The pursuit of a compromise in the court-ordered Lanier Golf Course rezoning continued Friday as the owners responded to neighbors’ proposed terms for an agreement.
But according to an e-mail update from the Lanier Lifestyle group, the new proposal was "unacceptable."
Neighbors have planned another meeting for Monday night to review the situation and continue working on acceptable zoning conditions.
On Thursday, Forsyth County commissioners again postponed a rezoning of the site to allow negotiations between the two sides to continue.
The new court-ordered rezoning deadline for the 172-acre site on Buford Dam Road is July 21.
It’s the second extension of the deadline, which was initially moved from June 26 with hopes of a compromise between owners Jack Manton and George Bagley Jr. and neighbors in the more than four-year dispute.
In 2007, the owners sued the county after commissioners rejected their request to rezone the property from agricultural to a master planned district.
The men had a contract with a developer to buy the site contingent upon its rezoning.
That litigation came to a stop May 12, when Appalachian Judicial Circuit Judge Roger E. Bradley ordered the site be given a "constitutional zoning classification."
Neighbors have agreed, in principle only, to a proposal that the course owners would donate the back 115 acres of the site to the county.
In return, the front portion would receive a higher density master planned development designation with a conditional use permit for a continuing care retirement community.
In exchange, the owners will require signatures of neighbors agreeing to drop current and future litigation.
According to Lanier Lifestyle, the most recent proposal does not have an adequate trigger for donating the land and only extended the time limit for the deal rather than eliminating it, as neighbors requested.
"Any time limit restriction must be completely removed," the group’s update states. "It doesn’t matter if it’s 100 years — homeowners should not sign off on any agreement with a time limit provision that further devalues adjacent properties throughout that period, and without some provision that further protects the proposed donated acreage from any development at any future time."
Other issues include: the zoning for the back portion and a clause agreeing that owners will also waive current and future suits, among others.