The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutZ-6519 Staff AnalysisOctober 15, 1998 ITEM NO.: C FILE NO.: Z-651 NAME: Shackleford West Office Park - Zoning Site Plan Review LOCATION: West side of Shackleford Road, approximately 1/2 mile south of Colonel Glenn Road DEVELOPER: ENGINEER: William A. Brandon McGetrick Engineering 15021 Spring Club Rd. 319 East Markham St., Suite 202 Little Rock, AR 72065 Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 4.46 Acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: I-1 ALLOWED USES: PROPOSED USE: Light Industrial Office/Warehouse VARIANCES/WAIVERS REQUESTED: 1. The applicant needs to request a variance for reduced building setbacks (west and south property lines). 2. The applicant also needs to request a variance for reduced buffers along the north, south and east property lines. BACKGROUND: The 4.46 acre site at the southwest corner of Shackleford Road and Clearwater Drive is zoned I-1, Industrial Park District. The I-1 zoning district requires site plan review approval by the Planning Commission for any development. A. PROPOSAWREQUEST: The applicant proposes to construct two office/warehouse buildings on the site, one being 40,625 square feet in area and the other 26,000 square feet. The property will be accessed by utilizing a driveway from Shackleford Road and a drive from Clearwater Drive. There are 156 parking spaces on the proposed site plan. Reduced building setbacks (south and west sides) and reduced buffers (north, south and east sides) are shown on the proposed site plan. October 15, 1998 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C Cont. FILE NO.: Z-6519 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is mostly cleared with few trees remaining. It appears that some site work and filling has been done in the past. A Little Rock Water Works facility exists across Clearwater Drive to the west with Capitol City Packaging located across Clearwater Drive to the north. The R-2 zoned property to the south is vacant and heavily wooded as is the I-1 property located across Shackleford Road to the east. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: Staff has received no neighborhood comment as of this writing. The John Barrow, Westwood and Pecan Lake Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Redesign driveway on Clearwater to meet Ordinance standards eliminate crossing if less than 75 feet from curb line. 2. Shackleford Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way to 45 feet from centerline is required. 3. Clearwater is a commercial street. Dedicate right-of- way to 30 feet from centerline and construct one-half street improvement with planned development. 4. Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP" (Master Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvement to these streets including 5 -foot sidewalks with planned development. 5. A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the corner of Shackleford and Clearwater. 6. Stormwater detention Ordinance applies to this property. 7. Easements for proposed stormwater detention facilities are required. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer main extension required with easements to serve property. AP&L: No Comment received. Arkla: No Comment received. Southwestern Bell: No Comment. Water: On-site fire protection may be required. An acreage charge and a Development Fee apply for water 2 October 15, 1998 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C(Cont.)FILE NO.: Z-6519 connections based on the size of the connection. Right of access off Clearwater Dr., which is a private street, needs to be worked out. Fire Department: Show fire hydrants on site plan. County Planning: No Comment received. LATA: No Comment. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No Comment. Landscape Issues: The street buffers drop below the 20 foot width requirement along the northern perimeter and the 24 foot width requirement along Shackleford Road. The land use buffer proposed along the southern perimeter of the site falls short of the 20 foot width requirement. Additionally, a 6 foot high opaque wood fence is required along the southern perimeter. If dumpsters are to be used, they must be shown on the site plan submitted and screened on four sides to a height of 8 feet. A total of six percent of the interior of the on site vehicular use area must be landscaped with interior islands. Prior to a building permit being issued, three copies of a detailed landscape plan must be submitted to and approved by Bob Brown, Plans Review Specialist. He may be reached at 371-4864. G. ANALYSIS• According to the City's zoning Ordinance Section 36-319(a), "The I-1 industrial park district is established to provide for modern, efficient, and well-designed industrial facilities within a "park -like" setting. As the city's most restrictive industrial district, the I-1 zone is designed to conform to high development standards while providing for a full array of industrial and related uses." Staff feels that the proposed site plan does not meet the purpose and intent of the ordinance. The building area and area of parking and drives amounts to approximately 75 percent coverage of the entire site. The interior landscape areas are very minimal and the applicant is showing reduced 3 ir October 15, 1998 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-6519 buffer areas and building setbacks. Staff feels that the item should be deferred in order for the site plan to be redesigned. The applicant submitted a letter to staff on July 7, 1998 requesting that the item be deferred to the September 3, 1998 agenda. H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the requested deferral to the September 3, 1998 agenda. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: Bob Lowe, of McGetrick Engineering, was present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief description.of the site plan. Staff noted that there were several issues relating to the site plan which needed to be resolved (reduced setbacks and buffers, lack of interior landscape areas, "park -like setting" required by ordinance for I-1 developments, etc.). Bob Lowe indicated that he would meet with the property owner to discuss revising the site plan and it was very possible that a deferral would be requested. The Committee encouraged Mr. Lowe to request a deferral and redesign the plan. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JULY 23, 1998) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted a letter to staff requesting that the item be deferred to the September 3, 1998 agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the September 3, 1998 agenda. A motion to that effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 11 ayes, and 0 nays. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a letter to staff on August 20, 1998 requesting that the item be deferred to the October 15, 1998 agenda. The applicant is continuing to work out issues associated with the site plan. Staff recommends approval of the deferral request. The revised plans will need to be submitted for review by the Subdivision Committee on September 24, 1998. 4 October 15, 1998 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C Cont. FILE NO.: Z--6519 PLANNING COMMISSION_ ACTION: (SEPTEMBER 3, 1998) Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had submitted a letter to staff requesting that the item be deferred to the October 15, 1998 agenda. Staff supported the deferral request. The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for inclusion within the Consent Agenda for deferral to the October 15, 1998 agenda. A motion to that effect was made. The motion passed by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE.COMMENT: (SEPTEMBER 24, 1998) Pat McGetrick was present, representing the application. Staff reviewed the concerns as noted in paragraphs G of this report. Mr. McGetrick stated that the site plan would be revised to address all of the ordinance requirements with the exception of the side yard setback on the south side. He stated that the revised plan would be submitted to staff on September 30, 1998. The Committee forwarded the issue to the full Commission for final action. STAFF UPDATE: The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on September 30, 1998. The revised plan complies with all of the ordinance requirements for I-1 zoned property with the exception of the building setback along the south side. The ordinance requires a 100 foot setback when the I-1 property abuts residential property. The undeveloped property to the south is zoned R-2. The applicant is requesting a variance from the required 100 foot setback due to the fact that the R-2 zoned property is designated "light industrial" on the city's Land Use Plan and it is very doubtful that the property will ever be developed as residential. The 30 foot setback that the applicant is proposing is the normal standard for I-1 zoning. Staff supports the variance request. The ordinance requires a minimum of 68 parking spaces for this development. There are 114 parking spaces on the proposed site plan. However, 40 spaces are located in the area behind building #1 where truck deliveries will take place. The location could limit the use of some of these spaces. The applicant has noted that the building height will be between 18 to 26 feet. This complies with ordinance standards. 61 October 15, 1998 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: C(Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-651.9 The applicant also notes that the hours of operation will be from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and that any signage will comply with city ordinance. The revised site plan submitted by the applicant is a vast improvement over the previous plan. The revised plan meets or exceeds all street side and land use buffer areas. The applicant has reduced the building and parking coverage from 75 percent to 64 percent and has increased the amount of interior and perimeter landscaped areas. With increased plantings in these areas, staff feels that the proposed plan complies with the -park-like- setting as required for I-1 zoned property. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the site plan, subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the comments as noted in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. 2. Staff recommends approval of the variance for reduced building setback on the south property line. 3. Any signage must comply with the City's Zoning Ordinance. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 15, 1998) Staff presented a positive recommendation on this application, as there were no further issues for resolution. There were no objectors to this matter. The Chairman placed the item before the within the Consent Agenda for approval A motion to that effect was made. The 8 ayes, 0 nays and 3 absent. 6 Commission for inclusion as recommended by staff. motion passed by a vote of