Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council tables straight rezoning request for Ash Street extension to allow applicant more time; commission recommended approval
Summary
A straight rezoning request to reclassify a parcel on East Ash Street from Neighborhood Business to General Business was tabled to the council's June 16 meeting after extended discussion about the merits of straight GB versus conditional zoning and whether the council should retain more control over future uses.
Goldsboro City Council on May 19 reopened public comment and then tabled a straight rezoning application (RZO 225, Lewis B. Jones) that seeks to change a parcel on East Ash Street extension from Neighborhood Business to General Business. Council chose to table the request to the June 16 meeting to allow the applicant time to consider options and to give council members additional time to review the implications of a straight GB rezoning.
What was requested: The applicant asked to rezone a roughly 41,382-square-foot tract along East Ash Street extension from Neighborhood Business (NB) to General Business (GB). Planning staff noted the General Business district permits a wide range of retail and service uses and has no minimum lot size; staff recommended approval because the city's commercial land-use designation covered the parcel and the change was compatible with surrounding nonresidential uses. Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval.
Council debate and concerns: Several council members and other commenters said they were concerned that a straight GB rezoning gives the landowner broad rights over future uses without site-specific conditions or required site plans. Councilwoman Boyette and others urged caution and noted there are established commercial uses in the area that had become nonconforming over time. Some council members suggested a conditional rezoning would allow the council to review a specific site plan and place use or design limits on future development; others said the existing Neighborhood Business zoning already allows certain residential uses and that denying a straight rezoning could merely delay, not prevent, future uses.
Applicant’s stated interest: An applicant representative said the owner was evaluating possible uses including residential such as apartments; the representative also said they are still considering options and requested time to determine which zoning best fits their plan.
Motion to table: After deliberation the council voted to table the rezoning request to the June 16 meeting (motion amended from an initial suggestion of July 14 during discussion). The council recorded the motion to table and set the next hearing date; the applicant may return with either a straight rezoning or a conditional proposal depending on their plans.
Quote: "When you have a property that is requested to be conditional zoning...the council has control and some say so over what goes on that property," Councilwoman Boyette said during deliberations, explaining why she favored either denial or a conditional approach rather than an unconditional straight rezoning.
