HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-3614-A Staff AnalysisDecember 9, 1980
Item No. 14 - Z-3614
Owner: M.R. Godwin, Trustee
Applicant: Don Chambers
Location: Mara Lynn Road (south side)
1320 feet east of Napa Valley
Road
Request: Rezone from "MF -24" Multifamily
to "0-3" General Office and "C-3"
General Commercial
Purpose: Office and Commercial Development,
Unspecified
Size: 10 Acres +
Existing Use: Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North -
Vacant, Zoned
"MF -18"
South -
Vacant, Zoned
"C-3"
East
- Multifamily,
Zoned "MF -24"
West
- Vacant, Zoned
"MF -12"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
No adverse comments have been received from any reviewing
agency. The zoning requested anticipates the eventual
development of the Bowman Road Extension from Markham Street
to Mara Lynn Drive as called for by the Master Street Plan.
Since the developer would be required to provide the
necessary improvements for the length of this extension
through his property, this application seeks to assure that
adequate economic compensation would be gained through
enhancement of the property's value (highest and best use
theory).
Staff views the request as premature and has encouraged the
applicant to withdraw the application. There is signficant
commercial property which is vacant and lying within this
general area. There is concern that acquiescence on this
request would open the way to further pressure to commit
unneeded commercial zoning on nearby properties. Staff is
particularly concerned about the property to the north on
which the owner had sought nonresidential zoning during the
original application which netted the "MF -18" shown on the
north side of Mara Lynn Road.
December 9, 1980
Item No. 14 - Continued
It is understandable that this owner would seek to gain a
higher use on the remaining property after having given up
an 80 -foot right-of-way and constructing the improvements
for. Bowman Road. However, there is no compelling certainty
that Bowman Road would be constructed all the way to Markham
Street, and further there is no real demand for that
arterial street at present anyway. The uncertainty
associated with this request produces an appearance of
speculation and premature commitment which staff would like
to avoid.
Finally, the Suburban Development Plan did not anticipate
any commercial development in this area. A plan change is
possible, but it should be justified by demonstration of
demand combined with a .lack of existing capacity.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends denial.
COMMISSION ACTION
David Jones, representing the applicant, was present and
addressed the staff concerns, particularly about the
construction of Bowman Road. In doing so, he presented a
petition from neighboring property owners stating that they
"would seriously consider participating in the formation of
a 'special street improvement district' setup for the
purpose of financing such construction (Bowman Road from
Markham to Mara Lynn)." A lengthy discussion ensued wherein
the applicant stated that the reason for the request, as had
been pointed out with staff, was predominantly economic that
he was willing to build his part of the road but would need
the zoning to offset the cost. After the lengthy
discussion, the Planning Commission stated that there just
appeared too many loose ends and that the applicant could
not commit to the City and the City could not commit
anything to the applicant relative to the construction of
Markham Street, Bowman Road, the bridges and various other
things that would be needed in order to satisfactorily tie
down the project.
The Commission moved to defer the action on this proposal
for thirty (30) days. The motion received no second and
died for a lack thereof. A second motion to approve the
application as filed was made. The motion failed on a vote
of 0 aves, 8 noes, 1 absent, 2 abstaining (Ron Tabor
abstained and Richard Massie abstained). The motion for the
application was declared to have been denied.
Z-3614
Owner: M.R. Godwin, Trustee
Applicant: Don Chambers
Location: Mara Lynn Road (south side)
1320 feet east of Napa Valley
Road
Request: Rezone from "MF -24" Multifamily
to "0-3" General Office and "C-3"
General Commercial
Purpose: Office and Commercial Development,
Unspecified
Size: 10 Acres +
Existing Use: Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North
- Vacant, Zoned
"MF -18"
South
- Vacant, Zoned
"C-3"
East
- Multifamily,
Zoned "MF -24"
West
- Vacant, Zoned
"MF -12"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
No adverse comments have been received from any reviewing
agency. The zoning requested anticipates the eventual
development of the Bowman Road Extension from Markham Street
to Mara Lynn Drive as called for by the Master Street Plan.
Since the developer would be required to provide the
necessary improvements for the length of this extension
through his property, this application seeks to assure that
adequate economic compensation would be gained through
enhancement of the property's value (highest and best use
theory).
Staff views the request as premature and has encouraged the
applicant to withdraw the application. There is signficant
commercial property which is vacant and lying within this
general area. There is concern that acquiescence on this
request would open the way to further pressure to commit
unneeded commercial zoning on nearby properties. Staff is
particularly concerned about the property to the north on
which the owner had sought nonresidential zoning during the
original application which netted the "MF -18" shown on the
north side of Mara Lynn Road.
Z-3614 - Continued
It is understandable that this owner would seek to gain a
higher use on the remaining property after having given up
an 80 -foot right-of-way and constructing the improvements
for Bowman Road. However, there is no compelling certainty
that Bowman Road would be constructed all the way to Markham
Street, and further there is no real demand for that
arterial street at present anyway,. The uncertainty
associated with this request produces an appearance of
speculation and premature commitment which staff would like
to avoid.
Finally, the Suburban Development Plan did not anticipate
any commercial development in this area. A plan change is
possible, but it should be justified by demonstration of
demand combined with a lack of existing capacity.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends denial.
COMMISSION ACTION
David Jones, representing the applicant, was present and
addressed the staff concerns, particularly about the
construction of Bowman Road. In doing so, he presented a
petition from neighboring property owners stating that they
"would seriously consider participating in the formation of
a 'special street improvement district' setup for the
purpose of financing such construction (Bowman Road from
Markham to Mara Lynn)." A lengthy discussion ensued wherein
the applicant stated that the reason for the request, as had
been pointed out with staff, was predominantly economic that
he was willing to build his part of the road but would need
the zoning to offset the cost. After the lengthy
discussion, the Planning Commission stated that there just
appeared too many loose ends and that the applicant could
not commit to the City and the City could not commit
anything to the applicant relative to the construction of
Markham Street, Bowman Road, the bridges and various other
things that would be needed in order to satisfactorily tie
down the project.
The Commission moved to defer the action on this proposal
for thirty (30) days. The motion received no second and
died for a lack thereof. A second motion to approve the
application as filed was made. The motion failed on a vote
of 0 ayes, 8 noes, 1 absent, 2 abstaining (Ron Tabor
abstained and Richard Massie abstained). The motion for the
application was declared to have been denied.