Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Clayton planning board recommends denial of 44-acre Stoton’s Crossings industrial rezoning after neighbors’ concerns
Summary
The Planning Board voted 5–3 to recommend denial of a conditional rezoning that would allow a 44-acre industrial park called Stoton’s Crossings, citing concerns about compatibility with surrounding residential areas, mass grading and potential impacts on private wells; the applicant says it will fund water and sewer extensions.
The Town of Clayton Planning Board on June 22 recommended denial to town council of a conditional rezoning request for a 44-acre site known as Stoton’s Crossings, following hours of testimony from staff, the applicant and dozens of neighbors.
Harbor Tate, a senior planner with the town, told the board the applicant seeks to change a Wake County R30 parcel to a Town of Clayton Conditional Industrial (CZI) district to allow warehouse distribution and other industrial uses. Tate said the concept plan shows two access points, stormwater controls and perimeter landscaping and that staff recommends approval, while flagging two primary concerns: the applicant’s request to be exempted from some mass-grading provisions and several industrial uses staff had asked be removed from the permitted list.
The applicant, Ben Harris of Stoton Industrial, said his firm would pay for utility extensions needed to serve the site: a 1.6–1.7 mile gravity sewer he estimated at about $1.9 million and an estimated $1.1 million water extension to be dedicated to the town. Harris stressed the site would be for "warehouse distribution and light manufacturing" and told the board, "No data centers. We are not a data center developer. We're not going to build a data center." He also said the plan uses the maximum Type D (40-foot) buffer and includes measures to preserve mature trees where possible.
Neighbors who live adjacent to the proposed site said the rezoning would be out of step with the surrounding low-density residential pattern and raised specific worries about private well water, traffic on Guy Road, truck queuing and heavy mass grading. Several residents invoked a local historic home on the property and asked the board to prioritize water availability and groundwater protection. One resident said the presentation did not directly address the effects on private wells or quantify truck trips, and multiple speakers urged larger buffers or a different location for industrial uses.
Board members questioned staff and the applicant on wastewater allocation (town engineering said a wastewater allocation request had not yet been filed), impervious-surface estimates (not provided without fixed building footprints) and whether the town’s annexation and contiguity rationale was appropriate. Staff said wastewater allocation requests above 10,000 gallons require council approval. Several members emphasized that site-plan review and subsequent permit stages would be important for limiting spillover impacts, such as truck parking and lighting.
After deliberation the board considered a motion to recommend approval but that motion failed on a divided vote. A separate motion to recommend denial passed on a roll call vote of 5–3 (the board’s vote is advisory; final approval rests with the Town Council). The board recorded its recommendation to deny based on inconsistency with the town’s future land use map and concerns about impacts to nearby residential properties.
The council will receive the Planning Board’s recommendation at a later meeting, at which the town council—rather than the planning board—will make the final decision.
What happens next: the Planning Board’s recommendation will be transmitted to Town Council. If the applicant proceeds, any future site plan and building permits will be reviewed by town staff and become part of the public record.
