Hedrick Rezoning - East Park Avenue (REZ-26-22)

At a glance

What: William Hedrick's request to rezone 17.94 acres on East Park Avenue from RA-3 to CZ-LI as an expansion of his construction business next door.
Where it stands: the Planning Board recommended approval 5-0 on October 6, with added conditions.
Next: Commissioners' public hearing October 26.

The proposal

Site: 17.94 acres (Lexington Township, Tax Map 325 Lot 68) on East Park Avenue about 300 feet north of Robert Everhart Road.
Expansion of his construction business next door, which the Board rezoned in February 2025.
A conceptual site plan shows possible future buildings at maximum buildout; he says he plans storage buildings for materials, not a business park.
A blue-line stream crosses the lot.

Conditions

The applicant's conditions, plus:
- A 20-foot vegetative buffer along the eastern line next to RA-3 properties.
- An NCDOT commercial driveway permit for direct access to East Park Avenue.

Status and next steps

Planning Board recommended approval 5-0 on October 6.
Commissioners' public hearing is October 26.

Log

2026-10-26 - Board of Commissioners Meeting - Public hearing; staff recommended approval and the board approved the rezoning and statement of consistency by voice vote.
2026-10-06 - Planning Board - Approved 5-0 with added 20-foot buffer and driveway permit conditions; a resident's question about blasting materials answered (none will be stored). Goes to the Commissioners October 26.

2026-10-06 - Planning Board (video detail)

Staff presented the request; the applicant, who already runs a construction business on the adjoining light-industrial tract, said he bought Lot 68 about a year earlier and wants the zoning to add storage buildings for pipe, grading materials and equipment. He agreed to a 20-foot vegetated buffer along the eastern line next to residential lots, and staff noted an NCDOT driveway permit would be needed if access is taken across the creek. One speaker asked about storage of blasting caps or hazardous materials; the applicant said he had no intention of storing blasting materials. Staff said no one had called about the application and supported it, citing the nearby economic development corridor and compatible light-industrial zoning. The motion to recommend approval with the buffer condition passed 5-0.