Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6051-C Staff AnalysisOctober 30, 1997 ITEM NO.: 15 FILE NO.: Z -6051-C NAME: Arkansas Systems Zoning Site Plan LOCATION: Systems Drive at Kirk Road, SW corner DEVELOPER: ENGINEER• Chenal Technology Ctr., LLC Joe White, Jr. c/o Hank Kelley White-Daters and Assoc. 425 W. Capitol Ave. 401 Victory Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Little Rock, AR 72201 376-8005 374-1666 AREA: 7.47 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: None ZONING: 0-2 ALLOWED USES: General Office PROPOSED USE: Same in a single four story building of 109,760 sq. ft. VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: Deferral of improvements on Kirk Road (unspecified time) BACKGROUND: The lots involved in this site plan were established by plat approval of the Planning Commission on July 18, 1997 at which time the overall plat was approved from Kirk Road to Chenal Parkway. The plat at that time created four lots on preliminary where one large lot is now proposed. The 0-2 zoning district which requires this site plan review was approved on October 3, 1995. A. PROPOSAL RE UEST: The project is a proposed four story office building containing 27,440 square feet per floor with a total of 109,760 square feet on 7.47 acres of land. The property will front on Technology Drive, a new street being installed by the Chenal Technology Center developers connecting Chenal Parkway with Arkansas Systems Drive. Immediately south of the project is the new post office under construction. North of the project is the Arksys Office Building Project. I J October 30, 1997 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -66451-C B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is gently sloping from the northeast corner to the southwest corner. The elevation change is approximately 25 feet, the abutting street system consists of Kirk Road which is substandard and two streets proposed but as yet unfinished. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: None received. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Dedicate 30 feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Kirk Road. 2. Provide design of streets conforming to the MSP. Construct one half street improvements Kirk Road including sidewalk with construction of building. Also, construct full street improvements for the remainder of Technology Drive and all of Systems Drive. 3. Systems Drive requires reconstruction of earthen dam with certification by an independent geotechnical engineer. 4. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 5. Grading permit and a development permits for special flood hazard area are required prior to construction. Contact Melvin Hall at 371-4461 or Steve Loop at 371- 4740. 6. Prior to building permit provide three copies of site grading and drainage plans and detention calculations. Contact Bruce Kemmet at 371-4740. 7. Provide for street lights, contact Traffic Engineering 340-4856. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements. AP&L: No response. Arkla: OK as submitted. Southwestern Bell: OK as submitted. Water: On site fire protection required. Fire Department: OK as submitted. County Planning: No Comment - inside city CATA: No response. No regular daily service. Pa October 30, 1997 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -66051-C F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Landscape: Areas set aside for landscaping and buffers meet with ordinance requirements. Curb and gutter will be required to protect all landscaped areas from vehicular traffic. If dumpsters are to be used their locations must be shown and an eight foot high opaque wood fence or wall provided to screen three sides. ' The City Beautiful Commission recommends saving as many existing trees as feasible. Additional credit can be allowed when saving trees of six inch caliper or larger. Planning Division: G. ANALYSIS: No comment, conforms to land use plan. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Approval of the site plan as submitted subject to Public Work requirements, resolving the Kirk Road improvement waiver and the following: 1. If approved will amend overall preliminary plat and approved driveway locations. 2. Need detail on parking lot lights. 3. Height of building in feet. 4. Detail on project signs, need plan for building and freestanding. 5. Resolve landscaping issues with Bob Brown. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 9, 1997) Mr. Hank Kelley was present as was Mr. Tim Daters, the engineer. The Committee asked a few questions. Staff offered its comments as did Public works Department. The only issue of consequence on this plan is the street improvements waiver. The Engineer will work to resolve the design questions. The item is forwarded to the full Commission for resolution. 3 I t I "October 30, 1997 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -5051-C PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 30, 1997) The Chairman recognized staff for purposes of presenting the staff recommendation and the application. Richard Wood, of the Staff, offered a brief overview of the application and stated that the only reason for retaining this matter on the regular agenda is that there is a request for deferral to an unknown time of the street improvements along Kirk Road. wood pointed out that the site plan is in order. The Chairman recognized Mr. Tim Daters, of White-Daters Engineers who came forward and stated that he represented the application. Mr. Daters stated that the applicant would like to defer the improvements along Kirk Road until adjacent properties which would be across the street to the east or property lying to the south toward Chenal Parkway is developed all the way down to Chenal Parkway. He stated that either of these two things happening would trigger the requirements to build the improvements for this site. He stated that they did not put a year or a time on their request. If either one of these events happen they would be willing to proceed with constructing their Kirk Road improvements. He stated it was not advisable at this time to improve this section of Kirk Road since much of it is an unimproved segment lying between this area and Chenal Parkway. The Chairman recognized Jim Lawson, of the Staff, for response to Mr. Daters' comments. Lawson stated staff did not have a problem with this. Chairman Lichty then asked the staff if they had a choice of the two proposals offered. Lawson asked Mr. Scherer of Public Works for a response. Scherer came forward and offered a brief commentary on the condition of the existing Kirk Road and its relationship to the Kroger Center that was recently approved to the south. He pointed out that Kirk Road is currently not a substantial street. Mr. Scherer posed a question to the engineer, Mr. Daters, as to whether their circumstance would be when Arkansas System's drive is connected to Kirk Road and would they be willing to build the Kirk improvements. Mr. Daters attached another condition to that being the two previous comments about improvements on the east side of Kirk Road or extending south to Chenal Parkway. At this point, Mr. Scherer stated what he believed to be is now offered by the developer as the condition for construction, fronting improvements on Kirk Road and not allowing connection of this development to Kirk Road until which time adjacent development occurs on Kirk Road for a period of 5 years or whichever occurs first. Jim Lawson offered his opinion at this point. He stated perhaps we would want to do both or either of the two. Mr. Scherer 4 'October 30, 1997 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 15 Cont. FILE NO.: Z -6051-C stated that if Arkansas Systems takes access to Kirk Road with the large amount of traffic that might potentially utilized that street, they need to do the improvements. Chairman Lichty inserted a thought that he believed this is a real need. The Chairman then recognized Commissioner Berry. He asked if the developer had a site plan of this project, a color rendering perhaps. Commissioner Berry inserted some comments at this point concerning parking and parking ratios as well as asking the developer what was presented by this plan on a 1,000 sq. ft. basis. Mr. Kelley pointed out that it was being driven by the proposed user and it is approximately four spaces per 1,000. A general discussion_ occurred at this point involving Commissioner Berry, Mr. Daters and others about parking ratios and the possible need for amending the ordinance. Commissioner Berry also pointed out it did not appear to be much landscaping on this site as on the other drawing adjacent. He offered concerns that this site plan did not appear to offer pedestrian ways, sidewalks or movement areas. Mr. Daters offered that the site plan did offer the required buffers, spacing and separation. Mr. Daters offered that in light of what is happening around the lake and said they would incorporate pedestrian areas within the drawing. He stated issues concerned with pedestrian ways would be dealt with. Jim Lawson pointed out that the City's regulations at this time do not address pedestrians from sidewalk issues within large parking areas. The City's current regulations set bare minimums; however, the developer can build more space and address that kind of concern in a project. Commissioner Earnest was identified at this point for comment. He stated that he felt a unified development plan would be appropriate for this area. Commissioner Adcock was then identified for comment. She asked a question as to whether or not a certain element on the drawing was a drive through. The drawing that she apparently was addressing or had pointed to was the previous application. It dealt with the Mixed Use Office Commercial which lies to the west of this site. She was told it was the other site and not the one currently being discussed by the Planning Commission where the possible drycleaner location would be placed. Her apparent concern was that this was a drive-thru restaurant and she was assured that it was not. The restaurant was in another portion of the building. A continued discussion between Commissioner Adcock and the developer occurred where she had several questions about the previously discussed item. Mr. Kelley came forward and answered her questions concerning access drive-thru and the relationship 5 October 3'0, 1997 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.• 15 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z -6051-C between several buildings. The Chairman then brought the discussion back to the issue at hand which is item #15 and stated again that the only issue before the Commission was the deferral of the improvements on Kirk Road. The Chairman asked staff if the discussion had resolved the manner in which the improvements would be deferred. Staff's response was yes. The Chairman pointed out that a motion on this item at this time should deal with that understanding on the deferral of Kirk Road as well as accepting the various comments that are in our write- up for today. Commissioner Hawn was recognized for a motion. He made a motion that the Commission approve the application as presented with the deferral of street improvements along Kirk Road until the applicant takes access on Kirk Road or adjacent property on Kirk Road are developed and all other conditions meet. The motion received a second. A vote on the motion produced 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. G