Marquette planning commission recommends conditional rezoning of 1700 Division Street amid resident objections

The Marquette Planning Commission voted to recommend that the City Commission approve a conditional rezoning of the vacant parcel at 1700 Division Street from Mixed Use to General Commercial, a change that would allow a future developer to pursue uses now limited in the Mixed Use district, including a possible self‑storage proposal if it wins subsequent approvals.

City planning staff told the commission the hearing considered only the rezoning request, not a site plan or a development application. The staff report said the applicant’s conditional rezoning submittal retains most Mixed Use permitted and special uses but specifically removes many options and leaves storage uses as one of the principal differences between the existing Mixed Use district and the proposed General Commercial designation.

The rezoning request drew more than a half dozen members of the South Marquette neighborhood to the podium. Speakers who identified themselves as nearby residents said a 24‑hour self‑storage facility would bring more nighttime traffic and lighting, reduce nearby property values and be visually incompatible with the neighborhood. Robert Jensen, who said he lives at 237 Rockwood Drive and is directly across the street, told commissioners the proposal lacked details on size, hours and security and said “we object to the rezoning and installation of the self‑storage facility.”

Other residents described direct sightlines from front windows or backyards to the parcel, expressed concern about nighttime lighting and safety, and asked whether existing utility poles and a longstanding billboard would remain. Planning staff and commissioners responded that the parcel is constrained by two streams — identified in the staff report as Orianna Brook and Billy Butcher Creek — and by the city’s riparian overlay rules. Staff said the riparian overlay requires a minimum 25‑foot buffer from the top of bank plus a slope factor that can increase the no‑build distance, and that existing vegetation in those buffers is an acceptable vegetative strip under the code.

Staff also noted that the billboard on the parcel is a legal nonconforming sign and would remain until the owner chooses to remove it or it becomes structurally unsafe. Staff said the conditional rezoning agreement required by state law can be finalized after this hearing but must be available to the City Commission before they act.

Commissioners debated whether granting a conditional rezoning on this single parcel would create an isolated or incompatible zone. Several commissioners acknowledged the parcel sits on the edge of the South Marquette place type described in the Community Master Plan and observed that prior rezoning of Division Street in 2019 created the Mixed Use district to encourage more residential‑commercial mixing. Commissioners also noted the parcel has been undeveloped for decades and that nonresidential uses historically have located there.

After deliberation Commissioner Lauder moved that, "after conducting a public hearing and review of the application and staff report analysis for 01/2025, the planning commission finds the proposed rezoning with conditions is consistent with the community master plan and meets the requirements of the Land Development Code section 54‑1405 and hereby recommends the City Commission approve as presented." Commissioner Cutter seconded. The motion passed; the commission recorded the recommendation and will forward the conditional rezoning to the City Commission for final action. Staff indicated the City Commission hearing is likely at the last meeting of October; if the City Commission approves the rezoning the applicant would then need to apply for a special‑land‑use permit and site plan, which would return to the Planning Commission for a separate public hearing.

The record includes a written objection from Donald and Marty Lacombe of 215 Sandstone Drive and oral testimony from at least eight nearby residents. The planning commission’s recommendation does not approve any development; it narrows the range of uses that may be proposed on the parcel and preserves required environmental buffers. The public may comment again if and when the applicant submits a site plan or special‑land‑use application.