Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Bel Air topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission recommends disapproval of rezoning for two South Bel Air Road parcels
Summary
The Columbia County Planning Commission voted 4-0 on Feb. 19 to recommend disapproval of a request to rezone two parcels at 309 and 311 South Bel Air Road from community commercial (CC) to R-2 single-family residential; staff had advised against the rezoning, citing long‑range corridor plans.
The Columbia County Planning Commission on Feb. 19 recommended disapproval of a rezoning request for two parcels at 309 and 311 South Bel Air Road, forwarding the commission’s recommendation to the Board of Commissioners for final action on March 3.
Staff planner Danielle told the commission the parcels had previously carried a time-limited conditional use for single-family residential that expired and that the county’s long-range plans identify the Bel Air corridor for professional/commercial uses. “For that reason, staff is recommending disapproval of the rezoning request,” Danielle said.
Applicant Charles Petrie, who said he speaks for one of the property owners, asked the commission to recommend rezoning to R-2 to preserve residential use and to create a buffer from adjacent commercial development. “Someone could come in and say you’re living there illegally,” Petrie said, describing a deal he said a developer then backed out of and urging relief so residents would not face noncompliance while they seek a buyer or other remedy.
A developer representative, Sanjal Kani, told the commission the developer already had acquired parcels to the north and intended a commercial layout that would include a fence, landscaping and an additional buffer to the north; he urged the commission to keep the CC designation so the long-term corridor plan would be preserved. “We would never treat anybody with disrespect and shoo them off in a certain amount of time,” Kani said, describing ongoing negotiations with the property owners.
Commissioners asked staff about options such as extending conditional use or withdrawing and reapplying for conditional use; staff said the conditional use had expired and that reapplication would be a separate process. After discussion, a commissioner moved to recommend disapproval of file RZ251204; the motion passed by the voice vote the chair announced as 4-0.
The commission’s recommendation is advisory; the Board of Commissioners will take up the matter at its March 3 meeting. The transcript shows staff, the applicants and the developer agreed negotiations were ongoing but disagreed on whether rezoning or a conditional-use extension best protects current residents in the short term.
