Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners approve rezoning of 39 Goose Pond Road despite neighbor opposition
Summary
Coffee County commissioners voted 14-2 to rezone a 3-acre parcel at 39 Goose Pond Road from A1 to C1, approving the applicant's request to site a family roofing business despite public testimony from neighbors who urged preserving farmland and raising traffic and child-safety concerns.
A divided Coffee County Board of Commissioners on June 23 approved a rezoning request for a 3-acre parcel at 39 Goose Pond Road, voting 14 in favor and 2 against to change the property from A1 (agriculture) to C1 (commercial). The applicant, who identified herself as Lacy Cune, said the rezoning would allow her family to locate the office for a family-owned roofing and siding business two miles from their home.
Neighbors urged the commission to preserve the area's agricultural character. "It's always been agriculture," said Ernest West, whose property borders the parcel. Donna West Fletcher, whose family farm is nearing century-farm status, cited congestion at the corner of Highway 53 and Goose Pond Road and said children play near the site.
The applicant defended the request, saying the business employs four people who already travel Goose Pond Road and that materials are shipped directly to job sites, so she did not expect semitrailer traffic or new congestion. "We are simply asking for the opportunity to establish a permanent home for it," she said.
Steve Cunningham, chairman of the Planning Commission, explained the commission's unanimous positive recommendation, citing the property's frontage on State Highway 53 (a collector/arterial), available water, nearby fire protection and the presence of other mixed commercial uses in the area. "What the Coons have asked in the eyes of the planning commission is reasonable and allowable," Cunningham said, while acknowledging sympathy for neighbors.
Commissioners discussed the legal voting standard for zoning changes, with county staff noting Tennessee law requires a majority of the full elected body (10 of 18 members) for such actions, not a majority of those present. After limited commissioner discussion and no additional public speakers, the commission voted to approve the rezoning 14-2.
The commission record does not list a formal amendment to the request; minutes show the motion carried as presented. The transcript contains inconsistent name spellings: the applicant self-identified as Lacy Cune; the planning chair referred to "the Coons," and the memorial resolution read earlier used the surname spelled with a trailing 'j.' The article uses the names as spoken but flags those inconsistencies in the record.
The county clerk noted this rezoning had been before the commission previously and failed to produce the 10 votes required; the applicant withdrew and later re-applied, after which the planning commission again issued a positive recommendation.
Next steps: the rezoning takes effect according to county procedures; no further action was recorded at the June 23 meeting regarding conditions or building permits.
