Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Highway19 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge protection of wetlands and rural character as Planning Commission debates 46‑lot rezoning on Highway 19
Summary
Multiple residents opposed a rezoning request for 70.14 acres along Highway 19 that would allow 46 single‑family lots, citing wetlands, flood risk, traffic and consistency with Imagine/Envision 2040; staff recommended disapproval of the future land use amendment but the commission approved the rezoning motion.
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Highway19 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Horry County Planning Commission spent extended public comment time on a request to rezone 70.14 acres from AG‑2 to MRD‑1 to allow 46 single‑family homes on Highway 19 in Conway. Staff described the proposal’s plan for 10,000‑square‑foot minimum lots, buffers, sidewalks and open space and reported approximately 34.3 acres of on‑site wetlands.
Felix Pitts, representing the applicant and G3 Engineering, said the project included a wetland delineation and "None of our lots are going to be developed within a flood zone," and he described 50‑foot buffers around wetlands and a 100‑foot buffer from the highway. Multiple residents testified in opposition. Michelle Kemp said the back "34.3 acres of wetland shouldn't be built on and should not be rezoned for MRD 1," warned that the road fronting the property flooded during Hurricane Matthew and Florence, and urged conservation rather than rezoning. Darwin Todd, Mike Cruz and others raised flood, traffic and school‑capacity concerns and said the change would erode the area’s rural character and the county’s comprehensive plan.
On the related future land use amendment, staff recommended disapproval because the change was inconsistent with the character of the community; the commission voted and the motion to approve the future land use amendment failed. On the rezoning itself, a commissioner made a motion to approve, a second was recorded and the motion carried. The transcript records the outcomes by voice/hand vote; individual roll‑call tallies were not recorded in the transcript.
