Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5118 Staff AnalysisAugust 8, 1989 Item No. C - Z-5118 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Fayrene W. Johnson Fayrene W. Johnson 17523 Highway 10 Rezone from unclassified to "C-2" Commercial development 3.3 acres Existing Use: Single family SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Vacant, zoned "0-2" South - Vacant, unclassified East - Vacant, unclassified West - Vacant, unclassified PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The request is to rezone 3.3 acres on Highway 10 from unclassified to "C-2" for an unspecified commercial use. The site is located west of Johnson Ranch Road and south of the proposed Johnson Ranch mixed use development. Land use in the immediate area is restricted to single family residences on large tracts with the majority of the land still vacant. Only the north side of Highway 10 is in the City limits and the existing zoning includes "MF -12," "MF -18," "0-2" and "C-2." The balance of the area is unclassified at this time because of being outside the City limits. The "0- 2" and "C-2" areas to the north have been zoned for several years but still remain undeveloped. The most recent zoning activity in the area involves the parcel directly to the west, part of the current Deltic proposal, and the request is to "C-2" but the issue has not been acted on by the Planning Commission. 2. The site is occupied by a single family residence. 3. Highway 10 is classified as a principal arterial on the Master Street Plan which requires a right-of-way of 110 feet. August 8. 1989 Item No. C - Z-5118 (Continued)_._ 4. Engineering has indicated that dedication of additional right-of-way will be required for Highway 10 to equal 55 feet from the center line. 5. There are no legal issues. 6. There is no documented history or neighborhood position on the site. 7. On the adopted Highway 10 Plan, a portion of the property is identified as part of a commercial node which includes the Deltic property to the west and land across Highway 10. The plan does not show the southeast one-half of the site to be part of the node but Staff feels that rezoning the entire tract is appropriate and supports the request. Rezoning the additional area that is not identified on the plan is an expansion of a node and should not have an impact on the area. Staff does suggest that the node expansion be limited to the 3.3 acres and establish the eastern boundary of the property in question as the commercial line. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the "C-2" rezoning request as filed. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (December 13, 1988) Staff reported to the Commission that the applicant had submitted a letter requesting that the item be deferred to April 4, 1989. A motion was made to defer the rezoning to the April 4, 1989 meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. AMENDED STAFF RECOMMENDATION: In place of the current "C-2" zoning application, Staff suggests refiling the request as a PCD utilizing the recommended design standards for the Highway 10 and Rock Creek corridors, entitled "Standards for Commercial Node Expansion". This position is based on the Board of Directors resolution (No. 8103) regarding zoning changes along Highway 10. A PCD also would provide more protection August 8, 1989 Item No. C - Z-5118 (Continued) for the residential area to the southeast. Application of the design standards would help maintain the scenic quality of Highway 10. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (April 4, 1989) (Items G and H were discussed together.) The applicant was present and there were several interested persons in attendance. Gary Greeson, Planning Director, reviewed the two requests and the history of each proposal. Mr. Greeson said both items were deferred in December to allow for additional time to consider filing a PUD for the properties and the applicants have asked for another deferral. David Jones with Vogle Realty and representing property owners along Highway 10 then discussed each request. Mr. Jones questioned the Staff's recommendation for the Deltic rezoning and why it was being deferred. Mr. Greeson responded and said that the Staff would probably not make a recommendation on the "C-2" portion of the Deltic application. Mr. Jones then proceeded to discuss the Johnson rezoning request. He first read portions of the Staff's write-up into the record and made several comments about the Highway 10 Plan. He said the commercial node in question appeared not to be site specific and went on to read the Staff's amended recommendation for the Johnson request. There was some discussion by the Planning Commission about the proposed design standards, and comments were offered by various individuals. Mr. Jones said he supported both commercial rezonings one hundred percent and stated that there were inconsistencies in the application of the land use plan for the Highway 10 area. Ruth Bell said that the League of Women Voters strongly supported adherence to the adopted Highway 10 Plan. A motion was made to defer both Items G and H to the August 8, 1989 meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent. August 8, 1989 Item No. C - Z-5118 (Continued) PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (August 8, 1989) Staff told the Planning Commission that the applicant had submitted a written request for withdrawal without prejudice and the item was placed on the consent agenda. A motion was made to withdraw the item without prejudice. The motion passed by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 nays and 3 absent.