Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Continued topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Alexander Construction rezoning continued as staff and neighbors seek clarifications on landscaping, buffering and lot constraints
Summary
A petition to rezone 4.37 acres at East Frammon Street from C5 to I2 for a contractor yard was continued to April 24 after discussion about a transmission easement, transitional-yard setbacks, landscaping and whether the I2 classification is appropriate near single-family homes.
The hearing examiner continued the rezoning petition from C5 to I2 for property at East Frammon Street (case 2025 CCN/CVR 809) to the April 24 hearing to allow staff and the petitioner to resolve outstanding concerns about buffering, landscaping and site layout.
Attorney David Rutherford, representing Alexander Construction and Landscape, said the roughly 4.37-acre site contains a high-voltage transmission easement that limits developable area and justified the need for several variances and site-specific commitments. Rutherford said the operation would be a single, well-kept contractor yard with tightly limited outdoor storage. He proposed amending one variance to provide a 30-foot east-side transitional yard (instead of the 15-foot yard filed) and described commitments that would restrict outdoor material storage, limit outdoor equipment to a maximum of two lowboy trailers, and require a decorative fence and masonry columns along the highly visible frontage.
City planning staff recommended denial. Marlene told the hearing examiner that the I2 district is intended to buffer protected districts from heavier industrial uses, and staff did not find the requested I2 zoning to function as a buffer in this location. Staff also raised concerns about multiple variances, deficient transitional yards (front and rear), the amount of proposed outdoor storage relative to ordinance limits, potential dust from unpaved maneuvering surfaces, and whether the site’s landscaping would meet the required green-factor calculations.
Rutherford noted local support from Warren Township and nearby neighbors, and said the petitioner had negotiated commitments to address township and neighbor concerns. During the hearing Rutherford and staff agreed a short continuance to April 24 would allow the parties to refine commitments and clarify building heights, landscape calculations and other technical items.
The continuance preserves the parties’ ability to adjust the petition to address staff questions and neighborhood concerns; the hearing examiner said she expected the parties to use the time to reduce unresolved items before the rescheduled hearing.
