Harrison County supervisors hear in-depth debate on zoning rewrite to define lot sizes, public review steps

Harrison County Board of Supervisors members spent the bulk of a special recess meeting Dec. 11, 2024, discussing a proposed rewrite of the county zoning approach that would break broad R-1 and related districts into smaller subcategories with explicit minimum lot sizes and revise the sequence of public review for subdivisions.

The proposal, introduced in presentation by Dunson Scruggs, an urban planner, would create multiple R-1 subdistricts that spell out minimum lot sizes and reduce reliance on conditional-use approvals by assigning density up front. “One of your biggest issues is the A-1 district. It has a size of 15 acres … the majority of people in Harrison County who are zoned A-1 do not have 15 acres,” Scruggs said while outlining recommended subcategories and related setbacks and density limits.

Supporters and several developers said the approach would give both the county and applicants clearer expectations. Kenneth Jones, a developer who gave his Gulfport address, said the change would tell developers what the board wants in each area: “If you would have a plan, guide developers. Guide people of what you think needs to go where,” he said. Andy Phelan, an engineer and member of the Ocean Springs Planning Commission, told the board that a tightened comprehensive-plan map coupled with the proposed districts could be used to identify growth corridors and direct development to places with infrastructure.

County staff and proponents described a multi-step process tied to the proposal. Under the outline presented, a rezoning hearing would establish permitted density (for example, a named R‑1.15 for 15,000‑square‑foot lots); a conceptual or sketch plat could be submitted with that rezoning or shortly afterward; and subsequent preliminary and final plat hearings would address engineering, drainage, road widths and other technical details. Scruggs and staff said that sequence would produce more public review opportunities than the current single-notice conditional-use process.

Engineering staff said a sketch plat can surface technical issues earlier. “The sketch plat is where you’re almost doing that conditional‑use type of look,” said Jackie (engineering department staff), urging that required components be defined so the public sees drainage, access and layout before final approval.

Opponents warned that rezoning to create a new by‑right density could make it harder for neighbors to stop high-density subdivisions later. Bert Gillespie, who identified himself as an attorney for the Harrison County Planning Commission and Zoning Office and as a rural resident, urged caution: “If we abandon the requirement of conditional use of subdivisions, we go regret it.” Several speakers also argued that approving a zoning map change without binding conditions could shift the legal burden to opponents and make remedies more difficult.

County counsel, identified in the meeting as Tim, said the board could build legal safeguards into any new process. “I think you could design a reverter clause or contingency clause where the first approval … would be contingent on the final approval of the plat,” counsel said, describing an approach that would make mapping changes conditional on later technical approvals.

Developers and builders discussed design drivers and costs. Several said curb-and-gutter requirements increase development costs and can push applicants toward smaller lots to recover infrastructure expense; some suggested allowing open ditches in appropriate places to lower cost and preserve environmental features. Kenneth Jones and other developers urged the board to “incentivize what you want” in the rules so builders choose larger lots or conservation subdivisions if that is the county’s preference.

Board members and commenters repeatedly urged that a stronger comprehensive plan or a focused land‑use map be used to identify which corridors are suitable for higher density before rezoning individual tracts. “Use the comp plan to define where rural Harrison County is,” an Ocean Springs planning commissioner and speaker said, arguing that a plan can guide both applicants and the board.

No ordinance change or rezoning was adopted at the meeting. Commissioners and staff indicated they would return with refinement to specifics, including whether conceptual plans should be required with rezoning applications and how time limits or reverter language would be structured. The board scheduled further consideration and a follow-up meeting on Dec. 19, 2024.

The discussion covered legal risk, public-notice timing, infrastructure costs, and environmental considerations; speakers from the planning office, engineering staff, county counsel and multiple developers and residents participated.