HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5758 Staff AnalysisNovember 30, 1993
ITEM NO.: 3 Z-5758
Owner:
Applicant:
Location:
Request:
Purpose:
Size:
Existing Use:
J. D. Pride
John Spann
Pride Valley and Kanis Road
Rezone from R-2 to C-3
Mini -Warehouse Units
5.01 acres
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North - Vacant and Office, zoned R-2 and 0-2
South - Vacant, zoned R-2
East - Vacant, zoned R-2
West - Vacant and Single -Family, zoned R-2
STAFF ANALYSIS
The property in question is in the general vicinity of the
Pride Valley and Kanis intersection, and the request is to
rezone the 5 acres from R-2 to C-3. The land is situated
approximately 720 feet west of Kanis Road and is outside the
City limits. The proposal is to develop the land for
mini -warehouse units. If the site is reclassified to C-3, a
conditional use permit will still be required for the
storage units because they are not a byright use in the C-3
district. The property has 327 feet of frontage on Pride
Valley and 133 feet on Kanis Road.
Zoning in the general area is R-2, 0-2 and PCD. The 0-2 is
found along the north and east sides of Kanis Road and the
PCD is at the corner of Kanis Road and the Chenal Parkway.
The site under consideration is surrounded by R-2 land.
Land use includes single family, commercial, offices for
Kinco Construction and Baker Elementary School. A
relatively high percentage of land is still undeveloped.
The Ellis Mountain plan shows property for low density
multifamily use and not for the nonresidential development.
Planning efforts and other plans done for this area have
never identified this site for commercial uses. It is the
staff's position that the property is not a viable C-3
location, and there is no strong justification for creating
November 30, 1993
ITEM Z- 7 Cont.
a new commercial area through this request. The plan
recommends certain sites along the Chenal Parkway for
commercial development and the land use plan's direction
should be reinforced by not endorsing the C-3 request for
the five acres. Because of the area and location, a C-3
reclassification could have an adverse impact on the nearby
residential properties.
LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT
The site is in the Ellis Mountain District. The plan for
the area recommends low density residential. There have not
been changes in the area to justify a major change in the
plan such as this. (Note: This would be another area of
higher density residential lost, making even the existing
amounts of commercial less justified.)
ENGINEERING COMMENTS
There are none to be reported.
STAFF RECOMriENDATION
Staff recommends denial of the C-3 rezoning.
PLANNIATG COMMISSION ACTION: (NOVEMBER 30, 1993)
The application was represented by Meredith Spann. There
were three objectors in attendance. Ms. Spann addressed the
request and said there was a need for mini -storage units.
She described the area and major nonresidential users, One
Source and Rinco. Ms. Spann made some additional comments
and said the rezoning would not create problems for the
neighborhood.
Jennipher Boone, a resident on Pride Valley, said there
would be problems with traffic and a commercial development
would harm the rural character of the area. Ms. Boone then
asked the Commission to deny the C-3.
Bill Worthen, a property owner, said he was opposed to the
C-3.
Meredith Spann offered some comments and said the proposed
development would be done in two stages.
Bob Brown, Plans Specialist, discussed landscaping and
buffering.
2
November 30, 1993
ITEM NO.: 3 Z-5758 (Co
Ray Robbins, property owner to the west, opposed the C-3
rezoning. Mr. Robbins discussed the area and property
values. He said C-3 allows a large number of uses.
Mr. Robbins described the proposal as a window into a
residential area and said the neighborhood would be impacted
by traffic. Mr. Robbins said the neighborhood was a quiet
R-2 area and asked for a vote against the proposed C-3
encroachment.
Meredith Spann offered some additional comments and asked
for the Commission to vote in support of C-3.
Peggy Robbins asked some questions about the development.
There was some additional discussion and the request was
amended to include a condition that there would be no access
to Pride Valley.
A motion was made to recommend approval of the C-3 rezoning
with the access restriction. The motion was denied by a
vote of 0 ayes, 7 nays, 3 absent and 1 open position.
3