Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Density topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Task force debates Jonesville Road density and whether multifamily belongs
Summary
Hilton Head Island’s LMO task force on March 26 debated whether to limit density on Jonesville Road and whether multifamily uses (including townhomes) should remain allowed. Staff urged separating density from design and pledged more analysis of nonconformities, traffic and subdivision rules.
The Land Management Ordinance task force discussed proposed zoning changes for Jonesville Road on March 26, focusing on whether to lower density and remove multifamily uses.
Town manager Mark (speaker 2) framed the group's role as providing a framework for staff rather than drafting final code: "What we're trying to do with you all is bring to you code edits that we believe are important," he said, adding that task force votes supply direction for code writers to produce legal text.
Staff maps and an analysis presented by Shay (speaker 11) isolated parcels along Jonesville Road now zoned RM‑4 and showed a range of existing and entitled densities. Shay said recent subdivisions and entitlements produced densities "around 3 between 3 and 5 to 6," and that Bailey's Cove was close to six units per acre; he noted that under some entitlements parcels could have achieved up to eight units per acre before recent subdivision rule changes.
Members split on the approach. Several members argued density and multifamily should be discussed separately: one said, "density is sort of the feel‑good metric" (speaker 10) and urged stronger design and subdivision standards rather than an automatic drop to the lowest density. Others, including residents who spoke in public comment, favored RSF‑3 (single‑family) to protect neighborhood character and to avoid additional traffic burdens.
Staff told the task force it will run a focused analysis of potential nonconformities (multiple dwellings on a lot), traffic and infrastructure constraints, and the practical effects of any density change. The staff presentation stressed that the task force's guidance would be used to draft code language for later public hearings.
Members used a live poll to gauge sentiment about removing multifamily uses; staff cautioned the poll was advisory and that wording and turnout affected results—at one point staff reported roughly 71% of those who voted said not to remove multifamily based on the votes received during the session.
What happens next: staff will analyze the land‑use and nonconformity impacts of proposed changes, produce specific draft code edits for the task force to review, and return with more detailed subdivision and traffic analyses before any formal recommendation to planning bodies or council.
