BZA denies major home-based tree-service request at Gee Road, citing neighborhood impact concerns

The Rutherford County Board of Zoning Appeals voted to deny a request for a major home-based business to operate a tree-trimming and removal service from a residence at 2079 Gee Road.

Planning staff described the 1.17-acre RM-zoned site and said the applicant sought approval to operate a tree service with three nonresident employees and to store four work vehicles on the property, including a bucket truck and a chipper truck. Staff noted concerns about outdoor storage and recommended conditions if the board chose to approve, but reported that the request met some but not all criteria for a major home-based business.

The applicant, Carlos Ramos, told the board he owns the property and said the business is intended to “get me off the ground” until he can acquire commercial space. Ramos said he planned to run three employees and four trucks, generally operate Monday through Friday between about 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., and that he does not bring debris from off-site jobs to the property. He also said he planned to install an 8-foot fence to screen equipment. Codes staff said their initial contact arose from a complaint about on-site burning; during that visit they discovered a possible business operation and advised the owner about burning restrictions.

Neighbors and nearby residents voiced safety and nuisance concerns. Tony Arnold said his primary worry was the potential for commercial-scale burning and smoke, which has caused community complaints in the past. Jason Richardson said smoke from burns had impacted nearby properties and noted the historic age and wood construction of a nearby house, calling any ongoing burn pile a fire risk.

After public comment and discussion, a board member moved to deny the request, asserting it was incompatible with the neighborhood because of the number of large vehicles, outdoor storage, noise and the potential for burning on the site, and saying a rezoning would be a more appropriate path for this scale of operation. The motion to deny passed in roll call (Yes to deny: Mike Curtis; Jerry Sartain; Renee Curtis; Patrick Hale; Zane Cantrell). Planning staff noted that the initial enforcement contact was for on-site burning and that they had not received evidence of ongoing burning complaints after advising the owner.

The denial means the applicant must either pursue a rezoning or relocate to a commercially zoned site to operate the business at the proposed scale. The board record cites concerns about neighborhood compatibility, vehicle storage, and outdoor debris handling.