BC 1994 09 19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

216 Midland area is located two to three miles from the site. In conclusion, he asked that the residential quality of the neighborhood be maintained and expressed concern regarding the safety of children and the increased traffic in the area. Mr. Sam Wilson, property owner, described his plans for the mini storage units and assured those present that there would be no drugs or chemicals stored in the facility. He plans to build his house first and then build 50 storage units with the remaining 150 units to be constructed at a later date. Shrubbery and trees will be planted to buffer the site, and one driveway will serve both the residence and the units. The planned hours of operation are Monday through Saturday from 7:00 A.M. until 5:00 P.M. He anticipates minimum traffic with an estimated 10 cars per day during the week and 20 cars on Saturday. Mr. Wilson cited a shortage of storage units in the area and stated his business will add to the tax base of Cabarrus County. Mr. James King, resident of Spring Drive, opposed the rezoning and listed the following concerns: storage of drugs, safety of children, increased traffic, and fire hazards in the event that chemicals are stored in the units. Mr. Carl Hill, Spring Drive resident, opposed the rezoning and stated the rural character of the neighborhood should be maintained. He expressed concerns regarding increased traffic, noise, adverse lighting, possible storage of drugs, and a decrease in the residential property values for that area. Mr. Henry Moore of Jim Sossamon Road, spoke in support of the rezoning. He stated in his opinion the mini storage units would not negatively affect the community. Mr. Duane Barton opposed the rezoning, stating the area should remain residential. He commented that commercial property is available at the intersection of Highway 601 and Highway 24-27. Mr. Barron submitted a letter to the Board expressing concerns regarding the following: safety of children, increased traffic, unattractive signage, bright lights, damage to property values, and the possible storage of illicit items or dangerous chemicals. Ms. Patricia P. Copeland of Jim Sossamon Road opposed the rezoning and any changes that would negatively affect the rural beauty of the area. She expressed concern about the future welfare of her children if the commercial zoning is approved. Mr. Newton stated he wished to clarify that the issue is a land use issue and that the Board should focus on land use facts in making its decision. Chairman Barnhart listed the following findings of fact for the case and moved to approve Petition 94-04 with conditions as set forth below. l) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) Property will be used both as a primary residential use as well as low impact commercial use which is carefully controlled by Zoning Ordinance. Property is located on a major thoroughfare with the access off secondary road; traffic impact would be minimal. Performance based standards in landscaping and buffering requirements will reduce any negative impacts on adjoining properties. The units will be screened and behind the residence to maintain the residential nature of both Highway 601 and Jim Sossamon Road. Site's ultimate development would coincide with the comprehensive plan suggested mix of residential and low impact commercial uses. Proposed development as submitted would meet the intent of the limited commercial zone as stated in the Zoning Ordinance to accommodate relatively small scale commercial uses and intensity complementary to residential land use. The Special Use process insures this would be the only use in the commercial zone situation. The conditions for the approval of Petition 94-04 as proposed by Chairman Barnhart were as follows.