2001-73 REZONING PROPERTY - 500 BLOCK OF BRUSH COLLEGE ROAD

Home Browse Search

Plan Commission Minutes of October 4 2001 'I Excerpts from , Cal. No. 01-40 Petition of DAVID ELLIOTT, 6375 East State Route 36, to rezone the ' premises in the 500 BLOCK NORTH BRUSH COLLEGE ROAD �, from R-6 Multiple Dwelling District to B-2 Commercial District. I Mrs. Stewart presented the recommendation of staff: I�! The subject property contains a 67,285.5 (232.5'x 289.4') square foot lot and is currently vacant. There is a 12"water main located at Brush College Road and sanitary sewer is also available. �� Land use to the north and east is residential, to the west is an elementary school and offices and I commercial uses are located to the south. I The petitioner proposes to rezone three lots totaling 1.54 acres, to B-2, Commercial District. The I,I petitioner has indicated that the lots will be used for future commercial development. Decatur Urban Land Use Plan shows subject property as high density residential. To date, no i multifamily units have been constructed on the R-6 properties. I The property owner owns the adjacent property which lies to the south and north of the subject II property. There will remain an R-6 buffer to the north between the proposed B-2 and the lot zoned R-3 to the corner of Cerro Gordo and Brush College Road. Based on commercial zoning and businesses in the vicinity, staff considers the proposed rezoning a logical extension of the B-2 District. Based on the above analysis, staff recommends approval of the petition as submitted. Mr. John asked about the R-6 buffer. Mrs. Stewart stated that Lot 39 is zoned R-6 and Lots 40, 41 and 42 are zoned B-2. Mr. Phillip Cochran, Consulting Engineer,was present and spoke for the petition representing Mr. Elliott. Mr. Cochran stated that the petitioner operates the East End Grill and wants to upgrade the property. Mr.Elliott owns up to Lot 39; Lot 39 remains zoned R-6 and is not part of the petition. The topography is such that Lot 39 is not buildable as there is a significant drainage way there and a steep drop off. There were no objectors present. Mr. Setina asked if there would be any problems as there is a school across the street. Mr. Cochran stated that there is a crosswalk with protection that would be taken into consideration and would not be jeopardized. It was moved and seconded(John/Peck) to forward Cal. No. 01-40 to City Council with recommendation for approval. Motion carried at a vote of seven to one with Commissioner Setina voting nay.