Bad Links?
Other glitches?
Notify Webmaster

Planners say ‘No’ to 268-acre rezoning

Bombshell: County center already zoned for big increase in residential density

By J. FRANK LYNCH
jflynch@theCitizenNews.com

It didn’t take long Thursday night for members of the Fayette County Planning Commission to recommend denial of Dan Stinchcomb’s latest request to increase density in the heart of the county.

But it also became clear that there was little, if anything, they could do to stop it in the future.

About two dozen neighboring property owners came out in opposition to Stinchcomb’s proposal to build 186 houses on 1-acre lots, straddling both sides of unpaved Davis Road.

The celebration was shortened, however, when Stinchcomb’s representative at the planning commission meeting let slip a bombshell:

The 268 acres up for rezoning represent just a fraction of the nearly 700 acres he owns north of Davis Road, stretching to Ga. Highway 54.

That land, embroiled in one controversy after another for the better part of a quarter decade, is already zoned to allow one-acre homesites.

And Stinchcomb intends to start building on them this year.

Randy Boyd, speaking for Stinchcomb, took issue with concerns about whether or not a rezoning of the southern end of the property would include improvements to Davis Road, now a rough dirt route that in some places is too narrow for more than one car at a time.

“We’re convinced that people would rather drive down a paved road rather than an unpaved dirt road, so we’re treating Davis Road as a property boundary,” Boyd explained.

Planners said they were willing to negotiate with Stinchcomb over part of his request, as long as he showed willingness to pave Davis Road.

“I probably wouldn’t have a problem with R-40 in that area if you did something about the road,” said Chairman Jim Graw.

“Mr. Boyd says it’s not intended to be used for traffic, but like it or not it is going to be used for traffic and I think the developer does have a responsibility to improve that road.”

Boyd responded, “It’s beyond me why somebody would take a dirt road we respectfully left in its natural state and want to improve it. If you improve it you are inviting people to use it.”

Besides, said Boyd, the plan Stinchcomb proposed last week was strictly a rough draft.

“We don’t know what this is going to look like eventually,” Boyd said.

It did show a paved main road would connect from Ebenezer Church Road all the way north to Huiet Drive, he said, where zoning in place since 1980 already allows for hundreds of homes, without any grounds for protest from nearby residents.

“We’re going to go ahead and do the R-40 area first, all the way from Hwy. 54 south,” said Boyd. “We’ll put in a nice recreation area up there, right across from the new middle school, and you know that’s the reason people want to move here.”

Al Gilbert, who has served on the planning commission for 17 years, said there’s no doubt in his mind what Stinchcomb’s next step will be.

“I sit here in fear tonight that the city of Fayetteville is going to come in here and annex this land,” he said. “You know it’s going to happen, no matter what the zoning is. And it’s wrong, just wrong. Why do we even have a land use plan? Why do we go to the trouble?”

Chairman Graw agreed that fear of a Fayetteville annexation was an issue, but pointed out that the commission can’t base its decision on that speculation.

“We can’t make a vote on what we think might happen in the future,” said Graw, adding, “But we can require that the developer fix the road as a condition of the rezoning.”

Boyd would have nothing of it.

“I’d rather not put Mr. Stinchcomb in that position,” he said.

Earlier in the meeting, the planners approved another Stinchcomb request, albeit with a significant change.

Boyd explained that Stinchcomb wanted to rezone 18.75 acres fronting Huiet Drive and Hwy. 54 just west of Smith and Davis to develop a nonresidential subdivision consisting of 10 lots.

Planners approved a rezoning, not for the commercial-highway (C-H) designation Stinchcomb sought, but for the much more limiting Office-Institution (O-I) category.

Both recommendations will be taken up by the Board of Commissioners on Feb. 24.