Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Sumter County Council denies rezoning request for 1990 Hideaway Drive after neighbors oppose
Loading...
Summary
Council denied a request to rezone 2.65 acres at 1990 Hideaway Dr. from Agricultural Conservation to Residential-15 after neighbors raised concerns about road frontage, septic capacity and potential declines in property values.
Sumter County Council voted to deny second reading of a rezoning request for 1990 Hideaway Drive on Nov. 22, after a public hearing in which neighbors urged the council to keep the property in its current Agricultural Conservation (AC) zoning.
Planning Director Helen Roodman told council the application sought to rezone about 2.65 acres from AC to Residential-15 (R-15) to allow additional attached or detached single-family units; the property currently contains a duplex and is adjacent to other duplexes on the eastern side of Hideaway Drive. Roodman said the site lacks public sewer, so septic-field size and soil conditions will limit the number and placement of homes.
Residents who spoke in opposition cited specific concerns. Chris Brooks asked those in the room opposing the rezoning to raise their hands; "approximately 13 people raised their hands," he said, and listed problems neighbors see as relevant to council's decision: the lot lacks the 100 feet of required road frontage for an R-15 house (the site has 95 feet), and duplexes would require 300 feet. Several speakers said existing duplexes nearby have contributed to litter and local crime concerns and that additional rental units could reduce surrounding property values.
A representative for Gainey Construction Company, the property owner, said the company has improved management of the existing duplexes and that new construction typically raises nearby property values. He also said it was not yet decided whether future housing would be duplexes or single-family homes and that proposed lots would be roughly three-quarters of an acre.
After the public hearing, Councilman Artie Baker moved to deny second reading; the motion was seconded and carried by the council. The action on second reading was recorded as denial.