Scotland County advisory board recommends rezoning and 17‑lot subdivision despite neighbor safety concerns

Scotland County — The Scotland County Planning Board voted to recommend approval of rezoning application 549-26 and a linked major subdivision application (1029-26) from applicant Bobby Campbell Jr., sending both items to the county commissioners for final action.

Board members considered a request to rezone three parcels totaling about 39 acres from R1 (residential single-family) to RA (residential agriculture) and a contingent plan to create up to 17 residential lots. The properties lie between Gibson Road/Highway 79 and Elmore Road and are listed on Scotland County Tax Map 311, block 010 (partial parcels referenced by the applicant).

The applicant told the board he had submitted transportation letters and driveway-permit paperwork to the North Carolina Department of Transportation, including a fee-based review the applicant said covered up to 17 driveway checks. “I got one,” the applicant said when board members asked which permits had been received; board members and staff repeatedly asked that all DOT documentation be presented to the board for the record.

Several residents who live adjacent to the proposed development expressed safety concerns about up to 13 driveways on Highway 79, which is posted at 55 mph in the area and which neighbors described as having blind spots and frequent speeding. A resident who identified himself as James said his wife was struck on that stretch in 2020 and urged greater caution; he said drivers “come by right there running 70” and recommended more enforcement or a speed‑limit review. The board responded that DOT uses engineering standards to evaluate driveway permits and that DOT approval indicates the department met its criteria, though members acknowledged public safety concerns remain a community consideration.

Neighbors also questioned whether selling multiple lots could create a de facto mobile‑home park or increase rental units and depress property values. The applicant has supplied proposed restrictive covenants that bar single‑wide mobile homes, permit double‑wides only if they meet age and foundation (masonry underpinning) standards, and otherwise constrain uses. Community members asked whether the covenants should bar rentals or include explicit term limits; one attendee suggested 25‑year terms with renewal. The board advised that covenants must be drawn to be recordable and that the applicant consult an attorney to produce enforceable deed restrictions.

Board members debated how prescriptive the advisory board should be about covenant terms. A staff member explained that covenants recorded with deeds run with the land and can be enforced by property owners, and that the county commissioners — not the advisory board — have the final authority to approve zoning and subdivision requests. The chair reminded residents they could appear before the county commissioners at their next meeting to state concerns; the commissioners meet the first Monday of the month at 6 p.m. in the EOC building at 1403 West Boulevard.

A motion to recommend approval of rezoning application 549-26 (rezone three parcels from R1 to RA) was made by Billy and seconded by Dave; the advisory board voted, and the transcript records the recommendation carried with a 4‑to‑1 tally. A separate motion to recommend approval of major subdivision application 1029-26 (to create up to 17 lots contingent on rezoning) was made by Javon, seconded by Billy, and the board carried that recommendation as well; the board will forward both recommendations and the applicant’s recordable covenants (once prepared) to the county commissioners for a final decision.

Next steps: The planning board’s actions are advisory. The rezoning and subdivision approvals will be considered by the Scotland County commissioners at their next meeting, where members of the public may testify for or against the proposals. The board asked the applicant to return with attorney‑prepared, recordable covenants and complete DOT paperwork prior to the commissioners’ hearing.