TO: Mayor and Members of City Council
THRU: Kelly Olivera - Assistant City Manager
Dr. Gerald Newton, AICP - Development Services Director
FROM: Will Deaton, AICP - Planning & Zoning Manager
Heather Eckhardt, CZO - Planner II
DATE: February 26, 2024
RE:
Title
P23-53. Rezoning from Single Family Residential 10 (SF-10) to Single Family Residential 6 (SF-6) located at 1040 Stamper Road (REID 0428335880000) totaling .25 acres ± and being the property of Rockfish Run Land and Development LLC.
end
COUNCIL DISTRICT(S):
Council District(s)
2 - Malik Davis
b
Relationship To Strategic Plan:
Strategic Operating Plan FY 2022
Goals 2027
Goal II: Responsive City Government Supporting a Diverse and Viable Economy
• Objective 2.1 - To ensure a diverse City tax base
Goal III: City invested in Today and Tomorrow
• Objective 3.2 - To manage the City's future growth and strategic land use.
Executive Summary:
The applicant is seeking to rezone 1040 Stamper Road from Single Family Residential (SF-10) to Single Family Residential 6 (SF-6).
The Zoning Commission held a legislative hearing on December 12, 2023. There was one speaker in favor and eight speakers in opposition. The Zoning Commission voted to deny the request (4-1). The applicant appealed the denial to City Council.
This item was tabled to February 26, 2024 during the January 22, 2024 City Council meeting at the request of the applicant.
Background:
Owner: Rockfish Run Land and Development, LLC.
Applicant: Tim Evans
Requested Action: SF-10 to SF-6
REID #: 0428335880000
Council District: 2 - Malik Davis
Status of Properties: Undeveloped
Size: .25 acres
Adjoining Land Use & Zoning:
• North: SF-10 - Single-family dwelling
• South: SF-10 - Single family dwelling
• East: SF-10 - Single family dwelling
• West: SF-10 - Single-family dwelling
Annual Average Daily Traffic: Bragg Boulevard: 22,000 (2021)
Letters Mailed: 161
Land Use Plans:
With the adoption of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan: Future Land Use Map & Plan on May 26, 2020, all properties within the city limits as well as properties identified as being in the Municipal Influence Area (MIA) are subject to this plan.
According to the Plan, it is recommended that this portion of the city should be developed as Medium Density Residential (MDR). Medium Density Residential calls for primarily single-family subdivisions on small lots with duplexes and townhomes interspersed.
Issues/Analysis:
History:
The subject property was annexed into the city in 1951 and has remained undeveloped since at least the late 1960’s.
Surrounding Area:
The surrounding area is primarily a subdivision consisting of single-family dwellings on 10,000-square-foot lots. The Cottages on Elm development is located to the west of the subject property. The Cottages on Elm development consists of two-to-four family dwellings. There is a city park located at the intersection of Stamper Road and McGougan Road. At the intersection of Stamper Road and Rogers Drive, there is a church and an adult day health center.
Rezoning Request:
Land within the City is generally classified by the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) to be within one of many base zoning districts. Land may be reclassified to one of several comparable zoning districts in accordance with Section 30-2.C.
The applicant has requested to rezone a single parcel from Single Family Residential 10 (SF-10) to Single Family Residential 6 (SF-6). The Single Family Residential 6 zoning district is intended to accommodate single family developments at a moderate density as well as two-to-four family dwellings, single family attached dwellings, and zero lot line development. The primary difference between the existing and proposed zoning districts is density. The Single Family Residential 10 zoning district focuses on single family developments at a moderate density while the Single Family Residential 6 zoning district accommodates single family developments at a high density while integrating two-to-four family dwellings. Both zoning districts allow for single family dwellings as a use by right. Any use beyond a single-family house in either zoning district would require a Special Use Permit approved by the City Council.
Straight Zoning:
The request is for a straight zoning from Single Family Residential 10 (SF-10) to Single Family Residential 6 (SF-6).
The Single-Family Residential 6 (SF-6) District is established and intended to accommodate principally single-family detached residential development at moderate densities that are designed to respond to environmental and site conditions. It also accommodates two-to-four-family dwellings, single-family attached, and zero lot line development.
The reclassification of land to a base zoning district without conditions allows all the uses that are shown on the attached Use Table taken from the UDO. The Zoning Commission may not consider conditions or restrictions on the range of allowable uses, use standards, development intensities, development standards, and other applicable regulations.
Land Use Plan Analysis:
According to the Future Land Use Map & Plan, it is recommended that this portion of the city should be developed as Medium Density Residential (MDR). Medium Density Residential calls for primarily single-family subdivisions on small lots with duplexes and townhomes interspersed.
Consistency and Reasonableness Statements:
The Future Land Use Plan also sets forth written goals, policies, and strategies. This application does follow the City’s strategic, compatible growth strategies and does meet the goals of the Land Use Plan found on the attached Consistency and Reasonableness form.
Conclusion:
The proposed Single Family Residential 6 zoning district is in keeping with the Future Land Use Plan designation of Medium Density Residential. The SF-6 zoning district allows for the uses and density called for in the Medium Density Residential areas. Medium Density Residential is defined in the Future Land Use Plan as “primarily single-family residential neighborhoods with small lots and duplexes or townhomes interspersed”
The small size of the subject property would limit expansive development such as multi-family dwellings (apartments) that are not in keeping with the surrounding area. Viable uses for the subject property would be single family and two-to-four family dwellings. The site would allow for these types of development while still being able to accommodate the development standards of the Unified Development Ordinance.
While this request may be considered spot zoning, it is likely not illegal spot zoning as it is in keeping with the Future Land Use Plan and the difference in the zoning districts is very modest. Ultimate determination regarding spot zoning is made within the court system.
Budget Impact:
There is not an immediate budgetary impact but there will be an economic impact associated with this rezoning that will occur due to taxes collected in the future.
Options:
1. Approval of the map amendment to SF-6 as presented based on the evidence submitted and finds that the rezoning is consistent with the Future Land Use Plan as demonstrated by the attached consistency and reasonableness statement (recommended).
2. Approval of the map amendment to a more restrictive zoning district based on the evidence submitted and finds that the map amendment would be consistent with the Future Land Use Plan and an amended consistency statement.
3. Denies the map amendment request based on the evidence submitted and finds that the map amendment is inconsistent with the Future Land Use Plan.
Recommended Action:
The Professional Planning Staff recommends that the City Council move to APPROVE of the map amendment to SF-6 based on the following:
• The proposed zoning map amendment implements the policies adopted in the Future Land Use Plan (FLUP), and those policies found in the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). The Future Land Use Plan calls for the subject property to be developed as Medium Density Residential (MDR).
• The uses permitted by the proposed change in zoning district classification and standards apply to such uses are appropriate in the immediate area of the land to be reclassified due to the existing zoning and uses surrounding this property; and
• There are no other factors that will substantially affect public health, safety, morals, or general welfare.
Note: The Zoning Commission denied this rezoning request at their December meeting. This item was brought to City Council on appeal.
Attachments:
1. Plan Application
2. Aerial Notification Map
3. Zoning Map
4. Land Use Plan Map
5. Subject Property
6. Surrounding Property Photos
7. Consistency and Reasonableness Statement Approval
8. Consistency and Reasonableness Statement Denial
9. Powerpoint