Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission recommends rezoning Pine Creek Road parcel for two-family rental units
Summary
The Richmond County Planning Commission voted to forward a rezoning recommendation for a 1.74-acre Pine Creek Road parcel to allow a two-family rental dwelling, with staff conditions requiring permits, landscaping and that the rezoning be limited to the proposed dwelling; tenants and neighbors spoke in support.
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Richmond County Planning Commission voted to forward a rezoning recommendation to the Board of Supervisors for a 1.74-acre parcel on Pine Creek Road owned by Cecil John Sills Jr., to change the zoning from Agricultural General (A‑1) to Residential General (R‑2) to allow construction of a two‑family rental dwelling.
Staff presented the application and recommended approval subject to conditions, saying the parcel was subdivided in August 2024, the property was purchased in November 2023, and that the rezoning would be conditional for construction of the proposed dwelling only. Staff noted the applicant must obtain all required state and local permits and that landscaping or buffering would be required along adjoining property lines. "Staff does recommend granting this rezoning based on the following," the staff presenter stated while reviewing the packet and GIS exhibits.
Applicant remarks and public testimony emphasized local housing needs. The applicant (identified in the record as Speaker 4) said the project’s main goal is to "provide more affordable inventory of housing for the area" and that the owner maintains existing rental properties. Tenants and neighbors spoke in favor: Tamika Croxton said she has lived at an owner-managed property for nearly four years and described it as "affordable" and well maintained; Jay Taylor described the owners as responsive and invested in keeping properties neat.
Commissioners questioned driveway and road access, potential for future development on an adjoining strip, and likely rent levels. The applicant said the driveway would be maintained by the owner, that the road could be widened if needed, and that rent levels were not yet finalized but were "typically lower than most" comparable units.
The commission made a motion to forward the application "as presented" to the Board of Supervisors and approved the recommendation by voice vote; the staff presenter noted the Board will schedule its own public hearing. The planning commission’s action is a recommendation only and does not by itself change the parcel’s zoning.
Clarifying details: the staff packet includes a site plan sketch described in the record as a roughly 2,400‑square‑foot multifamily building; the written notice in the record describes the request as to allow a two‑family dwelling. The record contains both descriptions; the commission’s recommendation conditions the rezoning to the construction described in the application and requires a final site plan and permits before construction.
What happens next: The planning staff will brief the Board of Supervisors and transmit the commission’s recommendation and stated conditions; the board will hold a public hearing and make the final decision.

