Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Comments topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Neighbors voice opposition to proposed drive‑through and other commercial uses at Blue Diamond and Durango

5871066 · February 12, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Multiple residents used the general‑public comment period to object to proposed commercial development on Parcel 6 near Blue Diamond and Durango, citing concerns about noise, light, pollution, 24‑hour operations and sewer use of their HOA system.

During the general public comment period at the Feb. 12 Enterprise TAB meeting, residents of the Red Mill/Blue Diamond area raised objections to proposed commercial redevelopment on Parcel 6 at Blue Diamond and Durango, where an earlier gas‑station plan was withdrawn and the developer now proposes an oil‑change business, an O’Reilly Auto Parts and a drive‑through restaurant.

Lorraine DeCamillo, who gave her address and spelled her name for the record, said homeowners previously opposed a proposed gas station and later learned the commission had approved the project; she said subsequent negotiations led to removal of the gas station but that the new proposal for a drive‑through restaurant would still be too close to nearby yards. “We are very, very opposed to the drive‑through restaurant as it is very close to our homes,” DeCamillo said, citing concerns about pollution, 24‑hour operations and noise.

Her husband, Michael DeCamillo, reiterated the concerns and asked about permit extension length; board staff said permit‑extension durations vary. Residents also raised concerns that developers had sought to tap into an HOA sewer system serving 15 homes and that the HOA was unwilling to allow that connection. Speakers asked for the record to reflect their opposition in anticipation of later county hearings on the parcels.

Board members took the comments as part of the public record; no action on the parcel was before the TAB that evening, and the speaker period closed with the next regular TAB meeting scheduled for Feb. 26.