Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Denial Highway Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners deny No Quarter Group rezoning after residents warn of highway safety and industrial uses
Summary
Pitt County commissioners denied a request to rezone 13.56 acres from rural residential to rural agricultural after residents and the planning board said additional permitted nonresidential uses were incompatible with the surrounding homes and safety concerns on NC 33.
The Pitt County Board of Commissioners denied a rezoning request from No Quarter Group LLC to change 13.56 acres on N.C. 33 East from rural residential to rural agricultural. The planning board had recommended denial, and commissioners followed that recommendation, citing incompatibility between some agricultural/industrial uses allowed under rural agricultural zoning and the surrounding residential area.
Speakers from the neighborhood described N.C. 33 as a narrow, two‑lane stretch with high speeds and a history of crashes near the property. Marvis Evans and other residents urged the board to keep the land residential, noting recent fatal and serious collisions on the road and warning that certain agricultural or commercial uses could increase truck traffic and danger for school buses and local drivers.
Planning staff explained that rural agricultural zoning allows some nonresidential uses not permitted in the current rural residential classification, including convenience stores, vehicle-related services, and other uses that could generate traffic and noise. Commissioners raised similar concerns, noting that permitted RA uses could be more intensive and that the planning board had found the proposal neither consistent nor reasonable for the area.
On a recorded or voice vote the board denied the request; planning staff incorporated the planning board’s reasoning (that some nonresidential uses allowed under RA are incompatible with surrounding residential uses) into the official action. No site-specific development plan was approved.
