The applicant requests to rezone three adjacent lots near the intersection of E. Truman Road and S. Cunningham Avenue in order to market the site’s existing commercial building as a commercial property. The building, a former drug store with a legal nonconforming basement apartment, was designed for retail use and couldn’t easily be used for most industrial purposes as zoned. Further, surrounding zonings and uses are retail/service in design and function. The northwest lot is dominantly a parking surface with a wooded portion on the west. The third lot, to the south, is accessed by a gravel drive off of S. Cunningham Avenue and provides garage parking for the legal nonconforming residential space that will become legal conforming if the property is rezoned to C-2.
No site improvements are required at this time. The applicant’s current proposal is to market the property to some unknown buyer. The applicant had requested a Special Use Permit (SUP) for used car sales as well at the time of the application; however, the tenant that would have required an SUP for his proposed business, backed out of the real estate deal. If the SUP had gone forward, the City could have required site improvements to the lots as a condition of approval.
Review Criteria: Recommendations and decisions on rezoning applications must be based on consideration of all of the following criteria:
1. Conformance of the requested zoning with the Comprehensive Plan – The Comprehensive Plan envisions Residential Neighborhood uses for this segment of the E. Truman Road corridor.
2. Conformance of the requested zoning with any adopted neighborhood or sub-area plans in which the property is located or abuts – There are no neighborhood or sub-area plans adopted for this location.
3. The compatibility of the proposed zoning with the zoning and use of nearby property, including any overlay zoning – The proposed C-2 zoning is both compatible with adjacent and nearby C-2 zoning and with surrounding commercial buildings and uses.
4. The compatibility of the proposed zoning and allowed uses with the character of the neighborhood – The existing commercial structure is compatible with the architectural character and uses in the immediate neighborhood.
5. The suitability of the subject property for the uses to which it has been restricted under the existing zoning regulations – Given the design, layout and size of the existing retail and residential structure and spaces, the property is not well configured for an industrial use.
6. The length of time the subject property has remained vacant as zoned. – The old drug store has been vacant for over five years. The basement apartment is currently occupied.
7. The extent to which approving the rezoning will detrimentally affect nearby properties. – The rezoning would allow the building to be used for its designed commercial/retail use, which is the dominant use along the Truman Road corridor.
8. The gain, if any, to the public health, safety and welfare due to denial of the application, as compared to the hardship imposed upon the landowner, if any, as a result of denial of the application. – If denied, the property would continue to be a blight on the neighborhood. If approved, the owner would be able to market the property for its designed use.
Planning Commission Action: At its August 14, 2018 Planning Commission meeting, the motion for approval passed 6-1, after consideration of the following facts:
- That, the rezoning is consistent with the review criteria listed in Section 14-701-02 of the City Code.
- That, a public hearing was held pursuant to a notice duly published according to law, at which time all interested parties were given the full opportunity to be heard.
- That, C-2 zoning allows for offices, banks, restaurants, schools, churches, retail sales and services, and other similar uses by right.
- That, this property has been zoned I-1 (or its equivalence in the previous Code) since at least 1980.
- That, C-2 zoning would be both compatible with adjacent and nearby C-2 zoning and with surrounding commercial buildings and uses.
- That, at the Planning Commission hearing, no one spoke in opposition to the rezoning application.
- That, at the hearing, no protest petition was submitted in opposition to the application.
Draft Planning Commission minutes are attached to this Council agenda item.