Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mount Comfort neighbors beat back full commercial rezoning; council approves split zoning amendment
Summary
After months of neighborhood opposition over traffic and safety, council amended and narrowed a developer's request for NSG commercial zoning at 3070 W. Mount Comfort Road to a split map (small NSG frontage on Mount Comfort and RSF‑18 on the rear) but later declined to advance the full rezone to third reading; the item remains on second reading.
Council considered a contested rezoning for 3070 West Mount Comfort Road on Oct. 7 after several public meetings brought out neighbors who said the street and adjacent Gooseberry Lane lack the infrastructure to support business traffic. Opponents, represented by neighborhood spokesman Jake Herzog, submitted petitions and argued that Mount Comfort and Gooseberry lack center turn lanes, sidewalks, adequate curb and gutter, and safe parking for customers and deliveries.
Herzog summarized neighbors’ stance: “The residents don’t want NSG. The neighborhood does not need NSG. The infrastructure cannot support NSG,” and urged council to instead adopt RSF‑18 zoning or other limits to block unrestricted commercial use.
The developer presented a compromise: NSG limited to the Mount Comfort frontage with RSF‑18 (two houses) to the rear, and an intent to reuse the existing house for small office uses. After public testimony from more than a dozen neighbors and several proponents (who argued a small neighborhood node would be beneficial), council voted to amend the request to the split zoning map. That amendment passed by roll call.
However, council then considered whether to move the rezoning to third reading immediately and voted; the motion to advance failed to reach the required affirmative votes, leaving the item on second reading for further consideration. Several councilmembers cited safety and street‑capacity concerns when declining to advance the full rezone.
Next steps: The split‑zoning amendment remains the working proposal; the item remains on second reading for future consideration and for staff to verify technical issues such as drive approach relocations and on‑site parking arrangements.
