Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS-1233 Staff AnalysisJanuary 21, 1999 ITEM NO.: 13 FILE NO.: S-1233 NAME: Chenal Office Plaza - Subdivision Site Plan Review LOCATION: Southwest corner of West Markham Street and Atkins Road DEVELOPER: ENGINEER• Rees Development, Inc. McGetrick and McGetrick 12,115 Hinson Road 319 East Markham St., Ste. 202 Little Rock, AR 72212 Little Rock, AR 72201 AREA: 4.64 acres NUMBER OF LOTS: 1 FT. NEW STREET: 0 ZONING: 0-3 ALLOWED USES: General Office PROPOSED USE: General Office VARIANCES WAIVERS RE VESTED: None requested. BACKGROUND The 4.64 acre site is zoned 0-3. The southern portion of this property (approximately 3 acres) was rezoned to 0-3 on January 16, 1979 by ordinance No. 13,580. The northern portion (approximately 1.64 acres) was zoned 0-3 prior to that date, with the Rock Creek Zoning Plan in 1977-78. The applicant is proposing to construct two (2) office buildings on the site for permitted 0--3 uses. Because the applicant is proposing more than one (1) building on the site, a subdivision site plan review is required by the Planning Commission. A. PROPOSAL RE BEST: As previously noted, the applicant proposes to construct two (2) office buildings on this property. The northernmost building will be one-story with 22,500 square feet of floor space. The building to its south will be a two-story structure (approximately 26 feet in height) and will contain 43,200 square feet of floor area. The applicant has noted that the buildings will be used for 0-3 permitted uses._ The applicant is proposing 239 parking spaces to serve the office uses. Two (2) access points are proposed from Atkins January 21, 1999 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13(Cont.)FILE NO.: S-1233 Road and one (1) access point from West Markham Street. The applicant is also proposing to abandon a small section of Malekin Street right-of-way which runs through the center of the property and a small section of Lorena Avenue which abuts this property to the south. Neither section of right- of-way has ever been constructed. Public Works has indicated support of the abandonment requests. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The 4.64 acre site is relatively level and has been mostly cleared of trees over the years. There are some trees along the west property line on the northern section of this property (between this property and the church to the west). The property is in an area of mixed uses and zoning. The property north of this site, across west Markham Street, contains a new bank office building and the office Max site which is currently under construction (Item #12 on this agenda). The property across Atkins Road to the east contains an auto dealership and a commercial development which is also under construction. The property to the west contains a vacant R-2 zoned strip of property, .a church, the Bale Chevrolet detail shop, one (1) single-family residence and an undeveloped 0-3 zoned piece of property. There is an existing single family neighborhood immediately south and southwest of this property and to the southeast across Atkins Road. C. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS: The Gibralter Heights/Point West/Timber Ridge and Parkway Place Neighborhood Associations were notified of the public hearing. As of this writing staff has had conversations with one (1) nearby property owner who expressed concerns about the proposed development. D. ENGINEERING COMMENTS: PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS: 1. Atkins Road and West Markham Avenue are listed on the Master Street Plan as collector streets. Dedicate right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline. 2. A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required at the corner of Atkins and Markham. 3. Provide design of streets conforming to "MSP" (Master Street Plan). Construct one-half street improvements to these streets including 5 foot sidewalks with planned development. 4. Plans of all work in right-of-way shall be submitted for approval prior to start of work. 2 January 21, 1999 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO. 13 Cont.) FILE NO.., 5-1233 5. Contact Bill Henry with Traffic Engineering to discuss closure of unopened right-of-way (Lorena Avenue and Malekin Street). 6. Stormwater detention ordinance applies to this property. 7. Existing topographic information at maximum five foot contour interval 100 year base flood elevation is required. 8. A Sketch Grading and Drainage Plan per Sec. 29-186(e) is required. 9. A Grading Permit per Sec. 29-186(c) and (d) is required. 10. Contact the ADPC&E for approval prior to start of work. E. UTILITIES AND FIRE DEPARTMENT/COUNTY PLANNING: Wastewater: Sewer available on site, not adversely affected. AP&L: No Comment received. ARKLA: No Comment received. Southwestern Bell: A 5 foot easement is requested along the west and south property lines. Water: Contact the Water Works regarding meter size(s) and locations(s). The L. R. Fire Department needs to evaluate this site to determine whether additional fire protection will be required. An easement must be retained for an existing water main in Lorena Dr. Fire Department: Place fire hydrants per code. Contact Dennis Free at 918-3752 for details. County Planning: No Comment received. CATA: No Comment received. F. ISSUES/TECHNICAL/DESIGN: Planning Division: No Comment. Landscape Issues: The plan submitted does not provide for the 14 foot wide street buffer along Atkins Road. To comply with this full buffer width requirement it would be necessary to delete the proposed front row of parking facing Atkins Road. Additional landscaping between the public parking areas and proposed buildings is required by the Landscape Ordinance. Some flexibility is allowed with this requirement. Though this site has been cleared of trees for many years, those trees that do remain should be preserved where feasible. This is especially true within the required land use buffers along the western and southern perimeters. A 6 foot high opaque screen, either a wooden fence with its face side directed outward or dense evergreen plantings are 3 January 21, 1999 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 Cont. FILE NO.: S-1233 required to help screen this site from the residential properties to the west and south. If the proposed structures do not have doors or windows (other than doors required by the city for safety) facing residential property, then additional opaque screening may not be required in those areas. Prior to a building permit being issued, a detailed landscape plan must be approved by the Plans Review Specialist. G. ANALYSIS• The applicant submitted a revised site plan to staff on January 6, 1999. The revised site plan has both positive and negative revisions. The positive changes which have been made in the site plan are as follows: 1. The land use buffer along the south property line has increased from 29 feet to 53 feet. 2. The head -in parking along the southern half of the Atkins Road frontage has been removed with additional landscaping shown. 3. The number of drives along Atkins Road has been reduced from 3 to 2, eliminating the southernmost drive which was only 25 feet from the nearest residential property to the south. The negative aspects of the revised site plan are as follows: 1. The head -in parking along the northern half of the Atkins Road frontage was not eliminated with increased landscaping provided. 2. The number of parking spaces only decreased by a total of 9 spaces. The revised plan still shows 97 more parking spaces (239 total) than the minimum number (142) as required by ordinance. 3. No screening fences are shown on the site plan. Although the building ordinance requirements made to the site plan, relating to the number row of head -in parking H. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: setbacks and heights conform to the and some positive changes have been staff continues to have concerns of parking spaces proposed and the along Atkins Road. Staff could support the site plan for this property with the following conditions/revisions: 1. Compliance with the requirements as noted in paragraphs D, E and F of this report. 4 January 21, 1999 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1233 2. Any site lighting should be low-level and directed away from adjacent property. 3. Existing trees within the buffer area along the west side of the northernmost building must be preserved according to ordinance standards. 4. Any existing trees within the southern buffer area must be preserved. 5. The required screening fences must be shown on the site plan. 6. The number of parking spaces should be reduced to be more in line with the minimum ordinance requirements. 7. The street side landscape buffer along the northern half of the Atkins Road frontage should be increased to at least 14 feet as noted in paragraph F of this report. 8. Staff recommends approval of the abandonment of the Malekin Street and Lorena Avenue rights -of -way as requested. The applicant must fill out the appropriate paperwork and submit it to Public works in order to take the abandonment requests to the City Board. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (DECEMBER 30, 1998) Bob Lowe was present, representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of the site plan. There was a brief discussion regarding the proposed parking. Staff noted that the site plan submitted provides for 106 more parking spaces than the minimum ordinance requirement. Staff noted that the entire row of parking spaces along Atkins Road should be eliminated with an increased street landscape buffer provided. Staff also noted that existing trees within the land use buffer along the west side of the northernmost building should be saved according to ordinance requirements. The Public works requirements were briefly discussed. Mr. Lowe indicated no problem with these requirements. Bob Brown, Site Plan Review Specialist, noted that there were several small existing trees in the area of the Lorena Avenue right-of-way which should be saved. After the discussion, the Committee forwarded the site plan to the full Commission for final action. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 21, 1999) Pat McGetrick and John Rees were present representing the application. There were four objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval subject to modifications being made in the site plan. Staff explained that the buffer along Atkins Road needed to be increased to at least 5 January 21, 1999 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: 5--1233 14 feet and the overall number of parking spaces needed to be reduced. Pat McGetrick addressed the Commission in support of the application. Mr. McGetrick gave a brief explanation of the proposed project. Commissioner Rahman asked Mr. McGetrick if he had any sections through the property. Mr. McGetrick explained that he did not, based on the fact that the property is relatively flat and that there would be very minimal cutting. Commissioner Hawn asked how far back the two-story building would set from the south boundary line. Mr. McGetrick explained that the building would be set back approximately 120 feet from the buffer and 170 feet from the south property line. He noted that there would be an eight foot fence along the south boundary line and that landscaping would conform to city ordinance standards. Commissioner Faust asked how many parking spaces would be lost with the increase in buffer width along Atkins Road. Mr. McGetrick responded that approximately 30 parking spaces would be lost. Commissioner Faust asked what the minimum parking requirement would be for this proposed development. Staff responded that the minimum number of parking spaces required for the project was 142. Commissioner Berry asked what the use of the buildings would be. Mr. McGetrick stated that they would be used for general/professional offices, similar to the Koger Center. Commissioner Berry suggested moving the one story building nearer the front (Atkins Road) property line and placing the parking in the rear. There was a brief discussion regarding Commissioner Berry's suggestion. John Rees addressed the Commission in support of the application. Mr. Rees discussed the proposed parking for the project. He stated that there was a need for 4 to 5 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of office space. There was a brief discussion regarding this issue. 6 January 21, 1999 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: S-1233 The Commission took a brief recess due to severe weather warnings. The Chairman called the meeting back to order. Commissioner Muse asked if the dumpster would be screened. Mr. Rees stated that the dumpster would be totally enclosed with a gate for access. There was additional discussion concerning the suggestion to move the northernmost building nearer to the front property line. Jim Lawson, Director of Planning and Development, restated staff's recommendation. He stated that if the 14 foot buffer along Atkins Road is not provided and the row of parking along Atkins Road is not eliminated then staff would recommend denial of the site plan. There was a brief discussion concerning the types of uses which would be in the building. Mr. Rees stated that the uses would be general office uses. Jana Allcock spoke in opposition to the application. Mrs. Allcock explained that she lives in the fourth house south of the proposed development. She stated that her main concern was with the drainage on this site. The Commission took another brief recess due to the weather conditions. The Chairman called the meeting back to order. Mrs. Allcock restated the fact that her main concern was with how the drainage on this site would effect the residences to the south. She also stated that the street name Atkins/Timber Ridge was very confusing. She also stated that she has concerns with increased traffic in this area. Ralph Desmarais also spoke in opposition to the project. He stated that the homes immediately south of this site were passive solar homes and very unique. He stated that these houses should be preserved. He stated that the proposed office development should blend in with the neighborhood. Mary Douglas also addressed the Commission in opposition to the project. Ms. Douglas stated that the Rock Creek Neighborhood requests that this site never be zoned commercial or the proposed development exceeding the square footage shown on the site plan. Mrs. Douglas also expressed concerns relating to traffic in this area. She stated that she would like for the south buffer to be increased and for the 8 foot fence to be moved north of the south 7 January 21, 1999 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.)FILE NO.: 5-1233 property line. Mrs. Douglas also stated that the northernmost building should be the two-story with the other building being one-story. Sally Goodfellow also spoke in opposition to the project. She stated that her main concerns related to traffic and safety. She also stated that the number of driveways should be decreased and the driveway from West Markham Street should be eliminated. Mrs. Goodfellow also discussed safety concerns relating to the Atkins Road/West Markham Street intersection. Chris Larson addressed the Commission in support of the application. Mr. Larson stated that the proposed site plan was in his opinion a good project. The Rock Creek Neighborhood Plan concerning commercial and office development was briefly discussed. Commissioner Rahman asked what the minimum distance a driveway had to be from an intersection. Bob Turner, of Public Works, stated that a drive had to be at least 100 feet (center of intersection to center of drive) from the intersection. Mr. Turner noted that the proposed drives conform to ordinance standards. Commissioner Hawn asked what the traffic counts for these streets would be. Mr. Turner stated that 2,500 vehicles per day would be the count for Atkins Road and the count for West Markham would be approximately 4,000 vehicles per day. Commissioner Hawn also asked about the drainage issue. Mr. Turner stated that the drainage flows from the residences to this property and this proposed project will not effect the drainage. Mr. McGetrick noted that the drainage from this property will flow from this property to the north to Rock Creek. There was a brief discussion relating to the location of the driveway from West Markham Street in relation to the driveway to the Office Max development. There was additional discussion relating to a traffic study for this area. A motion was made to approve the application as filed. There was a brief discussion relating to the conditions noted in the staff recommendation. 8 January 21, 1999 SUBDIVISION ITEM NO.: 13 (Cont.) FILE NO.: 5-1233 The previous motion to approve the application failed by a vote of 0 ayes, 10 nays and 1 abstention (Putnam). The application was denied.