Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4461 Staff AnalysisJune 25, 1985 Item No. 4 - Z-4461 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: J. Harold and Evelyn Williams J. Harold Williams 9100 Sibley Hole Road Rezone from "R-2" to "I-2" Construction Storage Yard 3.92 acres + Construction Storage Yard (Nonconforming) SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" South - Vacant and Single Family, Zoned "R-2" East - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" West - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. This request is 'before the Planning Commission as a result of an enforcement action initiated by the City. The Zoning Enforcement Office received a complaint from one of the nearby residents, and it was determined that the owner had expanded the use, a nonconforming construction storage yard. Prior to being annexed into the City, there was some storage of materials taking place. This has been increased significantly after becoming a part of the City. The property is located on Sibley Hole Road between I-30 and Base Line Road in an area that is still primarily undeveloped. The uses in the immediate vicinity include single family and a nonconforming industrial operation to the south. Single family uses abut this property directly to the south. To the west across Sibley Hole and north, the land is vacant. 2. The site is flat and occupied by several old truck trailers. In addition, there are other construction materials stored on the property. It also appears that some excavation has occurred. 3. There are no right-of-way requirements or Master Street Plan issues associated with this request. June 25, 1985 Item No. 4 - Continued 4. There have been no adverse comments received from the reviewing agencies as of this writing. 5. There are no legal issues. 6. Staff has received several calls in opposition to the request. The residents have voiced concerns about the appearance of the site and how the owner has altered it by the excavation that has taken place. One resident pointed out that there is a 15 -foot cut along his property line. The property was annexed in 1979 as part of the large I-30 annexation. 7. This location is part of the Otter Creek Plan area which identifies the property for multifamily use. Staff supports the plan and opposes the rezoning to "I-2." The site is somewhat removed from I-30 which is a more desirable industrial location. The rezoningiif granted would be misplaced and could have an adverse impact on the residential properties which the area seems to be -more suited for. There is no permanent structural involvement on the site, so to call the property a viable nonconforming industrial location is questionable. The land -is more of a dumping area and endorsing that type of use by rezoning the site could create problems for the other property owners. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the 11I-2" request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The applicant, John Gill, was present and representing Harold Williams, the owner. There were three objectors in attendance. Mr. Gill then addressed the Planning Commission. He said that Mr. Williams was a general contractor and that he was storing materials and equipment on the site. He indicated that expansion of a nonconforming use was not what had occurred. Mr. Gill then discussed the Suburuban Development Plan which had identified the area for light industrial uses and went on to say that the Otter Creek Plan had changed that to show multifamily for the area. He said the use was not changing the character of the area and the request was reasonable. Mr. Gill said the property was purchased in 1980 and the front one-half had been in use since then. It was pointed out that the property had been annexed in 1979 so there was a question June 25, 1985 Item No. 4 - Continued about the nonconforming status. Bob Summers, a resident of the area since 1976, spoke in opposition to the proposal. He said the land use had created too many problems such as dust and trash. Mr. Summers presented some photos and said Mr. Williams began using the site in 1980. He said that heavy equipment was also being stored. Kenny Scott of the City discussed the enforcement issue. Another resident spoke and said the property was nothing more than a junkyard. Mr. Gill spoke and said that excavation was due to a sewer line that was constructed through the area. Mr. Summers said that the digging was still taking place. There was a long discussion about the plan and the nonconforming issue. The Planning Commission then voted on the request. The vote - 0 ayes, 10 noes and 1 absent. The "I-2" rezoning was denied. June 25, 1985 Item No. 4 - Z-4461 Owner: J. Harold and Evelyn Williams Applicant: J. Harold Williams Location: 9100 Sibley Hole Road Request: Rezone from 11R-2" to "I-2" Purpose: Construction Storage Yard Size: 3.92 acres + Existing Use: Construction Storage Yard (Nonconforming) SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" South - Vacant and Single Family, Zoned "R-2" East - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" West - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. This request is before the Planning Commission as a result of an enforcement action initiated by the City. The Zoning Enforcement Office received a complaint from one of the nearby residents, and it was determined that the owner had expanded the use, a nonconforming construction storage yard. Prior to being annexed into the City, there was some storage of materials taking place. This has been increased significantly after becoming a part of the City. The property is located on Sibley Hole Road between I-30 and Base Line Road in an area that is still primarily undeveloped. The uses in the immediate vicinity include single family and a nonconforming industrial operation to the south. Single family uses abut this property directly to the south. To the west across Sibley Hole and north, the land is vacant. 2. The site is flat and occupied by several old truck trailers. In addition, there are other construction materials stored on the property. It also appears that some excavation has occurred. 3. There are no right-of-way requirements or Master Street Plan issues associated with this request. June 25, 1985 Item No. 4 - Continued 4. There have been no adverse comments received from the reviewing agencies as of this writing. 5. There are no legal issues. 5. Staff has received several calls in opposition to the request. The residents have voiced concerns about the appearance of the site and how the owner has altered it by the excavation that has taken place. One resident pointed out that there is a 15 -foot cut along his property line. The property was annexed in 1979 as part of the large I-30 annexation. 7. This location is part of the Otter Creek Plan area which identifies the property for multifamily use. Staff supports the plan and opposes the rezoning to "I-2." The site is somewhat removed from I-30 which is a more desirable industrial location. The rezoning if granted would be misplaced and could have an adverse impact on the residential properties which the area seems to be more suited for. There is no permanent structural involvement on the site, so to call the property a viable nonconforming industrial location is questionable. The land is more of a dumping area and endorsing that type of use by rezoning the site could create problems for the other property owners. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the "I-2" request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The applicant, John Gill, was present and representing Harold Williams, the owner. There were three objectors in attendance. Mr. Gill then addressed the Planning Commission. He said that Mr. Williams was a general contractor and that he was storing materials and equipment on the site. He indicated that expansion of a nonconforming use was not what had occurred. Mr. Gill then discussed the Suburuban Development Plan which had identified the area for light industrial uses and went on to say that the Otter Creek Plan had changed that to show multifamily for the area. He said the use was not changing the character of the area and the request was reasonable. Mr. Gill said the property was purchased in 1980 and the front one-half had been in use since then. It was pointed out that the property had been annexed in 1979 so there was a question June 25, 1985 Item No. 4 - Continued about the nonconforming status. Bob Summers, a resident of the area since 1976, spoke in opposition to the proposal. He said the land use had created too many problems such as dust and trash. Mr. Summers presented some photos and said Mr. Williams began using the site in 1980. He said that heavy equipment was also being stored. Kenny Scott of the City discussed the enforcement issue. Another resident spoke and said the property was nothing more than a junkyard. Mr. Gill spoke and said that excavation was due to a sewer line that was constructed through the area. Mr. Summers said that the digging was still taking place. There was a long discussion about the plan and the nonconforming issue. The Planning Commission then voted on the request. The vote - 0 ayes, 10 noes and 1 absent. The 11I-2" rezoning was denied.