Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4007-A Staff AnalysisSeptember 25, 1984 Item No. 2 - Z -4007-A Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: First Southern Service Corporation Pat Morrison Hinson Road and Hinson Loop Southeast Corner Rezone from "PCD" Planned Commercial Development to 110-3" General Office Office Building 1.0 acres Existing Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" South - Vacant, Zoned "0-3" East - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" West - Vacant, Zoned "0-3" PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The proposal is to develop the property in question for an office building. To the west of the site, there is 110-3" zoning with some office use in place, and one block to the east is the intersection of Hinson Road and Rodney Parham with a mixed land use pattern. The proposed zoning appears to be compatible with the trends occurring in the area. The property has "0-3" zoning to the south and west across Hinson Loop with nonresidential development being the primary land use along the south side of Hinson. 2. The site is vacant and heavily wooded with some slope to it. 3. Hinson Road is classified as principal arterial on the Master Street Plan. A principal arterial requires at least 80 feet of right-of-way so dedication of additional right-of-way is necessary because the existing right-of-way is deficient. 4. There have been no adverse comments received from the reviewing agencies as of this writing. r September 25, 1984 Item No. 2 - Coninuted 5. There are no legal issues. 6. The property was reclassified to "PCD" in June 1983, for an office building. There is no neighborhood position on the site. 7. The requested rezoning conforms to the Suburban Development Plan which shows the south side of Hinson for suburban office development. There are no outstanding issues, and staff is in support of the request. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The applicant was present. There were objectors present. After a brief discussion, the Commission voted to recommend approval of the request as filed. The vote - 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. September 25, 1984 Item No. 2 - Z -4007-A Owner: First Southern Service Corporation Applicant: Pat Morrison Location: Hinson Road and Hinson Loop Southeast Corner Request: Rezone from "PCD" Planned Commercial Development to "0-3" General Office Purpose: Office Building Size: 1.0 acres Existing Use: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" South - Vacant, Zoned "0-3" East - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" West - Vacant, Zoned "0-3" PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The proposal is to develop the property in question for an office building. To the west of the site, there is "0-3" zoning with some office use in place, and one block to the east is the intersection of Hinson Road and Rodney Parham with a mixed land use pattern. The proposed zoning appears to be compatible with the trends occurring in the area. The property has "0-3" zoning to the south and west across Hinson Loop with nonresidential development being the primary land use along the south side of Hinson. 2. The site is vacant and heavily wooded with some slope to it. 3. Hinson Road is classified as principal arterial on the Master Street Plan. A principal arterial requires at least 80 feet of right-of-way so dedication of additional right-of-way is necessary because the existing right-of-way is deficient. 4. There have been no adverse comments received from the reviewing agencies as of this writing. September 25, 1984 Item No. 2 - Coninuted 5. There are no legal issues. 6. The property was reclassified to "PCD" in June 1983, for an office building. There is no neighborhood position on the site. 7. The requested rezoning conforms to the Suburban Development Plan which shows the south side of Hinson for suburban office development. There are no outstanding issues, and staff is in support of the request. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The applicant was present. There were objectors present. After a brief discussion, the Commission voted to recommend approval of the request as filed. The vote - 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent.