|
Information |
TITLE: |
Public Hearing, Consideration, and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2023-20: An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Flagstaff, amending the Flagstaff Zoning Map to rezone approximately 1.17 acres of real property located at 1899 S Woodlands Village Boulevard from the Light Industrial Open (LI-O) zone with the Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) to the Highway Commercial (HC) zone with the Resource Protection Overlay (RPO), providing for severability, authority for clerical corrections, and establishing an effective date. |
STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: |
At the June 20, 2023, Council Meeting:
1) Hold the Public Hearing
2) Read Ordinance No. 2023-20 by title only for the first time
3) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2023-20 by title only (if approved above)
At the July 3, 2023, Council Meeting:
4) Read Ordinance No. 2023-20 by title only for the final time
5) City Clerk reads Ordinance No. 2023-20 by title only (if approved above)
6) Adopt Ordinance 2023-20.
|
Executive Summary: |
Direct to Ordinance Zoning Map Amendment requested by John Reddell Architects, on behalf of the property owner Trampus Mansker, of approximately 1.17 acres located at 1899 S Woodlands Village Boulevard from the Light Industrial Open (LI-O) zone with the Resource Protection Overlay (RPO) to the Highway Commercial (HC) zone with the Resource Protection Overlay (RPO). |
Financial Impact: |
No financial impacts are anticipated with this request. |
Policy Impact: |
There are no policy impacts affiliated with this request. |
Connection to PBB Priorities/Objectives, Carbon Neutrality Plan & Regional Plan: |
Priority Based Budget Key Community Priorities and Objectives
Achieve a well-maintained community through comprehensive & equitable code compliance, & development that is compatible with community values.
Promote, protect, & enhance a healthy, sustainable environment & its natural resources.
Carbon Neutrality Plan
WS-3 Continue to Support water conservation efforts across the Flagstaff Community
HF-1 Protect existing forests, resources, and meaningful open spaces.
EP-2 Support the adaptation efforts of local businesses as the climate changes and the economic landscape shifts.
Regional Plan
See attached Planning & Zoning Commission staff report for full analysis. |
Has There Been Previous Council Decision on This: |
There has been no previous Council decision on this application. |
Options and Alternatives: |
The City Council may approve the ordinance as proposed, approve the ordinance with modified conditions, or deny the ordinance. |
Background and History: |
The applicant, John Reddell Architects, is requesting a Direct to Ordinance Zoning Map Amendment on behalf of the property owner, Trampus Mansker, to rezone approximately 1.17 acres from the LI-O zone with an RPO to the HC zone with an RPO located at 1899 S Woodlands Village Boulevard. This amendment would allow the expansion of an existing use that became legal non-conforming with the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance in 2011. At the time this property was developed, in 2002, the property was zoned Light Industrial (LI) and both a carwash and lube shop were permitted uses.
The subject property is a corner lot located at the intersection of University Avenue and Woodlands Village Boulevard. The existing development fronts University Avenue which is the shorter street frontage on this lot and is sited closest to the interior lot line away from Woodlands Village Boulevard. Primary access to the site is from Woodlands Village Boulevard. Rows of vacuums are located along the Woodlands Village Boulevard frontage. All existing vegetation will be maintained on this site. The applicant proposes to remove the lube shop component (1,568 square feet) of the existing use and expand the carwash by 980 square feet.
In the future, any redevelopment of the site will need to conform to the standards of the HC zone and any regulations of the Flagstaff Zoning Code in place at the time, regarding lighting, site design, architectural design standards, site planning design standards, signage standards, etc. The site was developed before the adoption of the current Zoning Code, any new development will be required to conform with all regulations of the City in place at the time of redevelopment. |
Key Considerations: |
Zoning Map Amendment Findings
An application for a Zoning Map Amendment shall be submitted to the Planning Director and shall be reviewed and a recommendation prepared. The Planning Director’s recommendation shall be transmitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission in the form of a staff report prior to a scheduled public hearing. The recommendation shall include: an evaluation of the consistency and conformance of the proposed amendment with the goals and policies of the General Plan and any applicable specific plans; the grounds for the recommendation based on the standards and purposes of the zones set forth in Section 10-40.20 (Establishment of Zones) of the Zoning Code; and whether the amendment should be granted, granted with conditions to mitigate anticipated impacts caused by the proposed development, or denied.
The following findings will be analyzed specific to the approved site plan and consider if the site were to be redeveloped entirely under the HC zone standards.
Zoning Map Amendments shall be evaluated based on the following findings:
A. Finding #1:
The proposed amendment must be found to be consistent with and in conformance with the goals and policies of the General Plan and any applicable specific plans. If the application is not consistent with the General Plan, and any other applicable specific plan, the applicable plan must be amended in compliance with the procedures established in Chapter 11-10 of the City Code (Title 11: General Plans and Subdivisions) prior to considering the proposed amendment.
See Planning & Zoning Staff Summary.
B. Finding #2
To meet the finding, the proposed amendment must be determined not to be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City of Flagstaff (the “City”) and will add to the public good as described in the General Plan.
Staff believes that the proposed project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare so long as it is developed in accordance with all codes and requirements.
C. Finding #3
To meet the finding, the affected site must be determined to be physically suitable in terms of design, location, shape, size, and operating characteristics; and the provision of public and emergency vehicle access, public services, and utilities must ensure that the requested zone designation and the proposed or anticipated uses and/or development will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the property is located.
Staff believes that the proposed application meets this finding. The Inter-Division Staff reviewed the application and concluded that the site was suitable for the proposed development. The IDS team based its conclusion on the review of all applicable codes and requirements. No impact analyses were required for this site.
For all future redevelopment, Staff would review the proposed project through the IDS Review Process to ensure it is in conformance with all current codes. If any issues arise that could endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the property or improvements in the vicinity then further studies and analyses will be required. |
Community Involvement: |
Community benefits and considerations reltaed to this request are addressed in more detail in the attached Planning & Zoning Commission Staff Report date June 14, 2023. |
Expanded Options and Alternatives: |
Public hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council are conducted in conjunction with requests for Zoning Map Amendments. In accordance with Arizona State Statute, notice of the public hearing was provided by placing an ad in the Arizona Daily Sun, posting notices on the property, and mailing a notice to all property owners within 300 feet of the site excluding rights-of-ways.
The applicant held one on-site neighborhood meeting regarding this case on April 10th at 6:00 p.m. The architect, the property owners, and one neighboring business owner attended the meeting. The neighboring business owner showed his support for the proposed redevelopment. The second required meeting was waived by the Planning Director. Staff has not received any comments from the public as of the writing of this report. |
|
|