October 1, 2007 - 6:00 PM - County Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes (Rezoning)

10 436 Meeting of the Johnston County Board of Commissioners October 1 , 2007 6 00 pm The Johnston County Board of Commissioners met in regular session Monday , October 1 , 2007 at 6 00 pm in the Commissioners Meeting Room , Johnston County Courthouse Annex , Smithfield , North Carolina The following members were present Present Cookie Pope , Chairman , Wade M Stewart , Vice Chairman , Allen L Mims , Jr , Jeffrey P Carver , W Ray Woodall , DeVan Barbour , and Tony Braswell Absent None Also Present Rick J Hester , County Manager , Paula G Woodard , Clerk to the Board , J Mark Payne , County Attorney , and Deva C Holt , Deputy Clerk Chairman Cookie Pope called the meeting to order at 6 00 pm and the following business was transacted 1 Recognition of the Blue Ribbon Committee Membership The Board recognized the membership of the Blue Ribbon Committee for their recent work on studying issues related to the challenges the County faces concerning finance , growth , infrastructure , etc 2 Public Comments A Citizen Concern – Johnson Forest Subdivision Approval Pam McLamb , 229 Tramworth Drive , Drayton Downs Subdivision , addressed the Board and voiced concerns over the recent approval of Johnson Forest Subdivision adjacent to Drayton Downs Subdivision Ms McLamb shared with the Board the approved preliminary diagram for Johnson Forest Ms McLamb stated in her research , she discovered part of the area approved for the subdivision is identified as being a “ significant area ” in the “ Inventory of Significant Natural Areas for Johnston County ” Ms McLamb noted part of the area contains a number of rare species and she was concerned as to how the subdivision was approved Ms McLamb stated she and her neighbors are not trying to halt development ; however , she asked if the matter could be researched further to see if the subdivision could be redesigned so the area would be protected Ms McLamb submitted a letter to the Board signed by her and many of her neighbors concerned over the subdivision approval Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr asked Ms McLamb if she and her neighbors had received notice the Planning Board would be considering the proposed subdivision Ms McLamb reported they did not receive notification , or else she would have spoken at the Planning Board meeting Commissioner Mims expressed his concern that the parcels identified in the inventory of significant natural areas in Johnston County was not a layer on the Geographic Information Service in order to avoid matters such as this After discussion over the issue , it was noted that the subdivision layout has already been approved by the Planning Board ; however , the Commissioners began a discussion concerning the open space study conducted in 2001 At the request of the Board , County Manager Rick Hester stated he would look into what action had been taken on that study and report back to the Commissioners County Attorney Mark Payne reported it was his recollection the Commissioners simply accepted the open space study ; however , nothing else was done and no ordinance amendments were made The Commissioners thanked Ms McLamb for bringing the matter to their attention and encouraged her to attend upcoming community meetings related to a potential comprehensive land use plan to voice the importance of proper planning for natural and open space areas Ms McLamb inquired as to the next steps in trying to protect the property approved for Johnson Forest Subdivision Commissioner Tony Braswell asked Planning Director Berry Gray if the Planning Department had some sort of checklist to determine if adequate open spaces were being matched up against proposed subdivisions Page437 October 1 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued Mr Gray reported the Department does have a checklist and according to the map the Planning staff received for Johnson Forest Subdivision , the map indicated most of the trees and natural area were located within the planned open space of the subdivision Ms McLamb expressed concern that the map did not accurately depict the natural area Michael Edwards – 229 Tramworth Drive , Drayton Downs Subdivision , addressed the Board and reiterated Ms McLamb’s concerns that the subdivision should be redesigned in order to have more open space and protect the natural areas County Manager Rick Hester reported he would research the matter further 3 Public Hearings – Rezoning Cases and Special Use Permit Requests Advertised – In The Smithfield Herald – September 21 and September 25 , 2007 Certified letters were mailed to adjoining property owners on September 20 , 2007 Notices were posted at the locations on May 2 , 2007 for Cases 07 - 15 and 07 - 16 ; and August 7 , 2007 for Case 07 - 27 The Chairman opened the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 15 Case 07 - 15 Petition to rezone a 398 acre tract located at the intersection of NC Highway 50 and Old Drug Store Road SR 1524 in Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business Special Use District GB - SUD Tax ID 06D02003 Owner Lottie D Gurganus Applicant Son - Lan Development Planning Director Berry Gray stated this was a petition to rezone a 398 acre tract located at the intersection of NC Highway 50 and Old Drug Store Road SR 1524 in Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business Special Use District GB - SUD Mr Gray noted this case was heard by the Board several months ago as a request for straight General Business and the Commissioners at that time , voted to send the request back to the Planning Board to review the classification of General Business Special Use District Mr Gray further noted , if approved , the Special Use District classification would require the applicant to bring any identified uses back to the Board for review prior to being approved for construction within one year Curk Lane of True Line Surveying , representing the applicant , informed the Board that Son - Lan Development believes the tract of land could be well utilized for commercial use instead of residential Mr Lane noted Old Drug Store Road is currently being realigned with NC Hwy 50 and the intersection will be further away from the bridge over Middle Creek to allow the Department of Transportation in conjunction with the developers to install turn lanes with the necessary safety tapers in order to get the traffic back down to two lanes before crossing the bridge Mr Lane asked for any questions Joy Jones , 116 Shenstone Lane , Drayton Downs Subdivision , appeared before the Board and expressed her concern with the rezoning request Ms Jones questioned how the road realignment would make the area safer as well as how the applicant is trying to develop land on both sides of the intersection as commercial She stated she would like to see better planning done for the area Ms Jones asked if anything was being done to ensure Middle Creek was being protected Ms Jones referenced commercial development by Son - Lan one mile south of the area at Sanders Road and noted there are for sale signs listed for this commercial development Ms Jones stated she is not against growth ; however , expressed it should be managed properly and stated she felt commercial development at this intersection is unneeded Ms Jones recalled the last time the area was reviewed for a rezoning , she learned there are 10,000 cars per day on Old Drug Store Road and by next year once the developments already in place are finished , there will be approximately 15,000 cars per day Ms Jones felt the rezoning should be put on hold to allow for more planning Commissioner Jeffrey P Carver reminded everyone that the rezoning , if approved , would be a Special Use District and the citizens would have another opportunity to voice their concerns when an identified use was submitted Commissioner Carver reiterated the rezoning request on the opposite side of the road was previously denied as straight General Business Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr noted the previously denied rezoning request would be coming back to the Board for review as a Special Use District Page438 October 1 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued Commissioner Carver asked if the realignment would line up with another development that has yet to be approved Mr Lane informed the Board the development being proposed on the opposite side of the road has a residential and commercial section each and noted the residential section has already been approved Mr Lane stated that proposed commercial development will be coming back to the Board of Commissioners soon as a request to rezone to Community Business Special Use District Mr Lane further stated the realignment will form an intersection at this area Mr Lane noted staggering connections are not safe and intersections are needed wherever possible rather than having a double - stop condition Mr Lane confirmed that the intersection will not connect to Creekside Subdivision , per the residents ’ request Mr Lane stated Son - Lan will be requesting Community Business Special Use District for the tract on the opposite side of the road in an effort to address the citizens ’ concerns over mini - storage and noted mini - storage is not allowed under Community Business Commissioner Mims inquired about access to the recently approved smaller residential development Mr Lane reported the access for the smaller residential development will come in at the new intersection which will be signalized There was , at one time , going to be a connection provided for the Creekside residents to enter out on to NC Hwy 50 at a four - way signalized intersection ; however , those residents chose not to allow that and instead have their entrance further up on NC Hwy 50 Commissioner Carver stated the two rezoning cases should be heard by the Board simultaneously in order to evaluate how they would impact the area together Mr Lane reported the Community Business Special Use District rezoning case would be coming before the Commissioners next month He noted the developments had been tracking together ; however , became separated due to the Board denying one request and sending the other request back to the Planning Board for review Commissioner Mims reminded everyone that one of the reasons the Board denied the first rezoning was due to uncertainties regarding the road realignment Mr Lane confirmed that the DOT is currently constructing the realignment ; however , he was unsure how far along it was at the present In response to a question from Commissioner Carver , Mr Lane reported the DOT is funding the cost of the road realignment Mr Lane reiterated that both cases are coming before the Board as special use requests and he hoped what would eventually be proposed would be satisfactory to the citizens Mr Lane noted he has heard talk of a possible daycare and a dance studio as two potential uses He stated that by possibly having community business in the area , it may defuse some traffic because citizens would not have to travel as far for services they need Mr Gray reported the Planning Board recommended approval of Case 07 - 15 from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business Special Use District GB - SUD and reiterated the special use would require the applicant to bring a proposed use back to the Board within one year ; whereupon special conditions can be placed on the development There being no further comments , the Chairman recessed the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 15 Discussion by the Board on Rezoning Case 07 - 15 Commissioner Mims stated he had voted against both requests in the past as straight General Business ; however , he commended the applicant for getting the property to realign with the road in order to address safety Commissioner Mims noted he felt the Board should table the request until the Community Business Special Use District request is heard next month at which time both cases could be reviewed simultaneously to determine how they both would impact the area Commissioner Mims also stated he would like to have the residents from Creekside Subdivision present and discuss with them what they are requesting in regards to access for their subdivision Page439 October 1 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued Commissioner Carver inquired as to how many lots were currently in Creekside Subdivision Mr Gray reported there are less than 200 lots in Creekside Subdivision and with the addition of the new smaller residential development , the number of lots would remain less than 200 In response to a comment made by Curk Lane who stated the residents of Creekside Subdivision have requested to cut the secondary access off completely and not have an emergency access , Mr Gray noted the Planning Board has not reviewed the request yet At the inquiry of Commissioner Carver , Mr Gray reported a secondary or an emergency access is required for a development of 100 to 200 lots If the development is over 200 lots , a secondary full service access is required Decision on Rezoning Case 07 - 15 Case 07 - 15 Petition to rezone a 398 acre tract located at the intersection of NC Highway 50 and Old Drug Store Road SR 1524 in Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business Special Use District GB - SUD Tax ID 06D02003 Owner Lottie D Gurganus Applicant Son - Lan Development Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr moved the Board table rezoning case 07 - 15 , to rezone a 398 acre tract located at the intersection of NC Highway 50 and Old Drug Store Road SR 1524 in Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business Special Use District GB - SUD until the November 5 , 2007 meeting at which time rezoning case 07 - 15 and rezoning case 07 - 33 will be heard together since they are similar in nature Commissioner Jeffrey P Carver seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote The Chairman reopened the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 27 Case 07 - 27 Petition to rezone 2 parcels for a total of 366 acres located at 10666 Cleveland Rd SR 1010 , approximately ¼ mile east of S Shiloh Rd SR 1526 in Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB Tax ID 06E02041 , 06G05046 Owner Applicant Ruth McLendon Planning Director Berry Gray stated this was a petition to rezone two parcels for a total of 366 acres located at 10666 Cleveland Rd SR 1010 , approximately ¼ mile east of S Shiloh Rd SR 1526 in Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB Mr Gray noted the property is located directly in front of a residential subdivision ; however , there are several commercial zoning classifications in the vicinity as well as a General Business classification that was approved approximately one year ago He stated some of the residents have spoken in opposition to mini - storage Mr Gray reported the rezoning request was comprised of two lots , one directly on Cleveland Road and another smaller piece directly behind it In response to a question from Chairman Pope , Mr Gray reported Cleveland Mini - Storage will be located further up on Cleveland Road from the subject property Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr inquired if the smaller back parcel was a part of the existing residential subdivision Mr Gray reported it appears the parcel is part of the subdivision ; however , staff has researched the subdivision and could find no restrictions on commercial use within the subdivision Mr Gray noted the subdivision is an older development recorded in 1979 and although there are some vacant lots , it is a primarily established subdivision Applicant Ruth McLendon appeared before the Board and stated she would be glad to answer any questions Commissioner Tony Braswell noted in the Planning Board minutes regarding this case , Ms McLendon reported she currently had no desire for any type of business on the property now ; however , she wanted to sell it and felt she could get more for the property if it were rezoned General Business Commissioner Braswell asked Ms McLendon to confirm if this was correct Ms McLendon stated by rezoning the property she was unsure if she could sell it for more money ; however , she did want to make sure that whatever business locates on the property would be good for the neighbors PagePage pageNumber5440 October 1 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued Commissioner Jeffrey P Carver explained the differences between General Business and General Business Special Use District and asked Ms McLendon if she was acceptable to a Special Use District instead of a straight rezoning to General Business Ms McLendon indicated she would accept a General Business Special Use District zoning and confirmed that it does matter to her what type of business locates on the property Ms McLendon stated she did not want to do anything that would disturb her neighbors Mr Gray reported the Planning Board recommended approval of Case 07 - 27 from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB and stated staff would have no concerns with the rezoning being approved as General Business Special Use District GB - SUD Mr Gray noted if approved , the applicant would have one year to find a buyer to take advantage of the General Business Special Use District zoning There being no further comments , the Chairman recessed the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 27 Decision on Rezoning Case 07 - 27 Case 07 - 27 Petition to rezone 2 parcels for a total of 366 acres located at 10666 Cleveland Rd SR 1010 , approximately ¼ mile east of S Shiloh Rd SR 1526 in Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB Tax ID 06E02041 , 06G05046 Owner Applicant Ruth McLendon Commissioner Jeffrey P Carver moved the Board approve rezoning case 07 - 27 , to rezone two parcels for a total of 366 acres located at 10666 Cleveland Rd SR 1010 , approximately ¼ mile east of S Shiloh Rd SR 1526 in Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business Special Use District GB - SUD Commissioner W Ray Woodall seconded the motion Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr stated he could support the property with road frontage being rezoned to General Business Special Use District ; however , he could not see rezoning the back parcel that is a part of the subdivision and would vote no The motion carried by the following vote Ayes Commissioners Cookie Pope , Wade M Stewart , W Ray Woodall , Jeffrey P Carver , DeVan Barbour , and Tony Braswell Nays Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr The Chairman reopened the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 16 Case 07 - 16 Petition to rezone the underlying zoning district of a 2678 acre tract from Industrial - 2 I - 2 to General Business Special Use District GB - SUD and to rezone 2822 acres of a 4703 acre tract , for a total of 55 acres , from General Business GB to General Business Special Use District GB - SUD located at 4717 NC 42 Hwy W which is approximately 3 10 of a mile east of its intersection with Cleveland Crossing Drive SR 1628 in Cleveland Township Tax ID’s 06E02005R & 06E02005S Applicant Paramount Development Corporation Owners Billy Ray and Joe Mike Barefoot Planning Director Berry Gray stated this was a petition to rezone the underlying zoning district of a 2678 acre tract from Industrial - 2 I - 2 to General Business Special Use District GB - SUD and to rezone 2822 acres of a 4703 acre tract , for a total of 55 acres , from General Business GB to General Business Special Use District GB - SUD located at 4717 NC 42 Hwy W which is approximately 3 10 of a mile east of its intersection with Cleveland Crossing Drive SR 1628 in Cleveland Township Mr Gray clarified there are 286 acres zoned I - 2 across from NC 42 from the site and 66 acres zoned I - 2 adjacent to the site on the south side of NC 42 , which is the County’s most intense zoning designation and all of which is currently vacant Mr Gray noted there was a special use application associated with the request to allow for the operation and construction of a Super Wal - Mart commercial shopping center David Harner of the applicant Paramount Development Corporation , informed the Board that approximately eight months ago , Paramount Development commissioned a traffic study related to the proposed use on the area Mr Harner stated the study returned a number of traffic improvements needed for the development whereupon those recommendations were sent to the Department of Transportation Raleigh Congestion Management Office for review The Congestion Management Office along with DOT DistrictPagePage pageNumber6441 October 1 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued Engineer Tim Little generated additional required improvements and informed Mr Harner the recommendations by the DOT was the Department’s interpretation of what would keep the level of service in the area consistent with the addition of the Super Wal - Mart Mr Harner reviewed with the Board a few of the recommendations as required by the Department of Transportation Mr Harner stated one item both he and Mr Little recognized that will reduce the traffic coming off the development , is the new beltway , to be constructed Commissioner Jeffrey P Carver asked for a traffic count at Cornwallis Road and NC Hwy 42 , stating this would be a good indicator of traffic at the proposed development , depending on the time of day Mr Harner reported the count on the side of the road by the Food Lion is at 30,000 cars per day , and the side of the road where the Lowe’s is located is approximately half that The majority of the traffic congestion is west of Interstate 40 , according to the most recent traffic counts Mr Harner stated Paramount had researched what type of impact the bypass would have on the interchange and were unable to locate any data ; however , he felt the traffic improvements would help the situation Commissioner Mims expressed concern for the opposite side of the intersection continuing east bound on Interstate 40 and stated this area could also be impacted by a proposed Wal - Mart Mr Harner reported Tim Little acknowledged this was an area the Congestion Management staff was trying to address and reported DOT will be trying to close some driveways in order to lessen the impact of the traffic At the inquiry of Commissioner Mims , Mr Harner stated there were no discussions concerning a possible back road that would tie into Cleveland Road Mr Harner reported in front of the proposed development there would be a five lane through - section which would travel down to the bridge and be served by three signaled intersections to minimize the impacts as much as possible Chairman Pope questioned the direction going east towards Clayton and asked what would happen at the bridge Mr Harner confirmed , as recommended by the DOT , the traffic would go from five lanes back down to two lanes closer to the bridge and would be properly tapered Paramount Development’s Engineer , Chris Stover , reported the distance down to the bridge is 1,200 feet and would taper down to two lanes at approximately 100 to 150 feet back from the bridge Mr Harner reported the proposed traffic improvements have been scrutinized by a number of engineers not employed by Paramount and the improvements are the end result of that work by all parties Commissioner Mims voiced concern that there was no stub - out at the back of the property and stated he would like to see a mini - transportation plan developed that would involve a back connection to Cleveland Road to address potential future problems Commissioner Wade M Stewart agreed that more planning regarding traffic should be done for the area Joe Paramour of Paramount Development stated Mr Little had informed Paramount the DOT had intended to address some of the traffic concerns in the area ; however , it was a function of money Mr Paramour stated he did not mind constructing a stub - out behind the property to provide access to the back of the site ; however , he reminded the Board that Paramount did not control the other properties that may be involved Mr Gray reported the Planning Board recommended approval of Case 07 - 16 to General Business Special Use District There being no further comments , the Chairman closed the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 16 Decision on Rezoning Case 07 - 16 Case 07 - 16 Petition to rezone the underlying zoning district of a 2678 acre tract from Industrial - 2 I - 2 to General Business Special Use District GB - SUD and to rezone 2822 acres of a 4703 acre tract , for a total of 55 acres , from General Business GB to General Business Special Use District GB - SUD located at 4717 NC 42 Hwy W which is approximately 3 10 of a mile eastPagePage pageNumber7442 October 1 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued of its intersection with Cleveland Crossing Drive SR 1628 in Cleveland Township Tax ID’s 06E02005R & 06E02005S Applicant Paramount Development Corporation Owners Billy Ray and Joe Mike Barefoot Commissioner Wade M Stewart moved the Board approve rezoning case 07 - 16 , to rezone the underlying zoning district of a 2678 acre tract from Industrial - 2 I - 2 to General Business Special Use District GB - SUD and to rezone 2822 acres of a 4703 acre tract , for a total of 55 acres , from General Business GB to General Business Special Use District GB - SUD located at 4717 NC 42 Hwy W which is approximately 3 10 of a mile east of its intersection with Cleveland Crossing Drive SR 1628 in Cleveland Township Commissioner Tony Braswell seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote The Chairman opened the Special Use Hearing for Case 07 - 16 Case 07 - 16 Application to allow for the operation and construction of a Super Wal - Mart commercial shopping center Applicant Paramount Development Corporation Owners Billy Ray and Joe Mike Barefoot Those wishing to speak on Special Use Case 07 - 16 were sworn in by the Clerk to the Board Planning Director Berry Gray introduced the special use case and stated the request is to allow for the operation and construction of a Super Wal - Mart commercial shopping center Mr Gray introduced the following summary of evidence into the record A pre - application consultation was held with the applicant for Case 07 - 16 on March 21 , 2007 At that time , the applicant was informed of the following • If approved , applicant must provide to the Planning Office a Site Plan for their review and approval • Applicant must comply with the requirement of the Johnston County Land Development Code regarding landscaping , buffering and fence or any additional requirements as approved by this Board • Applicant will be notified in writing of the Board’s decision • If denied , no application can be accepted for the same use affecting the same property for a period of twelve 12 months and that their right of appeal to the Superior Court must be exercised within thirty 30 days of the receipt of notice of denial by the Board of County Commissioners • Applicant’s Special Use Permit will expire at the end of twenty - four 24 months if it is not used as permitted within the time period • When necessary , staff informed the applicant of further Planning and Zoning Department requirements and the requirements of other departments such as soil erosion and sedimentation requirements , Health Department regulations , stormwater and public utility requirements • Subsequent to the pre - application consultation , all required notices were mailed to property owners within 500 feet The property was posted and notices of public hearings were advertised in accordance with the requirements of the North Carolina General Statutes On May 15 , 2007 , the Johnston County Planning Board held a public hearing regarding Rezoning and Special Use Case 07 - 16 and made the following recommendations Upon a motion by Mr Gathers , seconded by Mr Moore , and carried by a vote of 6 - 1 with Mr Browder dissenting , the Planning Board voted to recommend approval of the Special Use Permit request , Case 07 - 16 , based on and subject to the following Finding of Facts for the Special Use Permit 1 That the use or development is located , designed , and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health , safety , and general welfare ; Applicant The Development is located directly adjacent to the existing Lowe’s Home Improvement on US Highway 42 @ Interstate 40 in Johnston County The property currently has three 3 existing zoning designations , IHI , I - 2 , and GB The proposed zoning reclassification is General Business Special Use District The land design is intended to facilitate a shopping and dining environment with emphasis on controlled access , curb appeal and safety The anchor is a 194,000 sq ft Super Wal - Mart The Development proposes 40,460 sq feet of retail shop space which will include typical mercantile uses such as apparel , electronic , restaurant and service retailers The two outparcels are intended for single users such as a bank or family sit - down or fast food restaurant The Development proposes a new traffic signal and considerable widening of US 42 as per the recommendations found in Traffic Impact Analysis dated 3 29 07 Staff Proposed location is within the area designated for commercial developments at Interstate Interchanges A new traffic signal , widening of Hwy 42 , and security lighting will maintain and promote the public health , safety , and general welfare 2 That the use or development appears to comply with all required use and intensity regulations of Articles II & IV of the Johnston County Land Development Code and the applicable specific standards in section 14 - 257 and with all applicable regulations ;PagePage pageNumber8443 October 1 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued Applicant The Development will comply with all local , state , and federal building codes and regulations and shall meet or exceed all landscaping , parking , and lightening requirements Additional restrictions forbidding undesirable uses shall be incorporated into the Development’s General Business Special Use District application Staff Proposed use is less intense than how the current underlying Industrial - 2 zoning district could be utilized Shopping Centers are allowed in both the GB and IHI district , so development approval is dependent on the Special Use Permit , more so than the change in intensity of the zoning district Development will meet all state , federal , and local land development regulations 3 That the use or development is located , designed , and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property , or that the use or development is a public necessity ; Applicant Area demographics have seen a huge increase over the past decade creating a need for more basic shopping opportunities This development will cater to the shopping patterns established by surrounding communities Additional traffic will be mitigated by the extensive road improvements proposed by this Development Staff This proposed shopping center is located within the IHI zoning district that promotes commercial growth at the interstate interchanges No residential conflict exists and required traffic improvements will maintain and or enhance the value of contiguous properties This Wal - Mart Super Center will cater to the Cleveland Community alleviating some traffic traveling east on Hwy 42 to the nearest Wal - Mart off US 70 in Clayton approximately 8 miles away 4 That the use or development conforms with general plans for the physical development of the County’s Planning jurisdiction , the Design Manual , or other development policies as adopted by the Board of Commissioners Applicant The Development is located within the commercial hub IHI district as designated by the BOCC All aspects shall comply with applicable land development codes and conditions as placed by the Planning Board The buildings constructed on the Shopping Center shall be designed so that the exterior elevation of each shall be architecturally and aesthetically compatible The design and construction shall be of high quality No building constructed on the property shall exceed 45 ’ including all mechanical improvements and architectural embellishments in height above finished grade No building constructed on the property shall exceed 45 ’ including all mechanical improvements and architectural embellishments in height above finished grade No building constructed on the Outparcels shall exceed 28 ’ including all mechanical improvements and architectural embellishments in height , as measured from the mean finished elevation of the parking area of the Shopping Center No building shall have metal exterior No building shall be constructed on the Shopping Center as either immediate development or future expansion except within the building areas Any rooftop equipment constructed on the buildings located on the Outparcels shall be screened so as not to be visible from the mean finished elevation of the respective parking area Staff This development will abide by all requirements of the codes and any conditions as placed by the boards List all Specific Land Uses Applicant The specific land use request is for a Shopping Center and Outparcels All buildings in the Shopping Center shall be used for commercial purposes of the type normally found in a retail shopping center including , without limitation , financial institutions , service shops , offices , restaurants and retail stores No portion of the Shopping Center will be used for a cafeteria , theatre , bowling alley , billiard parlor , night club or other place of recreation or amusement , “ adult ” bookstore or massage parlor , or residences ; No portion of the development will be used for a tavern , bar , or other establishment serving alcoholic beverages for on - premises consumption ; provided , however , that the foregoing shall not prohibit or limit the sale of alcoholic beverages within a permitted restaurant where such sales comprise less than 50 of the restaurants total sales Special Use Conditions 1 The Special Use Permit shall expire with the violation of any Special Use Condition 2 Submission of a detailed site plan for review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Department Staff 3 Submission of a unified sign plan for review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Department Staff 4 No portion of the Shopping Center will be used for a cafeteria , theatre , bowling alley , billiard parlor , night club or other place of recreation or amusement , “ adult ” bookstore or massage parlor , or residences ; 5 No portion of the development will be used for a tavern , bar , or other establishment serving alcoholic beverages for on - premises consumption ; provided , however , that the foregoing shall not prohibit or limit the sale of alcoholic beverages within a permitted restaurant where such sales comprise less than 50 of the restaurants total sales 6 No buildings will have metal exterior 7 Class A Buffer 2 large trees , 2 small trees , and 6 shrubs every 100 linear feet required at all property and or zoning lines Existing vegetation shall be kept and utilized as buffer if greater intensity than code requires 8 Any security lighting shall be engineered so not to shine onto adjacent properties 9 Must obtain commercial driveway permit s from DOT and comply with all NCDOT traffic improvement requirements that may stem from their Congestion Management Section 10 Required TIA recommendations to include five - lane widening of 42 and new traffic signal on 42 near site as depicted on site plan entrance must be complied with Mr Gray submitted information regarding a change in the color scheme provided by Paramount and specifically noted that the Department of Transportation’s recommendations for traffic improvements would be part of the special conditions PagePage pageNumber9444 October 1 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr asked Mr Gray if staff could work with the Planning Department’s traffic consultants and create a conceptual transportation plan to tie the area together over to Cleveland Road and require any applicant that comes before the Board in the future at this area to conform to the plan Mr Gray reported staff would be willing to work on a transportation plan for the area with the department’s consultant Commissioner Mims stated he felt a conceptual transportation plan would help to address the growing area by creating a backdoor entrance into the entire area consisting of the Lowe’s and the proposed Wal - Mart Commissioner DeVan Barbour stated it would be critical to at least identify where the roads must go and how they should connect as well as the Board needs to make sure the natural traffic lanes would not be closed Chairman Cookie Pope noted the Board looked at such a plan some time in the past Commissioner Mims agreed with the Chairman ; however , noted that was at a time when the land was to be used for a cloverleaf Commissioner Mims clarified he was not talking about connecting to Interstate 40 , but rather was suggesting some type of back road that will connect into Cleveland Road and require future development at this area to tie on to the connection , if and when it happens Commissioner Mims noted it would be sort of a thoroughfare plan for the area and would help to move the traffic flow David Harner of Paramount Development Corporation introduced Tara Stewart , Director of Public Affairs for Wal - Mart Carolinas Upon a question from Commissioner Tony Braswell , Mr Harner confirmed the proposed Wal - Mart would be similar to the one being constructed near Goldsboro Commissioner Braswell commented that he recently saw on CNN where the CEO of Wal - Mart stated Wal - Mart is embraced by communities because they make so many contributions Commissioner Braswell noted he had not seen that many contributions to such things as the arts by the local stores and asked Ms Stewart to comment Ms Stewart reported the manager of each individual store decides where the contributions will be distributed and noted they typically do not have much publicity associated with such efforts She stated many of the contributions are directed towards high school sports teams , local recreation clubs , etc Commissioner Braswell noted one of the arguments against Wal - Mart is they may replace the mom and pop stores Ms Stewart stated Wal - Mart also brings in businesses when they locate to an area such as new restaurants At the request of Commissioner W Ray Woodall , Ms Stewart stated she would be happy to provide the Board with a list of contributions the local Clayton and Smithfield stores have made County Manager Rick Hester indicated he would forward the requested information to the Board Mr Gray reviewed some of the proposed special conditions with the Board and reported based on the findings of fact with the special use conditions , the Planning Board recommended approval of the special use application for case 07 - 16 to allow for the operation and construction of a Super Wal - Mart commercial shopping center Commissioner Mims requested the Board consider his idea of an area transportation plan and the addition of a special condition that if the plan recommends a connection from the back of the applicant’s property , they would be required to do so County Attorney Mark Payne suggested since the timing of such a plan is not known , and as he understands , the applicant would be willing to construct a stub - out , he would not recommend a specific place for the stub - out , but to only state the applicant would be willing to provide a stub - out or access to a future road for a future connection Page0445 October 1 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued In response to a question from Commissioner Braswell , Mr Harner reported a cafeteria type establishment is not allowed on the property due to the amount of parking associated with such a development and Paramount felt it did not fit in with a project of this size There being no further comments , the Chairman closed the Special Use Hearing for Case 07 - 16 Decision on Special Use Case 07 - 16 Case 07 - 16 Application to allow for the operation and construction of a Super Wal - Mart commercial shopping center Applicant Paramount Development Corporation Owners Billy Ray and Joe Mike Barefoot Based on the following findings of fact and the special use conditions with an addition of special condition # 11 attached , Commissioner Wade M Stewart moved the Board authorize the Planning Department to issue a special use permit to Applicant Paramount Development Corporation to allow for the operation and construction of a Super Wal - Mart commercial shopping center located at 4717 NC 42 Hwy W which is approximately 3 10 of a mile east of its intersection with Cleveland Crossing Drive SR 1628 in Cleveland Township After discussion on the above motion , Commissioner Stewart inquired from the applicant if they were acceptable to the proposed language in special condition # 11 Mr Harner reported Paramount is agreeable to the language Commissioner W Ray Woodall seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote Finding of Facts for the Special Use Permit 1 That the use or development is located , designed , and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health , safety , and general welfare ; The Development is located directly adjacent to the existing Lowe’s Home Improvement on US Highway 42 @ Interstate 40 in Johnston County The property currently has three 3 existing zoning designations , IHI , I - 2 , and GB The proposed zoning reclassification is General Business Special Use District The land design is intended to facilitate a shopping and dining environment with emphasis on controlled access , curb appeal and safety The anchor is a 194,000 sq ft Super Wal - Mart The Development proposes 40,460 sq feet of retail shop space which will include typical mercantile uses such as apparel , electronic , restaurant and service retailers The two outparcels are intended for single users such as a bank or family sit - down or fast food restaurant The Development proposes a new traffic signal and considerable widening of US 42 as per the recommendations found in Traffic Impact Analysis dated 3 29 07 Proposed location is within the area designated for commercial developments at Interstate Interchanges A new traffic signal , widening of Hwy 42 , and security lighting will maintain and promote the public health , safety , and general welfare 2 That the use or development appears to comply with all required use and intensity regulations of Articles II & IV of the Johnston County Land Development Code and the applicable specific standards in section 14 - 257 and with all applicable regulations ; The Development will comply with all local , state , and federal building codes and regulations and shall meet or exceed all landscaping , parking , and lightening requirements Additional restrictions forbidding undesirable uses shall be incorporated into the Development’s General Business Special Use District application Proposed use is less intense than how the current underlying Industrial - 2 zoning district could be utilized Shopping Centers are allowed in both the GB and IHI district , so development approval is dependent on the Special Use Permit , more so than the change in intensity of the zoning district Development will meet all state , federal , and local land development regulations 3 That the use or development is located , designed , and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property , or that the use or development is a public necessity ; Area demographics have seen a huge increase over the past decade creating a need for more basic shopping opportunities This development will cater to the shopping patterns established by surrounding communities Additional traffic will be mitigated by the extensive road improvements proposed by this Development This proposed shopping center is located within the IHI zoning district that promotes commercial growth at the interstate interchanges No residential conflict exists and required traffic improvements will maintain and or enhance the value of contiguous properties This Wal - Mart Super Center will cater to the Cleveland Community alleviating some traffic traveling east on Hwy 42 to the nearest Wal - Mart off US 70 in Clayton approximately 8 miles away 4 That the use or development conforms with general plans for the physical development of the County’s Planning jurisdiction , the Design Manual , or other development policies as adopted by the Board of Commissioners The Development is located within the commercial hub IHI district as designated by the BOCC All aspects shall comply with applicable land development codes and conditions as placed by the Planning Board The buildings constructed on the Shopping Center shall be designed so that the exterior elevation of each shall be architecturallyPage1446 October 1 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued and aesthetically compatible The design and construction shall be of high quality No building constructed on the property shall exceed 45 ’ including all mechanical improvements and architectural embellishments in height above finished grade No building constructed on the property shall exceed 45 ’ including all mechanical improvements and architectural embellishments in height above finished grade No building constructed on the Outparcels shall exceed 28 ’ including all mechanical improvements and architectural embellishments in height , as measured from the mean finished elevation of the parking area of the Shopping Center No building shall have metal exterior No building shall be constructed on the Shopping Center as either immediate development or future expansion except within the building areas Any rooftop equipment constructed on the buildings located on the Outparcels shall be screened so as not to be visible from the mean finished elevation of the respective parking area This development will abide by all requirements of the codes and any conditions as placed by the boards List all Specific Land Uses The specific land use request is for a Shopping Center and Outparcels All buildings in the Shopping Center shall be used for commercial purposes of the type normally found in a retail shopping center including , without limitation , financial institutions , service shops , offices , restaurants and retail stores No portion of the Shopping Center will be used for a cafeteria , theatre , bowling alley , billiard parlor , night club or other place of recreation or amusement , “ adult ” bookstore or massage parlor , or residences ; No portion of the development will be used for a tavern , bar , or other establishment serving alcoholic beverages for on - premises consumption ; provided , however , that the foregoing shall not prohibit or limit the sale of alcoholic beverages within a permitted restaurant where such sales comprise less than 50 of the restaurants total sales Special Use Conditions 1 The Special Use Permit shall expire with the violation of any Special Use Condition 2 Submission of a detailed site plan for review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Department Staff 3 Submission of a unified sign plan for review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Department Staff 4 No portion of the Shopping Center will be used for a cafeteria , theatre , bowling alley , billiard parlor , night club or other place of recreation or amusement , “ adult ” bookstore or massage parlor , or residences ; 5 No portion of the development will be used for a tavern , bar , or other establishment serving alcoholic beverages for on - premises consumption ; provided , however , that the foregoing shall not prohibit or limit the sale of alcoholic beverages within a permitted restaurant where such sales comprise less than 50 of the restaurants total sales 6 No buildings will have metal exterior 7 Class A Buffer 2 large trees , 2 small trees , and 6 shrubs every 100 linear feet required at all property and or zoning lines Existing vegetation shall be kept and utilized as buffer if greater intensity than code requires 8 Any security lighting shall be engineered so not to shine onto adjacent properties 9 Must obtain commercial driveway permit s from DOT and comply with all NCDOT traffic improvement requirements that may stem from their Congestion Management Section 10 Required TIA recommendations to include five - lane widening of 42 and new traffic signal on 42 near site as depicted on site plan entrance must be complied with 11 Applicant will provide a stub - out or access to the south sufficient to meet future transportation needs as determined by Planning Staff at the time of the site plan approval The Board took a five minute recess 4 Public Hearing County Code of Ordinances – Section 14 - 75 Agricultural - residential district b 7 Advertised September 21 and September 25 , 2007 The Smithfield Herald Chairman Cookie Pope opened the public hearing and stated this hearing was to consider public comment on the possible amendment to the County Code of Ordinances – Section 14 - 75 Agricultural - residential district b 7 Planning Director Berry Gray stated if approved , the amendment would regulate the amount of time POD’s can be placed on residential property Mr Gray noted the amendment to the code would limit POD’s anywhere on the property to 30 days with a possible 30 day extension by Planning staff for hardship cases ; however , no more than twice per calendar year There being no further comments , the Chairman closed the public hearing Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr moved the Board adopt the amendment to the County Code of Ordinances – Section14 - 75 b 7 as presented Commissioner DeVan Barbour seconded the motion which carried by unanimous vote Sec 14 - 75 Agricultural - residential district AR b 7 Accessory buildings or structures , provided such buildings or structures shall be not less than ten feet from any interior property line , and meet the street setback requirements of subsection d Singlewide mobile homes will not be permitted to be used for storage commercial or noncommercial storage Temporary storage containers or PODs shall bePage2447 October 1 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued allowed for a 30 day period , with the possibility of a 30 day extension by Planning staff for hardship cases and no more than twice during a calendar year 5 Informational Item Summary of Public Concerns with Subdivisions and Rezoning Requests Planning Director Berry Gray reported the planning staff has analyzed the past five years of Planning Board minutes and categorized the public concerns regarding subdivisions and rezoning requests Mr Gray noted the Planning Board has reviewed the information and requested it be forwarded to the Commissioners Mr Gray stated it was the hopes of staff to have this information on hand and refer to for future rezonings and possible ordinance amendments Mr Gray reviewed with the Board the list of concerns as follows Public Comments from Planning Board 2002 - 2007 , year to date Subdivisions Comment Number of times issue was mentioned Riparian Buffer 7 Encroachment Issues 5 Maintenance Responsibility 8 Open Space Issues 2 29 Traffic Safety 27 Types of Homes going in Drainage Issues 23 Pond Lake Concerns 8 Access 10 Turn Lane Needed 8 29 School Capacity Storm Water Runoff 13 Cemetery Issues 5 Larger Lot Sizes Needed 7 Future Development of Phases 12 Driveway Separation 6 Soil Conditions 3 Erosion Control 1 The top 3 issues concerns from the public in red Rezonings Comment Number of times issue was mentioned 28 Noise Dust Smoke 3 Impact on Environment 7 Lighting 20 Trash Associated with Rezoning 8 26 Property Values Decreasing 29 Traffic Parking 10 Signage 4 Appearance 5 Alcohol 10 Crime Security Related to Rezoning 13 Sanitation 6 Access Easement 6 Sight Distances 5 Pond Issues 3 Odor Smell 6 Late Night Hours 11 Complaints from Sheriff’s Office on Rezoning 7 Landscaping 4 Liability 5 Buffer Fencing Needed 20 Storm Water Runoff 5 Disposal of Debris 4Page3448 October 1 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued Rodents as a Result 2 Hazards 9 Overall Nuisance 7 Too Intense for Area 6 Pollution , mainly related to water 1 The top 3 issues concerns from the public in red Commissioner W Ray Woodall referenced the matter earlier in the meeting brought up by Pam McLamb that the residents adjacent to the proposed Johnson Forest Subdivision were not notified of the Planning Board meeting where the subdivision request was discussed Mr Gray reported the adjacent property owners of Johnson Forest were notified twice and the Planning Department does have a record of those notifications Mr Gray stated although the Department is not required by Statute or the Ordinance to notify those adjacent property owners for subdivisions , staff does send notifications as a courtesy Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr noted in addition to the top three concerns under subdivisions there were others consisting of stormwater runoff , drainage , and erosion control that are basically the same issue and when added together , they become one of the larger concerns 6 Call for Public Hearing Town of Micro ETJ Extension Request Commissioner DeVan Barbour moved the Board schedule a public hearing for the November 5 , 2007 6 00 pm meeting , to consider a request from the Town of Micro to extend their ETJ Commissioner Tony Braswell seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote 7 Discussion of Wilson’s Mills ETJ Mayor Peter Wilson of Wilson’s Mills appeared before the Board requesting permission for the Town of Wilson’s Mills to establish a one - mile ETJ Note A public hearing was held on this matter on March 5 , 2007 Mayor Wilson asked if there were any questions from the Board In response to a question from Commissioner DeVan Barbour , Mayor Wilson verified that the Town is now participating in the National Flood Insurance Program Commissioner Tony Braswell inquired if Wilson’s Mills and the Town of Selma had settled their dispute concerning boundaries issues Mayor Wilson confirmed that since the Towns had not been able to come to a consensus regarding the properties , they had mutually decided to leave the properties under dispute within the County’s jurisdiction Upon questions from Chairman Cookie Pope and Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr regarding the fire tax and the fire department coverage , Mayor Wilson reported the Town has a contract with the Wilson’s Mills Fire Department to supply fire services to the Town and the County collects the fire tax for that district Chairman Pope commented Wilson’s Mills was the only municipality in Johnston County that does not have an established ETJ Commissioner Tony Braswell requested Mayor Wilson to explain why he felt the Town should establish an ETJ Mayor Wilson reported by having the main transportation artery of Hwy 70 , the Town could benefit the County by controlling the growth near Wilson’s Mills and the ETJ would ensure smart and sound planning He noted the Town does have an established Planning Board and if approved , two citizens from the proposed ETJ area would be put on the Town’s Planning Board Ed Temple , consultant for the Town of Wilson’s Mills , verified that if the Board approved the request , the Town would then go forward with the process by holding public hearings and notifying all property owners who would be affected prior to establishing the ETJ Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr questioned if the Town had a planning staff Mayor Wilson reported the Chair of the Wilson’s Mills Planning Board is the Town’s zoning enforcement officer and she is well qualified Page4449 October 1 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued Decision on Wilson’s Mills – Establishment of ETJ Request Commissioner W Ray Woodall moved the Board allow the Town of Wilson’s Mills to move forward with the process of establishing a one - mile ETJ in accordance with the boundaries on the following map titled “ Proposed ETJ Extension Wilson’s Mills , NC ” dated September 25 , 2007 Commissioner Tony Braswell seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote Note The next step in the process will be for the Town of Wilson’s Mills to begin the process of notifying those citizens affected by the ETJ establishment and hold public hearings to obtain citizen input Once the notification and public hearing process has been completed , the Town may choose to establish the ETJ 8 Manager Reports and Comments County Manager Rick Hester reminded everyone that the County is currently under a mandatory water conservation program ; however , he may be looking into more restrictive water conservation measures if the drought continues 9 Board Reports and Comments A Appointments Johnston County Heritage Commission – 7 positions ; 2 year terms This item was tabled from the 10 00 am meeting Upon a motion by Commissioner DeVan Barbour , seconded by Commissioner Jeffrey P Carver , and carried by unanimous vote , Angeline J Bryant , Charles W Creech , Eva Joan Jones , and Claudia W O’Hale were reappointed ; as well as Pearl Blackmon , Cheryl Oliver , and Betty Bailey Pope were appointed for two year terms to expire October 31 , 2009 Page5450 October 1 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued B Additional ETJ Extension Requests Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr stated he was glad that Wilson’s Mills will be moving forward with their process of establishing an ETJ and he would like to see the Board address the other ETJ extension requests in November C Road Fee on Development Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr stated the Legislature last year , had given the Board the authority to impose a road fee on new development Commissioner Mims noted this was something the Board should consider as discussions begin on a potential comprehensive land use plan and felt such funds could help address transportation needs in the County There being no further business , Commissioner W Ray Woodall moved the Board adjourn Commissioner DeVan Barbour seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote The meeting adjourned at 8 15 pm ____________________________ Cookie Pope , Chairman Paula G Woodard , Clerk to the BoardPage