Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rezoning 1380 Abattoir topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning Board recommends rezoning for 1380 Abattoir Road, presses for 100‑foot buffer and lower density on application

Town of Coats Planning Board · September 1, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Town of Coats Planning Board recommended approval of a development agreement and rezoning for 1380 Abattoir Road, but asked the applicant to amend the application to a lower density designation and urged retaining a 100‑foot buffer; the vote was 5–1 in favor of the recommendation.

Chair Hazel Stephenson opened the Sept. 11 continuation of the Planning Board meeting and led the board in further review of a proposed rezoning and development agreement for 1380 Abattoir Road.

Applicant representative David Goracke and engineer Randy Kemp presented a revised plan that the applicant said reduced the project by 63 lots from an earlier 198‑lot concept. Goracke said the plan would retain an on‑site cemetery, preserve a large magnolia tree, and set aside about 1.5 acres as a community gathering area. He said the development would be HOA‑controlled and that buyers would receive disclosures about ongoing farm operations and a nearby shooting range.

Engineer Randy Kemp told the board that the developer had consulted NCDOT and that the agency had said traffic volumes were insufficient to require a traffic impact analysis and that sight distance at the proposed entrance was adequate. Kemp added that reported accidents in the corridor were largely run‑off‑road incidents, DWIs, and early‑morning collisions with animals. “NCDOT indicated there was not enough traffic to require a traffic impact analysis,” Kemp said. He also described the project’s fiscal estimate: an increase to the town’s tax base of more than $50 million and about $68,000 in Parks and Recreation revenue over the life of the project, figures the applicant provided for planning purposes.

Board members pressed the applicant on several design points. Vice Chair Misty Gil asked about establishing a 100‑foot buffer on the north side; Goracke said he would try to accommodate a larger buffer if NCDOT accepted the needed driveway/entrance configuration. Ally Fouts asked whether the zoning could be lowered from SFR3 to SFR2; Goracke said he would be willing to amend the application if the board thought that appropriate. Board member Clint Latham confirmed that any sewer pump station upgrades identified in a study by Dillon Phillips would be the developer’s financial responsibility.

Nearby residents who spoke during the Sept. 4 public forum urged denial or further study. Beth Cole said the town’s schools were already “at capacity,” and other residents raised traffic‑safety and road‑condition concerns. Attorney Wiley Pope, representing John Pope and BW Pope Inc., said the proposal conflicted with the Coats Land Use Plan and warned of potential legal challenges related to nearby uses.

Goracke responded that the project included open space and buffers, that no wetlands impacts had been identified, and that spot rezoning complied with North Carolina General Statutes governing rezoning and annexation. He described a divided entrance as a safety measure used in other municipalities.

After discussion the Planning Board voted to recommend approval of the development agreement and rezoning, but with two formal notes: that the development obligations in the agreement uphold a 100‑foot buffer where shown, and that the applicant amend the rezoning application to SFR2. The motion passed with five members voting aye (Chair Hazel Stephenson, Vice Chair Misty Gil, Clint Latham, Don Plessinger and Mitchell Pope) and one member voting no (Lawrence Denning). The board adjourned following a separate motion to close the meeting.

The Planning Board’s recommendation will go to the Town Council for final action; council consideration and any required state notifications were not determined at the meeting.