BC 1994 12 19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

28O petitioner, Map 5 "Future Land Use" from the Midland Area Plan, Staff Analysis prepared by Ktm Shriefer and Sarah LaBelle, Conner Trucking History of Zoning Enforcement by Mike Downs, Traffic Impact Summary by Sarah LaBelle, Letter Referencing Bridge No. 143 over Muddy Creek on SR 1121 (Cabarrus Station Road) by J. A. Hough, District Engineer, and Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of October 20, 1994. Chairman Barnhart and the Clerk affirmed the following persons who indicated they wished to address the Board regarding Petition 94-07: Dr. Nancy Randall, Mr. Mike Downs, Ms. Klm Shriefer, Mr. Allan Brooks, Mr. George Long, Mr. Ira Howell, Mr. Robert Love, Mr. H. J. Harmon, Jr., Ms. Terri Wood, Mr. J. M. Little, Mr. James Russell, Ms. Carolyn Pope, Ms. George Pope, and Mr. Dan Buchanan. The public hearing for Petition 94-07 was opened. Mr. Hartsell and the Clerk affirmed each of the following persons prior to their presenting comments to the Board: Ms. Rose Bohannon, Mr. Larry Jackson, Ms. Gatl Page, Ms. Janice Gray, and Ms. Sylvia Callahan. Dr. Nancy Randall, Chairperson of the Planning and Zoning Commission, presented the Commission's recommendation to deny Petition 94-07 by a vote of 8 to 0. Mr. Max Conner, petitioner, wishes to rezone 5.62 acres on the southwest corner of Cabarrus Station Road and Bethel Avenue Extension from Low Density Residential to Limited Industrial-Special Use. The petitioner plans to use the existing structure as a dispatch office for a trucking company and to use other portions of the property as a parking facility and repair shop for trucks used in his operation. Stating that this is a land use issue based on findings, Dr. Randall explained that the Planning and Zoning Commission had concluded that the existing use is the most appropriate for the property. Therefore, she stated the Commission voted unanimously to deny the petition based on the following factors. (1) (2) <3> (4) This Special Use rezonin§ does not adhere to the adopted Midland Area Plan which focuses commercial and industrial development on the Highway 24-27 corridor. The proposed site is in the midst of a residential neighborhood and a mile away from the appropriate commercial or industrial location. Recent requests for commercial rezoning along the Highway 601 North corridor have been denied by the Board, citing non- compliance with the Area Plan. The road system at the location of the proposed rezoning is unsuitable. Cabarrus Station Road and Bethel Avenue Extension are narrow, two lane roads with topography and sight distances unsuited for large tractor trailer traffic. The two one-lane bridges at either end of Cabarrus Station Road do not meet weight reqUirements of tractor trailer trucks. Use which includes the repair of tractor trailers is inappropriate in a low density residential area. Proposed times of operation would adversely impact the residential character of the area as would the noise and air pollution. With the exception of the operations manager for the proposed use, the neighbors who testified at the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing and the neighbor who submitted a letter as testimony opposed the rezoning. Ms. Klm Schriefer, Planning Technician, located the property on a map and presented a video taken from the corner of Bethel Avenue Extension and Cabarrus Station Road. She reviewed the Staff Analysis and stated that the staff had recommended that the petition be denied based on the following findings: (1) The sttets development as a trucking facility is not in harmony with the Midland Area Plan adopted by the Commissioners as the land use plan for the area. Further, the trucking facility would not be compatible with the surrounding land uses, nor can it be made compatible with reasonable conditions. (2) Roads and bridges are not adequate to support the vehicles directly attributed to the business when considering the width, topography, and limited sight distances of the roads as well as the one lane bridges and railroad tracks, which would be crossed on a regular basis in travel to and from the site. (3) In the absence of finding the Midland Area Plan as wrong, North Carolina case law recognizes this as an improper form of spot zoning.