Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Leonard 2.4ac topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Anna council tables zoning for Leonard Avenue daycare after neighbors and members press for details
Summary
On Jan. 13 the Anna City Council voted 6–1 to table a rezoning request to C-1 for a 2.4-acre Leonard Avenue site proposed for a daycare, after residents and several council members said they wanted a full site plan and specific-use permit before approving zoning that could allow other uses.
The Anna City Council on Jan. 13 voted 6–1 to table a rezoning request that would have designated about 2.4 acres on Leonard Avenue as C-1 local commercial, a step developer representatives said is needed before filing a specific-use permit (SUP) for a planned daycare.
Council reviewed three linked items for the parcel: a municipal services agreement, voluntary annexation and the rezoning request. Staff said the annexation (ANX25-0007) and the services agreement could proceed; the rezoning prompted extended questions about timing and long-term land use.
"If C-1 does not allow multifamily, I'm okay with it," one council member said, citing concern that rezoning today without a site plan could leave an opening for different development later. Multiple council members urged caution and a completed SUP/site plan so neighbors can see exact proposals before zoning is finalized.
Developer representative Julian Castillo of Foscas Engineering told the council that the project team needs the zoning designation before submitting the SUP and site plan. "We need the zoning before the SUP," Castillo said, adding the developer intends to move quickly and hopes to start construction by the end of the year.
Nearby property owner Catherine McMenemy, who said she already has a sales contract on an adjacent parcel, supported the daycare proposal. "We're the owners... we already have a contract," McMenemy told the council, noting the lot is small and that a daycare appeared to her to be a good fit for the neighborhood.
Council members disagreed on process. One council member said he would not approve zoning without a "rock-solid" plan and cited prior contentious rezoning decisions in the area. City staff and the applicant discussed procedural options: tabling to a date certain would avoid re-advertising, while taking no action would require re-advertising the zoning case.
After discussion, Councilman [role label used for the member who moved the motion] moved to table the rezoning to the second February meeting (Feb. 24); the motion passed 6–1. Staff said tabling to that date would provide time to advertise and, if the applicant can complete the SUP and site plan, bring a fuller package back to planning commission and council.
Next steps: The annexation and municipal services agreement for the parcel were approved earlier in the meeting; the zoning matter will return to council on Feb. 24 or at a date certain once the applicant completes the SUP and site-plan submissions.
