1988-09-12 Public Hearings, Revenue Sharing, Budget Hearing, and Regular Meeting

Browse Search

e e F.P.J.V. & Jackson Rezoning Con't.... Page 2 The tract being considered for rezoning includes 2.0279 acr'es intended for an expansion of Hr. Jackson's Recr"eational Vehicle and Boat storage facility. A Speci.al Conditional Use (S.C.U.) Per'mit application to permit this expansion has been filed. This S.C.U. Permit application cannot be considered unless the requested rezoning is granted. The applicants propose a professional office use for the remaining 4.50 acres (See Exhibit A). Analysis: In considering a rezoning request, the Commission is charged to consider the following questions: 1. Is this request in co'nformance with the intent of the City's Comprehensive Plan? 2. If the request is not in conformance with the Compre- hensive Plan's intent, have there been sufficient changes in the circumstances surrounding the tract in question to warrant a change in the Plan? In considering the first question, the City's Land Use Map indicates a mixed use for this area (see Exhibit C). The application, if approved, eliminates the R-3 zoning adjacent to the elementary school but retains the R-3 zoning extending westward to Underwood Road. In considering Mr. Jackson's initial rezoning request (ff1501-A), the City Council expressed concern that the integrity of the remaining R- 3 trac t be preserved and the rezon ing not be u sed as a 11 stepp ing stone" to future rezonings that would further reduce the remaining R-3 tract (Minutes of City Council Public Hearing, August 10, 1987, Exhibit D). The integrity of the remalnlng R-3 tract would be preserved although the applicant has expressed a desire to consider rezoning the remaining R-3 land to some form of commercial zoning in the future. In considering the second question, as to whether a change to the Comprehensive Plan is warranted, a revie\v of the applicants' development sketch plan is in order. The development sketch plan submitted with the application proposes to continue the expclnsion of the Recreational Vehicle and Boat Storage facility in phases and doesn't speak to the development of the 4.50 acre tract to the east except that the best and proposed use 1s that of professional offices. Currently there are no plans for develop~ent of the site. The recent zoning changes in the general area of this request and the resulting development does change the Land Use conditions that existed at the time the Comprehensive Plan was developed.