04AprilPB
Planning Board April 2, 2024 Page 1 of 2
RANDOLPH COUNTY
PLANNING AND ZONING 204 E Academy Street, Asheboro NC 27203 (336) 318-6555
RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
AGENDA
APRIL 2, 2024
1. Call to Order of the Randolph County Planning Board.
2. Roll call of the Board members. (Completed by staff)
3. Consent Agenda:
● Approval of agenda for the April 2, 2024, Planning Board meeting.
● Approval of the minutes from the March 5, 2024, Planning Board meeting.
4. Conflict of Interest:
● Are there any Conflicts of Interest or ex parte communication that should be
disclosed? (If there is a Conflict of Interest, the Board must vote to allow the
member with the Conflict of Interest to not participate in the hearing of the
specific case where the Conflict of Interest has been identified.)
5. Old Business.
6. New Business.
SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST #2024-00000575
The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a duly published and notified
quasi-judicial hearing on the request by STEPHEN THOMAS and MONICA
GIBSON, Troy, NC, and their request to obtain a Special Use Permit at
6220 Mt Lebanon Rd, Union Township, Tax ID #7625802059, 13.11 acres,
RA - Residential Agricultural District. It is the desire of the applicant to
obtain a Special Use Permit to specifically allow a second residence on the
property for a family member as per the site plan.
REZONING REQUEST #2023-00003430
The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a duly published and notified
Page 1 of 162
Planning Board April 2, 2024 Page 2 of 2
legislative hearing on the request by CLAYTON KINDLEY, Trinity, NC, and
their request to rezone 5.00-acres at 1508 Ross Wood Rd, Tabernacle
Township, Tax ID #6792114129 and 6792017318, Secondary Growth Area,
from RA - Residential Agricultural District to CVOE-CD - Conventional
Subdivision Overlay Exclusive - Conditional District. The proposed
Conditional Zoning District would specifically allow the recombination of
property to make a five acre lots which would result in a fourth lot as per the
site plan. Property Owner: Brenda A Kindley Life Estate
REZONING REQUEST #2024-00000474
The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a duly published and notified
legislative hearing on the request by J-MAC PROPERTIES, LLC, Asheboro,
NC, and their request to rezone 84.20-acres on Crestview Church Rd,
Cedar Grove Township, Tax ID #7659858407, 7659842547 and
7659738846, Primary Growth Area, from RM - Residential Mixed District
and RR – Residential Restricted District to RM-CD - Residential Mixed -
Conditional District. The proposed Conditional Zoning District would
specifically allow a campground as per the site plan.
7. Updates from the Planning Director.
● Proposed changes to the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance
as it pertains to the HC - Highway Commercial zoning district.
● Proposed Rules of Procedure for the Randolph County Planning Board.
● Training on CivicClerk Board Portal
8. Adjournment.
Page 2 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 1 of 21 3/5/2024
March 5, 2024
1.Call to Order of the Randolph County Planning Board.
There was a meeting of the Randolph County Planning Board on March 5, 2024, at
6:00 PM in Meeting Room A, Randolph County Office Building, 725 McDowell Rd,
Asheboro, NC. Chairman Pell called the meeting to order and welcomed those in
attendance.
2.Roll call of the Board members.
The County Planning staff completed the roll call of the members of the Board as they
arrived at the meeting. Reid Pell, Ken Austin, Melinda Vaughan, Brandon Hedrick,
Kemp Davis, John Cable, Reggie Beeson were present. County Planning Director
Tonya Caddle and County Attorney Ben Morgan were also present, along with County
Planning staff members Kayla Brown, Melissa Burkhart, David Harris, Cory Hartsoe,
Kim Heinzer, Tim Mangum, and Eric Martin.
3.Consent Agenda:
●Approval of agenda for the March 5, 2024, Planning Board meeting.
●Approval of the minutes from the February 6, 2024, Planning Board
meeting.
On motion of Davis, seconded by Austin, the Board voted 7-0 to approve the Consent
Agenda as presented.
4.Conflict of Interest:
●Are there any Conflicts of Interest or ex parte communication that should be
disclosed? (If there is a Conflict of Interest, the Board must vote to allow the
member with the Conflict of Interest to not participate in the hearing of the
specific case where the Conflict of Interest has been identified.)
There were no Conflicts of Interest or ex parte communication identified by any
Planning Board member.
5.Old Business.
There was no old business for the Planning Board meeting.
6.New Business.
SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST #2024-00000099
Page 3 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 2 of 21 3/5/2024
The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a duly published and notified
quasi-judicial hearing on the request by MC ARMS of NC, Asheboro, NC,
and their request to obtain a Special Use Permit at 4576 High Pine Church
Rd, Union Township, Tax ID #7636264207, 10.78 acres, RA - Residential
Agricultural District. It is the desire of the applicant to obtain a Special Use
Permit to specifically allow the operations of firearms sales and
manufacturing to facilitate online sales in an existing building on the
property.
Caddle presented the first case of the night to the Planning Board.
Pell opened the public hearing and stated that anyone who wanted to provide
testimony on Special Use Permit requests must be sworn in before giving testimony.
Morgan administered the oath to two citizens.
Lucas Mullis, 4005 Stonehill Ln, Matthews, NC, stated that he is a partner in this
small business that started six months ago. He stated that the business is applying
for a type seven federal firearms license from the Federal Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Mullis stated that the business would be
taking firearm parts and putting the weapons together. He stated that he and his
partner both have full-time jobs, this operation will be part-time, and all sales will be
online only, and they will also handle the transfer of firearms for family and friends.
Mullis concluded by saying that all assembly would be done with "regular" hand
tools.
Bill Cranford, 4576 High Pine Church Rd, Asheboro, NC, stated that he is the
property owner and partner in the business. Cranford stated that the existing building
will be a location to allow purchases and for customers to come to the site to pick up
their purchases.
Pell asked if there were any questions from the Planning Board members.
Cable asked if there would be any test firing on the site and the applicants stated it
was not their intent to have a test range on the site.
Austin asked about ammunition storage and Cranford stated that the only
ammunition on the site would be his personal ammunition.
Cable asked about the safety and security of the site and Cranford stated that there
are security cameras on the site along with keypad locks and a six hundred-pound
safe where parts or completed weapons will be stored.
Cable stated that this is not the first request of this nature to come before the
Planning Board and that he worries about the safety and security of the family and
Page 4 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 3 of 21 3/5/2024
neighbors and that most applicants take good steps to protect everyone.
K. Davis asked if this would be a gun range and Cranford replied that there would
not be a gun range on the site.
Austin asked if the newly assembled weapons would get one serial number and
Cranford stated that the new weapons would get one serial number and they would
register the weapon and serial number with the ATF along with all other necessary
paperwork.
Pell asked if there were any other questions for the Planning Board. Hearing none,
Pell asked if there was anyone else in favor of the request who wanted to speak.
Hearing none, Pell asked if there was anyone in opposition to the request. Hearing
none, Pell closed the public hearing.
Cable stated that the applicants answered all of the questions and that the Board's
approval is necessary to obtain the federal firearms license.
On the motion of Cable, seconded by Austin, with a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to
approve the request with the motions contained in the Planning Board packet.
REZONING REQUEST #2024-00000301
The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a duly published and notified
legislative hearing on the request by MICHAEL C BRADY, Julian, NC, and
their request to rezone 77,480 sq. ft. out of 7.04-acres at 9144 Old 421 Rd,
Liberty Township, Tax ID #8708746407, Primary Growth Area, from HC -
Highway Commercial District and RA – Residential Agricultural District to HI-
CD - Heavy Industrial - Conditional District. The proposed Conditional
Zoning District would specifically allow the recycling, crushing, screening,
and sorting of rock, concrete, and asphalt into usable products.
Caddle presented the second case on the Planning Board agenda.
Pell opened the public hearing.
Michael C Brady, 9144 Old 421 Rd, Julian, NC, rose to address the Planning Board
and stated that he owns the property and is leasing the land to Piedmont Triad
Transportation and Grading and that this company is running the operation.
Pell asked if there were any questions from the Planning Board members.
K. Davis asked Brady about his current business, and he stated that he does
automotive work and that the rock crushing is being done by Piedmont Triad
Transportation and Grading. K. Davis asked if this was the closest operation of this
Page 5 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 4 of 21 3/5/2024
type to the megasite and Brady answered that it is the closest site to the megasite.
Caddle stated that this request is before the Planning Board tonight due to an
anonymous complaint and subsequent inspection and Notice of Violation of
the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance since the site is not properly
zoned for this operation.
Austin asked about the length of the lease and Brady stated that it is a one-year
lease with options to renew.
Morgan asked about the type of equipment and Brady said that he did not know
other than the rock crusher and a trackhoe.
Austin asked about the frequency of trucks going from this site to the megasite.
Brady said that some days no trucks go to the site and other days there might be two
trucks going between the sites.
Beeson stated that the operation was taking big rocks and making them into small
rocks and Brady stated that Beeson was correct and that the rocks would be
crushed, loaded, and used as needed at the megasite.
Beeson asked about the hours of crushing and Brady stated that the crushing never
starts before 7:30 am and the employees are gone by 5:00 pm. Brady further stated
that his business is there and he does not even know when the employees are there
running the crusher and that the trucks coming in and out of the site make more
noise than the crusher.
K. Davis asked about the hours of operation and Brady stated it was Monday
through Friday from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. K. Davis asked about the "intent of the
lease" and if the operation would continue after the megasite construction was
completed and Brady stated he assumed that the operation would close once the
construction was completed
Morgan explained the public hearing procedures for the citizens attending the
meeting in that the applicant goes first, those in favor of the request speak next and
then the opposition to the request gets to speak next followed by the applicant who
can address any concerns raised by citizens.
Pell asked if there were any other questions from Planning Board members. Hearing
none, Pell asked if there was anyone else in favor of the request who would like to
speak.
Elizabeth Kirkpatrick, 235 Old Quarry Rd, Graham, NC, rose to address the Board
and stated that she is an agent with Piedmont Triad Transportation and Grading.
Kirkpatrick stated that the current lease will expire on October 3, 2024, and that the
company currently has several contracts with Toyota Battery Manufacturing and the
Page 6 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 5 of 21 3/5/2024
work may continue on for some time. Kirkpatrick said that the company might be
interested in staying at this site after the megasite construction is completed.
Kirkpatrick also told the Planning Board that the company is not selling the rock but
recycling the rock to be used on the megasite. She also stated that there are
trackhoes and excavators on the site and the site will not be open on Saturday or
Sunday. She also stated that the truck will not be operating if it is raining and that, on
average, there are one to two trucks at the site as needed. Kirkpatrick concluded her
remarks by saying that at the end of the lease prior, they would return the site to its
previous condition and provide Brayd with a gravel parking lot.
K. Davis asked if there would be any permanent buildings on the site and Kirkpatrick
stated that there would be no buildings.
Austin asked about the trucks and Kirkpatrick stated that the trucks belonged to the
company.
Austin asked if there had been any complaints or inquiries from the neighbors and
Kirkpatrick stated that she was not aware of any complaints.
K. Davis asked if the site is only working with rocks from the megasite and
Kirkpatrick said that it was a true statement.
Pell asked if there were any further questions from the Planning Board. Hearing
none, Pell asked if there was anyone else who would like to speak in favor of the
rezoning request.
Tim Booras, 7157 Bobby Jean Rd, Julian, NC, stated that he is one mile away from
the site and wants to make sure that this request is done correctly. He mentioned
that tractor-trailers were on Old 421 Rd constantly and the road has bad curves. He
provided the Board with an information packet. (See exhibit #1.)
Booras asked that the Board add a condition that the exit from the site be on Bulb Rd
and that this area of the County should not be industrial. He also mentioned the
three food trucks that park across the road from the request location and he asked
the Planning Board to change the speed limit on the roads in this area to make it
safer.
Booras talked about the thirty to forty houses that are in Guilford County and why
they did not get notices about the public hearing Morgan stated that signs were
posted and the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance and North
Carolina General Statutes require the County to notify adjoining property owners but
that the County line does cause issues with notifications. Borras passed out another
packet to the Board. (See exhibits #2-7.)
Austin asked if the signage was good enough and Booras said that there was one
sign in front of the location.
Page 7 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 6 of 21 3/5/2024
Booras stated that he did notice that there were no stormwater measures or erosion
control information in the agenda packet and that must be addressed.
Austin asked if Booras had any conversations with the leasing company and Booras
replied, "No ."
K. Davis talked about Bulb Rd and the possibility of requiring the traffic to exit the
site on Bulb Rd and the possibility of a stop light being installed.
Caddle stated that local North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) staff
attend Technical Review Committee meetings for all cases and they had no
comments for this request location.
Austin said it appeared that the business has been operating for a while and that,
according to Kirkpatrick, there had been no complaints.
Austin stated the questions or suggestions about the speed limit or stoplights need to
be directed to NCDOT as the Planning Board has no control over those issues.
Morgan stated that Planning staff and the Board of County Commissioners have
asked NCDOT to address specific concerns but the County is not always successful
in these attempts. Morgan also addressed the concept of temporary zoning and
stated that the County does not have that as an option and that once a property is
rezoned, it will stay that way until there is a change and that any change in the site
plan would require a new application to amend the Conditional District Permit.
Cable stated that some of these issues are out of the hands of the Planning Board
and that NCDOT does not take much input from the Board.
Lee Musser, 7265 Bulb Rd, Julian, NC, rose to address the Board and she pointed
out her house with a red roof on the site plan and she stated that she does not have
a problem with the operation as they work the hours and days previously stated and
that once the trees bloom, they will not be able to see the site.
Pell asked if there were any questions from the Planning Board.
Cable stated that he had retired from the Guilford County Sheriff's Office in 2015
and that he had written many tickets in this area due to excessive speed.
Beeson asked about the request to move the drive and Musser stated that the site
was too wet and she did not want to see the trucks coming in and out of the site.
Pell asked if there was anyone else who would like to speak In favor. Hearing none,
Pell asked if there was anyone in opposition to the request who wanted to address
the Board. Hearing none, Pell asked if Brady or Kirkpatrick wanted to respond to any
Page 8 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 7 of 21 3/5/2024
of the statements made.
Brady stated that he did want to address a few concerns. He stated that the
company did look about exiting the site on Bulb Rd but it is too narrow.
Kirkpatrick stated that the homes in Guilford County have over a three-hundred-foot
setback and that the company is aware of the rules and regulations regarding
stormwater management and erosion control. Kirkpatrick stated that based on the
nature of the operation, they are exempt from certain environmental requirements.
Austin asked about erosion control and Kirkpatrick said that the North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) does not require them to submit
various plans but the company does the necessary work to comply with the
requirements.
Pell asked if there were any further questions from the Planning Board. Hearing
none, Pell closed the public hearing.
K. Davis asked if the Planning Board could we make a recommendation to NCDOT
and Caddle said that staff could make them aware of the concerns raised tonight.
Morgan stated the road issues are not part of the condition district being considered.
Austin stated that this is a perfect example of temporary zoning and why the County
should research this issue.
Cable stated that this request shows how these cases are supposed to work with
everyone having differing opinions but being polite at the same. Cable stated that life
has changed in this area and it is good to keep big rocks off of major roads and he
has not heard anyone say that they are against it.
Hedrick stated that the Randolph County Growth Management Plan expected there
would be incompatible uses and this could be an example of such a use.
On the motion of Austin, seconded by Cable, with a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to
approve the request with the motions contained in the Planning Board packet.
Caddle stated that the request has been approved but there is a fifteen-day appeal
period that must pass before the Conditional District Permit will be issued.
REZONING REQEUST #2024-00000126
The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a duly published and notified
legislative hearing on the request by DAVIS INVESTMENT PROPERTIES,
LLC, Randleman, NC, and their request to rezone 1.89-acres at 5567 Old
Greensboro Rd, Level Cross Township, Randleman Lake Protected Area
Page 9 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 8 of 21 3/5/2024
Watershed, Tax ID #7766591509, Primary Growth Area, from RA -
Residential Agricultural District to CVOM-CD - Conventional Subdivision
Overlay Mixed - Conditional District. The proposed Conditional Zoning
District would specifically allow a two-lot addition to an existing subdivision
for Class B manufactured homes and above as per the site plan.
Caddle presented the third case of the night to the Planning Board.
Pell opened the public hearing.
Eric Davis, P O Box 452, Randleman, NC, rose to address the Board and said that
he was the manager for Davis Investment Properties, LLC, and that they are
planning on putting Class A mobile homes on the property instead of the Class B as
shown on the application. E. Davis stated that the homes would be Clayton Homes,
and would be registered as real property once the property is sold. E. Davis
mentioned that the selling price for the lots in question would be $225,000.00 and up
and would have a one-year warranty. E. Davis also pasted out real estate comps for
the Board's review. (See exhibits #8-12.)
K. Davis asked E. Davis if he planned to pave the driveways for the lots, and he
replied no but that we would provide enough area for vehicles to turn out on the lot
instead of having to back into Old Greensboro Rd.
Vaughan stated that based on the pictures provided by E. Davis the homes will have
a lovely interior. Vaughan stated that one of her sons was in the engineering
program at North Carolina State University (NCSU) and said that based on the
testing done at NCSU and other agencies, people should not complain about the
construction of mobile homes since they are built in a factory and then moved on
major highways and interstates without any problems.
E. Davis said that all manufactured housing must be United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development (USHUD) listed and approved for it to be sold in
the United States.
Vaughan stated that manufactured housing can help to address the affordable
housing crisis.
E. Davis stated that the manufactured homes he is proposing to put on these lots will
be approximately 1,500 sq. ft.
Beeson asked E. Davis about his request for Class A manufactured housing and
better and E. Davis said that the surveyor had made a mistake on the application.
Hedrick stated that the rezoning application would need to be changed. Planning
staff changed the application during the public hearing and it was signed by E. Davis.
Page 10 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 9 of 21 3/5/2024
Beeson asked about the shape of the Z lot and E. Davis said that he needed to
shape the lot this way to give the lot more area and to meet County requirements.
Hedrick said that he was not sure if the lots met the 100 ft. lot width requirement and
Caddle and Beeson both said that the information is on the plat showing that the lots
do meet the requirements.
E. Davis told the Board that lot number one has been sold.
Pell asked if there was anyone else In favor of the rezoning request who wanted to
speak. Hearing none, Pell asked if anyone was in opposition to the request that
wanted to address the Planning Board.
Sybil Burgess Murray, 9833 US Hwy 64 E, Ramseur, NC, passed out exhibit #13.
Murray told the Planning Board how E. Davis did not honor the conditions agreed to
and imposed on the property that he had rezoned on Weeden St in Staley. Murray
read from the Planning Board minutes from March 2023 where they mentioned a
thirty-five ft. no-cut buffer. Murray stated that the Planning Board approved the
request and it was appealed to the Board of Commissioners. The Board of
Commissioners heard the appeal on April 7, 2023, and at that meeting, E. Davis
agreed to leave a fifty-foot buffer along the east property line to buffer Olivers Chapel
Church. Murray also mentioned that Commissioner Haywood asked about the debris
and E. Davis said that the debris would not be burned on the site.
Murray stated that in February of this year, debris burning was occurring on the
property and that she called the 9-1-1 Center and the Sheriff's Department and that
nothing was done and she felt it was social injustice since this is a predominately
African-American community. Murray concluded her remarks by stating that E. Davis
is not following the conditions established for the development and he has shown
himself to not be reliable
Pell asked if there were any questions from the Planning Board.
Cable asked Murry if she had notified the Planning staff of these problems and
concerns. Murray stated that she had not notified the staff as she did not know that
she needed to call the staff. Caddle stated that the staff would take her comments as
an official complaint.
Rhonda Carreras, 5893 Big Oak Way, Randleman, NC, addressed the Planning
Board and said that she was speaking on behalf of James Keith Buie, who lives near
the site and did not receive a written notice.
Carreras told the Board about an e-mail to Former County Manager Hal Johnson
about this subdivision and was told that Johnson approved the minor subdivision plat
for the first three lots and that the development was built quickly and expanded to
Page 11 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 10 of 21 3/5/2024
more than three lots. She also related that Buie is on municipal water and has very
little water pressure and if these additional mobile homes are approved, his water
pressure would go down even more.
Pell asked if Buie had contacted the City of Randleman about the water pressure
problems and Carreras said that Buie had not contacted the City of Randleman, but
when he found out about additional homes, he became worried about the water
pressure issues.
Morgan asked how long ago Buie had lived at this site and Carreras replied twenty
years.
Carreras talked for a moment about housing affordability and that she had pulled
information from the Rocket Mortgage website that showed the County currently has
an inventory of 298 single-family site-built on that market in January 2024, and 303
in February 2024. Carreras said that people cannot buy land if it is not available and
based upon the survey in the Randolph County Growth Management Plan, eighty-
five percent of the residents want stick-built homes and that by allowing
manufactured housing, the County is not providing justice to its citizens. Carreras
concluded her remarks by asking the Planning Board to follow the plan.
Chris Andreoli, 5626 Dashwood Dr, Pleasant Garden, NC, rose to address the
Planning Board. He stated that Providence Township has the most manufactured
homes and mobile homes than anywhere else in the County. Andreoil said that is a
place for manufactured homes but this is not the location due to the tax liabilities
imposed on the citizens since site-built homes bring in more tax revenues.
Andreoli also stated that the County zoning ordinance needs to be updated since the
County is experiencing so much growth. He stated that the US Hwy 220 Business
corridor is prime for growth and it needs water and sewer to maximize the resources
of the County. Andreoli states, "We must have well-managed zoning with a mix of
quality housing" and stated that the Planning Board has done a great job trying to
control growth.
Andreoli talked about other properties that E. Davis owns and he stated that they are
not well maintained, and that E. Davis is using the loopholes in the zoning ordinance
to do what he wants on the property that he owns and that there is a potential for
mismanagement. Andreoli asked the Planning Board to deny this request because it
is not well planned and the Board needs to close the loopholes to prevent this type of
development from happening again. In closing, he asked the Planning Board to,
"follow the plan."
Austin asked Andreoli about the loopholes that E. Davis is using to do his
development. Andreoli talked about the placement of manufactured homes on
properties and the location of a manufactured home at the traffic circle at US Hwy
220 Business N and Providence Church Road. Andreoli stated that the placement of
Page 12 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 11 of 21 3/5/2024
manufactured houses needs to be managed, well planned and for the Board to "lock
it down and control what is going in County."
Cable asked Andreoli to suggest a place for a manufactured home to be located.
Morgan asked if there was any information available to show the number of
manufactured homes that are in parks as opposed to manufactured homes that are
on individually deeded lots. He continued that the State has passed statutes to make
it harder to regulate manufactured housing but the citizens in this case are talking
about changing the process to make it even harder for manufactured housing and
that the Boards hear the concerns of the citizens and we have to look at the
individual needs. Morgan asked for more concrete recommendations from the
community to address their concerns but the County is limited in what can be done
based on the general statutes.
Andreoli stated that if a property owner has a twenty-acre parcel and wants to put a
manufactured home on the property for a child, that is different than a subdivision but
the County allows E. Davis to continue setting up manufactured homes.
Austin stated that the County does have plans in place to have managed growth, but
that there are people who can buy site-built homes and some people can only afford
manufactured housing, and that options cannot be removed. Austin stated that this
request is not for a manufactured home park but a subdivision where the owner of
the manufactured home will also own the lot. Austin concluded that the County
needs affordable housing and it is addressed in the Growth Management Plan and
the Board has to balance the need carefully.
Adreoli asked about protection for people building site-built homes and Morgan
agreed that there needs to be protections but the citizens need to tell the Boards
how it can be better accomplished.
Adreoili stated that he did not understand the definition of a manufactured home,
manufactured home park, and a subdivision.
Austin asked about the difference between manufactured housing and affordable
housing.
Caddle defined a manufactured home from the Randolph County Unified
Development Ordinance, "a manufactured home or mobile home is a structure as
defined in NCGS 143-145 (7)" and in this request, E. Davis wants to divide the
property into multiple parcels that will be sold with one manufactured home on each
lot and the home would be a Class A or better as defined by the Randolph County
Unified Development Ordinance so it could be a site-built house.
Cable stated that the Planning Board tries to strike a balance for housing types and
that the Board is seeing more requests from family members to be able to put
Page 13 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 12 of 21 3/5/2024
manufactured homes on their property for a child or parent
Hedrick stated that he wanted to clarify a point and stated that North General Statute
160D-910, Manufactured Homes, has been in place since 1987 and that the General
Assembly keeps making changes to the laws, and that the County has done a good
job of controlling the growth where it is allowed and several court cases shows the
limits of the power the County has in controlling manufactured housing. Hedrick
stated that any changes would have to be started at the North Carolina General
Assembly and they would eventually flow down to the County but that he feels that
the trend from the State is toward more affordable housing.
Adreoli said that the County can put controls on how the process works. Morgan
stated that the public hearing is being held because E. Davis is going beyond what is
allowed in the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance. Andreoli stated
that he is not against manufactured homes and that he owns one in another county
in a planned development.
Austin stated that E. Davis has said in the public hearing that these manufactured
homes will have the titles destroyed and will be listed as real property with the Tax
Department.
Mary Alice Asbury, 260 Red Cedar Ct, Randleman, NC, addressed the Planning
Board and told how she relocated to the area in 2017 and that she loves the area but
they do have well problems. Asbury stated that these new manufactured homes will
have an impact on the wells in the community. She also stated that it is difficult to
buy a site-built house in the County and that the average price in July 2023, was
between $157,000 to $259,000, and that she doubts that a manufactured home will
sell for $250,000. She concluded her remarks by saying that E. Davis is buying up
property and selling manufactured homes on the lots and they are not pleasing.
Beeson stated that this is a request is for a subdivision.
Asbury asked why people are not paying for better housing as manufactured homes,
causing home prices to drop and the roads are not being maintained, which causes
the tax burden to increase. She also distributed a packet of pictures of close
manufactured home parks and other development in the area. (See exhibits #14-17
.) She also stated that the manufactured homes would use more water than a site-
built home.
Cable stated that he was confused about the water usage being different based
upon the housing type--each home would potentially use the same amount of water
and that there is no difference in water used based on housing type, Cable also
stated that the County Planning is outstanding and if there is a true zoning violation,
they need to be notified so it can be investigated and handled.
Caddle stated that Code Enforcement is complaint-based and that staff do not have
Page 14 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 13 of 21 3/5/2024
the time to ride around the County looking for violations.
Cable stated that so many times the Board hears that no one wants to live beside a
particular project but that the County has a great staff and the citizens should allow
the staff to do their job.
Pell called for a five-minute recess.
Upon resuming the meeting, Pell asked if there was anyone else in opposition who
wanted to address the Board. Hearing none, Pell asked E. Davis if he wanted to
respond to the comments or questions raised by the opposition.
E. Davis stated that growing pains are never fun and that Old Greensboro Rd has
municipal water and there is a fire hydrant at the corner of the property. E. Davis said
that he did not know if the manufactured homes would impact the water but he had a
soil scientist review the property for septic systems and both lots have already been
approved for the septic systems.
E. Davis stated that these homes are being sold and built in a factory just like
modular homes.
Morgan stated that he wanted to address a couple of points. Morgan stated that the
County cannot control whether the property is rented or sold and the Board cannot
require the lots to be sold.
E. Davis stated that he does have rental property but the manufactured homes are
not Class A homes and not everyone takes care of their homes and it will not look
good if the property is not maintained.
E. Davis addressed the concern on Weeden Street and stated that he had hired
someone to do timbering and the contract stated that the fifty for no-cut buffer must
remain but he has not been to the site to measure it and he did not know that the
timber company had been burning the timber but he would check and have it
stopped. E. Davis concluded his remarks by stating that there is a huge need for
affordable housing and that he cannot make everyone happy but the homes he is
proposing for this property are increasing in value.
K. Davis asked if the request is for Class A manufactured homes instead of site-built
homes and E. Davis said that it was driven by the housing and real estate brokers
are saying they are having problems with homes over $300,000 and at this target
price, more people can afford the manufactured homes.
Cable asked about the appeal mentioned earlier and K. Davis asked where it was
located, They were told that the appeal was on property in Staley and that it had no
bearing on this rezoning request.
Page 15 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 14 of 21 3/5/2024
Morgan stated that the Planning Board can use the information supplied by Murray
as they wish.
Hedrick asked about the thirty-five ft no-cut buffer along the State roads and Caddle
said it is required by the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance and it
would be a code violation if it is not replaced.
Beeson said that he thought it would be cheaper for the developer to leave the buffer
before the request was heard than to have to replant the buffer later.
Hedrick stated that since this is rezoning, the thirty-five ft no-buffer would be a Code
Enforcement issue.
Pell stated that the requirement is already in the Randolph County Unified
Development Ordinance.
Pell asked if there were any further questions from the Planning Board.
Hedrick asked if the rezoning application had been updated and he was told that the
application had already been updated and signed by E. Davis.
Pell asked if there were other questions from the Planning Board. Hearing none, Pell
closed the public hearing.
Beeson said that he is a lifelong resident of Randolph County and is opposed to
manufactured home parks and that this request is a step up from a manufactured
home park.
Hedrick talked about the economic involvement and that the Planning Board can
consider that this site has public water and that the rules allow more density since it
has public water and Austin agreed.
K. Davis asked if the Planning Board was still considering the request on Old
Greensboro Rd and he was told the Board was still on the Old Greensboro Rd
rezoning request.
On the motion of Hedrick, seconded by Austin, with a vote of 6-1, Cable voting no,
the Board voted to approve the request with the motions contained in the Planning
Board packet.
Caddle stated that the request has been approved but there is a fifteen-day appeal
period that must pass before the Conditional District Permit will be issued.
REZONING REQUEST #2024-0000121
The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a duly published and notified
Page 16 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 15 of 21 3/5/2024
legislative hearing on the request by DAVIS INVESTMENT PROPERTIES,
LLC, Randleman, NC, and their request to rezone 10.32-acres on St Peter
Church Rd, Level Cross Township, Randleman Lake Critical Area
Watershed, Tax ID #7766273107, Primary Growth Area, from RA -
Residential Agricultural District to CVOR-CD - Conventional Subdivision
Overlay Restricted - Conditional District. The proposed Conditional Zoning
District would specifically allow a five-lot subdivision for Class A
manufactured homes and above as per the site plan.
Caddle presented the next case of the night to the Planning Board.
Pell opened the public hearing and called for the applicant to address the Planning
Board.
E Davis addressed the Planning Board and said that this request was the same as
the request on Old Greensboro Road that the Board had just heard. He said it would
be the same type of homes, brick foundations, and that the titles would be dissolved
at the property closing making the manufactured homes listed as real property. The
home sites on lots two and three have already been permitted and all lots will have
their own septic system and well. E. Davis did state that these homes would sell for
more money than the homes on Old Greensboro Road due to the larger lot sizes.
Pell asked if there were any questions from the Planning Board.
Hedrick asked about the shaded area on lot number two and E. Davis stated that the
shaded area will be for the septic system for lot number one.
K. Davis asked how much of the property was cleared and E. Davis estimated that
less than an acre had been cleared but that he did sell timber as select cut, E. Davis
said that lot number four was cleared and that lots number five, six, seven ad eight
have been select cut. K. Davis asked about the thirty-five-foot no-cut buffer and E.
Davis stated that the trees had already been removed. E. Davis stated that due to
the topography of the land, the manufactured homes must be close to the road. K.
Davis asked about the buffer on lots one, two, and three and he was told by Caddle
that those lots had already been approved as a minor subdivision since it was three
lots.
Caddle read from the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance, Article 600,
Section 618, where it says, "Forest harvested properties (clear-cut properties)
planned for major subdivision development shall maintain a minimum thirty-five feet
of existing uncut buffer along all existing State maintained roads." Caddle stated that
the first three lots in the minor subdivision would not need the buffers replanted.
Austin asked E. Davis if replanting the buffers would be a problem and E. Davis said
that he would do what was needed to meet the requirements.
Page 17 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 16 of 21 3/5/2024
K. Davis stated that the Planning Board could not give a variance from required
buffers as outlined in the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance.
Austin asked about the map showing streams on it and Caddle replied that the
streams on the map were from a project the County did in 2007 but we cannot be
certain that the streams are there and that Planning Staff uses the data produced by
the United States Geological Survey (USGS) since they are the official source of the
data.
K. Davis asked if the NCDOT has supplied any comments and he was directed to
the information contained in the Randolph County Technical Revew Committee
Report and Map Amendment Evaluation that is included in the agenda packet.
Pell asked if there was anyone else In favor of the rezoning request. Hearing none,
Pell asked if there was anyone in opposition to the request who wanted to address
the Planning Board.
Joy Sparks, Piedmont Triad Regional Water Authority, P O Box 1326, Randleman,
NC, stated that the Piedmont Triad Regional Water Authority (PTRWA) owns and
operates Randleman Lake which is a WS IV-Critical Area. The PTRWA desired to
ensure water quality for Randleman Lake and when properties are for sale close to
the lake, PTRWA tries to purchase the property to protect the lake. Sparks stated
that PTRWA had tried to purchase this property several years ago but someone
offered a high price that the PTRWA could not march. Sparks stated that the
PTRWA does own a two-hundred-foot buffer around the entire reservoir to protect
the lake and the water quality. She stated that this request is approximately five
hundred feet from Randleman Lake and that the property had been clear cut and
there are concerns about increased sediment and stormwater run-off into the lake.
Sparks asked the Planning Board to protect Randleman Lake and deny the request.
Cable asked Sparks to restate her numbers and she stated that the PTRWA has a
two-hundred-foot buffer and Caddle stated that this request is outside of the PTRWA
buffer around the lake.
Pell asked if there were any questions from the Planning Board.
Mimi Allen, 432 St Peter Church Rd, Randleman, NC, addressed the Board and
asked if there is a good place to put a manufactured home or a modular home. Allen
said, "Not in front of my house."
Allen stated that she sold the property several years ago and did not sell it to E.
Davis and she was told that the property would not be used for a manufactured
home park and it would only allow three site-built homes. Allen stated that everything
is gone now and she can see everything looking out her front windows. Allen then
asked if anyone on the Planning Board was related to E. Davis. K. Davis stated that
Page 18 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 17 of 21 3/5/2024
they only share a last name. Allen concluded her comments by stating that
everything she was told several years ago is now different and the only thing the
Board is concerned with is making money.
Austin asked Allen about the PTRWA offer to purchase the property and she stated
that the property was her brother's property at that time.
Carmen Mollette, 459 St Peter Church Rd, Randleman, NC, addressed the Planning
Board and said that someone had put a manufactured home close to her house and
it was now demolished and she no longer has any privacy, and her water is now
muddy. Mollette stated she is now going to have to put up a fence.
Roger Green, 352 St Peter Church Rd, Randleman, NC, talked about the
environmental issues caused by the number of wells and septic systems and if there
would be any buffers to prevent stormwater run-off. Green stated that the water is
going somewhere and it is only going to get worse.
K. Davis stated that part of the approval process is going through Environmental
Health and their inspection and review process and Environmental Health makes the
decisions on approving or denying wells and septic systems based on State rules.
Austin stated that if E. Davis got the necessary permits and approvals to install the
septic system, he could do it.
Hedrick stated that part of the permitting process is controlled by the North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) and that E. Davis will have to go
through their permitting process and that citizens should contact NCDEQ if there are
any problems.
Pell asked if anyone else wanted to speak in opposition to the rezoning request.
Hearing none, Pell asked E. Davis if he wanted to address the concerns raised by
the community.
E. Davis addressed the concerns raised by the citizens and stated that only a portion
of lot number one, two, and three are clear-cut and that the property naturally flows
down to the lake.
Austin asked E. Davis how much of the parcel had been clear and he replied that he
did not know but it was probably a couple of acres and maybe as much as five to six
acres. E. Davis stated that the property has not been clear cut as stated earlier by
Sparks. E. Davis said that he did try to control the erosion and stormwater run-off
and if he is disturbing less than one acre of land, he does not need to get a Soil
Erosion Control Plan approved by the State and that he would get the Soil Erosion
Control Plan when he did disturb more that one acre of soil.
Pell closed the public hearing for discussion among the Planning Board.
Page 19 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 18 of 21 3/5/2024
Hedrick stated that since the site is in the Randleman Lake Protected Area, there are
different minimum lot size requirements and that these lots meet those
requirements.
Cable told the citizens that this is the venue where people can talk about their
concerns and that the Planning Board does not try to pass the buck and sometimes
the Board takes on too much information. Cable continued that that are other State
agencies that control some parts of the development process and the Board's hands
are often tied but that the zoning compliance is under the Planning Board's control.
Cable said that the Board does well in trying to weigh everything out and they do not
always agree but everyone does their due diligence and tries to listen to each side of
the issues.
K. Davis told the citizens that his last name was the same as the applicant and if he
thought he could not make an impartial decision, he would recuse himself from the
case.
Beeson said that the property is clear-cut, and there is a lot of slope, and that E.
Davis should have reached out to PTRWA or NCDEQ before doing anything but that
this Board has little control over drainage. Beeson said this request is a major
subdivision and the necessary measures were not undertaken to control erosion or
stormwater run-off.
Austin stated that he agreed with Beeson.
Cable stated that he assumed the two-hundred-foot butter that is owned by the
PTRWA is still in trees and it appears that E. Davis did not go on to someone else's
property.
Austin stated that it would be hard to determine the slope and how wet the area
already is based on the amount of rain in the past couple of days.
Hedrick asked Caddle if the Planning staff could find a resolution to the issues and
Caddle said staff will have to enforce the thirty-five-foot no-cut buffer and no permits
would be released until the buffer is replanted.
Vaughan stated that it would be good to buffer the lake.
K. Davis said that there is a buffer between the PTRWA property and E Davis'
property.
Austin said he was not happy with the application at this point and that he did not
know what the proper step should be for the Board. Caddle said that the Planning
Board can deny the request and it if is denied, E. David would have to wait one year
to resubmit the request unless the Board determined that the request was
Page 20 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 19 of 21 3/5/2024
"substantially different."
Cable said that there are a lot of issues and the Board members may not be on the
same issues and it is not easy to make these decisions. Cable stated that he had
reservations on the previous request and has even more on this case and he does
not feel comfortable with the request.
Pell related that if the request was denied, E. Davis would have to wait one year to
resubmit. Pell said that E. Davis could ask the Board to table the request to allow
him time to redesign the request if he wanted to use the time to address the
concerns.
Morgan stated that E. Davis could withdraw his request at any time but once a
decision has been made by the Planning Board, it can be appealed to the Board of
Commissioners or it has to wait for one year.
Austin stated that he had concerns over the fact that half of the property has been
cleared and he does not know what can be done about the erosion and run-off at this
time.
Eric Davis withdrew the application at this time.
Morgan stated the E. Davis had withdrawn his application but he can turn in a
different application and this whole process starts again including the Neighborhood
Information Meeting and the Planning Board meeting.
REZONING REQUEST #2023-00003175
The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a duly published and notified
Legislative Hearing on the request by NASH DUGGINS, Asheboro, NC, and
their request to rezone 41.60 acres out of 56.87 acres at the end of
Farmwood Ln, Cedar Grove Township, Tax ID #7639173975, Secondary
Growth Area, from RA - Residential Agricultural District to CVOE-CD -
Conventional Subdivision Overlay Exclusive - Conditional District. The
proposed Conditional Zoning District would specifically allow a seventeen-lot
site-built subdivision as per the site plan.
Caddle presented the last case of the night to the Planning Board.
Pell opened the public hearing.
Nash Duggins, 1503 Badin Ln, Asheboro, NC, addressed the Board and said that
this proposal would finish the construction of the Farmwood subdivision. Duggins
stated that these homes may not be as nice as the homes in Phase Four but they
would have the same minimum square footage requirements. Duggins did inform the
Planning Board that the proposed deed restrictions in the agenda packet were
Page 21 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 20 of 21 3/5/2024
incorrect and he would get new covenants to the Planning Staff as soon as possible.
K. Davis asked about the housing and Duggins said that they would be the same as
the previous sections of the Farmwood subdivision.
Austin asked about the water and septic situation at the site and Duggins stated that
he had hired a private soil scientist to evaluate the property and each lot would have
its own septic system and well.
Beeson stated that it appeared the Duggins did not have opposition as opposed to
phase four. Duggins stated that this would be the end of the Farmwood subdivision
and that he does not intend to cross Taylor's Creek to do any further development.
Pell asked if there was anyone else In favor of the request to address the Planning
Board.
Ann Shaw, 1555 McDaniel Dr, Asheboro, NC, addressed the Planning Board and
said that at the end of the Neighborhood Information Meeting, everyone was happy
with the request. Shaw also pointed out errors in the proposed covenants.
Pell asked if there was anyone else In favor of the request to address the Planning
Board. Hearing none, Pell asked if there was anyone in opposition to the request.
Hearing none, Pell closed the public hearing.
Morgan stated that he appreciated the way the community acted during the
Neighborhood Information Meeting as those can sometimes get very personal.
Hedrick stated that the thought it was a good plan especially since it shows internal
roads.
Vaughan stated that she feels like this will be a nice development.
Cable stated that the homes in the subdivision will offset the manufactured housing
that was approved earlier in the meeting.
On the motion of Davis, seconded by Cable, with a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to
approve the request with the motions contained in the Planning Board packet.
Caddle stated that the request has been approved but there is a fifteen-day appeal
period that must pass before the Conditional District Permit will be issued.
7. Update from the Planning Director.
The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a duly published legislative
hearing on required updates to the Randolph County Unified Development
Page 22 of 162
DR
A
F
T
Page 21 of 21 3/5/2024
Ordinance as required by changes made by the North Carolina General
Assembly. These changes are necessary to remain compliant with
applicable general statutes.
Caddle briefly discussed the legislative updates to the Randolph County Unified
Development Ordinance as given to the Board at its February meeting.
There was no discussion among the Board since the updates are required due to
changes in the North Carolina General Statutes.
On the motion of Hedrick, seconded by Austin, with a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to
recommend approval to the Board of Commissioners that the proposed text
amendments be adopted.
● Proposed changes to the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance
as it pertains to the HC - Highway Commercial zoning district.
Caddle presented the proposed changes to the HC - Highway Commercial zoning
district. Caddle said it was staff intended to break the uses into areas that match
the Growth Management Plan and present it to the Planning Board to allow them to
make any changes they felt were necessary.
Beeson stated that he would like to see two options for billboards and those are
different requirements based upon a standard billboard versus an electronic billboard.
K. Davis stated that the Planning Board could get into more detail at the next meeting
and decide how to proceed moving forward.
8. Adjournment.
At 9:33 pm on motion of Cable, seconded by Davis, the Board voted 7-0 to adjourn.
There were sixty citizens present for the public hearing.
________________________________
Chairman
________________________________
Clerk to the Planning Board
Page 23 of 162
ti
ttEc
e !r!i
!
!i
E
z-9rI
oEr^sco!EocI
.l
'
l
6
lrliril!
EI
\
.).)
)
)
!
Il
r!i
i
Ii
Ei
l
l
:F
t
!
3ot
.1
I
o
I
o
B
a
IaEtIbt-l
P!
!xI
ooa{.+D
7t
).)
\)
I
.i
,
I{
r
l
\-
]
Et0xIJ
J
!i
i
g
I
ii
i
i
t;
l,t:s'
IE!
5s
!r
l
i
-i
T
J
H
ii
l
I
J-
.
,
t1
)
:6li
,
I
I!
F*
.
*
l
t'l
I
Gr
y
h
1
I
{
J
I
I
I
Page 24 of 162
subiecr
Dale
To
March 5. 2024 at 7:53AM
cotedefeve@ gmail.com
Tlm Boora3 cotedeteve@gmail com /
I
EXHIBIT
Z
oneSent lrom my
E
I
F
t
lEr l
a
';in
I
,l
,1 i
II
.. s..'ch r Sll.cr : w.b M.p. .'A lnlo l-O M.p Th.o.. C Prtnr
D
Page 25 of 162
Flw: Tlm B.o.x cot6d€1.v3@9mail.cofl /
D.r.: Mdch 5 m21at2:o2PM
To: @tedoleve@gmail corn
EXHIBIT
3
Sent from my iPhone
n
t- :
t @
Page 26 of 162
EXHIBIT
4Fr : nltt Boor- cd€det.!€@gmsil.cori ,
o.t : M.rch 5. :o24 ai 2roo PM
To: coredeGve@gmail.com
1
F
sfi&
*f.lr.
--t
tl
l
t:
_l
Page 27 of 162
nln B@ra. colodeteve@gmail com I
M.rch 5. 2024 al 2:02 PM
coi€deleve@qnail.c!.n
EXHIBIT
5
Sent from my iPhone
I
JL
.f
-
=
a
IIr
Page 28 of 162
G
Sent from my iPhone
l
ExH-tB-i-
F,m: Tlln 8oor.. cor6dclev6@gmall.com ,
Drt : March 5,2024a12:01PM
To: corcde,eve@gmall conr
]t
Page 29 of 162
From: Tlm Boorr. cot.d€1.v.@gnail.con O$hl.ct:
D.i.r Merch 5. aD24 at 2:02 PM
To: cotedd.ve@gmall co.n
E
Sent from my iPhone
EXHIBIT
-
TP
?l
.rf
1
'1
.l
I
Page 30 of 162
EXHIBIT3/t24,11:00hM
Client Full
55.r Old Gdn.bore lt@d R.n.ll.m.n, Nc 27317MLS' rlloTlo sub TvDe: R..ld.nfl.l/ia.n!L.t!rcd
T.x Parcer: 7765591301
zonrnq: citY Lim ts
2023
l222,OOO
GcDcralIDIcrEaUin
TotalHtd sFr l,a1s
Htd SF M. n: 1,475
Lot oime.sio.si l.c
1.00
&!41-D&le.Ygl D]trslsrg!!8!!o-h&!c!sl a!4re!5io!5
o
,,'.,f.3
22o aus. s. to old Gr..niboro Rd. Hoos. ir loc.t d 2 hou.c bctore the *hool.
Bc.utiful, br.nd Nw cl.yton Home! loc.ted in R.rdlGm.n, NC in the Iev.l cro...ommunity. e.rbY citi.s lr.lud.:
Randl€man, arhlborc, Gr.e..borc, lib€7tY, .nd Hlgh Poitrt. rhe lo@tion i3.lto..iort driving dist.ncetotho ncw
Toyot. ileg.-3lt l@.tlon.
No HOA Fee 1: HOA Fee I Pd:
T.x Blo.l: Ta( Lot: Tar Year: 2(123
owned oroe..ty lor l.$ than on€ ye.r Tax Rate: 0.0q)0 Tax Amount: lo
C!sh, Conventio..l, rHA, V Tax valuer lO lvpe of Sale:
O 2024 bv Triad MLS,lnc lMarch05,2024 | lliooAM lAgent:EncDavE
Info.mation s subj*t to venn@non !nd Nor Guaranteed
hnps /I.jad mlsmalir cotuMatrix?Pnnting/Pintoptros aSpI?C=MEA{AD""'AOAAMAqMAFAAAAAEOAAMC'A9AqAAO4NZEyEIMAAMAN* 1/1
I
-
-1
a
Page 31 of 162
3tst24 1011 Att
4934 aEnson D.vi. Ro.d sopha., l{c 27350
client Full
List Pncer I235,OOO111a552 subType: R..ld.ntl.l/tl:nuf..t!rcd
,ra6-at-516,1993
ta cty Limits:
cnAvEt{ & RICHARDSoI;pT f4 BliPa36-PG13
l235,OOO
Gqg!L!!&4!.liso
1,59O
1,690
o,a5
Eee4l-dg Sltr!!l!!!5 89941-0&!s!sl D'mensLons!e!s.l
o2
4fs
t 73 S tow..dr High Polnt, .xlt 89, R.t.xlt. f.t Coltr.n. illll, L Davl. CoontrY, R Br..son o.vls, Pror.rt, on thc R
An.zing, tha. i5 better th.n . ncw hom. .t.iti.g a n.w own.r. s€ll.r h!.l.tt no sto.. unturn.d on thi. prop€rtv ts
this is r..dy. .w upd.t.s id.lldc cl..tri..l, ew HVAC, xew lightfinur€., new kitch.n dbinetsr n.w gr.nit€
count.rtoos in kit<hen, N.w stainlcss .ppli.nccsr N* tvP Flooring threuohoutr x.w Bathroofr v.niti.s, xcw Painl
insid. a6d out, .nd so nu.h more. ot to m..tion, this prop€rty is .onv.ni..dY loot.d n.ar hilhe.y. but tow
countyt 16 aid No HOA, M.k. your.ppol6tfr.nt tod.yl Ag..t i. own...!
o HOA Fee 1: HOA Fee I Pd:
rax Block: Tax Lot' lax Year: 2022
own.d prop.rty for 1.5. th.n one v.fi Tar Rate: o.7a35 Tar Amountr :1413
C..h, Conv.ntlon.l, FHAr VA Tax Va ue: $60,370 Type of Sale:t./H!r R..ltY crn.ult nt
@ 2024 by Triad MLs,lnc lMarch0s,2024 | l0rlrAM I agent: Eric o.vis
Inromaio. is subject to v€f,ri<itron and ot Guaranteed ts
hftps://tnad.mlsmatnx com/Matdr/Pn.tng/Pnntoptros aspr?c=t AEAAAD""'AQAAAAAAAAARAOAAAEOAAAAGAgAAIGQ4NZEyBgMAAAABMw.. . I /1
tt
Page 32 of 162
Y5124 1A:12 AM
Client Full
4a96 Old Edq.r no.d sorhl., I{c 27350MLs,: llal35a Sub Type:TaxParcel: 7716-62-5094
zonr.q: RA Cty L,m'ts
Leaal Desc: R1528;l{
List Price: t215.OOOReside.tial/i{.nuf5.tured
1233,100
General lnlorm.tion
1,465
1,865
acres:
Unfn SF Low Lvlcl..r, F.nc.(.), P..turc L.nd, vacw
Vl.yl Por.h Yos
De.kr Fen.ed, G.zebo, Rem..ks
5li.le-In Oven/n.nteC..po.tr Driveway, G.avelr Paved
o3
M
st.rting or us-31t. continuc onto Nc-1993, co.ti.u. onto sht. Rd 1009, Turn l.tt onto Marlboro church Rd, Turn
rlght onto old Edcar Rd, o.3tin.tlo. will b€ on th..ltht, Look lorlRE 5ign,
w.l.oneto your <ou.trysirl. o.slr! t6d.d on Ju.t lndcr.n..rc of Plctlr6qs.l.nd. thl5 stunnlng t b.d / 3 b.th
w bo.us.oom hoh. offcrr. p.n..t bl.nd ottr.nqulllty and comfort. surrosnd.d bv.rCrdslv. c.ttl. p..tur... tha.
mor. th.n lrSoo 3q lt hoh. provldB. rare oppon!.tyto exp.rl..c.tlt. b..uty ol r!r.l Uvlng thholt -..ifi.ltoGo.v.nienc., Bo..tlng an ol.g.nt o.t.d Gntr.ncc, or.r noor p1.., tp.cious ,em., ovcFslz.d b.ct del, l.rgc 3-or..rport.nd mor.t S.hedul. . .howinc today.rd di.cover th.5.r.nlty th.t.w.it3 you in tha. idylll.4ttint.
o HOA Fee 1:
Tax Block:orncd p.op..ty lo..t lc..t on. y...
C..h, Cont.ntion.l, oth.7
,u.t!. R..l E t t tc
o.aooo
a1s2,a!o
2023
4x-3 O 2024 by Triad MLs, Inc lMarch0s,2024 110:124i{ lAqent: Eric Davis
Informanon s subject to verification and Not Guaranteed ts
httosT riad.mlsharrix.@mruatrirPnntngr'Prinloplids.aspx?c=AAEAAAO"_'AQAAAAAAAAARAOAAAEOAAAAG,\9AAcAO4NzET,B9MAAAABNAY. . 1n
ItL
.{
Page 33 of 162
3/5/24.10:134M
559 Cov.E., Brids. Ro.d rdnity,llc 27370Mrsr: ll2o977 Sub Typ€: R.rld.6tl.l/il.nuaactued
Tax Parcelr ,7ol753laaSubdivsio.: Yh.y.rPl.nt.tlon
ZoninA: CitY Limrts:
2021
L st Prcer a229,dro
tt /2912023
Gen€r.r lalorIo4lo[
o
8994I!&!c!cl arEg!5r9!5
o2
Porch Ys Fenced
water Hearer El.ctri.
H@vcr Hlll Rd to covc..d aride. td. Ho!* I. o.th. nlht,
.** g.ck on thc m.rk€t.t no aault du. to thc *ll.r. 2023 Cl.yto. EtploEr hom€ l@at6d on. bG.utiful viewlng hlll-top! 1y..r manut ctuEd w.r.nty. thl.t.ct o,l.nd.l.o h.. .n .ildltion.l lot lndud€d with the !'rice.In.lo*drivi.g dina... to Tririty, Archd.l., Hlsh Polnt,.nd A3hcboro.
o HOA Fee 1: HOA Fee I Pd:
Tax Block: Tax Lotr Tax Year: 2023Own.d proporty tor lc$ th.n on. year Tax Rate: O.O0OO Iax Amount: lOC.5h, Conventlo.al, aHA. vA Tax Valle: lO lype orsatel
,4,tr.s @ 2024 by T.iad MLS, rnc l'Ma.chOs,2024 | 10:t3 AM lAgent: Eric O.visInfomntron is SubJect to Venfiolon and Not Guaranteed tB
hnps:/Iriad.mrsmar.x @m/Mamrprinringr'prinroprions.aspx?c=AAEAAAD"..'AoAAAAAAAAARAaAAAEQAAAAGA9AAAAo4NZEyBgMAAAABNQ.
1t1
Client Full
-\..&
rI
r4h
Page 34 of 162
--
t
!II
1I
-
t=
\
I
]
I
,I
I
Jl cP
}_-l
a
I
t
t_
I
I
Q- to
EXHIBIT
Page 35 of 162
n-t7.
EXHIBIT
Z)
:d;
Page 36 of 162
I3
EXHIBIT
Vaughan asked if there is some type of EPA approval r lacility
Cable said he was unsure. He said there is a long list of requirements including proper
lighting, privacy fencing, and a big insurance bond and the inspections are standard
across the state.
Cable said he would love to see Gordon expand his business and haul lor the Highway
Patrol but he does not feel this residential area is the best location,
Davis asked Cable if he would like to make a motion based on his previous statements
and asked to check the Special Use reminders tor denying or approving the request.
Beeson said he has an issue with a commercial operation in a residential area causing
possible environmental issues.
Cable said he also has concerns that the request is not compatible with the area, that it
could endanger the public health or salety of residents, and it could have an adverse
etfect on the value ol adjoining property.
Cable made the motion to SENY this 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 may materially endanger the public health or safety, or the use
does not meet all required conditions and specifications, or the use may substantially
injure the value ol adjoining property, that the use is not a public necessity and the location
and character of use if developed according to the plan(s) as submitted, or will not be in
harmony with the area and in general conformity with the Randolph County Unitied
Development Ordinance. Beeson seconded the motion to gENY the Special Use Permit.
Pell, having a proper motion and second, called the question on the motion to dgly the
Special Use request. By a show ot hands, the motion was adopted unanimously.
Johnson presented the second case along with site plans, and pictures of the site and
surrounding properties.
REZONTNG REQUEST #2023-000000€
The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a duly published and notified
Legislative Hearing on the request by DAVIS INVESTMENT
PROPERTIES, LLC, Randleman, NC, and their request to rezone 10.01
acres on Weeden St, Columbia Township, Tax lD #8734196253, Primary
GroMh Area, from RA - Residentia/ Agticullural District to CVOR-CD -
Conventional Subdivision Overlay Restricted - Conditional DistricL The
proposed Conditional Zoning District would specifically allow a six-lot
subdivision for Class A mobile homes as per the site plan.
Planning Boatd Minutes March 7, 2023 Page 5 of 11
Page 37 of 162
Pell opened the public hearing and called for anyone wishing to speak in favor of the
request to come foMard.
Eric Davis, Randleman, Nc, explained to the Board his plan to have six new home sites,
allowing double-wide homes with brick skining which will be valued from two hundred to
two hundred, twenty thousand dollars. He said the property is located near the new
megasite where homes are needed. He also said the sites would be lully cleared and
each lot will have a conventional septic system and wells installed.
Bunting asked if he understood correctly that each individual lot would have a septic and
well. Davis answered yes. He said he has akeady had the soil evaluated and each lot
should have a gravityjed septic system.
Johnson asked where the driveways would be located. Davis said he spoke with Jenniter
Britt from NCDOT earlier in the afternoon and she approved the revised map, with shared
driveway locations as provided on a map given to the Board members belore the meeting.
(Exhibits 1A & 181.
Kemp oavis said with the new map proposal, it limits the number of driveway access to
the road and asked i, there would be a turn-around area for each lot. Davis answered
yes.
Cable asked if there would be sixiots with three driveways. Davis answered yes
Beeson said he saw in the original information, that NCDOT recommended lhere be two
hundred feet between each drive. Davis said NCOOT did recommend lhe two hundred
leet betlveen the driveway accesses but his surveyor, Daniel Tanner, has been trying to
obtain the actual rules that require that recommendation since December with no result
He said he drove to NCDOT earlier in the afternoon and asked Ms. Britt for an explanation
and she said "that's the way they want it", so they had the survey redrawn to comply He
said he developed another subdivision up the street and they are all one-hundred-foot
lots with individual driveways.
Planning Boatd Minules March 7, 2023 Page 6 ol 14
Johnson asked if the homes are new, the approximate size, and the cost of the homes,
Davis said they would average fourteen to fifteen hundred square feet, which creates
atfordable housing, with an average cost of Nvo hundred thousand dollars.
Pell asked if there was anyone else that would like to speak in favor ot the request.
Hearing none, Pell asked it anyone would like to speak in opposition to the request
Doug Nixon, Staley, NC, came forward to address the Board. He asked if the lots would
be si-milar to a mobile home park situation or if they would be owned individually He said
he has concerns for safety because ol the volume and speed of tratfic nearby.
Page 38 of 162
Maggie Dunn, Staley, NC said she has lived in Staley since 1989 and has a vested
interest in the development oI Staley. She said she has only recently gotten involved with
the development that is taking place in Staley. She said she knows that Mr. Oavis went
unattested with the development which took place nearby located just otf of Weeden St.
She said many of the landowners in Staley were unaware of how the property was being
developed so they are present to make a voice regarding this request.
Dunn said she has several questions regarding the development. She said she would
like to know if trr. Davis is planning to clear all ot the trees on the property or leave a
butfer tor the surrounding residents, how this development is going to atfect property
values, and how it will attect the Rocky River watershed. She said the 200 tt. minimum
requirement between driveways will be impossible with six proposed lots.
Dunn said the analysis information presented by the Planning Department is very dated
and does not represent what the community wants in Staley. She said she called the
Randolph County sheriff's depanment and asked lor the number ol calls relating to
several of the mobile home developments and there have been forty-three calls in the last
tivelve months for drug overdoses, domestic violence, as well as shootings and this as not
what the Staley community wants and it is not a good development.
Pell said Dunn mentioned that the property is located in the Rocky River watershed and
the information given to the Board says the property does not contain any streams, that
the property is not located within a flood zone, and the site does not lie within any
watershed. Dunn sard the information is wrong.
Hedrick told Ms. Dunn if she has evidence to present, she is more than welcome to do
so.
Johnson said the watershed requirements for residential development are that each lot
has a minimum of 40,000 square leet per residence. He said that if the entire property
was located within a watershed, it meets the requirements tor development,
Dunn asked Johnson iI he was stating that the watershed did not matter. Johnson said
he did not say that. He said it meets all the requirements even if it were located in a
watershed.
Travis Pugh, Liberty, NC, said he is a lourth-generation larmer of a 165-acre farm just
south of this property. He said he is not against development but is ror maintaining the
integrity oI the neighborhood. He said he is concerned with trattic and safety. He said he
is also concerned about the eflects development will have on him because he applies a
lot ot animal waste which is permitted and regularly inspected. He said he realizes that
Randolph county is beginning to transition but he feels there is a need lor maintaining "a
little countryside" for agriculture.
Planning Board Minules March 7, 2023
Pell said he will have NIr. Davis address all of the concerns after everyone has spoken.
Page 7 ol 74
Page 39 of 162
Paul A. (unable to determine last name lrom sign-in sheet or recording of the meeting),
Staley, NC, said he is a realtor and would like everyone to know that the manufactured
homes are built to the Department of Transportation specifications and not to the US
Depanment of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). He said the last thing we need
is something that will degrade our County and there have been people here that have
spoken about where they stand on this matter.
Elizabeth Pate, 382 Browns Crossroad Rd, Staley, NC asked about whether or not there
would be individual well and septics allowed for the development because she owns 5
acres and was only allowed one septic on her property.
Morgan said a lot ol the times, developers will hire soil scientists to evaluate the soil
berore a request to find out the potentialfor development, and it approved, the developer
will then have to have the County approve the sites for individual systems for permitting
a home.
Kemp Davis asked what the average costs of the homes he has provided in the area.
Eric Davis said the last home he closed on cost $199,500.00. Kemp Davis asked what
the market is supporting for blue-collar lamilies. Eric Davis said most oI the pre-
qualitication letters he has received are for approximately $225,000.00. He said maybe
one day they will afford a 2,000 sq. ft. home on 20 acres that cost $400,000.00 but they
have to start somewhere.
Cable asked about the power line on the property mentioned earlier. Eric Davis said
Planning Boatd Minutes March 7, 2023 Page I ol 74
Hedrick said the applacant did provide a soil map showing potential approvals tor
individual septic locations.
Carol Lobisser, 1395 Langley Rd, Staley, NC, said although this request is lor ten acres,
there is a power line easement that does not allow ten usable acres which seems to make
the houses more condensed. She said she understands there will be a need for housing
due to Toyota and valuable housing tor young families but leels this may not be the best
use for this piece of property. She said Toyota is advertising the investment of billions ol
dollars and asked it they really want this type of development.
Pell asked Davis if he would like to address some of the concerns and answer questions.
Eric Davis said he understands the concerns. He said he has hired a soil scientist and
the property has good soil, allowing each lotto have its own septic system. He said Toyota
hires blue-collar workers and this type of housing fits the budget of those workers. He
said these are not people that are participating in illegal activities, they are people that
need atfordable housing tor which they can obtain a loan. He said he is a farmer as well
and has a love for land but also has a love for people and people need homes.
Eric Davis said these are nice, atfordable homes with brick foundations, and not everyone
can atford half-million-dollar homes.
Page 40 of 162
Johnson asked it these lots are potential rentals. Erlc Davis said they will be individually
owned, not rentals.
Cable asked if there would be a buffer maintained lor the adjoining properties. Eric Oavis
said he originally planned to clear-cut the property but after hearing the concerns, he will
only cut the trees needed for the placement ol the homes, septic system, and well which
will probably leave trees on the back.
Hedrick asked Eric Davis if he is aware that he has to leave a thirty-five no-cut butfer
along the state-mainlained roads il he plans to clear-cut property. He also asked Davis il
he has had any conversations with the adjoining church property. Eric Davis said he had
a community meeting for the development and no one showed up except him.
Vaughan said she understands how disturbing it is to see change because she is seeing
a change in the Farmer area and unfortunately if you do not want to see a property
change, you must buy it. She also said she is happy to see the number of driveways
reduced with the 200 ft, requirement trom NCDOT. She appreciates the concerns ot the
citizens and also feels their pain.
Cable said he knows everyone is passionate and the Board is passionate as well. He
said there is a large crowd tonight and it does not mean you're right or wrong, it just means
you have a large crowd. He said the Board has listened to each of you and your concerns
and he knows that change is not easy. He thanked the citizens for coming and sharing
their concerns because this process is what makes our County great.
Hedrick said the County is aware of the need for the GroMh Management P/an to be
updated in this area ol the County and a group is currently working on those changes. He
said there will be a public meeting regarding those changes which should be announced
soon,
Hedrick asked if the chassis would be removed lrom the homes. Eric Oavis answered
yes.
Hedrick said the applicant has based his proposal on the current requirements of the
Unitied Development Otdinance and it is the Board's job to decide on meeting the
requirements as it is currently written and it is his understanding that the same property
would allow a three.lot division without coming before the Board for approval. Johnson
said three lots would be considered a minor subdivision allowing single-wide, double-
wide, or modular homes, and would not require approval from the Board. Hodrick said
this request holds the housing type to a little higher standard.
Beeson said he understands the concerns, he grew up on a farm and still lives on a farm,
but things are changing with new developments. He said no one wants to hear the term
Planning Board Minutes Page 9 of 14
there is a power line easemenl between lots five and six and lot six is wider to
accommodate lor the easement.
March 7.2023
Page 41 of 162
"trailer park" and this is a far cry lrom that and the homes will not be rentals, they will be
individually owned.
Johnson said there was a time when single-wide homes and mobile home parks were
being developed all over the County and because of the G roMh Management Plan and
zoning there have been no new mobile home parks in a long time. He said this request is
lor ovfier-occupied, double-wide homes with brick foundations for $200,000.00. He
commended the citizens for being involved and expressing their opinions,
Hedrick said the property is located in a primary groMh area. He said he commends
Davis tor obtaining preliminary soil evaluations and recommendations from NCDOT ,or
consideration by the Board although they are not required for the Board to make a
decision. He said one thing that gives him pause is that there is no buffer consideration
for the church property located to the East ol the request.
Cable said he believes the request talls within th€ requirements laid out in lhe lJnified
Development Otdinance, and the currenlGrov,tth Management Plan.
Kemp Davis said he understands wanting to maintain the character ol the area but if the
Board goes by the regulations set forth by the Unified Development Ordinance and lhe
Growth Management Plan, il is hard to deny something that meets the criteria. Cable
agreed.
Cable said he would make a motion, including the revised map and letter from NCDOT
Geferring to Exhib,ts 14 & l8), as provided to the Board.
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 lnterest
statements that are included in the Planning Board agenda, submitled 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 all agreed-upon revisions, also incorporated into
the motion and that the request is consistent with the Randolph County ctoMh
Management P/an, Beeson made a second to the motion to APPROVE the rezoning
request. Pell, having a proper motion and second, called the question on the motion to
aDDrove the rezoning request, and the motion was adopted unanimously.
Johnson explained the Ls-day waiting period tor a possible appeal and a permit wi
follow that waiting period.
Johnson presented the last case along with site plans, and pictures of the site and
surrounding properties.
REZONTNG REQUEST #2023-00000337
Planning Boatd Minutes March 7. 2023 Page 10 ol 14
Page 42 of 162
Special Meeting April 17, 2023 - Zoning Appeals
The Randolph County Board oI CommissioneE met in special session at 6:00 p,m. in the 1909
Randolph County Historic Coufthouse Meetiug Room, 145 Wonh Streer, Asheboro, NC.
Chairman Darrell Frye, Vice-ChahDan David Allen, Commissiooer Hope Ha)'wood,
Commissioner Maxton McDowell, and Commissio[er Kenny Kidd were present. Also present
were County Manager Hal Johnson, AssistantCounty Manager Wiltiam Johnson, County Attorney
Ben Morgan, Clerk to the Board Dana Crisco, and Depury Clerk to the Board Jenny Park
County Manager Hal Johrson reviewed the following request:
MARGARET L. DUNN, has requested an appeal for the decision made by rhe
Randolph County Planning Board to approve a rezoning for 10,01 acres on Weeden
Street, Columbia Township, Tax ID #8734196253, Primary crowth Area, from RA -
Residential Agricultural District to CVOR-CD - ConveDdonal Subdivision Overlay
Restricted - Conditional District. The proposed Conditional Zoning District would
specifically allow a six-lot subdivision for Class A mobile homes as per the site plan.
Mr. Johnson shared that there is a bill ar rhe State level beiog considered that could take away
the local level decision making from local govemment regarding the appeals process such as this
one throughout North Carclina. He is proud of what Randolph County has done over the pasr
decades in land use planning and development, He hopes that this right is not taken away from
the local elected officials,
Chairman Frye said, to follow up on Mr. Johnson's point, rhe proposed change in zoning
authority is alaming. Local elected officials could have this decision making right taken away,
If this legislature is passed, the State would then make rhe decision on issues such as this. This
legislature has been infroduced into the House and the Senate.
Public Hearinq
Chairman Frye opened the Public Hearing ar 6:05 p.m. and closed it after anyon€ wanting to
speak had done so.
Eric Davis, PO Box 452, Randleman, the applicant of the initial zoning requesr, presented two
photographs of rhe tlpe of homes that will be placed on the propeny irt question (following these
minutes as Attachment A). Mr. Davis stated the homes will be new Clayton homes, beMeen 1,400
and 1,600 square feet in size, that come with a one-year warranty from the manufacturer. The
price for these homes is approximarely $230,000 per home. He stated that he was a real estate
broker and understands that there is a shortage of homes currently. In his recent experience when
placing this rype of home on rhe market, these homes are under contract within two to three days.Mr. Davis stated rhat therc is a church at the back, right comer of the propeny whose members
had some concems regarding privacy. He said that he would leave a buifer-on ihe lot that adjoinsthe.church.to_rcspect the privacy of the church. The lots will only be cleared for septic tani, thewell, and the home,
4117/23
Page 43 of 162
Vice-Chaiman Alleo asked abour the driveways and if Mr. Davis had driveway permits, Mr.
Davis stated that he has met with NCDOT in person and they have pennission for the ddveways
to be placed side by side to help with the eaffic flow, so every two lots would have ddveways
adjacent to each other.
Commissioner Haywood asked if there would b€ room for someone to tum their car around.
Mr. Davis said they will be pufting in urn-arounds beside the home so the homeowner can back
into a turn-around and move forward into the road.
Commissioner Haywood stated that in the material presented, Mr. Davis would not be buming
the debds. [t will be removed and several options were mentioned but not specified, Mr. Davis
said that the debris would not be burned, but instead taken to a pulp wood facility that is nearby.
Keith Burgio, 3450 Weeden Streer, Staley, said he lives beside the lot thar Mr. Davis jusr
purchased and is in favor of the appeal. He moved to this cunent location to get away from people.
He does not like people and does not like neighbors. Mr. Burgio asked if Mr. Davis was building
homes or buying mobile homes to place on this propeny. He said that he has talked to his
marketing people and the value of his home will depreciate because of the mobile homes. He has
no Eespassi[g sigos on his propeny, but the surveying oew that Mr. Davis had do the survey were
fifty feet on his propeny. He stated that he has a dead tree that has fallen fmm Mr. Davis' propeny
that is destroying seyeral trees on his property and that nothiog has been done about it. Mr. Burgio
does not approve of this at all. He cunently has peace and quiet, tranquility, he gets away from
everyone. He and his wife purchased this property so no one would be arouDd them. If rhis zoning
appeal is denied, then he will have people right in his yard. He does not want ro have neighbors
and he doesn't want to be uound anyone. He has Bail caDeras on his propeny and he does not
want to see any contractoE nor workers coming onto his land, anyone at all, or they will be
prosecuted.
Carol Lobisser, 1395 Langley Road, Sraley, stated she is in favor of the appeal. She said rhar
she understood that the suwey did not include the power line easement and asked if there was an
updated survey that included it. Ms, Lobisser asked if people were going to be allowed to puchase
this property with a 100-foot power line easement on the parcels. She understands development,
but feels that six lots are too many for this parcel and she prefers stick built homes because she
wants to see the county grow nicely and look nice. She feels that this development will not look
as nice as the other propenies in rhe area due to them not being stick built homes.
Doug Nixon, 668 South Main Street, Sraley, said he knows that with the Tovota Site in
Randolph County and Wolf Speed in Chatham County there is grohth coming to borh sides ofstaley. staley is an old town with a rot of stick built houses, and there are many-lifetime residents
that live there. He is concemed wirh there being six houses shoved in this paicel of land. There
are several big trucking companies that rravel Oe road iD front of rhe propirty and from a safety
aspect he would like to see the number of homes lowered ro possibly rhree instead of six, M;,
Mr. Johnsol asked Mr. Davis if there were prcliminary soil evaluations done on each of the lots
in question. Mr. Davis stated they were done and the soll there would suffice for six homes with
three bedrooms each.
4/t7/23
Page 44 of 162
Nixon stated that when someone usually presents mobile homes for sale, the first buyers are
normally great, they take care of their propeny and there is no crime. But the second, third, and
founh buyers of these mobile homes are not as conscientious. Staley Cove is a great example of
this, the Shedff's Department is constantly being called to come out. He did not have any logs of
how many times the Sheriff's Office has gone into Staley Cove for domestic violence calls and
drug use, He stated that with the companies that are coming into the town of Staley, they would
Iike to offer nice residential places for them to live and not turn it into a'lrailer park comei' of
the County.
Chairman Frye reminded the citizens that Mr. Davis can put three single-wide mobile homes
on this propeny without and zoning,
4/t7/23
Travis Pugh, 6372 Gold Field Road, Libeny, spoke in favor of the appeal and does not want
this property rezoned. He owns the propeny south of the parcel in question, as well as a parcel
that joins one corner of the propeny. Mr. Pugh stated that he was not against development, but
being a farmer, he is very biased about land use. He works with a dairy farmer, AIt Koopmao, one
of the biggest dairy farmers in the area that he is aware of. He and Mr. Koopman are trying to
purchase these tracks of land at development prices when they know about them. Mr. Pugh asked
what are we going to do when there is no more agricultural land to farm, what are we going to do
when we can't feed ouNelves anlnore. He said that he did not know the property was for sale or
he would have purchased the land to keep this parcel from being developed. He understands that
the Commissioners have said the area is in primary growth, but he wants them to remember what
rhis county and this country were founded on; agriculture. He stated tiat if the neighbors knew
this land was for sale there would not be an issue of rezoning now, as the neighbors would have
purchased the property. The neighboE of this property did not knov what Mr. Davis wanted to
do with the land, and they were never made aware of what was going on with the land. Mr. Pugh
asked that the number of homes be cut back from six,
Margaret Dunn, 352 West Franklinville Sueet, Staley, stated the she is the person who
submined the appeal to this development. She said that the power line easement was never
depicted on the map which severely limits the road frontage and the number of lots that rhe
neighbors think are reasonable for this location. Ms. Dunn stated she had a number of concems
with this rezoning request such as the watershed, power line easement, and the transponation and
safety issue, which was already addressed. This land is in a low ponion of Weeden Street puning
the driveways in a blind spot. Ms. Dunn stated that she has spoket with someone at DOT who
gave the safety analysis on the original rezoning request that went before the Planning aod Zoning
Board. She said this person told her she should rake nores of how many wrecks occur there and
then repon it to the board. She feels this is not how safery should work. Safety should be a
proactive process not reactive. She said dat the locarion of this propeny is very dangerous from
a road standpoint. She was not sure how many of the Commissioners have been out to this
propeny. Ms. Dunn stated that these manufacrured houses do not meet HUD requirements. The
propeny owners in Staley that have nice homes and propeny are not interested in manufactured
homes, because they are not going to boost their value.
Ms. Dunn srared that anorher issue with this rezoning is long-rerm developmenr for Randolph
County. She stared that Randolph County is an agricultural county. Randolph County was number
Page 45 of 162
one in beef and com, number rwo in dairy, number six in pouluy and hay in the State. Randolph
County is number one in the country for tobacco and sweet potatoes and [umber two in hogs and
mrkey. Those citiz€ns that live in Randolph County have a long-rerm inrerest in what is happening
in the county, Ms. Dunn said that if those sining in front of her did not have any vested interest in
the citizens of Randolph County, then they did not need to be there, She said, righr now, rhe
country is in a crisis in terms of ag cultural food production and we should all be committed to
Nonh Carolina and cenainly Randolph County since we are such a large producer of agriculture.
Ms. Dunn submirted fifty-five affidavits from her small community with her original appeal
opposed to the rezoning of this propeny. She stated that she brought fifty-one more with her to
this meeting, and could have gotten more if she had the dme to do so.
She thanked the Board for allowing her to be a pan of this process and she hopes the Board has
listened to her voice along with the yoices of others that have spoken. She said they are concerned
about their community and the future of their commuoity. She also thanked the Board for the
meeting that will be held on Tuesday, April 18, 2023, at Eastem Randolph High School regarding
the Growth Management of Nonheast Randolph County.
Ms. Dunn said that she was not opposed to Mr. Davis offering housing for people, but certain
housing brings in all kinds of crime to our county. She would like to see stick built homes placed
on the propeny instead of manufactured homes. She would like to see a buffer on the propeny
Iine of the church as well as Mr. Burgio's propeny. tf the church is going to get a cenain buffer,
then it needs to be iD writing.
Ms. Dunn stated that no one knew what was happening ot the propeny until after rhe fact. She
stated that she filed the appeal shortly after March 7, 2023. After she asked seyeral of the
surrounding propeny ownerc, only Mr. Burgio was notified of the appeal in w ting of this appeal
meeting. There is a problem wirh transparency in this cornmuniry and they do not know wha( is
going on until after the fact. Ms. Dunn stated thar with the curent distrust of the Federal and local
govemment, when communities do not get notified of what is going on with items such as this, ir
gives the community more distrust in the local public officials.
Commissioner Ha).\dood asked who is responsible for notifying the citizens of things such as
this. Mr. Johnson stated that the Plarning Depanment was responsible. Ben Morgan, County
Attomey, stated that signs are placed on the property. Every adjacent propeny owner is notified
in writing. [t is advertised on de County's websire.
There was a concem by several in atrendance thar the sign thar is posted is too small and is hard
to see.
Bill Scotton, 1839 Browos Crossroads Road, Staley, spoke in opposition to the rezoning of thispropeny. He stated that the area to the south oI the prcpe(y was agricultural as well as thepropenies to the nonh aad east of the propeny in question. He expressed concerns with these
homes being put on approximately l0O feet of land and being so cloie together. He said that sixdouble-wide fiailers would rot fit the area at all. The memben of the chuich had no idea of whatwas being proposed and he stated the sign that was posted rdas too small for people to see and it
4/17 /23
Page 46 of 162
was posted in the weeds. Mr. Scotton suggested there needs to be a larger sign posted for a better
visual.
Ms. Dunn stated thar she knows Mr. Johnson keeps ralking about all of the manufacturing
business in Staley, however, there arc none. There is an old pallet company in Staley that has
approximately six employees, an old fumiture place that is now a business that paints front
bumpers, and the Main Street Grill. Staley is rlot a booming metropolis,
Discussion
Chairman Frye questioned whether or not the landowners would share driveways. Mr. Davis
stated that the driveways would be adjacent to each other, not shared.
vice-Chailmall A]len asked where the house would be sited on the parcel with the power line
Mr. Davis stated it would be sited to the right of the power line easement,
Chairman Frye asked Mr. Davis if he had built any stick built developments. Mr. Davis said
he was a licensed general coltractor and had built stick built homes in the past.
Chairman Frye asked if Mr. Davis considered sdck built homes for the propeny in question.
Mr. Dayis said no, because, in his opinion, affordable housing is very needed forthis area hdicated
by how many days a home is on the market. He sbted that this subdivision is not a trailer park.
These are nice home with brick underpinning built to high standads. These homes are inspected
by HUD and they do have a HUD label. Mr. Dayis said that these homes are not your typical 1980
double-wide. He understands that some people do not want change and some do not want
development and he respecb that, but if he cannot build homes here, where can he build them, He
stated that if you look at the housing on adjacent sfteets, the homes are maaufactured homes.
Commissioner Kidd asked if a buffer was in the cunent plan for the church thar sits to right of
the property line. Mr. Davis stated it was not in the cunent plan, but the honorable thing to do
would be for him to give the church a bufler. He was not sure of how much of a buffer he could
allow due to the septic system placement.
Chairman Frye asked if each lot would have their own sepdc system
would have thet own seplic system.
Mr. Davis stated they
Commissioner Haywood asked how many of the parcels are stili for sale. Mr. Davis said thatin his other subdivision, he has two up for sale and both are under conoact and one is not listed
4/t7/23
Commissioner Hafdood said that currerrdy when you go by the church you cannot see the
propeny when she weot to look at it, When looking behind the church you currently see trees
there. Mr. Davis stated the righr thing to do would be to leave a buffer oD the church propeny line.
vice-Chaiman Allen asked if placing the buffer beMeen the dashed lines on fte map, lot six,
of the parcel that is adjacent to the church woutd give Mr, Davis enough room for a well and septic
tank. Mr. Davis srared that it would be. Mr. Davis stated that he could pump the septic line under
the power line if needed.
Page 47 of 162
yet. He is working on a third contract and the sign will go up by the end of tiis week.
Commissioner Ha),r,vood stated she had seen the sign.
Mr. Davis said that the value of these manufactured home has increased over the past several
yea$. Two and three years ago these homes were selling for around $160,000 each, now those
same homes, evea used, will bring over $200,000.
Vice-Chairman Allen asked what the dimensions of these homes were
rypically 28 x 56 feet, wirh some being a li[le larger.
Mr. Davis said thev are
Commissioner McDowell asked whar size buffer would be left for the propeny that borders the
church. Mr. Davis said he could do a minimum of 25 feet or more, that he would leave as much
of a buffer as he could.
Commissioner McDowell asked how many of the lots have been sold or are under contract.
Mr, Dayis stated that he has not listed anlthing in this subdivision.
Commissioner Ha,,\^/ood asked if Mr. Davis had sraned clearing the lots. Mr. Dayis said they
have staned clearing, but stopped due to the rain.
Chairman Frye asked if Mr. Davis would consider a twenry-five foor buffer on de property line
that they church is on. Mr. Dayis said he would. Chairman Frye asked if he would consider a
buffer on the property line of Mr. Burgio. Mr. Davis said that he does not think that would be
feasible due to the Iot only being 100 feet wide. The lot would not be buildable if there were a 25-
foot buffer on that propeny line.
Vice-Chairman Allen said thar this was in his area of rhe county and he empadizes with the
citizeDs in this area. After driving out ro the propeny in question, he did notice thar there are some
site view issues along the road frontage where the driveways would be placed, however those
issues do nor seem to be catastrophic, but that is a DOT issue, Vice.Chairman Allen stated that he
could see the sign that was posred. He realizes that ir is not an ideal siruarion, but he is not sure
something could be prevented from being developed there. He empathizes with the agricultural
community, but also understands housing needs to be provided too. He stated that he knows the
citizens of Staley do not want change, nor does he, However, he understands that change is
coming, commercialization and iodustrialization are coming whether ir is liked or not and we all
have to make the best of it. Mr. Davis could have planned to place single wide mobile homes on
this propeny, bur with the rype of manufacrured homes he has proposed, and rhe parcels being on
a main road, he doesn't think rhar area will become a high crime area. Vice-Chairmar Allen stited
he would like to see somerhing differenr on this land, but we have to honor the righrs of those that
own propeny as well.
vice-Chairman Allen said that the County is trying ro let propeny owneN know more aboutwhat is going on, and they will be doing rhar tomorrow nighiat lasiem Rardolph High Schoolwith the Nonheasr Randolph Counry crowh Management ilan meeting. There is alw-ays going
to be growth, where the growh will be is the question. He encouraged"weryone to come to themeeting tomo(ow night,
4t17/23
Page 48 of 162
Vice-Chairman Allen stated that the Board is headng this request new. What happened during
the Plaoning Board Meeting does not have any impact on the Board's decision tonight.
Commissioner Haywood stated that her sense of the citizen complaints is because people don'r
care for change. The prcblem for them with the housing is not what it looks like now, it's what it
will look like 20-30 years from now after the propefty has gone through several owners. She stared
that these homes look good and they provide housing for citizens.
Chaiman Frye stated the applicaton has been amended and the land owner has signed it as
amended, showing a S0-foot buffer.
On motion of Allen, seconded by Hoyvtood, the Boord voted 5-0 to opprove this rezoning
rcquest to rezone the specifred porcel(s) on the rezoning opplicotion and the Map Amendment
Ordinonce, to the requested zoning district bosed upon the Determination of Consistency ond
Findings of Reosonableness and Public lnterest stotements that are included in the Planning
Board agenda, submifred during the rezoning presentqtion ond os msy be amended, incorporoted
into the motion, to be included in the minutes, os well os the site p lon(s) with the oddition of a 50.
foot buffer on the porcel with the powet line behind the church, also incorporoted inao the motion
ond thot the request is olso consistent with the Randolph County Growth Manogemen( Plon.
Adiournment
At 7:14 p.m., on motion ol Allen, seconded by Kidd, the Boord voted 5-0 to odjourn.
Danell Frye, Chairman David Allen
Kenny Kidd Maxton McDowell
Hope Ha,,\^r'ood Dana Crisco, Clerk to the Board
4n7/23
Vice-Chairman Allen stated that he was not sure if a 2S-foot butfer would be enough along the
church propeny line. He asked if 50 feet would be enough for the buffer. Commissioner
McDowell agreed that a So-foot buffer would be appropriate. Mr. Morgan asked Mr. Davis if he
would accept the S0-foot buffer. Mr. Davis stated he would conseor ro a so-foot buffer on the
eastem propeny line as shown on the site plan and would amend the application to state this.
Page 49 of 162
I
I
I
Page 50 of 162
EilII{iII
tlIt
T
I
II
d TI
r:
I
Page 51 of 162
{
I
:re!!::iiL;lrErur,
IT t
Page 52 of 162
I
E@xUJ
r
,€
t,
I
t\
I
fr
,
I
I
I
.,
.
]
Lq{*
ld
,/
i
I
,
r
I
l
i
r
Page 53 of 162
I
I
Fcxul
ro
fl
iL
.
_
--
:
:
-
.
-
-.
'
!
IItI
tl
I
;
$l
!
I
l
I
E
I
fl
l
__
_
l
..
,
,
-l
Page 54 of 162
I
EIExu.
l
aJ
AJ
-1
II
I
I
t
{+
-
IIIr
\
fi
g
Page 55 of 162
IELI
iII
*
IIT
tI
TI
II II
I
*)
I
(I
I
u
!
.E
I
.
,-
'
-
:
\
I
rnt
IIII
tt'l
Ol
I
l
t
IE
ll
,
-
,
lt
;
r :
tl
f
r
,
r*
S
j
r
":
J
.
,:1
I
.)
"
,/
-
txilt
II
i
r.
l
{
l
I
f,
IJ
I
11r
!'r
,}
I
I
a
-l
'l
l/
q
IJ
I
'I.l
I
-:
:
l
r
EcxUJ
Page 56 of 162
ta
\
\1
.
lr
lL
g$IIt.1
{.T
I
'i
-
l
I
I
\
t!
=t
IIi
I
ilI.l
I
,.
,
4
t
5=E
\_
>
I
=
I
1;r
I
U
f
I
ri
J
ItT
I
HI
t,
:
ll
t
ta
,
'1
,r'
{
t
,l
E
E
l-
!
I
I
l
l
il
\
I
Page 57 of 162
II
I
IJIb
I
-r
/
.
I
,-
a
{
I
I
Jl
r
a
I
-,
I
II
I
+i
.
II
III
1
u'
1
.
--
-
-
t
l
aa
r
..
,
ji
'iJ
J
,
--
I
'l
.
4'-
l
II
Page 58 of 162
I
I
tt
I
1
r
aI
a*
=
:
=
t
i
4i
t
t
ttgr
I
t!E
I
t
I
!
I
v
5
I II
Iii
!
t
.i
{
.
-
.
.
:
}
i
'
..
.
6
.
II
\
tr
?'
.
\
B
I
.l
:'
:
,
I
-t
Page 59 of 162
I t
!
E IS
215 H older lnman Rd.
Randleman , NC 27317
498 -2421 I 434_s894
498-4s88
LOTS 01-26
I
I
I
t
I
,/-
E
\
T
:
-*/
1r
,lE't
.,t'.F.... ',,
I
I
H
ts7tII
I
r
r
\
.t
aI
.l
. .r:
T
-!
{.t?r
G
,
tt
I
I
I
a
!
I
,
I
I
I
-
r1
I ir
I
s--'_
r)J-
{
I
(T1 Tt,1.
D
I\IOBILE HOMI
PARK
)
14
1
ffi
Z
\
tl7i
I {(
I
I I
J
T
l,
t1
1
*.
Page 60 of 162
I
--
t
r
F
I
I
--
-
'
=
{L'
i
I
!
T
!
I
I
;TI
,.
+
LII
|.
[{
.
,
lI,1,tII
)
rl
-=
I
--
f
l
,'
L-
II1
u
_H
e.
-
f
l
':
t'
l
t
,r
$
i
tl
l
r
,
I?t
T
I
F
l?
i
l
f
f
.,
:
;
i;
i
.
f
r
i
Page 61 of 162
I
I
:
I
I
'4
/
rl
t,
l
t
i
,(
r'
,'
.
1
,t
t,
.
't
/\
I
'.
I
H
tt
+
I
7
oa
l
I
./
i
/
-(
II
7L/
a
IL1I
{
!I
l/
7;l!
l
rl
II
l)
It
rI
I
iIt
ri
il
ITI
:,'1
i
l'
j
'r
'
-
.(
'
tr
r
i
1
I
rl
.
ii
r
*
.
,a
.
"
,I
.
Lr
t
l
i
q
tI
I
!
Lr
r
I
I
,i
v
.:
'
fj
.
-.
f#
'
,
.
i
si
'
r
*
t!
ct
IU
I
a\
t
Page 62 of 162
I
t
I
I
I
tII!tIII
i\\
I
T
r
tt
I
;
Ef a-
'
1
-,
J
I
\.
..
I
,i
,.
1l
i
f/
;.
I
/
IItI
V
Page 63 of 162
,
1.
_
l
-
-
I
I
/
{d$:La$N*R.
fr
,
,
ir
r
c
\oCnC\
raSl
FS
t
I
)/
t%
a
a
T
Page 64 of 162
.:
J
I
I
a
tl
i
v
I
/
?
ii
l_
t
Ik
I
Ei
.
,.
,
i
'r
;
.
1
'
:
'$
1
'
.
."
_
.
.
,
,
i
i
r
,
,
:'
44
'
'
.
''
i
r
a
t
s
Page 65 of 162
Page 66 of 162
TI
I
i /lI
-.
.
-
i^
*-
tI.IFI(r
t
I
I
E
xi,
i
f
3'
?
E
-
I
I
I
1l
T
t1
I
I
I
T
T
I
t
il
l
I
II
I
!I
a
a
E
I
'
.-
/
-
a
f,
x
?+
E
I
I
I{
I
I
I
t
It
I
-
!
I
I
a
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I I
r
-
IH
I
t,
lj
I
TI
I
II
I
'.
t'
.
ff
i
a
It
II
T
I
T
a
I
(
-
II
I
I
t
I
iJ
{
r
E
EEI
i?-
RI
f
I
a
I
IaI
E
ff
i
tt
fi
II
H
ti
\
t
I
\.
'
t
Iat
s
I II
-
I
a
IIiI
!
lc.l
I
1
!
..
.
.\
\
x'
,
Page 67 of 162
T
I
\
t
!
ITII
l
i
N-
I
".
!
p
tl
r
g
r
J
^
,
\
//
I
-i
,'
r-
{
I
\
I
I
I
l
I
I
Page 68 of 162
I
I
t
1
I
/-E
-,
-
\
I
-:
-
T
1
a.
l
a
I
I
I-
aI
t
It
!r
-
/
I
I
I
f
I
I
{
II
I
I
t
a
It
!
I
t
tl
I
I
(
\
I
li
r!
n
I
F:
1
v-
.
lr
,1
I
ta
rt
a
r1
t
I
I
,\
.
Page 69 of 162
I
-<
-
.=o
-o
J
CU
cr
)
rao
?v<'
tr
t
1!
\-C'
J-
,
r.
!
t
-lm\=
t/
Y.
,h,h=>
a^Y,
l7
-)
-
-
(/
)
=@,
.
--
,
lI{
IIt,
I
.t
n
Page 70 of 162
T
\
I
I
I
T
I
Z
II
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
II
1t
--
_
-
_
1
i
tr
t
I_
_
I
t
Page 71 of 162
't
l
t
I
It)
rt.
Ii
['
ii
E 'l
Fii
t
E]
L
il
,1
E
!
ln
l.
Page 72 of 162
I
.1
,l
I
!
njt
t!
\
.?
r
e
.-
.
..
A
i
F
'{
'
E
i
I
,l
r
h
I
\
Page 73 of 162
E
IHlr
l
f,
IgEI
I,
a
n
\
a
!
I
I
o
T
I
=t
IEIIII
I I
I9I
t
Hff
i
Irlil
i
Irl
T
I
I
tI
I
>l
I
I
r,
J
I
I
I
-,
t
f
r
'l
-r
'
--
Page 74 of 162
II
I
I
t
,a
I
I
I
*.
a
.
I
I
t,
I
"s
r
y
,
I
,F
{
u
'4
.'
.
:i
.
.
,
-
r
i
|
q'
I
I
f
I
U
I
I
1+
t
3.Sr
I
,:
a
't
.
aa
.
i$
-
i
{r
'
lr
.
'
I
E
7
I
,
i.
'
d'
-
l,
;
\
T
I
I
I
fi
f
*€
.
1
,
16
EB
t
t
I
lt
a
T.
GT
i
'4
I
ws-
i
5
,
I
,
rt
'
,
'
i'
l
4
t-
-
i.
(Jt
+.
n
.t
'.
^
a
.
a
e-
!,
tl
v
f
"
I
Y
t
-f
I
I
la
I
I
l-
I
I
tr
a
t
t
i
I
s
b
t.
.d
(
r
.!
:I
:I
t'
-+
t
r
fl
l
l
H#
n
!l
I
Ir
I
,l
1
,/
,l
Page 75 of 162
I
,
I
E
a
,l
a
t
T l.
T
t
..
.
I
-,
.-
LCt
r
r€,ELo
-*
q,
IIrr
I
.C
T
o
=
{J
C"
€,La--€,-t-t
rIE*
4
!
I
.a
I
/.
a
I
I
t
i4zz&FT
Iat-
.
fo
^r
\c\c
Page 76 of 162
I
T
II
I
I T
r
n$
-4J
h,
'
I
il
t
{
-,
,
-
]
$.j
A-
+
!.
t
I
I
)
I
,]t-
?,
j
l1II
ql
-i
'
*
r
rr
l
l
r
{
!
:
'
r*
e
,
;
I
.:
n
s
*
'i
._
Page 77 of 162
I
I
II
!
I
L
IIT
I
tI
I
a
II
H
-
ti
I
.t
a
I
IT
IT
.l
t
E
!r
l
J
7
:i
i
.i
l
I
,r
l
[|
1
I
r,
'{
.
4
'
'-
t
IttJ
t.
ls
-
tr
_l
L]
i\
-t
-.
I
l
I
1.
.
ri
I
.*
r-
-
Page 78 of 162
/
I
kt
Ia
t
E
7
?
!
I
{
I
I
II
!EL
R
-!
<l-
,
l
n
Gf
l
*
r
-
\I
t
Y
\t
\
I
I
'!rl
\
*i
i
.
1
TEE
\
\\
I
I
ti
l
T
E
,
>
IT
7
7
I
-&
:
-
'
.
s
t
I
,i
I
I
I
,l:
J
e
III
n
ri
+-
i
t
>
II
I
\
Page 79 of 162
fl
E
III
:
l_
It.
,l
Page 80 of 162
CASE SUMMARY FOR
SPECIAL USE REQUEST #2024-000005575
The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a duly published and notified quasi-judicial
hearing on the request by STEPHEN THOMAS and MONICA GIBSON, Troy, NC, and
their request to obtain a Special Use Permit at 6220 Mt Lebanon Rd, Union Township,
Tax ID #7625802059, 13.11 acres, RA - Residential Agricultural District. It is the desire of
the applicant to obtain a Special Use Permit to specifically allow a second residence on
the property for a family member as per the site plan.
ALL WITNESSES FOR SPECIAL USE PERMITS MUST BE SWORN IN BEFORE GIVING TESTIMONY.
Page 81 of 162
OATH FOR QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARINGS
(Special Use Permit Request,
Variances or Appeals)
NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY
Before opening the public hearing on a case, the
Chair must administer an oath or affirmation to those
wishing to speak on a specific case. (This oath is
specified in NCGS 11-11.)
The Chair should say,
“The Planning Board will now hear testimony for and
against this request. Anyone wishing to testify on this
request must come forward and take the oath. Only
those taking the oath may give testimony for this
request.
“Do you swear, or affirm, that the evidence you shall
give to the Board in this action shall be the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you,
God.”
Page 82 of 162
PARCEL INFORMATION:
ZONING INFORMATION:
Zoning District 1: RA-RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT
Zoning District 2:
Zoning District 3:
Specialty District:
Watershed Name: NONE
Class A Flood Plain On Prop?: NO
3710762400JFlood Plane Map #:
Total Permit Fee: $100.00
COMMENTS:
The undersigned owner/applicant do hereby make application for a SPECIAL USE PERMIT as required by the
Randolph Couty Zoning Ordinance. By making this application the owner/applicants acknowledge that no work
may be done pursuant to a Special Use Permit issued by the County Planning Board except in accordance with all
conditions that may be imposed by the Board. It is also acknowledged that any restrictions or conditions imposed
shall be binding on the owner/applicants and their successors in interest.
SPECIAL USE REQUESTED: TO ALLOW A SECOND RESIDENCE ON THE PROPERTY FOR A FAMILY
MEMBER
Signature of Applicant:
Melissa Burkhart
Authorized County Official
Applicant: GIBSON, STEPHEN THOMAS & MONICA
SUE
City, St. Zip: TROY, NC 27371
Address: 6220 MT LEBANON RD
Owner: GIBSON, STEPHEN THOMAS
Address: 6220 MT LEBANON CHURCH RD
City, St. Zip: TROY, NC 27371
Permit #: 2024-00000575
Parcel #: 7625802059
Date: 02/29/2024
Location Address: 6220 MT LEBANON RD TROY,
NC 27371
Permit Type Code: PZ 3
CONTACT
NAME:GIBSON, STEPHEN Contact Phone:336 381-1465
EDWARD JASON FERGUSON1, 2 + TR
Acreage: Township:13.1100 20 - UNION
Subdivsion: Lot number:
SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION 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 & Development
204 E Academy St - PO Box 771 - Asheboro NC 27204-0771
SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION
Page 83 of 162
Gibson Request Location Map
MT L
E
B
A
N
O
N
R
D
RAN
D
A
L
L
H
U
R
L
E
Y
R
D
PISGAH COVERED BRIDGERD
E V E N I N G S H A D E R D
1 inch equals 500 feet
Directions to site: US Hwy 220
Bus S - (R) Pisgah Covered Bridge
Rd - (L) Mt Lebanon Rd - Site on
(R) approx 1/10 mile past Evening
Shade Rd at 6220 Mt Lebanon Rd.
Page 84 of 162
Gibson Special Use Permit Request
PISGAHCOVEREDBRIDGERD
M
T
L
E
B
A
N
O
N
R
D
EVENING
S
H
A
D
E
R
D
1 inch equals 400 feet
Request
location
Legend
Parcels
Structures
Type
Permanent structure
Temporary structure
Roads
USGS Streams
50 ft. stream buffer
County zoning
Districts
RA
Page 85 of 162
Gibson Special Use Permit Request
PISGAH COVERED BRIDGE RD
M
T
L
E
B
A
N
O
N
R
D
E V E N I N G S H A D E R D
1 inch equals 500 feet
Legend
Parcels
Structures
Type
Permanent structure
Temporary structure
Roads
USGS Streams
50 ft. stream buffer
County zoning
Districts
RA
RR
Page 86 of 162
Gibson Special Use Permit Request
M
T
L
E
B
A
NO
N
R
D
1 inch equals 200 feet
Legend
Parcels
Structures
Type
Permanent structure
Temporary structure
Roads
USGS Streams
50 ft. stream buffer
County zoning
Districts
RA
Existing
residence
Location of
proposed
residence
Page 87 of 162
Gibson Special Use Permit Request
E V E N I N G S H A D E R D
M
T
L
E
B
A
N
O
N
R
D
1 inch equals 300 feet
Legend
Parcels
Roads
USGS Streams
50 ft. stream buffer
Page 88 of 162
Gibson Special Use Permit Request
Picture 1:
Request
location.
Picture 2:
Property across
road from request
location..
Picture 3:
Adjacent
residence.
Picture 4:
Adjacent
residence.
Picture 5:
Request location on
left as seen looking
toward Evening
Share Rd.
Picture 6:
Request location on
right as seen looking
toward Randall
Hurley Rd.
Page 89 of 162
Graham, Chad E
6293 Evening Shade Dr
Troy, NC 27371
Marion, Bonnie T
6193 Evening Shade Rd
Troy, NC 27371
Williamson, Clyde V Jr (Williamson, Alma B)
361 Little River Rd
Seagrove, NC 27341
Snider, Jacob Michael (Snider, Lindsay Shuskey)
6162 Mt Lebanon Rd
Troy, NC 27371
Snider, Jacob Michael (Snider, Lindsay Shuskey)
6162 Mt Lebanon Rd
Troy, NC 27371
Gibson, Stephen Thomas (Gibson, Monica Sue)
6220 Mt Lebanon Rd
Troy, NC 27371
Reeder, Benjamin Allen
6272 Mt Lebanon Rd
Troy, NC 27371
Strider, Ann G
3395 Pisgah Covered Bridge Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Page 90 of 162
COUNTY OF RANDOLPH ORDER Choose the decision. SPECIAL USE PERMIT
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT BY STEPHEN THOMAS and MONICA GIBSON SPECIAL USE REQUEST #2024-00000575
NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY
PLANNING BOARD
Having heard all the evidence and argument presented at the hearing on April 2, 2024, 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 6220 Mt Lebanon Rd for the purpose indicated is hereby Choose the decision., subject to all applicable provisions of the
Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance.
HAVING CONSIDERED ALL THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED, THE RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD Choose the decision. THE APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR STEPHEN THOMAS and MONICA GIBSON 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. This conclusion is based on the following FINDINGS OF FACT: Click here to enter findings of fact.
2. That the use meets all required conditions and specifications. This conclusion is based on the following FINDINGS OF FACT: Click here to enter findings of fact.
3. That the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property,
or that the use is a public necessity. This conclusion is based on the following FINDINGS OF FACT: Click here to enter findings of fact.
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. This conclusion is based on the following FINDINGS OF FACT:
Page 91 of 162
Click here to enter findings of fact. 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.
Adopted on April 2, 2024.
_____________________________________ Chair, Randolph County Planning Board
ATTEST
_______________________________
Kimberly J. Heinzer, Clerk to the Randolph County Planning Board
Page 92 of 162
MOTION TO APPROVE SPECIAL USE PERMIT
NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY
PLANNING BOARD
“I make the motion to APPROVE this 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 be in harmony with the area
and in general conformity with the Randolph County Unified
Development Ordinance.”
If making a second to the motion, please change to say, “I
second the motion . . .” and continue reading the rest of the
motion.
Page 93 of 162
MOTION TO DENY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY
PLANNING BOARD
“I make the motion to DENY this 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 may
materially endanger the public health or safety, or the use
does not meet all required conditions and specifications, or
the use may substantially injure the value of adjoining
property, that the use is not a public necessity and the
location and character of use if developed according to the
plan(s) as submitted and approved, or will not be in
harmony with the area and in general conformity with the
Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance.”
If making a second to the motion, please change to say, “I
second the motion . . .” and continue reading the rest of the
motion.
Page 94 of 162
Technical Review Committee Report and Map Amendment Evaluation Page 1 of 4
RANDOLPH COUNTY TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT AND MAP AMENDMENT EVALUATION
APPLICATION #2023-00003430
The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a duly published and notified legislative hearing on the request by CLAYTON KINDLEY, Trinity, NC, and their request to rezone
5.00-acres at 1508 Ross Wood Rd, Tabernacle Township, Tax ID #6792114129 and
6792017318, Secondary Growth Area, from RA - Residential Agricultural District to
CVOE-CD - Conventional Subdivision Overlay Exclusive - Conditional District. The proposed Conditional Zoning District would specifically allow the recombination of property to make a five-acre lot which would result in a fourth lot as per the site plan.
Property Owner: Brenda A Kindley Life Estate
GENERAL INFORMATION
Property Owner: Brenda A Kindley Life Estate
Hearing Type: Legislative Small Area Plan: None Flood Plain Overlay: None
Airport Overlay: None
Existing Use: Single-family residential
SITE INFORMATION AND SURROUNDING LAND USES
Direction Adjacent Zoning Adjacent Land Use
North RA - Residential Agricultural District Single-family residential
South RA - Residential Agricultural District Single-family residential
East RA - Residential
Agricultural District Single-family residential
West RA - Residential
Agricultural District Single-family residential
Page 95 of 162
Technical Review Committee Report and Map Amendment Evaluation Page 2 of 4
TRANSPORTATION INFORMATION
Information from North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT):
No comments have been received from NC Department of Transportation.
ZONING INFORMATION
Zoning History: There is no history of a rezoning, Variance or Special Use
Permit at the request location.
Proposed Zoning District Standards from the Randolph County Unified
Development Ordinance, Article 600, Section 614 (ex. Fencing, buffers, etc.):
CVO: CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION OVERLAY DISTRICT The Conventional Subdivision Overlay District has been established to accommodate
single-family residential subdivisions with four or more owner-occupied lots created for
sale or building development. This district is predominantly residential and suburban where current water and sewer needs are met primarily by individual wells and septic systems. Some public infrastructure may be available in the future. Housing characteristics within the CVO district will be designated Exclusive (CVOE), Restricted
(CVOR), or Mixed (CVOM), in conformance with other major subdivision zoning districts.
The Conventional Subdivision Overlay District is designed for those areas of Randolph County where the requirement of such an Overlay District can help achieve the policies and objectives of the Randolph County Growth Management Plan. This district is
specifically designed for Primary Growth Areas and Secondary Growth Areas as reflected
in the Randolph County Growth Management Plan. (1) PURPOSE AND USES PERMITTED The Conventional Subdivision Overlay District shall be considered as an
overlay district to the existing zoning districts. Uses permitted within the
underlying district shall be permitted provided they meet the requirements within the overlay zone subject to the restrictions provided by this section. (2) CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION STANDARDS
(a) All standards as required by the land development regulations
contained within this Ordinance.
Page 96 of 162
Technical Review Committee Report and Map Amendment Evaluation Page 3 of 4
(b) Minimum lot sizes as specified by this Ordinance. Lot sizes may be increased as required by soils and other factors particular to the location.
(c) Designed under the policies and guidelines outlined in the comprehensive land-use plan. (d) Subdivision layout and use of land will assure safe and
convenient circulation patterns while minimizing the impacts
on the established residential areas. (e) Site plans shall be submitted to reduce stormwater impact by designing new development in a manner that minimizes
concentrated stormwater flows using as a minimum vegetated
buffer area. (3) SITING ON PUBLIC ROADWAYS Conventional subdivisions shall be designed to minimize the number of
private driveway connections to existing public roads.
TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION
The Technical Review Committee has reviewed this request 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 the above conclusion. Policy 2.2 (a): Innovative and flexible land planning techniques should be supported as
a means of encouraging development configurations that safeguard existing natural land
and water resources. Consistency Analysis: The applicant in their request is taking portions from two different lots to create the new proposed lots. Based on the design presented, they are using
“innovative and flexible land planning techniques” that protect the existing resources.
Policy 2.5: 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.
Page 97 of 162
Technical Review Committee Report and Map Amendment Evaluation Page 4 of 4
Consistency Analysis: This area of the County is rural and, based upon the proposed
design, there will be minimum impact on the area while providing for “the long-term quality
of life in Randolph County.”
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.
It should be noted that this recommendation is only the opinion of the
Technical Review Committee based on information supplied by the applicant
before the public hearing. Additional information provided at the public
hearing could cause the Planning Board to either accept or reject these
recommendations.
Page 98 of 162
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 #: 3710678200K
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: 5.0000
Lot Size Indicator: ACRE(S)
Proposed Zoning District: CVOE-CD-CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION OVERLAY EXCLUSIVE
CONDITIONAL DISTRICT
Proposed Use(S): SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE - RECOMBINATION OF PROPERTY
TO MAKE 5-ACRES WHICH RESULTS IN A 4TH LOT
Condition(S):
Applicant: KINDLEY, CLAYTON
City, St. Zip: TRINITY, NC 27370
Address: 1440 ROSS WOOD RD
Owner: KINDLEY, BRENDA A LIFE ESTATE
Address: 1508 ROSS WOOD RD
City, St. Zip: TRINITY, NC 27370
Permit #: 2023-00003430
Parcel #: 6792114129
Date: 02/15/2024
Location Address: 1508 ROSS WOOD RD
TRINITY, NC 27370
Permit Type Code: PZ 2
CONTACT NAME:CLAYTON KINDLEY Contact Phone:336 736-0751
TREVOR KINDLEYNEW 1
Acreage: Township:5.4600 18 - TABERNACLE
Subdivsion: Lot number:
Melissa Burkhart
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
Page 99 of 162
Kindley Request Location Map
OLD US
H
W
Y
6
4
ROSSWOODRD
LOFLINHILLRD
1 inch equals 1,000 feet
Directions to site: US Hwy 64 W -
(L) Old US Hwy 64 - (R) Ross Wood
Rd - Site on (R) approx. 4/10 mile
past Loflin Hill Rd at 1508 Ross
Wood Rd.
Page 100 of 162
Kindley Rezoning Request
ROSSWOODRD
LOFLINHILLRD
1 inch equals 500 feet
Thelma
Kindley S/D
Trevor
Kindley S/D
Kindley Family
Limited S/D
Request
location
Legend
Parcels
Structures
Type
Multi-address structure
Permanent structure
Temporary structure
Miscellaneous structure
Roads
USGS Streams
50 ft. stream buffer
County zoning
Districts
RA
RM
Page 101 of 162
GR
I
D
N
O
R
T
H
N
A
D
8
3
(
2
0
1
1
)
Job No.:
Checked By:
Drawn By:
Date:
Scale:
Engineering - Consulting - Surveying
NC ENGINEERING & SURVEYING FIRM CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION: P-0336
PO Box 968, Asheboro, NC 27204Ph: 336-328-0902 Fx: 336-328-0922 www.summeyengineering.com
CLAYTON TREVOR KINDLEY
ROSS WOOD ROAD
TABERNACLE TOWNSHIP - RANDOLPH COUNTY - NORTH CAROLINA
MINOR SUBDIVISION PLAT FOR
PRELIMINARY
Page 102 of 162
Kindley Rezoning Request
ROSS
W
O
O
D
R
D
LO
F
L
I
N
H
I
L
L
R
D
1 inch equals 400 feet
Legend
Parcels
Structures
Type
Multi-address structure
Permanent structure
Temporary structure
Roads
USGS Streams
50 ft. stream buffer
County zoning
Districts
RA
RM
Page 103 of 162
Kindley Rezoning Request
ROSS
W
O
O
D
R
D
LO
F
L
I
N
H
I
L
L
R
D
1 inch equals 400 feet
Legend
Parcels
Roads
USGS Streams
50 ft. stream buffer
Page 104 of 162
Kindley Rezoning Request
OLD U
S
H
W
Y
6
4
LOFLINHILL
R
D
ROSSWOODRD
1 inch equals 1,000 feet
Legend
Roads
Growth Management
Secondary Growth Area
USGS Streams
50 ft. stream buffer
Page 105 of 162
Kindley Rezoning Request
Picture 1:
Request
location.
Picture 2:
Property across
road from request
location.
Picture 3:
Adjacent
residence.
Picture 4:
Adjacent
residence.
Picture 5:
Request location on
left as seen looking
toward Loflin Hill
Rd.
Picture 6:
Request location on
right as seen looking
toward Jan Dan Dr.
Page 106 of 162
Daniels, David Todd (Daniels, Murielle H)
379 Fox Run View Ln
Trinity, NC 27370
Kim, Roy (Choi, Sarah)
1425 Ross Wood Rd
Trinity, NC 27370
Kindley, Thelma W (Kindley, Clayton Trevor)
1440 Ross Wood Rd
Trinity, NC 27370
Kindley, Brenda A Life Estate
1508 Ross Wood Rd
Trinity, NC 27370
Muschlitz, T L (Muschlitz, Kurt H)
1548 Ross Wood Rd
Trinity, NC 27370
Early, Paul (Broder, Jo Ann)
1602 Ross Wood Rd
Trinity, NC 27370
Summey, J Mack Jr (Summey, Tammy J)
1299 Summey Town Rd
Trinity, NC 27370
Page 107 of 162
COUNTY OF RANDOLPH CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION AND FINDING OF REASONABLENESS AND PUBLIC INTEREST
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING BY CLAYTON KINDLEY REZONING REQUEST #2023-00003430
NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD According to North Carolina General Statutes § 160D and the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance, 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 Clayton Kindley are consistent with the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance and the Randolph
County Growth Management Plan and are reasonable and in the public interest for the
following reasons:
1. Determination of Consistency with the Growth Management Plan. A. Consistency with Growth Management Plan Map The Randolph County Growth Management Plan map for the southeast area
shows the parcel to be rezoned in an area designated as Secondary Growth Area
which generally contains transitional residential development with major subdivisions scattered between agricultural and commercial land use patterns. B. Consistency with Growth Policies in the Growth Management Plan
Policy 2.2.a: Innovative and flexible land planning techniques should be supported
as a means of encouraging development configurations that safeguard existing
natural land and water resources.
Consistency Analysis: The applicant in their request is taking portions from two
different lots to create the new proposed lots. Based on the design presented, they are using “innovative and flexible land planning techniques” that protect the existing resources.
Policy 2.5: 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.
Page 108 of 162
Consistency Analysis: This area of the County is rural and, based upon the proposed design, there will be minimum impact on the area while providing for “the long-term quality of life in Randolph County.”
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.
Adopted on April 2, 2024.
_____________________________________ Chair, Randolph County Planning Board
ATTEST
_______________________________
Kimberly J. Heinzer,
Clerk to the Randolph County Planning Board
Page 109 of 162
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF RANDOLPH COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA UPON REQUEST BY CLAYTON KINDLEY
WHEREAS, a 5.00-acre parcel, having the Randolph County Parcel Identification
Number of 6792114129 AND 6792017318 is currently zoned RA - Residential Agricultural
District by Randolph County, North Carolina;
WHEREAS, the Randolph County Planning Board has conducted a duly noticed public
hearing on April 2, 2024, to consider the proposed rezoning on application number 2023-
00003430, and all procedural requirements found in North Carolina General Statute 160D and the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance have been satisfied; WHEREAS, the Randolph County Planning Board has found that the proposed rezoning
is consistent with the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance and the
Randolph County Growth Management Plan and is reasonable and in the public interest, and the Randolph County Planning Board has adopted a separate statement to this effect; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING
BOARD THAT, the property is hereby rezoned to CVOE-CD - Conventional Subdivision
Overlay Exclusive - Conditional District. The official Randolph County Zoning Map and the Randolph County Growth Management Plan Map are hereby amended, if necessary, to reflect the same and this Ordinance shall become effective upon adoption.
Adopted on April 2, 2024.
_____________________________________ Chair, Randolph County Planning Board
ATTEST
_______________________________
Kimberly J. Heinzer, Clerk to the Randolph County Planning Board
Page 110 of 162
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
and the Map Amendment Ordinance, 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.
Page 111 of 162
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.
Page 112 of 162
Technical Review Committee Report and Map Amendment Evaluation Page 1 of 5
RANDOLPH COUNTY TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT AND MAP AMENDMENT EVALUATION
APPLICATION #2024-00000474
The Randolph County Planning Board will hold a duly published and notified legislative hearing on the request by J-MAC PROPERTIES, LLC, Asheboro, NC, and their request
to rezone 84.20-acres on Crestview Church Rd, Cedar Grove Township, Tax ID
#7659858407, 7659842547 and 7659738846, Primary Growth Area, from RM -
Residential Mixed District and RR – Residential Restricted District to RM-CD - Residential
Mixed - Conditional District. The proposed Conditional Zoning District would specifically allow a campground as per the site plan.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Property Owner: J-MAC Properties, LLC Hearing Type: Legislative
Small Area Plan: None Flood Plain Overlay: None
Airport Overlay: None
Existing Use: Vacant
SITE INFORMATION AND SURROUNDING LAND USES
Direction Adjacent Zoning Adjacent Land Use
North RE - Residential Exclusive
District Vacant
South RM - Residential Mixed
District Crestview Manor subdivision
East RA - Residential Agricultural District Single-family residential
West LI - Light Industrial District Industrial
Page 113 of 162
Technical Review Committee Report and Map Amendment Evaluation Page 2 of 5
TRANSPORTATION INFORMATION
Information from North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT):
NCDOT did state that roadway improvements may be needed.
ZONING INFORMATION
Zoning History: There is no history of a rezoning, Variance or Special Use
Permit at the request location.
Proposed Zoning District Standards from the Randolph County Unified
Development Ordinance, Article 600, Section 613 (ex. Fencing, buffers, etc.) and
Section 620:
RM: RESIDENTIAL MIXED DISTRICT
PURPOSE
The purpose of the Residential Mixed (RM) District is to provide a place for residential uses of all types including single-family residences, multi-family residences, mobile home parks, and Class A, B, or C manufactured housing. Requests for higher-intensity residential use are considered through standards established in this Ordinance and found to be consistent, reasonable, and in the public interest with the
Randolph County Growth Management Plan.
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR PRIMARY STRUCTURE Lot size with a minimum of 100 ft. of State road frontage for single unit 40,000 sq. ft. Water Quality Critical Area: 80,000 sq. ft. Lot size with less than 100 ft. of State road frontage 5 acres
Lot width 100 ft. at the building line
Front setback 35 ft. from any road right-of-way
Corner side setback 35 ft. from any road right-of-way Side setback 10 ft. from any side property line
Rear setback 30 ft. from the rear property line
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
Road setback 20 ft. from any road right-of-way Property line setback 5 ft. from any property line
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS NOTES
1. Lot areas and setbacks shall be increased if required by Randolph County Public Health. 2. Lot areas in designated Watersheds and Protected Areas are controlled by the Randolph County
Watershed Protection Regulations. 3. Front yard setback shall be maintained on all road rights-of-way.
4. Minimum lot size requirements within Primary Growth Areas may be reduced to a minimum of 30,000 sq. ft. or 20,000 sq. ft. with public utilities.
Page 114 of 162
Technical Review Committee Report and Map Amendment Evaluation Page 3 of 5
5. The minimum lot size requirements within Rural Growth Areas are 3 acres.
6. Lots in major subdivisions within Rural Growth Areas must maintain a 1:4 ratio. 7. The minimum lot size requirements within the Natural Heritage Overlay are 6 acres. 8. Conditional Districts are identical to the general use districts except for site plans and individualized development conditions are imposed only upon the signed petition of all owners of the land to be
included in the Conditional District.
CAMPING (INCLUDING TENTING AND OTHER FORMS OF COVERED CAMPING)
Zoning Districts: CEO, E-1, RA, RBO, RM
Minimum Area: Five acres is CEO, RA, RBO, and RM.
Ten acres with one hundred feet front yard depth in E-1. Parking: Off-street parking and loading shall be provided per Article
600, Section 633. Signs: Signs shall be permitted as described in Article 600, Section 634.
Site Considerations: Trailers shall be separated from each other and other
structures by at least fifteen feet. Any accessory structure such as attached awnings, carports, or storage facilities shall be considered part of the trailer.
The minimum size of space shall be as required by Randolph
County Public Health. There shall be at least one recreation area that shall be accessible from all trailer spaces. The size of such a
recreation area shall not be less than eight percent of the
gross site area. Roadways shall be stabilized gravel or crushed rock and of adequate width to accommodate anticipated traffic and in any
case, shall meet the following minimum requirements:
a. One-way, no parking: twelve feet; or b. Two-way, no parking: twenty-four feet.
No roadway parking shall be permitted. The water supply, the sewerage system, and service buildings shall be reasonably accommodated and shall meet the
requirements of the appropriate State and County regulatory
agency.
Page 115 of 162
Technical Review Committee Report and Map Amendment Evaluation Page 4 of 5
Screening: A Level III buffer shall be required in all districts where the use is permitted.
Required Plans: a. Topography of site, at contour interval no greater than five feet. b. Location and approximate size of all existing and
proposed buildings and structures within the site and
existing buildings and structures within five hundred feet adjacent thereto. c. Proposed points of ingress and egress together with
the proposed pattern of internal circulation.
d. Proposed parking areas. e. Proposed provision for storm and sanitary sewerage,
including both natural and man-made features, and the
proposed treatment of ground cover, slopes, banks, and ditches. Space Rental: Spaces shall be rented by the day.
TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION
The Technical Review Committee has reviewed this request 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 the above conclusion. Policy 3.1 (c): Commercial uses should be encouraged or incentivized to develop by consolidation and/or further development of existing commercially zoned property when
developed in a manner that lessens the effect of incompatibility with adjoining residential
and rural land uses. The County recommends that developers submit plans that address
the management of increased traffic, parking, and lighting plans to ensure compatibility
with the surrounding community.
Page 116 of 162
Technical Review Committee Report and Map Amendment Evaluation Page 5 of 5
Consistency Analysis: This area has various mixed uses including site-built homes, a mobile home subdivision, industrial uses, and an existing campground. The plans that have been submitted show an effort on the part of the developer to protect the existing
community and plan for any possible negative impacts.
Randolph County Board of Commissioners Resolution, Item #3: Ensure the
opportunity for landowners to achieve the highest and best uses of their land that are
consistent with growth management policies in order to protect the economic viability of
the County’s citizens and tax base.
Consistency Analysis: By approving this request, the Board will be allowing the
“landowner to achieve the highest and best use” and continue the development patterns
that have been established in the part of the County.
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.
It should be noted that this recommendation is only the opinion of the
Technical Review Committee based on information supplied by the applicant
before the public hearing. Additional information provided at the public
hearing could cause the Planning Board to either accept or reject these
recommendations.
Page 117 of 162
COUNTY OF RANDOLPH Department of Planning & Zoning 204 E Academy St - PO Box 771 - Asheboro NC 27204-0771
APPLICATION FOR ZONING CHANGE
Applicant: JMAC PROPERTIES, LLC
Address: PO BOX 4367
City, St. Zip: ASHEBORO, NC 27204
Owner: J-MAC PROPERTIES, LLC
Address: PO BOX 4367
City, St. Zip: ASHEBORO, NC 27204
Date: 02/29/2024
Parcel #: 7659858407
Permit #: 2024-00000474
Permit Type Code: PZ 2
Location Address:
CONTACT NAME: JEREMY MCNEILL Contact Phone: 336 328-7195
PARCEL INFORMATION:
Lot number:
Subdivsion:
Acreage: 53.3500 Township: 04 - CEDAR GROVE
Zoning District 1: RR-RESIDENTIAL RESTRICTED DISTRICT Zoning District 2: RM-RESIDENTIAL MIXED DISTRICT Zoning District 3:
Growth Management Areas: PRIMARY GROWTH AREA
Specialty District: N/A Watershed Name: NONE Class A Flood Plain On Prop?: NO
Flood Plane Map #:
REQUESTED CHANGE:
Flood Plain Map #: 3710765900J
Area To Be Rezoned: 84.2000 Lot Size Indicator: ACRE(S) Proposed Zoning District: RM-CD-RESIDENTIAL MIXED CONDITIONAL DISTRICT Proposed Use(S): CAMPGROUND Condition(S): AS PER SITE PLAN
Total Permit Fee: $100.00
COMMENTS: ENGINEER: ZACH GARDNER #(336) 302-4949
The undersigned owner/applicant do hereby make application for a PROPERTY ZONING CHANGE as allowed by the Randolph Couty Zoning Ordinance. Melissa Burkhart
Authorized County Official Signature of Applicant:
- LOCAL TELEPHONE NUMBER - Asheboro: (336) 318-6565 - Archdale/Trinity: (336) 819-3565 http://www.randolphcountync.gov
APPLICATION FOR ZONING CHANGE Page: 1 of 1
ZONING INFORMATION:
Page 118 of 162
J-MAC Properties, LLC, Request Location Map
LI
N
D
A
L
E
D
R
HA
Y
E
S
D
R
MCCRANFO
R
D
R
D
SLATE AVE
MANORVIE
WRD
SPRINGDALE DR
GR
E
E
N
M
T
N
D
R
ROCWOOD DR
CLEARVIEW DR
CRESTVIEW CHURCHRD
PAIGE CT
CE
D
A
R
G
R
O
V
E
D
R
E
X
T
WO
O
D
A
L
E
D
R
ANTHONY CT
H I LLTO P CHURC
H
R
D
KIMBERLY DR
OAKHURSTRD
1 inch equals 750 feet
Directions to site: US Hwy 220 Bus
S - (L) Crestview Church Rd - Site
on (L) across road from Manorview Rd.
Asheboro
Page 119 of 162
J-MAC Properties, LLC, Rezoning Request
SLATE AVE
WO
O
D
A
L
E
D
R
C R E S T V IE W C H U R C H R D
MA
N
ORVIEW
R
D
SPRI NGDALEDR
ROCWOOD
D
R
OAKHURSTRD
VestalCreek
1 inch equals 600 feet
Roc-Wood
Park S/D
Southern
Industrial
Park
Request
location
Legend
Parcels
Structures
Type
Multi-address structure
Permanent structure
Temporary structure
Miscellaneous structure
Roads
USGS Streams
50 ft. stream buffer
Flood plains
City of Asheboro ETJ
County zoning
Districts
HC
LI
RA
RE
RM
RR
Page 120 of 162
CR
E
S
T
V
I
E
W
CA
M
P
G
R
O
U
N
D
CR
E
S
T
V
I
E
W
C
H
U
R
C
H
R
D
AS
H
E
B
O
R
O
-
N
C
-
R
A
N
D
O
L
P
H
C
O
U
N
T
Y
Ga
r
d
n
e
r
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
,
P
L
L
C
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
-
L
a
n
d
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
-
P
e
r
m
i
t
t
i
n
g
NC
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
F
i
r
m
C
e
r
t
.
A
u
t
h
.
#
P
-
2
8
0
4
P.O
.
B
o
x
3
0
4
8
As
h
e
b
o
r
o
,
N
C
2
7
2
0
4
P:
(
3
3
6
-
3
0
2
-
4
9
4
9
)
E
m
a
i
l
:
z
a
c
h
@
g
a
r
d
n
e
r
e
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
p
l
l
c
.
c
o
m
ww
w
.
g
a
r
d
n
e
r
e
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
p
l
l
c
.
c
o
m
PR
E
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
PLAN
NO
T
F
O
R
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
PR
E
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
Page 121 of 162
J-MAC Properties, LLC, Rezoning Request
SLATE AVE
WO
O
D
A
L
E
D
R
C R E S T V IE W C H U R C H R D
MA
N
ORVIEW
R
D
SPRI NGDALEDR
ROCWOOD
D
R
OAKHURSTRD
VestalCreek
1 inch equals 600 feet
Legend
Parcels
Structures
Type
Multi-address structure
Permanent structure
Temporary structure
Miscellaneous structure
Roads
USGS Streams
50 ft. stream buffer
Flood plains
City of Asheboro ETJ
County zoning
Districts
HC
LI
RA
RE
RM
RR
Page 122 of 162
J-MAC Properties, LLC, Rezoning Request
CRES T V IE W C H U R C H R D
ROCWOOD DR
WO
O
D
A
L
E
D
R
OAKHURSTRD
SPRING DALEDR
Ve
s
t
a
l
C
r
e
e
k
1 inch equals 500 feet
Legend
Parcels
Roads
USGS Streams
50 ft. stream buffer
Page 123 of 162
J-MAC Properties, LLC, Rezoning Request
SLATE AVE
HA
Y
E
S
D
R
P A IGE CT
WO
O
D
A
L
E
D
R
ANTHONY CT
HAWTHORNE DR
SPRINGDALEDR
MCCRANFORDRD
MC
D
E
R
MOTT
ST
CE
D
AR
GROVE
RD US H
W
Y
6
4
MANORVIEWRD
ROC
W
O
O
D
D
R
KIMBERLY DR
CLEARVIEW DR
US
HWY
220
BUSS
OAKHURST R
D
O
LD
S
TATEHWY
US64WBONRAM PZ O O C O N N ECTOR
CRESTVIEWCHURCHRD
1 inch equals 1,000 feet
Legend
Roads
Growth Management
Municipal Growth Area
Primary Growth Area
Page 124 of 162
J-MAC Properties, LLC, Rezoning Request
Picture 1:
Request
location.
Picture 2:
Request
location.
Picture 3:
Adjacent
residence.
Picture 4:
Adjacent
residence.
Picture 5:
Request location on
left as seen looking
toward Rocwood Dr.
Picture 6:
Request location on
right as seen looking
toward Manorview
Rd.
Page 125 of 162
Cranford, Jackie L (Cranford, Bobbie Y)
448 Back Creek Church Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Cranford, Jackie L (Cranford, Bobbie Y)
448 Back Creek Church Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Albarran, Norma (Flores, Ociel)
1865 Bailey Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
J Mac Properties LLC
Po Box 4367
Asheboro, NC 27204
J Mac Properties LLC
Po Box 4367
Asheboro, NC 27204
J Mac Properties LLC
Po Box 4367
Asheboro, NC 27204
Johnson, Darrell T (Johnson, Brenda B)
330 Clearview Dr
Asheboro, NC 27205
Dunn, Brandon R
301 Crestview Church Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Pinedo, Oscar Ortiz (Garcia, Maria F)
319 Crestview Church Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Vazquez, Brian
324 Crestview Church Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Vazquez, Martin R (Vazquez, Victoria S)
324 Crestview Church Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Gutierrez, Jose Rafael Moran
340 Crestview Church Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Cw Warrior LLC
206 Elven Ct
Waxhaw, NC 28173
Del Hoyo, Robert (Del Hoyo, Laura Alicia)
1965 Manorview Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Garner, Grady C (Garner, Audrey)
P O Box 891
Asheboro, NC 27204
Rer Holdings LLC
3344 R H Dr
Asheboro, NC 27205
McKenzie Real Estate of NC LLC
103 Worth St
Asheboro, NC 27203
Page 126 of 162
J Mac Properties LLC
Po Box 4367
Asheboro, NC 27204
J Mac Properties LLC
Po Box 4367
Asheboro, NC 27204
Johnson, Darrell T (Johnson, Brenda B)
330 Clearview Dr
Asheboro, NC 27205
Routh, Galaxy N (Routh, McCoy C)
603 Crestview Church Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Byrd, Carolyn Elizabeth Rogers (Byrd, Gena Lynne)
- Additional Owners
612 Crestview Church Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Basurto, Jesus Israel (Rodriguez, Martha Herera)
626 Crestview Church Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Santos, Felix (Santos, Angie Janeth)
659 Crestview Church Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Goodson, Paul Daniel
664 Crestview Church Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
McPherson, Eutha Small Trustee (Smith, Tammie
McPherson Trustee)
689 Crestview Church Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
McPherson, Eutha Small Trustee (Smith, Tammie
McPherson Trustee)
689 Crestview Church Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Solarez, Janice G R
757 Crestview Church Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Cw Warrior LLC
206 Elven Ct
Waxhaw, NC 28173
Sellers, Lawrence Everett (Sellers, Jessie Harris)
386 Kimberly Dr
Asheboro, NC 27205
Tedder, Sherri Lynn
426 Kimberly Dr
Asheboro, NC 27205
Casas, Rufino Enciso
1722 Manorview Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Casas, Rufino Enciso
1722 Manorview Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Garner, Grady C (Garner, Audrey)
P O Box 891
Asheboro, NC 27204
Chandler, Richard H
316 Woods Rd
Glenside, Pa 19038
McKenzie Real Estate of NC LLC
103 Worth St
Asheboro, NC 27203
Page 127 of 162
J Mac Properties LLC
Po Box 4367
Asheboro, NC 27204
J Mac Properties LLC
Po Box 4367
Asheboro, NC 27204
Dunn, Brandon R
301 Crestview Church Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Pinedo, Oscar Ortiz (Garcia, Maria F)
319 Crestview Church Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Vazquez, Brian
324 Crestview Church Rd
Asheboro, NC 27205
Shadow of the Cross Baptist Church
P O Box 1022
Asheboro, NC 27204
Shadow of the Cross Baptist Church
P O Box 1022
Asheboro, NC 27204
Rer Holdings LLC
3344 R H Dr
Asheboro, NC 27205
Page 128 of 162
COUNTY OF RANDOLPH CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION AND FINDING OF REASONABLENESS AND PUBLIC INTEREST
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING BY J-MAC PROPERTIES, LLC REZONING REQUEST #2024-00000474
NORTH CAROLINA RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD According to North Carolina General Statutes § 160D and the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance, the Randolph County Planning Board finds that the proposed
zoning district map amendments to RM-CD - Residential Mixed - Conditional District as described in the application of J-MAC Properties, LLC, are consistent with the Randolph
County Unified Development Ordinance and the 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
which generally is located adjacent to municipal limits or regulatory areas and
generally extends along major urban/transportation corridors. It is predominately mixed-use that will include residential, commercial, and industrial development. B. Consistency with Growth Policies in the Growth Management Plan
Policy 3.1 (c): Commercial uses should be encouraged or incentivized to develop
by consolidation and/or further development of existing commercially zoned
property when developed in a manner that lessens the effect of incompatibility with
adjoining residential and rural land uses. The County recommends that developers
submit plans that address the management of increased traffic, parking, and
lighting plans to ensure compatibility with the surrounding community. Consistency Analysis: This area has various mixed uses including site-built homes, a mobile home subdivision, industrial uses, and an existing campground.
The plans that have been submitted show an effort on the part of the developer to
protect the existing community and plan for any possible negative impacts.
Page 129 of 162
Randolph County Board of Commissioners Resolution, Item #3: Ensure the
opportunity for landowners to achieve the highest and best uses of their land that are consistent with growth management policies in order to protect the economic
viability of the County’s citizens and tax base.
Consistency Analysis: By approving this request, the Board will be allowing the “landowner to achieve the highest and best use” and continue the development patterns that have been established in the part of the County.
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.
Adopted on April 2, 2024.
_____________________________________ Chair, Randolph County Planning Board
ATTEST _______________________________
Kimberly J. Heinzer, Clerk to the Randolph County Planning Board
Page 130 of 162
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF RANDOLPH COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA UPON REQUEST BY J-MAC PROPERTIES, LLC
WHEREAS, a 84.20-acre parcel, having the Randolph County Parcel Identification
Number of 7659858401, 7659842547 and 7659738846 is currently zoned RR -
Residential Restricted District and RM – Residential Mixed District by Randolph County, North Carolina;
WHEREAS, the Randolph County Planning Board has conducted a duly noticed public
hearing on April 2, 2024, to consider the proposed rezoning on application number 2024-
00000474, and all procedural requirements found in North Carolina General Statute 160D and the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance have been satisfied; WHEREAS, the Randolph County Planning Board has found that the proposed rezoning
is consistent with the Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance and the
Randolph County Growth Management Plan and is reasonable and in the public interest, and the Randolph County Planning Board has adopted a separate statement to this effect; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING
BOARD THAT, the property is hereby rezoned to RM-CD - Residential Mixed -
Conditional District. The official Randolph County Zoning Map and the Randolph County
Growth Management Plan Map are hereby amended, if necessary, to reflect the same and this Ordinance shall become effective upon adoption.
Adopted on April 2, 2024.
_____________________________________ Chair, Randolph County Planning Board
ATTEST
_______________________________
Kimberly J. Heinzer, Clerk to the Randolph County Planning Board
Page 131 of 162
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
and the Map Amendment Ordinance, 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.
Page 132 of 162
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.
Page 133 of 162
Summary of Commerical Zoning Changes February 27, 2024 Page 1 of 15
Summary of Commercial Zoning Changes in
the Randolph County Unified Development
Ordinance
102: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE DEFINITIONS
Add the following definitions to Section 102:
Taxi Stand – Park and Ride Lot: A system for reducing traffic congestion in which drivers leave their vehicles in parking lots and travel to other locations on various means of transportation. Towing Service: A temporary holding place for vehicles which have been towed or impounded. This
definition does not include the permanent storage or dismantling of vehicles.
Transitional Housing: Housing designed for the transition from a treatment program back into their community. Transitional housing is intended for individuals and families who are in recovery and require further assistance before living independently.
613: ZONING DISTRICTS ESTABLISHED
A. INTENT OF ZONING DISTRICTS The following pages include detailed descriptions of the base zoning districts contained
within this Ordinance. Overlay Zoning Districts are not included in the following charts
since the districts lay over the base districts and the specific guidelines are covered in more detail later in this section. Conditional Districts are not listed below as there are notes on each page that addresses the Conditional Districts. After the adoption of PC:
Primary Commercial District, SC: Secondary Commercial District, and RC: Rural
Commercial District, the HC: Highway Commercial District shall not be used in Randolph
County zoning jurisdiction for future rezonings. B. MINIMUM LOT SIZES For this Ordinance, all minimum lot sizes shall be computed by excluding any area in a
designed right-of-way, and land subject to flooding or land that may aggravate the flood
hazard. Add the following tables to Section 613:
Page 134 of 162
Summary of Commerical Zoning Changes February 27, 2024 Page 2 of 15
:
PC: PRIMARY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
PURPOSE
The purpose of the Primary Commercial (PC) District is to provide a place for regional
commercial uses and for which a full range of commercial and professional uses may
be located that attract customers from a larger service area. This district is recommended to be in the Primary Growth Areas as shown on the Randolph County
Growth Management Plan. The district regulations are designed to protect and encourage the transitional character of the district by permitting uses that are
compatible with the surrounding area.
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR PRIMARY STRUCTURE
Lot size with a minimum of 100 ft. of State road frontage 40,000 sq. ft. Water Quality Critical Area: 80,000 sq. ft. Lot size with less than 100 ft. of State road frontage 5 acres
Lot width 100 ft. at the building line
Front setback 35 ft. from the right-of-way
Corner side setback 35 ft. from the right-of-way Side setback 10 ft. from any side property line
Rear setback 30 ft. from the rear property line
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
Road setback 20 ft. from any road right-of-way Property line setback 5 ft. from any property line
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS NOTES
1. Lot areas and setbacks shall be increased if required by Randolph County Public Health. 2. Lot areas in designated Watersheds and Protected Areas are controlled by the Randolph County
Watershed Protection Regulations. 3. Front yard setback shall be maintained on all road rights-of-way.
4. Minimum lot size requirements within Primary Growth Areas may be reduced to a minimum of 30,000 sq. ft. or 20,000 sq. ft. with public utilities.
5. The minimum lot size requirements within Secondary Growth Areas are 40,000 sq. ft. 6. The minimum lot size requirements within Rural Growth Areas are 3 acres.
7. Lots in major subdivisions within Rural Growth Areas must maintain a 1:4 ratio. 8. The minimum lot size requirements within the Natural Heritage Overlay are 6 acres.
9. Conditional Districts are identical to the general use districts except for site plans and individualized development conditions are imposed only upon the signed petition of all owners of the land to be
included in the Conditional District.
Page 135 of 162
Summary of Commerical Zoning Changes February 27, 2024 Page 3 of 15
SC: SECONDARY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
PURPOSE
The purpose of the Secondary Commercial (SC) District is to provide a place for low to medium-intensity crossroad businesses and community shopping establishments. This district is recommended to be in the Secondary and Rural Growth Areas as shown on the Randolph County Growth Management Plan. The district regulations are designed to protect and encourage the transitional character of the district by permitting uses that
are compatible with the surrounding area.
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR PRIMARY STRUCTURE
Lot size with a minimum of 100 ft. of State road frontage 40,000 sq. ft. Water Quality Critical Area: 80,000 sq. ft.
Lot size with less than 100 ft. of State road frontage 5 acres
Lot width 100 ft. at the building line
Front setback 35 ft. from the right-of-way
Corner side setback 35 ft. from the right-of-way
Side setback 10 ft. from any side property line Rear setback 30 ft. from the rear property line
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
Road setback 20 ft. from any road right-of-way Property line setback 5 ft. from any property line
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS NOTES 1. Lot areas and setbacks shall be increased if required by Randolph County Public Health. 2. Lot areas in designated Watersheds and Protected Areas are controlled by the Randolph County Watershed Protection Regulations. 3. Front yard setback shall be maintained on all road rights-of-way.
4. Minimum lot size requirements within Primary Growth Areas may be reduced to a minimum of 30,000 sq. ft. or 20,000 sq. ft. with public utilities. 5. The minimum lot size requirements within Secondary Growth Areas are 40,000 sq. ft. 6. The minimum lot size requirements within Rural Growth Areas are 3 acres. 7. Lots in major subdivisions within Rural Growth Areas must maintain a 1:4 ratio. 8. The minimum lot size requirements within the Natural Heritage Overlay are 6 acres.
9. Conditional Districts are identical to the general use districts except for site plans and individualized development conditions are imposed only upon the signed petition of all owners of the land to be included in the Conditional District.
Page 136 of 162
Summary of Commerical Zoning Changes February 27, 2024 Page 4 of 15
RC: RURALCOMMERCIAL DISTRICT
PURPOSE
The purpose of the Rural Commercial (RC) District is to provide a place for crossroads commercial services to residences with basic trade and personal services that occur regularly. This district is recommended to be in the Rural Growth Area as shown on the Randolph County Growth Management Plan. The district regulations are designed to
protect and encourage the character of the district by permitting uses that are
compatible with the surrounding area.
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR PRIMARY STRUCTURE
Lot size with a minimum of 100 ft. of State road frontage 40,000 sq. ft. Water Quality Critical Area: 80,000 sq. ft. Lot size with less than 100 ft. of State road frontage 5 acres
Lot width 100 ft. at the building line
Front setback 35 ft. from the right-of-way
Corner side setback 35 ft. from the right-of-way
Side setback 10 ft. from any side property line Rear setback 30 ft. from the rear property line
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
Road setback 20 ft. from any road right-of-way Property line setback 5 ft. from any property line
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS NOTES
1. Lot areas and setbacks shall be increased if required by Randolph County Public Health. 2. Lot areas in designated Watersheds and Protected Areas are controlled by the Randolph County Watershed Protection Regulations. 3. Front yard setback shall be maintained on all road rights-of-way. 4. Minimum lot size requirements within Primary Growth Areas may be reduced to a minimum of 30,000 sq. ft. or 20,000 sq. ft. with public utilities.
5. The minimum lot size requirements within Secondary Growth Areas are 40,000 sq. ft. 6. The minimum lot size requirements within Rural Growth Areas are 3 acres. 7. Lots in major subdivisions within Rural Growth Areas must maintain a 1:4 ratio. 8. The minimum lot size requirements within the Natural Heritage Overlay are 6 acres. 9. Conditional Districts are identical to the general use districts except for site plans and individualized development conditions are imposed only upon the signed petition of all owners of the land to be
included in the Conditional District.
Page 137 of 162
Summary of Commerical Zoning Changes February 27, 2024 Page 5 of 15
618: TABLE OF PERMITTED USES
Districts in which uses are permitted as a use by right are indicated by a checkmark. Districts in which
uses are prohibited are indicated by a blank. Districts in which uses are permitted as a Special Use upon approval by the Randolph County Planning Board are indicated by S. Districts in which a particular use is permitted in an Overlay District are indicated by O. Districts in which a particular use is permitted as a temporary use as defined by these land development regulations, are indicated by T. See Article
600, Section 620 for further information. Districts in which uses are permitted as in a Special
Entertainment Overlay District upon approval by the Randolph County Planning Board are indicated by
E.
Page 138 of 162
Summary of Commerical Zoning Changes February 27, 2024 Page 6 of 15
USES RA
RR
RM
RE
OI
E-1
CE
O
CS
RB
O
HC
LI
HI
PC
SC
RC
Accessory uses
Adult bookstore E E Adult entertainment establishment E E
Adult motion picture theatre (including mini theatres) E E
Advanced battery or fuel cell
development
Aerospace, aviation, and
military/defense manufacturing
Agricultural uses2
Airfields and airports S S S S S S S Amusements, indoor commercial (e.g., bowling alleys, skating rinks) S S
Amusements, out-of-doors commercial (e.g., roller coasters, fairgrounds) S
Apparel and accessory sales
Athletic fields, recreation buildings,
playgrounds, swim, and racquet clubs (no commercial gain)
Auction sales, yards, permanent
Auction sales, temporary, one-time use
Automobile and truck rental Automobile body shops (excluding open storage of wrecked vehicles)
Automobile carwash, drive-through, requiring vehicle stacking
Automobile parts sales
Automobile racetracks S S
Page 139 of 162
Summary of Commerical Zoning Changes February 27, 2024 Page 7 of 15
USES RA
RR
RM
RE
OI
E-1
CE
O
CS
RB
O
HC
LI
HI
PC
SC
RC
Automobile sales
Automobile service stations
Automobile storage (excluding
wrecked and junked vehicles)3
Automotive, truck, and heavy equipment manufacturing and
assembly
Bakery
Banks, savings and loans, credit unions
Barber and beauty service S S S
Biofuels production
Biotechnology, pharmaceuticals,
medical, and life sciences manufacturing
Boats, recreational vehicle sales, and
service
Bottling plants
Brick, tile, and cement manufacturing Builders supply sales3
Bus station
Cabinet making Camping S S S S S
Cemetery
Chemical manufacturing Churches and their customary uses including childcare on-premises
Clinics, medical, dental
Clubs and lodges, private, non-profit
Clubs and places of entertainment (commercial) S
Coal sales and storage3
Page 140 of 162
Summary of Commerical Zoning Changes February 27, 2024 Page 8 of 15
USES RA
RR
RM
RE
OI
E-1
CE
O
CS
RB
O
HC
LI
HI
PC
SC
RC
Community centers, public or private non-profit, for assembly and recreation
S S
Compartmentalized storage for individual storage of residential and commercial goods
Concrete and asphalt products plant Contractor’s yard and outdoor storage area3
Convenience store
Conventional Major Subdivision home, Class A manufactured housing, modular home O O O
Conventional Major Subdivision home, Class A & B manufactured housing, modular home O
Conventional Major Subdivision homes (site-built) and conventional modular O O O O
Corporate offices or headquarters
Dairy products, wholesale, and
processing
Daycare facility (corporate)
Daycare facility (freestanding) S Distribution or logistics center
Drive-in window services (banks,
laundries, fast food) if permitted in the district
Drugstores
Dry cleaning and laundry Educational facilities and training centers
Page 141 of 162
Summary of Commerical Zoning Changes February 27, 2024 Page 9 of 15
USES RA
RR
RM
RE
OI
E-1
CE
O
CS
RB
O
HC
LI
HI
PC
SC
RC
Electronics and component manufacturing
Energy storage
Engine or engine parts production
Event center S S S Exterminating services Fabricated or primary metal manufacturing
Family care home S
Farm machinery sales
Farm supplies sales (feed, seed, fertilizer)
Fire, sheriff, and emergency services
Fitness and recreational sports center
Flea markets (indoors) Flea markets (out-of-doors)
Florists
Food freezer operations
Food processing Foundries, metal
Funeral homes
Furniture manufacturing Gift shops
Glass Manufacturing
Golf, miniature Golf courses Governmental offices
Grocery stores S
Group homes S S S S Gun range
Gun sales S S S S S
Page 142 of 162
Summary of Commerical Zoning Changes February 27, 2024 Page 10 of 15
USES RA
RR
RM
RE
OI
E-1
CE
O
CS
RB
O
HC
LI
HI
PC
SC
RC
Gunsmith S S S S S
Hardware, paint, and garden supplies
Home occupations
Hotels and motels S S Home furnishings and appliance sales
Hospital or sanatoriums S S S S S S
Health and social services centers Household product manufacturing
Industrial equipment sales and service
Junkyards (3 acres or more in size)4 S S
Kennels Laboratory, medical, and dental
Laboratory, research
Landfill S Laundry or dry cleaning, self-service
Library, public
Livestock sales
Locksmith S S S S S
Machine shop, welding shop S S
Manufacturing, machine tools, chemicals, fertilizer, paving materials, wood products, paper
Manufacturing, apparel, soft goods, textiles
Meat packing and poultry processing
Medical/Dental clinics or laboratories S
Mini warehouse Mixed commercial and residential use where commercial use is primary and both occupy the same structure or lot S
Page 143 of 162
Summary of Commerical Zoning Changes February 27, 2024 Page 11 of 15
USES RA
RR
RM
RE
OI
E-1
CE
O
CS
RB
O
HC
LI
HI
PC
SC
RC
Manufactured home park S
Manufactured home on individual lot Class A, B, or C
Manufactured home on individual lot Class A
Manufactured home on individual lot
Class A or B
Manufactured home in major
subdivision Class A
Manufactured home in major subdivision Class A or B
Manufactured home in minor subdivision Class A
Manufactured home in minor subdivision Class A or B
Manufactured home, travel trailer, camper, marine, recreational vehicle sales
Modular home, conventional Modular home, on-frame
Monument and cut stone manufacture and sales
Motor vehicle parts manufacturing Multi-family residence Nursery and plant cultivation and sales
Nursing and rest homes S S S S S
Office supplies sales
Outdoor storage yard Paint and coating manufacturing
Paint shop
Pharmacy and drugstore
Page 144 of 162
Summary of Commerical Zoning Changes February 27, 2024 Page 12 of 15
USES RA
RR
RM
RE
OI
E-1
CE
O
CS
RB
O
HC
LI
HI
PC
SC
RC
Planned Business Development S S S S S S S
Planned Rural Development S S S S S
Planned Unit Development S S S S
Plastics and resin manufacturing Post Office
Pottery manufacturing and sales
Press Shop Printing and reproduction shop Professional and business offices S
Public utility substations S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S
Quarry operations Radio or television studio S
Radio or television tower S S S S S S S S S S S S
Railroad rolling stock manufacturing Railroad yard
Recreational vehicle (RV) park S S S S
Research and development facilities
Retail sales, not listed elsewhere S Repair, rental, and service of products sold at retail in the same district
Residence, apartments, condominiums
Residence, duplex
Residence, single-family detached Residence, townhouses Residential solar collector
Restaurant S
Retail stores and shops (excluding vehicle sales) not otherwise listed herein S
Riding academy, commercial stables S
Page 145 of 162
Summary of Commerical Zoning Changes February 27, 2024 Page 13 of 15
USES RA
RR
RM
RE
OI
E-1
CE
O
CS
RB
O
HC
LI
HI
PC
SC
RC
Rodeo
Rooming house
Rubber products manufacturing
Rural family occupation of commercial/industrial nature S S S S S
Sanitary landfill S Sawmills, planing mills - permanent
Sawmills, planing mills - temporary Schools, academic S S S S S S S S S S S S Schools, business/trade S S S S S S S S
Septage land application site S
Service stations
Service establishments include but are not limited to barber and beauty shops, small-item repair, and rental S
Sheet metal fabrication
Shooting range S S
Sign, directional gateway S S S S S
Sign, on-premise
Sign, outdoor advertising (off-premises) S
Skills games, games of chance S S S
Solar energy facility S S Solar energy residential use Special events
Storage, flammable liquids above
ground in quantities for distribution S S
Storage pods T T T T T
Subdivisions, Minor (Residential) Tailor shop
Taxi stand
Taxi stand – Park and Ride Lot
Page 146 of 162
Summary of Commerical Zoning Changes February 27, 2024 Page 14 of 15
USES RA
RR
RM
RE
OI
E-1
CE
O
CS
RB
O
HC
LI
HI
PC
SC
RC
Telecommunications tower S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S
Temporary buildings, incidental to the development
Temporary carnivals, rides, Ferris wheels
Temporary healthcare structures
Theater, Drive-In
Tire manufacturing
Tobacco sales and warehousing
Towing service Trailer rentals
Transitional housing
Transportation equipment
manufacturing
Truck terminal Upholstering and furniture refinishing
Veterinary clinics
Warehousing and distribution
Warehouses, sales, or service Wholesale sales, not otherwise listed
Zoological park
Page 147 of 162
Summary of Commerical Zoning Changes February 27, 2024 Page 15 of 15
Page 148 of 162
Randolph County
Planning Board
Rules of Procedure
Adopted
Page 149 of 162
Randolph County Planning Board Rules of Procedure
March 15, 2024 Page 1 of 11
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Article I. Authority and Enactment .......................................................................................... 2
Article II. Applicability of Rules ................................................................................................. 2
Article III. Open Meetings ............................................................................................................ 2
Article IV. Membership ................................................................................................................. 3
Article V. Conflicts of Interest and Ex Parte Communications ........................................... 3
Article VI. Officers.......................................................................................................................... 3
Article VII. Meetings ....................................................................................................................... 4
Article VIII. Order of Business ....................................................................................................... 5
Article IX. Expectations of Board Members ............................................................................. 6
Article X. Public Comments and Input ..................................................................................... 6
Article XI. Meeting Procedures ................................................................................................... 7
Article XII. Disposition of Requests ............................................................................................ 7
Article XIII. Miscellaneous ............................................................................................................. 9
Page 150 of 162
Randolph County Planning Board Rules of Procedure
March 15, 2024 Page 2 of 11
RANDOLPH COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
RULES OF PROCEDURE
Article I. Authority and Enactment 1. The Randolph County Planning Board of Randolph County, North Carolina, under the requirements of The Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance and North Carolina General Statutes, does hereby adopt the following Articles to comprise the
Randolph County Planning Board Rules of Procedures. These Rules of Procedures shall also apply to the Randolph County Zoning Board of Adjustment and any other committees that may be formed for study or advisement to either Board. 2. References to the Randolph County Planning Board, hereinafter referred to as the
Board, shall also be understood to reference the Randolph County Zoning Board of Adjustment. References are also intended for the Randolph County Planning Director, hereinafter referred to as the Planning Director, or the Clerk to the Randolph County Planning Board, hereinafter referred to as the Clerk. Any references to The Randolph County Unified Development Ordinance, hereinafter referred to as the
Ordinance, or The Randolph County Growth Management Plan, hereinafter referred to as the Growth Management Plan, are also adopted for these rules. Article II. Applicability of Rules 1. These rules apply to all meetings of the Randolph County Planning Board at which
the Planning Board is empowered to exercise its role as directed by The Randolph
County Unified Development Ordinance and applicable State statutes, whether meeting in an administrative, evidentiary, legislative, or quasi-judicial hearing. 2. These rules may be amended at any regular meeting or at any properly called special
meeting that includes amendment of the rules as one of the stated purposes of the meeting. Adoption of these rules, or an amendment thereof, shall require an affirmative vote equal to a quorum. 3. The Board is also governed by the applicable provisions of the North Carolina
General Statutes as they pertain to land development regulations. 4. These rules are public records and are made available to the public via Randolph County’s website as required by NCGS § 160D-308. Article III. Open Meetings 1. The public policy of the State of North Carolina and Randolph County is that the hearings, deliberations, and actions of the Board and any committee shall be conducted openly and any person may attend.
2. An official meeting of any Board is defined as “any gathering together at any time or place to the simultaneous communication by conference telephone or electronic means of a majority of Board members to conduct hearings, participating in
Page 151 of 162
Randolph County Planning Board Rules of Procedure
March 15, 2024 Page 3 of 11
deliberations, or voting upon or otherwise transacting public business within the jurisdiction, real or apparent, of the Board.”
Article IV. Membership 1. The members of the Board shall be appointed by the Randolph County Board of Commissioners as outlined in the Ordinance. The term of the membership shall be three years. Members of the Board serve at the pleasure and discretion of the Randolph County Board of Commissioners and may be removed before the end of
their term of office. New members may be appointed to fill an unexpired term of a previous member. 2. A member completing a term of office who has not been reappointed and for whose seat a new appointment has not been made by the Randolph County Board of
Commissioners may continue to serve until he or she is reappointed, a new appointment is made, or until he or she decides to leave the Board. 3. A member who anticipates not being able to attend a meeting of the Board must contact the Planning Director upon receipt of the agenda, or earlier if possible, and
indicate the reason for the absence. In the event of an unforeseen emergency or illness, notification to the Planning Director shall be given at the earliest practical time. Article V. Conflicts of Interest and Ex Parte Communications 1. At the beginning of consideration of a matter before the Board, any member who has
a potential conflict of interest, whether direct or indirect, shall notify the Board of this
potential conflict in the section of the agenda that covers Conflicts of Interest. The Board shall vote to excuse the member for further participation, including voting, on the case where the conflict may arise.
2. At the beginning of consideration of any quasi-judicial matter before the Board, any
member who has received ex parte communication shall notify the Board of this potential conflict in the section of the agenda that covers Ex Parte Communications. The Board shall vote to excuse the member for further participation, including voting, on the case where ex parte communication may arise. Ex parte communication is
“any communication between a Board member and any other person or party outside
of the presence of all parties to a quasi-judicial matter.” Article VI. Officers 1. The officers of the Randolph County Planning Board shall be the Chair and Vice-
Chair for a term of one year with the election of officers taking place at the December
meeting. The Officers shall be eligible for re-election to their position. The Chair may designate the Clerk or the Planning Director to preside over the election of officers. 2. If the Chair is not able to serve an entire term of office, the Vice-Chair shall assume
the responsibility of the Chair until the term of office ends. The Board shall, at its next
regular meeting after the Vice-Chair becomes Chair, shall then elect a new Vice-Chair to serve the unexpired term of the Vice-Chair.
Page 152 of 162
Randolph County Planning Board Rules of Procedure
March 15, 2024 Page 4 of 11
3. If the Vice-Chair is not able to serve a full term of office, the Board, at its next regular meeting after the Vice-Chair is out of office, shall elect a new Vice-Chair to fill the unexpired term of the previous Vice-Chair.
4. The Chair shall preside at all meetings of the Board and may appoint committee membership in consultation with the Planning Director. 5. The Vice-Chair shall assume the duties of the Chair in case of absence by the Chair
at a Board meeting or in the event the Chair has been recused from discussion and
voting. 6. The Board, by a two-thirds majority vote of the full membership, may create other offices when deemed necessary.
7. The Clerk shall be designated by the Planning Director from among the Planning and Zoning Department staff. Article VII. Meetings
1. At its November public hearing, or the next public hearing if no meeting is scheduled for November, the Board shall approve its meeting schedule for the following calendar year. The tradition of the Board has been to have public hearings on the Tuesday following the first Monday of every month unless there is a scheduling conflict.
2. Special meetings may be called for by either the Planning Director or the Chair or Vice-Chair of the Board with at least a forty-eight-hour notice. Only those items contained in the forty-eight-hour notice of the special meeting shall be considered unless all members are present and the Board determines in good faith at the meeting that it is essential to discuss or act on the additional item immediately.
3. Special meetings may also be scheduled by the vote of the Board in open session during another duly called meeting. The motion for the special meeting shall contain (1) the time, (2) the place, and (3) the purpose. Only those items of business specified in the motion calling for the special meeting may be considered at the special meeting
unless all members are present and the Board determines in good faith at the meeting that it is essential to discuss or act on the additional item immediately. 4. The Planning Director or the Chair or Vice-Chair of the Board may schedule work sessions, committee meetings, or other informal meetings of the Board or a majority
of its members at such times and concerning such subjects as may be established by the Board. Work sessions, committee meetings or other informal meetings not regularly held are subject to the same notice requirements as listed above. 5. Whenever there is no business for the Board, the Planning Director shall notify the
Board of the cancellation of the meeting. The Planning Director may cancel any meeting for good cause such as knowing a lack of a quorum or inclement weather. Notice shall be given by the Planning Director at least 24 hours before the time set
Page 153 of 162
Randolph County Planning Board Rules of Procedure
March 15, 2024 Page 5 of 11
for the meeting to be canceled to all members, press, applicants, and other interested persons as determined appropriate. In the case of inclement weather, the notice of cancellation shall be given at the earliest practical time. Notice of such cancellation
shall include publication on Randolph County’s website.
6. The meeting agenda and appropriate review material and reports shall be prepared and distributed to all Board members and applicants as required by NCGS § 160D-406(c). No business, old or new, may be considered by the Board unless such an
item properly appears on the agenda. However, a matter of business not subject to
public notice requirements may be discussed or considered as a non-agenda item if approved by a majority vote of the members present. 7. A failure to vote by a member who is physically present at the public hearing, or who has
withdrawn without being excused by a majority vote of the remaining members present, shall be recorded as an affirmative vote. Article VIII. Order of Business
1. To allow for efficient use of the time, the Order of Business for regular meetings shall be as follows: a) Call to Order; b) Roll call to establish quorum;
c) Approval of the consent agenda; d) Project or committee reports; e) Old Business; f) New Business; g) Announcements; and
h) Adjournment. 2. The Order of Business for a special meeting shall be as follows: a) Call to Order;
b) Roll call to establish quorum; c) Business as stated in meeting notification; and d) Adjournment. 3. If a case is being brought back to the Board as part of the Old Business, the public
hearing will resume from the point that it ended at the previous Board meeting. For purposes of clarification, if the public hearing portion of the request is closed before the request is tabled, deliberations shall resume among the Board. If the public hearing portion of the request was never closed, the public hearing shall be deemed to still be open. If a public hearing was closed before the request was tabled, a
majority vote of the members shall be required to reopen the public hearing. 4. Each case presented under the section of New Business of the agenda shall be presented to the Board by the Planning Director. Once the case has been presented, the Chair shall open the public hearing. The applicant and those in favor of the
Page 154 of 162
Randolph County Planning Board Rules of Procedure
March 15, 2024 Page 6 of 11
request will be allowed to speak first, followed by those in opposition. After the opposition has been heard, the applicant shall be allowed to answer questions or comments raised during the public hearing. After all sides have been allowed to
speak, including answering questions from Board members, the Chair shall close the
public hearing for discussion among the members and a motion to act. The Board may reopen the public hearing after it has been closed by the Chair if new evidence is to be presented or for clarification and answers to questions posed by the Board. Once all necessary votes have taken place, the Board shall move to the next case.
Article IX. Expectations of Board Members 1. Board members are expected to be generally familiar with the Ordinance and the Growth Management Plan and with these Rules of Procedure.
2. Board members are expected to be prepared for the meeting by examining the
agenda packet and consulting County Planning Staff with questions. 3. Board members are to ask questions as appropriate during the hearing and actively participate in deliberations.
4. Board members should consider all information on each matter before the Board and make an informed decision. 5. Board members shall consider the application without prejudice.
6. Board members should not take a public position on any application before the meeting at which the application is considered. 7. Board members should refrain from deliberation with other members of the public or
formulation of a judgment or decision before the meeting at which the application is considered. 8. Board members must act in a fair, ethical, and consistent manner under these Rules of Procedure and applicable North Carolina General Statutes.
9. When not sitting in the place of an absent member, Alternates may sit with the Board if there is space, but they shall not participate in any part of the public hearings. Article X. Public Comments and Input
1. Anyone attending a Board meeting shall have the opportunity to speak and make comments on any agenda item only to the Board for a total of three minutes. (Applicants for cases are not limited on their amount of time to speak.) Comments are to be directed to the Board as a whole and not one specific member and must be relevant to the case before the Board at the time of their comments. Comments shall
not be disparaging. Questions for the applicant will be noted and asked of the applicant by the Chair.
Page 155 of 162
Randolph County Planning Board Rules of Procedure
March 15, 2024 Page 7 of 11
2. Speakers must give their names and addresses orally before speaking and in writing after speaking.
3. Disruptions or disruptive behavior during a Board meeting shall not be tolerated. All
disruptive behavior shall be enforced according to NCGS § 143-318.17 which states, “A person who willfully interrupts, disturbs or disrupts an official meeting and who, upon being directed to leave the meeting by the presiding officer, willfully refuses to leave the meeting is guilty of a Class 2 Misdemeanor.”
Article XI. Meeting Procedures 1. For the public hearings, the Board hereby adopts all rules as currently required by the North Carolina General Statutes and any rules that may be adopted in the future by the North Carolina General Assembly. This is intended to include requirements for
administrative, evidentiary, legislative, or quasi-judicial hearings as may be required
by the Ordinance or the General Statutes. 2. There shall be a quorum present at the meeting for actions taken to have legal standing. A quorum shall constitute a majority of current members of the Board.
3. If a member feels that insufficient information has been presented for the member to form an opinion on the matter in question, then the member may request that consideration of the matter be postponed until either (1) the next regular meeting of the Board or (2) at some stated date in the future. The member may then explain
what is still needed from the applicant to make a decision.
4. In any case, in which a motion results in a tie vote, the Chair shall encourage an alternate motion for consideration. If the alternate motion results in a tie vote, neither motion shall be considered to pass, and the request shall be considered denied.
5. The County Planning and Zoning staff shall prepare the agenda for each meeting of the Board. The agenda, as presented at the meeting, may only be changed by a two-thirds vote of the Board.
6. The County Planning and Zoning staff shall prepare recommendations from the
Technical Review Committee for the cases where such recommendations are allowed or required by the Ordinance or the General Statutes. 7. The Clerk shall keep minutes of all Board meetings. Minutes shall be given to all
Board members before the next meeting. Minutes must be approved by a majority
vote of the Board. 8. A failure to vote by a member who is physically present at the public hearing, or who has withdrawn without being excused by a majority vote of the remaining members present, shall be recorded as an affirmative vote. Article XII. Disposition of Requests
Page 156 of 162
Randolph County Planning Board Rules of Procedure
March 15, 2024 Page 8 of 11
1. Due to the complexity of the General Statutes and the need to ensure that proper procedures are followed whether the Board is meeting in an administrative, evidentiary, legislative, or quasi-judicial hearing, it is important to follow proper
procedures.
2. Rezonings, Special Use Permits, and Appeals require a majority vote of the Board in favor of or denial of a request. However, Variances require a four-fifths majority vote of the Board to decide in favor of the applicant. For example, if there are seven
members present for the Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting, at least six members
must vote in favor of the applicant to grant a Variance. 3. It is a requirement of the General Statutes for the Board to state in the motion to approve or deny any type of request the reason the motion is being made. It is not
sufficient to make a motion to approve or deny the request—the reasoning must be stated. 4. In the cases of rezonings, it is a requirement of the General Statutes for the Board when deciding that the rezoning is consistent, reasonable, and in the public interest
for the member making that motion to specifically state the policies from the Growth Management Plan that leads the member to that conclusion. The Consistency Determination and Findings of Reasonableness and Public Interest shall be updated by the Planning Staff to reflect the decision of the Board in cases where the Board goes against the recommendation of the Technical Review Committee
before the Board can vote to approve the rezoning request.
5. In the cases of Special Use Permits, a quasi-judicial function, it is required by the General Statutes for the Board to find, based upon the sworn evidence as to the testimony of professionals, that:
a) 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;
b) the use meets all required conditions and specifications;
c) the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property, or that the use is a public necessity; and d) 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. If one of the above findings of fact cannot be supported by the evidence or testimony presented, the Special Use Permit must be denied. The Board members making the
motions to approve or deny a request for a Special Use Permit shall state the facts
that support the decision of the Board. The Order of the Planning Board will be updated by the Planning Staff before the Board can vote to approve the Special Use Permit request.
Page 157 of 162
Randolph County Planning Board Rules of Procedure
March 15, 2024 Page 9 of 11
6. In the cases of Variances, a quasi-judicial function, it is required by the General Statutes that the Board base its decision on all the following findings of fact:
a) that if the applicant complies with the literal terms of the Ordinance, he cannot
secure a reasonable return from, or make reasonable use of this property; b) that the hardship of which the applicant complains results from unique circumstances related to the applicant’s land; c) that the hardship is not the result of the applicant’s own actions;
d) that, if granted, the Variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and
intent of the Ordinance and will preserve its spirit; and e) that, if granted, the Variance will secure the public safety and welfare and will do substantial justice.
If one of the above findings of fact cannot be supported by the evidence or testimony presented, the Variance must be denied. The Board members making the motions to approve or deny a request for a Variance shall state the facts that support the decision of the Board. The Order of the Zoning Board of Adjustment will be updated by the Planning Staff before the Board can vote to approve the Variance request. As
a reminder, a Variance may only be approved with a four-fifths vote of the Board as explained in number two above. Article XIII. Miscellaneous 1. All communication to the Board, including applications, petitions, and e-mails, when
specifically directed to the Board or appropriate for the Board’s information at the
reasonable discretion of the Planning and Zoning Staff, shall be directed to the Planning and Zoning Staff and shall thereafter be provided to the Board. 2. All requests for information (e.g., maps, ordinances, etc.,) from a Board member shall
be directed to the Planning Director. Any response by the Planning Director shall be
directed to all Board members. 3. The Planning Board may recommend the adoption, amendment, repeal, or alteration, in whole or in part, of these Randolph County Planning Board Rules of Procedures
by a majority vote at any regular meeting if any change requested has been placed
on the Board’s agenda for the meeting. These foregoing Randolph County Planning Board Rules of Procedures are hereby adopted
this the ______ day of _____________, 2024, a quorum of the Board being present.
_______________________________ _______________________________
Planning Director Chair
Page 158 of 162
Randolph County Planning Board Rules of Procedure
March 15, 2024 Page 10 of 11
_______________________________ Clerk to the Board
Page 159 of 162
Page 160 of 162
Board Portal Training March 12, 2024 Page 1 of 2
Board Portal Training
The URL for the Board portal is https://randolphconc.boardportal.civicclerk.com/.
You must use your County e-mail address and password to log into the site.
When the portal opens, you will see all the agendas created in CivicClerk. Using the buttons at the bottom of the screen you can view minutes, make notes, and
view any media files that are uploaded.
You will only be able to view items that have been published in the Board portal. For example, if the agenda or minutes are not complete, they will not show up on the portal.
AGENDA SECTION:
Clicking on an Agenda pulls up the agenda in a simple format. Clicking the blue arrow on the right side of the screen opens a window that shows the agenda item along with the ability to view the attachments. The Notes window on this page allows you to make notes
as you review the agenda or during the meeting. Only the member making the notes can
see your notes. Neither County staff nor the software company can see your notes. The top of the screen under the item details will show the Technical Review Committee Recommendations under the item called Recommended Action.
Under Attachments, you can see the agenda packet for the specific case. If you open the attachment, you can review all the supplied information, search the packet, and make any notes that you want on the packet.
At the bottom of the screen, click the Next Item button to go to the next item on the
agenda. You can always click Agenda Details at the top of the window to go back to the main agenda.
MINUTES SECTION: To view minutes, click on the Minutes button at the bottom of the window. Only approved, published minutes will be seen in this portion of the software.
Page 161 of 162
Board Portal Training March 12, 2024 Page 2 of 2
Click on a meeting date to view the minutes. You can click on any of the agenda items to see the minutes from that portion of the meeting along with the motion and the vote total at the top of the screen.
At the bottom of the screen, click the Next Item button to go to the next item in the minutes. NOTES SECTION:
The Notes icon at the bottom of the page allows you to see any agenda where you have made any notes. USER PROFILE: In the top right corner of the page, you will see your name and an icon. Click on this icon
and go to Email Preferences. By clicking the “Notify me when new meeting content is
published” you will get an automatic e-mail letting you know when the agenda packet has been posted to the Board portal. Under the User Profile, there is also a help section that you can use to learn more about
the software including screenshots and videos.
Page 162 of 162