Brown County planning commission recommends against rezoning 1335 Greasy Creek Road

The Brown County Area Planning Commission voted 4–1 on Feb. 24 to recommend that the County Commissioners deny a petition to rezone 2.262 acres at 1335 Greasy Creek Road from primary residential (R‑1) to General Business (GB).

Planning staff presented the petition (docket 26‑RZ‑01) and described the parcel’s existing structures, a small amount of floodplain, and utilities. Kayla, the planning staff member, noted the commission must weigh the comprehensive plan, current conditions and the character of surrounding land when deciding rezonings and referenced review criteria in 36‑7‑4‑603. She also reported that the applicant pulled a commercial driveway permit (permit #1476) on Dec. 22, 2025.

Petitioner Jesse Clark told the commission he operates Clark Electrical Services and said rezoning was necessary to keep his business and jobs in Brown County. “Our payroll exceeded $340,000 last year and we project about $450,000 this year,” Clark said, adding the firm employs nine people locally and trains apprentices through a county co‑op program. Clark offered several voluntary mitigations, including parking vehicles out of sight, limiting delivery days and avoiding a lighted sign.

Neighbors and an attorney representing several residents urged the commission to reject the rezoning as spot zoning. Dan Cyr, a lawyer for nearby resident Debbie Rogers, told the commission the parcel is surrounded by residentially zoned parcels and that the county staff report’s map shows adjacent properties are R‑1 or floodplain. “A GB designation opens this parcel to a wide range of commercial and light industrial uses, not just one electrical contractor,” Cyr said, adding that 40 or more neighbors signed a petition opposing the change.

Commissioners debated legal tools that might allow a business to operate while limiting impacts — site‑specific commitments, conditions or a planned unit development (PUD) — but repeatedly cited concerns about long‑term enforcement and the risk that a GB zoning would permit uses beyond the current petitioner’s intentions. Legal counsel explained that an owner can offer a written commitment recorded with the ordinance but noted that enforcement and future changes remain practical concerns.

Member [speaker 4] moved that the commission issue a negative recommendation to the Brown County Commissioners on docket 26‑RZ‑01; the motion was seconded and passed 4–1. The commission will certify that recommendation to the County Commissioners, who will hold the final public hearing and decision at a later meeting.

The commission also discussed the county’s comprehensive plan update and recurring enforcement questions about nonconforming uses. Staff told interested parties they can contact the commissioners’ office for the date the rezoning will be heard.