HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4973-A Stafff AnalysisAugust 14, 1990
Item No. B - Z -4973-A
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
Consolidated Leasing, Inc.
Patrick J. Morrison
3021 Cantrell Road
Rezone from "C-3" to "C-4"
Boat sales and display.
0.894 Acres
Vacant building.
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Office and Commercial, zoned 110-2" and 11I-2"
South - Vacant, zoned "C-3"
East - Commercial, "C-3"
West - Single Family, 1IR-2"
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The issue is to rezone a "C-3" lot at 3021 Cantrell Road to
"C-41'. The reclassification is being requested at this time
to permit boat sales with open display. There is one
building on the site and a high percentage of the lot is
paved. Along the east property line, there is a 20 foot
drive and fire lane easement, and adjacent to the west line
is a 34 foot easement. Another physical characteristic that
reduces the size of the usable area, is a grade difference
on the west side of the lot. The high point is the property
line, which is adjacent to a single family neighborhood.
Over the years, the site has been utilized by a number of
different users. The initial use was a service station and
the property has been used for auto sales. The two most
recent uses have been plant sales and a political campaign
headquarters. In 1988, a "C-4" request was filed to permit
auto leasing with outside storage. After several hearings,
the rezoning request was withdrawn without prejudice by the
planning commission.
1
August 14, 1990
Item No. B... --Z-7.4 _97- 37A(Continued)
The zoning in the area includes "R-2" 11R-3" 11R-5" 110-2"
110-3", "C-311, and 11I-2" with the property abutting 11C-3" on
two sides. The residential zoning is located to the west
and south. The existing non-residential zoning is found
north of Cantrell Road, with the exception of the "C-3" lots
adjacent to this property on the sough side of Cantrell
Road. Land use in the general vicinity is single family,
multi -family, office and commercial.
Staff views that the proposed use, boat sales and display,
as a reasonable option for the property. However, we are
concerned with the "C-4" reclassification of the site. We
have problems with some of the 11C-4" uses, such as auto
sales with no design control, and the site has some size
problems because of the depth. In the 11C-4" district, no
open display is permitted in the first 20 feet of the front
yard set back, and this could have significant impact on the
use, especially if right-of-way dedication is required.
To allow the proposed use and have some restrictions on the
site, the staff is recommending that the PCD process be
utilized. A PCD could limit the property to all "C-3" uses,
no change from the current status, and the boat sales and
display. Also, the site plan would show the property's
display areas and parking, which are critical to the
location. Some landscaping should be provided and staff
also recommends that the middle curb cut be closed as part
of the PCD. (Staff's position for 3021 Cantrell Road is
consistent with the proposed PCD for the auto sales location
to the east).
ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
Cantrell Road is classified as a principal arterial, which
has a right-of-way standard of 110 feet or 55 feet from the
center line.` The existing right-of-way is deficient so
dedication of additional right-of-way will be required.
STAFFRECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of a PCD for the property and not
"C-4" as requested.
2
August 14, 1990
Item No. B - Z -4973-A o
(Cntinued),
PLANNING COMMIS S.ION._. ACT I ON: (July 31 , 19 9 0 )
The applicant, Pat Morrison, was present. There were no
objectors in attendance. Mr. Morrison said that the parties
he was representing agreed with the Staff's recommendations,
including moving the fence back to be in line with the
building and dedicating the necessary right-of-way for
Cantrell Road. Mr. Morrison made some additional comments,
and said that he had worked closely with the staff to
develop a reasonable site plan. He then amended the request
to a PCD.
Commissioner Fred Perkins indicated that he was concerned
with the existing billboard, and suggested that the approved
site plan should not endorse the billboard. Steve Rowell,
Assistant City Attorney, said that a reference and/or note
could be placed on the site plan stating that the plan did
not include the billboard. Jim Lawson, Planning Director,
said the site plan would have a statement noting that the
plan was not an endorsement of the billboard.
Pat Morrison spoke again and asked that some display be
permitted between the fence and the right-of-way line. He
said some additional area was needed because of moving the
fence back.
Comments were then offered by Jerry Gardner, City
Engineering, and Bob Brown, Plans Review Specialist. Mr.
Gardner said that a franchise would be required for any
activity in the right-of-way and discussed the franchise
agreement process. Mr. Brown reviewed the plans landscaping
and the ordinance requirements.
There were some discussion about
Lawson indicated that the staff
wall mounted sign. Pat Morrison
wanted a pole sign of 36 feet in
the proposed sign
would prefer some
said that the
height.
new
and Jim
type of
tenant
Commissioner Brad Walker made some comments and had several
questions about landscaping. Bob Brown responded by saying
that no landscaping would be required by the landscaping
ordinance. Mr. Brown stated that the proposed landscaping
plan met 30 to 40 percent of the ordinance requirement and a
franchise was needed for any landscaping in the right-of-
way. He also said that one half of the front landscaping
could be in the right-of-way and a 6 foot perimeter strip
was the requirement. Mr. Brown went on to say that he
thought that the proposed landscaping would enhance the
site.
3
August 14, 1990
Item No. B - Z-4.973-A,.. T,CContinued)
Pat Morrison discussed the site plan and location. He said
the site was restricted and the user needed as much display
area as possible.
Commissioner Walker said that the site needed more
landscaping and streetscaping made a significant impact on a
community.
Commissioner Perkins commented about the location and the
surrounding area.
Commissioner Oleson made some comments and said she had some
problems with the chain link fence in the front.
Pat Morrison said adequate landscaping was being provided
and asked for an approval of the PCD.
Comments were made by various individuals, including
Commissioner Walker and Jim Lawson. Commissioner Walker
said that landscaping was needed for temporary display area
in front of the fence.
Pat Morrison added some comments and concluded by saying
that he was willing to work with the staff on all the issues
and the site plan.
A motion was then made to recommend approval of the PCD as
amended with the fence maintaining the same set back as a
building; exterior lighting directed inward and downward;
landscaping be provided as shown on the site plan; a foot
note on the site plan excluding the billboard from the
approved plan; temporary display be allowed outside of the
fence; the location of the sign will be negotiated; and the
PCD will be for all "C-3" uses and the boat sales and
display. The vote was 5 ayes, 1 nay, 4 absent and 1
abstention (Kathleen Oleson). The motion failed to received
6 votes and the item was automatically deferred to the
August 14, 1990 meeting.
(Some comments were made after the vote)
4
August 14, 1990
Item No. B Z -4973-A (.Continued
--- _._ _ _W.....
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (August 14, 1990)
The applicant, Pat Morrison, was present. There were no
objectors. Mr. Morrison spoke and said that he had worked
with the Staff and agreed with the revised site plan, which
increased the amount of landscaping and established a new
sign location. Mr. Morrison then indicated that the new
plan had addressed a majority of the issues raised by the
Planning Commission at the last meeting.
Bob Brown, Plans Specialist for the City, said that the
revised site plan answered the landscaping questions that
were discussed at the previous meeting.
Commissioner Kathleen Oleson said that she was still
concerned with the fence and asked whether it could be
removed if Red River Marine leaves the location. The
applicant responded by saying the fence would be removed
when Red River Marine vacates the site.
A motion was made to recommend approval of the PCD as
amended subject to the following conditions: 1) Fence
maintaining the same setback as the existing building;
2) Exterior lighting directed inward and downward;
3) Landscaping of the site as shown on the revised site
plan; 4) Allowing temporary display of merchandise outside
the fence; 5) Location of the proposed sign as identified on
the revised site plan; 6) Hours of operation being from 8:00
a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; 7) Site being used for showroom and
sales facility only, and no maintenance of boats or related
equipment; 8) All 11C-3" uses and boat sales and display;
9) A note on the site plan excluding the existing billboard
from the approved plan; and 10) Removal of the chain link
fence when Red River Marine vacates the property at 3021
Cantrell Road. The motion was approved a vote of 9 ayes,
0 nays, and 2 absent.
5