HARKER HEIGHTS — The City Council paved the way for the construction of more duplexes and multi-family housing Tuesday with the approval of several rezoning ordinance requests from Chris Douse of Rock Creek Investments LLC.
Douse asked council members to rezone the property at 101 Stone Canyon Court from a one-family dwelling district to a multi-family dwelling district .
He also asked the council to change properties at 103, 105 and 107 Stone Canyon Court from a one-family dwelling district to a two-family dwelling district.
Fred Morris, planning and development director, said all four vacant lots meet the use requirements for their individual zoning districts.
“Development records indicate these lots were originally platted in 1977 and the surrounding neighborhood is now built out, but these lots have remained unimproved for the past 36 years,” Morris said. “The applicant proposes an acceptable density change that will blend well with the existing area and bring much-needed in-fill development to the city.”
Morris said the staff sent out 76 notices to property owners within the 400-foot notification area.
One response received was in favor of the change, and four were opposed.
No one spoke out against the request during the public hearing.
Steve Ernse, an Oak Trail resident, recommended the City Council deny the request, citing parking issues.
Douse also asked the council to change the zoning in three lots at 2312, 2314 and 2316 Verna Lee Boulevard from townhouse single-family dwelling district to two-family dwelling district in order to construct duplex units. His intention is to replat the three townhouse single family dwellings into two duplex lots.
These lots were rezoned several times in 2012 from their initial zoning of one-family manufactured home dwelling district to their current zoning of townhouse single-family dwelling district, which was approved by the City Council in November, Morris said.
“At the time, the use of the minimum 30-foot-wide townhome lot requirements were seen as an exciting development opportunity for the site,” Morris said. “However, as of today, the density bonuses envisioned at the time have been lost due to easements that were not properly identified. The development plan as initially proposed is no longer viable.”