Franklin commissioners reject poultry-house rezone after neighbors raise water and road concerns

Franklin County commissioners have rejected, 5-0, a request to rezone roughly 100 acres on Corbet Chappellear Road in Martin for proposed poultry houses. The request, RZ-2026-001, sought to change Map/Parcel 052/027 in District 1 from Agricultural to Agricultural Intensive. The county Planning and Zoning Commission’s April 16 agenda records the Board of Commissioners’ denial, though it does not identify the date the board cast that vote.

The decision matters because Agricultural Intensive zoning was the land-use approval sought for the proposed operation. For the tract’s owners, the denial stops this application’s requested zoning change; for nearby residents, it answers a dispute over whether a more intensive poultry use should be allowed amid concerns about wells, water supply, runoff, road conditions, truck traffic, safety and property values. The recorded decision does not establish that poultry houses were built or that construction permits were issued.

The proposal first appeared on the Planning and Zoning Commission’s March 19 agenda as a request to rezone the approximately 100-acre Corbet Chappellear Road tract for poultry houses. By the time commissioners scheduled an April 6 public hearing, the Planning Commission had recommended approval by a 4-0 vote. That recommendation moved the matter to the county board but did not decide it; at the hearing, the applicant and neighboring owners laid out competing views before the board’s later recorded denial.

At the April 6 hearing, the applicant said the tract would be divided into two parcels, with poultry houses on each side. Adjacent and adjoining property owners urged commissioners to consider the effect of the proposal on water supply and private wells, runoff, the condition of local roads, truck traffic and a nearby stream. Those concerns are recorded as residents’ objections, not findings by the county that the project would cause those effects. The Planning Commission’s earlier 4-0 recommendation shows that the proposal had support within the county’s advisory review process, even as neighbors pressed the board to reject it.

What is settled is the outcome of RZ-2026-001: commissioners did not approve the requested Agricultural Intensive classification, according to the April 16 planning agenda. What remains unestablished is equally important. The March and April agendas and hearing minutes document a proposed poultry-house development and the public debate over it, but they do not show construction, a building permit or another implementation step on the tract. Nor does the April 16 agenda explain the board’s reasoning or state the date of its 5-0 vote.

The next public sign of renewed activity would be a county agenda item, a new application or a permit-related filing tied to RZ-2026-001 or Map/Parcel 052/027. The denial resolves this particular rezone request, but it does not determine whether the owners will return with a revised proposal, seek a different land-use route or leave their plans unchanged. Until a later county record answers those questions, the future of the poultry-house proposal remains undecided.