Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the James Oak Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee recommends denial of rezoning to allow animal production at James Oak Court parcel
Summary
The Natural Resources Committee voted unanimously to recommend denial of a request to rezone a 3.28-acre parcel at 64 James Oak Court from T3 Edge to May River CP to permit animal production, citing neighbor concerns about odor, noise, stormwater and compatibility; staff had recommended a 50-foot buffer if rezoning were approved.
Committee members debated a zoning map amendment requested to legalize animal production on a roughly 3.28-acre parcel in Pritchardville and ultimately recommended denial to council.
Planning Director Rob Merchant told the committee the parcel was operating an animal-production use in a district (T3 Edge) that does not permit that use, and the owner applied to rezone the property to May River Community Preservation (May River CP) to rectify a code violation. Staff recommended that, if approved, animal-production uses in May River CP adopt a 50-foot buffer from adjacent single-family residences to mitigate impacts.
Committee members expressed concern that the buffer would not protect neighbors from noise and odors and noted that the planning commission had recommended denial; one committee member read concerns across the nine criteria used for zoning decisions and moved to recommend denial. The motion to deny was seconded and passed unanimously; where enforcement is required, staff said the property already has a notice of violation and code-enforcement procedures would proceed if rezoning is not approved.
Why it matters: The request sought to change the parcel’s classification to allow commercial animal production in an area planned for low-density residential uses; the committee’s recommendation will go to full council for final action.
Next steps: The committee forwarded the recommendation to deny to council; if council denies rezoning, code enforcement will continue and the owner would be required to reduce animal numbers or otherwise remedy the violation.
