Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-0123 Staff AnalysisJune 10, 1980 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 1 - NEW MATTERS 1K7 T M V . OWNER/DEVELOPER: Office Park Addition ENGINEER: Rector Phillips Edward G. Smith & Associates Morse, Inc. 401 Victory Street 1501 N. University Ave. Little Rock, AR 72201 Little Rock, AR 72207 Phone: 666-7807 Phone: 374-1666 ,AREA: 64.75 NO. OF LOTS: 2 FT. OF NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: 110-3" PROPOSED USES: Office Park PLANNING DISTRICT: 21 CENSUS TRACT: 24.01 VARIANCES REQUESTED: 1. Waiver of off -site improvement on Shackleford Road required by M.S.P. at 4L-48' pay. 80' right-of-way. June 19, 1980 Item No. 1 -- Staff Report A. Existing Conditions 1.) Site Characteristics This plat occupies a peninsula bordered by Interstate 430 and Shackleford Road. The terrain is hilly, generally rising from the south to the north. This tract is heavily covered by timber, with little or no drainage problem. The site is typical of land in this sparsely developed area of Little Rock. The street frontage on Shackleford Road provides problems for driveways or street entrance due to severe cuts associated with street work performed by the county. 2.) Public Facilities All public facilities and services are in place except streets, and these are required by the Subdivision Ordinance. B. Development Proposal 1.) Site Preparation and Improvements This plat was submitted for purposes of providing a one lot final plat 300' x 550' as a site for facilities of the cable TV company. Site specifics were not provided reflecting the physical improvements to be placed on the lot. However, an on -site inspection reveals that the only potential problem of the significance is driveway grade. The county in preparing the right-of-way for a wider street improvement made severe cuts in several places. It appears most of the frontage of Lot 1 contains such a cut, (in excess of 10' for some distance). If this lot is to be used as a tower site with minor traffic generation, the problem would be minimized. 2.) Provision for Public Facilities This developer proposes to comply with all requirements of the ordinance except the street improvement along Shackleford Road (one half of a 48' pavement, curb, gutter and sidewalk) for 1500' more or less. June 19, 1980 Item No. 1 - Continued 3.) Conformance to Ordinance The plat and supporting documentation are in conformance except for several minor items such as: city limits, owner's name, acres noted on legal description and 45' building lines. The plat name is a potential conflict and should be changed. 4.) Variances and Justification are as Follows: Request for variance from the the boundary street improvements on Shackleford Road. Justification as stated by the applicant consists of: ( a) Owner of this tract made agreement with the county, which provides that the owner dedicate the needed right-of-way and the county to construct the roadway. *No specifics were presented outlining _what improvements were to be made, (b) The north 500' of Tract A abuts the proposed interchange on Interstate #430, which has been scheduled for construction in the near future. *The State Highway Department advises that design of the interchange is underway and preparation for future release of Highway funds are now frozen by the Feds. No specifics are available at this writing as to how far south of Interstate #430 the Highway Department will construct Shackleford Road as part of that project. The last statement in justification is a suggestion that the developer wants a deferral of improvements until the Items A and B are resolved, if such requirements are made of this platting. *Underline is Staff Comment. 5.) Legal Considerations The entire property is within the City, having been annexed on June 5, 1979. June 19, 1980 Item No. 1 - Continued The only question associated with the development of Lot 1 is land use. It appears that there are unanswered questions relative to towers, broadcasting receiving equipment and whether all of these are permitted Accessory "0-3" Offices Uses. The Zoning Ordinance permits broadcast towers and related facilities only in "AF" zones by right. C. Engineering Considerations No significant issues raised at this writing (5-22-80). The street improvements on Shackleford Road are to consist of 80 ° of right-of-way, with a 481 pavement, curb and gutter, and sidewalk, inasmuch as the county has performed all grading and right-of-way preparation. The base courses and riding surfaces are generally all that remain. D. Analysis: Staff review of the plat has revealed that there are several significant issues yet to be resolved, which remain from the rezoning approval. These are: 1. The owner agreed to downzone the property to "0-2" if the site was not developed prior to the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance. 2.) That site plan review would precede any development. The staff feels that the utmost caution must be exercised in this matter, since this is the first intrusion of development into the Interstate #430 corridor south of West 12th Street, and this is the first platting request whereby street improvements are required on Shackleford Road south of 12th Street. The developer/owner apparently has waivered from his position of single user development. Staff investigation of the waiver request and attending justification suggest to us that no hardships or circumstances prevail which would preclude the developers making a commitment to the off -site improvements. June 19, 1980 Item No. 1 - Continued Staff Recommendation: Approval of plat as filed, with exception of waiver request, inasmuch as the county has stated that no further work will be performed on this street in the form of widening or other physical improvements. The state project is unlikely to extend further than 500' from the bridge abuttment. � C The total waiver of improvements would set off a chain of variance requests along this street which would effectively eliminate the Master Street Plan as a functioning viable component of the City Master Plan. a. w . /" S June 26, 1979 Item No. 7 - Z-3363 Owner: Jim Hall and Dan Phillips Applicant: David Henry Request: Rezone to "E-l" Quiet Business District Purpose: Office Development Existing Zoning: "A" One Family Location: Shackleford Road at the I-430 Overpass Site Characteristics: Wooded and sloping Size: 66 acres + / Existing Land Use: Vacant Abutting Land Use and Zoning: North - Single Family and Vacant - Unclassified South - Vacant - Unclassified East - Vacant and Camp - Unclassified West - Single Family - Unclassified Zoning History: None Applicable Regulations: Zoning Ordinance FACTUAL INFORMATION June 26, 1976 Item No. 7 1. NEED AND/OR DEMAND The applicant and Chamber of Commerce representatives have indicated that a national company has expressed interest in this site for location of a major office facility. 2. COMPATIBILITY WITH MUNICIPAL PLANS An I-430 Corridor study prepared inhouse by staff in 1978, but never publicly presented, recognized the potential for large-scale office developments (of the type represented by the Farm Bureau Building) along the Interstate Corridor. No specific locations were addressed by that plan. 3. EFFECT ON ENVIRONS No reasonable environmental assessment can be made at this time, owing to the absence of adequate information. 4. NEIGHBORHOOD POSITION No neighborhood sentiment has been expressed. However, there is reason to believe that residences in Sandpiper Subdivision might express concern because of the proposal's probable impact on Shackleford Road, which serves as their only access. 5. PUBLIC SERVICES/EFFECT ON No adverse input has been received from any City department. However, there may be reason to be concerned about the implications for fire protection. The nearest fire fighting unit is located in the 9000 block of Kanis Road (east of the Baptist Medical Center) , and has one small pumper truck designed to handle residential fires. Recent annexation of several properties in this area has worsened this problem. 6. UTILITIES/EFFECT ON Utility demands for nonresidential uses are variable, but the City's accepted guideline for sewer demand is June 26, 1979 Item No. 7 - Continued 1,000 gallons per day per acre. The property is served from what should be adequate facilities. 7. EFFECT ON PUBLIC FINANCES Development of this property for a major office would add considerably to the City's tax base. Proponents of the application have made references to significant contributions to the job opportunities market as well. There are several offsetting potential costs peculiar to this site and general location. Shackleford Road is not presently suitable for major increase in traffic demand, although it will be improved some time in the future. County Judge W. E. Beaumont indicated in a letter to the President of the Chamber of Commerce obtained from the applicant that the county's commitment is to providing a base and seal coat for Shackleford Road. Another letter obtained from the applicant discusses the plan to construct an additional I-430 Interchange at Shackleford Road wherein the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department says: "The actual construction of these facilities are (sic) dependent upon the handling of environmental considerations, preparation of detailed construction plans, right-of-way acquisition and of course, the availability of funds". Such a project will be a major public undertaking, particularly at a time when so many other projects called for attention from the same scarce resources. 8. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS/REASONABLENESS This request, if approved, will be the first nonresidential zoning for this area. Representatives of Team Four consultants will be present at the meeting to provide an assessment of this request relative to the extraterritorial plan now underway. Even though some apparent demand for the zoning exists, there does seem to be some speculation involved. 9. STANDARDS OF QUALITY No standards of quality have been addressed; however, the applicant has indicated the commitment to rezone to an appropriate district under the new Zoning Ordinance which as presently written would provide site plan review, thereby assuring a unified development. June 26, 1979 Item No. 7 - Continued 10. TRAFFIC AND STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSIDERATION The sole access to this property is Shackleford Road. At present this thoroughfare, although classified as a major arterial on the Master Street Plan, is a wide gravel road. Traffic from the property would then have to travel either north or south a half mile to a mile to gain access to I-430 or any useful east -west thoroughfare. Any proposal to construct a new interchange at Shackleford Road and I-430 would have wide ranging implications for the future devlopment of the entire area. ANALYSIS: A review of the above data brings to light several major planning and public policy issues which must be considered prior to commitment to a zoning proposal of this magnitude. Three important considerations are apparent: (1) Further pursuit of commitments for the proposed highway interchange on I-430 and completion of the improvements to Shackleford Road; ( 2 ) Improvement of public services to match growth in the service area due to the annexation policy of the City; and (3) assessment of this proposal relative to the overall development plan for the I-430 Corridor. Staff will defer making a formal recommendation until after the presentation from Team Four. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Staff made a somewhat lengthy presentation on this matter describing in more detail the concerns raised in the written analysis and finally gave the recommendation that the application be approved with the following conditions: 1. That the building permit for development of the site be contingent upon the development of the proposed interchange between Shackleford Road and I-430. 2. That the Commission recommend to the Board of Directors that additional efforts be made to increase the planning for future development of the I-430 Corridor. ti June 26, 1979 Item No. 7 -- Continued 3. That the Commission include the statement that approval of this matter was not in any way a blanket endorsement of nonresidential development for the I-430 Corridor. The applicant, David Henry, made a brief presentation to the Planning Commission addressing several of the staff comments. In addition, he presented a more recent survey of the property which included a proposed routing for the interchange which had been under discussion. In addition, he tried to give the Planning Commission as much information as was available to him regarding the proposed tenant for this site. He did state that his clients were willing to be bound by the office park district regulations as presently written in the new Zoning Ordinance under consideration at this time. In addition to Mr. Henry, Vernon Markham, representing the Chamber of Commerce, made a brief talk to the Planning Commission talking primarily about how the Planning Commission, the Board of Directors and the Chamber of Commerce must work together in order to bring about better industrial development in Little Rock. After a lenghty discussion, the Planning Commission moved to approve the application with the condition that Mr. Henn provide the City with a etter indicatingtheir intention to a ow emse ves-L--ro %e ound by s ti e plan review should the p or perty not develop as presen y expected. The motion asse - ayes, nays 1 a sent. In addition, Chairman Hamilton proposed a resolution to the Board of Directors' requesting that they ask Team Four to prepare a special study of the I-430 Corridor. After a brief discussion, the Commission moved to accept the resolution. The motion passed - 8 ayes, 1 nay, 1 absent and 1 abstaining. Terry Mathews abstained, citing a lack of adequate information. City of LittleiRock Office of City Hall Comprehensive Markham at Broadway U; Planning Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 371-4790 June 16, 1980 Mr. Joe White Edward G. Smith & Associates 401 Victory Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: Office Park Addition Dear Mr. White: This is to inform you that the Little Rock Planning Commission met to review and decide on your application. The results are as follows: The Commission recommended approval as recommended by the Subdivision Committee and the Planning staff. Staff RecnmmenaAfinn- Approval as filed subject to the following: 1. That a minimum of 40 feet be dedicated from this plat and the preliminary clearly depict the right-of-way to be dedicated. 2. Full half street improvements on Shackleford Road the entire length of the plat except that portion determined to be within the State interchange project. These improvements to be constructed in conjunction with the second lot or tract developed. 3. All plans for physical improvements, street drainage, etc., to be submitted for one time review. 4. Applicant to take steps to down zone the entire 65 acres to "0-211 and submit site plan review on all subsequent developments. 5. Change the name of the plat to avoid conflict. Sincerely, J-V-� U't-x�- Mollie White Planning Technician MW:af12 0 14 1� to June 10, 1980 SUBDIVISIONS Item No. 1 - NEW MATTERS Office Park Addition OWNER/DEVELOPER: 0/z3 Rector Phillips Edward G. Smith & Associates Morse, Inc. 401 Victory Street 1501 N. University Ave. Little Rock, AR 72201 Little Rock, AR 72207 Phone: 666-7807 Phone: 374-1666 AREA• 64 75 NO. OF LOTS: 2 FT. OF NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: "0-3" PT,ANNTNG DTSTRICT: 21 CENSUS TRACT: 24.01 PROPOSED USES: Office Park 1. Waiver of off -site improvement on Sh ackleford Road required by M.S.P. at 4L-48' pay. 80' right-of-way. June 10, 1980 Item No. 1 - Staff Report A. Existinq Conditions 1.) Site Characteristics This plat occupies a peninsula bordered by Interstate 430 and Shackleford Road. The terrain is hilly, generally rising from the south to the north. This tract is heavily covered by timber, with little or no drainage problem. The site is typical of land in this sparsely developed area of Little Rock. The street frontage on Shackleford Road provides problems for driveways or street entrance due to severe cuts associated with street work performed by the county. 2.) Public Facilities All public facilities and services are in place except streets, and these are required by the Subdivision Ordinance. B . Development Proposal 1.) Site Preparation and Improvements This plat was submitted for purposes of providing a one lot final plat 300' x 550' as a site for facilities of the cable TV company. Site specifics were not provided reflecting the physical improvements to be placed on the lot. However, an on -site inspection reveals that the only potential problem of the significance is driveway grade. The county in preparing the right-of-way for a wider street improvement made severe cuts in several places. It appears most of the frontage of Lot 1 contains such a cut, (in excess of 10' for some distance). If this lot is to be used as a tower site with minor traffic generation, the problem would be minimized. 2.) Provision for Public Facilities This developer proposes to comply with all requirements of the ordinance except the street improvement along Shackleford Road (one half of a 48' pavement, curb, gutter and sidewalk) for 1500' more or less. 0 L-1 June 10, 1980 Item No. 1 - Continued 3.) Conformance to Ordinance The plat and supporting documentation are in conformance except for several minor items such as: city limits, owner's name, acres noted on legal description and 45' building lines. The plat name is a potential conflict and should be changed. 4.) Variances and Justification are as Follows: Request for variance from the the boundary street improvements on Shackleford Road. Justification as stated by the applicant consists of: (a) Owner of this tract made agreement with the county, which provides that the owner dedicate the needed right-of-way and the county to construct the roadway. *No specifics were resented outlining what improvements were to be made, (b) The north 500' of Tract A abuts the proposed interchange on Interstate #430, which has been scheduled for construction in the near future. *The State Highway Department advises that design of the interchange is underway and reparation for future release of Highway funds are now frozen by the Feds. No specifics are available at this writing as to how far south of Interstate #430 the Highwa Department will construct Shackleford Road as part of that project. The last statement in justification is a suggestion that the developer wants a deferral of improvements until the Items A and S are resolved, if such requirements are made of this platting. *Underline is Staff Comment. 5.) Legal Considerations The entire property is within the City, having been annexed on June 5, 1979. June 10, 1980 Item No. 1 - Continued The only question associated with the development of Lot 1 is land use. It appears that there are unanswered questions relative to towers, broadcasting receiving equipment and whether all of these are permitted Accessory "0-3" Offices Uses. The Zoning Ordinance permits broadcast towers and related facilities only in "AF" zones by right. C. Engineering Considerations No significant issues raised at this writing (5-22-80). The street improvements on Shackleford Road are to consist of 80' of right-of-way, with a 48' pavement, curb and gutter, and sidewalk, inasmuch as the county has performed all grading and right-of-way preparation. The base courses and riding surfaces are generally all that remain. D. Analysis. Staff review of the plat has revealed that there are several significant issues yet to be resolved, which 40 remain from the rezoning approval. These are: 1..) The owner agreed to downzone the property to "0-2" it the site was not developed prior to the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance. 2.) That site plan review would precede any development. The staff feels that the utmost caution must be exercised in this matter, since this is the first intrusion of development into the Interstate #430 corridor south of West 12th Street, and this is the first platting request whereby street improvements are required on Shackleford Road south of 12th Street. The developer/owner apparently has waivered from his position of single user development. Staff investigation of the waiver request and attending justification suggest to us that no hardships or circumstances prevail which would preclude the developers making a commitment to the off -site improvements. The County has stated that no further work will be performed on this street in the form of widening or other physical improvements. 40 V- 0 June 10, 1980 Item No. 1 - Continued The state project is unlikely to extend further than 500' from the bridge abutment. The total waiver of improvements would set off a chain of variance requests along this street which would effectively eliminate the Master Street Plan as a functioning visible component of the City Master Plan. Staff Recommendation: Approval of plat as filed, subject to the following: 1. That a minimum of 40' be dedicated from this plat, and the preliminary plat clearly depict the right-of-way to be dedicated. 2. Full half street improvements on Shackleford Road the entire length of the plat except that portion determined to be within the State Interchange project. These improvements are to be constructed in conjunction with the second lot or tract developed. 3. All plans for physical improvements, street drainage, etc. to be submitted for one time review. Is 4. Applicant to take steps to downzone entire 65 acres to "0-2" and submit to site plan review all subsequent development. 5. Change the name of the plat to avoid conflict. N f 4 K June 10, 1980 Item No. 1 - Continued Subdivision Committee Recommendation: Approval of the plat subject to conditions in staff recommendation. The vote was 4 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Approval as recommended by the Committee and staff. The vote was 7 ayes, 0 noes, 4 absent.