Residents cite health concerns as Coffee County commissioners reject proposed asphalt-plant rezoning

The Coffee County Board of Commissioners voted unanimously Dec. 1 to reject a rezoning application by CT Realty Investment Group for 50 acres at 450 Chaney Road that the applicant said would host an asphalt plant.

Jason Whiddon, the county’s code enforcement director, told the board the Planning Commission recommended approval but county staff recommended denial, citing that the proposal would create an isolated industrial district in an area that is largely agricultural and residential. The vote to reject was moved by Commissioner Ted O’Steen, seconded by Commissioner George McIver, and carried 5–0.

During the public hearing, company representative Reese Akins said concerns raised in an earlier, larger application had been addressed, including reducing the proposed site from 140 acres to 50 and adding buffer zones. Akins said there is limited water use in asphalt plants and that the company had invited affected residents to visit its Valdosta plant; he said only one resident took the offer and was satisfied.

Nearby residents raised health and property concerns. Greg Tanner told the board he objected "due to medical reasons and health issues that could potentially affect his family," and Robert Chaney said the plant could cause medical issues and create railroad-blockage problems that might reduce rental demand. Matt Seale, CEO of the Douglas Chamber of Commerce and Economic Development Authority, urged the board to approve the project, saying it could be a "multi-million-dollar investment" that "would eventually employee up to 50 employees." The board recorded those public comments and then rejected the rezoning.

The transcript records Planning Commission support for the proposal (Planning met Oct. 27, 2025) but notes staff opposition. Commissioner discussion and the board’s vote followed the public hearing and staff recommendation; no formal environmental or public-health analysis was presented during the meeting.

The rejection leaves the property zoned AG (Agriculture); the developer may choose to revise or withdraw the application or pursue other avenues consistent with county zoning rules. The board adjourned at 10:19 a.m.