Full house expected at Thursday’s Glynn County Commission meeting

By Scott Ryfun

 

There will be a full house for the August 6th Glynn County Commission meeting. At issue is massive opposition by residents to a rezoning request at 104 General Oglethorpe Road. Normally I would blow off the protest over a rezoning request on St. Simons Island, because, well, it seems EVERY rezoning request on St. Simons is vociferously opposed by SOMEBODY.

This one is different, though, and it’s one that bears some discussion for a couple of reasons. One is that there seem to be a pair of doctors who are trying to do something good for the community and are being relentlessly vilified and lied about while doing it. The other is that the issue involves spot zoning. Spot zoning is really the beast that should be held up to scrutiny in this issue.

First, though, can we just agree that not everyone who wants to do something we don’t like is evil? Maybe we just have different ideas, neither of which is more or less moral than anyone else’s. Far too often when I see disagreement, the difference of opinion is immediately dressed up as a moral disparity between the parties involved, and this rezoning situation has been no different.

A tour of the social media posts attempting to whip up opposition to the rezoning call into question the doctors ability to prepare a workable business plan, because “they don’t want to pay rent.” It seems to me that there’s a difference between being unable to prepare a good business plan and looking to improve the already good one you have. But phrasing it that way on social media makes it seem like this husband-and-wife medical team are incompetents, when nothing about the proposal says they’re not capable of drafting a workable business plan.

I saw a post that calls into question their medical ethics for wanting to base their concierge medical clinic in a residential area. Again, deeply cutting personal attacks are completely unwarranted in this case, yet they have persisted. One poster on social media made the assertion that the clinic would be open 24/7. That’s nothing more than a lie. The clinic will be open during regular business hours and will be limited to two patients per hour, which also stifles the arguments about the dramatically increased traffic flow that will come with the potential rezoning, as there will at most be sixteen additional cars turning onto General Oglethorpe Road each weekday.

One of the many AI-generated images opposing the rezoning portrays the clinic as a two-story, glass-and-stone megalith that dwarfs the houses lining General Oglethorpe Road, when in reality, the building would look like any other house that sits on that road. In fact, another dishonest tenet of the opposition is that once the land is rezoned, it could be sold and a CONVENIENCE STORE could be placed there, or, heaven forbid, a Dollar General. The problem is that the rezone isn’t to Commercial, it’s to Planned Development, and the property would have restrictions placed on it. It could still be used for residential purposes, or for a medical facility or for an office space. None of these uses are likely to elevate traffic levels significantly.

I have to say that when I see this kind of vitriolic, dishonest opposition I generally hope the side where the lies are being spread (even the posters who say they aren’t attacking the character of the applicants and then proceed to attack the character of the applicants) gets exactly what it deserves: a great big, stinking L.

Unfortunately, in this case there is some merit to the opposition. Spot zoning is rarely used and should be able to answer at least one of these three questions affirmatively:

-Is it consistent with the land use plan? Clearly, a commercial enterprise two lots into a residential development strikes most people as being at odds with the land use plan for that area. Furthermore, an attempt to place a reversion clause into the request, wherein a sale of the land would cause the zoning to revert back to residential was not deemed legal and was removed. A good compromise would be to have the Land Trust swap the adjacent lot that faces Frederica with the land at 104. The clinic would be on Frederica Road, and the neighborhood’s integrity would be preserved. In fact, the lot at 104 would never be anything other than wooded area if that swap were to be enacted.

-Does it serve the public welfare? It would be hard to argue that the public welfare is served broadly by a concierge clinic that’s limited to seeing sixteen people per day. In fact, the public welfare argument would probably be better served if the clinic were to be a 24/7 walk-in emergency clinic as many have dishonestly claimed. Maybe the doctors should reconsider. The imaginary clinic that those who are dishonest about their opposition have dreamed up would actually be a solid argument in favor of spot zoning to serve the public welfare.

-Does the rezone negatively affect the character and property values of the neighborhood? By itself, the clinic COULD meet this definition. After all, it’s a quiet business with upscale clients that would only result in sixteen more cars entering General Oglethorpe Road (and turning almost immediately) daily. However, it’s the uncertainty of what comes AFTER the clinic that would possibly harm the “character and property values” of the neighborhood. Is having a business two lots down from Frederica in a residential area good for the property values in the area? Well, it depends. Is it in keeping with the character of the area? Again, it depends.

And that vagary is enough to make me come down in defense of the current residential property owners.