According to a report, a civil complaint concerning a decision of North Carolina‘s Carteret County Board of Commissioners in May to rezone 156 acres of undeveloped land for a recreational camper park is scheduled to be heard by a judge on Monday.
The undeveloped land is located along Highway 58 near Peletier.
The Carteret County and the board of commissioners, named as defendants in the civil complaint submitted initially to Carteret County Superior Court on June 22, filed a second motion to dismiss the case on August 23.
The motion to dismiss is scheduled to be heard in the superior civil court starting 10:00 a.m. on October 25 at the courthouse located in Beaufort.
The first complaint was filed by two plaintiffs Barry Blackburn and Cathey Blackburn, who own property on West Firetower Road near the property rezoned as a recreational camping park (RCP) district in May.
Other plaintiffs mentioned in the complaint include Gilbert and Pam Taylor, James and Rebecca Dorris, and William and Lou Singleton, who also own property near the proposed camper park.
The complaint seeks a preliminary injunction, which would effectively overturn the commissioners’ 4-2 vote to rezone the 156 acres previously zoned for residential single-family into an RCP district.
Commissioners Robin Comer, Mark Mansfield, Chris Chadwick, and Ed Wheatly favored the rezoning. However, Commissioners Bob Cavanaugh and Chuck Shinn were against it. Commissioner Jimmy Farrington was recused from voting and deliberating due to his status as a part-owner of the landowner/developer involved in this request (Dirt2Dreams LLC.)
The complaint claims the plaintiffs “will suffer imminent injury through loss of character of the particular neighborhood and/or local area impacted by the Rezoning Decision into a high density, high traffic area, overwhelming an area otherwise zoned as low to moderate density residential.”
One of the main points in residents’ concerns is the county’s land-use policy which categorizes the area located along Highway 58 to be “limited transition.” The plaintiffs claim that the rezoning was not harmonious with the land-use plan, and it was a case of spot zoning, and therefore, shouldn’t be allowed to pass.