08-26-1996 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r I ^ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: June 20, 1996 ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: Referral of Development Proposal to the Planning Commission for Sketch Plan Review For Property Located at 2380 Shad>-\vood Road (former Grace Baptist Church Site) Involving a Rezoning of Residential Propert>* to Commercial List of Exhibits A - Site Plan B - Comprehensive Plan C - Street Elevation John O’Sullivan and Erwin Smith propose the submittal of conceptual plans for the commercial development of residential property to the immediate north of the former Martin Service Station property. The proposal consists of two structures, single stor>’ bank with roofed drive-in teller facilities and two story office building. Review Exhibit C, the applicants propose a mLxed office use with limited retail outlets or store fronts at the lower level. They have suggested retail uses such as a pharmacy, floral shop, card or specialty shops. The only district that lists office uses with retail is the B-5 but the purpose of the B-5 zoning district is to provide businesses that supply commodities or perform a service primarily for residents in the surrounding neighborhood, w’hich businesses are not high traffic generators and do not necessitate an inordinate amount of hardcover. The code notes the district may adjoin residential districts or other business districts which are subject to more restrictive controls. The code goes on to note that because of the location of the B-5 district only found in Navarre, the uses are limited in order to minimize hardcover and the generation of traffic because of historic traffic problems in Navarre. The proposed intensity of uses may pose a conflict with the B-5 zoning district. All-*/, in'* proposal involves two principal structures on one parcel. This requires a planned unit development (P.U.D.) The City code does not include the P.U.D. option for the Navarre area. Applicants have also been advised that the comprehensive vacation of Navarre Lane was not approved by the Council and they advised that they would once again seek to vacate the remainder of Navarre Lane as originally proposed and that they would be willing to grant a bike trail/pedestrian walkway easement through the property. In fact they noted that the walkway or bike trail could be located within the landscaped pond area and outlet at the north of the propert>' rather tlicn at the busy intersection.