Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council rejects rezoning request for Annadelle/Annandale Avenue parcel, suggests variance route

Mansfield City Council · November 19, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After a public hearing, Mansfield City Council voted 7-0 to reject Bill 25-180, a proposed rezoning of a parcel on/around Annadelle/Annandale Avenue from B-1 (neighborhood business) to B-2 (general business). Council and staff urged the owners to pursue a variance for storage-unit conditional use.

Mansfield City Council voted 7-0 to reject Bill 25-180, which would have rezoned a parcel on and around Annadelle/Annandale Avenue from B-1 (neighborhood business) to B-2 (general business). The vote followed a public hearing in which the property owners and council discussed possible future uses and zoning constraints.

The applicants, Jessica and Brian Dammerin, told council they bought the property planning for storage units and exterior storage but had not prepared final plans because they were unsure whether rezoning would be permitted. They said they sought neighborhood signatures before purchase and described anticipated traffic as low once any temporary construction activity ended.

Council members and planning staff raised concerns that the parcel abuts residential lots and small local streets and that rezoning to B-2 could allow a wider range of uses in the future. Planning staff noted two technical constraints: a B-1 conditional use for storage units typically requires a minimum lot size of about 3 acres, and the zoning code requires driveways and ingress/egress for off-street parking to be at least 40 feet from adjacent single- or two-family residential dwellings. Staff said those requirements were central to the planning commission's earlier denial.

Rather than rezoning, city staff recommended the owners pursue a variance through the planning commission that could allow storage units or limited structures while maintaining the protections the code establishes for adjacent residential properties. Council members echoed that advice during debate and discussion.

At final consideration, councilmember Miss Mount moved to place the bill on the floor; after discussion the ordinance failed by a recorded tally of "Bill fails 7 to 0." Following the vote, several council members reiterated that a variance route would give the applicants a cleaner path forward and would avoid opening the site to the broader range of uses that B-2 zoning permits.

The mayor and planning staff advised the owners to prepare site plans and, if appropriate, apply to the planning commission for a variance or conditional-use approval. No binding commitment to approve a variance was made during the meeting.

What happens next: the applicants may pursue a variance application with the planning commission; if the commission approves a variance for conditional use (storage units), the project could proceed without a rezoning action by council.