Neighbors oppose C-3 rezoning for RV ‘condominium’ storage; commission still recommends approval

A proposed rezoning (PCR-26-04) to convert roughly 5 acres on Zor Church Road from agricultural to C-3 for secure RV/motorhome storage condominiums prompted extended public comment at the Warrick County Area Planning Commission meeting.

Scott Beadle of Cash Wagner and Associates (speaker 10) and Lee Chandler (speaker 2), identified as the applicant, described the plan as a series of secure storage buildings sold as condominium units (10 units per building), with gated access, security cameras, large buffer zones (proposed 35–60 feet on several sides) and an on-site dry basin for stormwater detention. Beadle said the buildings would be constructed with firewalls between units and that covenants and a use-and-development commitment would limit allowable uses.

Several nearby property owners opposed the change. Angela Rumporf (speaker 11) said the request conflicts with the county comprehensive plan and called the rezoning a form of spot zoning that would bring increased traffic, noise and lighting. Mark Borstal (speaker 12) and Tom Newmaster (speaker 13) both said the area is residential with high-value homes and expressed concerns about runoff, narrow roads and neighborhood character. A few neighbors expressed that they do not object to secure storage per se but were worried about traffic and the scale and compatibility of C-3 zoning.

Applicant representatives said covenants would prohibit rentals and that the first phase would consist of a single building sized to meet code with drainage, erosion control and a commercial septic system sized for limited restroom use. The applicant noted adjacent property to the south is already zoned C-1 and that the development team intends to maintain buffers to minimize visibility.

After discussion, the commission recorded two opposed votes (Stacy and Richard Reed) but otherwise voted to forward a favorable recommendation to the commissioners. The commission noted the decision is a recommendation; final approval will be decided by the county commissioners. The commission also reminded attendees that private covenants and any legal challenges would be separate civil matters.