Johnston County Planning Board February 20, 2024-6:00 PM Johnston County Courthouse County Commissioners Room Smithfield, North Carolina  ' CADO  1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE  2. APPROVAL OFTHEI MINUTES:  From the. January 23,2024) Planning Board Meeting  3. ELECTION OF OFFICERS  6:00pm orafter (Public Hearings)  4. REZONING AND CONDIIONALZONINGS CASES & SPECIALUSES  CASE: 23-25  Rezoning Petition: Petition to rezone 2.99: acres ofa 18.30 acre tract located at 84281 NCI Hwy 501 N in the Elevation Township from Agricultural Residential  (AR) to General Business-Conditional Zoning (GB-CZ).  Tax ID: 07E06003 Owner: Katie Proulx Applicant: Blake Hesse commercial vehicle parking. CASE 24-04  Conditional Zoning Request: Mulch and landscaping sales & equipment and  Special Use Request: Petition to request a Special Usel Permit for 1.2 acres located at 3715 Jackson-King Rd. in the Pleasant Grove Township. Owner: 50-210 Community Fire Department, Inc. Applicant: Cellco /Thomas H. Johnson, Attorney Special Use Request: Cellular tower with related equipment.  Tax ID: 13C02003D    5. DISCUSSION: ITEMS 6. INFORMATIONITEMS 7. NEXTI MEETING: March 19,2024 8. ADJOURNMENT    DRAFT  MEETING OF THE. JOHNSTON COUNTY PLANNING BOARD  Tuesday, January 23, 2024 6:00 p.m.  The Johnston County Planning Board met ini regular session on Tuesday, January 23, 2024 at 6:00 p.m. in the County Commissioners Meeting Room, Johnston County Courthouse Present: Jared Crenshaw, Michelle Davis, Debbie Howard, Freddie Hudson, Timothy Absent: Brooke Holmes, Will Letchworth, BOCC Representative, BOE Representative Also present: Braston Newton, Director; Todd Marr, Senior Planner; Cameron Pittman, Vice-Chair Davis opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Vice-Chair Davis stated the Turlington Tract Subdivision had been withdrawn by the  Annex, Smithfield, N.C. with the following members:  Little, Gary Lovering, Jay Sasser  Planner; Jennifer Slusser, County Attorney  Mr. Crenshaw. Applicant.  Approval of the Minutes:  Upon a motion by Mr. Hudson to approve the December 19th Planning Board Minutes, seconded by Mr. Little, and carried by a unanimous vote of 7-0, the December 19, 2023 Consideration of proposed revisions to the Johnston County Soil Erosion and Mr. Newton introduced the proposed text amendments and discussed the role oft the Board. Ms. Chandra Farmer, Johnston County Director of Utilities, stated the County's Erosion and Sedimentation Control program is authorized by the North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission (SCC), and NCDEQ - Division of Energy, Minerals and Land Resources (DEMLR) provides oversight of the County's program. Ms. Farmer stated that they conduct routine audits and make recommendations for program improvements. Ms. Farmer stated that most of the proposed revisions are ones recommended by the state in order to be consistent with their current program. Ms. Farmer stated that there were also a few that the County staffrecommended fori implementation. Ms. Farmer reviewed some of thej proposed revisions. Ms. Farmer stated that this information was available on the Public Utilities website and the Board of County Commissioners would be holding a public hearing on March 4, 2024 at 10:00 A.M. Ms. Farmer stated that until that time, the public  Planning Board Minutes were approved as presented.  Sedimentation Control Ordinance:  does have time to submit comments by mail or email. Mr. Crenshaw asked for al briefoverview of exempted activities.  1    Ms. Farmer stated that activities under one acre are exempt from the sedimentation and erosion control ordinance assuming they are not part of a larger common plan of development. Ms. Farmer stated that others are types of usage related to agriculture, but the proposed revisions on page six, under item B, included clarification regarding mulch, ornamental plants, and other horticultural products. Ms. Farmer stated that other proposed revisions on page seven, items six and seven, included exemptions for wetland restoration activities and natural resource conservation service standards for wetland restoration. Ms. Farmer stated that most of those have Federal permitting associated with them.  Mr. Hudson stated that anything under one acre is exempt.  Ms. Farmer confirmed and stated that as long as it was not part ofal larger common plan of development. Ms. Farmer gave an example and stated that an overall subdivision was subject and the single family lots are also subject because they are part of that larger Mr. Newton stated that the role of the Board was advisory and a motion, second, and majority vote of the Board was needed to move it forward. Mr. Newton stated a public hearing would be on March 4, 2024 at 10:00 A.M. in the County Commissioners Meeting Room. Mr. Newton stated that the information was on thel Public Utilities website and open Upon a motion by Mr. Little to approve and move forward the proposed revisions to the Johnston County Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance, seconded by Mr. Hudson, the motion carried by a unanimous vote of 7-0 at the January 23, 2024 Planning  common plan of development.  forj public comment.  Board Meeting.  All speakers were sworn in. Subdivisions: Wynd Crest Phase 2 Owner: Jones Creek, LLC Developer: Jones Creek, LLC Surveyor: Carlos Bagley, PE Acreage/Lots: 25.43 acres, 11 lot Tax ID: #: 07D07020 Address: 32 Wynd Crest Way  Mr. Marrintroduced the subdivision and referenced the above information. Mr. Marrstated this came to the Board in June 2021 as the LW Godwin Tract and was approved for Mr. Carlos Bagley, 63 Watkins Rd., Clayton, N.C., Surveyor/Engineer, stated the particulars ofthe subdivision and was present to answer: any questions from the Board. Mr. Bagley stated that seventeen lots had been platted and they requested to subdivide lot 17.  seventeen lots and now they were asking for an additional lot.  There was no further discussion.  2    Vice-Chair Davis asked for the staff recommendation. Mr. Marr stated the staff recommended approval with the stated conditions and requirements in the staffi report.  Staff Recommendation: Approval  Upon a motion by Ms. Howard to approve Wynd Crest Phase 2, seconded by Mr. Sasser, Wynd Crest Phase 2 was approved by a unanimous vote of 7-0 at the January 23, 2024  Planning Board Meeting. Conditions and Requirements [Planningl  1. All lots shall be a minimum of30,000 sf. 2. Complete flood plain information 3. Metes & bounds 4. Certifications 5. Entrance sign & street signs 6. Street name approval 7. All lots shall access internal streets 8. Cul-de-sac lots must have 40' road frontage 9. Complete improvements or provide performance guarantee 10. Provide final plat Street Disclosure Statement Certificate for street maintenance (DM Sec 7, L. item 8) 11.1 Fee-in-lieu of open space shall be paid prior to recording  12. Provide utility easements along all lot lines in accordance with LDC Sec. 14- 13.Coordinate with the US Postal Service for the design of and utilization of b. CBU shall not obstruct the operation and maintenance of utility services.  75 (d)_(3)  cluster box mail receptacle units: a. CBU shall not impede the flow of traffic. C. CBU shall meet ADA and Fire Code requirements.  Environmental Health] unapproved lot [NCDOT]  14. Approval of all lots for onsite sewage disposal or statement for each  15.Ac driveway permit and subdivision design approval must be obtained prior to 16. All design aspects oft the plans shall comply with the current NCDOT Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures, NCDOT Subdivision Roads Minimum Construction Standards, and Policy on Street and Driveway Access  construction  tol North Carolina Highways  3    17. .Itwill be determined at the time the driveway permit application is submitted  ifany road improvements will be required  [Public Utilities]  18. Stormwater & Erosion Control Permits Required 19. Stormwater Statement Required well as any. jurisdictional features and buffers.  20. Wetlands should be delineated and shown on the plan ifany are present as 21. Property is limited to 15% impervious area without stormwater management. 22. An additional water tap willl have to be installed by a licensed utility contractor and inspected by our office prior to recording.  Turlington Tract  Owner: Long Rock Land Development, LLC Developer: Benson Hardee Road-Lan, LLC Surveyor: Freedom Firm, PC Acreage/Lots: 6.45 acres, 7 lots Tax ID #: 01D07029 Address: 3020 Benson-Hardee Rd.  Turlington Tract Subdivision was withdrawn by the Applicant.  Bagley Rd. Tract  Owner: Jeanne Woodard Life Estate & Edward Vince Woodard Remainder  Developer: Cloudbreak Investments, LLC Surveyor: Adams & Hodge Engineering, PC Acreage/Lots: 16.54 acres, 15 lots Tax ID #: 03P07019E Address: 1700 Block ofl Bagley Rd.  Mr. Marr introduced the subdivision and referenced the above information.  Mr. Jamie Guerrero, 314 E. Main St., Clayton, N.C., Adams & Hodge Engineering, PC, stated the particulars ofthe subdivision and was present to answer any questions from the  Board.  Vice-Chair Davis asked about the existing cemetery on the subject property.  Mr. Guerrero stated that they were providing a twenty foot maintenance access to the existing cemetery and it would not be used to serve any oft the lots along the easement. Mr. Hudson asked ift the access to the easement was off Princeton-Kenly Rd.  Mr. Guerrero confirmed.  Mr. Sasser asked about the access for maintenance only.  4    Mr. Guerrero stated that it was for the family to access the existing cemetery.  Mr. Lovering asked ift that was the existing access now.  Mr. Guerrero responded that he did not know. Mr. Guerrero stated that they would have to Mr. Lovering stated that they were going to put in access ifit was not already there. Mr. Guerrero confirmed and stated that it would not be used by any residents of the  maintain access to the cemetery.  proposed subdivision.  Ms. Howard stated that it appeared tol be a very small cemetery. Mr. Guerrero confirmed and stated that it appeared to be a family plot.  Vice-Chair Davis asked if there was already a driveway for the cemetery off Princeton-  Kenly Rd.  There was a response from the audience.  Mr. Paul Gorman, 95 Wethergate Dr., Clayton, N.C., Cloudbreak Investments, LLC, Mr. Josh Gibson and Ms. April Gibson, 3220 Princeton-Kenly Rd., Kenly, N.C., adjacent property owners, stated that the access to the existing cemetery is their driveway and they keep it maintained. Mr. Gibson stated concerns over the boundary lines shared with their property and expressed an interest ini resolving the concern overt thel location ofthe property  Developer, was also present to answer any questions from the Board.  lines.  Ms. Howard asked which proposed lot would adjoin the Gibson property.  Mr. Gibson pointed out his property on MapClick GIS.  Vice-Chair Davis stated lot 8.  Mr. Gibson stated that there was some property removed from the back of the property after they bought the house and they have a shelter and fence that is on part of the subject property that has been there for twenty years. Mr. Gibson stated that theirl house burnt down and they rebuilt the house in the same spot and all was approved by the County, SO they assumed everything was their property. Mr. Gibson stated that they wanted to replace their porch with ai room and were told they were already on their property line. Mr. Gibson stated that they wanted to get contact information for who they could speak with about clearing  up the property lines.  Mr. Guerrero gave his contact information to the Gibsons.  5    Mr. Edward Woodard, 42651 NC HWY 39N, Selma, N.C., Owner, stated that the access to the existing cemetery has been there for generations and spoke in favor of the proposed Mr. Hudson asked ifthe Board needed to wait to see ift there would be any changes.  subdivision.  Vice-Chair Davis responded no.  Ms. Linda Williamson, 3264 Princeton-Kenly Rd., Kenly, N.C., adjacent property owner, expressed concern for the cemetery access because it is directly adjacent tol her property. Ms. Williamson asked ift the access was going to change or would it be on the line. Mr. Guerrero responded that thet twenty foot easement to the cemetery is completely within the boundary of the subject property and it would not cross the property line.  There was no further discussion.  Vice-Chair Davis asked for the staff recommendation. Mr. Marr stated the staff recommended approval with the stated conditions and requirements in the staffreport.  Staff Recommendation: Approval  Upon a motion by Mr. Sasser to approve Bagley Rd. Tract, seconded by Mr. Crenshaw, Bagley Rd. Tract was approved by a unanimous vote of 6-0 at the January 23, 2024  Planning Board Meeting.  Ms. Howard had stepped out oft the meeting and was not present to vote.  Conditions and Requirements [Planningl  1. All lots must be a minimum of 30,000 sf. 2. Complete flood plain information 3. Metes & bounds 4. Certifications 5. Entrance sign & street signs 6. Street name approval 7. All lots shall access internal streets 8. Cul-de-sac lots must have 40' road frontage 9. Complete improvements or provide performance guarantee 10. Provide final plat Street Disclosure Statement Certificate for street maintenance (DM Sec 7, L. item 8) 11.1 Fee-in-lieu of open space shall be paid prior to recording  12. Provide utility easements along all lot lines in accordance with LDC Sec. 14- 13. Coordinate with the US Postal Service for the design of and utilization of  75(d)(3)  cluster box mail receptacle units:    a. CBU shall not impede the flow oftraffic.  b. CBU shall not obstruct the operation and maintenance ofutility services.  CBU shall meet ADA and Fire Code requirements.  Environmental Health] unapproved lot [NCDOT]  14. Approval of all lots for onsite sewage disposal or statement for each  15. A driveway permit and subdivision design approval must be obtained prior to 16. All design aspects of the plans shall comply with the current NCDOT Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures, NCDOT Subdivision Roads Minimum Construction Standards, and Policy on Street and Driveway Access 17.Ity will be determined at the time the driveway permit application is submitted 19. Require a No Access easement where lot 9 borders Princeton-Kenly Rd. Must  construction  toN North Carolina Highways  ifany road improvements will be required. 18. Require encroachment permit for any utilities within ROW.  be served internally. [Public Utilities]  20. Stormwater & Erosion Control Permits Required 21. Stormwater Statement Required well as any. jurisdictional features and buffers.  22. Wetlands should be delineated and shown on the plan if any are present as 23. Property is limited to 15% impervious area without stormwater management. 24. Construction plans will have to be: submitted and approved for waterline  construction. [Emergency Services]  25. Provide topographic information. 27. Provide a fire flow test.  26. Provide "No Parking" signage along access road at fire hydrant locations.  Eagles Landing Phase 5 Owner: LW Properties, LLC Developer: LW Properties, LLC Acreage/Lots: 37.78 acres, 17 lots Tax ID #: 07E07015 Address: 300 Block ofMemory Ln.  Surveyor: MacConnell & Associates, P.C.-Thomas Perdue  7    Mr. Marrintroduced the subdivision and referenced the above information. Mr. Marr stated that the subject property was previously in the Voluntary Agricultural District but had been Mr. Thomas Perdue, 302 E. Church St., Smithfield, N.C., Engineer with MacConnell & Associates, stated the particulars of the subdivision and was present to answer any  removed.  questions from the Board. Mr. Hudson asked about Lot 1S.  Mr. Perdue responded that Lot 1S is dependent upon the amount of suitable soils on Lot1 and could be used as either repair or an initial septic lot. Mr. Perdue stated that it would be Vice-Chair Davis asked ift the fifty foot easement to Memory Ln. already existed.  an non-buildable lot and reserved just for septic for Lot1.  Mr. Perdue responded that it had been recorded. Vice-Chair Davis asked ifit was already paved.  Mr. Perdue responded no. Properties, LLC. Mr. Perdue responded yes.  Mr. Lovering asked ifit had been recorded on the two properties that are not owned by LW  Mr. Lovering asked ift the repair area could be run underneath the road ifneeded. Mr. Perdue responded yes. Mr. Perdue stated that they had conducted preliminary soil Mr. Matthew Jenkins, 71 Dawn Rd., Benson, N.C., nearby property owner, and Mr. Robert Jenkins, 936 Bailey's Crossroads Rd., Benson, N.C., adjacent property owner, distributed information to the Board. Mr. Matthew. Jenkins, representing his parents and. Jenkins Farm, stated that the property is part oft the Voluntary Agricultural District. Mr. Matthew Jenkins stated that they do not oppose subdivisions but that their property is being damaged by the actions oft the pre and post construction oft the proposed subdivision. Mr. Matthew Jenkins expressed concerns for the: stream that runs across thej property and ifitisal blue line stream and for the clear cutting done on the subject property and ifit was approved to cross the existing wetlands and waterways. Mr. Matthew Jenkins referenced a previously heard subdivision and the decision of the Planning Board. Mr. Matthew Jenkins stated concerns for the sustainability of their family farm and the quality of life on the family farm. Mr. Matthew.Jenkins: stated that the clearing company laid logs through waterways to get across and the logs disrupted the flow of water causing floods onto their hay field. Mr. Matthew Jenkins stated that the field was still flooding and referenced pictures taken on January 22, 2024 provided to the Board. Mr. Matthew Jenkins stated that the damage caused has kept them from utilizing thei field fori its purpose ofg growing hay and cattle grazing. Mr. Matthew  evaluations but had not conducted lot specific soil evaluations.  8    Jenkins discussed the soil types on the subject property and expressed concern for the impact of water runoff. Mr. Matthew Jenkins stated that they had been in communication with thel NC Division of Water Resources and an Environmental Specialist was scheduling as site visit to the clear cut properties and referenced a letter from NCDEQ distributed to the Board. Mr. Matthew Jenkins stated that the NC Forest Service required the logging company to return to the subject property after the clearing was complete to try to fix the waterway issues. Mr. Matthew Jenkins discussed the easement to the subject property and expressed concern for the location oft the septic tank and dwelling on the Martinez property in relation to the easement. Mr. Matthew Jenkins expressed concern for the easement not being used for the clear cutting and the damage it could have potentially prevented to the wetlands. Mr. Matthew Jenkins expressed concerns for safety and discussed previous issues with trespassers and theft. Mr. Matthew Jenkins expressed concern for having only one ingress and egress at Aquilla Rd. and Turlington Rd. and the lack of accessibility for emergency vehicles. Mr. Matthew Jenkins also provided a letter to the Board from Mr. David and Ms. Marie Buckman, 1001 Memory Ln., Benson, N.C., adjacent property owners. Mr. Sasser asked about the provided pictures and asked if the flooding was there prior to Mr. Robert Jenkins responded no, the flooding was not there and it is getting worse. Mr. Robert Jenkins stated that the logs ran horizontal in the creek which compounded the drainage issues. Mr. Robert.Jenkins stated that the log company used trees to build al bridge Vice-Chair Davis asked Mr. Perdue ift the stream on the subject property was a blue line  the logging.  to access the property that was landlocked at the time.  stream.  Mr. Perdue responded yes.  Vice-Chair Davis asked about when the easement to the subject property was secured. Mr. Perdue responded that he was not familiar with the history ofthe easement but believed Vice-Chair Davis asked why the easement was not used for the clear cutting. Mr. Perdue responded that he could not speak to that question. Mr. Little asked when the clear cutting was done. Mr. Perdue responded that he was not aware.  it was established in 2015.  Vice-Chair Davis asked staff about the required setback for a dwelling from a public road Mr. Newton responded that a dedicated right-of-way is required of a major subdivision. Mr. Newton stated that therei isad difference between an easement and right-of-way and that right-of-way becomes its own separate property. Mr. Newton stated that a right-of-way is  and an easement.  9    maintained either privately or publicly. Mr. Newton stated that it is either private use or public use, and then ifp public use, potentially dedicated tol NCDOT for maintenance. Mr. Sasser stated that the preliminary plat stated a fifty foot public right-of-way. Mr. Newton stated that it could not go on top of a septic system and the concern would need to be investigated by Environmental Health and that the burden was on the applicant. Mr. Newton stated that if they could not, they would have to find an alternate route and if approved the alternate route would have to come back to the Board for approval. Mr. Newton addressed the question regarding the manufactured home on the lot with the easement stating that the structure should maintain a twenty foot setback from the edge of Mr. Sasser asked ift there was a septic tank setback distance from the right-of-way or just Mr. Newton responded that typically iti is ten feet from any property line, but that was only  the right-of-way. that it doesn't cross it.  his understanding and that he was not qualified to provide an answer. Mr. Hudson asked ifit was being classified as aj public use. Mr. Sasser stated that it was written as a fifty foot public right-of-way. Mr. Hudson stated that on the print it stated a fifty foot easement. Mr. Newton stated that for clarity it would be best to ask the applicant. Mr. Perdue responded that the plan was for it to be a fifty foot right-of-way.  Mr. Hudson asked ifit would bej paved.  Mr. Perdue responded yes and the plan was to dedicate it to the NCDOT road system and Mr. Sasser stated that he thought the surveyor could have answered a lot oft the questions asked at the meeting if present. Mr. Sasser stated that he was concerned about the lack of  itv would meet the minimum NCDOT standards.  information.  Mr. Little stated as well as the property owner. had been started on the property.  Mr. Lovering asked ift the land was clear cut before it was purchased and asked ifanything Mr. Perdue stated that he was not aware of any work that had been done on the subject Ms. Jessica Buckman, 100 Memory Ln., Benson, N.C., stated that the clear cutting took place in October 2022 and expressed concerns on behalf of her parents who are adjacent  property.  10    property owners. Ms. Buckman expressed concern that the subject property was perked during a major La Nina year dry spell and during El Nino years there is excessive rain. Ms. Buckman stated that during wet winters, the water runoff had greatly increased. Ms. Buckman stated that the back half of their property is all wetlands and a pond. Ms. Buckman expressed concerns for possible leach field failures during El Nino year winters on the subject property and possible water contaminations on neighboring properties and the impact on their pond and wetlands. Ms. Buckman also expressed concern for the increase in traffic on Memory Ln. and Turlington Dr. and the one point of ingress and egress for the proposed subdivision. Ms. Buckman expressed concern for the impact on  road conditions and public safety. There was no further discussion.  Vice-Chair Davis asked for the staff recommendation. Mr. Marr stated that there was a preference for the access to the open space to be moved to between lot 7 and lot 81 to avoid going into the riparian buffer. Mr. Marr stated the staff recommended approval with the Mr. Little spoke about the shared concerns regarding septici information, as well as possible runoff on adjoining properties and having clarification on pre and post runoff for the Mr. Sasser expressed concern for the absence ofthe landowner and surveyor at the meeting  stated conditions and requirements in the staff report.  proposed subdivision. and unanswered questions.  Mr. Hudson stated that answers were needed before a decision was made.  Vice-Chair Davis stated concern for the proposed location of the access to the open space, as well as the presence ofa blue line stream across numerous lots. Vice-Chair Davis also  expressed concerns for the easement and location oft the existing septic.  Staff Recommendation: Approval  Upon a motion by Mr. Sasser to deny Eagles Landing Phase 5, seconded by Mr. Hudson, Eagles Landing Phase 5 was denied by a unanimous vote of 6-0 at the January 23, 2024  Planning Board Meeting.  Ms. Howard had stepped out oft the meeting and was not present to vote.  Hatcher Rd. Tract Owner: RRTI Development, LLC Developer: RRTI Development, LLC Surveyor: Stocks Engineering, PA Acreage/Lots: 64.52 acres, 46 lots Tax ID #: 10N07004D Address: 800 Block ofHatcher Rd.  11    Mr. Marrintroduced the subdivision: and referenced the above information. Mr. Marr stated that the subject parcel is not within the ESA, however: a floodplain appears on aj portion of the parcel. Mr. Marr also stated, lots 44, 45, and 461 must share a single drive onto Bailey- Boykin Rd. ifa approved. Mr. Marr shared information regarding direct driveway access on Hatcher Rd. and from the Johnston County Land Design Manual regarding developments Mr. Ethan Averette, 801 E. Washington St., Nashville, N.C., Stocks Engineering, stated the particulars of the subdivision and was present to answer any questions from the Board. Mr. Averette discussed the portion ofthe subject property that is on the corner of] Hatcher Rd. and Bailey-Boykin Rd. and distributed two options to the Board. Mr. Averette stated the first option submitted to TRCI had all ofthel lots served internally to avoid the road front driveways, but the preference was to not have a shared easement across the front of lots 43,44, and 45. Mr. Averette stated the second option submitted had a shared driveway for lots 44, 45, and 46 on Bailey-Boykin Rd. and lot 43 would be served internally. Mr. Averette stated that they had received preliminary approval from NCDOT for the shared driveway shown in option two and the entrance location for the proposed subdivision due to the 500 feet separation between the entrance location and the shared driveway location and due to the appropriate separation from Hatcher Rd. Mr. Averette stated the developer  creating 4 or more lots.  was willing to do either option.  Mr. Sasser asked ifwhat was distributed by Mr. Averette was the proposal.  Mr. Averette responded that the proposal with the shared driveway was the preference of  the staff.  Mr. Sasser asked ifthat gave 500 feet between driveway entrances.  Mr. Averette confirmed and stated the shared driveway would serve lots 44, 45, and 46.  Mr. Sasser asked iflot 43 would come off Street A.  Mr. Averette confirmed.  Mr. Sasser asked about the handouts from Mr. Averette with regards to access and roads. Mr. Averette explained the differences between the two proposed options.  Vice-Chair Davis asked for the distance between the shared driveway easement and  Hatcher Rd.  Mr. Averette responded 200 feet.  Vice-Chair Davis expressed concern for the close proximity to the intersection. Mr. Averette stated that it did meet NCDOT requirements and they were given preliminary  approval.  12    Mr. John Bailey, 671 Bailey-Boykin Rd., Selma, N.C., nearby property owner, expressed concern for increased traffic onl Bailey-Boykin Rd. Mr. Bailey stated that the road was only nine-tenths ofamile and was a connector road between Hatcher Rd. and NCI HWY: 39. Mr. Bailey discussed recent increased traffic with recent construction of three homes on Hatcher Rd. Mr. Bailey also spoke about his farm on Bailey-Boykin Rd. and experiences Mr. Jonathan Murphy, 855 Hatcher Rd., Selma, N.C., adjacent property owner, expressed concern for the location of where Street A and Street B meet, specifically concerned for privacy and car lights at night pointed ini the direction ofhis home when stopped at the stop sign on Street B. Mr. Murphy asked ifthe developer would install al barrier tol help with his Mr. Michael Miller, 574 Hatcher Rd., Selma, N.C., nearby property owner, expressed concerns for public safety and potential crime. Mr. Miller expressed concerns forincreased traffic and speed, specifically with his children getting on and off the bus. Mr. Miller expressed concern for the amount of lots in the proposed subdivision and suggested less lots by increasing maximum lot size. Mr. Miller provided the Board with a list of signatures Ms. Laura Bailey, 667 Hatcher Rd. and 658 Hatcher Rd., Selma, N.C., nearby property owner, stated that her husband's family farm has been in existence for over two hundred years and shared in the concerns of those previously expressed. Ms. Bailey expressed concern about possible flooding with high density septics and the impact on the community Vice-Chair Davis asked ift the Bailey Farm was in the Voluntary Agricultural District and explained that it was a way to register farms with Johnston County Soil and' Water. Ms. Bailey asked about where she could find more information on local studies and high  with trespassers, theft, and vandalism.  concern.  from residents on Hatcher Rd. concerned for the proposed subdivision.  farms.  density septics.  Mr. Newton recommended Johnson County Environmental Health.  Mr. Nathan Priddy, 149 Bailey-Boykin Rd., Selma, N.C., nearby property owner, stated that in the seven years he had lived there, land had been cleared on both ends of Bailey- Boykin Rd. and six houses built. Mr. Priddy stated that the entrance to the proposed subdivision would be 32 feet from the end ofhis driveway. Mr. Priddy stated that there are currently eighteen houses on Bailey-Boykin Rd. Mr. Priddy suggested less homes with Mr. Little asked about a five foot non-access easement shown on Bailey-Boykin Rd. Mr. Averette stated that it was SO lot 43 did not have a driveway and that they only have access through the 20 foot driveway. Mr. Averette also stated that they had the wetlands flagged and evaluated and there were no proposed impacts to the wetlands on the subject property. Mr. Averette also stated that the density was much less than one per acre.  larger lots in the proposed subdivision.  13    Mr. Little asked about lots 32 through 38 and if the developer would be open to adding plants, shrubbery to minimize the effects oft the lights on the houses on Hatcher Rd. Mr. Averette responded yes, the developer would be willing to look at a screening buffer  along the back oft those lots. Mr. Sasser asked how tall.  Mr. Averette said they could look at planting evergreens, they could look at a ten foot  landscape buffer along the back oft those lots.  There was discussion among the Board regarding the landscape buffer.  There was no further discussion.  Vice-Chair Davis asked for the staff recommendation. Mr. Marr stated the staff recommended denial due to direct driveway access onto Hatcher Rd. Mr. Marr also stated that he was copied on an email from NCDOT stating they would sign off on a driveway Vice-Chair Davis appreciated the open space shown on the preliminary plat and stated that the number of proposed lots was 46 and the maximum density was 93 lots. Mr. Little asked about the property line across lots 4 through 15 and what was to the west Vice-Chair Davis responded that it was homes and asked about houses that were to the Mr. Newton responded that there were six addresses to the west oft thej property line. Mr. Little asked about the number oflots under the Land Use Plan.  permit for the three lots on Bailey-Boykin Rd.  oft the property line. west of the property line.  Mr. Newton responded that this area's placetype is Rural Living in accordance with the Land Use Plan and that there is no density associated with it yet. Mr. Newton stated that it did speak to low density and that is subjective. Mr. Newton stated that it would develop through future ordinance revisions and may consist of more diverse zoning districts for Vice-Chair Davis asked Mr. Averette if the developer would be willing to add a buffer Mr. Averette responded yes, itl looked like there was already some screening but they would be willing to add and dedicate at ten foot landscape buffer along those lots as well. Mr. Little stated that he understood the plight of the existing residents, but also considered  residential as opposed to singular. along lots 4 through 15.  the facts and what the Board was bound to.  14    Staff Recommendation: Denial, due to direct driveway access onto Hatcher Rd. Upon ai motion by Mr. Little to approve Hatcher Rd. Tract with the added condition for 10' landscape buffers along the rear of lots 4-15 and lots 38-42, seconded by Mr. Hudson, Hatcher Rd. Tract was approved by a unanimous vote of 7-0 at the January 23, 2024  Planning Board Meeting.  Mr. Hudson expressed appreciation for the willingness oft the developer.  Conditions and Requirements [Planningl  1. All lots must be a minimum of 30,000 sf. 2. Complete flood plain information 3. Metes & bounds 4. Certifications 5. Entrance sign & street signs 6. Street name approval  7. Cul-de-sac lots must have 40' road frontage 8. Complete improvements or provide performance guarantee 9. Lots 44, 45, and 461 must share a driveway. 10. Provide final plat Street Disclosure Statement Certificate for street maintenance (DM Sec 7, L. item 8) 11. Show shared driveway access easement and provide statement for shared maintenance on Final Plat 12. Show to whom open space is dedicated 13. Provide 20' fee simple access to open space  14. Provide utility easements along all lot lines in accordance with) LDC Sec. 14- 15. Provide a 10' landscape bufferalong rear of lots 4-15 and lots 38-42. 16. Coordinate with the US Postal Service for the design of and utilization of b. CBU shall not obstruct the operation and maintenance of utility services.  75(d)(3)  cluster box mail receptacle units: a. CBU: shall not impede the flow oft traffic.  CBU shall meet ADA and Fire Code requirements.  Environmental Health] unapproved lot [NCDOTI  17.Approval ofall lots for onsite sewage disposal or statement for each  18.Ad driveway permit and subdivision design approval must be obtained prior to 19. All design aspects of the plans shall comply with the current NCDOT Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures, NCDOT Subdivision Roads  construction  15    Minimum Construction Standards, and Policy on Street and Driveway Access 20. It will be determined at the time the driveway permit application is submitted 22. Remove existing driveway. just North of] proposed driveway and restore ditch.  tol North Carolina Highways  ifany road improvements will be required  21. Require encroachment permit for any utilities within ROW.  [Public Utilities]  23. Stormwater & Erosion Control Permits Required 24. Stormwater Statement Required well as any. jurisdictional features and buffers.  25. Wetlands should be delineated and shown on the plan ifany are present as 26. Property is limited to 15% impervious area without stormwater management.  [Emergency Services]  27. Provide topographic information. 29. Provide cul-de-sac detail. 30. Provide a fire flow test.  28. Provide "No Parking" signage along access road at fire hydrant locations. 31. Provide fire hydrant distribution plan/layout. (will need al hydrant on Hatcher  Rd.).  *Condition 15 was added by Planning Board and agreed to by applicant during the PB  Meeting.  There was a brief five minute break. Rezoning and Conditional Zoning Cases:  Rezoning Case 24-01 Sensitive Area (ESA) Owner: Hornet Homes, LLC  Rezoning Petition: Map Amendment petition to remove parcel from Environmentally  Tax ID: 11K99014N, 11K99014T, & 11K99014U Applicant: Hornet Homes, LLC/Jonathan Andrews  Location: 1.84 acres located at 15,25, &. 35 Chester Ln. in the O'Neals Township Mr. Marr introduced the case and referenced the information listed above. Mr. Marr also stated that he provided information from the Land Development Code, Sec. 14-103. - Environmentally sensitive area district (ES). Mr. Marr stated that in the Board's packet were maps provided by the Applicant to show their reasoning for the request, as well as a Mr. Jonathan Andrews, 7841 Stephenson Rd., Apex, N.C., Hornet Homes, LLC, was  letter from Johnston County Public Utilities Director Chandra Farmer.  present to answer any questions the Board may have.  16    Mr. Luis Vazquez, 996 Barnes Rd., Middlesex, N.C., adjacent property owner, requested information on the possible impact of the removal from the Environmentally Sensitive Mr. Newton responded and referenced the Land Development Code, Sec. 14-103. - Environmentally sensitive area district (ES). Mr. Newton stated that any property in the district is limited to a minimum 40,000 square feet lot size and also limited for major development to a twelve percent maximum impervious surface. Mr. Newton also stated that it limits development within the floodplain. Mr. Newton stated that the Board has approved these requests in the past when it was demonstrated that the properties requesting removal from the district did not generate any surface flow that was flowing back to the tributaries or drainage basins for the tributaries. Mr. Newton referenced the letter from  Area District.  Johnston County Public Utilities Director Chandra Farmer.  Mr. Lovering asked for clarification regarding the letter from Ms. Farmer.  Mr. Newton referenced Land Development Code, Sec. 14-103 and stated that Moccasin Creek was not listed as one ofthe streams intended tol be provided any protection under the  Environmentally Sensitive Area District.  Mr. Hudson asked ifit was essentially changing what it was in.  Mr. Newton responded that it was removing it because the Environmentally Sensitive Area District is not applicable to the Moccasin Creek tributary or drainage basin. Mr. Vazquez distributed photos to the Board and expressed concern for ongoing runoff issues from one of the subject properties, 15 Chester Ln. Mr. Vazquez spoke in favor of Mr. Andrews responded that he thought it was an issue with the grass and offered to exchange contact information with Mr. Vazquez to address his concerns. Mr. Andrews stated that the rezoning request was not about more or less water coming but about al label  the houses, but wanted his concerns for water runoffaddressed.  being incorrectly applied to the subject properties.  There was no further discussion.  Vice-Chair Davis asked for the staff recommendation. Mr. Marr provided a staff recommendation ofa approval and requested the Board refer to the provided response from Upon ai motion by Ms. Howard to approve Rezoning Case 24-01, seconded by Mr. Sasser, Rezoning Case 24-01 was recommended for approval by a unanimous vote of 7-0 at the Rezoning Case 24-01 will be heard by the Board of County Commissioners at their  Public Utilities Director Chandra Farmer.  January 23, 2024 Planning Board Meeting.  March 4, 2024 meeting. Rezoning Case 24-02  17    Rezoning Petition: Agricultural Residential (AR) to General Business-Conditional Zoning  (GB-CZ) Tax ID: 11P01031B Owner: Stanley Hall Applicant: Stanley Hall O'Neals Township Energy contractor.  Location: 8.46 acres ofa 39.43 acre tract located at 3509 Crockers Nub Rd. in the Conditional Zoning Request: Electrical, lighting yard, and equipment storage for Duke Mr. Marri introduced the case and referenced the information listed above. Mr. Marr A representative from MasTec, 1160 Country Club Rd. Roxboro, N.C., stated the particulars of the request and was present to answer any questions the Board may have. The MasTeci representative spoke about theiri intent toi install a chain linked fence and asked about a vegetation requirement around aj portion oft the fencing and ifit would be required Mr. Newton stated that the request is for a partial rezoning of the subject property. Mr. Newton stated that the County Ordinance requires a landscape buffer that borders the property ofthe moreintense: zoning from the lessi intense zoning district. Mr. Newton stated The MasTec representative asked about the height of the required vegetation buffer.  stated surrounding land uses and zonings.  given their intended distance from the road.  the buffer would need to be outside ofthe fence.  Vice-Chair Davis stated that it was a Class B buffer.  Mr. Newton referenced the Johnston County Land Design Manual.  The MasTec representative reviewed the conditions included at the end of the staff report  and agreed with those conditions. There was no: further discussion.  Vice-Chair Davis asked for the staff recommendation. Mr. Marrj provided a staff recommendation of approval and presented a draft statement of consistency for  consideration.  SlaffRecommendation: Approval  Upon a motion by Mr. Hudson to approve Rezoning Case 24-02, seconded by Mr. Little, Rezoning Case 24-02 was recommended for approval by a unanimous vote of7-0 at the Rezoning Case 24-02 will be heard by the Board of County Commissioners at their  January 23, 2024 Planning Board Meeting.  March 4, 2024 meeting.  18    Conditions:  1. Permitted Uses: Lighting yard and equipment storage for MasTec, A duke Energy 2. Applicant shall submit a detailed site plan for review and approval by the Planning 3. All buildings and/or structures must comply with rules enforced by Federal, State 4. Install Class B landscaping buffer. Existing natural vegetation may be used ifequal 5. The area housing all the equipment shall be enclosed within an 8' screen fence 6. Any lighting will be downlighting or dark sky SO as not to shine on to  Contractor.  and Zoning Department Staff. and Local agencies.  orr more intense. (proposed by applicant)  topped with barbwire.  adjacent properties. (Proposed by Applicant)  Rezoning Case 24-03 (GB-CZ) Tax ID: 16K02032  Rezoning Petition: Agricultural Residential (AR) to General Business-Conditional Zoning  Owner: Edgar Jose Mendoza Cordova Applicant: Edgar Jose Mendez Cordova  Location: .208 acres ofa 10 acre tract located at 416 David Rd. in the Wilders Township Conditional Zoning Request: Commercial tree service vehicle and equipment parking. Mr. Marrintroduced the case and referenced the information listed above. Mr. Marr stated surrounding land uses and zonings. Mr. Marr also stated this property came in asa zoning complaint to our office in June 2023, along with several other properties on this road, for the violation of operating a commercial business in an Agricultural Residential Ms. Howard asked ift the subject property was part oft the Windy Hill Subdivision.  zoning district.  Mr. Newton responded yes.  Ms. Howard asked ift there were restrictive covenants for the subdivision.  Mr. Newton stated that those are civil matters.  Ms. Howard stated that David Rd. is not a state maintained road.  Mr. Marr confirmed.  Mr. Calvin Mendez, representing the Owner/Applicant, was present to answer any  questions the Board may have.  19    Ms. Howard asked ift there was currently a manufactured home on the subject property.  Mr. Mendez responded no.  Ms. Howard asked ifv what she had was the proposed intent for the subject property.  Mr. Mendez responded yes.  Ms. Howard asked staffift they could rezone that small of a tract, 0.208 acre, to business. Mr. Newton responded that with any rezoning there was a concern for spot zoning. Mr. Newton stated that the other concern with regards to this particular request was the matter that there have been multiple properties in the neighborhood sent notices of violations for improper land use within the last six to eight months. Mr. Newton stated that this was developed asa ai residential neighborhood and staffhas a concern for stabishingaprecedent  by rezoning.  Ms. Howard asked about the road at the end ofDavid Rd.  Mr. Newton responded Wendell Rd.  Ms. Howard asked if any of the other properties have done anything in response to the  violation notices.  Mr. Newton responded that only one has been resolved to date. Mr. Marr spoke about several properties highlighted on MapClick GIS.  Mr. Hudson stated that the petitioner would have to come all the way down David Rd. with Mr. Newton spoke about the concern for spot zoning in a residential development and the potential for setting aj precedent within this residential development that would most likely Mr. Little expressed concern for the condition of the roadway for the rest of the residents Vice-Chair Davis asked about another property in the subdivision and its zoning. Mr. Newton confirmed that all were. zoned residential ini the subdivision.  his trucks.  lead to additional requests.  as well as emergency vehicles with it not being ini the state system.  Mr. Fernando Hernandez, 3441 Wendell Rd., Wendell, N.C., nearby resident, stated that he had a tow truck service and was looking to request a rezoning for his property as well as another one on David Rd. Mr. Hernandez addressed the Board's concern for the roads stating that the businesses on David Rd. are the ones maintaining it and paying for sand, gravel, and asphalt. Mr. Hernandez stated that there were businesses along Wendell Rd. in  the area ofI David Rd.  20    Mr. Jim Yeager, 409 David Rd., Wendell, N.C., adjacent property owner, stated that he had a lawnmower shop on his property and has for about fifteen years. Mr. Yeager stated that he uses his equipment to help maintain the road along with his neighbors. Mr. Yeager stated that he was in the process ofc completing the rezoning application. Mr. Charles Wesley, 178 Deer Tracks Dr., Wendell, N.C. adjacent property owner, spoke  in favor of the request.  Mr. Sasser asked Mr. Wesley about ai neighboring property on David Rd.  Mr. Wesley stated the neighboring property did have trucks, tractors, and trash on his property and he was not aware ofit and that he was still cleaning up trash that was on his property. Mr. Wesley stated that was not the case with Mr. Cordova or Mr. Yeager. Mr. Wesley stated that he spoke with the property owner to address his concerns.  Mr. Sasser asked about the proposed zoning.  Mr. Marr stated that all of the properties discussed were in violation currently except for Mr. Sasser asked if the property as it was would be in violation if it already had the Mr. Marr stated it would depend on the conditions. Mr. Marr stated staff had received  the one that has been rectified and moved operations.  requested rezoning.  complaints about multiple properties on David Rd. Vice-Chair Davis asked how long the property had been vacant.  Mr. Marr responded that they submitted a rezoning application in August or September right after the violation notice. Mr. Marr stated that while it was being prepared for the  Board, they found a warehouse and moved everything.  There was no further discussion.  Vice-Chair Davis asked for the staff recommendation. Mr. Marr provided a staff recommendation of denial based on the inconsistency with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and the continued violation of property. Mr. Marr also stated, David Rd. is not state maintained and is in very poor condition that can be made worse by the use ofc commercial  vehicle travel.  Vice-Chair Davis asked Mr. Mendez ifthere was an HOA.  Mr. Mendez stated that there was not an HOA and all oft the residents work to maintain the  road.  21    Mr. Yeager stated that when the subdivision owner passed away, it was turned over to some residents in the neighborhood to make up an HOA, but there was no agreement as to who would take it. Mr. Yeager stated he was the only original owner remaining.  Mr. Sasser asked ifthere was anything in writing.  Mr. Yeager responded no.  Ms. Howard asked Mr. Yeager ift they were in violation ofany restrictive covenants. Mr. Yeager stated that he did not know and that he was told the property was zoned  unrestricted agriculture at the time ofhis purchase.  Mr. Sasser expressed concern for spot zoning and setting a precedent. Mr. Yeager stated that the majority ofthe neighborhood is businesses.  Mr. Little stated an understanding for the businesses and expressed concern for setting a  precedent.  Vice-Chair Davis spoke about the location of the request. Mr. Hernandez stated that most of them want to bei in compliance.  Ms. Gaby, 416 David Rd., Wendell, N.C., stated that the request is for parking with no Vice-Chair Davis stated that there was a new subdivision going up to the north ofthis area Mr. Hudson asked staffifthey could delineate how many homeowners were on David Rd.  plans to construct or add any additional structures.  offof Stotts Mill Rd.  not including the ones operating businesses in violation.  Mr. Newton reference MapGlick GIS. Mr. Hudson stated that it appeared tol be 25-30.  Ms. Howard expressed concern for the request being in a residential neighborhood and Vice-Chair Davis asked about the difference between various home business types. Mr. Newton: responded and spoke about home occupations and those guideline restrictions.  concern for spot zoning.  Mr. Marr also explained home occupations and requirements.  22    Mr. Lovering expressed concern for picking and choosing properties within a residential neighborhood for rezoning. Mr. Lovering commended the existing businesses for  maintaining the road.  Vice-Chair Davis expressed concern for setting a precedent.  StatrRecommendation: Denial  Upon ai motion by Mr. Lovering to deny Rezoning Case 24-03, seconded by Mr. Crenshaw, Rezoning Case 24-03 was recommended for denial by a unanimous vote of 7-0 at the Rezoning Case 24-03 will be heard by the Board of County Commissioners at their  January 23, 2024 Planning Board Meeting.  March 4, 2024 meeting. There were no discussion items. The meeting ended at 8:08 p.m. Respectfully submitted by:  Jodie Gay, Secretary for the Board  23    STAFF REPORT  CONDTIONALZONING CASE23-25  Rezoning Petition: Petition to rezone 2.99 acres ofa 18.30 acre tract located at 84281 NCI Hwy 50 N in the Elevation Township from Agricultural Residential (AR) to General Business-Conditional Zoning  (GB-CZ). Tax] ID: 07E06003 Owner: Katie Proulx Applicant: Blake Hesse  Conditional Zoning Request: Mulch and landscaping sales & equipment and commercial vehicle parking.  Utilities & Services:  50/210 Fire District and Rescue Squad. Existing and Surrounding Land Uses/Zoning:  Existing Land Use: Zoned Agricultural Residential and used for those purposes.. and used for youth athletic fields and zoned GB and used for auto sales. Traffic count for this portion ofNCI Hwy 50 is 5,500 vpd (2021).  Surrounding Land Uses: Zoned AR: and used for residential and agricultural purposes. Zoned AR-CZ  Traffic Concerns:  NCHwy 50 appears on the CTP as an existing majort thoroughfare with adequate design capacity.  Land Usel Plan:  This area is located within a "Low Density Residential" future land use Placetype on the County's Envision  Johnston Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Staff Comments and Recommendation: Number of notices sent: 10  This property came in as a zoning complaint to our office in early 2023 for the violation of operating a  commercial business in an Agricultural Residential zoning district.  STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, based on thei inconsistency with the Comprehensive Land  Usel Plan and the continued violation of property.  Consistency Statement  This request is not consistent with the Envision Johnston Comprehensive Land Use Plan in that it is ina a Low Density Residential area and noti in close proximity to any activity nodes. It also conflicts with LU-1o of the Envision Johnston Plan that recommends to "Direct future growth toward the municipalities."  Conditional Zoning Applicant Questions:  1. That the use or development is located, designed, and proposed to be operated sO as to maintain or promote the Applicant: The proposed development will enable local residents and businesses to access resources necessary for the construction and maintenance of landscaping for aesthetic value and to abide by the county's landscape buffer ordinances. By promoting the growth of landscaping, erosion and sediment  public health, safety, and general welfare;  runoffintol local waterbodies and blue-line streams can be mitigated.    2. That the use of the 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 Applicant: The parcel is located along a major highway, NC 50, and is near other large parcels. Based on current trends, further development of subdivisions and other property types can be predicted 3. That the use or development is located, designed, and proposed to be operated sO as to maintain or enhance the Applicant The proposed development will serve as a resource for future development by providing the necessary supplies to create and maintain landscape buffers as required by the Johnston County 4. That the use or development conforms with general plans for the physical development oft the County's Planning jurisdiction, the Design Manual, or other development policies as adopted by the Board of Commissioners. Applicant: The proposed development will provide resources to enable adequate landscaping and greenery to be placed and maintained on new developments and existing properties. This will enable Johnston County to continue developing at its current rate while minimizing the negative effects to the  and with all applicable regulations; within the vicinity of the site.  value of contiguous property, or that the use or development is aj public necessity;  landscaping ordinances.  ecosystem and the visual aesthetic of the county.  Proposed Conditional Zoning) District Information  1. Please Provide the purpose of the district, aj project narrative, and al list of proposed land uses to be Applicant: The proposed conditional zoning area will provide mulch and other landscaping resources to new developments with the purpose of assisting new developments in meeting the landscaping requirements as set by. Johnston County. Individuals and existing residents may also purchase materials for the growth of gardens and other landscaping projects.  allowed within the conditional zoning district.  2. Conditions to apply to the conditional zoning district:  Within a Conditional. Zoning District, additional conditions andi requirements may be added which may assist in mitigating the impacts the development may have on the surrounding communily andi the environment. Siaff the Plaming. Board, and BoorlofCommisioners may propose additional conditions during the review process. Please list any conditions that you  propose, as the applicant, below. Applicant: No response  Conditions:  1. Proposed uses: Mulch and landscaping sale and staging; Equipment and commercial 2. An eight-foot opaque fence will bei installed around any outdoor storage areas.  vehicle parking.  3. Normal Business hours 8am-5pm Monday-Saturday.    4. The development shall conform to all requirements of the. Johnston County Land 5. Applicant shall submit a detailed site plan for review and approval by the Planning and 6. A Class B (2 large trees, 3 small trees, and 9: shrubs every 100 linear feet) landscape buffer shall be installed along all conditional zoning lines and must be placed outside ofa any fencing. 8. All structures must comply with all rules enforced by Federal, State, and Local agencies. 10. Any lighting will be dark sky or down lighting sO as not to shine onto adjacent properties. 11. Commercial vehicles will be limited to 2 trucks, 2 trailers, and 2 pieces of equipment to load.  Development Code. Zoning Department Staff. (existing vegetation may be used) 9. Secure an NCDOT driveway permit.  7. All signage shall comply with the. Johnston County sign code.  12. Mulch must be delivered from off site and cannot be produced onsite.    PENNYERD  BOWLINGS SPRINGDR        Z NOTICEOF CASE:  (919)989-5150                    REZONING & CONDITIONAL ZONING APPLICATION ADTICANTNIONATON  Johnston County Planning & Zoning 3091 E. Market Strect, Smithficld, NC27577 Phonc (919) 989-5150 Fax (919) 989-5426 wwphniommcumfPmans  Name of Applican/Pelitioner, Blakc Hesse- Enginecring Technician for Enoch Engincers P.A.  Mailing Address of Applicant: 1403NC50S Telephonc:, 919-894-7765 Email: Mak@emechmy.hnerscem PAOPAEDMNFONMITION Owners Name(s) KanicNiekimiePranikx Taleplhone2l9.669.982 Statc Road # NC-50 Township:. Flevation ZONINCINTOMATION Current Zoning District(s):AR Acres Bcing Rezoned:2.99  Fax:_  Pecdhopicacan  Mailing Address ofOwner: B7ANCHwysON-Amgir.NC2X01-172 Sitc Address:84281 NCHwy 50N N, Angier, NC27501-8727 'Tax IDI Number: 07E06003- -1 PIN:162300-82-8144  919-868-1680  Email Kbahaulinp.mailcom  Deed Book: 081 Requested Zoning District:. CY Tolnl Acresi inl Parcel: 18.30  Paget 763  COADIIONALZONINCINIORMATION tghCmllag 2oiinspleao ag dut dhbe aecton and Pges23 List Requested Uses: Mulch &1 landscaping staging sale and suping,eqigeent * Caraeren vehele perkig  UINITAUNECUMENENE Completed. Application 2. Zoning Fcc: (Lcss then 3/ Acres: $375.00)  (3.01 -6.00 Acrcs: $625.00) (6.01-+ Acres: $1250.00 + $18.75/Acre)  (5)-FOLDED 18x24 & (10). -FOLDED 11x1 17 coplcs of the preliminary p!l4-330 Certified' TIA required for developments with 100 peakl houe trips or 1000 or morc daily trips. ApplicahtsT must citherl bc performed by the County consultant, orr revicwed! by the County's consultant. TIA fccs and/or revicw fccs must be paid by thc applicant. Developments requiringa ATIA cannot bc placed on an agenda until aTlAis Iccriify on this date. 10/3123 that all the information presented in this petition/application is accurate to the best of my knowledge, information and belicf. Further,I understand that should this petition/application be approved by the Johnston County Board of Commissionets, no sitc activity can take placc until a site plan and/or any other land development permits arc issucd. Additionally, I allow county staff access to the petition property" whilc conducting revicw  conducied/revicved by the consultant.  EMUXMANAAVANAVAN PROPEKTYONNIR  oft this pctition. OWPER(S) SIGNATURE:, MnL APPICVTSNIGNATURA Bak P Siaffuse Onlj  DATE: 16/31123 DATE:  1/1/2023  FEE: SUBAITTALDATE: RECEIVEDI BY:  Please ropyforyour records  2023  Scanned with CamScanner    REZONING & CONDITIONAL ZONING APPLICATION  Johnston County Planning & Zoning 3091 E. Markct Strect, Smithficld, NC27577 Phonc (919)9 989-5150 Fax (919) 989-5426 phsoncampag  COMPLETBI FOR GONDITIONALZONINCAPPLICATON Board in determining its ecommendation. public hcalth, safcty, and gencral welfare: bluc-line streams can be mitigated.  The applicant must ansaer thej follonving questions and provide adequate explanation and documentationj for each. These questions will be used as guidelnes for the Planning 1. Explain how the use/devclopment is located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain/promotc the Theproposed development: will enable) local residents and businesses to access resources necessary for the construction and maintenance of landscaping for acsthetic value and to abide by the county's] landscape buffer. ordinances. Bypromoting the growth ofl landscaping, crosion and sediment runoff intol local waterbodies and 2. Explain how all uses permitted under thej proposed new district classification: are appropriate for the neighborhood or The parcel is located along a major highway, NC 50,andi is near other Jarge parccls. Based on current trends, further development ofs subdivisions and other property typcs can bc predicted within the vicinity of the sitc.  area:  3. Explain how the use/dcvelopment. is located, designed, and proposed tol be opcrated so as tot maintain/enhance the 'Thej proposed devclopment will serve AS at resource for future development by providing the necessary supplics to create  character of the neighborhood, andt that the usc/devclopment. is aj public necessity: and maintain landscape buffers as required by the) Johnston County landscaping ordinances.  4. Explain how the proposed voning changei is consistent with thej Johnston County Comprchensive Land Usc Plan and The proposed development will ptovide resources to cnable adequate landscaping: and greenery tol be placed and maintained on new developments and existing properties. This will enable Johnston County to continuc developing ati its current rate whilc minimizing the negative effects to the ecosystem and the visual acsthetic of the county.  other adopted plans and policics:  Proposed Conditional Zoning District Information:  1. Please provide the purposc of the district, aj project narrative, anda al list of proposed. land uses to bc allowed within thc purpose of assisting new developments. in mecting thel landscaping requirements as set by] Johnston County. Individuals and cxisting residents may also purchase materials fort the growth of gardens and other landscaping projccts.  conditional zoning district.  resources to new  with the  The proposed conditional voning arca will provide mulch and other landscaping  developments  StaffUse Only:  FEE: SUBMITTALDATE: RECEIVED BY:  Please copy forgyour records  2023    REZONING & CONDITIONAL ZONING APPLICATION  Johnston County Planning & Zoning 3091 E. Market Strcet, Smithficld, NC27577 Phonc (919) 989-5150 Fax (919) 989-5426 phntoccpang  ATY  2. Conditions to apply to the Conditional Zoning) District:  Withina Conditional Zoning District, additional conditions and requirements may bc added which may assist in mitigating thei impacts the development may have on the surrounding community and the environment. Staff, the Planning Boatd, and Board of Commissioncrs may propose: additional conditions duting thc revicw process. Plcasc list  any conditions that you! proposc, as thc applicant, bclow.  StaffUse Only:  FEE: SUBMITTALDATE RECEIVED BY:  Please copyforgyour records  2023    3440 T LANGDONDR SR1327  PENRD  amasAiatilaehinil 000000004 # 00040 o8  o  B1BCRA38 322 A30  RI 400  AS N 50 A MAN NC 8  M.Zi,Z0.10 Nfu s    4e LANGDONDR T SR1321  -Alalat 000000004 # 00040 pAx  4o  (Mo2)eCMIY WAIVOONDON  PEMANRD SR-1323  00    STAFF REPORT  REZONING AND SPECIAL USE CASE: 24-04  Special Use Request: Petition to request a Special Use Permit for 1.2 acres located at 3715  Jackson-King Rd. int the Pleasant Grove Township. Owner: 50-210 Community Fire Department, Inc. Applicant: Cellco Thomas H.. Johnson, Attorney Special Use Request: Cellular tower with related equipment.  Tax ID: 13C02003D  Utilities & Services:  50/210 Fire District and Rescue Squad. Existing and Surrounding Land Uses/Zoning:  Existing Land Use: Zoned AR and used as ai fire department.  Surrounding Land Uses: Zoned AR and used for agricultural and residential purposes.  Traffic Concerns:  Traffic count for. Jackson-King Rd. is 2200 vpd (2022). Jackson-King Road does not appear on the CTP as needing improvement.  Land Use Plan:  This area is located within a designated "Low Density Residential Placetype" on the County's Envision  Johnston Comprehensive Land Use Plan.  Additional Information:  The county'st technical consultant has reviewed this request.  If approved, the construction of the tower will have to adhere to all federal, state, and local regulations pertaining to construction and maintenance oflelecommunications facilities/towers. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial, based on designing the tower to reduce the number of tenants to four and not meeting setback requirements. Also, Insufficient concealment with special consideration given to a new residential development currently under construction across Jackson-  King Rd.  From the. Johnston County Land Development Code in regards to granting Relief:  (26) Relief. Any applicant desiring relief, waiver or exemption from any aspect or requirement of this section may request such at the preapplication meeting, provided that the relief or exemption is contained in the submitted application for either a special use permit or, in the case of an existing or previously granted special use permit a request for modification of its wireless elecommunications facility andlor facilities. Such relief may be temporary or permanent, partial or complete. However, the burden of proving the need for the requested relief, waiver, or exemption is solely on the applicant to prove. The applicant shall bear all costs of the county in considering the request and the relief, waiver, or exemption. No such relief or exemption shall be approved unless the applicant demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that, if granted the relief, waiver, or exemption, the same will have no significant effect on the health, safety, and  welfare of the county, its residents, and other service providers.    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 Applicant: TowerCo 2013 LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("TowerCo"), on behalf of AT&T and FirstNet, a federal government authority, is seeking to install a telecommunications tower with the intention of establishing, operating, and maintaining an interoperable public safety broadband network. The proposed facility is located to address an area needing wireless service improvement and thereby promotes public health, safety, and general welfare. As recognized in NC General Statutes Section 160D-930(a) and in Section 14- 257 (0) (1) of the Johnston County Land Development Code, the goal is "to ensure the ready availability of reliable wireless services to the public, governmental agencies and first responders, with the intention of furthering the public safety and general welfare." Many 911 emergency calls are made from cell phones, and greater access to cellular service will provide reliable access to emergency alerts, weather radar and warnings, and other necessary and critical information. Reliable service is essential to quick recording and coordination of responses to accidents, criminal activity, health events, natural disasters, and other emergency situations that impact public health and safety. In addition, this site will provide broadband 2. That the use of the 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  promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;  internet access to a rural area of the County.  ins section 14-257 and with all applicable regulations;  Applicant: A response to each ordinance is attached in the packet.  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: Needed access to wireless service is a public necessity, as emergency services and wireless connectivity are important and integral parts of the community. Greater access to wireless service may also improve efficiency among business and agricultural personnel in the surrounding area. An illustration of the current limited coverage is shown on Exhibits 8 and 9. Currently, much of the area has little access to reliable cellular coverage, and this tower will meet the needs of those seeking reliable cellular coverage in the surrounding area. An Impact Study by a licensed North Carolina appraiser will be provided to show no adverse impact on 4. That the use or development conforms with general plans for the physical development oft the County's Planning jurisdiction, the Design Manual, or other development policies as adopted by the Board of Applicant: Johnston County has expressed the goal of continuing to provide public safety services to residents. (See Goal 15) Greater access to telecommumications services and internet connectivity will provide greater access to emergency services and wireless connectivity, thereby ensuring more expeditious access to emergency services. Additionally, Johnston County recognizes that facilitating the development of wireless service technology can be an economic development asset to the County and of significant benefit to the County and its The tower is designed to house up to 4 antenna arrays. AT&T intends to install 1 antenna array on the tower, with additional space for up to 3 other antenna arrays, thereby providing an  adjoining property values.  Commissioners.  residents.  opportunity for collocation in the future, as shown on Sheet C5ofExhibit: 5.  Specific Land Uses: APPLICANT: Cell Tower    Special Use Conditions:  1. Permitted Uses: Cell Tower and fenced compound.  2. The Special Use Permit may be revoked with the violation ofa any Special Use Condition. 3. Applicant shall submit a detailed site plan for review and approval by the Planning and Zoning 4. All buildings and/or structures must comply with rules enforced by Federal, State and Local 5. Installation ofa Class B landscape buffer along the outer perimeter oft the chain-link security fence surrounding the base of the tower (2 large trees, 3 small trees, and 9 shrubs) every one hundred (100) linear feet. Existing natural vegetation may be used if more intense than the buffer 6. All feed lines shall bei installed within the support structure and antenna ports shall be sealed in 8. At the time of permitting, the Applicant shall provide a structural analysis signed by a North Carolina Professional Engineer to comply with ANSI/EIA/TIA-222-G (as amended) for 9. The facility shall be constructed so that access is only attainable by qualified personnel.  Department Staff. agencies.  requirement.  an manner to prevent access by birds and any other wildlife. 7. The proposed structure shall not be lighted (unless FAA requires). Johnston County for the approved number of antenna arrays.    SANITEN  ENOSONE  NTANE    6  PKuERr  - - -    24-04  NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARIMG ÇASE: 24-04 Fortnto (9,19) 989-5150  FEBI1N2024.    REZONING & CONDITIONAL ZONING APPLICATION  Johnston County Planning & Zoning 309 E. Market Strcet, Smithficki, NG27577 Phonc (919) 989-5150 Fax (919) 989-5426 phmsoacom/Phmang  Name of Appicant/Petitioner, Thomas H.J Johnson,E, Attorncy Mailing. Address of Applicant:. 301 Fayetteville St., Stc. 1700, Ralcigh, NC: 27601  Tclephonc:. (919)981-4006 Email: Pho@wlmmilmncen  FAN: (919) 981-4300  Owners Namc(s):. 50-210 Community Fire Depattment, Inc. Mailing Address ofOwner: 50 Greenleaf Road, Angier, NC27501 Site Address: 3715) Jackson-King Road, Willow Spring, NC27592  Taapione_0128P-76 Thx ID Number: 13C02003D Statc Road #: 1531 Township: Plensant Grove FORMAION Current Zoning District(s):. AR Acres Bcing Rezoncd: 0 List Requested Uses:_ N/A BAVIRIVVL 1. Completed. Application  Email_ N/A  Decd) Book: 01587 Requested Zoning District:, N/A Total Acres in Parccl:. 1.2  Page: 0280  Zoning Fce: (Less then 34 Acres: $375.00)  (3.01- -6.00 Acres: $625.00) (6.01-+ Acres: $1250.00 +$ $18.75/Acre).  (5)-FOLDED: 18x24 & (10)-FOLDED: 11x1 17 copics of the preliminary plat  Certified' TIA required for developments with 100 peak hour trips or 1000 or more daily trips. Applicant's TIA must cithcrl be performed by the County consultant, or reviewed by the County's consultant. TIA fces and/or revicw fccs must bc paid) by thc applicant. Devclopments requiring a TIA cannot bc placed on: an agenda until: aTIAis  conducted/tevieved. by thc consultant.  RTIG Iccrlify on this date. oft this pctition. OWNER(S) SIGNATURE: APPLIÇANT/S) SAGNATIRRE: FAL werbo VR0134 SlaffUdOnb  D  that all the information presented in this petition/mpplication is accuratc to the  best of my knowledge, information and bclicf. Further, Junderstand that should this petition/applitation be: approved! by the Johnston County Board of Commissioners, no site activity can take place until a sitc plan and/or any other land development permits arc issucd. Additionally, I: allow county staff access to the pctition property whilc conducting revicw  DATE: 160ck. 2023 lol/z025 DATE: I/13/2023  422  dak  JBI: SUBMITALIDATE: UICHIMEDIY  Pleaso copy forgyour vacords  2023    REZONING & CONDITIONAL ZONING APPLICATION RAPIRROR ADIION  Johnston County Planning & Zoning 309 E. Market Street, Smithficld, NC27577. Phonc (919) 989-5150 Fax (919)-989-5426 wwphasocom/pmmane  RHIGUDIA,  The applicant must ansier thej following questions and provide adequate explanation and documentation.for each. These questions avill be used as guidelines) fort the Planning 1. Explain how the usc/devclopment isl located, designed, and proposcd tol bc operated so: as to maintain/promote the  Board in determining its vecommendation. public health, safcry, and general welfire: Please scc altached responses.  2. Explain how: all uscs permitted under the proposed new district clssitication arc: appropriate for the neighborhood or  arca:  Please sce attached responses.  3. Explain how the usc/devclopment isl located, designed, and proposed to be operated so: as 101 maintain/enhance the  character oft the neighborhood, and that the use/devclopment: is: a public necessity:  Pleasc scc attached responses.  Explain how the proposed: voning change is consistent with the Johnston County Comprehensive Land Use Plan: and  other adopted plans andj policics: Pleases scc attached responses.  Proposed Conditional Zoning District Information:  1. Plense provide the purposc of the district, ap project narrative, and al list of proposed land uscs tol bc allowed within the  conditional zoning district. Not applicable.  StiffUse: Quly  BEEL SUDMITCALDAIE: REGEINED BX  Pleuse copyforgour records  2023    REZONING & CONDITIONAL ZONING APPLICATION  Johnston County Planning & Zoning 3091 E. Market Strect, Smithfiek, NC27577 Phonc (919) 989-5150 Fax (919) 989-5426 wphmonmcom/pamang  2. Conditions to apply to the Conditional Zoning Distric:: any. conditions thaty youp propose, as the applicant, below.  Within a Conditional Zoning District, additional conditions and requircments may! be udded which may assisti in mitigating the impacts the development: may have on thes surrounding community and the environment. Staff, the Planning Board, and Board of Commissioners may proposc additional conditions during the revicw process. Pleasc list  Not: applicable.  StaffUsa Qily  FEE SUBMIETALDAIT: ECEIVEDBY  Please copyforgour records  2023    Applicant: Thomas H. Johnson, Jr., Attorney on behalfofTowerCo: 2013 LLC Application: Special Use Permit, Setback Reduction, Antenna Array Reduction (4)  Site Name: McGees Crossroads NW Parcel ID: 160500-79-9052 Zoning District: AR  Address: 3715 Jackson-King Road, Willow Spring, NC27592  Landowner: 50-210 Community Fire Department, Inc., al North Carolina nonprofit corporation 1.That the use or development is located, designed, and proposed to be operated sO as to TowerCo 2013 LLC, al Delaware limited liability company ("TowerCo"), on behalfof AT&T and FirstNet, a federal government authority, is seeking toi install a telecommunications tower with thei intention of establishing, operating, and maintaining an interoperable public safety broadband network. The proposed facility is located to address an area needing wireless service improvement and thereby promotes public health, safety, and general welfare. As recognized in NC General Statutes Section 160D-930(a) and in Section 14-257(0)(1) of the. Johnston County Land Development Code, the goal is "to ensure the ready availability of reliable wireless services to the public, govermmental agencies and first responders, with thei intention of furthering the public safety and general welfare." Many 911 emergency calls are made from cell phones, and greater access to cellular service will provide reliable access to emergency alerts, weather radar and warnings, and other necessary and critical information. Reliable service is essential to quick reporting and coordination of response to accidents, criminal activity, health events, natural disasters, and other emergency: situations that impact public health and safety. In addition, this site will provide broadband internet access to a rural area oft the County. 2. That the use of development complies with all required use andi intensity regulations ofarticles II and VI of[this chapter), and the applicable specific standards contained in section 14-257 and  maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare.  with all applicable regulations.  A response to each ordinance requirement is attached.  3. That the use or development is located, designed, and proposed to be operated sO as to maintain or enhance the value ofcontiguous property, or that the use or development is aj public Needed access to wireless service is a public necessity, as emergency services and wireless connectivity are: important and integral parts of the community. Greater access to wireless service may also improve efficiency among business and agricultural personnel in the  necessity.  surrounding area.    An illustration of the current, limited coverage in the area is shown on Exhibits 8 and 9. Currently, much of the area has little access to reliable cellular coverage, and this tower will meet the needs of those seeking reliable cellular coverage in the surrounding arca. An Impact Study by al licensed North Carolina appraiser will be provided to show no adverse 4. That the use or development conforms with general plans for the physical development of the county's planning, jurisdiction as embodied in [this chapter), the county strategic plan, or other Johnston County has expressed the goal of continuing to provide public safety services to residents. (See Goal 15) Greater access to telecommunications services and internet connectivity will provide greater access to emergency services and wireless connectivity, thereby ensuring more expeditious access to emergency services.. Additionally, Johnston County recognizes that facilitating the development of wireless service technology can be an economic development asset to the County and of significant benefit to the County and The tower" is designed tol house up to 4 antenna arrays. AT&Tintends to install 1 antenna array on the tower, with additional space for up to 3 other antenna arrays, thereby providing an opportunity for collocation in the future, as shown on Sheet C5 of Exhibit 5.  impact on adjoining property values.  development policies as adopted by the board ofc commissioners.  its residents.