Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Evans Locks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission recommends disapproval of proposed retail rezoning on Evanston Locks Road after heavy public opposition
Summary
After multiple residents raised traffic and safety concerns, the Columbia County Planning Commission voted to recommend disapproval of a rezoning request at 4026 Evanston Locks Road for a small retail center, forwarding the recommendation to the Board of Commissioners.
The Columbia County Planning Commission on Feb. 19 recommended disapproval of a request to rezone two properties at 4026 Evanston Locks Road from R-2 to commercial community (CC), a move developer representatives said was intended to allow a roughly 10,000-square-foot retail center.
Planning staff (Will) told commissioners the surrounding area is primarily residential and cautioned that a CC designation would be an outlier in the middle of the corridor, although county planning documents (Vision 2035 and the newly referenced Foundations for the Future plan) allow for commercial corridor development in the long term. Staff outlined conditions the commission might require if rezoning were approved, including a 30-foot structural buffer, restricted trash-pickup hours and a photometric plan, and noted traffic review blocked an access point to Evanston Locks.
The applicant’s engineer, Bill Quarter of Blue Water Engineering, said the site is unlikely to be redeveloped for housing long term, that the applicant accommodated traffic and fire comments in the design and that the team could meet overlay and buffer conditions if rezoned.
Multiple residents spoke in opposition, citing high traffic volumes, proximity to Lakeside High School, Lakeside Park and walking trails, and the risk to pedestrians and emergency access. Resident Roy Bowers said he frequently waits to exit onto Evans Locks and warned, “Somebody's gonna get killed at some point.” Other residents cited a narrow stretch of road with inadequate turning lanes and pointed to available commercial vacancies elsewhere as evidence a new retail center was not needed.
After the public comment period, a commissioner moved to recommend disapproval of file RZ26-02-01; the motion was seconded and the commission voted to recommend disapproval. The chair announced the motion carried. The commission’s recommendation will be considered by the Board of Commissioners at its next meeting.
