Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4658 Staff AnalysisJuly 22, 1986 Item No. A - Z-4658 Owner: Robert Perez Applicant: Same Location: 7418 Mabelvale Pike Request: Rezone from "R-2" to "C-3" Purpose: Commercial/Dog Grooming Size: 0.24 acres Existing Use: Single Family SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" South - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" East - Multifamily, Zoned "R-2" West - Single Family, Zoned "R-2" PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 1. The proposal before the Planning Commission is to rezone a single lot to "C-3" for a small-scale commercial use, dog grooming. The property is located in a neighborhood that is primarily residential with some vacant land on the south side of Mabelvale Pike. There does appear to be one nonconforming commercial use on the east side of Lewis Road. The zoning is 17R-2," "PRD" and "MF -18" with no nonresidential classification in the vicinity. Along Mabelvale Pike, there is a mix of single family residences and multifamily uses with an apartment project currently under construction on the "MF -18" tract to the south. Also, there are some apartment units along Lewis Road. 2. The site is a typical residential lot with a single structure on it. 3. Mabelvale Pike is identified as a collector on the Master Street Plan, but at this time, it is unknown whether additional right-of-way is required. Engineering will provide the necessary information to make that determination. 4. There have been no adverse comments received from the reviewing agencies as of this writing. July 22, 1986 Item No. A - Continued 5. There are no legal issues. 6. There is no documented history or neighborhood position on the site. 7. Staff does not support the rezoning, because if granted, it would create a spot zoning and could have a very adverse impact on the neighborhood. The area is predominately single family with a few small multifamily developments. It appears that the existing lana use pattern has not disrupted the livability of the neighborhood, and the area should continue as a mix of residential uses. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the "C-3" request. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (5-27-86) Staff recommended that the item be deferred because the necessary notification of property owners had not been accomplished. A motion was made to defer the request to the June 24, 1986, meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (6-24-86) Staff informed the Commission that the item needed to be deferred because notification of property owners had not been completed. A motion was made to defer the issue to the July 22, 1986, meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes, 3 absent and 1 open position. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (7-22-86) There were no objectors in attendance. The applicant was not present. A request for withdrawal without prejudice was received. A motion to withdraw the application without prejudice was made and passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes, 3 absent.