Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Common Council approves rezoning and special-use permit to allow Mezcalero to house two food trucks on-site
Summary
The Greenfield Common Council voted 4-1 to rezone 6869 West Forest Home from C1 to C2 and approve a special-use permit and site review allowing Mezcalero to use its commercial kitchen to service and store up to two food trucks; the trucks will not serve food on the property. A neighbor testified about late-night noise, fights and pest concerns.
Get email alerts on the Zoning Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Greenfield Common Council on Sept. 16 approved an ordinance to rezone 6869 West Forest Home Avenue from C1 (Neighborhood Commercial) to C2 (Community Commercial) and a related resolution granting a special-use permit and site review that would allow the Mezcalero restaurant to use its kitchen to service and store up to two food trucks. The vote was 4 in favor, 1 opposed.
The rezoning and permit change are intended to bring a long-standing restaurant property into compliance and allow third-party food-truck operators to use Mezcalero’s commercial kitchen as a base for cleaning and servicing their vehicles. Planning staff told the council the change was recommended by the planning commission in August and that the requested operations would not allow the trucks to sell food on the parcel.
The action matters because it changes allowable uses at a property adjacent to houses. Council members and staff emphasized the request is for storage and servicing, not for on-site food sales, and that planning recommended approval. The council also heard a neighbor’s detailed concerns before voting.
Resident Jeff Unger of 4155 South 60 Eighth Street told the council he and his wife abut the restaurant’s property and described late-night noise, fights, and recurring rodent complaints. “We close the doors and the windows, and we keep the air conditioning on,” Unger said. He asked where the trucks would park and whether the trucks would be coming and going throughout the day. Planning staff showed a site map and said routine parking and clean-out activity would occur behind the building; the special-use conditions limit the use to servicing and storage rather than daytime vending.
Planning staff told the council the proposed food-truck operations would typically involve two trucks, each with about three to four employees, and cleaning or servicing hours roughly from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. The council was told the property had received one letter of support and one letter of objection during the public-notice period.
The council motion to approve the rezoning ordinance and the special-use resolution carried 4-1. The roll call during the vote recorded: Alderson Juszwicki — aye; Alderson Bailey — aye; Alderson Kasner — aye; Alderson Sarian — aye; Alderson Akers — no. The motion was made and seconded on the floor (motion made by Alderson Bailey; second recorded as Alderson Castner during the minute corrections). The planning commission’s recommendation and the site-review approval were included in the motion.
Council members said they expect the city and the restaurant to address operational issues (pest control, dumpster management, and possible parking adjustments) through the site-review conditions and by follow-up with staff if neighbors report ongoing problems. The council record includes staff comments that restaurants must maintain pest control and keep dumpsters sanitary under existing code.
The council approved the ordinance and special-use resolution that night; the changes take effect according to the city’s ordinance-adoption rules. Council and staff encouraged neighbors to report code or criminal incidents to city staff or police so they can be documented and addressed.
Background: the proposal was presented to the planning commission in August and returned to the council with a recommendation of approval. The applicant (Mezcalero) did not have a representative speak at the public hearing; planning staff answered procedural questions. No amendments to the approved motion were recorded.

