Fuquay Varina board debates rezoning on Longfellow Street; no decision reached

The Fuquay Varina Town Board heard more than an hour of public comment and commissioner remarks on a request to rezone two 0.169-acre parcels at 426 and 428 Longfellow Street but did not approve the petition Thursday night. The petitioner sought a map amendment from Residential Low Density to Town Center Residential to allow a two-unit townhouse-style development with voluntary aesthetic conditions.

The request was presented by Planning Director Pam Davison, who told the board the properties are two lots of record from the Lincoln Heights subdivision and that TCR zoning would "bring the properties into compliance with the current codes and standards and incorporate zoning conditions which require specific facade elements, including a covered entry or front porch, glazing on the front door, and no vinyl siding." Davison said the planning board had unanimously recommended approval.

The item drew several neighbors to the podium. Resident Danielle Caro told the board she and other neighbors had filed more than 50 complaints about an unfinished townhome on Longfellow and said the current project had produced "a half done, moldy townhome" and that neighbors were "sick of it." Caro pressed the board to take action to prevent similar problems in future developments.

Petitioner Mohammed Kagali (listed in meeting materials as the applicant) addressed the board and said he is a licensed general contractor and real estate agent and "I'm committed actually to keep this site clean and bond to the rules and regulation," adding that he would send neighbors contact information and perform daily cleanup. He also said he did not want his commitment recorded as a binding condition on the rezoning application.

Town Attorney James (as identified in the hearing) and staff clarified legal constraints: because the two parcels are recorded lots of record, "under the code, they could build two single family homes that fit within the setbacks on those two lots," meaning two dwelling units could be constructed regardless of rezoning. The attorney told the board the town has "no legal remedy to correct small lot recordings from the 1940s" and that prohibiting construction on such lots would raise takings issues.

Commissioner Hank Harris and other board members framed the debate largely as one of neighborhood character and equity. Harris said the lots'history and small dimensions had produced development outcomes the board must confront and said the town should have a broader discussion about how to treat older, smaller recorded lots going forward. Other board members expressed sympathy for neighbors and said voluntary zoning conditions offered a path to higher-quality materials and improved site maintenance where the town has limited regulatory levers.

When a motion to approve REZ-2024-14 was moved, no member seconded the motion and it died. The town attorney confirmed that because no affirmative decision was made the property remains under its existing Residential Low Density zoning. The board did not vote to deny, and no alternative motion was passed; the item remains undecided for future action by the property owner or the board.

The Longfellow hearing combined a factual zoning question (what the code allows on lots of record), citizen complaints about construction-site maintenance, and broader policy concerns about the character and equity of older neighborhoods. Residents who raised maintenance and nuisance concerns were told that the town's code compliance process is the primary available enforcement tool when builders fail to keep sites orderly.

Board members and staff said the issue is likely to recur at other locations with small lots of record and that it will require a longer-term policy discussion during future planning sessions.

No formal vote to rezone was recorded; the petitioner remains free under current law to pursue development that meets existing setback and lot-of-record standards.