11/28/2007 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

2007 the property was rezoned to Residential Office. Rezoning was initiated because it was determined that the existing multiple and limited industrial zoning was inappropriate for that area. The uses were too intense, and or dense, considering the uses would access the road system of a single family residence district. The applicants have been asked to provide information on the number of employees working the largest shift to determine parking requirements. Land area (square footage) per zoning district is needed to determine density and lot coverage. A revised tree preservation plan and/or landscape plan are needed as they are currently in conflict. Applicants need to show how trucks/delivery vehicles will make the entry radius with the location of the median island. The landscape plan indicates areas outside the tree cutting zone toward the rear property will remain in a natural appearance however natural appearance needs to be defined. She noted that there were few trees scheduled to remain, so the area would be brush or scrub. Code requires dense landscaping or landscaping and mounds to screen views of parking from residential neighbors, the commission needs to determine if the proposed screening is sufficient. The proposed spruce trees shown around the perimeter of the site lacks creativity or interest. Virtually all of the open space area is within the detention basin or riparian setback which can not be used by residents. Plans do not show a designated loading area. Garage D and E are neither close to a main entry, nor are there sidewalks connecting them to an entry. Although enclosed parking is not required, the garages are viewed as an accessory structure by the Building Department. The proposal maximizes the permitted density of the code while providing minimum setbacks and open space preservation. The building size is not conducive to the area and the use is vastly different in character then the surrounding properties. Mr. Conway said code requires garages to be an accessory part of the main structure and does not recognize separate garages. The setback of 20 feet from the property line is for the open parking requirement. The garages as free standing structures and requires a 35 foot setback. The commission needs to determine if the rear and sideyard setbacks are acceptable. The offset front property line which goes across the rear of the abutting residential property line requires a 50 foot setback and plans show less than 20 feet to the main structure. The 5610 Barton Road rear lot line is less than 50 feet from the main structure as well. Their sideyard is only 20 feet from the garages. Mr. Collins said the October 17 memo lists engineering issues which are outstanding. The traffic study recommends a traffic signal as well as north and southbound turn lanes at the intersection of Barton and Bradley Road with or without the development. He recommends the developer provide a portion of the funding for the signal and turning lanes. The outlet pipe from the storm water management basin needs to be relocated. The outlet invert elevation plan is not consistent with the existing ground elevation plan as the invert is higher than the existing ground. The west side of the site requires a drainage swale to prevent storm water draining onto adjacent property. All utilities must be run underground and all downspouts on the garages must be tied into a storm sewer. A culvert is required under the proposed Barton Road drive. A detailed plat is needed showing a permanent conservation easement for the riparian setback and the access easement for the storm water management basin. 4