Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pebble Creek proposal reduced to 24 townhomes draws residents’ opposition over traffic, flooding and character
Summary
Green City/Stone Ridge’s plan to reallocate 3 acres in the Pebble Creek PD for up to 24 townhome units prompted strong public comment: supporters praised 'master-on-main' for downsizers; opponents raised flooding, traffic and PD-compatibility concerns and asked the county to reject a change that they say contradicts original planned-development promises.
At a Greenville County informational hearing, developers presented a revised plan for CZ-2026-002, a PD amendment in Pebble Creek that would convert community recreation land to up to 24 attached townhome units and 1.2 acres of passive recreation.
Staff introduced the docket. The presenter who identified himself as Serge Atushko of Green City said the proposal is a reworked version of an earlier, larger plan. "We got denied, and we listened to the community...so we come back and we went to redesign and we just decide to change the tennis courts...so we decide to go ahead and try to put the 24 homes there," Atushko said, describing the units as "luxurious townhomes" with security cameras, walkways and design intended to maintain neighborhood quality.
Technical testimony from engineer Stephanie Gates described the layout: the developer proposes up to 24 units, each a maximum of 2,000 square feet and up to 45 feet high, constructed in townhome rows with no more than three units attached per row and a minimum of 36 parking spaces (two spaces per unit). Gates said PD language was left flexible so units could be for-sale or multifamily depending on market demand.
Opponents said the change would violate the original PD's intent for open space and floodplain buffering and would worsen congestion on nearby roads. "Building on this land directly contradicts the original PD, the county's flood protection goals, and the community's long standing expectations," resident Brenda Butchak told council, citing a September 2021 traffic study she described as outdated and saying approvals for many nearby homes have already added thousands of daily trips. She urged the council to deny the rezoning and protect the existing community character.
Tom Jackson, a golf-course architect and long-term Pebble Creek resident, said the site is lower than Pebble Creek Drive, raising questions about driveways, stormwater retention, sewer connections and past flood events. "That whole area...flooded during that period," he said of a past storm, and he asked the county to require detailed drainage and construction plans before approving any zoning change.
Supporter testimony included a resident, Chaney DeGroot, who said after touring the proposed units she believed the changes had been shaped by resident feedback and would provide desirable housing options while sustaining local home values.
Council asked follow-up questions about unit type, rental vs. owner-occupied tenure, and traffic; the applicant and engineer said flexibility in the PD lets market conditions determine exact product type, and they reiterated plans to design stormwater treatment to Greenville County standards.
County staff conducted a show-of-hands count of those present and estimated roughly 56 persons in opposition at the hearing; presenters and staff noted some variance in the count.
Because this hearing was informational, the Planning Commission recommendation and these public comments will move to the Planning & Development Committee and future council readings for formal action.
