121420 Zoning AppealDecember 14, 2020 Special Meeting Zoning Appeal
The Randolph County Board of Commissioners met in special session at 6:00 p.m. in the 1909
Randolph County Historic Courthouse Meeting Room, 145 Worth Street, Asheboro, NC.
Chairman Darrell Frye, Vice -Chairman David Allen, Commissioner Kenny Kidd, Commissioner
Maxton McDowell, and Commissioner Hope Haywood were present. Also present were County
Manager Hal Johnson, County Attorney Ben Morgan, Deputy Clerk to the Board Sarah Pack, and
Clerk to the Board Dana Crisco.
Chairman Frye opened the meeting and thanked the audience for their attendance. He said
during the Public Hearing, anyone wanting to speak will have a chance to do so.
Jay Dale, Planning Director, presented the request to appeal the decision of the Planning Board,
as follows:
THE JORDAN VALLEY RD. COMMUNITY has requested an appeal for the decision
made by the Randolph County Planning Board to approve a rezoning for 87.48 acres
located on Jordan Valley Rd, Tabernacle Township, from RA Residential Agricultural
District to CVOE-CD Conventional Subdivision Overlay Exclusive Conditional
District. Tax ID 47714527643, 7714727096. Secondary Growth Area. The Conditional
Zoning District approved was to allow a 48 -lot site -built subdivision with a minimum
house size of 1,500 sq. ft. as per site plan. Property Owner: Ashton Jade Earnhardt.
On October 6, 2020, the Randolph County Planning Board voted unanimously to approve the
rezoning request of Bobby Earnhardt to develop a 48 -lot subdivision on 87.48 acres located on
Jordan Valley Rd (PIN 7714527643 and 771427069). The housing would be site built with 1500
square feet minimum.
There was opposition from the neighborhood with the major concerns as follows:
1. There were no deed restrictions available for review at the hearing;
2. Possible runoff issues caused by the impervious surface area created by the development;
3. Traffic increase;
4. Housing size.
These issues were addressed in the hearing but the developer was unable to produce deed
restrictions for review. During the meeting the citizens and the Planning Board were reminded
that the County does not enforce deed restrictions.
Commissioner Haywood asked about an adjacent lot that Mr. Earnhardt might be interested in
purchasing so that the requested development area is not land locked. Mr. Dale said he would
have to defer to Mr. Earnhardt for clarification.
Chairman Frye said this proposed site is in the Trinity School District.
12/14/20
Commissioner Kidd asked if completion of the new school will help to even out the projections
of the school capacities. Chairman Frye confirmed this to be the case. Students in this subdivision
would go to the current Archdale -Trinity Middle School and Wheatmore High School.
Taylor Callicut from the Ivey and Eggleston law firm is representing Mr. Earnhardt. H.R.
Gallimore is the realtor involved. Both Mr. Earnhardt and Mr. Gallimore were available for
questions.
Chairman Frye asked about the availability of the deed restrictions. Mr. Callicut said the deed
restrictions have been provided but they are not yet recorded. If the Board has no further
recommendations or requirements, the deed restrictions will be filed at the Register of Deeds.
Chairman Frye asked if lots in this potential subdivision will be sold to individuals or developed
to be sold by the developer. Mr. Callicut said there is potential for both.
Commissioner Haywood asked who enforces deed restrictions. Mr. Callicut said generally the
residents in the development are responsible for enforcement. As long as construction meets
zoning and code requirements, deed restrictions are more or less the "icing on the cake" for the
residents.
Chairman Frye said that adjoining property owners have more authority in enforcement than
the County. Deed restrictions are put in place for the protection of the property owners. The
County does not have jurisdiction to enforce deed restrictions.
Mr. Gallimore reviewed the previous Planning Board meeting. The restrictions had been set
but were not available at the meeting due to a personal issue with one of the people working on
them. All technical requirements have been met in order to be compliant with the Growth
Management Plan. Water was run to this area a while ago in the expectation of growth. In regards
to runoff, development is development, whether its agricultural or suburban. The request is
actually a 45 -lot request — three lots along the street have already been approved separate from this
request. There is an adjacent piece of property at the end of a cul-de-sac that Mr. Earnhardt plans
to purchase which will eliminate the possibility of locked access to road frontage.
Chairman Frye asked if there is any sort of wetland issues with a creek or other water source.
Mr. Gallimore said no. This issue had already been covered by the Technical Review Committee.
Commissioner Allen asked about the width of road frontage. Mr. Dale said that there is a
minimum of 100 feet of space required. Mr. Gallimore said there may be more space but it won't
be less than 100 feet.
Commissioner Allen asked if the three lots from the other request were similar to the request
before this Board. Mr. Gallimore said yes. They will have 1500 square foot homes with a sales
price of approximately $200,000.
12/14/20
Commissioner McDowell asked if the homes would solely be 1500 square foot homes. Mr.
Gallimore said they would be 1500 square feet or greater. Generally, Mr. Earnhardt builds his
own homes rather than having another company build them.
Chairman Frye opened the Public Hearing.
Klas Anderson, 5172 Jordan Valley Road, Trinity, said that during the Planning Board
meeting, neighbors spoke of road traffic and water runoff with emotional pleas to keep the
neighborhood the way it is. There was misinformation presented to the Planning Board making
their determination unreasonable.
At the October 6, 2020, meeting of the Randolph County Planning Board, the Board
unanimously approved the above-mentioned request. Mr. Anderson said that the excerpt from the
motion, "based upon the Determination of Consistency and Findings of Reasonableness and Public
Interest" and the excerpt from the motion, "the request is also consistent with the Randolph County
Growth Management Plan and submission of the restrictive covenants as mentioned to meet our
specifications" were not made available to the public who were present at the meeting.
The Development Impact Analysis provided to the public listed 48 lots then 45 lots. The traffic
impact study was based on 45 lots to generate the "additional 270 total vehicle trips per day" on
Jordan Valley Road. Further, the Development Impact Analysis lists the "Minimum housing size:
1,500 sq. ft.". Upon receipt of the covenants, the minimum house size is listed as 1,000 sq. ft.
Mr. Anderson said that the residents contend these differences would affect the numbers listed
on the Development Impact Analysis and perhaps change the Determination of Consistency and
Findings of Reasonableness and Public Interest. At the meeting, testimony by a Realtor on behalf
of the Developer cited the request met the requirements of Randolph County Unified Development
Ordinance and Policy 6.5 in the Growth Management Plan. Mr. Anderson said that the residents
contend that all the policies listed in the Growth Management Plan should be considered such as:
• Policy 1.3 "The benefits of economic development should be balanced against the possible
detrimental effects such development may have on the quality of life enjoyed by area
residents". 65 neighbors of the proposed Tessa Downs subdivision signed a petition
against adding another 48 homes accessed on Jordan Valley Road. That petition was given
to the Planning Board.
• Policy 6.1 "community compatibility".
• Policy 6.12 "community compatibility".
• Policies 7.5, 7.6, 7.7, 7.8, 7.9, 8.4 and 8.9 All of which deal with storm water runoff. He
discussed the proposed development in relationship to the flood plain. The development
will change the amount of pervious and impervious lands that flow into the flood plain and
the relationship of the proposed subdivision to Earnhardt Road downstream.
Mr. Anderson said that Kenneth and Tammy Wilson live at the corner of Jordan Valley Road
(downstream) where Little Caraway Creek goes under Earnhardt Road. Steve and Karen Lane
own the next property upstream from the Wilsons. He referenced photographs showing before
and after water levels at the last rain event at Steve and Karen Lane's property and before and after
of the water levels at the last rain event at Kenneth and Tammy Wilson's property. He said the
12/14/20
water was flowing over Earnhardt Road. These photographs were available for viewing if the
Board requested them.
Mr. Anderson referred to the Growth Management Plan, stating that the Historical Background
of the Growth Management Plan states "The Growth Management Plan is designed to recognize
that sustainable economic growth, environmental protection and rural quality of life can be pursued
together as mutually supporting growth management and public policy goals. One does not
necessarily exclude the other." In the Growth and Management Plan, Randolph County Zoning
and Public Policy states "Individual rezoning decisions are dependent upon the scale of the
proposed development as it relates to the specific site and location. Sustainable rural economic
growth, environmental protection, and rural quality of life, shall be pursed together as mutually
supporting growth management goals. With appropriate site conditions, one goal does not
necessarily exclude the other." Mr. Anderson referenced the Summary of Growth Areas,
Development Considerations, Area 2: Secondary Growth Area "Incompatible development can
disrupt established residential patterns."
Mr. Anderson asked that the rezoning and subdivision request for Tessa Downs be denied in
favor of a subdivision with larger lots and fewer homes.
Commissioner Allen said that Mr. Anderson mentioned deed restrictions of 1000 square feet
but the request said 1500 square feet. He asked Mr. Dale what the minimum was. Mr. Dale said
the minimum was originally listed as 1000 square feet but after speaking to Mr. Gallimore it was
determined that the correct minimum square footage size was 1500. That has been corrected in
the latest draft of the covenants.
Chairman Frye asked if the 1500 square foot minimum is conditional of the rezoning. County
Attorney Ben Morgan said yes, that is a condition, but the County doesn't go out and stop
construction. The square footage is reviewed upon issuance of the permit.
Mr. Anderson said what was proposed and what was presented to them seemed to change.
Commissioner Haywood asked how far away Mr. Anderson's development is. He answered
that he is not developing any property.
Commissioner Haywood asked if he had anything to do with Ace Avant's rezoning request on
Racine Road. Mr. Anderson said that is a different subdivision and he only represented Ace Avant.
That request was approved.
Teresa Andrews, 1772 Mountain Meadow Drive, Asheboro, said that the development as
proposed is not in the best interest of the community. With increased built upon areas, there is
increased runoff that may contain wastes, heavy metals, oils, contaminants from fertilizers,
sediment, and other pollutants. With increased runoff there is downstream flooding and
streambank erosion. A colleague of hers ran a hydrograph report that shows a model of various
scenarios based on storm sizes. She discussed figures relative to the undeveloped site as opposed
to after development. There is a large increase of runoff potential based on a small storm size
model after development. Requiring stormwater detention would improve the conditions
12/14/20
downstream. Several of the downstream properties are affected by flooding. Requiring
stormwater detention or decreasing the number of houses would positively affect the properties
downstream.
Commissioner McDowell asked if the proposed 45 homes would create an impervious surface
and runoff problem that is detrimental to the stream. Ms. Andrews said yes. The existing runoff
at the site is 6.5 cubic feet per second, which would increase to 28.6 cubic feet per second based
on the change in impervious surface from the development. This is referring to flow rate and
would increase the amount of stormwater in the area. A retention pond could contain a certain
amount of water which would help with runoff and streambank erosion.
Commissioner Allen said that the one-year runoff is 4.4 times the post development runoff, but
the ten-year runoff is only 1.69 times post development, and the hundred -year runoff is 1.39 post
development. It seems that the smaller the event, the more severe the runoff. Ms. Andrews said
that at a certain point you can only predict so much. You can't engineer for everything. The giant
events are so big that adding a little more doesn't make that big of an impact. She clarified that
erosion control devices are used during construction but are removed after completion by
developer. They are not permanent structures.
Cindy Rutledge, 4848 Jordan Valley Road, Trinity, is concerned about the potential negative
impacts on the community and environment. Forty-five homes are a lot of homes in a small area.
She thanked the Board for listening to the community.
Chairman Frye invited Mr. Gallimore back to the stand. Mr. Gallimore said that the process of
constructing this property falls under the Department of Water Quality. A developer would not
clear-cut the whole area; rather they would save trees and buffers to provide structure in keeping
with natural elements. Some agriculture can be worse as far as runoff control.
Commissioner McDowell asked Mr. Gallimore for his opinion of the probability of being able
to sell 45 lots in that area. Mr. Gallimore said that a recently developed subdivision of similar size
sold 100 percent of the sites. Randolph County is a great place to live. Brokers from other areas
are showing sites in our area.
Commissioner Allen asked if it was possible that some of the lots would remain unused because
they may not perk. He asked that if lots were lost, would barrier lines be redrawn. Mr. Gallimore
said that typically yes, the lines would be redrawn. There are a couple of lots at the cul-de-sac the
developer may leave open to adjoin neighboring property to prevent available road frontage for
future development.
Hearing no further comments, Chairman Frye closed the Public Hearing at 6:53 p.m.
Chairman Frye said there are many environmental regulations. Chances are the developer may
not be able to build homes on 45 lots. There are also some issues from the State to be addressed.
This is not the first development by Mr. Earnhardt in the county. Chairman Frye said he's never
had a problem with Mr. Earnhardt. Anything asked of Mr. Earnhardt. He has done. He doesn't
know of any complaints about Mr. Earnhardt. This process is vetted by the Technical Review
12/14/20
Committee. Both the Review Committee and the Planning Board unanimously approved the
request. Chairman Frye said that the conditions are compatible with the homes in the area and this
will be a better development than some in the surrounding area.
On motion of Frye, seconded by McDowell, the Board voted unanimously to approve this
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 ofReasonableness and
Public Interest statements 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. "
Pursuant to North Carolina General Statutes § 153A-341 and 342, the Randolph County Board
of Commissioners finds that the proposed zoning district map amendments to CVOE-CD
Conventional Subdivision Overlay Exclusive Conditional District as described in the application
of Bobby Earnhardt are consistent with the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance and
the 2009 Randolph County Growth Management Plan and are reasonable and in the public interest
for the following reasons:
1. Determination of Consistency with the Growth Management Plan.
A. Consistency with Growth Management Plan Map
The Randolph County Growth Management Plan map for the southeast area shows
the parcel to be rezoned in an area designated as Secondary Growth Area.
Secondary Growth Areas are generally transitional in nature and uses change from
commercial and agricultural uses to more residential uses.
B. Consistency with Growth Policies in the Growth Management Plan Policy 6.5
The protection of viable rural neighborhoods should be encouraged by compatible
residential development to insure the continued existence as a major housing
source and as a reflection of the long-term quality of life in Randolph County.
Consistency Analysis:
Of the twenty-four subdivisions within one mile of the proposed subdivision
location, six are mobile home subdivisions with the remaining eighteen
subdivisions being site -built subdivisions. Based on this calculation, allowing the
creation of this subdivision would allow "viable rural neighborhoods" to be in
compliance with the Growth Management Plan as it would ensure major housing
in an area already infused with major housing developments.
Policy 6.6 Development in designated flood zones shall be avoided. Subdivision
lots that are partially within designated flood zones shall compute the minimum lot
size as that area located outside the flood zone.
Consistency Analysis:
12/14/20
A portion of this property under request for rezoning does contain a designated
flood zone. The developer and surveyor have designed the subdivision to prevent
lots in the subdivision in the flood zoning area from being developed for residential
use.
2. Statement of Reasonableness and Public Interest
Reasonableness and Public Interest Analysis:
The policies listed above illustrate how this request is consistent with the Ordinance, the
Plan and applicable General Statutes. The parcel in this rezoning request is subject to the
Conditions agreed upon between the property owner and the Planning Board. These
Conditions will limit the amount and type of development on the property reducing the
impact on adjoining parcels. The proposed use will also increase the tax base and increase
economic activity within the County.
Adjournment
At 6:58 p.m. on motion of Allen, seconded by Haywood, the Board voted unanimously to
adjourn.
Darrell Frye, Chairman David Allen
Kenny Kidd
Hope Haywood
Maxton McDowell
Sarah Pack, Deputy Clerk to the Board
12/14/20