12DecemberPB
RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES
December 3, 2019
There was a meeting of the Randolph County Planning Board on Tuesday, December 3,
2019, at 6:30 p.m. in the 1909 Historic Courthouse Meeting Room, 145-C Worth St,
Asheboro, NC.
Chairman Pellcalled the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. and welcomedthose in
attendance. Pell called for a roll call of the members.
Jay Dale, Randolph County Planning and Zoning Director, called theroll of the members.
Reid Pell, Chairman,present;
Wayne Joyce, Vice Chairman,present;
John Cable,present;
Keith Slusher,present;
Kemp Davis,present;
Melinda Vaughan,present;
Ralph Modlin,present;
Michael Koehler, Alternate,present;and
Reggie Beeson, Alternate,present.
County Attorney, Ben Morgan was also present.
Daleinformed the Chairman that there was a quorum of the members present for the
meeting.
Pellcalled for a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented.
Consent Agenda:
Approval of minutes from November 5, 2019, Planning Board meeting.
Approval of agenda for December 3, 2019, Planning Board meeting.
Approval of the Planning Board meeting schedule for 2020.
Approval of Special Use Order for His Laboring Few Ministries.
Approval of Resolution Changing the Date of the Planning Board
meetings.
Davismade the motion to approve the consent agenda as presented with Slusher
making the second to the motion. The motion was adopted unanimously.
Pellcalled for any old business to bebrought before the Board. Hearing none, the Board
moved forward with the cases on the agenda.
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 1of 22
Daleread the Conflict of Interest statement.No Board members indicated a conflict with
any of the cases to be considered.Dalethen presented the first case of the night along
with site plans and pictures of the site and surrounding properties.
SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST #2019-00002920
JESSE J McADAMS,Denton, NC, is requesting a Special Use Permit at his residence
at 8664Woods Dairy Rd, Concord Township. Tax ID# 6781748004. The Special Use
Permit would specifically allow the applicant to obtain a Federal Firearms License and
operate an in-home, internet sales, gunsmithing and small arms manufacturing without
an outside firing range.
Pellopened the public hearing and asked if anyone was present in favor of the Special
Use Permit request.
Daleadministered the oath to Jesse J McAdams.
Jesse JamesMcAdams, 8664 Woods Dairy Rd., Denton, NC said he isa business
owner of M&M Welding and Fabricationsand is interested in obtaining a federal firearms
license which will allow him to conduct small arms manufacturingand gunsmithing at
home in the evening.
Modlinasked if all of this would be handled online or if there would be a lot of anticipated
traffic.McAdamssaid some of his operation would be handled online but the main goal
is for gunsmithing although therewould not be a tremendous amount of traffic.
Cableasked if there would be a lot of traffic due to shipping.McAdamssaid he has two
driveways that are very accessible and there would not be an impact on the neighbors.
Pellasked if there was anyone else present in favor of the request.Hearing none,Pell
asked if there was anyone in opposition to the request.Hearing none, Pellclosed the
public hearing for discussion among the Board members and a motion.
Davismade the motion to approve the Special Use Permit request on the specified
parcel(s) on the Special Use Permit application, based upon the sworn witness testimony
that is included in the minutes, as well as the site plan(s) with any and all agreed upon
revisions, and that the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety, the use
meets all required conditions and specifications, the use will not substantially injure the
value of adjoining property, that the use is a public necessity and the location and
character of use, if developed according to the plan(s) as submitted and approved, will
be in harmony with the area and in general conformity with the Randolph County Unified
Development Ordinance.Slushermade a second to the motion to approvethe Special
Use Permit request.
Pellcalled the question on the motion to approve the Special Use Permit request for
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 2of 22
Jesse J McAdamsand the motion was adopted unanimously and the Special Use Permit
was granted.
Daleinformed McAdams that his Special Use Permit had been granted by the Randolph
County Planning Board.
Dalepresented the second case of the night along with site plans and pictures of site
and surround properties.
REZONING REQUEST #2019-00002977
ISAAC D YOW,Asheboro, NC, is requesting that 1.17 acres out of 3.35 acres at 3313
Pisgah Covered Bridge Rd, Cedar Grove Township, be rezoned from RA –Residential
Agricultural and RR–Residential Restricted to HC-CD–Highway Commercial –
Conditional District. Tax ID# 7647783936. Secondary Growth Area. The proposed
Conditional Zoning District would specifically allow an automotive repair shop in a
proposed 30 ft. by 50 ft. building and automotive sales with a 5-car display area as per
site plan.
Pellopened the public hearing.
Isaac Daniel Yow,3313 Pisgah Covered Bridge Rd., Asheboro, NC said he would like
to have automotive repair and 5 car sales lot located at his home.
Joyceasked if there would be any outside storagefor junk parts, etc.Yowanswered no,
hesaid he did not want a junk yard.
Cableasked if an outside fence was planned.Yowsaid there would be a fence installed
between the proposed building and neighbor.
Davisasked about the location of the building in relation to the property line and if there
would be a natural tree line between his property and the neighbor’s.Yowsaid the
existing wooded area would have to be thinned out and he would eventually install a fence
for the neighbor’s privacy.
Cableasked if the fence would be 6 ft. or 8 ft. and if it would be a privacy type fence.Yow
said he would install an 8 ft. privacy fence in the future.He said the neighbor indicated
that he is fine without a fence but he will install one out of respect.
Cableasked how much noise he would anticipate.Yowsaid it would be minimal, most of
the noise would be contained within the building.
Slusherasked about the hours of operation, oil storage and disposal.Yowsaid he would
be open from approximately 4 p.m. until 9 p.m., he would purchase anabove-ground oil
tank for storage and contractwith a waste oil management company that will pick up the
used oil, antifreeze etc.
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 3of 22
Pellasked if there was anyone else present in favor of the request.Hearing none, Pell
asked if there was anyone in opposition to the request.Hearing none, Pellclosed the
public hearing for discussion among the Board members and a motion.
Joycemade the motion to approve the rezoning request to rezone the specified parcel(s)
on the rezoning application to the requested zoning district based upon the Determination
of Consistency and Findings of Reasonableness and Public Intereststatements that are
included in the Planning Board agenda, submitted during the rezoning presentation and
as may be amended, incorporated into the motion, to be included in the minutes, as well
as the site plan(s) with any and all agreed upon revisions, also incorporated intothe
motion and that the request is also consistent with the Randolph County Growth
Management Plan.Slushermade a second to the motion to approvethe rezoning
request.
Pellcalled the question on the motion to approve the rezoning request for Isaac D Yow
and the motion was adopted unanimously and the rezoning was granted.
Daleinformed Yow that his rezoning request had been approved by the Randolph County
Planning Board.
Dalepresented the third case of the night along with site plans and pictures of site and
surround properties.
REZONING REQUEST #2019-00003049
LANIER, INC.,Asheboro, NC, is requesting that 1.84 acres located at the intersection of
US Hwy 220 S and Lewis Ctry Dr, Union Township, be rezoned from RA –Residential
Agricultural District to CVOM-CD–Conventional Subdivision Overlay Mixed –Conditional
District. Tax ID# 7657758130. Primary Growth Area. The proposed Conditional Zoning
District would specifically allow the division of a lot in the Lewis King subdivision into 2
lots for manufactured housing as per site plan.
Pellopened the public hearing.
Don Lanier,6048 Sandy Creek Church Rd., Staley, NC, officer for Lanier, Inc., told the
Board that would require septic systems, have public water available and both lots meet
the minimum lot size and road frontage requirements.
Davisasked if the driveway access would be located on Hwy 220 Bus. South.Lanier
saidhe planned to have both driveways located to the south of each lot in lieu of site
distance,with the possibility of the corner lot having access from either 220 Bus. South
or Lewis Ctry Dr.
Pellasked if there was anyone else present in favor of the request.Hearing none, Pell
asked if there was anyone in opposition to the request.Hearing none,Pellclosed the
public hearing for discussion among the Board members and a motion.
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 4of 22
Davismade the motion to approve the rezoning request to rezone the specified parcel(s)
on the rezoning application to the requested zoning district based upon the Determination
of Consistency and Findings of Reasonableness and Public Intereststatements that are
included in the Planning Board agenda, submitted during the rezoning presentation and
as may be amended, incorporated into the motion, to be included in the minutes, as well
as the site plan(s) with any and all agreed upon revisions, also incorporated into the
motion and that the request is also consistent with the Randolph County Growth
Management Plan.Cablemade a second to the motion to approvethe rezoning request.
Pellcalled the question on the motion to approve the rezoning request for Lanier, Inc.,
and the motion was adopted unanimously and the rezoning was granted.
Daleinformed Lanier that his rezoning request had been approved by the Randolph
County Planning Board.
Dalepresented the fourth case of the night along with site plans and pictures of site and
surround properties.
REZONING REQUEST #2019-00003166
SLIDER SOLAR, LLC,Raleigh, NC, is requesting that 40.70 acres, out of 45.79 acres,
on Hoover Hill Rd, just past Old Park Rd, Trinity Township, be rezoned from RA –
Residential Agriculturalto LI-CD–Light Industrial –Conditional District.Tax ID#
7715861937. Primary Growth Area. The proposed Conditional Zoning District would
specifically allow a 5-megawatt solar farm as per site plan.
Pellopened the public hearing.
Tom Terrell, 300 N Green St., Greensboro, Fox RothschildAttorneys at Law,
representing Renewable Energy Services, said hehas represented companies in three
states designing over a hundred of these facilities and found that Counties which allow
these facilities have realized the benefit of increased income without the traffic,noise,
and negative environmental impact to others. He said thereis nothing to opposealthough
people do not like change.
Terrellsaidthe same property had previously received arecommendation of approval by
the Planning Board for a solar farm and due to issues with Duke Energy, the request was
not completed.He also said prior to the solar farm request, a request for a subdivision
had been made and denied because the neighbors did not want houses because of traffic
among other things.
Terrellprovided a notebook to the Planning Board and discussed the contentsincluding
the application; site plan;acopy of a 6-page letter that had been sent to the neighbors
including as much information possibleregarding solar farms and their proposal, including
contact information for the neighbors in case therewere any questions or concerns;a
section of the ordinancewhichpertains to solar just to show theirrequest exceedsthe
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 5of 22
requirements of Randolph County;a statement from an electrical engineer who would be
speaking to them as well; an operations and a de-commissioning plan;and a report,
“Increased North Carolina County Tax Revenue from Solar Development”,which
demonstrates the increase of taxable incomeof solar farms.
Matthew Delafield,co-owner and chief operating officer of Renewable Energy Services
which also owns Slider Solar, LLC.He said he has been with this project since its
conception in 2015 and the initial issues with Duke Energy have been resolved, allowing
them to askfor the Board’s approval once again to complete the project.
Delafieldsaid the proposed project is a 5 mega-watt solar farm, fairly standard in North
Carolina,with fixed tilt panelswhich means the panels willsit about 20 degrees due south
to absorb as much of the summer sun as possible.He said he knows that people would
prefer to look at grassy fields rather than a solar farm so they design their projects with
as little impact as possible, taking the neighbors into consideration.He said although the
ordinance requires a Level 2 buffer, they have planned a Level 3in addition to leaving as
much of the existing vegetation as possible for more protection to the neighbors.He said
in addition to the buffers, they have already decided to remove thesmall section of panels
shown in the southeast corner of the site plan.
Delafieldstated that there would be a bond provided covering the cost of
decommissioning the sitein order to protect the County as well as the neighbors and the
maintenance plan is included in the notebook provided by Terrell.He asked the Board if
there were any questions for him.
Vaughanasked how long it would take for the proposed buffer to be established.
Delafieldsaid it typically takes three to five years and they would be willing to add some
type of opaque screening along the road and the portions of property that adjoin
residences until the buffer could be established if needed.Vaughansaid the greenery
would be amore attractive buffer although she would like to suggest a maintenance
clause.Delafieldsaid they could increase the frequency of on-site checks for landscape
as well.
Cableasked Delafieldif he could confirm that the posts would be removed as part of the
decommissioning plan.Delafieldsaid the post as well as the subterranean conduit would
be removedbecause it is economically motivating to do so; the posts are made out of
stainless steel and are quite valuable.Cableasked if the surety bond would cover the full
45-years.Delafieldsaid bonds are typically re-assessedevery ten years to make sure
the value is still appropriate and the value of the bond is calculated by an independent
engineer.
Slusherasked Delafieldhow long he has been in business and how many solar farms
he is operating.Delafieldsaid he has been in business since 2013; developing the
projects not operating.He said they are in partnership with Sole River Capitalwhich has
85 projects in the Southeast and will be the end owner/operator of the facility.He said he
believes they have six facilities in North Carolina which are either operational or under
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 6of 22
constructionand they are willing to abide by any concessions that are made upon
approval.
Ricky Bevan,4557 Hoover Hill Rd., Trinity, owner of the proposed property, said he and
his wife Kay purchased the 100 acre propertyin 2008 beside their 32 acre tract of land
where they reside to prevent development of the property.He said they put half of the
acreage in conservation immediately to prevent it from ever being developed and have
tried to find a way to generate income from the remaining property other than chicken
houses and housing development that has low impact to the neighbors and is
environmentally friendly.He said he is hoping the neighbors will see this proposal as a
positive aspect for this property and the guarantee that the land will not be developed by
anyone for the next 40 years.
Chris Sandifer,3118 Green Rd., Spring Hope, NC, said he is an electrical engineer, a
licensed electrician with unlimited license, has worked for Duke for 30 yearsand is also
aPlanning Board Member of Nash Countywhere there have been 37 solar farms
approved to date.He said he is a landowner with 100 acres of solar panels as well. He
also said he has been around solar for the last 10 years and is very familiar with the
installation and removal; thetechnologyis not new, it has been around for at least 50
years, some even 100 years.He said this is a good way to maintain land within a family
as tax rates riseand the project design will not endanger the health and safety of anyof
the residents in Randolph County.
Rich Kirkland,9408 Northfield Ct., Raleigh, NC, Kirkland Appraisals, said he has been
a certified general appraiserfor 23 yearsas well as an MAI through the Appraisal Institute
andhas been asked to speak to the Board regarding the impact analysis included in the
notebook provided by Tom Terrell.He said he has looked at approximately 650 solar
farms in the past eight years, most of them located in North Carolina. He explained the
process for his analysis and stated there is typically no real change in market value for
surrounding real estate;if any, slightly on the positive side.He said usually when you find
an impactto surrounding property values, it is due to environmentally hazardous material,
odor, noise, traffic, stigma with the smallest impact being appearance which is usually
associated with cell towers, billboards, and tall buildings which cannot be screened like
solar farms.
Terrellsaid Kirkland had concluded their presentation, however, they would be available
for any additional questionsif needed.
Morganexplained that the applicant or his representatives would have the opportunity to
speak at the end and answer any questions anyone may have.
Pellasked if there was anyone else present that would like to speak in favor of the
request.Hearing none, Pellasked if there was anyone present in opposition of the
request.
Kim Lee,4474 Old Park Rd.,Trinity, NC,said the previous request for development of
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 7of 22
modular homes on the property was consistent with the area and feels a solar farm is
most definitely not consistent and is not in a typical location for one either.She said she
appreciated the appraiser coming up and stating what the solar farm wouldor would not
do to property values and would argue that there is a big difference between appraised
values and saleability.She said Ricky Bevan said he hoped the neighbors would see this
asapositive proposal; speaking on behalf of all the neighbors, they are all in opposition.
Leesaid she would like to make a correction to a statement made by the attorney that a
housing development was approved for this site.She said Bevan purchased the property
before a final decision could be made and the requestwas withdrawn.
Leeasked if she would be permitted to speak on behalf of some of the neighbors who
were unable to attend; there was a short notice for the hearing, especially with the
holidays.Pellasked if she had a list of the people she was referringto.Leesaid she
didn’t have anything typed up but could give him the names.She said she had spoken
directly to the Ruddick, Watkins, Johnson and Routh families which are all in opposition
and could not be present for the meeting.
Leesaid she is not opposed to solar, she believes the facilities serve a purpose and have
a place in North Carolina,there are many locations within the County that are suitable for
solar farms and the proposed location is not one of them.
Leeprovided several handouts and photos with the following comments in opposition of
the proposal:
She said she has concerns regarding the ownership of a company headquartered
outof Singapore,registeredas a North Carolina company,not having North
Carolinians best interest at heart(Exhibit#1);
Other solar farms in Randolph County are located in less developed areas and are
more suitable than theproposed site(Exhibit#2); andtheir investments were made
in arural, not industrial area,prior to Bevan’s purchase and none of them would
have done so if the proposed site had been industrial.(Exhibit#3).
She then referenced three objectives from the Randolph County Growth Management
Plan:
1.To encourage quality and Sustainable Growth;
2.Provide guidance onrezoning and growth related issues;and
3.Recognize that sustainable economic growth, environmental protection and rural
quality of life can be pursued together as mutually supportingpublic policy goals.
Leesaid she would argue that a multi-acre industrial site would not meet the standard
quality of growth in an area zoned for Residential Agriculture, especially by those that will
be most affected by the facility including herself and her adjoining property owners and in
regards to number 3, she said she would confidently speak for herself and her neighbors
in attendance,as well as those who were unable to attend,that construction of an
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 8of 22
industrial solar farm would absolutely, concretely, and negatively impact their quality of
life.She said based on this information, she feels it is the duty of the Board to deny the
request.
Leesaid she and her husband have made their lifetime investment into this property and
asked how it is fair for one man to profit from this type of project at the expense of
everyone else around them.
Leeexpressed concerns regarding the future quality of the water for them as well as their
animals due to storm water runoff which feeds into their wells, creeks and ponds,sharing
nearly 1400 ft. of property line with the proposed site (Exhibit#4).She also shared
concerns of erosion from the runoff and provided photos (Exhibit#5),showing the existing
problems and mentioned the potential harm from toxic metals.
Leethen provideda handout (Exhibit #6) withinformation on potential lightning strikes
and the damage that could occur to the equipment.She said if the equipment is damaged
due to lightning strikes, we face an increased risk of fire, and toxic waste being be leached
into soil,impacting the wells, pondsand creeks. She then quoted differentarticles, one
stating there would be huge waste from solar panels in the future because they are hard
to recycle;land used for solar farms would no longer be fit for farming; damagedsolar
farms couldpotentially become hazardous; and asked who would be responsible for
cleanup.She said she read in her research that there is no current plan for the disposal
of waste from the 85,000 acres of solar panels weighing 475,000 tons.
Leeprovided a portion of the Growth Management Planincluding economic pie chart
(Exhibit#7) and stated there is only 0.02%allocated for Environmental Protection which
is nearly zero.She asked how we could feel secure in knowing that Randolph County
would have the ability take care of the any environmental impacts from an industrial facility
especially if damagedor destroyed.She also expressed concerns for a decommissioning
plan whenthere is no way to predict costs and the requirements 30-40 years from now.
Leesaid her main concerns are health relatedand not knowing how a 5 mega-watt solar
farm will affect the health of her family and her adjoining neighbors 10, 20 or even 30
years from now.She said although solar companies will imply there is no proof that solar
is harmful, there is no definitive evidence that these solar farms are not harmfuleither.
She said a real health study takes 20 years of testing and she willchallenge anyone in
the solar industry present or across the nation, to produce a single study conducted that
proves they don’t pose a health danger.
Leesaid she andher neighbors are not wealthy although they are 100% committed to
combining their energy, efforts and resources as long, far and as hard as necessary to
fight itthe proposal, all the way to Supreme Court if needed.
Cableasked Lee if the proposed Level 3 buffer would it be sufficient aestheticallyif
installed.Leesaid it would not grow tall enough to cover anything for a long time to be
sufficient and if she had to prioritize, the aestheticsis at the bottom of her list.She said
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 9of 22
the health related concerns are priority.Cablesaid she had mentioned aesthetics multiple
times and asked again if the buffer would satisfy her.Leeanswered no.
Modlinasked Lee about the location of her home and asked if her road was state
maintained.Leedescribed her home in relation to the proposal and said her road is not
state maintained; she and her neighbors work on it all of the time.Modlinsaid he
understood her to imply that she would prefer a 40-50 home development rather than
solar.Leesaid she never said she would like 40-50 homes.She said she wants
something consistent with the homes already there, possibly 10-15 acre tractswith
compatible homes would be acceptable. She said she is not trying to prevent Bevan from
making money off his property, she would just like to see it’s consistent with Residential
Agricultural zoning.Davissaid several of the Board members are farmers and realize
what it takes to pay for 100 acres of land.Vaughansaid Bevan mentioned chicken
farming and asked Lee if there would be opposition due to the negative impacts
associated with it.Leesaid she would not raise a concern about a chicken farm because
she moved into an agricultural area.
Pellasked if there was anyone else present to speak in opposition of the request.
Jason Meyer,4669 Hoover Hill Rd, Trinity, NC, said he has concerns about run off from
the property, the potential hazards that may affect his children and he expressed his
concern for negative aesthetic changes and the reason they moved to the country to
begin with.
Kathy Hayes, 4643 Hoover Hill Rd, Trinity, NC, said she just picked up house plans to
build her new home and has real concerns of how a solar farm will affect house value.
She said if the request is approved, her entire back yard will have the view of solar panels.
She also said she has concerns of health related issued caused by solar due to the lack
of research.
Hayessaid she understands Bevan’s need to do something with the land, she just doesn’t
feel solar is the right thing.She said if the proposal is approved, she doesn’t feel the
proposed buffer is enough.
Hayesthen said she would also like to speak on behalf of her mom which lives at 4679
Hoover Hill Rd., and is probably most affected because her view will be of nothing but
solar panels located approximately 15-20 feet from her drive.
Chris Boggs, 4461Old Park Rd., Trinity, NC, said he has lived there for about 10 years
and moved there to be in the country.Heexpressed his concerns for the possible
decrease of property values and the unpleasing view that would be caused by a solar
farm.He also talked about the elevation of the property preventinga buffer from actually
blocking the view of the solarpanels and that a portion of the property shown on site plan
would be of no use due to shading.He said the Meyer’s property would literally be right
next to the panels where his children play.
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 10of 22
Pellasked if there was anyone else present to speak in opposition of the request.Hearing
none, Pellasked if anyone would like to answer some of the concerns from the opposition
before closing the public hearing.
Terrellsaid he would like to address some of the questions and concerns that have been
mentioned.He said there is a claim that all neighbors are opposed to the request although
Mr. Bevan could provide a list of neighbors that support his request.He said that most
solar farms are actually located on the road, contrary to what hasbeen stated by the
neighborsand said the question to askthem would be if they are speaking about an older
solar farm with no requirements or one of the newer farms with three times the buffer
requirements.
Terrellsaid it is easy for a real estate agent to make statements of what would or would
not potentially affect property values, it is different when an appraiser puts his license on
the line with an actual study showing the results.He said in regards to the Growth
Management Planand the quality of life, this project would protect the rural quality of life.
He said it is dark at night, unlike homes that have security lights and no noise from traffic.
Terrell also said solar panels have been classified as pervious which means there will be
little difference in water absorption from storm water, having no additional impact on
existing water run off problems.
Modlinasked if grass would be sewn, fertilized and maintainedat a sod level to help with
the waterrun-off.Terrellanswered yes and said there will be an erosion and
sedimentation control plan put into place by the County or State as well.
Terrellsaid Cypress Creek has nothing to do with this projectand the pine trees and
power poles in the area are at much greater risk at getting struck by lightning than the
solar panels as mentioned and they are not banned.He said the statement that land
used for solar would be ruined for any future farming is incorrect, there are no harmful
components of the panels.
Terrellsaid that Bevans is currently paying agricultural tax rates and if approved, Mr.
Delafieldwould be paying significantly higher rates as asolar farm.He said there is no
plan for disposing of the panels because they are almost 100% recyclable and highly
valuable.
Terrellsaid regarding health issues, there is an electrical magnetic field produced by
everything including refrigerators, computers, etc., and the solar farm would produce no
more for you than standing in front of a refrigerator.He said the setbacks from the property
line to the solar panels is actually 50 ft. which will meet or exceed County requirements.
Cableasked if panels would be placed in the shaded areas mentioned by one of the
neighbors.Delafieldexplained that the site plan isaconceptual plan and once the shade
analysis is completed, they may find that some of the area(s) on the plan will not actually
be utilized as shown;general design practices are to show the maximum footprint
possibilities before studies are complete.He said in response to erosion control, it is
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 11of 22
mandatory for sedimentation and erosion control plans be approved by the Department
of Environmental Quality prior to any construction permits.He said the erosion control
plans could possibly be beneficial to the adjoining property owners with theirexisting run-
off issues.
Davisasked what happens in the areasshown on the site plan that cannot be used.
Delafieldsaid the areas will remain as is.Cableasked approximately how large is the
shaded area that may not be used that would increase the setback.Delafieldsaid he
would guess it to be two to three acres.
Vaughanasked if an engineered sediment pond would address the issues of run off as
well as any concerns of possible contaminants.Delafieldsaid he is not a civil engineer
although he has worked with about 65 plans and the State has requirementsin placefor
addressing those issues.Hesaid as far as contaminants, there havebeen countless
testing done by government agencies that show no signs of contaminants associated
with solar farms.
Cableasked if there was a possibility of putting measures into place to prevent any run-
off prior to beginning project.Delafieldsaid all of the erosion control measures, required
by the State, are taken prior to any grading or construction.Cableasked if the existing
run-off problems for Ms. Lee would be eliminated if these controls were to be put into
place.Delafieldsaid he felt it would take care of the current issuesbecause there are no
preventative measures being taken now.He said he feels the minimum requirement
would be silk-fencing and probably much more.
Bevantold the Board he would be willing to trade land with neighbors to satisfy the
property line and obstructed view issues that have been brought up.Pellsaid those
issues would be something that would have to be worked out amongst themselves.
Pellasked if there was anyone else that would like to speak regarding the request prior
to closing the public hearing.Hearing none, Pellclosed the public hearing for discussion
among the Board members and a motion.
Davissaid there have been several solar farms throughout the County, the most recent
being located on Gold HillRd., and it is located in a very populated area.He asked if they
could be given some history on the application(s) for this property.Dalesaid
approximately three yearsago, basically the same request was made and recommended
by the Board to approve the request as Rural Industrial Overlay and it was pointed out by
Ms. Lee that the zoning would be inappropriate based on the Growth Management.He
said he originally had hesitation for Light Industrial zoning due to the densely populated
area and after reviewing it, decided Light Industrial zoning would be more appropriate for
the request.He said the original request never moved forward to the commissioners.He
said the process has changed since the original request and the Planning Board now
makes the final decision.Davisasked why the request was never heard by the County
Commissioners.Delafieldsaid at the time, Duke Energy would not approve the
formulated connections.He said over time, those issues have been resolved and they
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 12of 22
are ready to move forward with the request. Cableasked if they were using the same
technology as before.Delafieldsaid it would be exactly the same although they have
resolved issues with Duke by coming up with a solution to bypass regulators that once
prohibited them to connect,now allowingthem to proceed with the request.He said at
the time of the first application, Cypress Creek was involved and no longer have an
ownership stake in the project.
Davisasked if any of the decisions were made due to Bevans changing his mind orplans
for the project.Delafieldanswered no.He said it was a problem on their end and Mr.
Bevans has been very patient with them to resolve all of the issues.
Modlinsaid the farm he grew up on has been split by the Interstate 85/74, so he can
definitely understand the concerns of the neighbors not wanting their lifestyles to change.
He said the day and age we live in, there will be change.He also said no one wants to
see land removed from agricultural use any more than him, however, hefeels this would
probably the best use of the property in minimizingtraffic from Hoover Hill Rd.
Modlinmade the motion to approve the rezoning request to rezone the specified parcel(s)
on the rezoning application to the requested zoning district based upon the Determination
of Consistency and Findings of Reasonableness and Public Intereststatements that are
included in the Planning Board agenda, submitted during the rezoning presentation and
as may be amended, incorporated into the motion, to be included in theminutes, as well
as the site plan(s) with any and all agreed upon revisions, also incorporated into the
motion and that the request is also consistent with the Randolph County Growth
Management Plan.Davismade a second to the motion to approvethe rezoning request.
Pellcalled the question on the motion to approve the rezoning request for Slider Solar,
LLC.,and the motion was adopted unanimously and the rezoning was granted.
Daleinformed Delafieldthat his rezoning request had been approved by the Randolph
County Planning Board.
Pellasked for there to be a 10 minute break @ 8:24 p.m., before proceeding to the next
case.The Planning Board reconvened at 8:33 p.m.
Dalepresented the last case of the night along with site plans and pictures of site and
surround properties.
REZONING REQUEST #2019-00003161
NASH DUGGINS,Asheboro, NC, is requesting that 45.43 acres located on NC Hwy 49S
and Old NC Hwy 49, Cedar Grove Township, be rezoned from RA –Residential
Agricultural Districtand RR–Residential Restricted Districtto CVOE-CD–Conventional
Subdivision Overlay Exclusive –Conditional District.Tax ID #7639187958. Secondary
Growth Area. The proposed Conditional ZoningDistrict would specifically allow a 22-lot
site built subdivision with a minimum house size of 1,750 sq. ft. as per site plan. Property
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 13of 22
Owner: Terry Charles Vuncannon.
Pellopened the public hearing.
Nash Duggins, 3092 Old NC Hwy 49, Asheboro, NC, said he has addressed some of
the concerns raised by the neighbors during the previous request and feels that he meets
all of the requirements of the Unified Development Ordinanceas well as the Growth
Management Plan.He said he feels that it is importantto point out that the staff from the
Planning Department have made a recommendation to the Planning Board to approve
the request.He pointed out some of the changes that have been made to address the
issues from the neighbors such as the removal of an additional accesspoint to the
residual acreage between two lots;shortened the Farmwood Ln extension, providing
access to the residual land by Hwy 49;reduced the number of requested lots;and has
added a “no burn” statement on the plat.He said there would be no burning, there would
be grinding of stumps and debris from the clearing of the property and everything would
be disposed of properly.He said they have even went one step farther to add a statement
that agricultural uses cannot come through Farmwood which would currently be allowed
without this proposal.He said the acreage calculation mistakes have all been corrected
and he doesn’t know of any other technical mistakes that were an issue. He askedthe
Board if they had any questions for him.
Dalesaid aletterhas been provided by NCDOT stating no additional connections would
be allowed to NCHwy 49, requiring any further development to access through
Farmwood and an additional letterwas issued, dedicating an SR number by NCDOT to
show that Farmwood has been taken over by the State.Dugginssaid he was correct
and the assigned number for Farmwood is SR 3304.
Davisasked Duggins if Farmwood Lnwould end as shown on the current plat.Duggins
said it will end for right now with the possibility of future use if additional approvals are
granted.He said every other road in Farmwood has a finished cul-de-sac and this road
was left with gravel at the end with intensions of future development.Davisasked if the
road (at lot 20) will have a cul-de-sac or will it be a dead-end road.Dugginssaid it will be
a dead-end, leaving the possibility for future development just like it is now with enough
distance for a turn around.
Cableasked if the road extension would provide access to Hwy 49.Dugginsanswered
no.
Joycesaid NCDOT said they could not enter from NC Hwy 49 if he has understood
correctly.Dugginssaid it would be more dangerous to add an additional entrance to Hwy
49.He also said they will not be required to do anything additional to the existing entrance
of the development.Joycesaid when you look at Farmwood versus Oak Hollow, there
may be 3 times more houses located in Oak Hollow with only one entrance and there
havebeen no issues.Dugginssaid that is correct.He said he thought there were over
100 lots in Oak Hollow and Farmwood currently has approximately 47 and if approved,
he would be adding 22 lots.
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 14of 22
Pellasked if there was anyone else present to speak in favor of the request.Hearing
none, Pellasked ifthere was anyone present to speak in opposition of the request.
Lou Jones, 1487 Allen Ct, Asheboro, NC, thanked the Board for the opportunity to speak.
He said first of all, since the letter regarding no additional entrances has been mentioned,
he would address that first.He said NCDOT was asked about entrances for this proposal
as an extension of 22 lots in Farmwood rather than developing a separate parcel as
requested by the neighbors due to the 1,750 sq. ft. house size not being compatible with
the existing homes in Farmwood, particularly with the homes in Phase 3.He said NCDOT
was never asked to consider an entrance to developthe200 acres as a separate parcel
so it cannot be concluded that the only way to develop this property is through Farmwood.
Jonessaid he spoke to Mr. Charles Vuncannonyears ago regarding the future of
Farmwoodand he was told that Farmwood Ln was left purposefully with a dead end,
providing the possibility of future development and stated he would require the same deed
restrictions that were currently placed on Farmwood.
Jonessaid in regards to the changes that have been made, hesaw the concession that
had been made for agricultural access which heappreciates.He said he would like to
point out that the other changesmade by Duggins’ proposal are corrections, not
concessions, and should not be implied as such.He said the house size proposed is still
1,750 square feetand feels it is not compatible with the existing housing.He said
compatibility, was upheld by the Board on September 10, 2019.He said the refusal to
change the square footage to be in line with the existing homes in Farmwood, particularly
Phase 3, was notedthree times in the written Findings of the Board’s decision.
Jonessaid Farmwood homes average over 2,400 square feet although the minimum
required square footage is 2,000.He said the proposed house size is 650 square feet
(27%)smallerthan average and that number becomes important.He said the County
Commissioners determined there had been a levelof change exceeding 10 percent,
which they defined as “significant”.He asked the Planning Board to consider the same
definition be considered when deciding that the proposed homes are substantially smaller
than the existing homes in Farmwood.He said there are three homes in the 1,500 square
foot range with a total of eight homes less than 2,000 square feet within Phase 1 and
Phase 2 although the average home within the entire community is 2,400 square feet.He
said the average house size in Phase 3 is 2,579 square feet, making the proposed house
size 829 square feet (32%), smaller.He said the large variance of house size constitutes
a threat to the value of the existing homes and he doesn’t understand why the request is
before the Board again when there have been no changesmade by the Developer to
increase the house size.He said it was a major issue in the findings by the Board
previously.
Jonessaid although the agricultural access issue has been resolvedandthe neighbors
do not want anyone to be able to access the additional land through Farmwood.He said
Farmwood is a cul-de-sac community and Farmwood Ln should become a dead end
street for future Farmwood lots only or terminated as a cul-de-sac.He said they don’t
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 15of 22
want someone to buy the additional land, develop mobile home parks and access the
property through Farmwood without restrictions placed on it.
Jonessaid Farmwood is currently a custom home subdivision and the minutes from the
previous meeting referenced the possibility of building “spec” homes to start the
development;builder’s would not want to build on a lot requiring homes to be larger than
1,750 square feet due to costs of construction.He said they want to maintain the
characteristic of a custom built home, cul-de-sac neighborhood picked deliberately by the
neighbors for those reasons.
Jones said current Farmwood homes have a total value assessed by the Tax Department
as $13,743,000.00, generating tax revenue for the County at a little over $105,000.00.He
said if the potential decrease of home values areno more than 10%, it would be a
decrease in $1.3 million tax value which needs to be consideredby the Board.He asked
those in the audience in support of his arguments to stand up.There were 24 citizens
who stood in support.
Jonesthanked the Board for their time and asked them to deny the request.He said
there has not been enough change to warrant approval and it does not meet the
requirementsto be compatible to the existing neighborhood.
Ann Shaw, 1555 McDaniel Dr., Asheboro, NC said there is no benefit to current
Farmwood residentswith the rezoning proposal.She said there has been no
consideration for the concerns of the residents by Mr. Duggins since the lastmeeting on
September 10, 2019; heis still refusing to increase the minimum house size to be
compatible with the adjoining property;there is still uncertainty of what will happen with
the remaining portion of the 200 acres;heis still vague about access;and is adamant
about using Farmwood’s existing access although it has been requested he obtain a new
access.
Shawsaid in regards to the letter from NCDOT, she was told by a Division Engineer that
a separate entrance could be considered at the request of the Randolph County
Commissioners and she didn’t feel that NCDOT would force another development to use
Farmwood foraccess if it was a separate development from Farmwood as they have
requested.
Shawsaid after years of construction, residents of Farmwood can finally see a possible
end totheconstruction phase and they do not want see the heavy trucks and equipment
funneled through Farmwood for a new section for years to follow.She said Duggins will
be exposing their neighborhood to over 200 acres of unknown development and she has
still not heard definitively that extending Farmwood Ln would not eventually create a link
between new NCHwy 49 to Old Hwy 49.
Shawsaid kids ride their bikes throughout the neighborhood with and without their parents
and the traffic from clearing the property of debris will become a safety issue.She said
Duggins’ intensions may be good but after seeing so many errors and inaccurate
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 16of 22
statements made from the beginning of the process, there is no confidence in Duggins’
ability to create anything that is compatible to Farmwood as it currently exists,with what
appears to be his first attempt at real estate development.She said she doesn’t want their
homes and investments to be diminished by being part of his experiment.Shaw told the
Board that Duggins had shared his resume with the neighbors at the Neighborhood
Information meeting to give them an idea of what he has developed and asked if she
could share copieswiththe Board.Pell asked her to give a copy to the Clerk for the
record.She said after reviewing the resume, there is nothing that shows Duggins has had
experience in subdivision development in the past, she said Duggins has still not made
any concessions because of the cost to him so he insists on using their neighborhood,
their resources and access points at their expense.She said she would say again, “There
is absolutely no benefit tocurrent Farmwood residents with this rezoning proposal”.She
said this proposal will only cause problems for the residents which will be avoided by
keeping his development separate andapart from Farmwood.
Pamela Freeman, 2248 Farmwood Ln., Asheboro, NC,read from a prepared letter
written to the Board and informing them that there had been steps taken to reinstate deed
restrictions of Farmwood and the residents of Farmwood are united.She said one of the
ongoing concerns from the residents is what will happen with the remaining portion of the
200 acresof which they have neverbeengiven a clear answer.Freeman said she had
heard there would be 53, one-half acre lots developed and wondered if that was the
reason for the 1,750 square feet.She asked who would be responsible for the decreased
value of her home, given the proposed square footage is much less than the average
home in Farmwood.She said there has already been costs to them for repairs needed
after road work was completed.She mentioned the original owner, Charlie Vuncannon
and the care he had for the residents of Farmwood buthis son just wants to sell the
property and cut all ties from Farmwood.
Freemandiscussed the access off NCHwy 49and the costs involved being too cost
prohibitive for anyone leads them to believe that by extending Farmwood Ln, it will
eventually become access to the rest of the property.She also pointed out that the names
for the owner of the property, applicant for the request and the name on the restrictive
covenants were all different and asked if that did not warrant the request to be null and
void.
Freemandiscussed the changes Duggins made for the most recent proposed platwith
the lot and access changes and said there have been no changes to the minimum square
footage.She said the final statement of the Reasonableness and Public Interest Analysis,
provided to the Planning Board at the September 10, 2019,meeting stated “that the
request is not reasonable and in the public interest for all of the reasons stated above;
the applicant refused repeated requests by area residents and the Randolph County
Board to increase the minimum house size to be more compatible with the existing
portions of Farmwood.”She said if the proposal was not reasonable at the September 10,
2019,meeting, then it is still not reasonable.
Freemanalso mentioned Duggins’ resume which he provided to the area residents at
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 17of 22
their request.She told the Board several things she found in her research indicating that
Duggins is not currently a licensed general contractor.Morgantold Freeman that
Duggins’ general contractor’s license is not relevant to the request for development.
Freemansaid she was pointingout her findings to show Duggins’ character.Morgantold
Freemanthe Board did make decisions for development on one’s character.
Wade Dawkins, 1501 Allen Ct., Asheboro,NC, said he would like to read from a
statement emailed to the Planning Department (copies were given to the Board prior to
the meeting), written by Ron, Julie and their son, Seth Parrish who also reside in
Farmwood.He said they couldnot be present for the meeting because they were currently
out of the country.The letter stated that they had invested their lifetime of savings into
their property for the up-scale nature of the neighborhood, quietness and the streets that
were used only by the residents.The letter also stated their concerns for the decrease in
value to their homes if smaller homes were allowed;the proposal would not be keeping
with the standards of compatibility, comparability or similarity with the immediately
surrounding neighborhoods of Farmwood or Oak Hollow;and their investments would be
stolen from them if this proposal were to be allowed.The letter stated that the seller and
developer of the proposal wanted to use the name and reputation of the Farmwood
Subdivision to make it more attractive to potential buyers;if the proposal is to be called
Farmwood it shouldhave the same standard and current restrictions equal to the average
square foot of the present homes.There was a statement thanking the Board for the
sincere thoughts and deliberation they would put forward in serving everyone with wise
and fair decisions.The letter followed up by asking everyone present at the meeting in
agreement, to stand in support.There were 23 citizens who stood in agreement.
Wayne Simpson,1524 Allen Ct., Asheboro, NC, said he is not asking fordevelopment
not to take place, he justwants it to meet the same standards as Phase 3 which is 2,000
square feet for the minimum house size.He said all of the homes in that section are larger
than the minimum and most are custom built homes.He said if the same standards are
not followed,he would ask that it not be part of Farmwood but rather a separate
subdivision with its own entrance and at a minimum, having its own construction entrance
to prevent construction traffic passing through Farmwood.He said they are putting their
trust in the Board to make the right decision.
Charles Scott Morgan, 1530 Allen Ct., Asheboro, NC said he would address one of the
arguments that he felt Duggins would have regarding the square footage of his home.He
said his home is approximately 1,900 square feeton the bottom level with the potential of
being over 3,000 square feet if the upstairs were to be finished.He also said he would
like to point out that Mr. Charles Vuncannon, the original developer of Farmwood,was
great about checking on the subdivisionto make sure it was maintained as required.
Morgan then referenced another subdivision on the mountain, stating that the house sizes
continue to increase instead of decrease, causing home values to rise.He said he would
like to see the same for his subdivision, protecting their investments.
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 18of 22
Pellasked if there was anyone else present that would like to speak in opposition to the
request.Hearing none, Pellasked Dugginsif he would like to address any of the
comments or questions regarding the request.
Dugginssaid Morgan’s house was not one of the two houses he was going to point out
but appreciated him doing so.He said 1525 and 1460 Allen Ct. are 1,995 and 1,911
square feet per tax records within a phase that should be a minimum of 2,000 square feet
and were both spec homes which they seem to have a problem with and should not be
an issue.
Dugginsthen addressed several of the “character” statements made against him before
moving forward with issues and questions regarding the proposal.
Dugginssaid he does not know what will be done with the remaining portion of 200 acres
at this time but it will have to come before the Board again for any future development
request, a mobile home park would not be allowed without rezoning either.He said up to
3mobile homes could be placed on the property as it is without rezoning.
Dugginssaid he would not agree with Shawbecause he has made concessions and
corrections and pointed out that Shaw along with two others live in the phases of 1,500
square foot minimum.He said he doesnot understand how she can complain about the
2,000 square foot minimum.
Dugginssaid he didnot know how many times he had already answered the question
regarding the thoroughfare toNCHwy 49 but no one in their right mind would pay to install
a road across the creek--it is unaffordable.
Dugginssaid regarding construction traffic, Shawhas lived through two other phases of
the development and this would be no different.
Dugginsthensaid the personal attacks started on him at the Neighborhood Information
Meeting (NIM) and he made the comment that he didnot have to be there.He said he
would like make it clear for the record, he asked to have the second NIM to try and clear
up any additional questions and make clarifications to the changes that had beenmade
since the first application and meeting.
Dugginssaid the residents have signed to reinstatetwo sets of restrictive covenants,
oneset allowing the 1,500 andthe other set for2,000 square feet minimum house size.
As far as the additional entrance, it is cost prohibitive whether anyone wants to hear that
or not.
Dugginsthen said the Parrishfamily has complained about the square foot value and
stated they would have never bought a home in Farmwood if they thought smaller homes
could be built in the already well-established neighborhood when they purchased in a
Phase thatrequired only 1,500 square feet to begin with.
Dugginssaid several people have stated that he is not showing good faith or willing to
negotiate which he will argue.He said the original proposal askedfor much less square
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 19of 22
footage, starting at 1,400 (which he said was an actually an error), then increasing to
1,500then 1,700 and now 1,750.He said at somepoint you have to stop and make a
business decision.He said he should not be asked to spend thousands of dollars to build
a construction entrance that is not normal or required, itis not good business.
Dugginssaid, in reference to Morgan’sstatements, there are much smaller homes built
next to larger homes on the Mountain as well and it has not affectedthe value of their
homes; he said he feels 250 square feet will not affect the value of existing homes in
Farmwood either.
Cableasked what changes have been made since the last Planning Board meeting.
Dugginssaid 3 lots were dropped, decreased the extension on Farmwood Ln., added a
flag lot on the back side to eliminate and access point that had been a concern and
changed the overall acreage that was shown on the site plans.
Cableasked if he had changed from burning to grinding to satisfy people as well.
Dugginssaid the notes on the plat had been changed although he had not realized it
was there to begin with, it was an oversight of his and he never had intensions to burn.
Cableasked if there is a letter provided by NCDOT that states he cannot have a separate
entrance.Dugginsanswered yes and provided him with a copy.
Cablesaid he understands it is not cost effective for anyone to come off NC Hwy 49 and
cross the creek for development and asked if that was correct.Dalesaid he had asked
Mack Summey, an engineer about that earlier and Summey told him it would basically
require somekindof a bridge to cross.
Davisasked if the residual 200 acres would be landlocked in any way.Duggins
answered no.He said there is access to Old Hwy 49 and new NCHwy 49.Davisasked
if developing any of the remaining property would require crossingwetlands and creeks
from old Hwy 49.Dugginssaid there is access to this property near a gravel road
(McDaniel Rd), beside Silos.Cableasked how much property was on that side of the
creek off old Hwy 49.(It was not known).
Dugginssaid he would also like to mention that the rumor of 53 half-acre lots has never
been mentioned by him and regulations would not allow that small of a lot size.He said
he had only mentioned the possibility of large tracts of land at this point.Morganreminded
the Board that future lot development would require another public hearing.
Vaughansaid she is from the Farmer community and they have a lot of pride in the
neighborhood and the adjoining neighborhood creating a desirable community.She
asked how hard it would be to raise the square footage to 2000 square feet even though
she felt people would probably build larger homes.She said she felt it would be a sense
of security for the existing residents even though 1750 square feet is the marketable
number right now.Dugginssaid the cost of construction prohibits the commitment and
he felt the 1,750 square feet meets the middle off the current 1,500 and 2,000 square foot
minimums currently there and agrees that people will build what they choose just like the
existing residents have done, most of them being larger than required.
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 20of 22
Vaughanasked if he had set pricing for the lots based on his studies.Dugginssaid the
prices have not been announced publicly although he feels the cost of the lots will not be
under $30,000.00, which willdrivethe type of housing as well.
Pellasked if anyone else had any questions.Hearing none, Pellclosed the public hearing
for discussion and a motion.
Joycesaid he has sit through a lot of housing development requests in the past and this
must be the most emotional one he has ever sat through.He said he has looked through
the Randolph County Growth Management Planand has found nothing by law that
prohibits the approval of the request from the Board.
Slushersaid the biggest differencefor him from the last meeting and this one is not the
square footage, it was the mistakes which were questioned as intentional and feels they
have all been addressed.Joyceagreed.
Cablesaid he agreeswith the previous statement by Slusher.He said Duggins alluded
to the mistakes made and he feels the Board has tried to hear all sides and proceed with
caution.He said there were a lotof unanswered questions at the last meeting causing
him to deny the request.He said he liveson a 5 acre tract of land in a development that
requires a minimum of 2,000to 2,200 square foot house size and he thinks the smallest
house is 4,200 square feet.He said builders will build based on supply and demand.
Cablesaid there are some fence mending required from both sides,which the Board
cannot fix,but they can ask forall involved to good stewards and neighbors.He said he
had originally thought Duggins should be willing to create a new entrance on NCHwy 49
and after reading the email from NCDOT, it appears they don’t want Duggins to have an
additional entrance.
Cablethen thanked everyone for their passion, for being civil and for remembering that
we are all good Randolph County residents.
Joycemade the motion to approve the rezoning request to rezone the specified parcel(s)
on the rezoning application to the requested zoning district based upon the Determination
of Consistency and Findings of Reasonableness and Public Intereststatements that are
included in the Planning Board agenda, submitted during the rezoning presentation and
as may be amended, incorporated into the motion, to be included in theminutes, as well
as the site plan(s) with any and all agreed upon revisions, also incorporated into the
motion and that the request is also consistent with the Randolph County Growth
Management Plan.Slushermade a second to the motion to approvethe rezoning
request.
Pellcalled the question on the motion to approve the rezoning request for Nash Duggins
and the motion was adopted unanimously and the rezoning was granted.
Daleinformed Duggins that his rezoning request had been approved by the Randolph
County Planning Board.
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 21of 22
Having no further business, Pellcalled for a motion to adjourn the meeting.
Cablemade the motion to adjourn with Slusher making the second to the motion.
Pellcalled the question on the motion to adjourn and the motion was adopted
unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10: 06 p.m. with 47 citizens present.
RANDOLPH COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
__________________________
Planning Director
_________________________________________________________
Clerk to the BoardDate
Minutes approved on
January 7, 2019
Planning BoardMinutesDecember 3, 2019Page 22of 22