Greene County planning panel approves rezoning for Route 29/33 corridor to allow business uses

The Greene County Planning Commission voted to approve rezoning case RZ25001, which will change portions of Tax Map 60 C A 24 along the Route 29/33 corridor from R2 (multifamily/residential) to business districts B2 and B3. The motion, read into the record by a commission member, recommended approval "in accordance with the Greene County zoning ordinance, public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice." The motion passed by voice vote.

Staff told the commission the applicant, Route 33 Holdings LLC, seeks to rezone roughly 18.55 acres to enable future business development. Staff said the request would reclassify a 0.229‑acre sliver to B2 (interior business) and about 6.14 acres to B3 (highway/business) while leaving the larger, tan‑shaded multifamily portion unchanged. Staff emphasized that no site plan or buyer is currently under review and that parcel lines will be adjusted when a specific development proposal arrives.

LJ Lopez, representing Route 33 Holdings LLC, said the rezoning "is outlined in the request" and that the company had prepared the land-use and traffic materials the commission used in its review. Lopez told the board the applicant "is here to answer any questions" and did not present an additional slide deck after staff's overview.

Commissioners and staff discussed traffic and access management at length. Staff noted that VDOT typically provides detailed comments at the site‑plan stage unless a rezoning shows an immediate safety hazard; staff also said a traffic memo submitted with the application shows business uses would likely generate fewer trips than multifamily uses for the parcels in question. Commissioners observed that long‑term access solutions may favor right‑in/right‑out approaches with medians rather than new signalized intersections because of the parcels' proximity to Route 29.

The commission also reviewed utilities and public‑safety considerations. Staff said the area is served by public water; additional sewer, stormwater and building‑code reviews will be required when a specific use is proposed. On the subject of nearby mobile‑home residents, staff and the applicant said planners have been working on a consolidated replacement‑park concept intended to allow relocation without displacement, but soil and septic issues have delayed approvals. Staff described an earlier plan in which phase‑1 could provide approximately 15–20 replacement sites; they said grant and funding work for sewer and relocation assistance remains ongoing.

A commission member moved to approve RZ25001 "as submitted by the applicant," and the motion received a second. The board recorded several oral "Aye" votes and adopted the rezoning. Staff thanked the applicant and closed the public‑hearing item.

The commission then approved routine minutes and heard administrative updates, including rollout of a new online application system (building‑permit intake tentatively scheduled for Aug. 1) and a preview of next month’s agenda items. The commission adjourned after brief additional business.

What happens next: rezoning grants the applicant the entitlement to seek site‑plan approval and any necessary plats or boundary adjustments; VDOT, sewer/stormwater authorities and building officials will review access, utilities and public‑safety measures when a formal site plan is filed.