Hart County commissioners take first reading on Chapter 46 changes to limit parcel splits

The Hart County Board of Commissioners voted 5-0 on May 13 to take a first reading of revisions to Chapter 46 of the county land development standards, moving the ordinance change forward for additional drafting and a later public hearing.

The proposed amendment would require that "the land reference herein shall be delineated by its parent / original tax map and parcel number," and that a division of a parent parcel to create a newly numbered parcel under the exemption would be allowed "only once in a 2 year period," language read into the record by planning staff. The change is intended to limit rapid subdivision that commissioners said can be used to evade the county’s review process.

Supporters said the rule would make exemption reviews clearer and reduce workarounds. Planning staff read the draft language on the record: "the land reference herein shall be delineated by its parent slash original tax map and parcel number" and that a subsequent division "shall occur only once in a 2 year period." Commissioners discussed making the period longer — one county cited had a three-year limit — and asked staff to consider alternative phrasing and fixed dates.

Discussion at the meeting focused on several enforcement and implementation issues. Commissioners and staff debated whether change of ownership should reset the subdivision clock, whether a required legal description or plat should accompany exempt divisions, and how to handle divisions already in progress. Commissioner Bennett warned that people could seek "workarounds" if the language was unclear and asked for clearer anti-circumvention language. Commissioners also raised practical enforcement concerns: planning and permitting staff currently share many duties and would carry additional workload if the county adds subdivision monitoring duties.

Staff and commissioners discussed enforcement mechanisms the county could use if a division "slipped through the cracks," including stop-work orders or case-by-case review, and whether to require plats or stamped surveys for exempt divisions. One commissioner suggested requiring a plat to create a permanent record, noting that other counties use plats for similar controls.

By motion of Commissioner Dorsey, seconded by Commissioner Teasley, the board took the amendment as a first reading and instructed staff to incorporate the comments discussed and return with revised language. The vote was 5-0.

The measure was taken as a first reading; the board did not adopt a final ordinance at the meeting. Staff said they would return the amended language for further consideration at a later meeting.