Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Catawba County denies rezoning request for frontage of Cushman Properties parcel
Summary
The Catawba County Board of Commissioners unanimously denied a request to rezone 15.12 acres of a 105.87-acre Cushman Properties parcel from R-40 Residential to Highway Commercial, finding the proposal inconsistent with the county's 2024 comprehensive land-use plan.
The Catawba County Board of Commissioners on Nov. 17 denied a request by The Building Company US LLC to rezone 15.12 acres of a 105.87-acre parcel owned by Cushman Properties LLC from R-40 Residential to Highway Commercial (HC).
Planning Director Chris Timberlake told the Board the frontage area requested for rezoning is within the WS‑IV Watershed Protection Overlay and has public water along NC 16 but no public sewer. Timberlake said rezoning the road frontage to HC would create a split‑zoned condition under county rules that can allow by‑right HC uses to be applied to the larger parcel until a subdivision plat separates the frontage from the R‑40 area. The applicant's narrative said the frontage would be used for an office for a custom home construction business and the remaining acreage could later be subdivided into an 87‑lot cluster subdivision.
The county's Planning Board held a public hearing Oct. 27 and voted 8‑0 not to recommend the rezoning, citing the proposal's inconsistency with the Catawba County Comprehensive Plan and concerns about creating a commercial strip rather than focusing growth at established commercial nodes. Timberlake noted the Comprehensive Plan, adopted April 2024, designates the parcel for low‑density residential uses and encourages commercial growth at three nodes along NC 16.
At the Nov. 17 hearing supporters Miles Wright and Greg Crawley spoke in favor of the request. Commissioner Robert C. Abernethy Jr. moved to deny the rezoning application and adopt the plan‑inconsistency and unreasonableness statement included with the agenda. The motion carried unanimously.
The Board's formal finding cites North Carolina General Statute 160D‑605 in support of its determination that the rezoning would be inconsistent with the county's adopted land‑use plan. The Board's denial keeps the parcel zoned R‑40 and maintains the county's current land‑use recommendation for the site.
The denial was entered into the minutes on Nov. 17, 2025. No vote tally by individual commissioner was recorded in the minutes beyond the unanimous outcome.
