Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Franklin Limestone Rezone topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission pauses Franklin Limestone rezoning to industrial‑restrictive after residents raise congestion, environmental and notice concerns
Summary
A proposal to rezone 23.48 acres on Franklin Limestone Road from AR‑2 to Industrial Restrictive drew extensive public opposition on traffic, dust, tree loss and environmental risk; commissioners voted to defer the matter for two meetings so staff and the applicant can continue outreach.
The Planning Commission on Feb. 13 deferred consideration of a rezoning request for a 23.48‑acre portion of property along Franklin Limestone Road from Agriculture Residential (AR‑2) to Industrial Restrictive (IR) after residents raised concerns about traffic, dust from adjacent quarry and asphalt operations, stream and watershed impacts, and notice to nearby homeowners.
Staff presenter Yomi Akume described the site and staff recommendation. The property is within a District Impact policy area and a Conservation policy area that includes floodplain, floodway, steep slopes and streams. Staff recommended IR zoning, saying the industrial‑restrictive district allows light industrial uses—generally enclosed operations with limited outdoor storage—and is consistent with District Impact guidance directing industrial activity to strategic locations. The presentation noted there is developable area outside mapped conservation features and that District Impact policy supports locations for more intensive industrial uses.
Applicant William Tanner, of Distribution Realty Group, said the applicant intends to build light-industry/warehouse facilities and emphasized commitments to route truck traffic away from certain neighborhood connections. Brandon Bowles of Kimley-Horn said the applicant is prepared to work with NDOT on traffic study requirements, to improve Franklin Limestone Road frontage and to maintain stream buffers and stormwater protections.
More than a dozen residents spoke in opposition. Neighbors said they had not received adequate notice of the applicant’s outreach and asked for more community meetings; several speakers described dust and tree loss from quarry and asphalt operations in the area and said the proposed industrial development would worsen air-quality and stormwater risks near Mill Creek watershed and nearby subdivisions. One resident referenced endangered species and a stream that runs behind nearby homes. Several speakers asked that existing forest and conservation zones be preserved.
During discussion commissioners asked staff about noticing procedures and buffering. Staff said 370 notices were mailed to property owners within 1,000 feet (the rule governing Planning Commission notice for rezoning), and signs were posted on the property. Staff also noted that an IR rezoning is a straight-zoning request (not an SP) and that final design, stormwater, and transportation measures would be reviewed at permitting and final site-plan stages by relevant agencies (stormwater, NDOT, fire, building codes).
Vice Chair moved to defer the rezoning for two meetings to allow additional neighborhood outreach and further analysis; the motion carried.
