Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6084 Staff AnalysisJanuary �2, ' x.396 ITEM NQ.: 6 Z-6084 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Existing Use: Harry T. Fuller and Walter Isgrig Pete Hornibrook Northeast corner of West 36th Street and S. Shackleford Road Rezone from R-2 to C-3 Unspecified commercial development 11.9± acres Vacant, wooded land SURROMMING LAND USE AND ZONING z North - Undeveloped woodland; zoned MF -12 South - Vacant land; zoned R-2 East - Our Way Living Center; zoned R-2 West - Vacant lot, zoned C-3; Vacant Commercial Building, zoned C-4; Nonconforming Office -warehouse Complex, zoned R-2 ENGINEERING COMMENTS 36th and Shackleford Road are minor arterials with 45 feet of right-of-way from centerline required. 36th will require a right -turn lane, therefore, additional 12 feet of ROW required for this right -turn lane. With construction: 30 foot of pavement required from centerline of Shackleford Road with a sidewalk. 30 feet of pavement and the right - turn lane are required for 36th Street. The right -turn lane is to have 150 feet of stacking space and a 100 foot taper, see page 12 of the master street plan. A sidewalk is also required. Stormwater detention analysis will be required. A grading permit shall be obtained prior to construction. LAND USE ELEMENT The site is located in the I-430 District. The adopted Land Use Plan recommends Public Institutional use. The request January , 1996 ITEM Z-6084 nt. is for Commercial use. While staff is willing to consider alternative land uses to Public, Commercial is not appropriate at this time. Multifamily would appear to be a more appropriate change of use. STAFF ANALYSIS The request is to rezone this 11.9± acre tract from "R-2" Single Family residential to "C-3" General Commercial. The property is currently undeveloped and wooded. No specific commercial development has been proposed. The zoning pattern in the area is varied, ranging from R-2 to C-4. Uses in the immediate vicinity are mixed, including such uses as single -wide mobile homes, vacant commercial buildings, churches and an office warehouse complex. Although there are a variety of nonresidential uses in the area, the commercial zoning has been restricted to the west side of Shackleford Road. A small cluster of commercial properties is located at the northwest corner of 36thtand Shackleford. The proposed Summit Mall PCD is also located on the west side of Shackleford Road, northwest of this site. East of Shackleford Road the area takes on a more residential character. Uses to the east include the Our Way residential living center, single family homes and churches which are permitted in residential zones with a conditional use permit. The I-430 District Land Use Plan recommends Public Institutional use for this site which is reflective of the Our Way and United Cerebral Palsy sites adjacent to the east. While staff believes it is appropriate t consider alternative uses to Public/Institutional, Commercial zoning is not proper for this site. A transition zoning such as multifamily would be better to progress from the Commercial zoning on the west side of Shackleford Road to the residential uses east of the site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the requested C-3 zoning. PLANNING COMM1 SION ACT Y (JANUARY 2, 1996) The applicant, Pete Hornibrook, was present. There were no objectors present. One letter supporting the commercial zoning had been presented to the Commission. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of denial of the requested C-3 zoning. 2 January 2-, `1396 ITEM Z-6094 n In response to a question from Commissioner Adcock, staff noted that Shackleford Road formed a boundary between the existing commercial zoning and the residential uses which extend eastward into the John Harrow Neighborhood. Staff also noted that no specific use had been proposed for the site; that the request was for C-3 zoning directly adjacent to a residential development. Commissioner Daniel stated that he was opposed to multifamily on this site but that he could support commercial development if it provided needed services to the residents of the our Way complex adjacent to the east. He stated that he could not support C-3 zoning with no specific development being proposed. Mr. Hornibrook addressed the Commission in support of his application. He presented a map of the area and noted other commercial properties in the area. Mr. Hornibrook made reference to the letter from the executive director of United Cerebral Palsy voicing support for the commercial rezoning. Mr. Hornibrook stated that it was appropriate to zone the site C-3 which would allow for the development of a strip commercial center. He then listed several neighborhood service type uses which might go in such a center. Commissioner Woods asked if those same uses might not also go in if the property were zoned C-2. Mr. Hornibrook responded that they would. He stated that he had no problem with amending the application to -C-2 and coming back to the Commission with a site plan. Commissioner Woods stated that he supported some type of commercial development at this location but that he wanted to see a specific development rather than a straight C-3 rezoning. Commissioner Lichty asked Mr. Hornibrook if he had any discussions with the people at United Cerebral Palsy about potential development of the site. Mr. Hornibrook responded that he had discussed development of the site as a strip shopping center containing such uses as a cleaners, pharmacy and grocery store. Commissioner Hawn asked Staff how long it had been since the Land Use Plan had been reviewed in this area. Dana Carney, of the Planning Staff, responded that the Land Use Plan in this area had been reviewed very recently due to other rezoning requests in the area. Commissioner Hawn stated that he felt it was important to stick to the plan unless there is a compelling and overriding reason that the Plan needs to be revised. Mr. Hornibrook responded that the Plan is not set in stone and that it should be used as a guideline. 3 January`3, 1096 ITEM Z- 4 n Jim Lawson, Director of the Department of Neighborhoods and Planning, made reference to the letter which had been sent by United Cerebral Palsy. In that letter, he noted, UCP voiced support for development of a "neighborhood shopping facility that would be an enhancement to individuals residing in this area." Mr. Lawson noted that the application was for C-3 zoning, not C-1 zoning which would accommodate a neighborhood shopping facility. He noted the difference in uses allowed in the two zones. Mr. Lawson noted the vacant commercial property across Shackleford Road and the relationship of this site to adjacent residential properties. Commissioner Putnam noted that Mr. Hornibrook had stated he would accept C-2 zoning which requires site plan review. Mr. Lawson responded that C-2 does have site plan review but that it does not control the uses. Mr. Lawson stated that C-1, C-2 and C-3 zonings are appropriate when the Plan indicates so; but that in some cases, a more sensitive approach must be taken. ` Mr. Hornibrook and Mr. Lawson then discussed the relationship of the site to residential properties in the area. Mr. Hornibrook stated that he would be willing to amend his application to either C-2 or C-1. Acting Chairman Ball then confirmed with Mr. Hornibrook that the application had been amended to C-2. In response to a question from Commissioner Woods, Mr. Hornibrook stated that he did not have a plan to submit as a planned development and asked the Commission to approve the requested C-2 zoning. In response to a question from the Commission, Staff noted that the Kensington Place and John Barrow Neighborhood Associations had been notified of the C-3 zoning request. No opposition to the request had been received. After a discussion of the various uses allowed in C-2 and C-3, Commissioner Lichty stated that it was not the Commission's responsibility to guarantee an applicant a profit. There was then further discussion of the appropriateness of zoning the site C-2 with site plan review. Mr. Lawson then reiterated that the C-2 site plan review required conformity with minimum standards only. 4 January , 11996 ITEM Z-6084 n Acting Chairman Hall then brought the item to a vote as amended to C-2. The vote was 0 ayes, 10 noes, 0 absent and 1 abstaining (Putnam). The request was denied. 5