Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents object to Land Rocco rezoning; board approves reclassification with special‑use conditions
Summary
After a lengthy public‑comment period raising flooding and public‑notice concerns, the Pickens County Board approved portions of the Land Rocco parcel reclassification and a special‑use permit that limits the subdivision to no more than 27 lots and requires a hydrology study, abandonment of a road cutoff, and other conditions.
Pickens County commissioners approved a multi‑part reclassification of a 145.988‑acre tract owned by Land Rocco LLC and granted a special‑use permit with conditions aimed at limiting development impacts, after dozens of residents raised concerns about flooding, road safety and public‑notice procedures.
A motion approved reclassifying tracks 1–12 to Estate Residential and tracks 13–29 to Small AG, and directed the applicant to split the parcel into two lots consistent with the board action. Staff outlined special‑use permit conditions the board adopted: the two new parcels may not contain more than 27 lots in total; four lots in the Estate Residential district are to be confined to two lots for sight‑line effectiveness; the end of Cutoff Road must be abandoned; the developer must submit a new plat reflecting the board's action and conduct a hydrology study as part of Chapter 38 subdivision review.
Multiple residents spoke during the guest‑comment period. One commenter said they collected affidavits from people who did not see notice of the planning‑commission hearing and questioned whether the required public notice had been posted in the correct location. Several residents described frequent flooding on Pettit Road and adjoining properties and warned that adding homes, driveways and impervious surfaces could worsen runoff and damage downstream properties. Steve Brooks, a resident who identified himself at the meeting, said his property repeatedly floods and urged the board not to approve the subdivision as proposed: "Both times, my property has flooded across my driveway," Brooks said.
Other speakers raised safety concerns about Pettit Road, which they described as narrow, hilly and lacking shoulders; one speaker asked the county to consider a single main entrance or turn lanes to reduce the number of driveways onto the road. The board discussed staff recommendations and stipulated the special‑use conditions intended to address many of those site‑specific concerns.
The board's action on this item included a vote to reclassify parts of the parcel and to adopt the special‑use permit with staff‑recommended conditions. Commissioners noted the action triggers Chapter 38 subdivision procedures, including required plats and studies before final approval of lot layouts or roadwork.
