Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Rezone Storage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors raise flooding and setback concerns as planning board recommends self-storage rezoning for TC4 Grand Street LLC
Summary
The Planning and Zoning Board recommended that the city council approve a rezoning request from TC4 Grand Street LLC to CAR (commercial automotive regulation) to allow a self-storage facility with boat/RV parking. Neighbors expressed worries about flooding, drainage, setbacks and a lack of a local representative.
The Planning and Zoning Board voted to recommend that the city council approve a rezoning application from TC4 Grand Street LLC to convert land from Agricultural (AG) to Commercial Automotive Regulation (CAR) to permit a self-storage facility with boat and RV parking.
Multiple neighbors spoke in public comment and expressed concerns about drainage, proximity and the absence of an on-site representative for the applicant. Resident Bill Cowan said he did not know who the property owner is and called the site "a frog pond," saying he worried about water running onto nearby yards and that buildings could ultimately be built very close to his fence. Cowan asked for a buffer wall and clear setback guarantees and asked that a project representative meet neighbors before construction.
Jake Gibson, another nearby resident, said the parcel "backs up to my south fence" and described recurring standing water that he said could be exacerbated by development.
A staff member provided the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) standards for CAR zoning, stating minimum lot-size and setback rules and explaining that the UDO (adopted in 2019) limits building coverage to 30% of a lot. The staff explanation included interior setbacks of 15 feet, a 50-foot street-side setback and a 100-foot minimum street frontage for some configurations.
The board discussed whether the application complied with the master plan; one member urged board members to apply rules consistently. After discussion a motion to recommend approval to the city council carried. The chair reiterated the board is a recommending body; the council will hold the final vote.
Next steps: neighbors were encouraged to contact the applicant and their city council representative before the council hearing. The record includes the residents27 drainage and setback concerns, which the council and applicant will be able to address during the formal review.
