Greenville City Council settles Woodruff Road zoning fight

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20110202/NEWS/302020037/1003/rss04/Council-settles-Woodruff-Road-zoning-fight

February 2, 2011 Greenville City Council settles Woodruff Road zoning fight By Rudolph Bell Staff Writer The Greenville County Council voted to allow less development on her property than she had originally requested, but Linda M. Leslie didn’t seem discouraged following the decision. Instead, Leslie said the council’s decision had opened a “wonderful opportunity for development” on the 1.4-acre parcel she owns with Anthony K. Cousins at the intersection of Woodruff and Godfrey roads. The vote means something besides housing can now be developed on the site, Leslie said. “I think it’s a good thing it’s opening up for development,” she said. The latest zoning fight along congested Woodruff Road began when Leslie and Cousins requested a rezoning that would allow up to 18,000 square feet of office space on the site where a single house is the only development now. Weeks of controversy came to a head Tuesday night, when County Council gave final approval to the rezoning but with the condition that any office development be limited to 3,500 square feet. That’s in line with the East Woodruff Road Area Plan, a guide for land use drawn up with citizen input in 2008. A group of Eastside homeowners, including state Rep. Phyllis Henderson, had asked that the council abide by the plan. The council voted 10-0 with two members absent to approve the rezoning with conditions. There was no debate. On a separate issue, two citizens told council members that they didn’t like a proposed ordinance that would prohibit pet owners from chaining their animals outdoors for more than two hours a day. The county’s Public Works, Planning and Development Committee signed off on the plan Monday. Robert G. “Butch” Taylor criticized the proposal as an improper intrusion into the affairs of private property owners. David Knapp, another resident who spoke during a public comment period, said the county didn’t need a “dog management law.”