Planning board recommends denial of 5-acre rezoning along NC 43 South; opponents cite traffic and noise concerns

The Pitt County Planning Board voted to recommend denial of a rezoning request from property owner Calvin Overcash to change 5 acres on Edwards Farm Road, adjacent to NC 43 South, from rural residential to general commercial.

Planning staff described the property as two 2.5-acre portions that straddle Edwards Farm Road and noted other nonresidential uses on NC 43 South nearby, including contractors, an automotive repair business and a dog training facility. Staff said the NC 43 South Corridor land use plan designates the corridor as primarily rural residential and agricultural but allows small-scale nonresidential uses with direct access to NC 43 South. Planning staff recommended approval in this case on the basis of direct access to NC 43 and proximity to other commercial uses.

One nearby resident, Jeannie Everett, who said she lives “a field away” from the property, told the planning board she opposed the rezoning because certain commercial uses such as a gas station could increase traffic, noise and theft and would add conflict at a location that already has collisions on a nearby road. Planning board members questioned whether sewer service or other utilities would be available; staff said properties outside Greenville’s jurisdiction would typically rely on septic and that Greenville Utilities generally requires voluntary annexation for sewer access but had waived that requirement for other projects in the Weyerhaeuser matter discussed later in the meeting.

After public comment, a planning board member moved to recommend denial of the rezoning, finding it inconsistent with the NC 43 South Corridor Land Use Plan and not reasonable because it was not compatible with surrounding uses. The motion to deny carried; the board chair noted the planning board’s recommendation will go to the Pitt County Board of Commissioners for a public hearing on July 21 where the commissioners will make the final decision.

Planning staff said future nonresidential development on the property—if approved by the commissioners—would still require site-plan approval and review for access, traffic, and other requirements.