Planning commission continues review of Reebaugh Road preliminary plat after extensive public comment; applicants asked for revised materials

The Beaufort Planning Commission voted to continue consideration of a preliminary plat for a proposed 72-unit townhouse development at 1026 Reebaugh (Rebow) Road, directing the applicant to supply additional technical and design materials before the item returns. The motion to continue passed unanimously after two-plus hours of staff presentation, applicant remarks and extensive public comment by neighboring residents and environmental advocates.

Kurt, the planning staff member who presented the item, described the parcel as previously a mobile home park and summarized earlier approvals and sketch plans. He said the current submission proposes 72 units—mostly attached townhouses with alleys and private drives—and retains a central tree-covered open space. Staff recommended approval with suggested conditions including additional perimeter landscaping and consideration of two-story end units adjacent to existing single-family homes.

Applicant representatives said the property owner has reduced density compared with earlier proposals and reiterated that utilities and stormwater reviews are underway with Beaufort-Jasper Water and Sewer Authority and city engineering. Dan Kiefer (attorney with Whitmer Jones Kiefer) and Tim Butcher and Larry Paragano (development team) told commissioners they seek preliminary plat approval and said detailed architecture is not yet complete.

Neighborhood speakers and organizations raised multiple concerns. Diane Fairley (Haven Collective), representing adjoining Oak Haven and Pine Haven residents, said notification procedures in earlier rezoning rounds were inconsistent and asked for stronger transitional protections between the new development and existing one-story homes. Residents repeatedly asked the commission to limit building heights nearest single-family homes to two stories and to avoid a full vehicular cut-through from the new development onto Oak Haven Street. Several speakers described Oak Haven Street as a narrow, roughly 20-foot pavement width neighborhood street that is not designed for through traffic.

Environmental and technical concerns also featured prominently. Jesse White of the Coastal Conservation League urged more tree preservation, use of green-infrastructure stormwater techniques rather than relying on a central detention pond, and consideration of smaller detached units or narrower row-house footprints to reduce impervious cover. Residents questioned whether portions of the parcel that lie at as-low-as 7 feet above sea level would require substantial fill and how that would affect drainage into Battery Creek. Applicant engineers said the site grading and stormwater design have been coordinated with city consultants and Beaufort-Jasper Water and Sewer Authority and that Allison Road improvements provide an outfall; applicants said more detailed permits remain to be finalized.

Commissioners and staff noted several procedural and informational gaps that must be addressed before the planning commission can make a final decision. The commission requested an updated traffic-impact analysis (TIA) keyed to the current proposal showing trip distribution and level-of-service figures and seconds of delay at affected intersections; building massing and concept elevations for the proposed townhouses to show scale adjacent to existing homes; a topographic overlay showing how proposed buildings and roads relate to existing grades; stormwater flow direction diagrams that show how runoff reaches on-site controls and whether any off-site flow results; and a fire-marshal letter on emergency access. The commission also asked the applicant to consider reducing overall density and to present options regarding the Oak Haven/Rebow Road access configuration (for example, right-in/right-out on Rebow and restricted access to Oak Haven), informed by the updated TIA.

After discussion, a commissioner moved to continue the item to a future meeting and listed the materials the applicant should supply for the continuation; a second was made and the motion passed unanimously. Staff will post the continuation date and the applicant said it will submit revised materials for staff review and for the next hearing.

No final approvals or denials were recorded at the meeting.