Council votes to rezone lot

Despite some concerns by a small group of citizens speaking out against the move, the Farmington City Council voted Monday evening to rezone a piece of ground at 302 West Columbia as commercial.

Admitting she had a similar business and lived nearby, Mayor Jeannie Roberts separated herself from any further discussion and the vote on rezoning the land. She said she was distancing herself from any further action regarding the bill, and turned that portion of the council meeting over to Mayor Pro Tem L.J. Miller.

Roberts had been very outspoken during an earlier council work session about her dissatisfaction with the rezoning request. She said she opposed the property being rezoned without knowing exactly what the owners, Ed and Jacinta Weidenbenner, had planned for the lot next door to their Butterfield’s Florist.

But Roberts comments and opposition came under fire when Councilwoman Vonne Phillips questioned whether the mayor should even be voicing her opinion on the matter in specific terms when she owned a florist shop which would appear to be in direct competition with the Weidenbenners business.

While she had continued to voice her perspective at the work session, Monday evening Roberts made no comments about the rezoning bill. She simply said she would “not vote on the issue,” and asked that the mayor pro tem handle the bill.

Miller took the mayor’s seat and asked that the bill be introduced and read a second time, steps required before a vote can be taken by the council. At that point he opened the floor for discussion and asked that anyone speaking on the matter limit their talking to three minutes. Councilman Dennis Smith questioned the idea of public input since a lengthy public hearing on the rezoning request had been held during the work session on Feb. 19. Roberts stood up and explained that as mayor she had the right to allow public discussion prior to a council vote. Miller said he had no problem with the public participation and would continue allowing the residents to speak.

One by one a string of nearly a half dozen people took turns voicing their opposition to the rezoning of the property just west of Butterfield’s Florist. All seemed concerned with the future of the neighborhood and what effect a commercial-zoned area could have on West Columbia Street.

Jessie Williams, Planning and Zoning member, told the council that the Weidenbenners had said during the P&Z meeting prior to last week’s work session that they would either use the rezoned lot to expand their existing building or utilize the space for parking.

Ed Weidenbenner was called on to respond. He said he had not indicated he would use the lot for only one of those two uses, but said a special use had been approved months ago to use the lot as a parking area. He indicated, as he had during last week’s meeting, that he was not sure what he would do with the lot in question.

Councilman Jeff Firehammer asked Weidenbenner if he would see the rezoned lot immediately. Weidenbenner responded by saying he “hadn’t been made an offer”. He went on to say he and his wife would build nothing on the lot to take away from the neighborhood.

With discussion done, a vote was called for by Miller. Council members Dr. David Coleman, Darrel Holdman and Ron Perryman voted against the rezoning. Smith abstained from the vote, citing his wife’s employment by the Weidenbenners. Members Don Johnson, Phillips, Firehammer and Miller voted in favor of the rezoning. The matter passed by a 4-3 vote.

Had Smith voted and chose to vote “yes,” Miller would have then been called on to cast a tie vote acting as mayor pro tem. That vote was not required in this case.

Just as it seemed the controversy was over for the evening, the next bill to be read and called for a vote caused tempers to flare to the point of raised voices and accusations. This time it was Miller and a family of developers who would cause the mayor to bang her gavel on the table and call for order and for the discussion to cease.

A bill was on the table to grant a Planned Unit Development to Burgess Construction for the Villas at Butterfiend Gardens project. Miller had made it clear during last week’s meeting that he was not in favor of allowing a variance from the existing building codes requiring residential homes to be built at least 17 feet apart. A similar request had been made, debated and approved in January for another development in the city.

Monday evening Miller began to discuss his dissatisfaction with the deviation from the existing building requirement when developer Matt Burgess walked to the front of the council chambers and began defending his company’s intentions with the requested change from the city’s code requirements.

As Miller continued making his point about his concerns over the change in the restriction Burgess began making references to apartments built and owned by Miller nearby the Villas at Butterfield Gardens development. Miller answered by saying he had built his apartments to code.

Then Burgess took the discussion in a different direction by saying he had contacted all city council members except Miller earlier in the day. He said Miller had been talking negatively about Burgess Development in the community. Miller questioned Matt’s claim, at which time Burgess said Miller had been talking to businessman Keith Hutson.

As the mayor tried to redirect the conversation Burgess went on to say he had a problem with a city councilman talking (bad) about his business. Matt’s brother and business partner Brett Burgess stood up and walked up beside his brother and joined in the conversation. Roberts began banging her gavel on the table and asked that the discussion cease or be redirected back to the legislation at hand.

A call for a vote was made by Roberts. When the roll call was made the bill passed by a vote of 7-1 with Miller being the only one to vote against the development.

During quieter times the council approved a number of housekeeping-type bills, giving the nod to an assortment of curbing, sidewalk, paving and maintenance contracts for coming months.

The meeting ended with council members rejecting a bill which would have required gas stations in the city to insist customers pre-pay or get pre-approval before making fuel purchases. The controversial bill was introduced as a means of saving the police department time and money in investigating “drive off” gas theft cases. But in the end the council voted 6-2 to not pass the bill.

The council is set to meet next for the March work session on March 13 at 6:30 p.m.

Archives Web Site Marketplace Obits Babies Jobs