A special exception permit for a wedding, events and photography venue on a couple’s five-acre parcel in the Elon area received the Amherst County Board of Supervisors’ approval May 21 in a 3-1 vote.

Alexis Fisher and her husband, Austin, requested the permit at 219 Phyllis Lea Drive on land zoned A-1, agricultural residential, to continue operating their business, Three Oaks Manor. The Amherst County Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of the permit in February and a second time in April by a 4-2 vote after the Fishers amended the permit to remove planned Airbnb use at the home on site.

Some neighbors have opposed the operation they called a “party venue” and said would disrupt the peace and tranquility of a rural, scenic neighborhood in the Elon community while some residents who directly adjoin the couple’s land have spoken in favor of it.

The Fishers plan to use a greenhouse and pavilion for special events, including weddings and photography with conditions that include no music playing after 10 p.m., a 100-guest limit for events and a required parking attendant for events exceeding 75 guests.

Alexis Fisher has apologized to county leaders for not having proper permitting in place for past events on site and said she has worked tirelessly to get proper zoning when she became aware of the requirements. She said Three Oaks Manor is affordable at $2,500 compared to other typical wedding venues that range from $8,000 to $30,000. 

She said of nine events held there to date, five had fewer than 35 guests and three had 50 or fewer. The venue’s hours of operation would be 9 a.m. to 10 p.m., parking would have direct oversight and carpooling is required, she said.

Fisher said previous events ended by 9 p.m. or earlier and carpooling would be required for events consisting of 50 to 100 guests. She said she and her husband have gone above and beyond what the county zoning ordinance requires.

“We promise to maintain and protect the current state of privacy and tranquility that current residents of Phyllis Lea [Drive] enjoy,” Fisher said.

She said the business supports vendors such as florists, caterers, restaurants, videographers, photographers, wedding planners and more, and serves couples and families desiring events on a controlled budget.

“It’s well loved and admired by many. It plays a special role in the lives of so many beautiful couples,” Fisher said, adding that not allowing it to continue would be devastating to her family and others.

She said about 590 people signed a petition in its favor and the couple has put in self-imposed conditions aimed at easing some neighbors’ concerns, including measures to minimize noise.

“We hope you can see how this benefits Amherst as a whole and how it helps financially support our citizens,” Fisher told supervisors.

Three Oaks Manor fulfills a need for affordable, small-scale weddings that offer uniqueness along with other events such as baby and bridal showers, engagement parties and birthdays, among others, and would allow her to stay home and raise their children, Fisher said.

Megan Vaughan, who along with her husband runs a micro-wedding venue on Elkton Farm Road in the Forest area of Bedford County, said during a May 21 public hearing that she went through a similar situation as the Fishers last year by applying for a special use permit, which some in her neighborhood “came out of the woodwork” to oppose after becoming aware of the zoning review process. The Bedford County Board of Supervisors approved the Vaughans’ special use permit on a 7-0 vote.

“The rules we set for ourselves are the same rules that the county set for us and we followed them with our special use permit,” Vaughan said. “The Fishers would do the same. This is a huge tourism opportunity for Amherst County … Any time they have a wedding the local economy is positively impacted and this growth potential for the county should be encouraged.”

Talia Coleman, who is moving to the county in the near future, said she had an engagement event at the greenhouse that drew fewer than 35 people and she has seen the Fishers jump through hoops to run the venue in a way that isn’t disruptive to the area. Coleman said the self-imposed conditions are more than generous in her view and noted the county has processes in place to revoke the permit if it came to that point.

She added most wedding venues cost an “arm and a leg.”

“Three Oaks Manor is an exception to that,” Coleman said.

Coleman said the “hardworking, dedicated” young couple should be allowed to continue a business that brings thousands of dollars in revenue to the local economy.

Rachel Vest, an Amherst County resident and wedding coordinator, said the Fishers’ dream to operate the venue is needed for the county. She said she believes in fairness, compassion and willingness to give entrepreneurs such as the Fishers an opportunity.

“As a resident deeply invested in Amherst County and the event industry I recognize the dire need for affordable venue options. What Austin and Alexis aspire to offer is precisely what our community lacks — an intimate backyard event space at accessible pricing,” Vest told supervisors. “They deserve a chance and it’s up to you all to give it to them.”

Jewel Newman, who lives next door to the Fishers, said she was happy to see the short-term rental component of the application dropped. Newman said the Fishers have been great neighbors and she supports their request.

Sharon Mays, an Elon resident and mother of a neighbor who lives directly next to the Fishers and supports the venue, said she has noticed past events have been quiet with dimmed lighting.

“It’s a beautiful area, they worked so hard and I think that other people should have a chance to enjoy Elon as well as we do,” Mays said.

Two others spoke in support of the Fishers, describing them as “standup citizens” who are contributing positively to the community.

Ten residents spoke in opposition to the request, including Whitney Gregory and her husband who said operating a party venue in a residential area is incompatible with the surrounding area.

Whitney Gregory said her father built their house in 1976 and it holds special meaning to her family, adding the events venue is “being forced on the neighborhood.”

“We’re not against small business or hard work,” Gregory said. “We’d love to help the applicant find a parcel where their dream to run a venue makes sense but operating 10 party events since December 2022 has created excessive traffic, noise and repeated U-turns at the end of the street where we are and in our driveway.”

She said 14 properties of 24 adults with more than 630 years combined residency in that area oppose the project.

“There are no conditions that you can put on a party venue that might sway us toward approval,” Gregory said. “We simply do not want a party venue in our neighborhood.”

She said the topography of the Tobacco Row Mountains foothills creates an amphitheater-like backdrop for sound to be easily heard among neighbors in the area.

“We hear it all and it’s much different than a neighbor throwing their own personal occasional milestone party,” Gregory said. “Those are very rare and not for profit.”

Gregory said her family’s “breathtaking” view of Tobacco Row Mountain is negatively impacted and said she feels the board’s “forever” decision to approve it contradicts the county comprehensive plan for growth and development as far as protecting the county’s natural beauty and rural character.

John Leddingham, who also lives in that area, said the planning commission had good reasons for shooting it down on two occasions.

“It’s a party venue — period,” Leddingham told the board. “If you all allow something like this to go on, there will be other people … who want to put venues like this throughout subdivisions in Amherst and you could end up having a whole bunch of micro venues like that that will create problems within subdivisions.”

His son, Joseph Leddingham, said he supports small business but expressed concerns with noise and other effects.

“A wedding venue, in my opinion, is probably pushing the boundaries of the five acres of this residential property,” Joseph Leddingham said.

Greg Freshour, who lives on nearby Kimberlea Road, said he moved to that area for the peace, quiet and privacy with views of Tobacco Row Mountain that area provides. He said the petition of those opposed shows 82% of neighbors in that area do not want it.

“Wedding venues are made for large parcels where neighbors will not be disturbed, not on a small five-acre plot surrounded by several homes,” Freshour said.

Other speakers raised concern with the effects on water capacity and quality, the environment and wear and tear on private roads that residents pay to maintain.

Supervisor Tom Martin said he understands the neighbors’ concerns and spoke of where he lives in Clifford on a road where a local church brings much traffic. He also noted landowners directly adjacent to the Fishers are not opposed.

“I think this young couple put a lot of investment in it,” Martin said, complimenting the venue’s design.

Martin said when his oldest daughter got married the family couldn’t find a smaller venue and used a local event space that cost a lot more than $2,500 that the Fishers charge.

“I think it’s a need,” Martin said of affordable wedding venues.

At Martin’s suggestion, the board nixed a proposed condition that the Fishers shall mail notifications 30 days in advance of any special event to all property owners on Phyllis Lea Drive and Kimberlea Road, adding that would likely lead to problems that in his view are unnecessary.

Supervisor David Pugh, the lone no vote, said he thinks the county is doing a disservice to the community by allowing it. He said allowing up to 100 people for events on a five-acre tract will bring noise and other issues, and such venues should be on much larger tracts without any homes nearby.

“I just don’t think it’s the right spot for a wedding venue,” Pugh said. “I don’t think it’s harmonious with the neighborhood. I think it’s going to be a detriment to everyone who lives around it, including their way of life, their peace …”

Vice Chair Claudia Tucker said she initially leaned to opposing it and finds it hard to not back the commission’s recommendation.

“But I also support small business,” Tucker said, adding the county’s ability to revoke the permit should be an incentive for the Fishers to follow through on their word.

Supervisor Chris Adams, who represents the county’s District 3 where the venue is located and was the deciding yes vote, said he is blessed to live in the Pleasant View area and put himself in the position of how he would feel if the business was locating near him. Adams said he is “in awe” of the investment the Fishers have put into the property.

“I have not taken this zoning request lightly,” Adams said. “… They have spent a lot of time, a lot of effort, a lot of money and it seems like they put a lot of pride in what they have.”