Planning commission finds Parsons Lane application meets minor-variation criteria; rezoning not decided

The Georgetown Planning Commission on April 16 found that an application to classify a proposed comprehensive-plan map amendment for properties at 3 and 7 Parsons Lane as a minor variation meets the town’s criteria. The finding allows the applicant to proceed without the Office of State Planning Coordination undergoing a full review of the proposed amendment.

Nicholas Pallone, an engineering intern with Axiom Engineering, spoke for the applicant and said the parcels — referenced in the application as tax map IDs 135, 15, 17-121 and 122 — together measure about 22,000 square feet, approximately one-half acre. Pallone described the site as currently shown as single-family residential on the town’s future land-use map but surrounded on other sides by commercial and institutional uses; the applicant’s submission argued that a map reclassification to business would be a minor and relatively insignificant deviation from the comprehensive plan’s recommendations.

Pallone told the commission the submission addressed the ordinance’s listed elements for a minor variation, including the unique circumstances of the parcels, the relative size of the proposed change and whether the change would alter the pattern of development in the area. He said supporting materials included 2022 satellite imagery and two 2023 surveys by Miller Lewis showing Parcel 121 at 12,861 square feet and Parcel 122 at 9,102 square feet. Pallone also described existing commercial uses across Parsons Lane and an existing gas station nearby.

Commission discussion focused on process rather than the substance of any future grocery-store proposal. Commissioners noted that classifying the amendment as a minor variation is a procedural determination; it does not itself change zoning and would still be subject to a public hearing if the application proceeds. At least one speaker observed that while the applicant has announced plans for a grocery store, "we're not voting on that tonight," and a commission member said the commission must apply the code’s specific elements in making the minor-variation finding.

The commission voted to approve the request to determine the map amendment as a minor variation. The record shows a roll-call process and commissioners provided brief reasons for their votes for the record; the finding does not approve rezoning or a development plan.

Next steps described in the meeting: if the commission’s finding is that the application is a minor variation, the Office of State Planning Coordination may not perform a full review; any formal rezoning or site plan would still require separate review and public hearings.