Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Fraser Road topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission denies Fraser Road rezoning after neighbors raise safety and privacy concerns
Summary
The board denied a rezoning request by River Capital Properties LLC to convert a 0.58‑acre parcel on Fraser Road from BA2 to BA after neighbors cited traffic, safety and privacy impacts and after the applicant offered a restrictive covenant.
The Clay County Board of County Commissioners denied a request to rezone a 0.58‑acre parcel on Fraser Road from BA2 (Commercial & Professional Office) to BA (Neighborhood Business) after a contested hearing featuring the applicant’s presentation and extensive neighbor opposition.
Staff reported the parcel is commercially designated and sits near US‑17 and Fraser Road; the Planning Commission had earlier recommended denial. Stanley Hunt, representing River Capital Properties LLC, sought the change to permit a two‑story, roughly 3,600‑square‑foot building as headquarters for his CPA firm. Hunt said the two‑story design would reduce the building footprint and allow more landscaping and buffering than a single‑story 2,500‑square‑foot layout, and he offered a restrictive covenant, drafted with counsel, that he said would limit future uses to BA2‑type professional uses and run with the land.
Neighbors, however, told commissioners the single‑lane Fraser Road is unsafe and that a commercial use—even a small CPA office—would increase traffic, reduce visibility and harm neighborhood character. Rick Baker, who has lived on Fraser Road for 40 years, said the neighborhood’s mailboxes and front‑yard activity are centered at the road end and expressed concern about doubling vehicle trips on a narrow, single‑lane street.
The applicant’s attorney summarized the restrictive covenant, which would limit the site to BA2 uses and require unanimous neighbor consent to change that restriction. Several commissioners said the covenant was novel and supportive but could not substitute for hearing a fully vetted legal instrument; staff confirmed they did not have a copy in the packet though the attorney offered to provide it.
After discussion on compatibility, traffic impacts and the adequacy of a restrictive covenant presented on short notice, the board moved to deny the rezoning request; the motion carried by voice vote. Commissioners emphasized that the property remains commercially zoned under the current BA2 rules and that the applicant retains other development options that comply with existing zoning.
