Derby residents allege misconduct, flood impacts in protest of proposed rezoning at Woodlawn and 50 Fifth

Two Derby residents used the council’s public-forum period on Aug. 12 to press the council to halt a proposed rezoning at the “Southwest Corner Of Woodlawn And 50 Fifth,” raising two separate sets of concerns: neighborhood flooding and runoff tied to recent development, and what they called improper conduct by members of the Planning Commission.

Audrey Goff, who identified herself as a Derby resident at 3201 North Woodlawn Boulevard, said the proposal would change the property’s zoning from “ag single dwelling” (the pre-annexation designation) to R-2 rental duplexes and that “the majority of residents in the surrounding area” opposed the change and had submitted a petition on the city’s website. She said the rezoning would harm owners of adjacent large-lot single-family properties and would increase runoff in an area that already “struggles to manage the water volume.”

Goff alleged that Planning Commission members denied that opposition was voiced at the commission hearing, and that the commission chairman then “hammered his gavel and proceeded to yell derogatory comments towards the residents,” including singling out a mother with a child. She said residents who gathered outside afterward were met with police presence and described that response as an intimidation tactic. “They are guilty of malfeasance and other violations,” Goff said, and asked the council to remove the allegedly unprofessional planning commissioners and to “allow no more than single family dwellings on 5 acre lots” for the parcel.

Goff also said a 2013 hydrology study shows the city had knowledge of flooding issues and urged the council to act on that knowledge. She said she has video showing flooding of several acres near her property following nearby development and described interactions with staff in which she was told to buy flood insurance rather than being offered a city remediation plan.

Lauren May, of 1102 Arbor Meadows Street, likewise criticized the Planning Commission’s voting record and its approach to public comment. “I want to remind everyone on this council that you work for us, not the other way around,” May said, and told the council she reviewed Planning Commission minutes and found that, from August 2024 to the present, the commission’s votes were almost always unanimous. She said the frequency of unanimity raised questions about whether informal coordination or other factors were shaping outcomes. May asked the council for specific information, including how many Planning Commission members were appointed by the current mayor, the exact time of the police call at the last Planning Commission meeting, and who manages the city’s social media.

City staff responded during the meeting that they would follow up with the requested details: City Manager Kyle Mangus said staff would provide information to people who contact the city with specific requests. No formal action or vote on the rezoning was taken by the council during the meeting; the remarks were public comments recorded during the public-forum portion of the agenda.

Ending

The council did not take immediate action on the rezoning matter during the Aug. 12 meeting. Residents asked the council to require single-family lots of five acres and to remove planning commissioners; staff said it would provide requested factual information about appointments and the police call to residents who supply contact details.