✕
☰

Rezoning request to allow for storage facility on Valleydale Road denied

by

Erica Techo

Courtesy of Eight18 Properties

Photo by Erica Techo

Photo by Erica Techo.

The Shelby County Planning Commission unanimously denied a rezoning request that could have permitted a storage facility on a property along Valleydale Road.

During the Oct. 3 Shelby County Planning Commission meeting, a crowd of nearly 70 attended to hear discussion and voice concerns regarding the proposed rezoning from general business and office and institutional district (B-1 and O-I) to general business district (B-2). The request was submitted for a 6.16 acre property on the northwest corner of Valleydale Road and Hillandell Drive, about .6 miles away from Caldwell Mill Road.

Brent Fields of Eight18 Properties submitted the request with the intention that, if approved, self-storage facilities would be constructed on the property.

Senior Planner Sharman Brooks presented the request and staff findings to the planning commission, noting that the property was rezoned to B-1 and O-I in 1990, when the property owner proposed a development that included businesses near the road with office buildings behind. Those plans never came to fruition, she said.

The development proposed by Fields would include three self-storage buildings, including one 47,000-square-foot, two-story climate controlled building and two non-climate controlled buildings, Brooks said. There would be no outdoor storage of boats, vehicles or other items permitted on the property, and there would be gated security access.

While the self-storage facility was not “incompatible” with surrounding properties, it was “different,” Brooks said, and she noted the planning commission has always been careful when it comes to rezoning decisions along Valleydale Road — a highly congested area as-is. The traffic produced by a self-storage facility would generate traffic patterns which are more compatible with office-type uses, Brooks said, but a B-2 rezoning allows for developments which would have potentially higher traffic uses.

Other B-2 uses include anything permitted under B-1 as well as a public garage, frozen food locker, hospital or clinic for animals, retail store or shop, used car lot, a shopping center and other uses, according to Shelby County zoning regulations.

Staff recommended the consideration of a special district, which would limit the rezoning to only a self-storage facility, rather than the other uses allowed in B-2, but the applicant said there would not be enough time to gather the necessary plans for that sort of application, Brooks said.

Planning commissioners Bob Land and Jim Davis both noted concerns that the self-storage facility was the only B-2 use which was not incompatible with the surrounding area, and that the rezoning to simply B-2 might open up the site to undesirable developments.

When Fields presented his plan for the property, he emphasized that a self-storage facility is his only plan for the property, and that the expected tenant mix for the property “definitely fits” for a residential area.

Plans for the building included materials which would fit with a “residential aesthetic,” said architect Chuck Penuel, giving the climate controlled building an appearance more similar to an office building. There were also plans buffers along all four, said civil engineer Brian Harris.

There would be 600 units in the climate-controlled building, Fields said, a number that drew a murmuring from the crowd gathered at the meeting. One of the other buildings would include 60 drive-up units, and the smaller building would include 40 units.

Tom Crawford, the property owner of an adjacent property, spoke in favor of the rezoning, noting the self-storage facility would be better than the fruit stand and other things currently on that land, but several others voiced their concerns and disapproval at the meeting.

One resident read a letter from Shelby County Commissioner Mike Vest, who was unable to attend the meeting but is the commissioner over the area in question as well as a resident of the area.

“Residents surrounding this aforementioned property reached out to me and asked for my assistance in their concern,” the letter read. “As their commissioner and neighbor, I support their efforts in the opposition to the zoning change request.”

Concerns included the potential noise of large trucks going in and out of the facility during the proposed hours of 6 a.m. to 9 or 10 p.m., the buildings being “ugly” and hurting property values, the lack of a buffer compared to the current zoning and potential effects on water runoff and wildlife.

Branscomb Beavers, representing the Havenwood Park homeowners association, said the neighborhood was in complete opposition to the storage facility and to the B-2 rezoning.

“Sure, it’s a class A facility, but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s a storage facility,” Beavers said.

Beavers asked the neighbors in opposition to the plan to stand, and most of the 70 individuals in attendance — who were not already standing — stood up.

After around an hour of discussion, planning commission chairman Ken Wilder addressed Brooks, saying “What we’ve got is a B-2 [rezoning], up or down,” noting that it was not possible to add on a special district because the proper submittal wasn’t included and that tabling the request would be ineffective.

“I don’t think the problem is with the facility because I’ve seen facilities like this in Atlanta and Dallas and very, very nice neighborhoods, and they actually add to the area,” he said. “… I think the facility is nice, Ithink it’s good. But we have no guarantees that’s what they’ll do. If somebody came in and offered you $1 million tomorrow after we approve this, you might put it in the bank tomorrow and say, ‘Bye.’”

Commissioner land made the motion to deny the request, which was seconded. The planning commission unanimously approved the motion to deny the request.

Also at the meeting, the planning commission:

Back to topbutton