HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-3592 Staff AnalysisNovember 11, 1980
Item No. 7 - Z-3592
Owner:
Applicant:
Request:
Purpose:
Existing Zoning:
Location:
Site Characteristics:
Size:
Existing Land Use:
Abutting Land Use
and Zoning:
Zoning History:
Applicable Regulations:
Dr. Wesley Wise
James Hathaway
Rezone to Various Districts
Mixed Use Development
"AF" Agriculture and Forestry
Southwest Corner Shackleford and
Kanis Roads
Heavily Wooded, Sloping
142 Acres +
Vacant
North - Single Family
Zoned "R-2" and "0-3"
South - Single Family
Zoned "R-2"
East - Single Family
Unclassified
West - Single Family
Unclassified
None
Zoning Ordinance and
Subdivision Ordinances
FACTUAL INFORMATION
Item 7
November 11, 1980
1. NEED OR DEMAND
The applicant is planning a mixed use development which
will be supported primarily by the office uses
proposed. There will be some commercial and some
residential development as well.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH MUNICIPAL PLANS
Proposal is compatible with the Suburban Development
Plan.
3. EFFECT ON ENVIRONS
No adverse environmental impacts are expected.
4. NEIGHBORHOOD POSITION
No neighborhood comments have been received.
5. PUBLIC SERVICES
No adverse comments have been received.
6. UTILITIES/EFFECT ON
No adverse comments have been received.
7. EFFECT ON FINANCES
This proposed development will add to the City's tax
base and likely will provide many jobs.
8. LEGAL/REASONABLE
The proposed development is compatible with City plans
for the area and will fit with the surrounding
developments.
9. STANDARDS OF QUALITY
No standards have been addressed. I
November 11, 1980
Item No. 7 - Continued
10. TRAFFIC AND FIGHT -OF -WAY
A part of the success of this development is dependent
upon the construction of a new interchange with I-430
at this location. There will be an internal street
system and access to two arterial streets along the
north and east boundaries of the property. No
right-of-way issues attend this case.
ANALYSIS:
There is a difference of opinion regarding the proper zoning
for the larqest of the several tracts within this property.
Staff believes that "0-2" Office and Institutional zoning
should be ur -_i bec� use the 'Proposed development involves a
substantial ofFice park on :his part of the property, and
this is precisely the kind of project which the "0-2"
District was developed to accommodate. The applicant (on
direction of the proposed user of the property) feels the
"0-2" District is not flexible enough for the use intended.
This has to do with the scheme of development and t tie
phasing of construction and financing.
Staff believes that the quality of development will not
suffer from a lack of site plan review but does feel that
site plan review will not hamper the developer while
retaining the kind of control over development for which
those provisions of the ordinance were adopted. Use of the
"0-2" District should not inaolve any delays in project
implementation since the development will be subject to
platting approval under multiple building site provisions in
any case. Applicant's conce.-n relates to perceived
"subjectivity" of the site plan review process.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval with the exception of the "0-3"
tracts. These should be zoned "0-2" Office and
Institutional.
COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant was present and there was one objector. A
lengthy discussion ensued regarding the "0-2" zoning versus
"0-3" which Staff had recommended. The applicant made a
lengthy presentation providing pictures, maps and aerial
photos of the area, and described in great detail the
proposal made for site requested for "0-3."
November 11, 1960
Item No. 7 - Continued
Tommy Russell, owner of the southeast corner of the
intersection of Kanis and Shacklef_ord Roads, stated that he
objected to the "C-2" portion of the application.
After a lengthy discussion, the Commission moved to approve
the application as filed, with the condition that the owner
provide a let;=er stating that they would agree to allow the
City to downzone the property from "0-3" to "0-2" if the
pending transaction fails to run to completion. The motion
was passed: 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.