HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4431 Staff AnalysisApril 30, 1985
Item No. 5 - Z-4431
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Al Deaver and A.C. Freeman
Same
By: Al Deaver
14,900 Cantrell Road
Rezone from "R-2" to "C-3"
Commercial
2.0 acres +
Existing Use: Residential
cr7DS?nTM7n7N(_ T.awn TTSF ANn ZONING:
North - Vacant, Zoned "R-2"
South - Single Family and Commercial, Zoned "R-2"
and "C-3"
East - Commercial, Zoned "R-2"
West - Single Family, Zoned "R-2"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
1. The property in question is located in the vicinity of
the Highway 10/Taylor Loop Road intersection, and the
rezoning request is for "C-3." No specific_ plans have
been provided at this time other than some type of
commercial or retail use. This section of Highway 10
from Pinnacle Valley to the west is made up of
residential and nonresidential uses which include a
church, landscaping operation and a food store: A
majority of the nonresidential uses along this corridor
are also nonconforming with the exception of the food
store east of Taylor Loop and an antique shop west of
Taylor Loop. Those properties and a tract of land on
the north side of Highway 10 were rezoned to "C-3"
within the last six months. The site being considered
for rezoning with this request does not have a
nonconforming use on it.
2. The site is relatively flat and occupied by a one-story
residence with a barn in the rear.
3. State Highway No. 10 (Cantrell Road) is classified as a
major arterial on the Master Street Plan, so dedication
of additional right-of-way will be necessary because
April 30, 1985
Item No. 5 - Continued
the existing right-of-way is deficient. The required
right-of-way is 50 feet from the centerline of Highway
No. 10.
4. Engineering reports that boundary street improvements
will be required and access must be approved by the
Traffic Engineer. No other comments have been received
as of this writing.
5. There are no legal issues associated with this request.
6. There is no history on the site. The property was
annexed into the City in 1979. The neighborhood's
position either for or against commercial rezonings in
the area has been well documented over the years.
7. In [november 1984, the City Board of Directors amended
the Suburban Development Plan over the objections of
the staff to designate the intersection of Taylor Loop
and Highway 10 for neighborhood commercial. This
action included both the north and south sides of
Highway 10. This property is just west of the
commercial area shown on the amended Suburban
Development Plan, and staff does not support the
request. Three properties within the proposed
commercial area have been rezoned to "C-3." Staff is
concerned that granting a 11C-3" rezoning to a tract
beyond the established commercial area will make it
very difficult to stop future rezoning requests outside
the identified area on the Suburban Development Plan.
The stripping out of Highway 10 will become very real
in this location if the plan is not maintained. Staff
is satisfied that an adequate amount of land was
designated for commercial use at the Highway 10/Taylor
Loop intersection and should not be increased by
approving this rezoning. Along Highway 10, both to the
east and west, there are significant tracts of land
zoned for commercial development.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the "C-3" request.
April 30, 1985
Item No. 5 - Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant/owner was represented by Beth Stephens. There
were three objectors in attendance. Ms, Stephens spoke and
discussed the rezoning proposal. She said that the property
was in a bad situation and had problems because of the
current "R-2" zoning. Ms. Stephens indicated that the site
was unsuitable for residential use because of its location.
There was a long discussion about the Suburban Development
Plan and the property's relationship to the recommended
commercial location at Highway 10 and Taylor Loop.
Bentley Stracener spoke against the rezoning. Mr. Stracener
said that the property had residential potential because he
had tried to acquire it for that purpose. Betty Saugey
voiced her opposition to the "C-3" request. She said that
it was not the time to rezone other properties beyond what
was shown on the plan. Ms. Saugey also described the
history of the property's ownership. Ms. Stephens then
addressed some of the issues and said that the site had been
purchased for investment purposes. She said that the
property could be a buffer to the commercial uses to the
east and amended the request to "0-3." The Planning
Commission then voted on the amended application to "0-3."
The vote: 0 ayes, 9 noes and 2 absent. The rezoning was
denied.
April 30, 1985
Item No. 5 - Z-4431
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Al Deaver and A.C. Freeman
Same
By: Al Deaver
14,900 Cantrell Road
Rezone from "R-2" to "C-3"
Commercial
2.0 acres +
Residential
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Vacant, Zoned "R-2"
South - Single Family and Commercial, Zoned "R-2"
and "C-3"
East - Commercial, Zoned "R-2"
West - Single Family, Zoned "R-2"
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
1. The property in question is located in the vicinity of
the Highway 10/Taylor Loop Road intersection, and the
rezoning request is for "C-3." No specific plans have
been provided at this time other than some type of
commercial or retail use. This section of Highway 10
from Pinnacle Valley to the west is made up of
residential and nonresidential uses which include a
church, landscaping operation and a food store. A
majority of the nonresidential uses along this corridor
are also nonconforming with the exception of the food
store east of Taylor Loop and an antique shop west of
Taylor Loop. Those properties and a tract of land on
the north side of Highway 10 were rezoned to "C-3"
within the last six months. The site being considered
for rezoning with this request does not have a
nonconforming use on it.
2. The site is relatively flat and occupied by a one-story
residence with a barn in the rear.
3. State Highway No. 10 (Cantrell Road) is classified as a
major arterial on the Master Street Plan, so dedication
of additional right-of-way will be necessary because
April 30, 1985
Item No. 5 - Continued
the existing right-of-way is deficient. The required
right-of-way is 50 feet from the centerline of Highway
No. 10.
4. Engineering reports that boundary street improvements
will be required and access must be approved by the
Traffic Engineer. No other comments have been received
as of this writing.
5. There are no legal issues associated with this request.
6. There is no history on the site. The property was
annexed into the City in 1979. The neighborhood's
position either for or against commercial rezonings in
the area has been well documented over the years.
7. In November 1984, the City Board of Directors amended
the Suburban Development Plan over the objections of
the staff to designate the intersection of Taylor Loop
and Highway 10 for neighborhood commercial. This
action included both the north and south sides of
Highway 10. This property is just west of the
commercial area shown on the amended Suburban
Development Plan, and staff does not support the
request. Three properties within the proposed
commercial area have been rezoned to "C-3." Staff is
concerned that granting a "C-3" rezoning to a tract
beyond the established commercial area will make it
very difficult to stop future rezoning requests outside
the identified area on the Suburban Development Plan.
The stripping out of Highway 10 will become very real
in this location if the plan is not maintained. Staff
is satisfied that an adequate amount of land was
designated for commercial use at the Highway 10/Taylor
Loop intersection and should not be increased by
approving this rezoning. Along Highway 10, both to the
east and west, there are significant tracts of land
zoned for commercial development.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the 11C-3" request.
April 30, 1985
Item No. 5 - Continued
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The applicant/owner was represented by Beth Stephens. There
were three objectors in attendance. Ms. Stephens spoke and
discussed the rezoning proposal. She said that the property
was in a bad situation and had problems because of the
current "R-2" zoning. Ms. Stephens indicated that the site
was unsuitable for residential use because of its location.
There was a long discussion about the Suburban Development
Plan and the property's relationship to the recommended
commercial location at Highway 10 and Taylor Loop.
Bentley Stracener spoke against the rezoning. Mr. Stracener
said that the property had residential potential because he
had tried to acquire it for that purpose. Betty Saugey
voiced her opposition to the 111C-3" request. She said that
it was not the time to rezone other properties beyond what
was shown on the plan. Ms. Saugey also described the
history of the property's ownership.. Ms. Stephens then
addressed some of the issues and said that the site had been
purchased for investment purposes. She said that the
property could be a buffer to the commercial uses to the
east and amended the request to "0-3." The Planning
Commission then voted on the amended application to "0-3."
The vote: 0 ayes, 9 noes and 2 absent. The rezoning was
denied.