Supervisors deny rezoning for proposed Dollar General near Tunstall High School

The Pennsylvania County Board of Supervisors on July 15 denied a rezoning request for 3.9 acres on Mount Cross Road that would have allowed a retail store to be built near Tunstall High School.

The move came after more than an hour of public comment in which neighbors raised traffic, safety, lighting, crime and economic-impact concerns. The developer asked the board for a 60-day deferral to hold a community meeting and present additional information, then withdrew the application after the board moved to act.

The petition (Case R‑25‑015) sought to rezone two parcels totaling 3.9 acres from RC‑1 Residential Combined Subdivision District to B‑2 Business District General to allow a retail establishment. The planning commission had recommended approval by a 5‑2 vote, according to the staff summary included in the board packet.

Gregory Stewart, a commercial developer representing Rhett’s and Companies and the property owner, told the board he ‘‘respectfully request[ed] a 60 day deferral’’ to hold a community meeting and address concerns including traffic, architectural treatments and buffering. He said his firm had previously developed several Dollar General locations in the county and wanted to ‘‘do it the right way.’’

Dozens of nearby residents spoke against the rezoning. Dennis Gibson, of the Westover District, said he ‘‘strongly oppose[d] the proposal’’ and warned that national dollar stores can hurt local groceries. Tyler Mills, owner of Mills Grill and Grocer, said he had served the community for 15 years and called the project ‘‘not about what’s best for the Tunstall community.’’ Jackie Mize said the site was in a ‘‘blind curve’’ near schools and recounted a local fatal crash nearby.

Board member comments repeatedly cited traffic and safety. After hearing the applicant request withdrawal and additional public testimony, a motion to deny the rezoning was made, seconded and then approved unanimously. The board’s unanimous vote closed the application; the clerk recorded the outcome as ‘‘application denied.’’

County staff and the board noted that a denial would allow the applicant to reapply later if they chose; the attorney explained procedural limits tied to reapplication timing when a petition is withdrawn or denied.

With the denial, the zoning for the parcels remains RC‑1, and no development related to this application can proceed under a business district designation without a new successful rezoning application.

The board’s action followed the public‑hearing procedure stated in the packet, "pursuant to Article 5 Division 6 of the Pennsylvania County zoning ordinance," and the staff summaries and planning commission recommendations were part of the public record for the hearing.