Danny Steelman speaks during public comments at a Yadkin County Commissioner’s meeting regarding the ongoing community opposition to a proposed aggregate quarry in Hamptonville.
Discussion of two rezoning requests took up much of the time at Monday’s Yadkin County Board of Commissioners meeting. Once again the meeting was attended by a large group of Hamptonville area residents who are opposed to a rezoning request from Rural Agriculture to Manufacturing Industrial that would allow for an aggregate mine near West Yadkin Elementary School. On June 13 the Yadkin County Planning Board voted 3-2 to recommend the request for approval. It was anticipated that a public hearing on the matter would be scheduled for the July 18 Yadkin Commissioners meeting, but on Monday the board voted to postpone that hearing until its Aug. 15 meeting.
Danny Steelman, of Hamptonville, addressed the board during public comments regarding the continued community opposition to the rezoning request.
As was mentioned during the July 13 Planning Board meeting, Steelman said that official complaints have been filed with the North Carolina Engineering and Geology licensing and compliance boards in regard to licensing of the Colinas Group, Turnkey Processing Solutions and others from which numerous documents have been sent to the planning board from the applicants of Three Oaks Quarry.
“We’re contending inappropriate business licensing and practices in North Carolina,” said Steelman. Steelman went on to say that the cases have been assigned to investigators and that process would likely be ongoing for the next 30 to 40 days.
Based on that information, Commissioner Frank Zachary suggested and then made a motion to schedule the public hearing on the rezoning for the Aug. 15 board meeting.
The requested rezoning of several parcels of land on Ireland Road, east of the intersection of Ireland and Longtown Road, were discussed at length during a public hearing on that matter. Jerry Bryant of Boonville requested a rezone of three parcels from Rural Agriculture to Residential Restricted for the purpose of a housing sub-division. The Planning Board’s recommendation was to deny the request based on the future land use plan which calls for the area to be Rural Agriculture.
Among the points indicated by the planning board for the denial was that there was not convincing demonstration that the character of the neighborhood would not be adversely affected.
“Planning board did not believe the request was appropriate for the area based on current existing development,” Seth Harris, county planner, shared with the Commissioners.
During the public hearing on the rezoning request, Bryant offered a different layout of the parcels, proposing fewer homes, eight rather than his original proposal of 15. Planning staff explained to the board that that would still require a rezone for that number of parcels.
Several neighboring property owners spoke during the hearing asking that the county board uphold the planning board’s decision to deny the rezoning request.
After a lengthy discussion on the matter, Bryant withdrew his application for the rezoning with plans to resubmit a different application. Planning staff noted that a resubmitted application would have to start the process over again being reviewed by staff and then the planning board before coming again before the county board.
