Bulloch County delays five rezoning hearings after legal‑notice error; residents raise water, road and school‑capacity concerns

Bulloch County commissioners heard public comment on five separate rezoning applications on a packed agenda but determined they could not take votes because county staff said the required legal notice for the zoning hearings did not meet the statutory window. County staff apologized and said the board would hear comments now and take formal votes at a reconvened hearing on Aug. 5.

Chairman David Bennett explained the county could not legally vote after staff advised the public‑notice deadline was missed. "We can legally not hold a vote on these zoning issues tonight," the chairman said. The board then allowed applicants and opponents to present and routinely moved each item to the Aug. 5 meeting.

Turtle Landing Investments LLC (Sinkhole Road at Ephesus Church Road): The applicant described an R‑80 (minimum 80,000 sq. ft. lots) subdivision of roughly 71 acres proposing 22–25 lots accessed primarily from an internal road off Ephesus Church Road and three lots fronting Sinkhole Road; the planning staff recommended denial after a unanimous Planning & Zoning vote to deny, and staff also listed recommended conditions if the board approved. Applicant John Spandl and developer Clayton Randall said the homes would be stick‑built, 1,200–1,600 square feet, served by wells and private roads; neighbors—represented by Judy McCorkle and others—argued the development would lack public water and sanitation, would change rural character, and could stress nearby schools. McCorkle submitted a packet of materials and said a petition of 67 signatures opposes the rezone; commissioners unanimously voted to defer the item to Aug. 5.

Michael Mallard (Clito Road): Mallard requested rezoning of about 24 acres from AG‑5 to R‑80 to create roughly nine lots, incorporating two existing homes on the parcel. Mallard said the houses would be modest, energy efficient and owner‑occupied or for rent; several neighbors, including Garrett Sowell and Dean Roberts, opposed the request citing nearby approved developments, existing infrastructure limitations on Cleito Road and concerns about rental housing and property maintenance. The board voted to defer to Aug. 5.

Beverly Kennedy (Old River Road South): Kennedy presented a modest request to subdivide a 6.07‑acre tract from AG‑5 to R‑80 to allow two additional lots; Planning & Zoning had recommended approval. Commissioner Ray Davis recused himself from this item because of a family relationship; the board deferred the matter to Aug. 5.

John and Marie Honeycutt Family LLP (US Highway 80 East): The Honeycutt application sought rezoning of about 51 acres for an R‑8 subdivision (8,000 sq. ft. lot minimum). Agent Steve Rushing said the request follows the county’s Bulloch 2045 comprehensive plan, anticipates public utilities as the City of Statesboro extends water and sewer, and envisions roughly 130–134 lots phased over several years. Dozens of residents, including Robert Lee and Lee Davis, opposed the proposal on flooding, drainage and wetland concerns; speakers described prior flooding after nearby developments and asked for a water‑impact study. Rushing said engineering work would avoid building in mapped wetlands and that detention and drainage would meet state standards. The board deferred the item to Aug. 5.

ABA Development LLC (Maria Sorel Road): The applicant sought to rezone 50.13 acres from AG‑5 to R‑25 for a lower‑density suburban subdivision (about 1.3 units per acre). Agent Grace Wooten said the plan is less dense than the county’s suburban plan and that engineers would design stormwater controls. Opponents raised questions about stormwater detention placement, a nearby active rail line and an adjacent propane transfer site, and said a blind curve on Maria Sorel Road and existing industrial traffic raise safety concerns. The board deferred this item to Aug. 5 as well.

Votes at a glance: Each rezoning was heard for public comment and then deferred to the August 5 meeting because county staff missed the legal notice deadline; motions to defer carried unanimously.

Ending: Commissioners repeatedly apologized for the notice error, said they would accept public comment again on Aug. 5 and encouraged applicants and opponents to return. The board did not take any rezoning votes at this meeting and left detailed staff recommendations in the record for the August hearing.