Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council rejects conditional rezoning for 27500 Marquette after debate over housing and traffic
Summary
After a lengthy presentation and public comment, Garden City Council voted to deny a conditional rezoning request for 27500 Marquette that would have allowed office use and a childcare center; the motion failed on a 3–4 recorded vote.
Garden City’s City Council denied a conditional rezoning request for 27500 Marquette on July 27, after council members and residents debated whether the city should preserve scarce residential land or accept commercial reuse of a vacant former church and school.
Planning consultant Mario Ortega told the council the site is a 2.05‑acre lot currently zoned R‑1 and that the applicant had offered a conditional rezoning limiting permitted uses to a professional office by right and a childcare center only after special‑land‑use review. Ortega said the planning commission recommended approval and the applicant had submitted a signed conditional zoning agreement to bind permitted uses. “The applicant has voluntarily chosen a conditional rezoning … limiting the uses allowed on the site to only establishing a professional office and the childcare center,” Ortega said.
Council members split over how the parcel fits the master plan and whether redevelopment should be encouraged. Council member Cara Fotis argued the city needs to protect residential property and promote micro‑housing, saying the parcel could accommodate multiple small homes under recent variances. “I just think that we should think twice about giving up our residential property,” Fotis said. Others, including Council member King, said the existing building and demolition costs make residential conversion unlikely and that an occupied office would be preferable to a long‑term vacancy.
Applicant architect Nasser of NC Designers described his office proposal as appointment‑only and said he expected minimal parking demand compared with a retail use. “What makes that better than putting this building as an office building … it’s not gonna be very aggressive,” Nasser said.
The rezoning motion required five affirmative votes under the city’s zoning ordinance. On roll call the motion failed: Mayor Pro Tem Dole — Nay; Council member King — Aye; Council member Cara Fotis — Nay; Council member Dole — Nay; Council member Witt — Aye; Council member Hughes — Nay; Mayor Jacobs — Aye. Because it did not attain the required five affirmative votes, the rezoning request was denied. The applicant may pursue other options, but council members noted the property would need special‑land‑use approval if a childcare center is proposed in the future.
