Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Drainage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears downzoning proposal for Concord-area tract amid Ashbury sinkhole and drainage concerns
Summary
Planning staff presented a rezoning request to downzone a 10.04-acre C2 parcel south of Concord Drive to R2A single-family to reduce development density. Staff recommended approval but council members and staff flagged existing drainage, FEMA floodplain, and the Ashbury sinkhole as major constraints.
Planning staff on June 26 reported on a request (case Z282025) to rezone a 10.04-acre parcel south of Concord Drive from C2 general commercial to R2A single-family residential. Staff recommended approval, characterizing the rezoning as a downzoning that would reduce the tract's maximum development potential from an estimated 120'160 multifamily units (under C2) to roughly 39'46 single-family units under R2A, with the applicant's sketch showing 39 lots.
Planning presenter Mr. Tyndall said the property is wooded with varying topography and that a small portion of the northwest corner lies in FEMA-mapped floodplain; he also flagged a potential "blue-line" stream on site. "This area does drain to the Ashbury Sinkhole," Tyndall said, noting the sinkhole is FEMA mapped and that proper drainage coordination is required for any development.
Public-safety and street-department concerns were raised. Councilman Shekinah and other members questioned the track record of the Ashbury basin and whether the sinkhole and nearby drainage have produced flooding in adjacent neighborhoods; City staff and Mr. Smith (street/engineering staff) said the area has experienced high water levels in the past and that the sinkhole receives flows from a broad area, including Concord and Meadowbrook. "Ultimately, saw water very near the doorstep of Fire Station 6," Smith said, describing historic high-water events in the basin.
Staff and council members said any development will be required to maintain or reduce existing flow rates and likely must detain or retain substantial runoff; Tyndall warned that detention requirements could reduce the number of developable lots shown on the sketch. Councilman McLaughlin and others emphasized the known drainage constraints as a reason the site has not previously developed.
The planning commission recommended approval and staff characterized the measure as aligning with the comprehensive plan by matching the suburban neighborhood land-use designation for much of the tract. Council members asked that any subdivision application be circulated to departments for stormwater, fire-rescue access, and other reviews before final approval.
