Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Map Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission tables Chateau Cerise C‑1→C‑4 rezoning after neighbors raise watershed and use‑type concerns
Summary
A proposed zoning map amendment to reclassify the 20.61‑acre Chateau Cerise property on South Highway 53 from C‑1 (local business) to C‑4 (highway service) was tabled after neighbors and the commission requested more specificity on permitted/excluded uses and infrastructure impacts; motion to table passed 7–3.
The Planning and Zoning Commission paused consideration of a requested zoning amendment for a large commercial property at 2419 South Highway 53 (docket PZ‑25‑013) after sustained public opposition and technical questions about potential future uses and watershed impacts.
What was proposed: Applicants for “Chateau Cerise” sought to rezone roughly 20.61 acres from C‑1 (local business) to C‑4 (highway service). They told the commission the request is intended to accommodate legacy commercial uses on the site — a furniture showroom/warehouse operation known as the Cherry House that operated on the parcel for decades — and to allow tenancy for uses that mirror the property’s historical commercial operations.
Neighbors’ concerns: Multiple residents raised objections focused on watershed protection and the broad list of uses allowed in a C‑4 district. Neighbor James Stutson and others emphasized a creek and pond system that drains from the Cherry House property through adjoining yards into Crystal Lake. As resident Nelson Lemon put it, “That’s our concern is that we see right now all the water that’s coming from Cherry House is going to come down eventually into Crystal Lake.” Other neighbors asked the commission to exclude heavier or hazardous uses (for example, certain types of manufacturing, vehicle salvage, bulk storage or other C‑4 uses) that could pose runoff or contamination risks.
Applicant position and history: Applicant counsel explained the property’s commercial use history dates to the 1960s and the Cherry House operation grew in scope through zoning changes in 1969, 1979 and 1984. Owner Steve Whitehouse described decades of operation and a peak of heavy activity: “At its peak, the LaGrange showroom generated about a thousand car trips a day on peak days, plus a few buses.” The applicants said their immediate plan is not to expand building footprints; they intend to lease existing buildings consistent with past uses and asked for C‑4 to make potential tenants eligible for historically relevant uses. The team proposed a binding element that would require review if a future tenant sought to increase building or parking footprints or exceed historical traffic volumes.
Staff and technical issues: County staff and the county engineer noted they cannot evaluate infrastructure impacts for unspecified future uses; binding element language was suggested to require the applicant to provide proposed uses for review if a tenant proposed changes that could trigger traffic or stormwater improvements. The Technical Review Committee also flagged concerns about vehicle access on Zalesmith Road and asked the applicant to commit to no commercial traffic via the residential access at that location unless that parcel is rezoned.
Decision: After lengthy public comment and an on‑record debate about how to handle future uses and enforce protections for downstream waterbodies, the commission voted to table the rezoning request so the applicant and staff could negotiate clearer binding conditions and a list of excluded uses. The tabling motion carried 7–3.
Why the commission tabled: Commissioners and staff cited the need for either (a) a clearer, agreed‑to list of permitted/forbidden uses that reflect neighbor concerns about the Crystal Lake watershed and hazardous runoff, or (b) a fully worked‑out development plan that identifies tenant types and proposed infrastructure fixes so the County Engineer and KYTC can evaluate traffic and stormwater impacts.
Next steps: The application is tabled; applicants and staff will work to produce clearer binding language (examples discussed included explicit excluded C‑4 uses and a process for returning to the commission if a tenant proposes increased impervious cover or a use that would materially change traffic). If the applicants do not reach agreement, the commission could later vote to forward a recommendation to the fiscal court as submitted, forward a modified recommendation, or deny the request.
Quotable: Owner Steve Whitehouse described the property’s historical usage and scale: “At its peak, the LaGrange showroom generated about a thousand car trips a day on peak days, plus a few buses.” A neighbor summarized environmental worry succinctly: “That’s our concern is that we see right now all the water that’s coming from Cherry House is going to come down eventually into Crystal Lake.”
