Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Four Oaks board leaves rezoning request for 7023 U.S. 301 S. unresolved after resident objections
Summary
A proposed rezoning of Parcel 08H10097A from RA to R6 for multiunit housing drew multiple resident objections over water supply, flooding and infrastructure, and a motion to deny the request "failed to carry"; the minutes record no approval vote at the April 20 meeting.
A proposal to rezone Parcel 08H10097A, adjacent to 7023 U.S. 301 S., from RA to R6 to permit 2–3 bedroom apartment units intended as affordable housing drew sustained public opposition and did not reach a conclusive approval at the Town of Four Oaks Board of Commissioners’ April 20 meeting.
Planning & Zoning Director Mike Cook summarized the request and said staff would only recommend rezoning if a related special-use permit passed and the parcel was annexed. Justin Lee, representing petitioner Godwin Engineering, told the board the development would include a wide entry with curb and gutter and that the units were intended as "affordable housing for young professionals such as police officers and teachers."
Several nearby residents told the board they opposed the rezoning. Sam Austin said the town faces a limited water supply and adding multiple units "doesn't make sense." Trina Baker urged the town to impose a building moratorium because of water concerns. Silva Allen said the parcel contains protected wetlands and warned that increased development would worsen existing flooding. Rhonda Norris said she was worried about infrastructure and local schools; Dedra Shepard, who lives downhill from the parcel, cited existing flooding and heavy traffic.
After public comment the board closed the hearing. Commissioner Linwood Parker moved to deny the rezoning request and Commissioner Kim Robertson seconded; Mayor Pro-Tem Tony Capps is recorded as opposing the motion. The minutes state the motion "failed to carry." The minutes do not record a subsequent motion to approve the rezoning during the April 20 meeting.
Why it matters: rezoning would change the parcel's allowable uses and could add multiple housing units in Four Oaks’ extraterritorial jurisdiction, affecting water demand, drainage and nearby property owners’ expectations. The record from April 20 leaves the rezoning status unresolved pending a future action.
Next steps: the board did not record an approving motion on April 20; the item may return for further consideration after staff follow-up, additional information on water and infrastructure, or upon annexation, according to the presentation and public record.
