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 Evans Locks Road rezoning after residents raise traffic and safety concerns
Summary
After a public hearing with more than half a dozen residents raising traffic and emergency-access concerns, the commission recorded a recommendation to disapprove a proposed rezoning of 4026 Evans Locks Road to Community Commercial; the item will be sent to the Board of Commissioners for final action.
The Columbia County Planning Commission recommended disapproval on Feb. 19 for a request to rezone 4026 Evans Locks Road from R-2 residential to CC (Community Commercial) for a proposed small retail center.
Planning staff (Will) described the site and noted surrounding R-2 zoning; staff said the applicant had offered to meet Evans Town Center overlay requirements and proposed conditions including a 30-foot structural buffer where the site adjoins residential uses, limits on trash pickup hours and additional site landscaping. Staff recommended approval with conditions contingent on those mitigations.
Bill Quarter of Blue Water Engineering, speaking for the applicant, said the property is unlikely to be developed as residential and that the applicant accommodated traffic and fire comments during site review. He urged the commission to approve CC with the recommended conditions.
Neighborhood opposition was strong. Roy Bowers said traffic on Evans Locks Road already causes long delays and said drivers cut through nearby Oak Grove to avoid backups: "Somebody's gonna get killed at some point," he said, urging commissioners to consider safety. Multiple nearby residents (including Audra Tiller, Sandra Bowers and Emily Unger) said the corridor is narrow, near Lakeside High School, Lakeside Athletic Complex and a popular walking trail, and argued commercial development would worsen congestion and risk emergency response.
After public comment the commission recorded a motion and, as announced by the chair, "Motion carries for disapproval." The transcript shows inconsistent wording around who moved and whether the motion was to approve or disapprove, but the commission's recorded outcome was to recommend disapproval; that recommendation will be forwarded to the Board of Commissioners for final action on March 3, 2026.
The commission did not provide a detailed roll-call tally in the transcript; the chair's announcement recorded the outcome.
