Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer seeks rezoning of Ellis Forest Road parcel; commissioner moves to keep 2‑acre minimum
Summary
A developer asked the Meriwether County Board of Commissioners to rezone 25.87 acres on Ellis Forest Road from rural residential to R‑1 to allow five 1.5‑acre lots in phase 1; commissioners raised questions about water, road‑paving costs and precedent and a motion was made to retain the 2‑acre minimum for the area.
John Knight, presenting on behalf of Chisel Mill Design and Bill's LLC, told the Meriwether County Board of Commissioners on June 23 that his firm seeks rezoning of a 25.87‑acre parcel on Ellis Forest Road from RR to R‑1 to permit five 1.5‑acre lots in a phase‑1 subdivision.
Knight said the proposal reduces an earlier concept of seven lots to a first phase of five, that water is available up to the property and that the nearest hydrant is about 1,000 feet away. He described a flow test showing adequate pressure for the proposed phase and said paving Ellis Road is feasible once the waterline is extended; he told the board the applicant intends to pave the developer’s portion of Ellis Road in early 2027 if approvals and cost estimates support that timeline.
Commissioners and residents focused on three recurring concerns: whether rezoning the entire 25.87‑acre tract rather than only the smaller portion intended for immediate development would allow more lots later, the cost and timeline for paving Ellis Road, and whether adequate water pressure exists at higher elevations. One commissioner said the board should confirm prior approvals and minutes showing where smaller lot entitlements were granted in the county before setting precedent. Another resident urged the board to maintain a two‑acre minimum countywide.
After discussion, Commissioner (S6) moved that the board not rezone the parcel to R‑1 and instead keep the area zoned for two‑acre minimum lots; the motion was seconded and approved by voice vote (roll‑call tally not specified in the transcript). The board then moved on to the next agenda item.
Why it matters: Rezoning decisions change allowable lot sizes and can affect future development patterns, road‑paving responsibilities and expectations about where infrastructure (water, hydrants) will be extended. Commissioners repeatedly pressed the applicant for clearer cost estimates and documentation linking prior rezoning approvals to water extensions.
What’s next: The transcript records a motion to retain two‑acre minimum zoning for the area and a voice vote in support; the minutes and any formal ordinance or plat changes will reflect the board’s final action and any required conditions or stipulations.
