TO: Mayor and City Council
THRU: Kelly Strickland - Assistant City Manager
Dr. Gerald Newton, AICP - Development Services Director
FROM: Demetrios Moutos, Planner I
Craig Harmon, Senior Planner
DATE: September 22, 2025
RE:Title
P25-47: The City of Fayetteville is requesting initial zoning from Planned Neighborhood Development (PND, County) to Conditional Community Commercial (CC/CZ, City) for one contiguous parcel totaling approximately 40.54 acres. The subject property is located on the southern side of Carvers Falls Road at 430 Carvers Falls Road and an unaddressed portion of Carvers Falls Road. The parcel can be further identified by Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 0540184339000. Title
end
end
COUNCIL DISTRICT(S):
Council District(s)
1 - Mayor Pro Tem Kathy Jensen
b
Relationship To Strategic Plan:
This conditional rezoning would allow a City-owned site on Carvers Falls Road to be used by the Public Works Commission (PWC) for a fenced, ~35-acre solar utility field with preserved tree buffers, minimal lighting, and no staffed buildings; operations are passive/automated, with only periodic maintenance and minimal trip generation (continuous 24/7 operation of solar infrastructure, not people). The analysis below maps the proposal to each Strategic Plan goal, noting where it advances, supports/neutral, or neutralizes stated objectives and priorities.
GOAL I - Safe & Secure Community (Objectives: emergency preparedness, traffic/pedestrian safety, crime reduction, community engagement).
Supports/neutral. The use is low-intensity, with little on-site activity and negligible traffic, which is consistent with traffic and public safety aims and should not materially increase calls for service. There is no direct nexus to GOAL I priorities centered on violence reduction and mental/behavioral health response; impacts are largely neutral to the plan’s GOAL I performance measures.
GOAL II - Diverse & Viable Economy (Objectives: diversify tax base; invest in places; leverage partnerships for jobs; sustain development climate).
Supports (indirectly) and advances partnerships. Because the property is City-owned and used for public utility purposes, it will not directly expand the ad valorem tax base (Objective 2.1). However, the project leverages a core City partnership - PWC is explicitly identified as a GOAL II collaborator - to deliver resilient local energy infrastructure that underpins business climate and competitiveness (Objective 2.4), aligning with GOAL II’s focus on development climate and corridor appearance/market vitality measures.
GOAL III - City Investment Planning (Objectives: enhance connectivity/traffic flow/stormwater; manage future growth and strategic land use; sustain timely development services).
Advances. Siting a passive utility use with strong vegetative buffering and limited impervious surfaces aligns with Objective 3.2’s focus on managing growth and strategic land use, and generally supports stormwater objectives under 3.1. This alignment is further reinforced by the adopted Future Land Use Plan’s statement that its goals implement Strategic Plan GOAL III - strategic land use policy - through coordinated infrastructure decisions with PWC. Relevant GOAL III performance metrics, such as preparedness to manage growth and timely plan reviews, offer a framework for tracking implementation, although the project itself does not require extensive capital street work.
GOAL IV - Live, Work, & Recreate (Objectives: quality transit/airport; recreation/cultural opportunities; sidewalks/trails/bikes; clean & beautiful community; great neighborhoods; reduce poverty/homelessness).
Supports/neutral. The project preserves a substantial natural buffer and commits to downward-directed, minimal lighting and enhanced streetscape landscaping - measures that help maintain corridor appearance and a “clean and beautiful community” (Objective 4.4). It does not directly address transit, parks programming, or housing objectives, but is compatible with GOAL IV performance measures related to green space and corridor cleanliness on a maintenance basis.
GOAL V - Financially Sound City (Objectives: strong financial management; innovation/technology; workforce excellence).
Advances Strategic Priority 4 (Use City-owned property to enhance economic growth opportunities). Utilizing City-owned land for long-life, resilient utility infrastructure is consistent with the Priority 4 action to “use innovative solutions to leverage city-owned property for growth while addressing public needs”. While the Priority’s KPI set includes returning assets to the tax rolls, this specific site selection favors a public-purpose utility over disposition, which is still congruent with the Priority’s O&M burden (PWC owns/operates), aligning with prudent resource stewardship under GOAL V.
GOAL VI - Collaborative Government (Objectives: collaboration with business/local governments/military/stakeholders; trust & transparency; outreach/education).
Advances. The proposal is, by definition, an inter-organization partnership with PWC, a named stakeholder/collaborator in the Strategic Plan (GOAL II and GOAL VI contexts). The conditional rezoning process, with mailed notices and public hearings, supports the Plan’s emphasis on transparent engagement and customer-facing processes (GOAL VI).
Bottom line. The solar utility station strongly advances GOAL III (strategic land use/infrastructure coordination) and GOAL VI (formal collaboration with PWC), advances GOAL V Strategic Priority 4 (leveraging City property for public benefit), and supports aspects of GOAL II (business climate via infrastructure reliability) and GOAL IV (clean/beautiful corridors through buffering/landscaping). It is largely neutral relative to GOAL I and other GOAL IV social program aims. Overall, the proposal is compatible with the FY2025 Strategic Plan’s goals, priorities, and performance-management framework.
Executive Summary:
The applicant, Fayetteville Public Works Commission (PWC), requests a conditional rezoning of approximately 40.54 acres (PIN 0540184339000), owned by the City of Fayetteville, along the Carvers Falls Road corridor from Planned Neighborhood Development (PND) to CC/CZ (Community Commercial - Conditional) to allow a solar utility station. The proposal limits the site to solar energy generation and related utility infrastructure, with no occupied buildings. Improvements include roughly 35 acres of solar arrays within a secured perimeter fence, preservation of a natural tree buffer around the site, added streetscape landscaping, and minimal, downward-directed lighting. Operations are passive and continuous (24/7) with only periodic maintenance, resulting in negligible traffic and noise. Although the Future Land Use Map designates the tract as Low-Density Residential, the conditioned, passive public-utility use - with full perimeter screening - functions as a low impact neighbor and avoids retail or ‘strip’ encroachment the plan seeks to curtail.
On September 15, 2025, the Fayetteville Zoning Commission held a legislative hearing regarding this case. The Commission voted 3-1 to deny the requested initial zoning to CC/CZ. The Commission found that the applicant had not met the standards of the Consistency and Reasonableness Statement.
Background:
Owner: City of Fayetteville
Applicant: Public Works Commission (PWC) (Project Owner and primary contact is Rodney Maness)
Requested Action: Initial zoning from Planned Neighborhood Development (PND) to Conditional Community Commercial (CC/CZ)
REID #: 0540184339000
Status of Property: Vacant - no residential units or nonresidential development currently exist on the site.
Size: 40.54 acres ±
Adjoining Land Use & Zoning:
• The surrounding area is predominantly Planned Neighborhood Development (PND).
• Northeast and southwest: zoned Rural Residential (RR).
• South: zoned Planned Neighborhood Development with Conditional Use (PNDCU).
• Northwest: zoned Single-Family Residential 10 (SF-10).
Letters Mailed: 60
Land Use Plans:
The City of Fayetteville’s Future Land Use Plan serves as the primary policy document guiding rezoning decisions and long-range development patterns within the municipal limits and its influence area. It provides the framework for evaluating whether proposed zoning changes are consistent with the community’s vision for growth, balancing economic development with neighborhood stability and environmental stewardship. Within this plan, the Low Density Residential (LDR) character area is intended to preserve the form and function of traditional suburban neighborhoods, generally consisting of single-family detached housing on larger lots, complemented by open space, tree preservation, and limited neighborhood-serving amenities. The designation emphasizes maintaining a stable residential character, supporting reinvestment in existing housing stock, and ensuring that new development occurs in a manner compatible with surrounding neighborhoods and available infrastructure.
Issues/Analysis:
History:
Beginning with a 2017 City TRC review and a subsequent period of inactivity, the Carvers Falls / PWC solar concept re-emerged in June 2024 through County-initiated coordination with the City regarding annexation and permitting jurisdiction. In February-March 2025, the City confirmed that the County would lead site development review while City Traffic Services would lead access on City/NCDOT roadways (single requirement), and further stated that the City would not annex the property at that time. Concurrently, RLUAC flagged a potential glint/glare concern relative to Simmons Army Airfield and requested PWC-Fort Bragg coordination. The County processed ZON-24-0031 (described as PND to A1/CZ for ≈44.95 acres at 430 Carvers Falls Road), with Planning Board and staff recommending approval; the BOCC conducted a hearing on May 19, 2025, and denied the rezoning application, memorialized by a Final Action Notice dated May 22, 2025 (refiling not permitted until after June 18, 2026 under County ordinance). City staff compiled and forwarded the County Actions, RLUAC correspondence, access/Traffic Services processes, and the 2017 TRC packet to Planning in August 2025 for the case file.
Surrounding Area:
The subject property is a largely wooded tract on the south side of Carvers Falls Road, set between the developed Ramsey Street (U.S. 401) corridor to the west and the Cape Fear River valley to the east. North of the site, across Carvers Falls Road, the landscape reads predominantly residential: established single-family neighborhoods are interspersed with multifamily communities such as The Park Apartment Homes, and anchored by institutional uses like Cedar Falls Baptist Church. West and southwest toward Ramsey Street, the pattern intensifies into a typical suburban corridor - garden-style apartment communities (e.g., Meadowbrook and Autumn View) and neighborhood-scale commercial uses oriented to U.S. 401 and supported by the I-295 interchange just to the north. East and southeast of the subject property, the character shifts to large tracts of wooded and recreational land, including the privately owned and operated ZipQuest Waterfall & Treetop Adventure and driving range, before giving way to extensive riparian forest associated with the Cape Fear River and its floodplain.
According to the application materials, the immediate zoning context is a mix that includes Cumberland County’s Planned Neighborhood Development (PND/CZ) and Rural Residential (RR) districts, with City SF-10 mapped nearby to the northwest. The PND/CZ district is expressly set up for master-planned neighborhoods that may mix residential densities with limited, neighborhood-oriented uses in a single, integrated project - intended to function as a cohesive plan with appropriate buffering, open space, and design controls. The RR district reflects the area’s rural edge: it is a low-density classification intended for traditionally rural settings - lots generally 20,000 square feet or larger - where the principle uses include single-family residential (including manufactured housing) and agriculture. Within the City, SF-10 is a low-density residential base district established primarily for single-family detached neighborhoods; it also accommodates certain flexible formats - such as zero-lot-line layouts and two- to four-family dwellings designed to present as single family - subject to the City’s development standards.
Taken together, the on-the-ground land uses and these mapped districts illustrate a transitional setting: suburban single-family and multifamily neighborhoods and corridor commercial activity to the west, giving way to programmed recreation and significant natural open space to the east. That transition - especially the proximity to the river corridor - underscores the importance of site design that respects the area’s environmental context while aligning new investment with the surrounding neighborhood fabric and regional access provided by Ramsey Street and I-295.
Rezoning Request:
UDO §30-2.C.4 establishes Conditional Rezoning as a legislative tool that applies a base zoning district with mutually agreed conditions to ensure consistency with adopted plans and to address anticipated impacts. Only the owner(s) of all land proposed may initiate an application, which follows the Common Review Procedures and may include a request for site-specific vested rights under N.C.G.S 160D-108.1. The Technical Review Committee reviews the submittal before staff completes its report. The Zoning Commission then holds a legislative hearing. It adopts a recommendation - approval (with or without applicant-agreed revisions), approval with a reduced area, or denial - along with plan consistency and reasonableness statements. Any aggrieved party may appeal the Zoning Commission’s recommendation to the City Council within ten days. If no appeal is filed and the recommendation is approval, Council may approve at its next regular meeting without another hearing; if the recommendation is denial and unappealed, it becomes the City’s final action. If Council holds a hearing, it adopts its own consistency and reasonableness statements, and in all cases, only conditions agreed to in writing by the applicant may be imposed.
Conditions must relate to ordinance compliance, adopted plans, and mitigation of reasonably expected impacts; they may modify dimensional standards when compatible or add a limited number of otherwise non-permitted uses when compatible, and may be expressed in text and/or plans. Conditions are generally not less restrictive than the parallel base or overlay standards, and, once approved, are binding as an amendment to the UDO and Official Zoning Map. Suppose no subdivision or site plan is filed within two years of approval. In that case, the City Manager initiates rezoning back (or to another appropriate base district), with one six-month extension available for good cause if requested at least 30 days before expiration. Minor technical deviations may be approved through Administrative Adjustment; material changes (such as uses, density, or basic configuration) require a new rezoning. Approved districts are shown on the map with the base district label plus the “/CZ” suffix (e.g., CC/CZ).
Consistency and Reasonableness:
Upon approving or denying a rezoning, the decision-maker must adopt two statements: a plan consistency statement and a statement of reasonableness. The consistency statement explains whether the action aligns with all applicable City-adopted plans; if a map amendment is adopted as inconsistent, it simultaneously amends the future land use map without a separate plan amendment, and for “large-scale rezonings” (G.S. 160D-602(b)), the statement may address the overall action. The consistency statement may be adopted with the rezoning motion or separately and is not subject to judicial review (G.S. 160D-605(a)). The reasonableness statement sets out why the decision is reasonable and in the public interest, considering factors such as the tract’s size and conditions, benefits and detriments to owners and neighbors, relationships to existing and proposed development, public interest, and any changed conditions (G.S. 160D-605(b)). Both statements may be adopted in a single motion.
Specifics of this Conditional Rezoning Request
The applicant proposes to condition the district as follows:
1. The only permitted use is a solar energy generation facility (major utility) and its associated utility infrastructure; no other industrial or commercial activities would be allowed.
2. Mitigate off-site impacts by.
a) Require security fencing enclosing the ±35-acre solar array.
b) Preservation of the natural tree buffer around the perimeter with added streetscape landscaping for screening.
c) Establishment and maintenance of a minimum 100-foot undisturbed vegetated buffer measured from all property lines (with disturbance allowed only for necessary drive, emergency access, and utility crossings, which must be minimized and promptly restored).
d) And the use of minimal, downward-directed lighting to reduce glare and light spill. Operations would remain passive, with limited human presence outside of periodic inspections and routine maintenance.
Technical Review Committee Feedback
The City’s TRC conducted a first-round review of the Carvers Falls Solar Utility Station and provided comments that will be addressed during the detailed site/engineering plan phase and, where applicable, through the conditional zoning conditions. Key items are summarized below for the record.
Life Safety & Emergency Access. The Fire Marshal requires Knox access, clear addressing, and emergency information on the front gate, and a minimum 20-foot clear width at the gate for apparatus access. These items will be incorporated into the final gate design and signage.
Zoning Use Standards & Security Fencing. Staff notes that a “Major Utility” must be set back at least 100 feet from all property lines; the applicant’s commitment to perimeter buffering and passive operations aligns with this standard. Security fencing may be up to eight feet in height under the UDO’s safety exemption or an approved security plan; barbed/concertina wire or electrified fencing is otherwise prohibited unless specifically authorized through that process. Final fence height and materials will be coordinated with zoning staff at site plan review.
Landscaping, Screening, and Lighting. Coordination with PWC is required to confirm that landscaping and lighting do not conflict with utility easements and to obtain PWC approval prior to TRC sign-off. A landscape plan prepared by a qualified practitioner is required and must show street trees, site/parking areas landscaping, required buffers, plant legend (species, sizes, spacing), and easements. Technical notes include minimum soil areas for tree islands (≈274 SF, 10’ width for canopy trees; ≈180 SF, 7’ width for understory trees), shrub offsets from curbs/parking overhang (≈30 inches/2.5 feet), maintenance of vehicular-use screening as a continuous 36-inch hedge, and tree installation best practices (visible root flare, proper mulching). A photometric/lighting plan is also required; light poles must be at least ~15 feet from trees. Existing vegetation may satisfy perimeter buffers subject to field verification, with supplemental plantings added if needed.
Engineering, Stormwater, and Erosion Control. An Infrastructure Permit is required via a new application. Because the project adds 20,000+ SF of impervious area, it must comply with the Stormwater Control Ordinance, limiting post-development one-year and ten-year peak discharges to pre-development rates or to the downstream system’s capacity, whichever is more restrictive. The site lies in a protected watershed and is limited to 70% impervious coverage. An Erosion and Sedimentation Control permit is required (site > 1 acre); the NCDEQ-approved plan must be submitted before land disturbance or Infrastructure Permit issuance.
Military Compatibility (RLUAC). RLUAC is preparing a formal comment letter for P25-47 and anticipates recommending at least one condition: that PWC transmit the final site plan/layout to RLUAC and Fort Bragg prior to permitting, so any changes - particularly panel removals/relocations prompted by the larger perimeter buffer - can be checked against the conclusions of the prior glare study. PWC has indicated the plan remains generally the same aside from a wider buffer that may reduce and shift some panels, with panel orientation unchanged; RLUAC does not expect issues but seeks verification after conferring with Fort Bragg. A letter reflecting this coordination and the requested condition is expected following RLUAC committee review.
Process & Coordination. Standard TRC notes emphasize that development must conform to the approved site/engineering/utility plans; revisions trigger re-submittal; and any future development requires additional review. The City’s Special Project Coordinator (Development Services Ombudsman Manager) is available to assist with inter-departmental coordination as the project advances.
Implications for the Conditional Zoning. Collectively, these comments reinforce the appropriateness of conditioning the district to: (1) adhere to the “Major Utility” 100-foot perimeter separation; (2) maintain and supplement the natural perimeter buffer (with an added undisturbed buffer where applicable); (3) submit PWC-coordinated landscape and lighting plans; (4) meet life-safety access standards (Knox access, addressing, 20-foot clear gate): and (5) comply with stormwater/erosion requirements and provide military compatibility confirmation of the glare findings. These items are implementable at TRC and align with a passive, well-screened utility use.
Note: All TRC items will be resolved during the detailed plan/permitting phase; no occupancy or construction may proceed until required approvals are obtained.
Land Use Plan Analysis:
A front-to-back reading of Fayetteville’s Future Land Use Plan (FLUP) shows that rezonings are to be judged against both the map and the policy text, with this document superseding older small-area plans and directing staff, boards, and Council to review “all land use petitions… for consistency with the future land use map as well as the goals, policies, and strategies of this plan.” The FLUP is organized to move from public input and character-area mapping, through goals and policies, to implementation steps and a community profile, and it explicitly frames itself as the City’s current, citywide land-use guidance.
Public engagement emphasized conserving natural areas, building out greenways and trails, and avoiding additional strip-style commercial development. Residents’ “Keep/Toss/Create” results called for preserving trees and green space, advancing river and creek greenways, and “tossing” strip development and similar patterns; greenways were repeatedly identified as a priority amenity. The proposed PWC solar facility - an unstaffed, passive utility use conditioned within CC/CZ - aligns with those preferences by avoiding new storefront activity in a neighborhood interior and by accommodating enhanced buffers and potential trail easements along mapped open-space corridors.
On the map side, the FLUP replaces a purely Euclidean approach with character areas that deliberately mix uses at appropriate scales, concentrate activity along centers and corridors (e.g., the Ramsey Street spine), and recognize rural/less-intense lands east of the Cape Fear River where utilities and soils constrain growth. In parallel, a GIS-based suitability analysis identifies focal commercial/industrial nodes and highlights environmental constraints that should guide siting and intensity. The subject tract is mapped as Low-Density Residential (LDR) with adjoining Park/Open Space corridors; reserving the entitlement to a screened, low-impact solar utility maintains the neighborhood function of LDR while avoiding the strip-commercial encroachment that the plan and the public input caution against.
The goals and policies in Section 3 provide the primary consistency tests. Goal 1 and LU-1 call for growth and investment in serviced areas, coordinated with utilities - explicitly instructing the City to work with PWC to plan facilities and to use the FLUP as a guide for infrastructure expansion, while limiting service extensions toward Rural areas east of the river. A municipal solar installation is a public-purpose utility that strengthens grid resilience without generating retail traffic or drawing new service lines into unserved rural territory, and is therefore consistent with LU-1’s intent.
Goal 2 and LU-2 encourage strategic economic development, including preparing sites for technology industries and coordinating necessary utility, transportation, and stormwater upgrades. This project is, in essence, a City/PWC technology-infrastructure investment that supports the local economy’s reliability and cost structure while being tightly conditioned to prevent unrelated commercial uses.
Goal 3 seeks reinvestment in strip corridors and dissuades further proliferation of strip commercial patterns. Coupled with the “Toss” feedback about strip development, the plan points intensity toward designated nodes rather than interior neighborhoods. Because the solar use generates no retail frontage or customer trips, it does not dilute the plan’s corridor-and-center strategy.
Goal 4 focuses on safe, stable, and attractive neighborhoods; the policy framework under “Safe, Stable, and Attractive Neighborhoods” expects transitions, high-quality site edges, and compatibility. The offered conditions - evergreen screening and tree preservation, down-shielded/security-only lighting, controlled construction hours/haul routes, and a decommissioning plan - create a predictable, low-impact edge consistent with this goal.
Environmental stewardship and resiliency are central to Goal 5 and LU-8 through LU-10. The plan calls for preserving open space and unique natural features, building a connected greenway system, controlling stormwater to mimic pre-development hydrology, and carefully managing floodplain development - discouraging uses that involve hazardous material storage and recognizing floodplains’ “best (and safest)” function as floodwater storage with compatible passive recreation. In practice, that means enhanced riparian buffers, LID stormwater, prohibition of hazardous-materials storage, and reserving greenway easements where alignments are identified - each of which is appropriate to condition here.
Goal 6 and LU-11 through LU-13 address compatibility with Fort Bragg and coordination with major institutions. They recommend limiting high-intensity development in sensitive JLUS areas, providing notice for major actions near the base, and continuing routing intergovernmental coordination. The passive, low-profile character of a solar array presents no congregation of height issues; continued courtesy coordination remains consistent with these policies.
The implementation chapter then instructs staff to use the plan to guide decisions, to review rezonings for consistency with both the map and the policy text, to refine development codes, to coordinate across departments and with partners, and to update the map as decisions are made. Approval of a narrowly conditioned, public-purpose utility that secures buffers, LID stormwater, hazardous-materials prohibitions, and greenway accommodations is an archetypal “use the plan to guide decisions” action - and it does so without eroding the FLUP’s center-based pattern along Ramsey Street.
Finally, the Community Profile and suitability work provide the empirical backdrop: they document environmental constraints (including floodplain and hydric soils) and define how intensity should be placed away from neighborhoods while concentrating activity in appropriate nodes - principles that a screened, low-impact solar utility respects.
Conclusion:
Read holistically - front matter, public input, map and character-area intent, goals and policies (LU-1 through LU-13), implementation guidance, and the community profile - the FLUP supports a finding of general consistency for a CC/CZ rezoning that is strictly limited to a passive solar energy facility and conditioned to: preserve and enhance riparian/tree buffers; employ low-impact stormwater that mirrors pre-development hydrology; prohibit hazardous-materials storage; provide greenway easements if requested; minimize lighting and operational impacts; and restore the site at decommissioning. This approach advances the plan’s utility coordination and resiliency agenda, protects neighborhood character and open-space systems, and avoids the strip-commercial encroachment the plan seeks to curtail, all while keeping activity focused in the City’s intended centers and corridors.
Budget Impact:
Adoption of the conditional rezoning is expected to have a negligible impact on the City’s General Fund. The solar facility would be financed, built, and operated by PWC as an enterprise utility; routine City costs are limited to standard application processing, which is offset by fees. No City capital outlay is anticipated: the use does not require new public roads, buildings, or utility extensions, and construction-phase controls (erosion, stormwater, traffic) are the applicant’s responsibility. Given the facility’s passive, fenced nature, incremental demands on police, fire, and sanitation should be minimal and absorbable. Because the site remains in public ownership for a public utility use, no new property-tax revenue is expected unless the property is later conveyed or otherwise returned to the tax rolls.
From a Strategic Plan and fiscal stewardship standpoint, the request maintains a low-risk budget posture by leveraging enterprise funding while modestly supporting broader objectives around resilient infrastructure. The key trade-off is opportunity cost: reserving the site for a public utility use forecloses near-term private development that could produce ad valorem growth. Council can weigh that policy choice against non-fiscal benefits (grid reliability, sustainability). Bottom line: no identified new City capital commitments, negligible operating impact, and fiscal effects - if any - occurring primarily within PWC’s enterprise budget.
Options:
The City Council may take one of the following actions on this request:
1. Approve the application subject to the conditions included in the application;
2. Approve the application subject to any revised or additional conditions agreed to by the applicant, in writing;
3. Approve the application with a reduction in the area included; or
4. Deny the application.
Recommended Action::Recommended Action
The Planning Staff recommends that the City Council move to approve the proposed conditional rezoning to Community Commercial (CC/CZ), subject to the applicant’s agreed-upon conditions, based on the following findings:
• The request is consistent with applicable City-adopted plans, including the Future Land Use Plan and Strategic Plan goals to focus reinvestment on serviced sites and to encourage context-appropriate nonresidential uses.
• The proffered conditions (e.g., setbacks, buffering/screening, lighting limits, and facility operations/maintenance) adequately mitigate potential impacts and ensure compatibility with adjacent uses.
• Adequate public infrastructure and safe site access exist or can be provided, and remaining site-specific issues (traffic, stormwater, environmental protection) will be addressed through the City’s development review and permitting processes, avoiding undue adverse effects on public health, safety, or welfare.
The Zoning Commission denied the rezoning based their conclusion that the application did not meet the standards of the Consistency and Reasonable Statements. This denial has been appealed by PWC.
end
Attachments:
1. Plan Application
2. Aerial Notification Map
3. Zoning Map
4. Land Use Plan Map
5. Subject Property
6. Surrounding Property Photos
7. Site Plan
8. Consistency and Reasonableness Statement
9. BOCC Final Action Notice (May 22, 2025)
10. RLUAC Correspondence
11. PowerPoint
12. Notice of Appeal