Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Union County hearing on House of Pearls rezoning draws years of testimonials; commissioners defer decision
Summary
A public hearing on a proposed residential recovery campus for House of Pearls drew dozens of supporters and some nearby residents worried about scale, wetlands and traffic. Staff recommended approval, but a board rule that bars same-night votes after voiced opposition put the rezoning on the next meeting’s agenda.
Union County commissioners heard more than two hours of testimony on May 18 over a conditional rezoning request for House of Pearls, a faith-based residential recovery and life-skills program seeking to develop up to eight homes and a life center on a parcel on Camden Road.
Planner Bjorn Hansen told the board the request would be processed as a master plan development so the project can proceed in phases; staff recommended approval. "The maximum number of residents shall not exceed 80," Hansen said, and he emphasized conditions that prohibit medical detox, conversion to a shelter or correctional facility, and on-site parking for residents. Planning Board members had recommended unanimous approval at their meeting the prior month.
Speakers for the applicant described program operations and outcomes. "We are a nonprofit faith based, organization," Steve Merritt, chairman of the House of Pearls board, said, recounting the program’s history and saying it has helped many women since about 2006. Executive director Delois Carpenter said the program provides job training, life skills and intensive supervision, and other leaders said the organization screens residents and provides a 12-month program with follow-up services.
Neighbors voiced concerns about siting, scale and infrastructure. Delaine Clay, speaking for nearby residents, said the property "does not perk and sits within wetlands," warned that nearby Camden Road and a nearby intersection are not designed for increased daily traffic, and urged the board to require thorough traffic, environmental and safety studies and to limit the development’s initial scale.
Several current and former residents gave personal testimony about recovery outcomes. "If it weren't for this program... I would have ended up exactly where my brother is," Erica Sullivan, a current resident, said, describing her recovery and urging approval. Supporters repeatedly emphasized that residents are supervised and that the organization provides aftercare and community partnerships.
County staff advised the board that a long-standing Board Rule of Procedure prevents the board from voting the same night an item draws voiced opposition. A staff member told the board "that rule prohibits being able to vote on something the same night if there was opposition voiced," and recommended the matter be scheduled for consideration at the next meeting. The chair confirmed the public hearing record would be left open for the board’s future deliberation.
What happens next: Because neighbors spoke in opposition, the board will not vote on the rezoning at this meeting; staff said the petition will be eligible for consideration at the next regular meeting. The transcript does not record a subsequent vote or final decision.
Authorities and actions referenced in the hearing (as stated in staff presentation) include the county’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) and the Planning Board’s prior unanimous recommendation. The rezoning petition was identified in the record as CZ2026-006 (House of Pearls).
