BC 1994 09 19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

215 Zoning Atlas Amendment - Public Hearing - 7:00 P.M, Petition 94-04. Samuel Wilson, Petitioner, located on U.S. 601 South at Jim Sossoman Road, Map/PIN 5556-00-3669, wishes to rezone from Low Density Residential to Limited Commercial/Special Use. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6 to 3 to deny this petition. At the request of Commissioner Payne, Mr. Gerald Newton, Director of Planning, Zoning and Building Inspections, discussed the difference between a "home occupation" and a "rural home occupation". Mr. Hartsell and Mrs. Bonds affirmed the following persons who indicated they wished to speak regarding Petition 94-04: Dr. Nancy Randall, Planning and Zoning Commission Chair; Ms. Klm Schriefer, Planning Technician; Mr. Newton; Florence Potter; Dewey Watkins; Sam Wilson; James King; Carl Hill; Henry Moore; Duane Barron; and Patricia Copeland. Dr. Randall presented Petition 94-04 by Mr. Sam Wilson to rezone approximately eight (8) acres at the corner of Jim Sossamon Road and Highway 601 from Low Density Residential to Limited Commercial/Special Use in order to construct mini storage units. Initially, 50 units are to be constructed with up to 200 units permitted by the site plan. The Planning and Zoning Commission denied the petition on August 18, 1994 by a vote of 6 to 3 (including the vote of an absent member that was counted in the affirmative). Dr. Randall summarized support of the rezoning as follows: (1) Highway 601 is a major thoroughfare; (2) Low impact commercial use; (3) Facility to be located behind the residence with appropriate screening; and (4) Staff recommended approval with conditions. She listed the following findings of fact by the Commission in its action to deny Petition 94-04: (1) Use did not comply with the Midland Area Plan; (2) No adjacent commercial zone to the property; (3) No sewer available to property; (4) Negatively impact residential neighborhood. In addition, Dr. Randall expressed concerns about the impact of the additional traffic, security lighting, and signage on the residential quality of the neighborhood. Ms. Klm Schriefer, Planning Technician, reviewed the location of the property requested for rezoning and presented the Staff Analysis for Petition 94- 04. She reported that the property is subject to the requirements of the County's Transportation Overlay Zone with access limited to Jim Sossamon Road at a point at least 175 feet from the Highway 601 right of way. In addition, she reviewed the intent of a "low density residential" zone and the performance based standards for self-service storage facilities in permitted zones. She stated that the proposed use would not be so intensive to create a significant volume of traffic on either Jim Sossamon or Highway 601. Also, according to Ms. Schriefer, it was staff's opinion that the requested zoning change and use would not appear to have any negative impact on adjoining property, nor would the proposed use seem to compromise the intent of the County's land development plan. Therefore, she stated it was staff's recommendation to approve Petition 94-04 with the following conditions: Add/retain wooded area along north property line as a buffer between adjacent property on US Highway 601. Construction of the residence should occur before or in conjunction with construction of the storage facility. Adherence to the modified development plan. Chairman Barnhart opened the public hearing for Petition 94-04 at 7:45 P.M. He asked if anyone were present who wished to speak either for or against the rezoning request. Ms. Florence Potter, resident of Troutman Road, reported that Jim Sossamon Road had been widened to better handle school buses. She expressed concern about the safety of children in the area and the possibility that drugs and stolen goods would be stored in the storage units. Mr. Dewey Watkins, resident of Spring Drive, stated his main objections to the storage units were what would be stored there and who would be storing it. According to Mr. Watkins, this type of facility has been used in Charlotte to store drugs and stolen goods. Mr. Watkins questioned the use of the residential area for commercial purposes, stating the designated commercial area for the