Loading...
Item 5 - ZA16-100 SPIN Report SPIN MEETING REPORT SPIN Item Number: SPIN16-37 Project Name: Verizon Wireless Facility (Loading Area) SPIN Neighborhood: SPIN #1 Meeting Date: November 8, 2016 Meeting Location: 1400 Main Street, Southlake, TX City Council Chambers Total Attendance: Seven (7) Host: David Alexander, Community Engagement Committee Applicant Presenting: Kathy Zibilich City Staff Present: Jerod Potts, Assistant to the Director – Planning and Development Services Attached to the end of this report are the Blackboard Connect Delivery Results for the November 8, 2016 SPIN Town Hall Forum Town Hall Forums can be viewed in their entirety by visiting http://www.cityofsouthlake.com and clicking on “Learn More” under Video On Demand; forums are listed under SPIN by meeting date. FORUM SUMMARY: Property Situation:  500 W. Dove Rd. Development Details:  Amending loading dock #4  The reason for the amendment is the current loading dock has a driveway on an incline that needs leveled about three feet lower on the loa ding dock than it is right now  The problem that is created when the driveway is uneven is the truck is at an angle instead of being flat; you are dragging a heavy load up hill to get it on the dock  The other major change is trading out swing doors that have a threshold for roll - up doors without a threshold so when you have a heavy load you are not dragging across a bumpy threshold  Proposal includes widening the dock driveway and angling it closer to the building  Dock would be expanded to put in a scissor lift to replace current lift  Other changes are adding stairs and handrail that match existing stairs and handrail – the reason is because the driveway is now lower so the stairs have to go three feet further down to get to them  Because the angle of the driveway is changing there is a fire hydrant and three bollards that will be relocated so they are back in the grass and not in the driveway  Proposing to add a deliveries only sign  Requesting a canopy over the loading area to keep cargo dry as it is being unloaded  Elevation of the loading dock will not change – will look the same as before at the same height. However, because they are excavating the current driveway, they need the extra set of stairs that will look like the existing stairs  Scissor lift would normally be in the resting position  Bridge plate can be any color, as with the concrete  Retaining wall would be adjusted to accommodate the lower driveway in that area  Existing trees would all remain  Was an issue over the summer with the irrigation system – trees in that zone did not get the water they needed. Irrigation system has been rectified. Will watch trees to make sure they come back in the spring. 11 trees were replaced, but determination was made that certain trees would come back so they were not replaced. Those trees will be replaced if they do not return  Canopy material is proposed to be a dark red to match color scheme in the loading area now – can be any color Exhibits presented at SPIN: QUESTIONS / CONCERNS:  Does the current loading area contain an electric lift? o Yes  Is it similar as scissor lift you plan to install? o Is not a scissor lift – proposed lift is hydraulic which makes no sound. Motor is in the building  What is the reason for going to a scissor lift? o To keep the loading dock at the same level as the building. Driveway is further down so the lift has to go higher  Lift not for repair? o Correct  How much additional linear feet of railing do you plan on adding? o Another set similar to what is there now. Approximately 50’ – 100’ linear feet of additional railing  How will the railing be attached? o Same manner as it is now.  Attached to the current structure? o Some attached to current, some attached to proposed structure  Proposing new structure to be added? o Dock will be extended slightly  Adding additional concrete over and above what you had on the previous site plan? Do you know the additional linear dimensions and/or amount of cubic feet of structure/concrete you will be adding? o The dock is widened slightly on this edge by about 4 to 5 feet, that is the additional concrete just along that edge  What are your current loading hours at that dock? o Make an average of 4 to 5 deliveries a week  Will these changes cause an increase or decrease in the amount of loading trips per week? o There is no anticipated change  With these changes in the elevation, will this allow different vehicles than currently used to load or unload at that site? o From discussions with Verizon – this will not change any loading currently going on – vehicles or amount of vehicles  What types of vehicles currently unload at that site? o Not sure  Can you detail more about the topography changes for the new site plan? How many yards of dirt are planning to remove from the site to reduce the three feet, how many yards will you be excavating? o Can get those numbers  If these new changes cause the elevation to be more or less horizontal, do you anticipate that will shine lights into the neighborhood? If not, have you performed any studies to verify that? o Don’t believe they have done any studies. Depending on where you are standing you may be able to see some of the additional loading dock  Pictures taken not taken from highest point of the neighborhood to determine whether vehicle glare would hit the neighborhood? o Don’t know what the actual highest point of the neighborhood is – tried to take representational pictures  One of the concerns of the neighbors is the lights will be shining into the neighbors’ homes o After the change the truck would be pointed less towards Kirkwood  Is your plan increasing or decreasing the size of the loading door openings? o No  What are the visual external changes that will be experienced by Kirkwood Hollow with regard to these site plan changes? Will this be larger than it currently is? o It varies where you are, what you would see. The main difference visually would be the canopy, the height of the loading dock, more stairs  In the visual, it seems there is a lot of overlap on that tree - concerned for development of the tree? o Would trim tree if necessary for the canopy  Does this plan include any additional signage? o Yes. The additional signage would be just the proposed deliveries only sign. That is only if it is allowed under the City code. If not we would have to go through whatever approval process there is for a sign.  The additional structural area to this particular lot is the concrete, the canopy, the railings…is that correct? o They are adding a little more retaining wall, modifying the lift, and changing the doors to rolling doors  Does this site plan increase or decrease the originally approved property line setbacks? o No  Do you know why the initial loading dock was put there was built on an angle? Possibly to avoid the lighting into the neighbors? o Don’t know  Concern is that this particular site plan change does change the character of the development. It makes it larger, adds significantly new structures. It does increase the gross floor area of the structures in the area of the lot o I think the floor area is considered covered area. We are going through the site plan amendment process.  How is the canopy attached? Is it attached to the building? Is it attached to the structure? o It’s on four posts. It appears to be free standing.  Will this site plan increase the intensity of the use as it relates to deliveries, than currently? o No SPIN Meeting Reports are general observations of SPIN Meetings by City staff and SPIN Representatives. The report is neither verbatim nor official meeting minutes; rather it serves to inform elected and appointed officials, City staff, and the public of the issues and questions raised by residents and the general responses made. Responses as summarized in this report should not be taken as guarantees by the applicant. Interested parties are strongly encouraged to follow the case through the Planning and Zoning Commission and final action by City Council. Blackboard Connect Delivery Results for the November 8, 2016 SPIN Meeting