Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Killian Road topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission recommends disapproval of 105.88-acre Killian Road rezoning request
Summary
The Richland County Planning Commission voted to send case 25-020MA to county council with a recommendation of disapproval after staff said the proposed R-3 zoning is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan and neighbors raised flooding and infrastructure concerns.
The Richland County Planning Commission on May 5 recommended disapproval of a rezoning request for about 105.88 acres near 180 Killian Road, voting to send case 25-020MA to county council with a recommendation that the request be denied.
Staff told commissioners the applicant, Ryan Holmes, seeks to rezone four parcels currently zoned a mix of Agricultural (AG), Residential Transition (RT) and Homestead (HM) to Residential-3 (R-3). Planning staff concluded the request is noncompliant with the county comprehensive plan’s neighborhood low-density designation, noting the future land-use map and an existing Planned Development District (PDD) in the general area present conflicting guidance.
Neighbors who spoke at the meeting said the area has flooding and road-infrastructure problems that would be worsened by large-scale residential development. Dwayne Bridal, who said he lives at 220 Killian Road, told commissioners the road has been “blowed out” by storms and that debris reaches his property. Sandra Sims of Blythewood said Killian Road had been out for 10 days after a heavy rain previously and warned that adding more housing without infrastructure upgrades would cause more damage.
Commissioners discussed how the future land-use map labels that corridor. Staff noted the map is “broadly painted” and that the mixed-use corridor designation in this location conflicts with adjacent neighborhood-low-density areas; previous map-amendment requests that would have supported a mixed-use corridor were denied and no supporting public improvements have been identified.
Commissioner Grady moved to send case 25-020MA to county council with a recommendation of disapproval “for the reasons stated by staff in their report.” Commissioner Sierks seconded. The motion carried on a roll-call vote: Grady, Sierks, Taylor, Durant, Mitts, Frierson and Yankee voted Aye; no Nays were recorded in the transcript. Staff said county council will take the case up at its May 20 zoning public hearing at 7 p.m. in council chambers; staff also noted councilwoman Barron, who represents the area, likes to hold town-hall meetings, so the case may be deferred to June.
What the commission voted on was a recommendation only. County council will hold its own public hearing and take the final legal vote on the rezoning request.
Votes at a glance: the planning commission’s recommendation to disapprove 25-020MA passed; staff noted the matter will be scheduled for county council on May 20 at 7 p.m. and could be deferred.
