2002-64 REZONING PROPERTY - 1250 SOUTHSIDE DRIVE

Home Browse Search

Excerpt from Plan Commission Minutes of July 9, 2002 Cal. No. 02-31 Petition of BORCHER'S C.C., INC., 1250 Southside Drive, to rezone the premises from B-1 Neighborhood Shopping District to B-2 Commercial District. Mrs. Stewart presented the recommendation of staff: The subject property was included in an annexation of a large tract on the corner of Route 48 and Southside Drive in 1994. A pre-annexation agreement for the tract specified B-1 zoning for the subject parcel. The property was rezoned from R-1 to B-1, after annexation, in May 1994. On March 14, 2002 the petitioner was granted a variance by the Decatur Zoning Board of Appeals to allow the construction of a free standing canopy structure at 1250 Southside Drive while leaving a front yard setback of twenty (20)feet. A minimum setback of twenty-five (25) feet is required. The supporting columns for this structure are in compliance with the minimum setback requirements; only the roof is encroaching into the required front yard area. The subject site contains a 2,725 square foot commercial structure on a 50,069 (1.15 acres) square foot lot. Currently there are no other structures located on the property. The structure contains a gas station, convenience store, and restaurant. The petitioner proposes to rezone one lot totaling 1.15 acres, to B-2 Commercial District. The surrounding area is zoned B-2. The petitioner is requesting B-2 zoning because it allows for greater sign face square footage. The B-1 District limits sign area to 75 square feet,whereas the B-2 allows a sign of up to 100 square feet, or if advertising 3 or more businesses,up to 200 square feet. Staff is of the opinion that the rezoning of the lot would not have a detrimental effect to the subject site or the general area. The rezoning would be in harmony with the surrounding area, which is predominantly B-2. Based on the above analysis, staff recommends approval of the petition as submitted. Mr. Dan Carr,petitioner,was present and spoke for the petition stating that he was the owner of the subject property. Mr. Carr stated that what he was trying to achieve was self-explanatory. He stated that he had run into problems with the new Sign Ordinance and was present to request rezoning of the property. There were no objectors present. It was moved and seconded (Smith/Sands)to forward Cal. No. 02-31 to City Council with recommendation for approval. Motion carried unanimously.