Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rezoning 072601 Zulu topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission rejects rezoning request after residents and commissioners cite access, spot‑zoning concerns

Roane County Commission · July 14, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A request to rezone two parcels to C-1 (Resolution 072601 Zulu) drew resident opposition over easement access, private water/sewer and risk of spot zoning; the commission discussed the planning department opinion but the motion to approve failed in the recorded proceedings.

The Roane County Commission on July 26 considered Resolution 072601 Zulu, a request to rezone two small parcels from A-2 (rural) to C-1 (commercial). The public hearing produced opposition from nearby residents and commissioners who raised concerns about access, private utilities and the precedent that spot zoning could create.

Mike Parkinson, who identified himself as a Kingston resident, told the commission the 2.1-acre site could host 8–13 campers and argued the site sits on private water and sewer and is reached only by an easement rather than a county-maintained road. Parkinson said approving C-1 zoning where adjacent properties are not C-1 would amount to impermissible spot zoning and could make future rezone requests harder to deny.

Applicants Holly and Michael Murphy described plans for a campground with full hookups and said they are surveying two parcels into one and have contracted for driveway repairs. Planning staff (Corey Haggard) told the commission the department’s technical opinion is that the proposed rezone would not, in itself, constitute spot zoning and that the proposed uses are consistent with adjacent rural-business uses and nearby city commercial property. However, staff acknowledged that lack of road frontage and easement access are legitimate concerns and noted planning commission concerns raised earlier.

Multiple commissioners said the parcel’s lack of road frontage and the potential precedent for additional commercial conversions made them reluctant to approve the rezone. After extended discussion, the motion to approve the rezoning measure was not adopted in the portion of the transcript provided; the record states the motion failed.

The commission also noted planning and long-range zoning work coming this year; some members urged additional workshops and public education before future zoning changes.