The Rockingham County Planning Board on Jan. 13 recommended approval of several rezoning requests and special-use orders and forwarded the matters to the county commissioners for final action in February.

Staff opened the first case (2025‑16), a conventional rezoning of a mixed‑zoned parcel to Residential‑Agricultural (RA). Planning staff told the board the application was complete and recommended approval; the board approved a motion to recommend the rezoning and will send its recommendation to the Board of Commissioners for its Feb. 16 hearing.

The board then considered Quad Oaks LLC’s request (2025‑17) to remove a conditional use tied to RV sales and service and convert the property to straight Highway Commercial. Applicant Edward Mateer said his LLC had purchased the parcel in 2007 and asked the board to remove the prior condition so a business could operate there. Nearby residents raised questions about parcel size and possible runoff; staff noted the site lies in the Dan River protected watershed and said technical review and required setbacks would apply before any plan could be permitted.

A separate request near 195 US‑29 Business (2025‑19) was presented by applicant Tyler Bryant, who said he plans a heavy‑truck sales lot on the parcel. Board members questioned access, the need for DOT approvals and proximity to residences; Bryant said operations would be during daytime business hours.

In each rezoning case the board moved, seconded and recorded voice votes recommending approval. Planning staff emphasized that recommended rezonings are advisory; final decisions will be made by the Board of Commissioners.

The planning board also reviewed and re‑voted prior special‑use orders, including approvals for wireless communications towers (Vertical Bridge / VBTS LLC) and a denial that remained in the record from an earlier meeting. Planning staff reminded the board that zoning map changes should be evaluated for consistency with NC General Statute 160D, the county’s land‑use plan and the Unified Development Ordinance before the commissioners’ hearings.

The planning board’s recommendations will be on the commissioners’ February agenda; technical permitting and site‑plan review processes remain required for any future development.