Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council rejects conditional rezoning for Telegraph Road storage facility
Summary
After public comment and council questioning about market need and site conditions, the council voted 2–4 to deny a conditional rezoning that would have allowed a self-storage facility on a 2.07-acre parcel on Telegraph Road.
Get email alerts on the Zoning Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A motion to conditionally rezone a roughly 2.07-acre parcel on the east side of Telegraph Road from B‑3 general business to I‑1 light industrial failed after the council recorded two yes votes and four nos.
Councilwoman Brandon initiated the item as the second reading of an ordinance and asked planning staff detailed questions about the local market and how many storage facilities currently operate in Taylor. Planning staff said the city has six existing storage facilities, one under construction, and a petition proposing the rezoning included additional buffering and landscaping compared with earlier proposals.
Hunter Galbraith of Design House Architecture presented two market studies for the applicant, saying a Storage 101 report estimated roughly 46,000 square feet of unmet demand within a two‑mile radius, and a BDO study estimated roughly 221,000 square feet within three miles. "I do have copies of both those demand studies if you'd like to see them," Galbraith said.
Residents voiced concerns about need and precedents. Lynn Montroy asked, "is there a real need for this?" and asked where the public could find the project backup online; staff directed residents to the city's agenda hyperlink and encouraged attendance at the planning commission review. Another resident, who identified herself as Mary Susan, said a prior council had denied a storage project on Telegraph and questioned whether approving this site would repeat past neighborhood harms, citing drainage and lighting concerns.
Council members who supported the proposal said the site is set back from the road, offered more conditions than previous petitions and would reuse a long‑vacant parcel that otherwise attracts vandalism. Opponents pointed to neighborhood opposition and policy concerns. On roll call the clerk recorded the outcome: two votes in favor, four opposed; the motion failed.
