Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOmega_PB staff reportSTAFF REPORT Page 1 of 6 R REZONING STAFF REPORT Case: PLAN2004-0002 PLAN2004-0003 Jay Sikes, Mgr. of Planning Services jsikes@harnett.org Phone: (910) 893-7525 Fax: (910) 814-8278 Planning Board: July 6, 2020 County Commissioners: July 20, 2020 Requesting a Rezoning from Commercial to RA-20M Applicant Information Owner of Record: Applicant: Name: Omega X, LLC Name: Omega X, LLC Address: 5506 Yadkin Rd Address: 550 Yadkin Rd City/State/Zip: Fayetteville, NC 28303 City/State/Zip: Fayetteville, NC 28303 Property Description PIN(s): 0513-69-2523 & 0513-68-5465 Acreage: Approx 14.75 ac (68.64 total) Address/SR No.: Ray Rd (SR 1121) & Rambeaut Rd (SR 1124) Township: (09) Johnsonville (10) Lillington (11) Neill’s Creek (12) Stewart’s Creek (13) Upper Little River (01) Anderson Creek (02) Averasboro (03) Barbecue (04) Black River (05) Buckhorn (06) Duke (07) Grove (08) Hectors Creek Vicinity Map STAFF REPORT Page 2 of 6 Physical Characteristics Site Description: Site is primarily undeveloped. An automobile related business was on one of the parcels but all will be removed soon. The previous owner zoned this portion to Commercial in 2011 but. Surrounding Land Uses: Area land uses consist of individual single-family residences Vacant/undeveloped and a few businesses. Also, single family residential uses that consist of stick-built & manufactured homes. Services Available Water: Public (Harnett County) Private (Well) Other: Unverified Sewer: Public (Harnett County) Private (Septic Tank) Other: unverified Transportation: Annual Daily Traffic Count: ~ 13,000 on Ray Rd Site Distances: good STAFF REPORT Page 3 of 6 Zoning District Compatibility The following is a summary list of potential uses. For all applicable uses for each Zoning district please refer to the UDO’s Table of Uses. CURRENT REQUESTED Commercial RA-20M Parks & Rec X Natural Preserves X X Bona Fide Farms X Single Family X Manufactured Homes, Design Regulated X Manufactured Homes X Multi-Family X Institutional Commercial Services X Retail X Wholesale X Industrial X Manufacturing X Land Use Classification Compatibility ZONING LAND USE Commercial Med Density Res Parks & Rec X X Natural Preserves X X Bona Fide Farms X X Single Family X Manufactured Homes, Design Regulated X Manufactured Homes X Multi-Family X Institutional X Commercial Service X X Retail X X Wholesale Industrial Manufacturing _________________________________________________________________________________ STAFF REPORT Page 4 of 6 Site Photographs Site view from Rambeaut Rd Site view from Ray Rd Site, adjacent property & Ray Rd south view Site and Ray Rd & Rambeaut Rd intersection view STAFF REPORT Page 5 of 6 Site and Ray Rd & Rambeaut Rd intersection north view Site and Ray Rd north view Evaluation Suggested Statement-of-Consistency (Staff concludes that…) As stated in the evaluation, the requested rezoning to RA-20M is compatible with the County’s Land Use and would not harm the surrounding community based on the existing residential uses. Therefore, it is recommended that this rezoning request be APPROVED. Yes No The IMPACT to the adjacent property owners and the surrounding community is reasonable, and the benefits of the rezoning outweigh any potential inconvenience or harm to the community. REASONING: The impact to the surrounding community is reasonable, as the requested zoning district is same as adjacent properties. Yes No The requested zoning district is COMPATIBLE with the existing Land Use Classification. REASONING: The requested zoning is compatible with the overall land use classification of Medium Density Residential. MDR could have a mixed residential base with average lot sizes where public utilizes are planned and utilized. Yes No The proposal does ENHANCE or maintain the public health, safety and general welfare. REASONING: The requested zoning to RA-20M would maintain the public health, safety and general welfare due to the existing residential uses within the area. Yes No The request is for a SMALL SCALE REZONING and should be evaluated for reasonableness. REASONING: Due to the size of the tract, this application does not have to be evaluated for Small Scale Rezoning. STAFF REPORT Page 6 of 6 Review Worksheets TRADITIONAL STANDARDS OF REVIEW The Planning Board shall consider and make recommendations to the County Board of Commissioners concerning each proposed zoning district. The following policy guidelines shall be followed by the Planning Board concerning zoning districts and no proposed zoning district will receive favorable recommendation unless: Yes No A. The proposal will place all property similarly situated in the area in the same category, or in appropriate complementary categories. Yes No B. There is convincing demonstration that all uses permitted under the proposed district classification would be in the general public interest and not merely in the interest of the individual or small group. Yes No C. There is convincing demonstration that all uses permitted under the proposed district classification would be appropriate in the area included in the proposed change. (When a new district designation is assigned, any use permitted in the district is allowable, so long as it meets district requirements, and not merely uses which applicants state they intend to make of the property involved.) Yes No D. There is convincing demonstration that the character of the neighborhood will not be materially and adversely affected by any use permitted in the proposed change. Yes No E. The proposed change is in accordance with the comprehensive plan and sound planning practices. GRANTING THE REZONING REQUEST Motion to grant the rezoning upon finding that the rezoning is reasonable based on All of the above findings of fact A-E being found in the affirmative and that the rezoning advances the public interest. DENYING THE REZONING REQUEST Motion to deny the rezoning upon finding that the proposed rezoning does not advance the public interest and is unreasonable due to the following: The proposal will not place all property similarly situated in the area in the same category, or in appropriate complementary categories. There is not convincing demonstration that all uses permitted under the proposed district classification would be in the general public interest and not merely in the interest of the individual or small group. There is not convincing demonstration that all uses permitted under the proposed district classification would be appropriate in the area included in the proposed change. (When a new district designation is assigned, any use permitted in the district is allowable, so long as it meets district requirements, and not merely uses which applicants state they intend to make of the property involved.) There is not convincing demonstration that the character of the neighborhood will not be materially and adversely affected by any use permitted in the proposed change. The proposed change is not in accordance with the comprehensive plan and sound planning practices. The proposed change was not found to be reasonable for a small scale rezoning