At a Pickens County commission work session, county planning staff presented seven rezoning applications and recommended approval for each. The planning commission had reviewed the cases and recommended approval in every instance; commissioners discussed land-use impacts, road improvements and maintenance responsibilities but did not take final votes at the work session.

County planner Charles (staff) led the presentation, listing each application and the parcel details. The requests included: a rezone of an 8.084-acre parcel (Parcel 012073) from Urban Residential to Estate Residential (RZ-190851; applicant Roy Donald Brady); a 3.88-acre portion of a 15.78-acre parcel (Parcel 020016) from Agriculture to Highway Business to allow a service/shop for trucks and tractors (RZ-190852; applicant Sean Elliott); a 27.2-acre parcel along Stone Crest Road from Agriculture to Small Agriculture to permit a five-lot subdivision (RZ-190853; applicant Southern Property Investments); a 15.12-acre portion of a 34.72-acre parcel from Agriculture to Rural Residential for an eight-lot single-family subdivision (RZ-190854; applicants Brandon Roman and Brett Nolan); a 1.5017-acre portion of a 31.86-acre parcel from Agriculture to Rural Residential to combine with an adjoining lot (RZ-1190856; applicant Kristen Braswell); a 0.23-acre adjustment and a 4.11-acre portion rezoning to separate a house from a larger tract and create a buildable lot (RZ-190857; Thompson Lane Dreams LLC); and a 10.82-acre portion of a 60.39-acre parcel from Agriculture to Small Agriculture for smaller lots (RZ-190858; Thompson Lane Dreams LLC).

Staff recommended approval of each request on the basis that the proposed uses align with the county’s comprehensive plan character-area designations (many described as rural residential or commercial corridor) and that applicants had addressed code conditions. Charles said staff had reviewed the requests against the comprehensive plan and zoning code and that the planning commission had moved to recommend approval in each case; planning-commission vote tallies were reported in the staff presentation (multiple cases recorded as carrying unanimously 4–0 or 5–0).

Discussion during the presentation focused on a handful of recurring issues. For the application to subdivide the Stone Crest Road parcel, staff and the applicant had agreed to a condition requiring a 15-foot extension of an existing Stallcrest Steam Mill Road right-of-way to create a 60-foot-wide easement (30 feet each side of center) to meet county road-width requirements; the applicant provided signed petitions from neighboring owners to dedicate the right-of-way. Commissioners asked who would maintain the upgraded road; county staff said the applicant intends to bring the portion up to standard but that county maintenance may not extend to the newly dedicated portion, and the county’s records show parts of the route in a gray area where formal abandonment had not been completed.

On a separate application fronting Highway 136 West (RZ-190852), staff described the rezoning as enabling construction of a shop for commercial equipment and noted that, if the business failed in the future and regulatory requirements were met, the property could later be used for retail. For the Thompson Lane minor subdivisions (RZ-190857 and RZ-190858), staff said driveways onto the state route would require Georgia Department of Transportation approval and that conversations with DOT indicated fewer access cuts would be required — the developer expects two lots to share a driveway so there would be only four driveway cuts instead of eight.

Commissioners and staff also discussed a parcel containing an existing cell tower where a small lot adjustment would separate the tower parcel from the larger agricultural tract; staff said cell towers are treated as conditional uses under the county code and that the conditional-use approval predated some of the rezoning. Several commissioners asked for clarity on surveys and on whether neighboring property owners had provided consent for dedications; staff confirmed petition signatures had been included in at least one application.

No final votes on any rezoning requests were recorded during the work session. Each case will return as an agenda item at a future regular meeting for formal action by the Pickens County Commission.

Votes at the planning-commission level were reported in the staff presentation and are summarized in the actions metadata for each application below. The commission discussion emphasized road access, maintenance responsibility and consistency with the comprehensive plan as the principal factors commissioners expect to review when each case returns for final action.