Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission recommends rezoning for Nellis Lawn Service site; neighbors press for buffer and fence
Summary
The commission recommended approval (5-3) of a partial rezoning at 3010 Carussell Road to allow a landscaping business with a narrow UDC; neighbors objected citing traffic, noise and spot-zoning concerns; commissioners required a 10-foot buffer and the petitioner committed to trees and screening.
On May 1 the Area Plan Commission recommended approval of a rezoning request for a portion of 3010 Carussell Road to C4 with a use-and-development commitment limiting the site to landscaping and lawn-service uses. The motion passed by roll call, 5 yes, 3 no, and the commission forwarded its recommendation to the county commissioners.
Petitioner Noah Nellis, appearing for Nellis Lawn Service LLC, and counsel Joshua Claiborne described the filing as a narrowly tailored UDC that would allow only landscaping services (use group 11), lawn and garden treatment and a shrub/plant nursery. Claiborne said the UDC significantly restricts typical C4 uses and that the limited set of activities would not create additional client traffic because the operation would be a shop/yard serving off-site jobs rather than a retail outlet.
Neighbors and residents submitted a petition of remonstrance with at least 35 signatures and several attendees said they opposed spot zoning in the middle of an agricultural/residential area. Speakers cited narrow roads (Creasle/Carussell and Marks), existing ditches, and safety concerns for children and school buses. Several remonstrants said they already hear trucks early in the morning and raised concerns about dusty gravel drives, larger deliveries, and outdoor storage of mulch, rock or equipment. Don Meisler of 8520 Marks Road and Robert Steven Watson of 3939 Carussell Road addressed the commission and urged denial.
Commission discussion referenced required buffers between C4 and residential properties. Commissioners and the petitioner discussed tree lines, a fence and paving the access drive; the petitioner volunteered to add trees and install a screening fence and said he planned to pave drives to reduce dust.
After debate, commissioners recorded votes as follows: yes — Mister Petke, Mister Shetler, Mister Walters, Miss Cobble, Miss Freeman; no — Mister Gable, Mister Nicks, Miss Stevens. The tally was 5 yes, 3 no. The commission—s record notes the petition will move forward with a recommendation for approval to the county commissioners. Staff noted the property lies partly within the University TIF area and that public infrastructure and access constraints on University Parkway were factors raised during the hearing.
The record shows the petitioner committed on the record to add trees along the residential property line within the required buffer and to work with neighbors on fencing and site design; commissioners stated that any such commitments should be included in the UDC or site review as the petition proceeds to county review.
