 square feet each and parking for 601 vehicles. The north boundary street, LeGrand Dr., will be constructed in conjunction with the development of the site along the site boundary. A sidewalk will be constructed along the Chenal Parkway frontage of the site, as well as along both sides of LeGrand Dr. No variances are requested. A. PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Planning Commission review and approval of a site plan is requested. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is currently undeveloped and heavily wooded. The topography ranges from a low point of 495 feet MSL (Mean Sea Level) at the southeast corner of the tract, to an elevation of 550 feet MSL on a knoll in the northern half of the tract, to an elevation of 517 feet at the northwest corner of the tract. October 17, 1995 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.- 26 (Cont.) _ FILE NO.: Z-609-A The existing zoning of the tract is 0-2. Property to the southwest is zoned R-2. Property to the south is zoned 0-2, as is property across Chenal Parkway to the east. Across LeGrand Dr. to the north, and to the northwest, is the site for the future Village at Chenal PRD development. C. ENGINEERING/UTILITY COMMENT$: Public Works Staff comments: The access street must be a minimum of 27 feet in width through the site, and from the first parking aisle to LeGrand Dr., it must be 36 feet in width. Grading and NPDES permits must be obtained prior to construction. Sidewalks must be constructed along both street frontages. A sidewalk is recommended along the internal drive. Stormwater detention analysis is required for the project. Plans for construction of the collector street must be submitted for review and approval. The intersection should be to Master Street Plan standards. The proposed drive should line up with the planned drives to the future Village at Chenal development. Water Works comments that, in addition to normal connection charges, a pro-rata acreage charge of $300 per acre applies. On -site fire protection will be required. Wastewater comments that a sewer main extension, with easement, will be required to provide service. Arkansas Power and Light Co. approved the submittal. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. approved the submittal. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. noted that easements will be required. The Fire Department approved the submittal. E October 17, 1995 HDIVI I ITEM NO.: 26 (Oont. )_ FILE -NO. : _ 2-6Q19-A D. I SUESILEGALITECHNICAL/DRSIGN: Sec. 36-126 requires that, for all sites zoned, among others, 0-2, the Planning Commission is to review and approve the site plan. Since the site is zoned 0-2, the site plan review is required. Sec. 36-130 requires that the site plan include a schematic landscaping plan and the proposed perimeter treatment of the property, indicating screening materials to be used for fencing, walls, plantings, etc. Sec. 36-502 requires that, for business and professional office uses, 1 parking space for each 400 square feet of gross floor area, up to 10,000 square feet be provided. For areas of structures over 10,000 square feet, up to 20,000 square feet, 95% of the basic requirement is required. For areas of structures over 20,000 square feet, up to 30,000 square feet, 90% of the basic requirement is required. For areas of structures over 30,000 square feet, up to 40,000 square feet, 85% of the requirement is required. For areas over 40,000 square feet, 80% of the basic requirement is required. The structures are 75,000 square feet each; each building requires 162.5 spaces, or a total of 325 spaces on site. The applicant has provided a total of 601 parking spaces on site. The Neighborhoods and Planing Site Plan Review Specialist notes that: a) the areas set aside for buffers and landscaping meet and exceed Ordinance requirements, with the exception of a small section of the southern parking lot which extends 15 feet into the full buffer requirement of 40 feet, and that the average minimum requirements, with transfer, is 26.5 feet; b) a 6 foot high opaque wooden fence, with its face side directed outward, or dense evergreen plantings, are required to screen this site from the adjacent residential properties to the south and west; and c) curb and gutter, or other approved border, will be required to protect the landscape areas from vehicular traffic. E. ANALYSIS• Only the landscaping plan has not been submitted for review; however, the Site Plan Review Specialist notes that there is more than enough land to meet the landscaping and buffer requirements. Approval of the site plan should be conditioned upon compliance with the landscaping and buffer ordinances. 3 October 17, 1995 SUBDIVISION ITEM FILE Z- 1 -A F. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the site plan, subject to meeting the requirements of the Ordinances, as cited in the staff report. SigBnTOPT SZON COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 12, 199S) Mr. Joe white, with White-Daters & Associates, Inc., was present. Staff outlined the nature of the request, and staff and the Committee members reviewed with Mr. White the comments contained in the discussion outline. Mr. White responded that all comments would be addressed, and the Committee forwarded the item to the full Commission for approval of the site plan. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIO : (OCTOBER 31, 1995) Staff reported that all issues had been resolved. The item was included on the Consent Agenda for approval, and was approved with the approval of the Consent Agenda with the vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent, and 0 abstentions. 4