Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-3442-A Staff AnalysisAugust 28, 1990 SUBDIVISION Item No...A - Z -3442-A NAME: Billy Jane Bussa APPLICANT: Rick Ashley LOCATION: Baseline Road at I-30 AD-9vMT: Rezone from 11I-2" to "C-3" PURPOSE: Retail Development SIZE: 18.22 acres EXISTING USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Vacant, zoned "C-3" South - Vacant, zoned "R-2" and 11I-2" East - Single Family, zoned "R-2" West - Vacant, zoned "C-3" STAFF ANALYSIS: The request is to rezone 18 acres from 11I-2" to "C-3" for future commercial development. If "C-3" reclassification is granted, the proposal is to combine this tract with the 23 acres to the north and develop a shopping center. The property is situated south of Baseline Road and just east of where Baseline Road intersects I-30. The land is wooded and vacant. Land use in the general vicinity is single family, multi- family, commercial and industrial. The single family and multi -family uses are found in a well-established neighborhood that is located directly to the east, and extends from Baseline Road to the railroad tracks. The multi -family units are situated on lots adjacent to Baseline Road and around Stratford Court, a cul-de-sac. At this time, the properties to the south and west are undeveloped. On the north side of Baseline Road, there is a combination of commercial and industrial uses. The zoning pattern is mixed and includes "R-211, "C-3" and 11I-211. 1 August 28, 1990 SUBDIVISION Item No. A .(.Continued) (.Continued) .. ................ - ..... On Geyer Springs West District Plan, the property under consideration is shown as part of a large office/commercial area. Therefore, the proposed "C-3" reclassification conforms to the adopted plan and Staff supports the rezoning, except for the existing 50 foot OS area along the east side of the site. Staff's position is that the OS buffer is needed and should not be altered through this rezoning request. 50 feet is the minimum width for an OS area in the zoning ordinance. ENGINEERING COMMENTS.* None reported. STAFF RECOM24ENDATION : Staff recommends approval of the "C-3" rezoning, except for the existing 50 foot OS area adjacent to the east property line. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (June 19, 1990) The applicant was represented by Stuart Hankins, an attorney. There were five interested residents in attendance. Mr. Hankins spoke briefly and said the applicant had no problems with the Staff's recommendation of maintaining the existing 50' "O-S" strip adjacent to the east property line. Ann Summerville, a resident on Yorkton Drive, then addressed the Commission. Ms. Summerville asked questions about the future development of the property and made statements about the need to protect residential property values in the area. She said the residents wanted a six foot brick wall along the property line and the development would hurt the residential neighborhood. She also said that a wood fence would not work and expressed concerns about crime increasing due to the commercial uses. Stuart Hankins said there were no firm-development plans other than the site being utilized for "C-3" use. Mr. Hankins told the Commission that there was no fence on the existing "C-3" to the north. He then indicated that there would be no problem with requiring site plan review prior to a building permit being issued. 2 August 28, 1990 SUBDIVISION Item No. A (Continued) There was some discussion about various issues including the need to re-notify the neighborhood when a site plan was filed with the City. A motion was then offered to condition the rezoning approval on a site plan review. The motion failed to receive a second. J.D. Ashley said there could be a potential hardship placed on the property by adding the site plan review and re - notification requirements. Ruth Bell made comments about notifying the property owners. Stuart Hankins spoke again and said the applicant had some problems with the site plan review and indicated that a chain link fence would be put up on the interior of the 50' "0-3" buffer. Ann Summerville asked that the item be deferred for a period of time to allow for more neighborhood involvement. She also reminded the Commission that property values have decreased in the area. Mr. Hankins made some final statements and said that a fence on the interior of the "O -S" area would make maintenance next to impossible. A motion was made to recommended approval of the "C-3" rezoning subject to maintaining the fifty foot "O -S" area on the east side of the property with a six foot chain link erected on the eastern boundary of the fifty foot "O -S" strip. The vote was 3 ayes, 4 nays, 4 absent and 1 abstention (Martha Miller). The item was automatically deferred to the July 17, 1990 hearing. Comments were offered by Commission Collins after the vote was taken. 3 August 28, 1990 SUBDIV1S10N Item No. A (Con.t.i_nued.)____ PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (July 17, 1990) Prior to the hearing, the applicant requested that the rezoning be deferred. There were several interested residents present, but they did not object to a deferral and the item was placed on the consent agenda. A motion was made to defer the issue to the August 28, 1990 meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (August 28, 1990) As requested, the Planning Commission voted to withdraw the "C-3" rezoning without prejudice. The vote was 10 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. 4