Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2119-Z DATE: January 23, 2012 TO: Planning Commission and City Council FROM: Stephen C. Richardson, Planning Manager SUBJECT: Consider a request for a zone change from RS (Residential Single Family Dwelling) District to GC-MD-2 or more restrictive district FILE: 2119-Z STAFF REPORT The Planning Manager recommends denial. This item is a request for a zone change from RS (Residential Single Family Dwelling) District to GC-MD-2 (General Commercial-Multiple Family Dwelling-2) District or more restrictive district. The property is located at 7825 and 7835 Highway 105. Mike Aref, the property owner, states that he would like to rezone the property so that he can build a 4,500 sq. ft. shopping center. This zone change request could be considered spot zoning. Spot zoning connotes an unacceptable zone that singles out a single tract for treatment that differs from that accorded similar surrounding land without proof of changes and conditions. When faced with such a situation, several issues must be resolved to determine if the zone change is indeed a spot zoning situation. Those issues are as follows: 1. The law demands that the approved zoning plan be respected and not altered for the special benefit of the landowner when the change will cause substantial detriment to the surrounding land or serve no substantial public purpose. Would the zone change be in compliance with the adopted comprehensive plan? ANSWER: The subject property is totally surrounded by RS zoning. While a A grandfathered @ kennel is immediately to the east of the subject property, the other developed tracts in the immediate vicinity of the request are single family residential in nature. Across Hwy. 105, a proposed church recently received a specific use permit in an RS District. STAFF REPORT continued The Comprehensive Plan designates this area along Hwy. 105 as a Neighborhood Growth Unit. As such, a Neighborhood Growth Unit allows for a diversity of housing types and convenient access to parks, schools, and shopping centers while still protecting single family residential areas from intrusions of incompatible land uses. Commercial uses are typically located at the intersections of major thoroughfares. The nearest commercial uses, other than the grandfathered kennel, is approximately 700' west of the subject property. Rezoning this property could cause substantial detriment to the surrounding residential uses and serve no substantial public purpose. The rezoing may increase the value of the subject property at the expense of surrounding residential properties. The change would not be on compliance with the adopted comprehensive plan in that it would permit a commercial strip approximately 2,100' from the Hwy. 105/Major Dr. intersection and approximately 4,700' from the Hwy. 105/Keith Rd. intersection. 2. Will this change adversely impact the surrounding properties? The nature and degree of an adverse impact upon neighboring lands is important. Lots that are rezoned in a way that is substantially inconsistent with the zoning of the surrounding area, whether more or less restrictive, are likely to be invalid. ANSWER: Rezoning the subject property to GC-MD-2 would be inconsistent with the surrounding zoning. 3. Is the tract of land suitable or unsuitable for use as presently zoned? This is a factor. The size, shape and location of a tract of land or lot may render it unusable or even confiscatory as zoned. ANSWER: The land is perfectly suitable for single family residential uses. The argument might be made that commercial uses are more appropriate along Hwy. 105. However, the land along this stretch of Hwy. 105 has historically been developed with residential uses. 4. Does the proposed zone change bear a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, morals or general welfare or protect and preserve historical and cultural places and areas. The amendatory ordinance must bear a substantial relationship to the aforementioned considerations. ANSWER: The proposed change does not bear a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, morals or general welfare or protect and preserve historical and cultural places and areas. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Notices mailed to property owners 22 . Responses in Favor . Responses in Opposition . LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ORDINANCE PURPOSES Being Lots 1 and 2, Mize Estates, City of Beaumont, Jefferson County, Texas, containing 0.72 acres, more or less. GENERAL INFORMATION/PUBLIC UTILITIES APPLICANT: Mike Aref PROPERTY OWNER: Same LOCATION: 7825 and 7835 Hwy. 105 EXISTING ZONING: RS (Residential Single Family Dwelling) District PROPERTY SIZE: 0.72 acres, more or less EXISTING LAND USES: Vacant FLOOD HAZARD ZONE: A X @ - Areas determined to be outside 500-year floodplain SURROUNDING LAND USES: SURROUNDING ZONING: NORTH: Hwy. 105, vacant RS (Residential Single Family Dwelling) District EAST: Kennel RS SOUTH: Residential, vacant RS WEST: Residential RS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Neighborhood Growth Unit STREETS: Hwy. 105 - Major Arterial with 4 lanes, undivided DRAINAGE: Curb and gutter WATER: 8' water line SANITARY SEWER SERVICE: 8" sanitary sewer line PROPERTY OWNERS ADAMS BENJAMIN L & LINDA M AREF MIKE BARNES HARRY & SHARON D BEAUMONT COMMUNITY CHURCH AKA BEAUMONT BIBLE CHURCH BRUM CHERIE M CUNNINGHAM CLIFFORD B &BARBARA GONZALES MICHAEL & KRISTINA HARVEY RONALD DALE KATSERES CARRIE & JAMES T MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGIS SYS % DOVENMUEHLE MORTGAGE INC NORTHWEST CHURCH OF CHRIST PEPPER MCKENDREE GIBSON & ANGIE JEANNETTE PERKINS ESTELLA SAVOIE WATSON LADY SHELANDER SCOTT F & PAMELA A SIMON MASHELL L TURNEY TERRELL M WELLS DONALD R & IRIS F YEATES MARLENE