Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6206 Staff AnalysisOctober 28, 1996 Item No.: 1 Fil � NO.: QyM,.er: A.ddregs: Des riPtic)II: zoned: Variance Requested: justification: Present use of PK92f-rtY: Proposed Use of Propert : Staff Repor : A. Public WorKs -Comments: Z-6206 AFCO Metals 7701 Lindsey Road Tract A, Area 104, Little Rock Port Industrial Park 1-3 A variance is requested from the area regulations of Section 36-321 to permit construction of a building with a reduced side yard setback. Applicant's Statement: When the facility was first constructed the building was located 10 feet from the east property line and a railroad spur constructed through the building. (See attached plan). we are now planning a three (3) phase facility, which when completed will be some 120,000 plus square feet. This new facility requires unloading rail cars and a rail extension south from the south side of the existing building to the south property line to accommodate all three phases. Therefore the buildings need to align to serve this facility and require a variance for a 10 foot setback for the spur extension construction. Steel storage and fabrication plant steel storage and fabrication plant The Port Authority is responsible for street improvements in this area with an agreement with the Public works Director. October 28, 1996 I item No. 1 (C:)nt.,l Driveways should meet ordinance, driveway shown on Fourche Dam Pike is less than 25 feet from property corner. Stormwater detention in port is not required, however grading permit is required including soil loss calculations prior to construction. All driveways should meet City ordinances and have concrete aprons to property line. If the disturbed area exceeds five acres, then a NPDES permit will be required. B. Staff AnAIY—sis: AFCO Metals is located on a 20+ acre tract at the southeast corner of Lindsey Road and Fourche Dam Pike, in the Port industrial Park. The company currently has a 212, 000+ square foot facility on the property. They propose to add a new facility on the property containing some 120,000+ square feet. When the original facility was built, it was located 10 feet from the east property line and a railroad spur was constructed through the building. The new 120,000+ square foot facility is proposed to maintain that 10 foot side yard setback which will allow for the railroad spur to be extended directly south from the existing building into the new structure. The property is zoned 1-3. The 1-3 district requires a side yard setback of 30 feet. The Port Industrial Park consists primarily of heavy industrial uses constructed on large tracts of land. The property to the east of this site is currently undeveloped and is still being utilized as farm land. ' Should this tract of undeveloped property ever be developeda, it will be separated from the subject property by a 40 foot right-of- way occupied by the Little Rock Port Railroad. The 40 foot railroad right-of-way will help to mitigate the reduced side yard setback proposed by the applicant. Section 36-321 of the Code of Ordinances does allow the side and rear yard setbacks of 1-3 zoned properties to be adjusted to accommodate those tracts provided with rail service. Staff believes the proposal to be reasonable and supports the variance request. C. Staff RecQmm ndatio : Staff recommends approval of the requested side yard setback variance subject to compliance with Public Works Comments. 2 October 28, 1996 Item No.: I (Cont.) BOARD OF ADtTUSTMENT: (OCTOBER 28, 1996) Ron Boyeskie was present representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval, subject to compliance with Public Works Comments. Mr. Boyeskie offered no additional comments. Kirby Rowland abstained at this point, after being made aware that he had a conflict of interest. Mr. Boyeskie and David Scherer, of the Public Works Department, stated that all parties involved were working to resolve the issue concerning the driveway location. A motion was made to approve the requested variance subject to compliance with Public Works Comments. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes, 2 absent, 1 open position and 1 abstaining (Rowland). 3