REZONING STAFF REPORT Case: Samantha Ficzko, Planner II Phone: (910) Fax: (910)

Transcription

1 REZONING Case: Samantha Ficzko, Planner II Phone: (910) Fax: (910) Planning Board: November 3, 2008 County Commissioners: November 17, 2008 Requesting rezoning from RA-30 to COMMERCIAL Applicant Information Owner of Record: Applicant: Name: Allen M. Potter Name: Rodney Haire Address: 440 Palmer Walker Rd. Address: 31 Jae St. City/State/Zip: Broadway, NC City/State/Zip: Spring Lake, NC Property Description PIN(s): Acreage: Approx. 1 acres Address/SR No.: Hwy 87 Township: (01) Anderson Creek (02) Averasboro (03) Barbecue (04) Black River (05) Buckhorn (06) Duke (07) Grove (08) Hectors Creek (09) Johnsonville (10) Lillington (11) Neill s Creek (12) Stewart s Creek (13) Upper Little River Vicinity Map Vicinity Map Page 1 of 6

2 Physical Characteristics Site Description: Site is currently vacant aside from the existence of a chain-link fence. There is a large amount of overgrowth on site as well. Surrounding Land Uses: Surrounding land uses include a limited number of single-family homes, several recently approved restuarants, a grocery store, and related smaller businesses, day care center, and a large retail business. Aerial Photograph Services Available Water: Public (Harnett County) Private (Well) Other: Unverified Sewer: Public (Harnett County) Private (Septic Tank) Other: unverified Transportation: Site is located in the Highway Corridor Overlay. If the rezoning request is approved, all site plans will have to meet requirements set forth by HCO and be reviewed by the DRB. Annual Daily Traffic Count: 20,000 at nearest count on Hwy 87 Site Distances: Good Zoning District Compatibility CURRENT REQUESTED RA-30 COMM Parks & Rec Natural Preserves Bona Fide Farms Single Family Manufactured Homes, Design Regulated Manufactured Homes Multi-Family Institutional Commercial Services Retail Wholesale Industrial Manufacturing This is a summary list of general uses, for actual permitted uses refer to the Zoning Ordinance. Page 2 of 6 Zoning Map

3 Land Use Classification Compatibility ZONING LAND USE COMM RDN Parks & Rec Natural Preserves Bona Fide Farms Single Family Manufactured Homes, Design Regulated Manufactured Homes Multi-Family Institutional Commercial Services Retail Wholesale Industrial Manufacturing Future Land Use Map Evaluation No The IMPACT to the adjacent property owners and the surrounding community is reasonable, and the benefits of the rezoning outweigh any potential inconvenience or harm to the community. REASONING: The impact to the adjacent community is reasonable, as many of the adjacent and surrounding uses are of a commercial nature. Additionally, this area is developing as a small commercial hub in this section of Harnett County, mainly due to the expected BRAC growth coming to the area. No The requested zoning district is COMPATIBLE with the existing Land Use Classification. REASONING: The existing land use classification is a rural development node, which is meant for development with a community focus, including neighborhood business with pedestrian and vehicular accessibility being encouraged. The proximity to exisiting commercial zoning and uses, as well as to Hwy 87, this petition is compatible with the existing land use classification. No The proposal does ENHANCE or maintain the public health, safety, and general welfare. REASONING: The proposal to Commercial zoning does enhance the general welfare of the public, as it will allow for a more appropriate use of the property. The site in which this property is located is not condusive for residential use due to the existing commercial uses surrounding the subject property. No The request is for a SMALL SCALE REZONING and should be evaluated for reasonableness REASONING: The subject property is adjacent to existing Commercial zoning and thus this application does not need to be evaluated for a small scale rezoning. Page 3 of 6

4 Suggested Statement-of-Consistency (Staff concludes that ) The requested rezoning to COMMERCIAL is compatible with Harnett County regulatory documents and would not have an unreasonable impact on the surrounding community and will enhance the public health, safety, and general welfare for the reasons stated in the evaluation. It is recommended that this rezoning request be APPROVED. Site Photographs Subject Property Adjacent Site (Residential Home) Adjacent Site (Daycare Facility) Adjacent Site (Retail Establishment) Page 4 of 6

5 Adjacent Roadway (Hwy 87 North) Adjacent Roadway (Hwy 87 South) Standards of Review and Worksheet STANDARDS OF REVIEW The Planning Board shall consider and make recommendations to the County Board of Commissioners concerning each proposed zoning district. The following policy guidelines shall be followed by the Planning Board concerning zoning districts and no proposed zoning district will receive favorable recommendation unless: No A. The proposal will place all property similarly situated in the area in the same category, or in appropriate complementary categories. No B. There is convincing demonstration that all uses permitted under the proposed district classification would be in the general public interest and not merely in the interest of the individual or small group. No C. There is convincing demonstration that all uses permitted under the proposed district classification would be appropriate in the area included in the proposed change. (When a new district designation is assigned, any use permitted in the district is allowable, so long as it meets district requirements, and not merely uses which applicants state they intend to make of the property involved.) No D. There is convincing demonstration that the character of the neighborhood will not be materially and adversely affected by any use permitted in the proposed change. No E. The proposed change is in accordance with the comprehensive plan and sound planning practices. GRANTING THE REZONING REQUEST Motion to grant the rezoning upon finding that the rezoning is reasonable based on All of the above findings of fact A-E being found in the affirmative and that the rezoning advances the public interest. DENYING THE REZONING REQUEST Motion to deny the rezoning upon finding that the proposed rezoning does not advance the public interest and is unreasonable due to the following: The proposal will not place all property similarly situated in the area in the same category, or in appropriate complementary categories. There is not convincing demonstration that all uses permitted under the proposed district classification would be in the general public interest and not merely in the interest of the individual or small group. There is not convincing demonstration that all uses permitted under the proposed district classification would be appropriate in the area included in the proposed change. (When a new district designation is assigned, any use permitted in the district is allowable, so long as it Page 5 of 6

6 meets district requirements, and not merely uses which applicants state they intend to make of the property involved.) There is not convincing demonstration that the character of the neighborhood will not be materially and adversely affected by any use permitted in the proposed change. The proposed change is not in accordance with the comprehensive plan and sound planning practices. The proposed change was not found to be reasonable for a small scale rezoning Attachments Original Rezoning Application Justification Statement Page 6 of 6