Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Burke County to hold public hearings on two rezoning requests; planners split on one
Summary
Burke County planning staff presented two zoning map amendment requests April 7: a small NC 18 parcel recommended for approval by the planning board and an Ashton Drive parcel, proposed to support Evans Construction, recommended for denial after a neighbor complaint about buffering and truck activity.
Alan Glines, Burke County planning director, presented two zoning map amendment requests to the board at the county's April 7 pre-agenda meeting and noted both items will proceed to a scheduled public hearing.
ZMA-2025-01 (2907 NC 18 South): Ryan Honeycutt petitioned to rezone a 0.27-acre parcel from Residential-2 to General Business. Glines said the site has long been used for commercial purposes intermittently (restaurant, secondhand shop, retail) and sits in a pocket of commercial uses along NC 18. The planning board reviewed the request on Feb. 27, heard from only the applicant, and recommended approval by a 7-0 vote. Glines said the county would update the future land-use map to reflect the change if the board approves it.
ZMA-2025-02 (Ashton Drive): Mickey and Debbie Evans requested rezoning of a 1.15-acre parcel from Residential-2 to General Business to support Evans Construction's existing operations. Glines said Evans Construction has operated in the area since about 1970. The planning board heard one neighbor, identified as Miss Swanson, who opposed rezoning because of dust, truck traffic and perceived impacts on her property. The planning board voted 6-1 to recommend denial; Glines said the board's primary concern was whether proposed buffering would sufficiently mitigate impacts on the adjacent residential property. If rezoned, Glines said a 10-foot evergreen buffer would be required along three sides to separate commercial and residential properties.
Commissioners asked clarifying questions about prior complaints and whether the site had been used for storing road materials. Glines said he had inspected the property and had not observed large stockpiles, and noted that the zoning ordinance requires buffers intended to mitigate impacts such as dust and truck traffic.
Both items were left on the agenda for the regular meeting and will be considered at scheduled public hearings where neighbors and other parties may comment.
Glines: "Now the planning board did review it, on February 27. No one spoke on the matter except the applicant, and the planning board felt that they wanted to recommend support to you all, 7-0."
