Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Planning And Zoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Lincoln County commissioners approve several rezoning requests, deny others and pass UDO cleanup

Lincoln County Board of Commissioners · September 16, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The board approved multiple zoning map amendments and a Unified Development Ordinance cleanup removing riding stables and standalone wineries from residential permitted uses; one rezoning was denied, another postponed to Oct. 6, 2025.

Lincoln County commissioners on Tuesday approved multiple zoning map amendments across the county, rejected two applications from the same applicant and postponed another after planning staff and the planning board offered differing recommendations.

Jeremiah, a county planning staff member, told the board the meeting considered several cases carried from August. The board approved ZMA 7‑54 (Troy LeHue) to rezone 3.8 acres on Unity Church Road from residential single‑family to general business after the planning board recommended approval. Commissioner Susina opposed that rezoning, saying: "I think it's a bad idea to zone something that we have no earthly idea what's gonna go on that property," and citing intersection and traffic concerns. The commission approved ZMA 7‑54 on a 4‑1 vote with Commissioner Cecena recorded as the lone dissent.

Two applications from Big A Ranch LLC received different outcomes. The board denied ZMA 7‑60, a 0.98‑acre request at the St. James Church Road/Glen Meadows Drive intersection, after adopting a staff consistency statement; a later, similar request (ZMA 7‑62) was also denied. For ZMA 7‑61, the chair moved to postpone the decision until the Oct. 6, 2025 meeting "to allow for the applicant and the property owners to determine if they would continue with the application," and the board voted to postpone.

The board also approved several other rezonings presented from hearings on Sept. 8: ZMA 7‑64 (rezoning 2.38 acres on Maybank Lane to rural residential), ZMA 7‑65 (Joseph and Jamie Woody: 3.67 acres to rural residential to align an existing 5‑acre parcel), ZMA 7‑66 (a 1.285‑acre portion at 5016 Reepsville Road to neighborhood business), and ZMA 7‑67 (2.13 acres at 4910 East Highway 150 in Pumpkin Center to neighborhood business). Each was adopted following the planning board's recommendation and motions by commissioners.

In related business, planning staff presented UDO 20‑25‑4, a zoning text amendment to remove riding stables and wineries from the table of permitted uses in residential districts. Staff explained that wineries defined by the county ordinance require an on‑site vineyard and are statutorily farm uses protected under North Carolina law; the amendment cleans up residential use tables while leaving industrial, stand‑alone wineries (without vineyards) allowable in industrial districts. The board approved the UDO amendment.

Votes at a glance: - ZMA 7‑54 (Troy LeHue, Unity Church Road): approved, 4‑1 (Cecena no). - ZMA 7‑60 (Big A Ranch LLC): denied (ayes recorded). - ZMA 7‑62 (Big A Ranch LLC): denied (ayes recorded). - ZMA 7‑61 (Big A Ranch LLC): postponed to Oct. 6, 2025. - ZMA 7‑64: approved (voice vote). - ZMA 7‑65: approved (voice vote). - ZMA 7‑66: approved (voice vote). - ZMA 7‑67: approved (voice vote). - UDO 20‑25‑4 (remove riding stables and residential wineries): approved (voice vote).

Why it matters: These votes change allowable land uses on several parcels near busy corridors and subdivision corridors, affecting future development prospects and traffic patterns. Commissioners who opposed rezoning emphasized uncertainty about future uses and intersection safety; proponents relied on planning board findings and the county land‑use plan.

What’s next: ZMA 7‑61 will return to the board on Oct. 6, 2025, and applicants with denied requests may consider appeals or revised submissions according to county procedures.