Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5056 Staff AnalysisNovember 1, 1988 Item No. A - Z -505E Owner: Al Porter Applicant: AI Porter Location: 2804 Peyton Street Request: Rezone from "R-3" to "C-1" Purpose: Single family and food store Size: 0.3 acres Existing Use: Single family SURROUNDING LAND_ USE.AND_ZONING: North - Single family, Zoned "R-3" South - Single famiiy, Zoned "R-3" East - Single family, Zoned "R-3" West - Single family, Zoned "R-3" PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The owner of 2804 Peyton Street applied for a Privilege License to operate a small business out of his residence. The license was denied because of the residential zoning and the applicant was instructed to file a commercial rezoning request, "R-3" to "C-1." The site is approximately 2 1/2 blocks north of Asher Avenue in an area that is primarily residential in terms of land use. To the south and southeast, the zoning is a mix of "0-3," "C-3," and "1-2" with the commercial and industrial zoning being restricted to lots between West 29th Street and Asher Avenue. The nearest nonresidential zoning to the property in question is the half block north of West 29th and east of Peyton that is zoned 110-3;" all the 110-3" lots along West 29th are occupied by residential uses. North and west of the lot the zoning is "R-3" but there are some isolated locations zoned for commercial purposes. Land use around 2804 Peyton is residential and the nonresidential uses are located closer to Asher Avenue. The existing 110-3" line north of West 29th has been in place for many years and has established a definite zoning boundary between residential and nonresidential uses. November 1, 1988 Item_, ......No. ........A_....-.. Z-5056..._.._....._(Continued) _._...... . ....._........_......._._....._......._...................... ................ ...... ... .... __.._._....._............ __......... _. 2. The site is an 87' x 150' lot with one single family residence and an accessory structure on it. 3. There are no right-of-way requirements or Master Street Plan issues associated with this request. 4. There have been no adverse comments received from the reviewing agencies as of this writing. 5. There are no legal issues. 6. There is no documented history of neighborhood position on the site. 7. As with other commercial rezoning efforts in older residential neighborhoods, Staff has a number of concerns with the current request and is opposed to the proposed 11C-1" rezoning. The surrounding neighborhood appears to be fairly stable and a commercial reclassification could have a negative impact on the area and lead to other undesirable rezonings. In this type of neighborhood, the potential for long-term damage, to the area is too great and outweighs any short term benefits or justifications for the proposed rezoning. Finally, the "C-1" rezoning is in conflict with the adopted Oak Forest Neighborhood Plan which maintains the residential character of the area. STAFF ...... RE.COMMENDAT I_ N : Staff recommends denial of the "C-1" rezoning request as filed. PLANNING_ COMMISSION ACTION: (August 9, 1988) Staff reported that the rezoning request needed to be deferred. A motion was made to defer the item to the September 20, 1988 meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes, and 5 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (September 20, 1988) Staff informed the Commission that the item needed to be deferred. A motion was made to defer the request to the November 1, 1988 meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 noes, 3 absent, and 1 open position. November 1, 1988 I tem No. A - Z-5056_.Ieont._in-ued.)---........,...... __ .-... _........ ...... PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (November 1, 1988) The applicant, Al Porter, was present. There were no objectors but Staff reminded the Commission of the letter in opposition to the request. Mr. Porter discussed the issue and said he was just trying to help the children of the neighborhood. Mr. Porter disagreed with the Staff's position and said the rezoning would not impact the other properties. Additional comments were made by several Commissioners and Mr. Porter. A motion was made to recommend approval of the "C-1" zoning. The vote was 1 aye, 9 noes, and 1 absent. The motion failed and the request was denied.