Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission fails to advance rezoning for 98 Jennings Road after affordable-housing, infrastructure concerns
Summary
Beaufort County Planning Commission did not recommend approval of a rezoning for 86.16 acres at 98 Jennings Road after commissioners raised concerns about affordable-housing commitments, infrastructure documentation and road impacts; the applicant said it will continue negotiations with County Council.
The Beaufort County Planning Commission declined to forward a recommendation to County Council for a rezoning request affecting about 86.16 acres at 98 Jennings Road, citing remaining questions about affordable housing commitments and infrastructure readiness.
The application from Pulte Homes would use the county’s Hamlet place-type overlay to allow a mix of T3 Hamlet Neighborhood and T4 Hamlet Center uses. County staff told the commission the applicant had addressed several mapping and open-space labeling issues raised at an earlier review but recommended conditional approval only if the developer works with County Council on a development agreement addressing affordable housing.
Rob Merrick of Pulte Homes told the commission the company had revised plans and provided a draft development agreement, saying the plan contains multiple affordable-housing components including deed-restricted workforce units, first-time-homebuyer provisions and a community repair fund. "We're more than happy to continue having those conversations to negotiate what would best fit the community," Merrick said.
Commissioners pressed for stronger, quantifiable affordable-housing commitments. One commissioner said the plan’s current estimate of fewer than 4 percent of units in the 80–120 percent area-median-income bracket was too low and suggested a target in the 10–20 percent range.
Members also requested supporting documentation for utility capacity and stormwater plans. The applicant said service letters and supporting documents were in the record and that detailed engineering and any needed upgrades typically occur later in the development-review process.
A motion to recommend approval with conditions — including a more meaningful affordable-housing plan and a prohibition on altering district design standards inside a development agreement — was moved and seconded. The chair called for the vote and recorded opposing voices; the motion did not pass.
Because the Planning Commission is advisory, the matter may return to County Council for further negotiations and any potential action. The applicant said it would continue discussions with County Council about the development agreement and housing components.
