Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Opposition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors cite spot-zoning and enforcement failures in opposition to Greasy Creek rezoning
Summary
Neighbors and counsel told the APC that allowing General Business zoning at 1335 Greasy Creek Road would be spot zoning, would expand permitted uses unpredictably, and raised long-running enforcement and noise concerns; one neighbor reported 48 signatures opposing the change.
A string of neighbors testified in opposition to petition 26-RZ-01, pressing the commission to prioritize neighborhood character and enforcement history over rezoning.
Dan Cyr, appearing for neighbor Debbie Rogers, argued that approving the petition would constitute "spot zoning" and warned that General Business zoning "opens the property to many uses for the future." Rogers told the commission her family had owned nearby land for more than 60 years, described a semi-trailer that had sat for years on the parcel, and said she lives about 500 feet from a nearby parcel where she can "see and hear everything." She reported 48 signatures opposed to General Business on that county road.
Other neighbors raised similar themes: concerns about diminished property values, uncertainty over what future businesses could occupy the site, unresolved noise complaints linked to other rezoned parcels, and frustration that complaints had not produced consistent enforcement historically. Brandon Harris said the neighbor closest to the property (Ron Bishop) had submitted multiple complaints and had paid electric bills historically for prior owners, which Harris said reflected long-term issues with the parcel’s oversight.
Commission members cited the opposition’s enforcement concerns during deliberations, and the volume of opposing testimony contributed to the APC’s decision to forward a negative recommendation to the Board of Commissioners.
