CLEMSON — Despite revisions reducing the number of bedrooms and apartment units, the Clemson Planning Commission on Monday night recommended 6-1 to reject Steve Sefick’s request to rezone property between Cochran Road and Lindsay Road.

Sefick had requested the property be rezoned to an RM-3 and RM-4. Revisions presented to the planning commission showed reductions from 999 total bedrooms to 877, a 12 percent decrease; from 252 units to 226 units, a 10 percent decrease and from a maximum number of 996 unrelated occupants to 875, a 12 percent decrease.

RM-3 allows for a multihousehold residential district intended for units with single or mutiple households living in one- and two-story structures that require a greater density. RM-4 allows for multihousehold residential district that maintains and promotes development that is medium- to high-density for multiple and cluster housing. In addition, alternatives are provided for low-density, single-household or detached housing.

Sefick proposed the rezoning of 14 acres — rather than 17 as originally planned — in RM-4 in order to create more of a buffer in RM-3 along the western boundary of Cochran Road. Vehicle access to Lindsay Road would also be reduced through the revision.

Sefick’s original request to the planning commission in March resulted in a deadlocked vote sent on to Clemson City Council. In turn, council, hearing the same concerns about high density and traffic as the planning commission urged Sefick to go back before the commission and lower the impact of the rezoning.

“My goal is to establish the density,” Sefick said.

The problem Sefick said he faces is the inability to sell the property that he and his brother, John Sefick, have owned for many years. Sefick said four real estate companies informed him that the present density of the property wasn’t high enough to take the risk of purchasing the property.

But Sefick has repeatedly pointed out that the city is losing valuable revenue from the rezoning — estimating that the tax revenue during a 20-year period would be $1.9 million for an RM-3 and more than $3 million for an RM-4.

“I feel like this property has been held hostage, and you’ve lost tax money for 10 years,” he said.

But John Terry, a Cochran Road resident who lives across the street from the proposed development, expressed concern about how its rezoning would impact the infrastructure of roads, including traffic, sewer and water.

“Those are the things I think should be taken into consideration,” Terry said.

Planning commission members, while sympathetic with Sefick’s efforts to sell his property, said they too were uneasy about the proposal.

“I can appreciate your desire to maximize the value of your property, but the problem is that the property exists in a place that doesn’t support access adequately,” said David Allison, adding, “The topography used to support this would be an environmental hazard in my opinion.

But Del Kimbler — the lone commission member to vote in favor — said the property had previously been approved for more than 300 bedrooms as the now defunct “Heights at Calhoun” development, adding, “Those 300 plus bedrooms would have traffic impact beyond what is there now.”

“What we’re really talking about now is not going from nothing to 900 bedrooms but from 300-600 because it’s going to ultimately be impossible to build on that entire RM-4 area,” Kimbler said.

As far as infrastructure, Kimbler said developments are typically built beyond the capacity to comfortably move cars up and down the roads and that it “catches up at some point.”

“The choices are moderately high density that will attract development and live with high traffic in the area or leave it as is,” he said. “I think I prefer the first.”

Ultimately, the remainder of the commission disagreed and the recommendation to reject the proposal will now go before city council. Typically, council has the option of accepting or rejecting the planning commission’s recommendation or sending it back to the commission for additional review.

Chairman Spencer Bryan said he hoped the commission provided some direction to Sefick in his ongoing efforts to rezone his property.

“We had a good discussion, gave a lot of feedback, and that’s the best we could do,” Bryan said.