08-19-1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SYSCO Foods Expansion Planning Case 532-98 August 19, 1998 Page 2 Discussion: Drainage and Soil Suitability At the time this report was written, staff had not yet received a copy of the drainage plan prepared for the Sysco site. It is our understanding, however, that when the development was constructed in 1988, the ponding was sized to accommodate the maximum planned buildout. I verified that this was the case with SEH and also with Rice Creek Watershed District, who indicated that because of revised standards and other drainage requirements, a new watershed district permit would need to be obtained. Staff has not yet received a copy of the drainage plan, although we have received a copy of the drainage calculations, which were sent to the City Engineer for review. With regard to soil suitability, it is staff's understanding that the soils are reasonably suited for the planned expansion, however the applicant will be providing information to the City to supporty this. Setbacks: The plans provided to staff, date stamped 8/14/98, do not explicitly show setbacks and thus have been estimated by staff. Because of this, we have requested a confirmation of all setback • distances from the applicant and will report to the Planning Commission if they are different from our estimates. The current conditions plan show the front setback for the Sysco facility to be 30 feet, while the setback for parking lot appears to be zero feet. It is proposed that the parking lot expansion will maintain the same zero setback. The existing setback for the access drive along the east side of the property begins at 50 feet, then narrows to a zero setback, gradually increasing to 25 feet before ending at approximately 18 feet. The proposal shows the access drive extending the zero setback for approximately 300 feet. The truck parking at the rear of the property currently ranges from 15 to 20 feet, which is shown to be decreased by 10 feet. The new truck parking along the western edge is shown with a 10 foot setback. Staff is concerned about the reduced and zero setbacks present in the proposed expansion plans. The City may, however, allow these setbacks in conjunction with the development plan because of Sysco's PUD zoning status, which allows for deviations from the City's setback requirements. It appears from the plans that the zero setback status is a present condition which, by virtue of its existence, has received City approval in the past. The reduced setback toward the rear of the property are less of a concern, as this area borders Highway 118 and is shielded from view by the noise barricades. The reduced setback along the eastern edge of the property is of a concern not because of the adjacent property owner, but rather because of the possible environmental impact to the wetlands. To protect against possible degradation of the wetlands, staff would recommend that the access drive maintain a minimum ten foot setback along the property's entire eastern edge. This would result in the drive aisle being narrowed to forty feet in one area unless it could • be shifted to the west a compensating distance.