Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press council over traffic, safety as developer presents John Gray/Pleasant Avenue mixed‑use plan
Summary
A developer presented a mixed‑use plan for the John Gray–Pleasant Avenue site during a second reading; neighbors raised traffic and safety concerns and asked council to review planning‑commission materials before a final vote scheduled at the next meeting.
A developer presented a mixed‑use residential and commercial plan for the 24‑acre site at John Gray Road and Pleasant Avenue during the Sept. 8 Fairfield City Council meeting, and nearby residents strongly objected, focusing on traffic queuing and neighborhood safety.
At the council meeting, Adam Craft said council had received the planning commission’s recommendation to deny the requested zoning change and that the ordinance would stand as a second reading; a third reading and final vote are scheduled at the council’s next meeting in two weeks. Ben Mann, Fairfield’s public works director, summarized how the city evaluates traffic signals under the Ohio Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and said the intersection currently does not meet common signal warrants such as the peak‑hour or accident‑based thresholds.
Developer Matt Gaston, representing Vicky Development Group, said the project would yield about 45 owner‑occupied units with a target price around $300,000 and that all units would be restricted from renting. Gaston said the developer’s traffic engineer collected counts in March and proposed geometric changes — including extending the left‑turn storage on John Gray from 130 to 275 feet — that consultants project would reduce AM and PM delays in future (2045) conditions.
Residents who live on Carousel Circle and nearby streets described routine backups and safety risks. Gary Webb told council he had a photo showing more than 500 feet of backing on John Gray. “Please go watch the planning commission meeting and the video,” Webb said, asking council to consider the committee’s findings. Josh Large said his neighborhood has many children and asked, “Who’s going to be responsible if something happened to one of our little kids?”
Neighbors also questioned whether extending the left‑turn lane might worsen egress for existing businesses such as Walgreens and whether the developer’s turn‑lane and signal timing assumptions properly reflect peak conditions. Council members asked for the consultant data — specifically whether counts were derived from real‑time camera counts or seasonal averages — and Ben Mann said the city typically relies on outside firms and that ODOT and regional agencies also publish counts.
Mayor (as presiding officer) said council would review planning commission minutes and video and take the item up for final action at the next meeting. The planning commission’s recommendation to deny the zoning amendment and the requirement for a supermajority (5 of 7) to overturn a planning‑commission denial were discussed as part of the record.
The council did not take a final vote on the ordinance during the Sept. 8 meeting; the item is scheduled for third reading and a final vote at the council meeting in two weeks.
