Commission denies comprehensive-plan amendment and rezoning after residents raise traffic and screening concerns in Green Turf Acres

The Marion County Board of County Commissioners on March 17 denied both a proposed comprehensive-plan amendment and a zoning change that would have permitted a mobile-home/model-home sales complex on a commercially zoned lot adjacent to the Green Turf Acres subdivision along State Road 200.

Growth Services staff opened the hearing describing case numbers tied to the request: a change of future land use from Commercial to Employment Center and a companion rezoning from B-2 to B-4 to permit a mixed-use sales lot that would include mobile and modular homes. Staff recommended denial of the comprehensive-plan amendment and the rezoning, citing consistency concerns with the county’s Future Land Use and Transportation elements and noting that Green Turf Acres qualifies as a rural neighborhood with privately maintained, substandard roads (notably Southwest 70 Third Avenue). Planning & Zoning also recommended denial.

Applicant representatives, led by attorney Austin Daley of Klein & Klein and developer representatives for Gateway Properties, said the parcel has been commercially zoned for decades and said the proposed use — a sales lot combining modular and mobile homes — is consistent with nearby commercial activity and the urban growth boundary. The applicant offered alternatives such as limiting moves and using a special-use permit or developer agreement to restrict move-in/move-out timing. The applicant also said site-plan improvements could address access and buffering.

Residents from Green Turf Acres testified at length, opposing the change. Speakers said the site already exhibits unpermitted activity, that semis and delivery trucks regularly block the private road and Highway 200 during moves, and that the existing frontage displays manufactured homes without required skirting or buffering. Residents provided multiple accounts of blocked access, rutted private roads the neighborhood maintains, and visual intrusions of house tops above the existing fence line. Staff acknowledged past code enforcement involvement and noted some units were installed without permits; code enforcement confirmed pending citations for doing business in an improper zone and for lack of permits.

Commissioner Curry moved denial of the comprehensive-plan amendment; Commissioner Stone seconded. The board voted unanimously to deny the land-use amendment. The board then denied the rezoning by unanimous vote as well. Following the vote the board directed staff to continue with code enforcement actions: Growth Services and Code Enforcement will pursue permit compliance and removal of units that do not meet code; Code Enforcement said it would provide a 30-day compliance window before scheduling the case for the code board and potential fines if violations remain.

County staff and the applicant noted that if the applicant pursues a compliant site plan and obtains required permits, site improvements (driveway upgrades, buffers, walls, and stormwater) would be required and could mitigate some neighborhood concerns, but commissioners concluded the current proposal and parcel access did not support the higher-intensity future land use or B-4 zoning in this location.

The denial preserves the existing commercial land-use designation for the parcel and leaves enforcement of existing violations to Code Enforcement.