The URL can be used to link to this page

04AprilPB http://www.randolphcountync.gov RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 204 E Academy Street, Asheboro NC 27203 (336) 318-6555 DUE TO COVID-19, WE WILL TAKE NECESSARY PRECAUTIONS TO FOLLOW SOCIAL DISTANCING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE SAFETY OF OUR CITIZENS, BOARD MEMBERS AND STAFF. RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD AGENDA April 13, 2021 1. Call to Order of the Randolph County Planning Board. 2. Roll call of the Board members:  Reid Pell, Chair;  Wayne Joyce, Vice Chair;  John Cable;  Keith Slusher;  Kemp Davis;  Melinda Vaughan;  Ralph Modlin; and  Reggie Beeson, Alternate. 3. Consent Agenda:  Approval of minutes from March 2, 2021, Planning Board meeting.  Approval of agenda for April 13, 2021, Planning Board meeting.  Approval of the Order of the Board to Approve the Special Use Permit for Robert Lee Evans Comer and Brandon Hollingsworth, and the Consistency, Reasonableness and in the Public Interest Statements for the Rezoning Requests by Glandon Forest Equity, LLC, and TJTR Properties, LLC. 4. Old Business. REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000075 The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a Legislative Hearing on the request by NORMA C PIERCE HEIRS, Trinity, NC, and their request to rezone 29.04 acres located between Flint Hill Rd, Beeson Farm Rd and Beckerdite Rd, Back Creek Township, be rezoned from RA – Residential Agricultural District to CVOE-CD – Conventional Subdivision Overlay Exclusive – Conditional District. Tax ID # 7724675402. Secondary Growth Area. The proposed Conditional Zoning District would specifically allow a 27-lot site-built subdivision with minimum house size of 1,300 sq. ft. as per site plan. 5. New Business. REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000645 The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a Legislative Hearing on the request by MELISSA AND JIMMY LEE HILL, JR, Climax, NC, and their request to rezone 1.06 acres on Ramseur Julian Rd, approximately 350 ft. north of Shelar Dr, Liberty Township, Tax ID #8706803607, Rural Growth Area, Sandy Creek Watershed, from RA – Residential Agricultural District to HC-CD – Highway Commercial - Conditional District. The proposed Conditional Zoning District would specifically allow a 30 ft. by 40 ft. warehouse building with office space as per the site plan. REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000651 The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a Legislative Hearing on the request by TONY HURLEY AND VICKY HARRIS, Randleman, NC, and their request to rezone 2.65 acres at 122 Spring Forest Rd, Tabernacle Township, Tax ID #7712139808, Secondary Growth Area, Lake Reese Watershed, from HC - CU – Highway Commercial – Conditional Use District to LI – Light Industrial District. The existing Conditional Use District specifically allows an automotive repair business in a 30 ft. by 80 ft. building, a 25 ft. no-cut buffer along the eastern property line, hours of operation of 8:00 am to 6:00 pm along with no outside storage. REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000654 The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a Legislative Hearing on the request by PHIL BURGESS CONSTRUCTION, INC, Liberty, NC, and their request to amend the Conditional District, Racine Rd, Providence Township, Tax ID #7777761655, 7777760294, 7777760191, 7777761305, 7777761419 and 7777768355, Ace Avant Real Property Company subdivision lots one through six, Secondary Growth Area, Polecat Creek Watershed. The existing Conditional Zoning District specifically allows a seven-lot site-built subdivision with a 1,700 sq. ft. minimum house size. REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000717 The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a Legislative Hearing on the request by NC MINE 1, LLC, El Segundo, CA, and their request to rezone 11.80 acres off Spencer Meadow Rd, Back Creek Township, Tax ID #7721886981, 7721895145, 7721899418 and 7721990277, Daphne and Arthur Hoover subdivision lots one through four, Secondary Growth Area, from RA – Residential Agricultural District to LI-CD – Light Industrial District – Conditional District. The proposed Conditional Zoning District would specifically allow an unmanned data center with accessory solar use as per the site plan. Property Owners: Mark L and Collette G Hoover and Scotty Page and Rebecca H Hoover. 6. Adjournment. Planning Board Minutes March 2, 2021 Page 1 of 10 RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES March 2, 2021 There was a meeting of the Randolph County Planning Board on Tuesday, March 2, 2021, at 6:30 p.m. in the 1909 Historic Courthouse Meeting Room, 145-C Worth St, Asheboro, NC. Vice-Chairman Joyce called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. and welcomed those in attendance. Joyce called for a roll call of the members. Jay Dale, Randolph County Planning and Zoning Director, called the roll of the members.  Reid Pell, Chairman, absent;  Wayne Joyce, Vice Chairman, present;  John Cable, present;  Keith Slusher, present;  Kemp Davis, present;  Melinda Vaughan, present;  Ralph Modlin, present; and  Reggie Beeson, Alternate, present. County Attorney, Ben Morgan, was also present. Dale informed the Vice-Chairman that there was a quorum of the members present for the meeting. Joyce called for a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented. Consent Agenda:  Approval of minutes from February 9, 2021, Planning Board meeting.  Approval of agenda for March 2, 2021, Planning Board meeting.  Approval of the Order of the Board to approve the Special Use Permit for Paul Scarlata, and the Consistency, Reasonableness and in the Public Interest Statements for the Rezoning Requests by David Lewis, MERIC, Inc., Derksen Poultry, LLC, and Mac Wilson Property, LLC. Davis made the motion to approve the consent agenda as presented with Cable making the second to the motion. The motion was adopted unanimously. Joyce called for any old business to be brought before the Board. Hearing none, the Board moved forward with the cases on the agenda. Planning Board Minutes March 2, 2021 Page 2 of 10 Dale presented the first case of the night along with site plans and pictures of the site and surrounding properties. SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST #2020-00003470 ROBERT LEE EVANS COMER, Asheboro, NC, is requesting a Special Use Permit at his residence at 7243 US Hwy 220 S, Richland Township, Tax ID# 7666501994, RR – Residential Restricted District and RA – Residential Agricultural District. The proposed Special Use Permit would specifically allow a landscaping business with a produce stand as per the site plan. Joyce opened the public hearing and asked if anyone was present to speak in favor of the Special Use Permit request. Morgan administered the oath to Robert Comer. Robert Lee Evans Comer, 7243 US Hwy 220 S, Asheboro, said he plans to sell mulch, rock, sand, hay, straw, and produce to benefit the community. He also said he would like to sell Christmas trees. Joyce asked how many employees he planned to have and what his hours of operations would be. Comer said he would have three employees and his hours would be Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m., and Saturdays from 8:00 a.m. until 12:00 p.m. He said he would not be open on Sundays. Davis asked if he currently operates a business on his property. Comer answered no. Slusher asked if he would be installing any exterior lighting for his inventory. Comer said he had already had three lights installed by the power company. Davis asked if it was the normal outside lighting from the power company that turns on at night. Comer answered yes. Davis asked if he would be using the existing drive shown on the maps. Comer said he would be installing an additional driveway to the right of the existing drive. Vaughan asked if there would be evergreen buffers between his property and the adjoining property. Comer answered yes and said there is a significant distance between the neighbor’s home and his property where the business will be located. Joyce asked if there was anyone else that would like to speak in favor of the request. Hearing none, Joyce asked if there was anyone that would like to speak in opposition to the request. Morgan administered the oath to Roy Edward Freeman. Roy Edward Freeman, 7281 US Hwy 220 S, Asheboro, said he currently lives adjacent to Mr. Comer and has plans to close on the property in a couple of days because he has Planning Board Minutes March 2, 2021 Page 3 of 10 just sold to his daughter and son-in-law. He expressed his concerns regarding the impact the business may cause for his family including increased traffic and the location of the business so close to his property line. Joyce asked Freeman where his home is located to the proposed business. Freeman said from the road looking toward the property, he is located to the right of the proposed business. Slusher asked Freeman what were his specific concerns that the Board could address. Freeman said he would like some privacy with a buffer and that it not be located on the property line. Cable asked what his daughter and son-in-law’s main concern would be to the request. Freeman said they do not want the business to be located right on the property line. Slusher asked how closed his home is located to the property line. Freeman said he would guess that it would be approximately fifty feet. Vaughn asked if the buffer that is shown on the maps before them is located on his property or Comer’s property. Freeman said there is no longer a buffer, it has been clear-cut. Joyce said according to the map before the Board, the house is located approximately 100-125 feet from the property line. Davis asked what he would consider an ideal distance from the property line. Freeman said he would like the business to be at least twenty feet from the property line. Cable asked if the twenty-foot setback from the property line would be acceptable. Freeman answered yes. Cable told Freeman he appreciated him coming to the hearing and being honest. Slusher asked where the landscaping bins would be located. Comer said they would be approximately forty feet from the property line. Cable asked if the forty-foot would be minimum. Comer answered yes. He said he would like everything to look good and remain country-looking. Having no additional opposition to the request, Joyce closed the public hearing for discussion among the Board members and a motion. Cable said it seems as though all of the concerns were addressed. Joyce agreed. Slusher said there was only one person to speak in opposition and his main concern was regarding the distance from the property line and it was answered satisfactorily. Slusher made 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 the use if developed according to the plan(s) as submitted and approved, will Planning Board Minutes March 2, 2021 Page 4 of 10 be in harmony with the area and in general conformity with the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance. Vaughan made a second to the motion to approve the Special Use Permit request. Joyce called the question on the motion to approve the Special Use request, and the motion was adopted unanimously and the Special Use was granted. Dale presented the second case of the night along, with site plans and pictures, of the site and surrounding properties. SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST #2020-00003643 BRANDON HOLLINGSWORTH, Asheboro, NC, is requesting a Special Use Permit at his residence at 786 McDowell Ctry Trl, Franklinville Township, Tax ID# 7782367405, RA – Residential Agricultural District. The proposed Special Use Permit would specifically allow a federal firearms license for a gunsmith shop with in-person and internet sales with no firing range as per the site plan. Joyce opened the public hearing and asked if anyone was present to speak in favor of the Special Use Permit request. Morgan administered the oath to Brandon Hollingsworth. Hollingsworth, 786 McDowell Country Trl, Asheboro, said he had recently moved to Randolph County and would like to continue a business that he began approximately six years ago while living in Davidson County. He said he runs a gunsmith shop for repairs and handles some sales and legal transfers by appointment only. He said he would be working strictly from the basement of his home, there would be no outside storage, no firing range of any type, minimum traffic such as one or two cars per week and there would be limited inventory on-site. Joyce asked what would be his hours of operation. Hollingsworth said he works full time at Energizer so he plans to work Monday through Friday from approximately 4:00 p.m. until 8:00 p.m. and Saturdays from 12:00 p.m. until 8:00 p.m. Cable asked if there would be any test firing. Hollingsworth answered no. He said all of his testings would be done at a certified gun range. Beeson asked if his supplies or inventory that is needed would typically be a UPS or FedEx delivery. Hollingsworth answered yes. Joyce asked if there was anyone else that would like to speak in favor of the request. Hearing none, Joyce asked if there was anyone in opposition to the request. Hearing none, Joyce closed the public hearing for discussion among the Board members and a motion. Planning Board Minutes March 2, 2021 Page 5 of 10 Davis said Mr. Hollingsworth seems to be experienced in what he is doing and he sees no potential problems. Davis made 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. Slusher made a second to the motion to approve the Special Use Permit request. Joyce called the question on the motion to approve the Special Use request, and the motion was adopted unanimously and the Special Use was granted. Dale presented the third case of the night along with site plans and pictures of the site and surrounding properties. REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000241 GLANDON FOREST EQUITY, LLC, Raleigh, NC, is requesting to rezone 2.00 acres at the intersection of US Hwy 311 and Cedar Square Rd, New Market Township, Tax ID #7737131258 and 7737133652, L A Bowman subdivision lots 2-7, 61-64 plus another tract, Primary Growth Area, Randleman Lake Watershed, from RA – Residential Agricultural District to HC-CD – Highway Commercial - Conditional District. The proposed Conditional Zoning District would specifically allow a retail store as per the site plan. Property Owner: Kermit R Hayes. Joyce opened the public hearing and asked if there was anyone present to speak in favor of the request. Bob Brent Purdum, Triangle Design, 4004 Barrett Dr., Raleigh, NC, representing Glandon Forest Equity, LLC, said he is there to request approval for a general retail store and answer any questions the Board may have. He said a lot of research has gone into the area, concluding the proposed site to be the best location for their request. Modlin asked what type of items would be sold. Purdum said the store would sell grocery items and general supplies like Wal-Mart. Dale said the site plan indicates it will be a Dollar General store. Purdum said he was correct. Davis asked if there are turning lanes planned for the entrance of the store. Purdum answered yes. He said they have already been in contact with NCDOT and they have indicated there will be a turning lane for both directions of traffic on US Hwy 311. Modlin asked if the access would be located on “Old 311”. Purdum answered yes. He said there Planning Board Minutes March 2, 2021 Page 6 of 10 would be access off of Cedar Square Rd as well. He said another reason for choosing this site is because of access from two different roads, which is more desirable for the large truck deliveries needed for the store. Cable asked if NCDOT has permitted the entrances and exits for this location. Purdum said they have been given the guidelines although it is subject to changes after the zoning decision. Joyce asked if there was anyone else that would like to speak in favor of the request. Hearing none, Joyce asked if there was anyone that would like to speak in opposition to the request. Matthew Doyle, 5590 Old Cedar Square Rd, Archdale, said his property is adjacent to this request. He said he realizes the property is a desirable location for retail because of the proximity to the highway but there are six other Dollar General locations within ten miles of this particular property. He said there are other local businesses in the area that sell the same product(s) as Dollar General which will be affected by a Dollar General and if there is one thing that everyone has learned during a pandemic, it is to support your local businesses. Doyle said he invested in his property approximately three years ago and has invested in the property to improve the value of the home and starting a family farm for his kids. He said a decision to approve a commercial site adjoining his property takes away from the agriculture values that Randolph County is known for. Davis asked Doyle how much property he owns adjoining the requested site. Doyle said he owns 7.6 acres and described the property in more detail with the amount of cleared area that is used for personal farming. Austin Frazier, 5559 Old Cedar Square Rd, Archdale, said he lives across the road from Matt and agrees with Matt’s concerns. He said he is not in favor of a Dollar General and he chose a rural area to keep away from the commercially zoned property. He would have moved to the city, next to a store, if that’s what he had wanted. Doyle asked the Board if the request were to be approved, would a buffer be required to help protect the surrounding properties. He also asked if he could expect additional rezoning for other properties in the area. Dale said there are no current requests for rezoning in the immediate area although it would be reasonable to assume that there will be additional requests in the future, due to the location of Hwy 311 and Interstate Hwy 74. He said the site plan does not show any buffer. Morgan asked if the rezoning classification would not require a minimum buffer. Dale said there would be a level one buffer required for this particular zoning. Beeson asked if the rezoning request is for the entire property or just two acres. Dale said the rezoning would include only the two acres. Planning Board Minutes March 2, 2021 Page 7 of 10 Joyce asked if there was anyone else that would like to speak in opposition to the request. Hearing none, Joyce closed the public hearing for discussion among the Board members and a motion. Davis said he understands how Doyle feels because he is a farmer as well. He said he also understands that this property is located at an intersection of a major highway and that there will be a natural buffer between his home and the store and it will only be two acres out of the seven acres to be rezoned. Cable agreed with Davis’ statements and said the area changed when Interstate Hwy 74 was constructed. He said there are several commercial properties in the area, including the railroad. He also agreed with Dale’s statement regarding future development should be expected because of the location to Interstate Hwy 74 and Cedar Square Rd. Joyce said US Hwy 311 has been commercialized for many years. Modlin said he is also from the area and it has always been considered somewhat of a commercialized area because of the Union 76 gas station, fertilizer business, etc. Joyce said there has been a furniture operation across the street for twenty years or more. Beeson said he feels there should be some conditions required to add turning lanes as part of the request. Dale said NCDOT is pretty strict on requirements based on traffic counts. There was additional discussion from the Board members regarding the existing lanes and flow of traffic. Slusher said the aerial photo shows there to be natural vegetation surrounding the two acres requested to be rezoned and asked if that was correct. Dale said if they do not clear-cut the property during construction, it would have a natural buffer. Davis asked if they would be allowed to clear-cut the entire property. Dale said they could clear-cut the property but they would have to plant a level one buffer as required by the Unified Development Ordinance. Cable made 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 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. Slusher made a second to the motion to approve the rezoning request. Joyce called the question on the motion to approve the rezoning request, and the motion was adopted unanimously and the rezoning was granted. Dale presented the fourth case of the night along with site plans and pictures of the site and surrounding properties. REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000246 Planning Board Minutes March 2, 2021 Page 8 of 10 TJTR PROPERTIES, LLC, Asheboro, NC, is requesting to amend the existing Conditional Zoning District at 2863 NC Hwy 134, Tax ID# 7657589747, 21.24 acres, Secondary Growth Area, LI-CD – Light Industrial – Conditional District, to also allow two 40 ft. by 100 ft. warehouses and a 14 ft. by 28 ft. accessory building as per site plan. (The existing Conditional Zoning District permit allows a 40 ft. by 100 ft. building for the sale and manufacturing of portable accessory buildings as per site plan along with no billboard advertising signs.) Joyce opened the public hearing and asked if there was anyone present to speak in favor of the request. Dale announced that Mr. Schneider could not be present for the meeting because of exposure to someone that could have coronavirus. He said Mr. Schneider is available by phone for any questions the Board may have if they are willing to proceed with his request. He told the Board that Mr. Schneider has expressed the need to expand his existing business and needs the two additional buildings. Joyce asked if there was anyone present that would like to speak in favor of the request. Hearing none, Joyce asked if there was anyone in opposition to the request. Hearing none, Joyce closed the public hearing for discussion among the Board members and a motion. Cable said the business is doing well, even during the pandemic. Slusher said the business fits the area, there is no opposition to the request, it is an expansion of an existing business and he sees no reason to deny the request. Slusher made 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 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 (including the water study, all NCDOT approvals and changes to residential covenants as discussed), also incorporated into the motion and that the request is also consistent with the Randolph County Growth Management Plan. Modlin made a second to the motion to approve the rezoning request. Joyce called the question on the motion to approve the rezoning request, and the motion was adopted unanimously and the rezoning was granted. Dale presented the last case of the night along with site plans and pictures of the site and surrounding properties. REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000075 Planning Board Minutes March 2, 2021 Page 9 of 10 NORMA C PIERCE HEIRS, Trinity, NC, is requesting to rezone 29.04 acres located between Flint Hill Rd, Beeson Farm Rd and Beckerdite Rd, Back Creek Township, be rezoned from RA – Residential Agricultural District to CVOE-CD – Conventional Subdivision Overlay Exclusive – Conditional District. Tax ID # 7724675402. Secondary Growth Area. The proposed Conditional Zoning District would specifically allow a 27-lot site-built subdivision with a minimum house size of 1,300 sq. ft. as per the site plan. Dale told the Board of recent discussions with NCDOT regarding the approval and denial process which is somewhat different than the procedures followed in the past. Dale said he had been told by the surveyor, as it was explained to him, that even if the Board were to pass this request, the NCDOT would not approve access because it does not meet their criteria. Dale also said there have been multiple conversations and emails regarding their requirements, with no clear answers as to what they will and can require at this time so he does not know how to advise the Board at this time. Cable said in light of the information, he suggests the NCDOT provide additional information before the Board makes a decision. Cable made a motion to table the rezoning request. There were additional discussion and agreement amongst the Board members regarding the need to postpone the request until additional information or clarity is received from NCDOT. Slusher made a second to the motion to table the rezoning request. Joyce called the question on the motion to table the rezoning request, and the motion was adopted unanimously. Having no further business, Joyce called for a motion to adjourn the meeting. Davis made the motion to adjourn with Cable making the second to the motion. Joyce called the question on the motion to adjourn and the motion was adopted unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 7:39 p.m. with 33 citizens present. RANDOLPH COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA Planning Board Minutes March 2, 2021 Page 10 of 10 __________________________ Planning Director __________________________ _______________________________ Clerk to the Board Date COUNTY OF RANDOLPH ORDER APPROVING SPECIAL USE PERMIT IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT BY ROBERT LEE EVANS COMER SPECIAL USE REQUEST #2020-00003470 NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD Having heard all the evidence and argument presented at the hearing on March 2, 2021, the Randolph County Planning Board finds that the application is complete, that the application complies with all of the applicable requirements of the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance for the development proposed, and that therefore the application to make use of the property located at 7243 US Hwy 220 S, for the purpose indicated is hereby APPROVED, subject to all applicable provisions of the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance. HAVING CONSIDERED ALL THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED, THE RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD APPROVES THE APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A LANDSCAPING BUSINESS WITH A PRODUCE STAND BASED UPON THE FOLLOWING: 1. That the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety if located where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and approved; 2. That the use meets all required conditions and specifications; 3. That the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property, or that the use is a public necessity; and 4. That the location and character of the use if developed according to the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in general conformity with the Growth Management Plan for Randolph County. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Randolph County Planning Board has caused this Special Use Permit to be issued in its name and the property owners do hereby accept this Special Use Permit, together with all its conditions as binding on them and their successors in interest. _______________________________ _______________________________ Randolph County Planning Director Chair, Randolph County Planning Board _______________________________ _______________________________ Clerk to Planning Board Date COUNTY OF RANDOLPH ORDER APPROVING SPECIAL USE PERMIT IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT BY BRANDON HOLLINGSWORTH SPECIAL USE REQUEST #2021-00000233 NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD Having heard all the evidence and argument presented at the hearing on March 2, 2021, the Randolph County Planning Board finds that the application is complete, that the application complies with all of the applicable requirements of the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance for the development proposed, and that therefore the application to make use of the property located at 786 McDowell Ctry Trl for the purpose indicated is hereby APPROVED, subject to all applicable provisions of the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance. HAVING CONSIDERED ALL THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED, THE RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD APPROVES THE APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSE FOR GUN SMITH SHOP WITH IN- PERSON AND INTERNET SALES WITH NO FIRING RANGE BASED UPON THE FOLLOWING: 1. That the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety if located where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and approved; 2. That the use meets all required conditions and specifications; 3. That the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property, or that the use is a public necessity; and 4. That the location and character of the use if developed according to the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in general conformity with the Growth Management Plan for Randolph County. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Randolph County Planning Board has caused this Special Use Permit to be issued in its name and the property owners do hereby accept this Special Use Permit, together with all its conditions as binding on them and their successors in interest. _______________________________ _______________________________ Randolph County Planning Director Chair, Randolph County Planning Board _______________________________ _______________________________ Clerk to Planning Board Date COUNTY OF RANDOLPH CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION AND FINDING OF REASONABLENESS AND PUBLIC INTEREST IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING BY GLANDON FOREST EQUITY, LLC REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000241 NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD According to North Carolina General Statutes § 153A-341 and 342, the Randolph County Planning Board finds that the proposed zoning district map amendments to HC-CD – Highway Commercial – Conditional District as described in the application of Glandon Forest Equity, LLC, 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 northwest area shows the parcel to be rezoned in an area designated as Primary Growth Area. Primary Growth Areas generally lie along major transportation corridors and have access to urban services. This parcel is along US Hwy 311 and is also close to Interstate 74 which is a major transportation corridor. B. Consistency with Growth Policies in the Growth Management Plan Policy 4.1 Provide for sites in Randolph County jurisdiction where rural commercial activity can locate; with the goal of increasing economic activity; job creation, and the provision of services to the rural community. Consistency Analysis: The proposed location for this proposed retail store is supported by the Randolph County Growth Management Plan by allowing for the orderly development of an area of the property that will increase economic activity, job creation and the provision of services and goods to this rural community. Policy 4.6 Compatible land uses such as rural neighborhood retail and service establishments located close to general residential areas should be considered during the rezoning process with the general goal of reducing automobile travel distances and promoting better livability in the community. Consistency Analysis: The proposed location for this retail store would help reduce the travel distances that citizens must now undertake to be able to have the necessities of living in this area. There are some small retail stores currently in the area and the addition of another retail store could possibly help the existing stores and promote better livability in the area. 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. _______________________________ _______________________________ Randolph County Planning Director Chair, Randolph County Planning Board _______________________________ _______________________________ Clerk to Planning Board Date COUNTY OF RANDOLPH CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION AND FINDING OF REASONABLENESS AND PUBLIC INTEREST IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING BY TJTR PROPERTIES, LLC, REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000246 NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD According to North Carolina General Statutes § 153A-341 and 342, the Randolph County Planning Board finds that the proposed zoning district map amendments to LI-CD – Light Industrial – Conditional District as described in the application of TJTR Properties, LLC, 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 southwest area shows the parcel to be rezoned in an area designated as Secondary Growth Area. Secondary Growth Areas are predominately areas that are transitional in nature in that they are changing from a rural, agricultural area to more of a mixed use type of development. B. Consistency with Growth Policies in the Growth Management Plan Policy 3.1 Industrial development should be on land that is physically suitable and has unique locational advantages for industry. Advanced planning for the identification of such land should be encouraged. Consistency Analysis: The property for this request is suitable for this type of operation as the property was rezoned for this type of operation several years ago. The location of the request, along with the adjoining commercial uses, encourages commercial development in this area and prevents having pockets of commercial or industrial zoning scattered through-out the County. Policy 3.4 Warehousing, storage and distribution facilities should have direct access to appropriate thoroughfares and should be visually buffered according to their location. Consistency Analysis: The request location, with its proximity to NC Hwy 139, Interstate 73 74, and US Hwy 220 S, affords the site to direct access to major transportation corridors and would limit the amount of commercial traffic in residential neighborhoods. 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. _______________________________ _______________________________ Randolph County Planning Director Chair, Randolph County Planning Board _______________________________ _______________________________ Clerk to Planning Board Date April Request Location Map 0 2.5 5 7.5 101.25 Miles Archdale Trinity Randleman Asheboro Seagrove Liberty Staley Ramseur Franklinville /0j2 ?v!"c$ KÃ !"`$ I¤I¤!"`$ KÈ ?k ?ø ?ø ?k ?i ?Å ?Ú ?Ä ?ç ?d ?ø ?ø?d !"a$ !"a$ !"`$ !"a$ Legend Roads Reservoirs County line Municipal Zoning kjPierce kjHill kj Burgess kj Hurley kj NC Mine 1, LLC TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000075 The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a Legislative Hearing on the request by NORMA C PIERCE HEIRS, Trinity, NC, and their request to rezone 29.04 acres located between Flint Hill Rd, Beeson Farm Rd and Beckerdite Rd, Back Creek Township, be rezoned from RA – Residential Agricultural District to CVOE-CD – Conventional Subdivision Overlay Exclusive – Conditional District. Tax ID # 7724675402. Secondary Growth Area. The proposed Conditional Zoning District would specifically allow a 27-lot site-built subdivision with minimum house size of 1,300 sq. ft. as per site plan. The Randolph County Technical Review Committee has met on the above-listed case, and after review of all applicable standards contained in the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance and the Randolph County Growth Management Plan, the Technical Review Committee finds that this request: • Meets all technical requirements of both the Ordinance and the Plan; • Is consistent, reasonable, and in the public interest; and • Should be approved by the Randolph County Planning Board. Based upon information available at the time, the Technical Review Committee recommended approval of the rezoning request. However, after further review of issues raised by the community and the North Carolina Department of Transportation, the Technical Review Committee is now split on the recommendation for this rezoning request. Specifically, North Carolina General Statutes 153A, Part 3, that authorize County zoning states, “for the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, morals and general welfare” and part of the Technical Review Committee now has safety concerns regarding the number of connections to the existing State maintained roads. The following policies from the Randolph County Growth Management Plan were identified by the Technical Review Committee as supporting this conclusion for approval of the request. Policy 6.13 Conventional Residential subdivisions are anticipated of similar housing characteristics to the community. 38 Policy 6.14 Residential subdivisions should, in order to promote efficiencies in the delivery of urban services, be encouraged to develop in a fashion which minimizes “leap frog” development (i.e. leaving large vacant areas between developments). The following policies from the Randolph County Growth Management Plan were identified by the Technical Review Committee as supporting this conclusion for denial of the request. Policy 6.12 Factors to be considered in major subdivision approval in Primary and Secondary Growth Areas should include suitability of soils, access to major thoroughfares, the potential availability of public services and facilities and community compatibility. Policy 6.22 New driveway connections should be designed in a way to minimize new locations on existing public roads. PARCEL INFORMATION: ZONING INFORMATION: Zoning District 1: RA-RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT Zoning District 2: Zoning District 3: Specialty District: N/A Watershed Name: NONE Class A Flood Plain On Prop?: NO Flood Plain Map #: 3710772400J Growth Management Areas:SECONDARY GROWTH AREA Flood Plane Map #: Total Permit Fee: $100.00 COMMENTS: REQUESTED CHANGE: The undersigned owner/applicant do hereby make application for a PROPERTY ZONING CHANGE as allowed by the Randolph Couty Zoning Ordinance. Area To Be Rezoned: 29.2000 Lot Size Indicator: ACRE(S) Proposed Zoning District: CVOE-CD-CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION OVERLAY EXCLUSIVE CONDITIONAL DISTRICT Proposed Use(S): TO ALLOW A 27 LOT SUBDIVISION FOR SITE BUILT HOMES WITH A MINIMUM HOUSE SIZE OF 1,300 SQ. FT. AS PER SITE PLAN Condition(S): Applicant: NORMA C PIERCE HEIRS City, St. Zip: TRINITY, NC 27370 Address: 1874 THAYER RD Owner: PIERCE, NORMA C Address: 1874 THAYER RD City, St. Zip: TRINITY, NC 27370 Permit #: 2021-00000075 Parcel #: 7724675402 Date: 01/13/2021 Location Address: Permit Type Code: PZ 2 CONTACT NAME:PIERCE, BEVERLY Contact Phone:336 909-8166 Acreage: Township:29.0400 02 - BACK CREEK Subdivsion: Lot number: Timothy Mangum Authorized County Official Signature of Applicant: APPLICATION FOR ZONING CHANGE Page: 1 of 1 - LOCAL TELEPHONE NUMBER - Asheboro: (336) 318-6565 - Archdale/Trinity: (336) 819-3565 http://www.randolphcountync.gov COUNTY OF RANDOLPH Department of Planning & Zoning 204 E Academy St - PO Box 771 - Asheboro NC 27204-0771 APPLICATION FOR ZONING CHANGE Pierce Request Location Map LIBERTYS RUN DR FLINTHILLRDBEESO N FARM RD WIL LI A MHE N LEYPLBECKERDITERD 1 inch = 400 feet Directions to site: US Hwy 311 - (L)Beeson Farm Rd - Site on (L) at end. Pierce Heirs Rezoning Request !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(JES S S M IT H R DWILLIAMHENLEYPLLIBERTYSRUNDRFLINTHILLRD BEE S O N F A R M R D BECKERDITERD 1 inch = 500 feet O W Spencer S/D Liberty's Run S/D CarawayBaptistChurch Flint Hill UnitedChurch of Christ Requestlocation Legend ParcelsStructures Type !(Permanent Structure !(Temporary Structure Roads Streams 50 ft. Stream bufferCounty zoning Districts RA RR 100.00 100.00 100.00 73.02272.54 267.64 401.60100.00105.00105.00108.00177.58 260.15102.6347.91 96.82 3.10 100.03 10.75 89.28 99.67356.7750.42198.07 41 3.9 64 05.8740 4.0 8406.91 75.88 406.00 75.88 CURVE RADIUS ARC LENGTH CHORD LENGTH CHORD BEARING DELTA ANGLEC1 142.96 100.95 98.87C2 317.32 100.42 100.00C3 317.32 106.63 106.13C4 60.00 38.86 38.19C5 60.00 38.14 37.50C6 60.00 38.14 37.50C7 60.00 38.14 37.50C8 60.00 38.14 37.50C9 60.00 38.14 37.50C10 60.00 38.14 37.50C11 60.00 46.18 45.05C12 257.32 221.86 215.05C13 317.32 72.61 72.45 C2 C3 C12 10x70SightTriangle 10x70SightTriangle Notes: 1. No NCGS Monuments found within 2000' of property.2. This project is not located within a special flood hazardarea. 3. Area calculated by coordinate geometry.4. No Field Work performed at this time. Map drawn fromRandolph County GIS 5. No attempt was made by this survey to locate allunderground utilities nor any other easements that would be revealed by a title search.6. Zoning: RA7. Tax PIN: 7724675402 8. Total Acres: 28.854 AcresAcres in Proposed R/W: 1.262 Acres Acres in Lots: 27.592 Acres Number of Lots: 27Average Acres per Lot: 1.022 Acres 9. 785 Linear Feet of Road Location Map (Not to Scale) Legend Property Line Computed Property Line Right of Way Line Easement Line Old Plat Book Line Existing Iron Rod/Pipe New Iron Rod/Pipe Point Not Set/Computed Point Well Tie Lines PRELIMINARY PLAT - NOT FOR RECORDATION, CONVEYANCES, OR SALES Job #: 12476 Proposed Subdivision For: Pierce Estates Back Creek Township Randolph County North Carolina December 15, 2020 Deed Book:857 Pg:320 Scale: 1" = 100 US Survey Feet Bar Scale: , Firm #: P-1110 Dan W Tanner II L-4787 Owners: Norma C Pierce 1874 Thayer RdTrinity, NC 27370 154 S. Fayetteville St, Suite B, Asheboro, NC 27203 Phone Number: 336 625-8000 Email: mail@surveycarolina.com 10' Utility Easement Typical Utility Easement, Buffer and Setbacks Layout Road R/W Road R/W 10'60'35'10'30'35'35' "No-Cut" Buffer Along R/W Lot 11.030 Acres Lot 241,466 Sq. Ft. Lot 3 41,951 Sq. Ft. Lot 4 42,852 Sq. Ft. Lot 5 1.020 Acres Lot 6 42,191 Sq. Ft. Lot 71.027 Acres Lot 842,796 Sq. Ft. Lot 9 1.047 Acres Lot 10 40,501 Sq. Ft. Lot 11 41,275 Sq. Ft. Lot 1340,347 Sq. Ft.Lot 14 40,362 Sq. Ft.Lot 15 40,454 Sq. Ft. Lot 16 40,375 Sq. Ft. Lot 20 1.337 Acres Lot 19 41,506 Sq. Ft.Lot 1840,524 Sq. Ft.Lot 17 40,350 Sq. Ft. Lot 27 40,198 Sq. Ft. Lot 26 1.040 Acres Lot 251.222 Acres Lot 24 1.245 Acres Lot 23 1.391 Acres Lot 22 41,630 Sq. Ft. Lot 21 1.184 Acres Lot 12 41,329 Sq. Ft. 60.0'60.0' 0 100 200 300 Beckerdite RdSR 1524 60' Public R/W Beckerdite Rd Libertys Run Dr Site Cameron Mark Allen Jeffrey Lee Arnold Cooper2482-332 Jimmy D Canoy Jr2641-138PB 19 Pg 38 Pierce Estates Drive (Proposed)60' Public R/W 50' Creek No BufferC5 C9C1 0 320.36100.0017.0182.99100.00122.91409.97 414.04 412.96 404.48 100.00 100.00 100.00 73.02272.54 267.64 401.60100.00105.00105.00108.00177.58 260.15102.6347.91 96.82 3.10 100.03 10.75 89.28 99.67356.7750.42198.07 41 3.9 64 05.8740 4.0 875.88 75.88 CURVE RADIUS ARC LENGTH CHORD LENGTH CHORD BEARING DELTA ANGLEC1 142.96 100.95 98.87C2 317.32 100.42 100.00C3 317.32 106.63 106.13C4 60.00 38.86 38.19C5 60.00 38.14 37.50C6 60.00 38.14 37.50C7 60.00 38.14 37.50C8 60.00 38.14 37.50C9 60.00 38.14 37.50C10 60.00 38.14 37.50C11 60.00 46.18 45.05C12 257.32 221.86 215.05C13 317.32 72.61 72.45 C2 C3 C12 10x70SightTriangle 10x70SightTriangle Notes: 1. No NCGS Monuments found within 2000' of property.2. This project is not located within a special flood hazardarea. 3. Area calculated by coordinate geometry.4. No Field Work performed at this time. Map drawn fromRandolph County GIS 5. No attempt was made by this survey to locate allunderground utilities nor any other easements that would be revealed by a title search.6. Zoning: RA7. Tax PIN: 7724675402 8. Total Acres: 28.854 AcresAcres in Proposed R/W: 1.262 Acres Acres in Lots: 27.592 Acres Number of Lots: 27Average Acres per Lot: 1.022 Acres 9. 785 Linear Feet of Road Location Map (Not to Scale) Legend Property Line Computed Property Line Right of Way Line Easement Line Old Plat Book Line Existing Iron Rod/Pipe New Iron Rod/Pipe Point Not Set/Computed Point Well Tie Lines PRELIMINARY PLAT - NOT FOR RECORDATION, CONVEYANCES, OR SALES Job #: 12476 Proposed Subdivision For: Pierce Estates Back Creek Township Randolph County North Carolina December 15, 2020 Deed Book:857 Pg:320 Scale: 1" = 100 US Survey Feet Bar Scale: , Firm #: P-1110 Dan W Tanner II L-4787 Owners: Norma C Pierce 1874 Thayer RdTrinity, NC 27370 154 S. Fayetteville St, Suite B, Asheboro, NC 27203 Phone Number: 336 625-8000 Email: mail@surveycarolina.com 10' Utility Easement Typical Utility Easement, Buffer and Setbacks Layout Road R/W Road R/W 10'60'35'10'30'35'35' "No-Cut" Buffer Along R/W Lot 11.030 Acres Lot 241,466 Sq. Ft. Lot 3 41,951 Sq. Ft. Lot 4 1.050 Acres Lot 541,625 Sq. Ft. Lot 6 40,485 Sq. Ft.Lot 7 1.042 Acres Lot 842,796 Sq. Ft. Lot 9 1.047 Acres Lot 10 40,501 Sq. Ft. Lot 11 41,275 Sq. Ft. Lot 1340,347 Sq. Ft.Lot 14 40,362 Sq. Ft.Lot 15 40,454 Sq. Ft. Lot 16 40,375 Sq. Ft. Lot 20 1.337 Acres Lot 19 41,506 Sq. Ft.Lot 1840,524 Sq. Ft.Lot 17 40,350 Sq. Ft. Lot 27 40,198 Sq. Ft. Lot 26 1.040 Acres Lot 251.222 Acres Lot 24 1.245 Acres Lot 23 1.391 Acres Lot 22 41,630 Sq. Ft. Lot 21 1.184 Acres Lot 12 41,329 Sq. Ft. 60.0'60.0' 0 100 200 300 Beckerdite RdSR 1524 60' Public R/W Beckerdite Rd Libertys Run Dr Site Cameron Mark Allen Jeffrey Lee Arnold Cooper2482-332 Jimmy D Canoy Jr2641-138PB 19 Pg 38 Pierce Estates Drive (Proposed)60' Public R/W 50' Creek No BufferC4 C 5 C9 C 1 0 320.36100.0017.0182.99100.00122.91C13 409.97 404.48212.07207.02207.02 210.02 195.98 Pierce Heirs Rezoning Request LIBERTYS RUN DR BEESON FARM RDBECKERDITERD FLINTHILLRD1 inch = 300 feet Legend Parcels Roads Streams 50 ft. Stream buffer Pierce Rezoning Request Picture 1: Request location. Picture 2: Adjacent residence. Picture 3: Adjacent residence. Picture 4: Adjacent residence. Picture 5: Adjacent residence. Picture 6: Adjacent residence. Page 1 of 6 Development Impact Analysis February 24, 2021 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT ANALYSIS County of Randolph, North Carolina Department of Planning & Development 204 E Academy Street, Asheboro, NC 27203 (336) 318-6555  planning@randolphcountync.gov Development policies outlined in the Randolph County Growth Management Plan are specifically designed to encourage long-term planning among property owners, developers, and the County. The Development Impact Analysis is a key component of this Plan and its use will increase public awareness of the relationship of growth, rural environmental impacts, and the capacity of local government to provide adequate public facilities based on future land use demands. The information contained in the Development Impact Analysis comes from the best available public data sources. Preliminary Plat Name Plat name and section: Pierce Estates Applicant Information Owner of Record: Developer: Name: Norma C Pierce Estate Name: Norma C Pierce Estate Address: 1874 Thayer Rd Address: 1874 Thayer Rd City, ST ZIP: Trinity, NC 27370 City, ST ZIP: Trinity, NC 27370 E-mail: E-mail: Phone: Phone: Representative: Engineer/Surveyor: Name: Janice Spainhour Name: Survey Carolina, PLLC Address: 118 Trindale Rd Address: 154-B S Fayetteville St City, ST ZIP: Archdale, NC 27263 City, ST ZIP: Asheboro, NC 27203 E-mail: janice.spainhour@gmai.com E-mail: mail@surveycarolina.com Phone: 336 681-2791 Phone: 336 625-8000 Property Description Parcel: 7724675402 Acreage: 29.20 acres Growth Management Area: Secondary Growth Area Township: Back Creek Fire District: Guil-Rand Existing Zoning: RA Existing conditions: Waterway Description Does the site contain any streams or rivers? Yes Stream name: Unnamed Does the site contain any flood zone area? No Approximate acreage: 0.00 acres Does the site lie within a watershed? No Watershed: N/A Does the site contain wetlands? No Type: N/A Other comments: Page 2 of 6 Development Impact Analysis February 24, 2021 Project Description (If appropriate, attach a letter outlining in detail, the scope of the request.) Subdivision type: ....................................................................................................................... Site built Total acreage of development: ............................................................................................. 29.20 acres Total number of building lots: .............................................................................................................. 27 Minimum housing size: ........................................................................................................ 1,300 sq. ft. Total acreage of proposed open space (if applicable): .......................................................... 0.00 acres Total road frontage of proposed development: ..................................................................... 1,773.20 ft. Average frontage of lots: .......................................................................................................... 102.46 ft. Width of the lot with smallest amount of road frontage: ............................................................. 38.14 ft. Width of the lot with greatest amount of road frontage: ............................................................ 370.35 ft. Is the 1:4 ratio maintained for Rural Growth Areas? ......................................................................... N/A Property is currently being used as: Residential Commercial Industrial Farming Leased hunting Vacant Other Features unique to this property: Ravines Hills Mountains Rights-of-way Easements Cemeteries Other Utilities Impact Water source: Public water Sewer source: Septic system The distance, location, and provider of the nearest public water and sewer source. Service type Distance Location Provider Public water 0.00 ft Flint Hill Rd/Beeson Farm Rd Davidson Water Public sewer 4.90 miles Leyland Ter City of Archdale Page 3 of 6 Development Impact Analysis February 24, 2021 Public Education Impact (Provided by the Boards of Education) School system: Randolph County Schools School impacted Grade level DPI Capacity Current membership Impact New Market Elementary K-5 586 420 6 Randleman Middle 6-8 969 851 3 Randleman High 9-12 705 878 2 Current mobile classrooms present: School Number of mobile classrooms New Market Elementary Randleman Middle Randleman High Current traffic assessment: School Traffic assessment New Market Elementary Congested Randleman Middle Congested Randleman High Congested School construction plans: School Construction plans New Market Elementary None Randleman Middle None Randleman High None Traffic Analysis Impact (Provided by NCDOT GIS data services) Road(s) directly accessed by development: Road name Speed limit Average daily traffic count Beckerdite Rd 55 mph 1,600 Beeson Farm Rd 55 mph 390 Flint Hill Rd 55 mph 1,400 Condition of the road accessed by the development: Beckerdite Rd: Poor; Beeson Farm Rd: Good; Flint Hill Rd: Fair Characteristics of the road(s) directly accessed by development: Paved Curves Graveled Blindspot(s) Single lane Intersection(s) Bridge(s) Hill(s) The proposed development with 27 lots will generate an additional 162 total vehicle trips per day. Does the ADT count greater than 4,000 which would require a turning lane? No Page 4 of 6 Development Impact Analysis February 24, 2021 Housing and Community Impacts (Within one mile of the proposal) Housing patterns in subdivisions: Subdivision Type Number of lots Average acreage Adam F Hedrick Estate n/a 1 0.11 Bridge Point Site built 19 0.96 D W Canoy Estate Mobile home 24 5.18 Dylan Place Site built 7 3.80 E J Smith Estate Site built 7 9.98 Hearthwood at Sylvan Grove Site built 39 0.51 Hedrick Hills Site built 11 0.86 Indian Creek Development Site built 3 1.07 Keyauwee Forest Site built 21 1.00 Libertys Run Site built 39 1.01 Lloyd Canoy Estate n/a 5 6.45 O W Spencer Site built 9 3.74 Paul W Key Site built 4 1.72 Pinecrest Site built 7 3.00 Walter Farlow Site built 10 2.94 Windson Site built 5 2.94 Total number of site-built homes ...................................................................................................... 235 Average square footage of site-built homes ................................................................... 1,741.95 sq. ft. Largest site-built home by square footage ..................................................................... 4,145.00 sq. ft. Smallest site-built home by square footage ...................................................................... 672.00 sq. ft. Total number of mobile homes ........................................................................................................... 27 Percentage of site-built homes .................................................................................................. 89.70 % Percentage of mobile homes .................................................................................................... 10.30 % Total number of acres .................................................................................................... 2,495.36 acres Average acreage ................................................................................................................... 5.96 acres Total acreage in tax-deferred farms .................................................................................. 475.25 acres Community Land Uses Commercial Farming Forestry Industrial Residential Church facilities Other: Page 5 of 6 Development Impact Analysis February 24, 2021 Special Community Districts Airport Overlay District Cluster Subdivision Overlay District E-1 Districts Rural Lot Subdivision Overlay District Rural Business Overlay District Industrial Overlay District Scenic Corridor Overlay District Commercial Environmental Overlay District Voluntary Agricultural District Conventional Subdivision Overlay District Unique Rural Land Uses in the Community HLPC Landmark/Cultural Heritage Site National Historic Landmark National Forest Natural Heritage Designated Sites Trailway as part of the County Greenway Plan Youth Camp(s) Agricultural Impact (Within One mile of the proposal) Adjoining farm properties: • Norma C Pierce Estate (7724675402) • Marie Murray Hollingsworth Life Estate (7724778656) Are all well minimum setback lines noted on plat? Yes Tax-deferred farm properties: Property owner Parcel ID Location William S and Betsy M Beeson 7735302709 R1525; R1526 Betty R Farlow 7724995532 Keyauwee Forest; PH3 Lo 17 Betty R Farlow 7724996751 Keyauwee Forest; PH3 Lo 18 Betty R Farlow 7724997833 Keyauwee Forest; PH3 Lo 19 Betty R Farlow 7724998905 Keyauwee Forest; PH3 Lo 20 Betty R Farlow 7725905334 R1716; N Betty R Farlow 77225908251 Keyauwee Forest; PH3 Lo 22 Betty R Farlow 7725909055 Keyauwee Forest; PH3 Lo 21 Betty Rush Farlow 7725919635 R1525; Both Jesse and Amy Lou Smith Frye 7724547699 Amy Lou Frye Tr New 2 James and Elizabeth G Harris 7725527158 R1004; N Christopher H and Karen Louise Beeson Hinshaw 7725523976 R1004; E Marie Murray Hollingsworth Life Estate 7724778656 R1524; Both Terrence and Phyllis Ann Lanier 7724077669 Terrence & Phyllis Lanier; Tr 2 Joseph Benjamin and Anita B Millikan 7725945383 R1536; E Deeded Access Norma C Pierce 7724675402 R1004; E Glenda Gayle Smith 7724468582 R1540; N Glenda Gayle and William Jeffrey Smith Life Estate 7724458004 R1540; S Farm operations that begin after the development of a major residential subdivision must abide by the 100 ft. waste setback rule on the farm property. Page 6 of 6 Development Impact Analysis February 24, 2021 Other Materials Submitted Preliminary approval from NCDOT District Engineer’s Office Buffer site plan Land Clearing Debris Plan Open Space Uses and maintenance agreements, if applicable Proposed deed restrictions Soil analysis Soil erosion plan, stormwater management plan, etc. Other: PROPOSED RESTRICTIONS FOR PIERCE ESTATES 1.All lots in said subdivision shall be known, described and used as residential lots only. No structure shall be erected, altered, placed, or permitted to remain on any of said lots, other than one detached single family dwelling, not to exceed two and one half stories in height, and a private garage and other outbuildings incidental to the residential use of said lots; said garage and other outbuildings to be architecturally harmonious with the dwelling upon such lots. 2.No residence shall be built upon less than a minimum of one (1) lot as set out on said plat. No resident shall be built with no less than thirteen hundred (1,300) square feet of ﬂoor space exclusive of carports, porches, or garages. 3.There shall be no junk automobiles or debris remaining on the property at any time. 4.No imitation or asbestos sighting may be used and no cement blocks shall be left showing from the outside appearance. For the purpose of this covenant aluminum siding and vinyl siding are not considered imitation siding. 5.The minimum building line and sideline restrictions should be as set out on the recorded plat. 6.No animals or livestock shall be kept on any lot except that domestic or household pets may be kept provided they are not raised or kept for commercial use. 7.No obnoxious or offensive affairs or activities that should become an annoyance to the neighborhood shall be permitted. 8.No billboards or signs shall be erected or allowed to remain on said property except “For Sale” signs or “For Rent” signs, and these shall not exceed 3 feet in length and 2 feet in width. 9.These covenants shall run with the land and shall be binding by all parties and all persons claiming the for a period of twenty-ﬁve (25) years from the date these covenants are recorded after which time said covenants shall be automatically extended for successive period of ten (10) years unless an instrument signed by majority of then owners of the lots have been recorded, agreeing to change said covenants in whole or in part. 10.The developer, together with the owners of the adjacent lots on each side may waive any minor violations of these covenants. What is a minor violation is in the sole discretion of the developer. In the event the adjacent land owner and the developer are not able to agree, then the decision should be made solely by the developer. Such waivers shall be in writing suitable for recording in the Office of the Register of Deeds for Randolph County; by such waiver, developers should incur no liability. 11.Enforcement shall be by proceedings at law or in equity against any person or persons violating or attempting to violate any covenant either to restrain violation or to recover damages. 12.Invalidation of anyone of these covenants by judgement or court order shall in no way effect any of the other provisions which shall remain in full force and effect. 13.All fences installed on these lots shall be approved in writing by an instrument qualiﬁed to be recorded in the Office of Register Deeds of Randolph County, and signed by the developer for a period of ﬁve (5) years for a period of this agreement. After said date no approval shall be necessary. 14.For a period of ﬁve (5) years from the recording date of this agreement, any outbuildings must be approved by writing by the developer. After said date such approval must be signed by at least one property owner. 1 Mangum, Timothy V. From:Martin, Eric J. Sent:Wednesday, February 3, 2021 10:36 AM To:Mangum, Timothy V. Subject:FW: Concerns over proposed development in Sophia From: Brandon Hedrick <bhedrick@smith-leonard.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2021 8:46 AM To: Dale, Jay L. <Jay.Dale@randolphcountync.gov>; Martin, Eric J. <Eric.Martin@randolphcountync.gov> Subject: Concerns over proposed development in Sophia Jay and Eric, I’m reaching out in regards to the planned development at the intersection of Flint Hill Road, Beckerdite Road, and Beeson Farm Road in Sophia. I have some concerns over the traffic impact of the planned development. It seems like the road infrastructure is already not suitable for the amount of traffic received. My fear is adding increased housing density will further this issue. My wife and I built our current residence at 2829 Sawyer Rd a year ago. Prior to that, we owned a home at 3006 Wesley Farm Ln for 10 years, which is even closer to the proposed development. Our prior house was also in the Hearthwood neighborhood, which has future planned access to Beckerdite Rd in the vicinity of the proposed development as well. Since moving to our new residence, my wife and I are incredibly nervous when traveling down Beckerdite Road. We experience oncoming vehicles in our lane almost daily. We both use the road to access Highway 74, as both of our jobs lead us to High Point, Greensboro, and at times, Asheboro. I presume this will be the case for many future homeowners in the proposed development as well. Before finding out about the proposed development, we were already worried about what Beckerdite road will look like in 5 years when our daughter will be a teenage driver. We are already nervous about her driving with the ever presence of mobile devices, along with other drivers having increased opioid usage. However, the situation on Beckerdite seems to be beyond this. Many of the drivers that find themselves in the lane of oncoming traffic is the result of a curvy road and an almost nonexistent shoulder. If anyone is towing a trailer (many construction guys around here), or worse, if a large tractor or combine is oncoming, it’s impossible to avoid them without swerving into oncoming traffic. Additionally, there’s no where to pull off on the side. Speed doesn’t seem to be as much a factor as the lack of space. The trend for increased traffic in this area isn’t just residential. There are several businesses along Beckerdite Road as well. There as some long-term businesses such as Snyder Farms restaurant, Farlow Oil, and Sophia Barbershop, and more-recently, the County issued a zoning variance to Triple Target Gun Range. These businesses account for traffic along Beckerdite Rd as well. The only other concerns we have are environmental impacts. We hope that no variances or waivers are provided in achieving the requested development density, as it relates to waste water (primary fields and repair areas), erosion control/water runoff, and other considerations. Although, having gone through that process myself, I’m aware you guys have that under control and do a great job. I assume on the water supply, the neighborhood would likely use Davidson Water, since their supply line runs nearby? While I am involved in the business community of the triad, with most of my clients in the surrounding region, I don’t endorse endless growth. I feel growth should be strategic and well thought-out. For that reason, I don’t envy you guys having to account for all of the variables involved with zoning and planning. I appreciate the work you do. Your consideration in the traffic pattern for the planned development is greatly appreciated as well. If I need to reach out to another agency, like the NCDOT, please let me know. I’ll be happy to contact them separately if that’s best. 2 Best Regards, Brandon Hedrick Brandon Hedrick, CPA | Tax Director Smith Leonard PLLC D (336) 821-1358 M (336) 870-4704 HIGH POINT | LEXINGTON | WINSTON-SALEM Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail transmittal is privileged and confidential intended for the addressee only. If you are neither the intended recipient nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this e-mail to the intended recipient, any disclosure of this information in any way or taking of any action in reliance on this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the person transmitting the information immediately. 1 Mangum, Timothy V. From:Janna Allen <janna.m.allen@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 15, 2021 8:58 PM To:Planning DL Subject:Neighborhood Information Meeting: Citizen Concern Form Name: Cameron and Janna Allen Address: 6448 Flint Hill Rd, Sophia, NC 27350 Phone: 336-337-2861 & 336-944-4934 Email: callen3615@gmail.com, janna.m.allen@gmail.com Rezoning request applicant name: Pierce Estates, #2021-00000075 Rezoning request location: Parcel # 7724675402 Concerns/Comments: First of all, thank you for the time and effort that has been taken to research the impact this development will have on our community of Flint Hill. Our community is made up of several families that have lived here for many generations and I believe we all feel the same about preserving that history, heritage, and beauty as best we can. We live at 6448 Flint Hill Rd, which directly adjoins the property to be developed. We have thought through the different scenarios of what might happen to the land and hoped for the least invasive outcome, but never envisioned it being this large of a development. We are concerned with the level of flooding that would occur on our property, increasing in both intensity and frequency, if this development is allowed to proceed as presented. The density of the proposed development will drastically increase impervious areas including the proposed roofs, driveways, and roads, that will directly impact the runoff downstream creating flashy flows and subsequent stream bank erosion leading to a loss of property, as well as increased pollution downstream and increased flooding. We request that the density be reduced to 1 home per 3 to 4 acres to mitigate this issue. In addition, according to the proposed development, it appears that piping the stream will be necessary for lots 20, 21, 22, and 23 to develop and make the lots usable. By piping the stream we will see increased velocity of water running off the subject property onto our property creating increased erosion and scouring of the stream channel which will increase the depth and width of the creek creating a hazardous situation. We are concerned with having 4/5 properties bordering the back of our land and the liabilities that will come along with that. The topography of our land makes it hard to see the eastside of our property increasing our concern that if anyone were to come across it, specifically during a rain event, it would be dangerous for the individual and put us as property owners at risk. The proposed development has direct and long lasting negative impacts to our property, changing the entire use, safety, and value of our land. 2 Another concern of ours is the significant increase in traffic to the intersection and three separate roads that border the P.E. property. Flint Hill Rd may be a ‘back’ road, but it is a major transit route for many people traveling from Asheboro to Archdale/High Point. We were very surprised with how busy this road has been since we moved here. It is also an area that many people enjoy riding over Caraway mountain by bike, motorcycle and sportscars. All throughout the day and week it stays steady with traffic. There have been multiple occasions when deer, cats, or the neighbor’s dog were hit by cars traveling at relatively high speed along Flint Hill Road. If you allow the addition of 27 homes, 7 of those being accessed in the blind curve on Flint Hill Rd, then we fear for the safety of any children, pets and people, in general, that will be living along the street. We are also concerned with increased congestion for both intersections. There will be 16 more driveways and cars that will be coming directly onto each of those 3 roads, with an estimated increase in 162 total vehicle trips a day from the development, according to the development impact analysis that was provided; an analysis that we are concerned is not entirely accurate. I am curious how Beckerdite Rd was found to have the highest traffic count over Flint Hill and Beeson Farm, when the latter two roads are main transits to cities and highways. It begs to question the validity of the overall report. There are more concerns that we have and that many of our neighbors in the community have brought to light. We strongly believe there must be a better scenario than the one that has been presented. Although, we would love to see the property stay as is, we are not against the property being developed. We are concerned that the proposal for 27 homes will adversely affect this community in safety, value, and environmental ways. The few developments that have been added to this area have been off of main roads, on larger lots and of improved value. These proposed homes will be limited in size and quality based on the size of the lots proposed, which will have an adverse effect on the rest of the community’s property values. It would be more beneficial for our community if the P.E. property was developed to have less lots to accommodate for larger homes. Therefore, we respectfully request the density be reduced to 1 home per 3 to 4 acres. Fewer homes on that property would lessen the road congestion, result in less water runoff issues and retain the general rural atmosphere the residents in the neighborhood enjoy. There are no economic changes coming to this area to justify the need for more homes and there is not a housing shortage in Flint Hill or the surrounding communities. The housing market is doing extremely well and construction costs are currently high, but that is not a reason to damage and take advantage of small county communities. As public officials and servants to your county and local communities, we hope that it would be the highest priority to make a decision that would be most beneficial to the community you serve and not for what will financially benefit a small number of people that do not live in our community. Thank you, Cameron and Janna Allen 1 Mangum, Timothy V. From:Lori Weatherman <loryweatherman@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, February 19, 2021 11:16 PM To:Planning DL Subject:Norma pierce estate I wrote this original copy two weeks ago It was not listed in your randolph. County , about the meeting .... why is that ? Concerned Citizen of Flint Hill Community : My name is Lori Canoy Weatherman. I am a concerned citizen of what is happening in my neighborhood .The county had a meeting which I was unable to attend due to work . My concerns are as to what is happening with the rural countryside of Flint Hill community Our community has 3-4 developments in it within a mile from where this one will go , which most are full and the other people are still building in one . I know that my aunt held on to this property for years . The Forestry has their beautiful trees planted on it . What will people do for sewage ? Will they have their own ? I was told they would need their own septic tanks , or will they slide the sewage system into our community which tax payers will have pay for? How do you get 27 homes in a 29 acre without it going onto land of other homes ? Why is it that when an individual wants to sell their home or build onto their land they need 5 acres ? Why is that ? but yet a builder can build 27 homes on top of each other ? My question is this , why can’t they be bigger homes , more property acreage ? How is there one entrance from Flint Hill with a cul de sac that all the homes around the cul de sac have access to Flint Hill rd ? Is that the correct way for having that passed ? Why do you say that there are 1400.00 vehicles on this road per day, knowing there are more than that . Does the land perk? Why not put a school there? Help the community The schools are not at full capacity because of COVID . Some have più led their children out to go to private schools because they are open . When this pandemic has became a memory , the schools will be over crowed again , and with homes at 1300sq ft , there will be that situation again So why not raise the acreage per lot Why overcrowd a rural area with 27 homes? Why? Is it for the property tax? Is it because they are “looking after human nature? “ Is it because it is a win win for everyone involved in the selling buying and building ? Who is protecting our wildlife when they cut all these trees? 2 Hawks, deer, all types of birds, all kinds of wildlife . So for me this can still happen but I feel that less than an acre per lot to an acre is too small . People might as well move into an apartment complex if all they want is that amount of room in a home and land . It to me is a money maker for the buyer and seller other than what is best for the people that are settled here for years . Thank you , Lori Canoy Weatherman Tommy Weatherman Sent from my iPhone Sent from my iPhone 1 Mangum, Timothy V. From:Marie Hollingsworth <bmhollingsworth@yahoo.com> Sent:Thursday, February 25, 2021 3:53 PM To:Planning DL Subject:Rezoning for Norma Pierce Estate My name is Marie Hollingsworth and I have lived on Beckerdite Rd for 46 years. Many families along with myself have many concerns with this rezoning for this development. If this development is approved safety concerns are so visible with 16 driveway entering onto Beckerdite Rd, Beeson Farm Rd and Flint Hill Rd in Sophia. As you know Beckerdite Rd. is a well traveled road with 1600 cars passing on it daily. All three roads have a limited sight issue when pulling out onto them with many hills and curves. If this developer is approved they are proposing 16 driveways to enter/exit around the perimeter of 29 acres. Most all subdivisions have one entrance into them which is much safer for everyone in the community. Our roads will be much safer with less congestion and with less driveways surrounding these three well traveled roads. SAFETY is our main concern to stop so many entrances to these roads. We would like to see the covenants be more in line with the surrounding of the subdivisions in this community. Less homes with larger sq. ft., Homes be a minimum of 1600-1700 sg ft., closed in carports, paved driveways, no aggressive breed of dogs and dogs contained, NO unsightly junk in yard. These homes need to be more in line with the surroundings area. Most people have worked hard to have these nice homes and this standard type of development will decrease their property value. We also need to keep our schools in our thought for our children with more overcrowding being an issue already. Neighbor's close to the development area to the are concerned with the water coming from Archdale as of now. Water being shut off for different reasons and water pressure being so minimal. With 27 more home what will it be for the other neighbors water issues. Thank you for your time and taking all these into consideration for a safer and happier community for everyone involved. Thank You Marie Hollingsworth 2092 Beckerdite Rd. Sophia, NC 27350 1 Mangum, Timothy V. From:Permits DL Sent:Monday, February 22, 2021 4:10 PM To:Mangum, Timothy V. Subject:FW: Concerns over proposed development in Sophia Attachments:Hearthwood Sylvan Grove.pdf Tim, Jay just forwarded this comment sheet and asked if we should just print for the Board members for the meeting. I was wondering if we should just go ahead and add to Agenda since we have enough time??? Just let me know. Thanks. Kim From: Brandon Hedrick <bhedrick@smith-leonard.com> Sent: Monday, February 22, 2021 12:59 PM To: Dale, Jay L. <Jay.Dale@randolphcountync.gov> Subject: RE: Concerns over proposed development in Sophia Jay, I saw where the agenda for the March 2nd meeting is already in place. I’m not sure anything can be done at this time to add comments to the agenda. I would like to bring to the board’s attention, that Hearthwood Development, which is already in place, has over 40 vacant buildings sites, and is less than 7/10 of a mile from the proposed Pierce Estates. The argument for needing more homesites in the area, isn’t a great argument with these sitting vacant. I know the developer of Hearthwood continues to build, and I’m sure he’ll do so as quickly as he gets contracts for new construction. I think even more important, is that the development model and plan for Hearthwood was much better, as none of the homesites had direct driveway access to main roads. Hearthwood also provided open areas, allowing the development to be more aesthetically pleasing. I suspect if the developers of Pierce Estates would propose something similar, there would be much less pushback from the surrounding community in terms of property values, quality of life, aesthetics, and traffic concerns. I know you have access, but for easy reference, attached is a plat of Hearthwood. Best Regards, Brandon From: Dale, Jay L. <Jay.Dale@randolphcountync.gov> Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2021 1:24 PM To: Brandon Hedrick <bhedrick@smith-leonard.com> Subject: RE: Concerns over proposed development in Sophia This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 2 Thank you for taking the time to contact us with your concerns. We will forward them to the members of the Planning Board. In light of what I have read it might be worth your time to contact the NCDOT as well and bring their attention to the road conditions. Have a great afternoon and thank you again. Jay Dale Planning Director From: Brandon Hedrick <bhedrick@smith-leonard.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2021 8:46 AM To: Dale, Jay L. <Jay.Dale@randolphcountync.gov>; Martin, Eric J. <Eric.Martin@randolphcountync.gov> Subject: Concerns over proposed development in Sophia Jay and Eric, I’m reaching out in regards to the planned development at the intersection of Flint Hill Road, Beckerdite Road, and Beeson Farm Road in Sophia. I have some concerns over the traffic impact of the planned development. It seems like the road infrastructure is already not suitable for the amount of traffic received. My fear is adding increased housing density will further this issue. My wife and I built our current residence at 2829 Sawyer Rd a year ago. Prior to that, we owned a home at 3006 Wesley Farm Ln for 10 years, which is even closer to the proposed development. Our prior house was also in the Hearthwood neighborhood, which has future planned access to Beckerdite Rd in the vicinity of the proposed development as well. Since moving to our new residence, my wife and I are incredibly nervous when traveling down Beckerdite Road. We experience oncoming vehicles in our lane almost daily. We both use the road to access Highway 74, as both of our jobs lead us to High Point, Greensboro, and at times, Asheboro. I presume this will be the case for many future homeowners in the proposed development as well. Before finding out about the proposed development, we were already worried about what Beckerdite road will look like in 5 years when our daughter will be a teenage driver. We are already nervous about her driving with the ever presence of mobile devices, along with other drivers having increased opioid usage. However, the situation on Beckerdite seems to be beyond this. Many of the drivers that find themselves in the lane of oncoming traffic is the result of a curvy road and an almost nonexistent shoulder. If anyone is towing a trailer (many construction guys around here), or worse, if a large tractor or combine is oncoming, it’s impossible to avoid them without swerving into oncoming traffic. Additionally, there’s no where to pull off on the side. Speed doesn’t seem to be as much a factor as the lack of space. The trend for increased traffic in this area isn’t just residential. There are several businesses along Beckerdite Road as well. There as some long-term businesses such as Snyder Farms restaurant, Farlow Oil, and Sophia Barbershop, and more-recently, the County issued a zoning variance to Triple Target Gun Range. These businesses account for traffic along Beckerdite Rd as well. The only other concerns we have are environmental impacts. We hope that no variances or waivers are provided in achieving the requested development density, as it relates to waste water (primary fields and repair areas), erosion control/water runoff, and other considerations. Although, having gone through that process myself, I’m aware you guys have that under control and do a great job. I assume on the water supply, the neighborhood would likely use Davidson Water, since their supply line runs nearby? While I am involved in the business community of the triad, with most of my clients in the surrounding region, I don’t endorse endless growth. I feel growth should be strategic and well thought-out. For that reason, I don’t envy you guys having to account for all of the variables involved with zoning and planning. I appreciate the work you do. Your consideration in the traffic pattern for the planned development is greatly appreciated as well. If I need to reach out to another agency, like the NCDOT, please let me know. I’ll be happy to contact them separately if that’s best. Best Regards, 3 Brandon Hedrick Brandon Hedrick, CPA | Tax Director Smith Leonard PLLC D (336) 821-1358 M (336) 870-4704 HIGH POINT | LEXINGTON | WINSTON-SALEM Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail transmittal is privileged and confidential intended for the addressee only. If you are neither the intended recipient nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this e-mail to the intended recipient, any disclosure of this information in any way or taking of any action in reliance on this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the person transmitting the information immediately. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended for use only by the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, dissemination, distribution, copying of this communication, or unauthorized use is strictly prohibited. Please notify us immediately by reply email and then delete this message from your system. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Randolph County Government. This email and any file attachments have been scanned for potential viruses; however, the recipient should check this email for the presence of viruses and/or malicious code. Randolph County accepts no liability for any damage transmitted via this email. Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail transmittal is privileged and confidential intended for the addressee only. If you are neither the intended recipient nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this e- mail to the intended recipient, any disclosure of this information in any way or taking of any action in reliance on this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the person transmitting the information immediately. Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail transmittal is privileged and confidential intended for the addressee only. If you are neither the intended recipient nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this e-mail to the intended recipient, any disclosure of this information in any way or taking of any action in reliance on this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the person transmitting the information immediately. 1 Mangum, Timothy V. From:paige linthicum <phlinthicum@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, February 24, 2021 3:19 PM To:Planning DL Subject:Concerns for rezoning Paige Linthicum 6232 Flint Hill Rd Sophia, NC 27350 336-848-3074 Rezoning request applicant name: Norma Pierce Rezoning request location: Intersections of Flint Hill Rd., Beeson Farm Rd., and Beckerdite Rd. Concerns/Comments: I am writing concerning the proposal to make a subdivision at the intersection of the these roads. I feel it would cause problems with traffic due to having 16 driveways coming onto the main roads that are already heavily traveled. There are two intersections and another development within 100 ft. of this area. There are curves, blind spots, and hills that cause trouble when traveling these roads already, and I feel that adding this many driveways would only create a more hazardous situation. Bringing in this many houses would not only create traffic issues, it would also mean more population for our schools. Randleman is already overcrowded and doesn't need anymore students. We can't reduce class size if we keep adding students and have no room to put them. Therefore, I feel education would suffer due to overcrowding of the schools. I also feel this would decrease the property value of the houses that already exist in this area. The average size house is 1700 sq. feet and the proposal is for speck houses of 1300 sq ft., therefore, property value in this area would decrease. Davidson Water ends at my driveway, and I am currently connected to their water supply. I feel with this many houses on the water system it would create more problems than we already have. I hate waking up to no water due to water line problems. We already have issues with this and I feel more houses would just increase the problem. We are a country/farming community with wooded areas all around, and I think it would be a shame to have this much construction in this area. This land had a contract and was planted with pines and has wildlife throughout the area. If they were to clear all the trees, it would take away many homes for the wildlife that is living there now. These are a few of the concerns I have about this proposal, with the main one being the traffic issues. Thank you for considering blocking this rezoning request. Paige Linthicum 1 Mangum, Timothy V. From:Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 2:09 PM To:Pate, Mickey; Britt, Jennifer L; Dale, Jay L.; Mangum, Timothy V. Subject:FW: [External] Objections to proposed development: Pierce Estates FYI. R. J. Monroe District Supervisor Division 8 - District 1 336-318-4000 rjmonroe@ncdot.gov 300 DOT Drive Asheboro, NC 27205 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. -----Original Message----- From: Paula Storm <pstorm@northstate.net> Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2021 12:01 PM To: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Subject: [External] Objections to proposed development: Pierce Estates CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam.<mailto:report.spam@nc.gov> Dear Mr. Monroe, As a concerned citizen who resides off Beckerdite Rd. (Hollow Ridge subdivision) in Sophia, I would like to voice my concerns. The proposed subdivision at the intersections of Flint Hill Rd., Beeson Farm Rd., and Beckerdite Rd. is a very dangerous design. 16 individual driveways accessing 2 busy intersection areas is a definite hazard. People already don't stop at the intersection on Beckerdite and Beeson Farm Rd., and to make matters worse, its an angled intersection. After this intersection- adjoining onto Beeson Farm the proposed plan is to create 5 lots with 5 driveways accessing this already short area - around 500' before you turn onto Flint Hill Rd. The entire plan consists of creating 5 driveways off Beckerdite close to the intersection, another 5 off Beeson Farm, again, close to both intersections, and another 7 off Flint Hill Rd., also close to the intersections! This subdivision plan is very hazardous especially to us that travel back and forth through there frequently. Not to mention 2 Beckerdite is a narrow road as it is. The inside lane width is only 8'9". Also I want to mention the traffic is moving at 55 mph plus on Flint Hill Rd. This plan has too many driveways too close to intersections on 3 busy roads. If this plan is to move forward I would suggest increasing lot size, house size (to recoup costs) and allow only interior roads with maybe only 2 access points off of Beckerdite and Flint Hill Road. The area off Beeson Farm is only around 500' and is not long enough to gauge traffic safely from all directions. Thanks in advance for allowing me to voice my concerns. I would also like to suggest an in person site visit with the proposed plat in hand so you can see what I am voicing concerns about. Regards, Paula Storm (336) 495-3200 ________________________________ Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. 1 Mangum, Timothy V. From:Pat Hollingsworth <path@northstate.net> Sent:Thursday, February 25, 2021 4:58 PM To:Planning DL Subject:Beckerdite Road Concerns To whom it may concern; Name: Patricia Hollingsworth and H. Curt Hollingsworth Address: 2078 Beckerdite Road City, State, Zip: Sophia, NC 27350 Phone # -336-498-2018 E-mail: path@northstate.net Rezoning request applicant name: Norma C Pierce Rezoning request location: Back Creek Township (Parcel: 7724675402) Concerns/comments: I have lived on Beckerdite Rd for almost 60 years and have witnessed many changes. Some were good and some were not. This proposal will not be a good one. The traffic on this road is 24/7 and the speed limit is 45 not 55. No one seems to know the difference and there have been numerous wrecks on our property. This road is too narrow and curvy to handle any more traffic. This housing development would not be an asset but a liability to all of the residents of Beckerdite Road. I ask that this permit be denied for the health and safety of all residents living in this area. Best Regards, Pat Hollingsworth 1 Mangum, Timothy V. From:Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 2:11 PM To:Pate, Mickey; Britt, Jennifer L; Dale, Jay L.; Mangum, Timothy V. Subject:FW: [External] Pierce Estates Development FYI. R. J. Monroe District Supervisor Division 8 - District 1 336-318-4000 rjmonroe@ncdot.gov 300 DOT Drive Asheboro, NC 27205 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. From: Jodi Smith <jhsmith1126@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2021 11:48 AM To: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Subject: [External] Pierce Estates Development CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam. Hi Jeron, My name is Jodi Hollingsworth Smith. I wanted to touch base with you regarding the Pierce Estates development in Sophia located at the corner of Flint Hill Rd, Beeson Farm Rd., and Beckerdite Rd. My family, along with many others in the community, have major safety concerns with these three roads and intersections if this development is approved. They are proposing 16 driveways to enter/exit homes around the perimeter of the 29 acres. There is 1 proposed street to be added off Flint Hill Rd. to access the internal 11 lots. Including the new street, there will be 17 entrance and exit points on these three roads. Honestly, most housing developments I see, whether they’re on a corner of multiple roads or not, have one, maybe two entrances. There are ZERO driveways exiting onto these surrounding roads in these developments. The driveways enter/exit onto a street built within the development. This keeps the traffic flow entering and exiting at one, maybe two designated areas. Our community is asking you and your office to please help us keep the high safety standards by not allowing this development to be built. If any portion of the development is approved, please keep our roads and intersections 2 surrounding this area safe by not allowing driveways to enter/exit onto the perimeter roads. Also, by increasing the acreage per house sold, which in turn will decrease the number of homes built, will help with road safety as well. Our roads will be safer and less congested with less homes and less driveways exiting the perimeter. Thank you for your time regarding Pierce Estates development! My family and community members really appreciate it! Thank you, Jodi Hollingsworth Smith 540-589-2639 Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. 1 Mangum, Timothy V. From:Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 2:13 PM To:Pate, Mickey; Britt, Jennifer L; Dale, Jay L.; Mangum, Timothy V. Subject:FW: [External] Pierce Estates Proposed Development Traffic Concerns 2021-00000075 FYI. R. J. Monroe District Supervisor Division 8 - District 1 336-318-4000 rjmonroe@ncdot.gov 300 DOT Drive Asheboro, NC 27205 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. From: Kim Therrien <Kim.Therrien@altiumpkg.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2021 9:48 AM To: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Subject: [External] Pierce Estates Proposed Development Traffic Concerns 2021-00000075 CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam. Good morning. I am a resident of Beckerdite Road. I am writing this email to express my concerns for the proposed Pierce Estates development at corners of Flint Hill Road, Beeson Farm Road, and Beckerdite Road. I am concerned that this development will increase traffic on these narrow and curvy roads from residents trying to get to the bypass. I think this safety concern should be looked at further before the development is approved. The roads are dangerous enough without increased traffic from an unneeded subdivision. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Kim Therrien | Office Manager Altium Packaging 1408 Unity Street | Thomasville, NC 27360 T: 336-472-1500 | T: 336-481-0035 Direct | F: 336-472-5531 | Kim.therrien@altiumpkg.com 2 Consolidated Container Company is now Altium Packaging! Please update my new email address accordingly. Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. 1 Mangum, Timothy V. From:Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 3:01 PM To:Pate, Mickey; Britt, Jennifer L; Dale, Jay L.; Mangum, Timothy V. Subject:FW: [External] Norma C Pierce Estste FYI. R. J. Monroe District Supervisor Division 8 - District 1 336-318-4000 rjmonroe@ncdot.gov 300 DOT Drive Asheboro, NC 27205 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. -----Original Message----- From: Marie <bmhollingsworth@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2021 2:54 PM To: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Subject: [External] Norma C Pierce Estste CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam.<mailto:report.spam@nc.gov> My name is Marie Hollingsworth, I live on Beckerdite Rd and have land that joins Pierce Estate. Many families of this community have a safety concern with the three intersections on the end of Beckerdite Rd, Beeson Farm Rd and Flint Hill Rd If this development goes forward and approved as is. This would be way to many driveways entering into these roads. It is already a bad area to pull out of these roads with limited visual sight with the amount of traffic daily on these roads. Most all sub-divisions around this area have one entrance/exit drive for the entire sub-division. We feel this would be the safest benefit if the is approved. We are truly hoping for less houses or no houses built to keep our area safe by not allowing so many houses in such a tight setting with less congestion all around. Speed is a another factor for these roads not giving you time to even pull out of your driveway with out a car flying 2 over the hill or coming around a curve before they are right on you in a split second. If this development is approved in any size we hope you will see that the safest measures are taken by not allowing driveways to enter/exit onto the perimeter roads. Thank you for your time regarding our concerns for the Pierce Estate Development. Thank you Marie Hollingsworth 336-870-6591 Sent from my iPhone ________________________________ Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. 1 Mangum, Timothy V. From:Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Sent:Thursday, February 25, 2021 4:00 PM To:Dale, Jay L. Cc:Mangum, Timothy V.; Jones, Brandon H; Pate, Mickey; Britt, Jennifer L Subject:Proposed Pierce Estates Subdivision Attachments:Pierce Estates Proposed Subdivision.pdf Jay, Good afternoon. This e-mail is in reference to the attached proposed Pierce Estates subdivision, which is located along Beckerdite Rd. (SR 1524), Beeson Farm Rd. (SR 1525), and Flint Hill Rd. (SR 1004). Based on safety and mobility concerns for the existing roadways in this area, NCDOT recommends that only one main access point be allowed to serve this development and all proposed lots should be accessed by an internal roadway network. Safety is a top priority for the Department and we feel this recommendation will best serve the traveling public and those who will eventually utilize this site. If you have any questions or need any additional information, just let us know. Thanks! Jeron R. J. Monroe District Supervisor Division 8 - District 1 336-318-4000 rjmonroe@ncdot.gov 300 DOT Drive Asheboro, NC 27205 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. 1 Mangum, Timothy V. From:Dale, Jay L. Sent:Friday, February 26, 2021 4:57 PM To:Mangum, Timothy V. Subject:FW: [External] Thank You Attachments:Proposed Pierce Estates Subdivision From: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 3:27 PM To: Dale, Jay L. <Jay.Dale@randolphcountync.gov> Cc: Jones, Brandon H <bhjones@ncdot.gov> Subject: RE: [External] Thank You Yes, see the attached e-mail. When you get a chance, can you please give me a call. Thanks! R. J. Monroe District Supervisor Division 8 - District 1 336-318-4000 rjmonroe@ncdot.gov 300 DOT Drive Asheboro, NC 27205 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. From: Dale, Jay L. <Jay.Dale@randolphcountync.gov> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 3:22 PM To: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Subject: RE: [External] Thank You CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam. Have you sent your recommendations yet? From: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 1:01 PM To: Brandon Hedrick <bhedrick@smith-leonard.com> Cc: Jones, Brandon H <bhjones@ncdot.gov>; Britt, Jennifer L <jlbritt@ncdot.gov>; Pate, Mickey <mpate1@ncdot.gov>; 2 Dale, Jay L. <Jay.Dale@randolphcountync.gov> Subject: RE: [External] Thank You Mr. Hedrick, Yes, that’s correct. The roads will need to be designed to meet the minimum NCDOT construction standards and the plat should match the approved plans. If you have any additional questions, just let us know. Thanks! Jeron R. J. Monroe District Supervisor Division 8 - District 1 336-318-4000 rjmonroe@ncdot.gov 300 DOT Drive Asheboro, NC 27205 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. From: Brandon Hedrick <bhedrick@smith-leonard.com> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 11:20 AM To: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Cc: Jones, Brandon H <bhjones@ncdot.gov>; Britt, Jennifer L <jlbritt@ncdot.gov>; Pate, Mickey <mpate1@ncdot.gov> Subject: RE: [External] Thank You CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam. Jeron, So in talking with the county planning director, Jay, it sounds like the road on the plat for Pierce Estates will be a public road, not private. As such, it seems like the plat will require a stamp from NCDOT to be recorded. Is that correct? Thanks, Brandon Brandon Hedrick, CPA | Tax Director Smith Leonard PLLC D (336) 821-1358 M (336) 870-4704 HIGH POINT | LEXINGTON | WINSTON-SALEM From: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 9:33 AM To: Brandon Hedrick <bhedrick@smith-leonard.com> Cc: Jones, Brandon H <bhjones@ncdot.gov>; Britt, Jennifer L <jlbritt@ncdot.gov>; Pate, Mickey <mpate1@ncdot.gov> Subject: RE: [External] Thank You 3 This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Mr. Hedrick, Good morning and no problem. As a Department, we value the public’s input as it relates to the safety of our roadways. Thanks and I hope you enjoy your weekend! Jeron R. J. Monroe District Supervisor Division 8 - District 1 336-318-4000 rjmonroe@ncdot.gov 300 DOT Drive Asheboro, NC 27205 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. From: Brandon Hedrick <bhedrick@smith-leonard.com> Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2021 1:07 PM To: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Cc: Jones, Brandon H <bhjones@ncdot.gov>; Britt, Jennifer L <jlbritt@ncdot.gov>; Pate, Mickey <mpate1@ncdot.gov>; Jones, Brandon H <bhjones@ncdot.gov> Subject: [External] Thank You CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam. Jeron, Brandon Jones called me this morning to let me know you met with the planning/zoning department regarding Pierce Estates. I greatly appreciate your efforts in doing so. Other neighbors and myself are hopeful that the planning/zoning board will force the developers to revise the plat to at least meet NCDOT access recommendations, prior to county approval. Again, we sincerely appreciate the efforts of you and your staff. Best Regards, Brandon Brandon Hedrick, CPA | Tax Director Smith Leonard PLLC D (336) 821-1358 M (336) 870-4704 HIGH POINT | LEXINGTON | WINSTON-SALEM 4 Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail transmittal is privileged and confidential intended for the addressee only. If you are neither the intended recipient nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this e- mail to the intended recipient, any disclosure of this information in any way or taking of any action in reliance on this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the person transmitting the information immediately. Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail transmittal is privileged and confidential intended for the addressee only. If you are neither the intended recipient nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this e- mail to the intended recipient, any disclosure of this information in any way or taking of any action in reliance on this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the person transmitting the information immediately. Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail transmittal is privileged and confidential intended for the addressee only. If you are neither the intended recipient nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this e- mail to the intended recipient, any disclosure of this information in any way or taking of any action in reliance on this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the person transmitting the information immediately. Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended for use only by the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, dissemination, distribution, copying of this communication, or unauthorized use is strictly prohibited. Please notify us immediately by reply email and then delete this message from your system. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Randolph County Government. This email and any file attachments have been scanned for potential viruses; however, the recipient should check this email for the presence of viruses and/or malicious code. Randolph County accepts no liability for any damage transmitted via this email. Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. 1 Mangum, Timothy V. From:Dale, Jay L. Sent:Friday, February 26, 2021 4:58 PM To:Mangum, Timothy V. Subject:FW: [External] Thank You From: Brandon Hedrick <bhedrick@smith-leonard.com> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 1:51 PM To: 'Jones, Brandon H' <bhjones@ncdot.gov>; Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Cc: Britt, Jennifer L <jlbritt@ncdot.gov>; Pate, Mickey <mpate1@ncdot.gov>; Dale, Jay L. <Jay.Dale@randolphcountync.gov> Subject: RE: [External] Thank You Thanks for that clarification Brandon. Brandon Hedrick, CPA | Tax Director Smith Leonard PLLC D (336) 821-1358 M (336) 870-4704 HIGH POINT | LEXINGTON | WINSTON-SALEM From: Jones, Brandon H <bhjones@ncdot.gov> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 1:20 PM To: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov>; Brandon Hedrick <bhedrick@smith-leonard.com> Cc: Britt, Jennifer L <jlbritt@ncdot.gov>; Pate, Mickey <mpate1@ncdot.gov>; Jay Dale <jay.dale@randolphcountync.gov> Subject: RE: [External] Thank You This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I will add that there are additional requests and reviews that NCDOT has to approve. The developer has to apply for access to our roads. We must grant access to properties but we have to approve the accesses in safe locations. Example if their proposed roadway was accessing our road in an unsafe location due to sight distance, proximity to an intersection, etc, then we could deny their request as submitted if they have other options. Also, the proposed rezoning plan shows an internal roadway based on some type of design. NCDOT must review and approve the roadway design if it is going to be a future NCDOT road. If their submitted design does not meet our requirements then we would deny their submittal and they would have to redesign. The redesigns mentioned above may require a change in the plat. The developer would then have to go back to the county and their process for such a change. Brandon Jones, PE Division Engineer Division Eight North Carolina Department of Transportation 2 910 773-8003 office bhjones@ncdot.gov 121 DOT Drive Carthage, NC 28327 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. From: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 1:01 PM To: Brandon Hedrick <bhedrick@smith-leonard.com> Cc: Jones, Brandon H <bhjones@ncdot.gov>; Britt, Jennifer L <jlbritt@ncdot.gov>; Pate, Mickey <mpate1@ncdot.gov>; Jay Dale <jay.dale@randolphcountync.gov> Subject: RE: [External] Thank You Mr. Hedrick, Yes, that’s correct. The roads will need to be designed to meet the minimum NCDOT construction standards and the plat should match the approved plans. If you have any additional questions, just let us know. Thanks! Jeron R. J. Monroe District Supervisor Division 8 - District 1 336-318-4000 rjmonroe@ncdot.gov 300 DOT Drive Asheboro, NC 27205 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. From: Brandon Hedrick <bhedrick@smith-leonard.com> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 11:20 AM To: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Cc: Jones, Brandon H <bhjones@ncdot.gov>; Britt, Jennifer L <jlbritt@ncdot.gov>; Pate, Mickey <mpate1@ncdot.gov> Subject: RE: [External] Thank You CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam. 3 Jeron, So in talking with the county planning director, Jay, it sounds like the road on the plat for Pierce Estates will be a public road, not private. As such, it seems like the plat will require a stamp from NCDOT to be recorded. Is that correct? Thanks, Brandon Brandon Hedrick, CPA | Tax Director Smith Leonard PLLC D (336) 821-1358 M (336) 870-4704 HIGH POINT | LEXINGTON | WINSTON-SALEM From: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 9:33 AM To: Brandon Hedrick <bhedrick@smith-leonard.com> Cc: Jones, Brandon H <bhjones@ncdot.gov>; Britt, Jennifer L <jlbritt@ncdot.gov>; Pate, Mickey <mpate1@ncdot.gov> Subject: RE: [External] Thank You This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Mr. Hedrick, Good morning and no problem. As a Department, we value the public’s input as it relates to the safety of our roadways. Thanks and I hope you enjoy your weekend! Jeron R. J. Monroe District Supervisor Division 8 - District 1 336-318-4000 rjmonroe@ncdot.gov 300 DOT Drive Asheboro, NC 27205 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. From: Brandon Hedrick <bhedrick@smith-leonard.com> Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2021 1:07 PM To: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Cc: Jones, Brandon H <bhjones@ncdot.gov>; Britt, Jennifer L <jlbritt@ncdot.gov>; Pate, Mickey <mpate1@ncdot.gov>; Jones, Brandon H <bhjones@ncdot.gov> Subject: [External] Thank You 4 CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam. Jeron, Brandon Jones called me this morning to let me know you met with the planning/zoning department regarding Pierce Estates. I greatly appreciate your efforts in doing so. Other neighbors and myself are hopeful that the planning/zoning board will force the developers to revise the plat to at least meet NCDOT access recommendations, prior to county approval. Again, we sincerely appreciate the efforts of you and your staff. Best Regards, Brandon Brandon Hedrick, CPA | Tax Director Smith Leonard PLLC D (336) 821-1358 M (336) 870-4704 HIGH POINT | LEXINGTON | WINSTON-SALEM Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail transmittal is privileged and confidential intended for the addressee only. If you are neither the intended recipient nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this e- mail to the intended recipient, any disclosure of this information in any way or taking of any action in reliance on this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the person transmitting the information immediately. Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail transmittal is privileged and confidential intended for the addressee only. If you are neither the intended recipient nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this e- mail to the intended recipient, any disclosure of this information in any way or taking of any action in reliance on this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the person transmitting the information immediately. Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail transmittal is privileged and confidential intended for the addressee only. If you are neither the intended recipient nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this e- mail to the intended recipient, any disclosure of this information in any way or taking of any action in reliance on this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the person transmitting the information immediately. Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail transmittal is privileged and confidential intended for the addressee only. If you are neither the intended recipient nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this e- mail to the intended recipient, any disclosure of this information in any way or taking of any action in reliance on this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the person transmitting the information immediately. 5 Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail transmittal is privileged and confidential intended for the addressee only. If you are neither the intended recipient nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this e-mail to the intended recipient, any disclosure of this information in any way or taking of any action in reliance on this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the person transmitting the information immediately. 1 Mangum, Timothy V. From:Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Sent:Monday, March 1, 2021 3:25 PM To:Dale, Jay L. Cc:Jones, Brandon H; Blakley, Reuben; Britt, Jennifer L; Pate, Mickey Subject:RE: [External] Thank You Attachments:Excerpt from Policy on Street and Driveway Access 2003.pdf Jay, Good afternoon, I hope you enjoyed your weekend. NCDOT has to allow a property owner the ability to gain access to their property. However, based on our driveway permitting process which is covered under the “Policy on Street and Driveway Access to North Carolina Highways” manual, we have the ability to regulate the design, location, and number of access points to a property. This includes all subdivision accesses and any shared accesses to frontage lots. Our approval is contingent upon safety, mobility, sight distance, etc. of the existing roadway and the proposed access connections. I have attached & highlighted a few pages from our manual, which also references the General Statues that will hopefully help to provide the information that you are requesting. Our goal as a Department is to work together with the County and all parties involved in this process. If you have any additional questions, please let us know. Thanks! Jeron R. J. Monroe District Supervisor Division 8 - District 1 336-318-4000 rjmonroe@ncdot.gov 300 DOT Drive Asheboro, NC 27205 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. From: Dale, Jay L. <Jay.Dale@randolphcountync.gov> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 5:11 PM To: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Subject: RE: [External] Thank You CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam. 2 Other than the driveway manual that you and Jennifer Britt have referenced, should you come across any general statute that governs the NCDOT’s ability to deny access to a public road when a subdivision goes in could you let me know where that is? I am sure I will be asked. I would love to have that before the public hearing on Tuesday if possible. Thanks Jay Dale From: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 3:27 PM To: Dale, Jay L. <Jay.Dale@randolphcountync.gov> Cc: Jones, Brandon H <bhjones@ncdot.gov> Subject: RE: [External] Thank You Yes, see the attached e-mail. When you get a chance, can you please give me a call. Thanks! R. J. Monroe District Supervisor Division 8 - District 1 336-318-4000 rjmonroe@ncdot.gov 300 DOT Drive Asheboro, NC 27205 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. From: Dale, Jay L. <Jay.Dale@randolphcountync.gov> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 3:22 PM To: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Subject: RE: [External] Thank You CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam. Have you sent your recommendations yet? From: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 1:01 PM To: Brandon Hedrick <bhedrick@smith-leonard.com> Cc: Jones, Brandon H <bhjones@ncdot.gov>; Britt, Jennifer L <jlbritt@ncdot.gov>; Pate, Mickey <mpate1@ncdot.gov>; Dale, Jay L. <Jay.Dale@randolphcountync.gov> Subject: RE: [External] Thank You 3 Mr. Hedrick, Yes, that’s correct. The roads will need to be designed to meet the minimum NCDOT construction standards and the plat should match the approved plans. If you have any additional questions, just let us know. Thanks! Jeron R. J. Monroe District Supervisor Division 8 - District 1 336-318-4000 rjmonroe@ncdot.gov 300 DOT Drive Asheboro, NC 27205 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. From: Brandon Hedrick <bhedrick@smith-leonard.com> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 11:20 AM To: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Cc: Jones, Brandon H <bhjones@ncdot.gov>; Britt, Jennifer L <jlbritt@ncdot.gov>; Pate, Mickey <mpate1@ncdot.gov> Subject: RE: [External] Thank You CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam. Jeron, So in talking with the county planning director, Jay, it sounds like the road on the plat for Pierce Estates will be a public road, not private. As such, it seems like the plat will require a stamp from NCDOT to be recorded. Is that correct? Thanks, Brandon Brandon Hedrick, CPA | Tax Director Smith Leonard PLLC D (336) 821-1358 M (336) 870-4704 HIGH POINT | LEXINGTON | WINSTON-SALEM From: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2021 9:33 AM To: Brandon Hedrick <bhedrick@smith-leonard.com> Cc: Jones, Brandon H <bhjones@ncdot.gov>; Britt, Jennifer L <jlbritt@ncdot.gov>; Pate, Mickey <mpate1@ncdot.gov> Subject: RE: [External] Thank You This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 4 Mr. Hedrick, Good morning and no problem. As a Department, we value the public’s input as it relates to the safety of our roadways. Thanks and I hope you enjoy your weekend! Jeron R. J. Monroe District Supervisor Division 8 - District 1 336-318-4000 rjmonroe@ncdot.gov 300 DOT Drive Asheboro, NC 27205 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. From: Brandon Hedrick <bhedrick@smith-leonard.com> Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2021 1:07 PM To: Monroe, Roosevelt J <rjmonroe@ncdot.gov> Cc: Jones, Brandon H <bhjones@ncdot.gov>; Britt, Jennifer L <jlbritt@ncdot.gov>; Pate, Mickey <mpate1@ncdot.gov>; Jones, Brandon H <bhjones@ncdot.gov> Subject: [External] Thank You CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam. Jeron, Brandon Jones called me this morning to let me know you met with the planning/zoning department regarding Pierce Estates. I greatly appreciate your efforts in doing so. Other neighbors and myself are hopeful that the planning/zoning board will force the developers to revise the plat to at least meet NCDOT access recommendations, prior to county approval. Again, we sincerely appreciate the efforts of you and your staff. Best Regards, Brandon Brandon Hedrick, CPA | Tax Director Smith Leonard PLLC D (336) 821-1358 M (336) 870-4704 HIGH POINT | LEXINGTON | WINSTON-SALEM 5 Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail transmittal is privileged and confidential intended for the addressee only. If you are neither the intended recipient nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this e- mail to the intended recipient, any disclosure of this information in any way or taking of any action in reliance on this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the person transmitting the information immediately. Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail transmittal is privileged and confidential intended for the addressee only. If you are neither the intended recipient nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this e- mail to the intended recipient, any disclosure of this information in any way or taking of any action in reliance on this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the person transmitting the information immediately. Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail transmittal is privileged and confidential intended for the addressee only. If you are neither the intended recipient nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this e- mail to the intended recipient, any disclosure of this information in any way or taking of any action in reliance on this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the person transmitting the information immediately. Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended for use only by the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, dissemination, distribution, copying of this communication, or unauthorized use is strictly prohibited. Please notify us immediately by reply email and then delete this message from your system. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Randolph County Government. This email and any file attachments have been scanned for potential viruses; however, the recipient should check this email for the presence of viruses and/or malicious code. Randolph County accepts no liability for any damage transmitted via this email. Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended for use only by the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, dissemination, distribution, copying of this communication, or unauthorized use is strictly prohibited. Please notify us immediately by reply email and then delete this message from your system. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Randolph County Government. This email and any file attachments have been scanned for potential viruses; however, the recipient should check this email for the presence of viruses and/or malicious code. Randolph County accepts no liability for any damage transmitted via this email. Policy On Street And Driveway Access to North Carolina Highways Page vii July 2003 Policy On Street And Driveway Access to North Carolina Highways Page 38 July 2003 Signing - The property owner or lessee shall not place or erect any advertising sign, price list, flag, or other identifying marker for the purpose of attracting attention to the site, either fixed or movable, on or extending over any portion of the highway right-of-way or sight distance area except as allowed under Identification Signing and Landscaping. Lighting - Lighting of commercial driveways used extensively after dark may be helpful to assist motorists in easily locating the entrances and may be erected on private property. No commercial lighting will be allowed on highway right-of- way. All lighting shall be in compliance with G.S. 136-32.2. Lighting shall not be similar to traffic control devices (i.e., signals or flashing beacons). All signs that have lights shall be effectively shielded so as to prevent light rays from causing glare or impairing the vision of motorists. In some cases, it may be desirable for the developer to place highway or street lighting units to illuminate a part of the highway facility. Any lighting placed within highway right-of-way shall meet standards and specifications approved by the NCDOT through a separate encroachment agreement. Railroad Corridors - If the applicant’s property is within or crossing an active or preserved rail corridor, a rail corridor encroachment agreement must be obtained prior to the installation of any driveway or issuance of a PERMIT. Railroad encroachments are submitted, reviewed, and approved through the NCDOT - Rail Division Office. Policy On Street And Driveway Access to North Carolina Highways Page 39 July 2003 Utilities - All utility installations within the highway right-of-way shall be consistent with the current edition of the NCDOT’s “Policies and Procedures for Accommodating Utilities on Highway Rights of Way.” Right-of-Way Reservation/Dedication - Review of all plans for right-of-way including sight distance and easements required to accommodate additional needs will be by the District Engineer. Where additional auxiliary lanes are needed to accommodate site traffic, traffic control devices, sight distance areas, or drainage facilities, the applicant will be responsible for all necessary right-of-way dedication. Parking Vehicle for Sale or Distribution of Goods- As set forth in the North Carolina Administrative Code (19A NCAC 02E.0414), it shall be unlawful for any person to park any vehicle on the right-of-way of any primary or secondary highway or road of the State Highway System for the purpose of using said vehicle for the sale or distribution of fruits, vegetables, goods, wares, or merchandise of any character, and it shall be unlawful for any person to erect any stand or structure on the right of way of any primary or secondary highway or road of the State Highway System or to sell from said vehicle, stand, or structure or from any place on the right of way of any primary or secondary highway or road of the State Highway System any fruits, vegetables, goods, wares or merchandise of any character. In addition, obstructions shall not be placed within right-of-way, sight distance triangles and setbacks, or along roadside clear zones in order to protect the traveling public and to provide necessary sight distance at street and driveway intersections. C. Number and Arrangements of Driveways The number of street and driveway connections permitted to serve a single property or commercial development along a State maintained roadway will be the minimum deemed necessary by the NCDOT for reasonable service to the property without undue impairment of safety, mobility, and utility of the highway. Normally, one driveway connection will be permitted for a single property or commercial site. However, the NCDOT may consider additional entrances or exits as justified and if such access does not negatively impact traffic operations and public safety. Only one combined entrance and exit connection will be permitted where the frontage is less than 100 feet. COUNTY OF RANDOLPH CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION AND FINDING OF REASONABLENESS AND PUBLIC INTEREST IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING BY NORMA C PIERCE HEIRS REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000075 NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD According to North Carolina General Statutes § 153A-341 and 342, the Randolph County Planning Board finds that the proposed zoning district map amendments to CVOE-CD – Conventional Subdivision Overlay Exclusive – Conditional District as described in the application of Norma C Pierce Heirs 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 Primary Growth Area. Primary Growth Areas generally lie along major transportation corridors and have access to urban services. B. Consistency with Growth Policies in the Growth Management Plan Policy 6.13 Conventional Residential subdivisions are anticipated of similar housing characteristics to the community. Consistency Analysis: As indicated in the Development Impact Analysis, there are sixteen subdivisions within one mile of the request location. Of those sixteen, thirteen are site built subdivisions with an average lot size of 2.50 acres. Based upon this calculation, the proposed subdivision would be similar to the existing subdivisions in the community. Policy 6.14 Residential subdivisions should, in order to promote efficiencies in the delivery of urban services, be encouraged to develop in a fashion which minimizes “leap frog” development (i.e. leaving large vacant areas between developments). Consistency Analysis: This request location for a proposed subdivision, if approved, would encourage more “in-fill” of the vacant property in the community by allowing the development of a subdivision that is similar to the existing land use conditions while also encouraging more efficient delivery of services to this area. 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. _______________________________ _______________________________ Randolph County Planning Director Chair, Randolph County Planning Board _______________________________ _______________________________ Clerk to Planning Board Date COUNTY OF RANDOLPH CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION AND FINDING OF REASONABLENESS AND PUBLIC INTEREST IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING BY NORMA C PIERCE HEIRS REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000075 NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD According to North Carolina General Statutes § 153A-341 and 342, the Randolph County Planning Board finds that the proposed zoning district map amendments to CVOE-CD – Conventional Subdivision Overlay Exclusive – Conditional District as described in the application of Norma C Pierce Heirs are not consistent with the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance and the 2009 Randolph County Growth Management Plan and are not 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 Primary Growth Area. Primary Growth Areas generally lie along major transportation corridors and have access to urban services. B. Consistency with Growth Policies in the Growth Management Plan Policy 6.12 Factors to be considered in major subdivision approval in Primary and Secondary Growth Areas should include suitability of soils, access to major thoroughfares, the potential availability of public services and facilities and community compatibility. Consistency Analysis: As indicated in the Development Impact Analysis, there are sixteen subdivisions within one mile of the request location. The traffic counts for the area roads show the average daily traffic counts, based upon information from NCDOT, as being 1,600 for Beckerdite Rd, 390 for Beeson Farm Rd and 1,400 for Flint Hill Rd. NCDOT also classified Beckerdite Rd as being in poor condition, with Beeson Farm Rd being in good condition and Flint Hill Rd being in fair condition. NCDOT has expressed concerns about the number of proposed drive-way connections on each road and they feel that the proposed number of connections would be unsafe. Policy 6.22 New driveway connections should be designed in a way to minimize new locations on existing public roads. Consistency Analysis: Based upon the current design of the proposed subdivision, there are sixteen proposed driveway connections onto existing State maintained roads. The driveway connections have not been designed to minimize the number of connections on the existing State road system. 2. Statement of Reasonableness and Public Interest Reasonableness and Public Interest Analysis: The policies listed above illustrate how this request is not consistent with the Ordinance, the Plan, and applicable General Statutes. This request is not in the public interest due to the number of driveway connections on the existing State maintained road system since it does not consider public safety in its design. _______________________________ _______________________________ Randolph County Planning Director Chair, Randolph County Planning Board _______________________________ _______________________________ Clerk to Planning Board Date MOTION TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL DISTRICT REZONING NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD “I make the motion 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 of Reasonableness 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.” If making a second to the motion, please change to say, “I second the motion . . .” and continue reading the rest of the motion. MOTION TO DENY A CONDITIONAL DISTRICT REZONING NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD “I make the motion to DENY 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 of Reasonableness 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 not consistent with the Randolph County Growth Management Plan.” If making a second to the motion, please change to say, “I second the motion . . .” and continue reading the rest of the motion. TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000645 The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a Legislative Hearing on the request by MELISSA AND JIMMY LEE HILL, JR, Climax, NC, and their request to rezone 1.06 acres on Ramseur Julian Rd, approximately 350 ft. north of Shelar Dr, Liberty Township, Tax ID #8706803607, Rural Growth Area, Sandy Creek Watershed, from RA – Residential Agricultural District to HC-CD – Highway Commercial - Conditional District. The proposed Conditional Zoning District would specifically allow a 30 ft. by 40 ft. warehouse building with office space as per the site plan. The Randolph County Technical Review Committee has met on the above-listed case, and after review of all applicable standards contained in the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance and the Randolph County Growth Management Plan, the Technical Review Committee finds that this request:  Meets all technical requirements of both the Ordinance and the Plan;  Is consistent, reasonable, and in the public interest; and  Should be approved by the Randolph County Planning Board. The following policies from the Randolph County Growth Management Plan were identified by the Technical Review Committee as supporting this conclusion. Policy 4.3 Individual Rural Business or Highway Commercial rezoning decisions will depend upon the scale of the proposed development as it relates to the specific site and location weighed against impacts to adjoining rural land uses. Policy 4.6 Compatible land uses such as rural neighborhood retail and service establishments located close to general residential areas should be considered during the rezoning process with the general goal of reducing automobile travel distances and promoting better livability in the community. Hill Request Location Map RAMSEUR JULIAN RDSHELAR DR 1 inch = 500 feet Directions to site: NC Hwy 49 N -(L) Ramseur Julian Rd - Site on (L)approx 350 ft past Shelar Dr. PARCEL INFORMATION: ZONING INFORMATION: Zoning District 1: RA-RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT Zoning District 2: Zoning District 3: Specialty District: N/A Watershed Name: SANDY CREEK WATERSHED Class A Flood Plain On Prop?: NO Flood Plain Map #: 3710870600J Growth Management Areas:RURAL GROWTH AREA Flood Plane Map #: Total Permit Fee: $100.00 COMMENTS: REQUESTED CHANGE: The undersigned owner/applicant do hereby make application for a PROPERTY ZONING CHANGE as allowed by the Randolph Couty Zoning Ordinance. Area To Be Rezoned: 1.0600 Lot Size Indicator: ACRE(S) Proposed Zoning District: HC-CD-HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL CONDITIONAL DISTRICT Proposed Use(S): TO ALLOW A 30 FT. BY 40 FT. WAREHOUSE WITH OFFICE SPACE AS PER SITE PLAN Condition(S): Applicant: HILL, MELISSA MARTIN & JIMMY LEE JR. City, St. Zip: CLIMAX, NC 27233 Address: 2764 BRIAROAK DR. Owner: HILL, MELISSA MARTIN Address: 2764 BRIAROAK DR City, St. Zip: CLIMAX, NC 27233 Permit #: 2021-00000645 Parcel #: 8706803607 Date: 03/04/2021 Location Address: Permit Type Code: PZ 2 CONTACT NAME:HILL, MELISSA Contact Phone:336 233-1611 Acreage: Township:1.0900 11 - LIBERTY Subdivsion: Lot number: Eric Martin Authorized County Official Signature of Applicant: APPLICATION FOR ZONING CHANGE Page: 1 of 1 - LOCAL TELEPHONE NUMBER - Asheboro: (336) 318-6565 - Archdale/Trinity: (336) 819-3565 http://www.randolphcountync.gov COUNTY OF RANDOLPH Department of Planning & Zoning 204 E Academy St - PO Box 771 - Asheboro NC 27204-0771 APPLICATION FOR ZONING CHANGE Hill Rezoning Request !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(RAMSEURJULIANRDSHELARDR The request is located in Sandy Creek Watershed Area.1 inch = 300 feet Requestlocation Legend ParcelsStructures Type !(Permanent Structure !(Temporary Structure RoadsCounty zoning Districts RA Hill Rezoning Request SHELAR DR RAMSEURJULIANRDThe request is located in Sandy Creek Watershed Area.1 inch = 100 feet Legend Parcels Roads Hill Rezoning Request Picture 1: Request location. Picture 2: Adjacent residence. Picture 3: Adjacent residence. Picture 4: Property across road from request location. Picture 5: Request location on left as seen looking toward Old Liberty Rd. Picture 6: Request location on right as seen looking toward Shelar Dr. COUNTY OF RANDOLPH CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION AND FINDING OF REASONABLENESS AND PUBLIC INTEREST IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING BY MELISSA AND JIMMY LEE HILL, JR. REZONING REQUEST #2021-000000645 NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD According to North Carolina General Statutes § 153A-341 and 342, the Randolph County Planning Board finds that the proposed zoning district map amendments to HC-CD – Highway Commercial-Conditional District as described in the application of Melissa and Jimmy Lee Hill, Jr., 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 northeast area shows the parcel to be rezoned in an area designated as a Rural Growth Area. Rural Growth Areas are predominately agricultural and rural residential in nature. The area also allows for industrial and commercial development that require access to rural resources. B. Consistency with Growth Policies in the Growth Management Plan Policy 4.3 Individual Rural Business or Highway Commercial rezoning decisions will depend upon the scale of the proposed development as it relates to the specific site and location weighed against impacts to adjoining rural land uses. Consistency Analysis: The site plan for this proposal shows the building as being 1,200 sq. ft. on a 1.09-acre parcel and would have very minimal impacts on the adjoining land uses. Policy 4.3 Compatible land uses such as rural neighborhood retail and service establishments located close to general residential areas should be considered during the rezoning process with the general goal of reducing automobile travel distances and promoting better livability in the community. Consistency Analysis: The proposed business, if developed in this location, could reduce automobile travel distances for the citizens living in the area if the business provides the goods and services needed by the community. The business could also enhance the livability in the community. 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. _______________________________ _______________________________ Randolph County Planning Director Chair, Randolph County Planning Board _______________________________ _______________________________ Clerk to Planning Board Date MOTION TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL DISTRICT REZONING NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD “I make the motion 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 of Reasonableness 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.” If making a second to the motion, please change to say, “I second the motion . . .” and continue reading the rest of the motion. MOTION TO DENY A CONDITIONAL DISTRICT REZONING NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD “I make the motion to DENY 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 of Reasonableness 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 not consistent with the Randolph County Growth Management Plan.” If making a second to the motion, please change to say, “I second the motion . . .” and continue reading the rest of the motion. TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000651 The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a Legislative Hearing on the request by TONY HURLEY AND VICKY HARRIS, Randleman, NC, and their request to rezone 2.65 acres at 122 Spring Forest Rd, Tabernacle Township, Tax ID #7712139808, Secondary Growth Area, Lake Reese Watershed, from HC - CU – Highway Commercial – Conditional Use District to LI – Light Industrial District. The existing Conditional Use District specifically allows an automotive repair business in a 30 ft. by 80 ft. building, a 25 ft. no-cut buffer along the eastern property line, hours of operation of 8:00 am to 6:00 pm along with no outside storage. The Randolph County Technical Review Committee has met on the above-listed case, and after review of all applicable standards contained in the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance and the Randolph County Growth Management Plan, the Technical Review Committee finds that this request:  Meets all technical requirements of both the Ordinance and the Plan;  Is consistent, reasonable, and in the public interest; and  Should be approved by the Randolph County Planning Board. The following policies from the Randolph County Growth Management Plan were identified by the Technical Review Committee as supporting this conclusion. Policy 3.1 Industrial development should be on land that is physically suitable and has unique locational advantages for industry. Advanced planning for the identification of such land should be encouraged. Policy 3.3 Light industrial sites should be located in urbanized areas to take advantage of available services and to reduce home-to-work distances. Careful design and/or buffering shall be required to ensure compatibility with surrounding areas. Hurley Request Location Map CAMERON CIR CAMERON PLSPRINGFORESTRDUS HWY 64 W GARDENGATE RD 1 inch = 200 feet I¤ I¤ Directions to site: US Hwy 64 W - (R)Spring Forest Rd - Site on immediate(R) at 122 Spring Forest Rd. PARCEL INFORMATION: ZONING INFORMATION: Zoning District 1: HC-CU-HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL CONDITIONAL USE DISTRICT Zoning District 2: RA-RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT Zoning District 3: Specialty District: N/A Watershed Name: LAKE REESE WATERSHED Class A Flood Plain On Prop?: NO Flood Plain Map #: 3710770200J Growth Management Areas:SECONDARY GROWTH AREA Flood Plane Map #: Total Permit Fee: $100.00 COMMENTS: REQUESTED CHANGE: The undersigned owner/applicant do hereby make application for a PROPERTY ZONING CHANGE as allowed by the Randolph Couty Zoning Ordinance. Area To Be Rezoned: 2.6500 Lot Size Indicator: ACRE(S) Proposed Zoning District: LI-LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT Proposed Use(S): Condition(S): Applicant: HURLEY, TONY & HARRIS, VICKY City, St. Zip: RANDLEMAN, NC 27317 Address: 2213 OLD LIBERTY RD. Owner: HURLEY, TONY LYNN Address: 2213 OLD LIBERTY RD City, St. Zip: RANDLEMAN, NC 27317 Permit #: 2021-00000651 Parcel #: 7712139808 Date: 03/05/2021 Location Address: 122 SPRING FOREST RD ASHEBORO, NC 27205 Permit Type Code: PZ 2 CONTACT NAME:HURLEY, TONY Contact Phone:336 672-3776 TABERNACLE ACRES35-46 Acreage: Township:2.6100 18 - TABERNACLE Subdivsion: Lot number: Eric Martin Authorized County Official Signature of Applicant: APPLICATION FOR ZONING CHANGE Page: 1 of 1 - LOCAL TELEPHONE NUMBER - Asheboro: (336) 318-6565 - Archdale/Trinity: (336) 819-3565 http://www.randolphcountync.gov COUNTY OF RANDOLPH Department of Planning & Zoning 204 E Academy St - PO Box 771 - Asheboro NC 27204-0771 APPLICATION FOR ZONING CHANGE Hill Rezoning Request !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(RAMSEURJULIANRDSHELARDR The request is located in Sandy Creek Watershed Area.1 inch = 300 feet Requestlocation Legend ParcelsStructures Type !(Permanent Structure !(Temporary Structure RoadsCounty zoning Districts RA Hurley Rezoning Request CAMERON PLCAMERONCIR SPRING FOREST RDGARDENGATE RD US HWY 64 W The request is located in Lake Reese Watershed Area.1 inch = 200 feet I¤ I¤ Legend Parcels Roads Streams 50 ft. Stream buffer Hurley Rezoning Request Picture 1: Request location. Picture 2: Adjacent residence. Picture 3: Adjacent residence. Picture 4: Adjacent residence. Picture 5: Request location on left as seen looking toward Hoover Hill Rd. Picture 6: Request location on left as seen looking toward US Hwy 64 W. COUNTY OF RANDOLPH CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION AND FINDING OF REASONABLENESS AND PUBLIC INTEREST IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING BY TONY HURLEY AND VICKY HARRIS REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000651 NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD According to North Carolina General Statutes § 153A-341 and 342, the Randolph County Planning Board finds that the proposed zoning district map amendments to LI-Light Industrial as described in the application of Tony Hurley and Vicky Harris 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 northwest area shows the parcel to be rezoned in an area designated as a Secondary Area. Secondary Growth Areas are areas that are predominately residential but transitional. It is also an area where mixed development may occur. B. Consistency with Growth Policies in the Growth Management Plan Policy 3.1 Industrial development should be on land that is physically suitable and has unique locational advantages for industry. Advanced planning for the identification of such land should be encouraged. Consistency Analysis: This property has been used for an automotive repair business in the existing building along with conditions for a 25 ft. no-cut buffer on the eastern property lines, hours of operations of 8:00 am to 6:00 pm along with no outside storage. By rezoning the property to LI-Light Industrial the number of uses for the property will be less intense and potentially have less impact on the surrounding community. Policy 3.3 Light industrial sites should be located in urbanized areas to take advantage of available services and to reduce home-to-work distances. Careful design and/or buffering shall be required to ensure compatibility with surrounding areas. Consistency Analysis: This property is near an existing automobile sales lots and Tabernacle Elementary School and Tabernacle Acres subdivision. The location of this proposed industrial site could help reduce the home-to-work travel distances if citizens near the site were able to gain employment at any future industrial 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. _______________________________ _______________________________ Randolph County Planning Director Chair, Randolph County Planning Board _______________________________ _______________________________ Clerk to Planning Board Date MOTION TO APPROVE A REZONING NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD “I make the motion 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 of Reasonableness 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 and that the request is also consistent with the Randolph County Growth Management Plan.” If making a second to the motion, please change to say, “I second the motion . . .” and continue reading the rest of the motion. MOTION TO DENY A REZONING NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD “I make the motion to DENY 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 of Reasonableness 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 and that the request is not consistent with the Randolph County Growth Management Plan.” If making a second to the motion, please change to say, “I second the motion . . .” and continue reading the rest of the motion. TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000654 The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a Legislative Hearing on the request by PHIL BURGESS CONSTRUCTION, INC, Liberty, NC, and their request to amend the Conditional District, Racine Rd, Providence Township, Tax ID #7777761655, 77777600294, 7777760191, 7777761305, 7777761419 and 7777768355, Ace Avant Real Property Company subdivision lots one through six, Secondary Growth Area, Polecat Creek Watershed. The existing Conditional Zoning District specifically allows a seven-lot site-built subdivision with a 1,700 sq. ft. minimum house size. The Randolph County Technical Review Committee has met on the above-listed case, and after review of all applicable standards contained in the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance and the Randolph County Growth Management Plan, the Technical Review Committee finds that this request:  Meets all technical requirements of both the Ordinance and the Plan;  Is consistent, reasonable, and in the public interest; and  Should be approved by the Randolph County Planning Board. The following policies from the Randolph County Growth Management Plan were identified by the Technical Review Committee as supporting this conclusion. Policy 6.5 The protection of viable rural neighborhoods should be encouraged by compatible residential development to ensure the continued existence as a major housing source and as a reflection of the long-term quality of life in Randolph County. Policy 6.13 Conventional Residential subdivisions are anticipated of similar housing characteristics to the community. Phil Burgess Construction, Inc, Request Location Map RACINERDSURRIETRLPROVIDENCECHURCHRD 1 inch = 500 feet Directions to site: US Hwy 220 Bus N -(R) Providence Church Rd - (L) RacineRd - Site on (R) approx. 4/10 mile. PARCEL INFORMATION: ZONING INFORMATION: Zoning District 1: CVOE-CD-CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION OVERLAY EXCLUSIVE CONDITIONAL DISTRICT Zoning District 2: Zoning District 3: Specialty District: N/A Watershed Name: POLECAT CREEK WATERSHED Class A Flood Plain On Prop?: NO Flood Plain Map #: 3710777700J Growth Management Areas:SECONDARY GROWTH AREA Flood Plane Map #: Total Permit Fee: $100.00 COMMENTS: REQUESTED CHANGE: The undersigned owner/applicant do hereby make application for a PROPERTY ZONING CHANGE as allowed by the Randolph Couty Zoning Ordinance. Area To Be Rezoned: 19.4100 Lot Size Indicator: ACRE(S) Proposed Zoning District: CVOE-CD-CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION OVERLAY EXCLUSIVE CONDITIONAL DISTRICT Proposed Use(S): TO AMEND EXISTING CONDITIONAL DISTRICT PERMIT Condition(S): Applicant: PHIL BURGESS CONSTRUCTION, INC City, St. Zip: LIBERTY, NC 27298 Address: PO BOX 900 Owner: PHIL BURGESS CONSTRUCTION INC Address: P O BOX 900 City, St. Zip: LIBERTY, NC 27298 Permit #: 2021-00000654 Parcel #: 7777768355 Date: 03/05/2021 Location Address: Permit Type Code: PZ 2 CONTACT NAME:MICKEY BURGESS Contact Phone:336 706-5879 ACE AVANT REAL PROPERTY COMPANY LLC6 Acreage: Township:19.4100 15 - PROVIDENCE Subdivsion: Lot number: Eric Martin Authorized County Official Signature of Applicant: APPLICATION FOR ZONING CHANGE Page: 1 of 1 - LOCAL TELEPHONE NUMBER - Asheboro: (336) 318-6565 - Archdale/Trinity: (336) 819-3565 http://www.randolphcountync.gov COUNTY OF RANDOLPH Department of Planning & Zoning 204 E Academy St - PO Box 771 - Asheboro NC 27204-0771 APPLICATION FOR ZONING CHANGE Phil Burgess Construction, Inc, Rezoning Request !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(SURRIETRLPROVIDENCE CHURCH RDRACINERD The request is located in Polecat Creek Watershed Area.1 inch = 500 feet Old EnglandEstates S/D CanterburyTrails S/D Quaker HillNorth S/D Cedar Lane S/DWoodfieldAcres S/D Requestlocation Legend Parcels Structures Type !(Permanent Structure !(Temporary Structure !(Miscellaneous Structures Roads Streams 50 ft. Stream buffer County zoning Districts CVOE RA RM RR Phil Burgess Construction, Inc, Rezoning Request RACINERDThe request is located in Polecat Creek Watershed Area.1 inch = 300 feet Legend Parcels Roads Streams 50 ft. Stream buffer Phil Burgess Construction, Inc., Rezoning Request Picture 1: Request location along Racine Rd. Picture 2: Request location Surrie Trl. Picture 3: Adjacent residence. Picture 4: Adjacent residence. Picture 5: Request location on left as seen looking toward Red Lane Rd. Picture 6: Request location on right as seen looking toward Providence Church Rd. COUNTY OF RANDOLPH CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION AND FINDING OF REASONABLENESS AND PUBLIC INTEREST IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING BY PHIL BURGESS CONSTRUCTION, INC REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000654 NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD According to North Carolina General Statutes § 153A-341 and 342, the Randolph County Planning Board finds that the proposed zoning district map amendments to CVOE-CD – Conventional Subdivision Overlay Exclusive-Conditional District as described in the application of Phil Burgess Construction, Inc., 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 northeast area shows the parcel to be rezoned in an area designated as a Secondary Growth Area. Secondary Growth Areas are areas that are predominately residential but transitional. It is also an area where mixed development may occur. 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 ensure the continued existence as a major housing source and as a reflection of the long-term quality of life in Randolph County. Consistency Analysis: The development as proposed would continue the development patterns that have been established in this area of the County since the late 1980s. It will ensure a housing source and protect the long-term quality of life. Policy 6.13 Conventional Residential subdivisions are anticipated of similar housing characteristics to the community. Consistency Analysis: The proposal will be of similar housing characteristics that can be found in the surrounding community. 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. _______________________________ _______________________________ Randolph County Planning Director Chair, Randolph County Planning Board _______________________________ _______________________________ Clerk to Planning Board Date MOTION TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL DISTRICT REZONING NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD “I make the motion 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 of Reasonableness 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.” If making a second to the motion, please change to say, “I second the motion . . .” and continue reading the rest of the motion. MOTION TO DENY A CONDITIONAL DISTRICT REZONING NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD “I make the motion to DENY 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 of Reasonableness 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 not consistent with the Randolph County Growth Management Plan.” If making a second to the motion, please change to say, “I second the motion . . .” and continue reading the rest of the motion. TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000717 The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a Legislative Hearing on the request by NC MINE 1, LLC, El Segundo, CA, and their request to rezone 11.80 acres off Spencer Meadow Rd, Back Creek Township, Tax ID #7721886981, 7721895145, 7721899418 and 7721990277, Daphne and Arthur Hoover subdivision lots one through four, Secondary Growth Area, from RA – Residential Agricultural District to LI-CD – Light Industrial District – Conditional District. The proposed Conditional Zoning District would specifically allow an unmanned data center with accessory solar use as per the site plan. Property Owners: Mark L and Collette G Hoover and Scotty Page and Rebecca H Hoover. The Randolph County Technical Review Committee has met on the above-listed case, and after review of all applicable standards contained in the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance and the Randolph County Growth Management Plan, the Technical Review Committee finds that this request:  Meets all technical requirements of both the Ordinance and the Plan;  Is consistent, reasonable, and in the public interest; and  Should be approved by the Randolph County Planning Board. The following policies from the Randolph County Growth Management Plan were identified by the Technical Review Committee as supporting this conclusion. Policy 3.1 Industrial development should be on land that is physically suitable and has unique locational advantages for industry. Advanced planning for the identification of such land should be encouraged. Policy 3.7 Sustainable economic growth, environmental protection, and quality of life shall be pursued together as mutually supporting growth management goals. NC Mine 1, LLC, Request Location Map US HWY 64 W T R A N Q U I L L NSPE N CER M EA D O W R DCLUBVIEWDR 1 inch = 400 feet I¤ Directions to site: US Hwy 64 W - (R)Spencer Meadow Rd - Drive on (L) approx 200 ft past Tranqil Ln PARCEL INFORMATION: ZONING INFORMATION: Zoning District 1: RA-RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT Zoning District 2: Zoning District 3: Specialty District: N/A Watershed Name: NONE Class A Flood Plain On Prop?: NO Flood Plain Map #: 3710772100J Growth Management Areas:SECONDARY GROWTH AREA Flood Plane Map #: Total Permit Fee: $100.00 COMMENTS:MULTIPLE PROPERTIES INVOLVED, WITH MULTIPLE OWNERS. REQUESTED CHANGE: The undersigned owner/applicant do hereby make application for a PROPERTY ZONING CHANGE as allowed by the Randolph Couty Zoning Ordinance. Area To Be Rezoned: 11.8000 Lot Size Indicator: ACRE(S) Proposed Zoning District: LI-CD-LIGHT INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONAL DISTRICT Proposed Use(S): PROPOSED REZONING FROM RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONAL DISTRICT FOR A UNMANNED DATA CENTER WITH ACCESSORY USE SOLAR. Condition(S): Applicant: NC MINE 1, LLC City, St. Zip: EL SEGUNDO, CA 90245 Address: 880 APOLLO STREET, SUITE 333 Owner: HOOVER, SCOTTY PAGE Address: 1369 MOORE RD City, St. Zip: ASHEBORO, NC 27205 Permit #: 2021-00000717 Parcel #: 7721886981 Date: 03/11/2021 Location Address: Permit Type Code: PZ 2 CONTACT NAME:PARKER, CATE Contact Phone:484 620-0989 DAPHNE & AUTHOR HOOVER4 Acreage: Township:2.5800 02 - BACK CREEK Subdivsion: Lot number: Eric Martin Authorized County Official Signature of Applicant: APPLICATION FOR ZONING CHANGE Page: 1 of 1 - LOCAL TELEPHONE NUMBER - Asheboro: (336) 318-6565 - Archdale/Trinity: (336) 819-3565 http://www.randolphcountync.gov COUNTY OF RANDOLPH Department of Planning & Zoning 204 E Academy St - PO Box 771 - Asheboro NC 27204-0771 APPLICATION FOR ZONING CHANGE NC Mine 1, LLC, Rezoning Request !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(AsheboroCountyCountryClubLakeTR A N Q U IL L N US HWY 64 W SPENCERMEADOWRDCLUBVIEWDR1 inch = 400 feet Asheboro CountryClub (Rezoned 2000) 5 MW solar farm(Rezoned 2017) Requestlocation I¤ Legend ParcelsStructures Type !(Permanent Structure !(Temporary Structure !(Miscellaneous Structures Roads Streams 50 ft. Stream buffer Overlay zoning districtsCounty zoning Districts RA RE RIO RR NC Mine 1, LLC, Rezoning Request AsheboroCountyCountryClubLakeTR A N Q U IL L N US HWY 64 W SPENCERMEADOWRDCLUBVIEWDR1 inch = 400 feet I¤ Legend Parcels Roads Streams 50 ft. Stream buffer NC Mine 1, LLC, Rezoning Request Picture 1: Request location on left. Picture 2: Adjacent residences. Picture 3: Adjacent residence. Picture 4: Adjacent residence. Picture 5: Adjacent residence. Picture 6: Adjacent power substation. COUNTY OF RANDOLPH CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION AND FINDING OF REASONABLENESS AND PUBLIC INTEREST IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING BY NC MINE 1, LLC, REZONING REQUEST #2021-00000717 NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD According to North Carolina General Statutes § 153A-341 and 342, the Randolph County Planning Board finds that the proposed zoning district map amendments to LI-CD – Light Industrial-Conditional District as described in the application of NC Mine 1, LLC, 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 northwest area shows the parcel to be rezoned in an area designated as a Secondary Growth Area. Secondary Growth Areas are areas that are predominately residential but transitional. It is also an area where mixed development may occur. B. Consistency with Growth Policies in the Growth Management Plan Policy 3.1 Industrial development should be on land that is physically suitable and has unique locational advantages for industry. Advanced planning for the identification of such land should be encouraged. Consistency Analysis: The location for this proposal is physically suitable for the type of development as it is an area that is predominately residential but does also include a golf course and an existing solar farm that was rezoned in 2017. Policy 3.7 Sustainable economic growth, environmental protection, and quality of life shall be pursued together as mutually supporting growth management goals. Consistency Analysis: This proposal would provide for economic growth, environmental protection while protecting the existing residential developments in the area. 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. _______________________________ _______________________________ Randolph County Planning Director Chair, Randolph County Planning Board _______________________________ _______________________________ Clerk to Planning Board Date MOTION TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL DISTRICT REZONING NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD “I make the motion 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 of Reasonableness 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.” If making a second to the motion, please change to say, “I second the motion . . .” and continue reading the rest of the motion. MOTION TO DENY A CONDITIONAL DISTRICT REZONING NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD “I make the motion to DENY 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 of Reasonableness 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 not consistent with the Randolph County Growth Management Plan.” If making a second to the motion, please change to say, “I second the motion . . .” and continue reading the rest of the motion.