FOUR OAKS – In 1918, Berea Presbyterian Church opened their doors at 10379 Highway 210 near Raleigh Road. Prior to 1918, the property had been used for a sawmill. The church and community have seen a lot of change in the last 102 years. In recent years, traffic, growth and congestion have been the biggest issues.
When a house next door to the church was recently purchased to turn into a home health care business, church members opposed. Rev. Paul Rowland said businesses are still a mile or so away from the church and he wants to keep it that way as long as he can.
Rev. Rowland and a church elder attended the December 17, 2019 meeting of the Johnston County Planning Board opposing a request by Ultimate 1 Properties, LLC to rezone a single family residence at 10321 Highway 210 from Agricultural Residential (AR) to General Business – Special Use District (GB-SUD). The applicant reportedly wanted to operate a home health care business with technicians meeting in the morning then going out to make home visits during the day before returning in the afternoons. The site would house administrative offices and a place to hold staff meetings.
The planning board voted 5-to-2 in December to recommend Commissioners deny the request.
During their March 2nd meeting, the owner of Ultimate 1 Properties LLC did not appear, however Curk Lane from True Line Surveying of Clayton did address the board and attempt to answer questions.
Rev. Rowland presented commissioners with a petition signed by 23 church members opposed to the rezoning. Rowland said the rezoning would allow for a particular business now, but would pave the way for a wide range of businesses in the future. He claimed the health care business had already been in operation for two months without the required rezoning.
Commissioner Butch Lawter asked Lane if he knew if the applicant was already operating a business from the site. Mr. Lane said he did not know.
Commissioner Vice Chairman Chad Stewart said he was pro-business and for people to be able to do what they want with their property, however he had concerns with this particular case.
With the property owner not being present to respond to questions and concerns from commissioners, the board voted unanimously to reject the rezoning request.
