Franklin County approves two R‑1 rezonings after residents urge preservation of rural character

Franklin County commissioners voted to approve two rezonings from agricultural to R‑1 (single‑family residential) that together cover roughly 11.5 acres on Rogue/Gap Road after several nearby residents spoke against the change.

Neighbors told the commission during a public hearing that the parcels, listed as Franklin County property map 86, Parcel 7.03 (about 5.5 acres) and Parcel 7.13 (about 6.06 acres), are adjacent to homes on Charlotte Drive and provide habitat for sandhill cranes and a pond many residents use for enjoyment. Speakers said they fear new houses would change neighborhood character and lower property values.

The rezoning applications list Paige Howard as agent for Highway 16 Partners. Planning Director Eric Bradford explained county rules and what R‑1 zoning allows: single‑family homes only (no duplexes or apartments), a common minimum lot size of about 20,000 square feet in R‑1, typical front and rear setbacks in the 30‑ to 35‑foot range and a maximum building height of about 35 feet. Bradford also said the parcels sit inside the City of Winchester’s urban growth boundary and could be annexed by the city in the future, at which point the city would have authority over subdivision plat review.

Several residents who spoke identified themselves as homeowners on Charlotte Drive and said they had bought properties for their semi‑rural setting. Rhonda Campbell and Howard Campbell said they do not want houses built behind them; Vicky Hill and Carla Garceau raised concerns about taxes, fence replacement and the loss of a visible pond; Donna Shedders said the overgrown land has contributed pests near her backyard; Anthony Rudzke and Andy Short also urged leaving the property as is. Planning staff and commissioners clarified that agricultural zoning currently allows multiple small divisions and trailers and that rezoning to R‑1 imposes different rules on lot size and housing type.

Commissioner McMillan moved to approve the rezoning for parcel 7.03; Commissioner Kelly seconded the motion. The commission voted and the motion carried. Commissioners then approved the rezoning for parcel 7.13 on a separate motion moved by Commissioner Hans and seconded by Commissioner Johnson; that motion also carried.

The commission’s action rezoned the parcels to R‑1 but did not adopt any specific subdivision plat or site plan; future subdivision layout, lot sizes, and house designs would be subject to county and possibly city review if annexation occurs. Planning staff told residents that agricultural zoning as it currently stands allows more frequent divisions (the county’s agricultural rules permit multiple small divisions per owner), meaning the practical number of future houses could be similar under either designation unless annexation or a specific subdivision plat sets different lot sizes.

The commission’s votes were recorded as “motion carries”; the transcript does not include individual yes/no tallies.

Residents were told how to follow up: questions about platting and house size would be addressed through city plat review procedures if annexation occurs, and county permitting rules if the land remains in county jurisdiction.