Bad Links?
Other glitches?
Notify Webmaster

County votes 4-0 against 286-acre rezoning

By BEN NELMS
bnelms@TheCitizenNews.com

Fayette County commissioners heard community concerns Feb. 24 over the proposed rezoning request by developer Dan Stinchcomb to rezone 268 acres fronting Davis and Ebenezer Church roads in the county’s geographic center.

The board denied the request that would have paved the way for the development of 182 homes on the property.

Commissioners also denied a request by Stinchcomb that would have rezoned 18.75 acres fronting Ga. Highway 54 and Huiet Drive from R-40 to C-H. Currently zoned for single-family residences, the request would have resulted in the development of 10 commercial lots.

Stinchcomb agent Randy Boyd made the case for the rezoning requests. Boyd told commissioners plans for the 268-acre development would include a recreation area, an amenities package with a pool, tennis courts and lake access along with 182 lots for single-family housing. Boyd said development would begin on the north portion of the property and work southward. Lots in the development would likely carry a price of $100,000, he said.

“This property has continued to sit for five years and it’s at the point now where it’s time to start developing it,” said Boyd. “We think this would be a nice subdivision.”

After Boyd’s presentation, Chairman Greg Dunn asked if anyone in the audience would like to speak in favor of the petition. No one in the audience responded.

Residents’ concerns over the rezoning request became clear when Dunn then asked if anyone in the audience would like to speak in opposition to it. His question was met with 46 people who stood, 10 of whom went to the microphone minutes later to state their concerns. Residents also supplied the signatures of 120 area residents who also opposed the rezoning effort.

One resident said their main objections were that petition did not adhere to current zoning requirements or with the county’s land use plan nor did the proposal indicate that a flood-plain study been performed.

Other objections from the obviously aligned community of neighbors, such as the cost to the school system in terms of increased numbers of students, the protection and maintenance of the historical nature of some portions of the property and currently existing drainage problems that would only be intensified with development, were noted.

Some residents suggested that the petition area could be rezoned for three-acre lots rather than the higher density, one-acre lots being requested.

Offering his reason for objecting to the petition, community resident Steve Short said water quality has the potential for being compromised with the addition of 182 homes and septic systems.

“What comes out of the septic goes straight into the drinking water. I don’t want to be forced into public water in a few years because of 182 more septic systems in a concentrated area getting into my drinking water,” he said.

Remarks by community resident Trudy Whittington echoed the sentiments of many of the residents both at the meeting and after it, as she noted the changes being proposed for their area.

Though many apparently favored a five-acre lot size while others agreed that three acres would suffice, all were insistent that the proposed one-acre lot size was not acceptable. Whittington said that if the petition was approved by the board her property would be bordered by several lots in the new development.

“It’s all quite disturbing. My husband and I moved here a few years ago with our two daughters. We’ve raised them here in the county,” Whittington said. “The quaint town that we moved to has just changed drastically. We moved out to Ebenezer Church Road, never giving a thought that one day we would wake up to this horror, that our property line could almost be city limits or even having one-acre houses. I feel if this [rezoning] happens here, a good and cherished way of life will come to and end.

“It’s hard to instruct your children when you see that government can come in and just totally change your choice and your way of life. I do understand the right for development but I would ask that it be no less than three acres.”

Robert Howell was the last resident to speak in opposition to the rezoning petition. Howell told commissioners he recently relocated to Fayette County from New York City when his company moved its headquarters. As he looked in Fayette and other counties, Howell said he found Fayette’s land use plan quite attractive.

“It made good sense, a nice mix of density in rural areas. And I found it was a nice place to live. I did my homework,” Howell said. “I decided it was a nice place to live based on the land use plan. It’s a good plan, it’s a sound plan and I encourage the board to stand behind that plan. I think as it is zoned today is the way it should stay.”

After residents spoke, Boyd assured commissioners that flood-plain and wetlands requirements would be complied with as would compliance with all applicable ordinances pertaining to the property. He asked commissioners to approve the rezoning petition, adding that if done, work on the development would start immediately.

Commissioners took up the issue, first discussing many of the aspects involved in a motion to deny zoning for one-acre lots and to permit, instead, zoning for three-acre lots. During the discussion phase, reference was made to Stinchcomb’s past zoning petition rejection by the Fayetteville City Council. Reference was also made by Dunn and other commissioners to the recent headlines and articles in The Citizen stating that the county feared annexation of the property. Those headlines, Dunn said, may have reflected the views of one member of an appointed board, not those of a member of the county commission.

After further discussion on items related to the rezoning petition, the motion to deny the request and to approve the property for three-acre lots was defeated. A subsequent motion to deny the rezoning petition and leave the current zoning in place passed.