2003-34 REZONING PROPERTY - 3231 EAST MOUND ROAD

Home Browse Search

Excerpts from Plan Commission Minutes of June 5, 2003 Cal. No. 03-26 Petition of JEFFERY A. WALKER to rezone the premises at 3231 EAST MOUND ROAD from R-3 Single Family Residence District to B-2 Commercial District. Ms. Suzan Stickle,Planner, was sworn in by Mrs.Henderson. Ms. Stickle presented the recommendation of staff: The subject petition requests rezoning to B-2 Commercial District to allow for the development of a retail nursery as well as a garden center/coffee shop. The subject site is approximately 3.5 acres and contains an existing structure, nonfunctioning pool and dilapidated miniature golf course. There are utilities available at the site. The surrounding zoning includes R-3 Single Family Residence District, R-1 Single Family Residence District and O-1 Office District. The proposed rezoning is not compatible with the adjacent residential zoning in the area The creation of a B-2 Commercial District could have a negative impact on the surrounding neighborhoods. The access to the property is difficult due to the intersection of East Mound Road and Illinois Route 48. This could create traffic congestion problems in the area if it were rezoned to B-2 Commercial District. Notwithstanding the petitioner's intended uses, rezoning must be judged based on the merits of permitted uses. Rezoning could lead to such incompatible uses as: commercial fabrication; gas station or convenience store; commercially zoned property located immediately adjacent to residential property would be detrimental to the neighborhood and surrounding area. The ' rezoning of the subject property is in conflict with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. While staff is supportive of reuse of the site, appropriate controls are necessary to protect the adjoining residential neighborhood. As an alternative to rezoning the property to a B-2 Commercial District, a planned development for the petitioner's use would be compatible with the adjacent neighborhood and surrounding areas. A planned development would also be in harmony with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends denial of the rezoning petition. However, if the Commission should recommend approval, the petitioner shall submit a site plan, landscaping plan and lighting plan according to the Zoning Ordinance and approved by Econornic and Urban Development and Engineering and Infrastructure. Mr. Smith asked if petitioner is amenable to a planned development. Mr.Bragg stated that petitioner was not amenable to a planned development during their most recent discussion with staff.