OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Gastonia Planning Commission Meeting – September 3, 2026

City Council & Commissions — Thursday, September 3, 2026
BodyGastonia, North Carolina
SessionCity Council & Commissions
DateThursday, September 3, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 2:48:17

Transcript — Verbatim
0:00

So you're all in the right spot.

0:02

So good evening.

0:02

My name is Chad Gorley.

0:04

I am the chairman of the Gastonia Planning Commission.

0:06

On behalf of the Commission, I would like to welcome you to today's meeting.

0:09

I will now call the September 3rd, 2026 meeting of the Gastonia Planet Commission to order.

0:14

If you plan to address the Commission in favor or in opposition this evening, please sign the appropriate sign in sheet on the table outside the door.

0:22

Item one roll call sound check.

0:25

Commissioners go around the room now asking state your name and if you had any calls or contacts.

0:31

We'll start from my left.

0:35

Meg Mason Chapman, no calls, no contacts, Ward 6.

0:40

Julie Coffee, Ward 5, 3 contacts.

0:45

Jeff Howe, Ward 3, no contacts.

0:50

No contacts.

0:51

Deanna Murfrey, Ward 2, no contacts.

0:53

Welcome to Clarch Number 1, no contacts.

0:57

Chad Gorley, Ward 1, no contacts.

0:59

Hereby declare a quorum for the meeting.

1:03

Item 3, 3A, approval of August 6, 2026 meeting minutes.

1:07

Are there any corrections or additions to the August 6, 2026 meeting minutes?

1:12

Here are none.

1:13

Is there a motion to adopt the meeting minutes as submitted and/or revised?

1:17

Motion.

1:21

Second.

1:22

All those in favor of the motion, please raise your right hand.

1:26

Motion carries.

1:31

Rules of procedure.

1:32

Before we begin the public hearings, let me first explain the procedures that will be followed.

1:37

A time limitation policy is used to conduct the meeting.

1:40

Generally, we ask that opponents and proponents limit their total time to a total of 20 minutes, distributing this time to two to three minutes per speaker.

1:47

Time will be available for rebuttals if needed.

1:50

At any time following the opening of the public hearing, the planning commission may consider continuing the hearing to a later meeting or in order that sufficient information may be obtained for the commission to make a decision.

2:00

Following the hearing, the planning commission will consider action on the request.

2:03

The commission may take action this evening or delay an action to another meeting.

2:08

Actions of the Planning Commission for rezonings may include granting the item requested, granting granting the request with request with a reduction in the area requested, granted a more restrictive rezoning than the one requested or denying the request.

2:22

If the decision of the Planning Commission for rezonings is by three-fourths vote and no one appeals our decision, then the decision of this body shall rest as final action.

2:30

On the other hand, if our vote is by less than three fourths, then the case will automatically go on to the city council for a new hearing and their consideration.

2:37

Also, regardless of how the planning commission voted, if anyone appeals our decision, the case will go on to City Council for a new hearing and final action.

2:45

Any such appeal must be filed with a city manager or city planning office by 5 p.m.

2:49

on Friday, September 18, 2026, unless otherwise noted at the beginning of the hearing.

2:55

Notice of any potential or required hearings before the city council was given with notice of the hearing.

2:59

Therefore, no separate notification will be made if there is a city council hearing.

3:03

If you would like to be notified of any appeal hearing before the city council, call or email the planning department.

3:14

Item 4a, public hearing, the Grove at Airport Road, file number 2026 00008.

3:21

Subject hearing involves a request to rezone approximately 4.65 acres from RS 12, single family residential minimum 12,000 square foot lots to RS8 Conditional District, single family residential, minimum 8,000 square feet lots, conditional zoning district.

3:37

The subject properties are located at 440 Airport Road and 450 Airport Road and are owned by the Development Solutions Group LLC.

3:46

I'd like to recognize Veronica Bateson, AICP, Senior Planner for Staff's Presentation.

3:51

Thank you, Chair.

3:54

As you stated, the owner is development solutions group and the applicant is Kent Olson.

4:00

These two parcels are located at 440 and 450 Airport Road for a total of 4.65 acres and are located within Ward 3.

4:10

The request is to rezone both parcels from the current RS 12 to RS8 conditional to facilitate the development of 13 dwelling to family, commonly known as duplexes, which will result in 26 units in total.

4:26

Harry, you can see an aerial overview of the properties.

4:31

And this is the rezoning site plan that is proposed for tonight.

4:35

It includes elements such as front loaded with shared driveway, and here is an enhanced view of the rendering, as well as a sand filter due to its proximity to the airport.

4:47

It also features a divided median entrance and sidewalk, both throughout the complex as well as on the current street.

4:56

The rezoning site plan also features common open space in two locations and tree safe.

5:03

Here you will see the elevations and renderings that are proposed.

5:07

Note that there is no vinyl siding.

5:10

It will be fiber cement with stone or brick accents on approximately one third of the front elevation, and garage doors will feature glass elements.

5:20

The conditions can be found in your packet, but for those in the audience, I will take the time tonight to read them out.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Engineering And Infrastructure████████████████████████████████32%
Procedural████████████████16%
Community Engagement███████████████15%
Public Safety██████████10%
Transportation Safety██████████10%
Public Engagement█████5%
Pending Litigation████4%
Affordable Housing███3%
Environmental Protection███3%
Summary of Proceedings

Gastonia Planning Commission Meeting – September 3, 2026

The Gastonia Planning Commission met on September 3, 2026, at 5:30 PM in the City Council Chambers. The meeting included two public hearings: a rezoning request for The Grove at Airport Road (4.65 acres) and a special use permit (SUP) request for 1735 Union Road Apartments (108 units). Both requests were denied by votes of 6‑1.

Consent Calendar

  • Unanimously approved the minutes from the August 6, 2026 Planning Commission meeting without correction.

Public Comments & Testimony

The Grove at Airport Road (File #202600008)

  • Eight written oppositions were received (two emails, five phone calls, one in-person with follow-up). Ten residents spoke in opposition.
  • Sheila Everhart read a letter from Representative Donnie Loftus opposing the rezoning, arguing that 26 duplexes on 4.65 acres is excessive density that would harm the quiet neighborhood and maximize developer profit.
  • Bob Edwards (45-year resident) testified that Airport Road is a half-mile dead-end single-lane road, already congested near Gaston Day School, and that additional traffic would endanger children.
  • Samantha McCants (combined time with Bob Edwards) argued the development would generate at least 52 additional vehicles, strain infrastructure (Rutherford Electric struggles), and that the developer is “cramming as many units as possible” for profit.
  • Ellis Smith (pilot and resident near airport) raised safety concerns: no fence on the runway side, risk of children or pets being struck by aircraft landing at 100 knots, and increased probability of accidents.
  • Jimmy Freeman (business owner at 409 Airport Road) cited past plane crashes, difficulty for emergency vehicles on the narrow road, and concerns about children playing near the runway.
  • John Freeman (126 John Freeman Lane) noted trees had been cleared, opening access to the runway, and questioned infrastructure capacity.
  • Robert Hawkins (1840 Gaston Day School Road) worried about children’s safety, wildlife loss (deer, possums, raccoons), increased crime, and slow police response times (17+ minutes).
  • Dottie Murphy allocated her time to others; no separate testimony.

1735 Union Road Apartments (File #202600251)

  • Nine residents signed up to speak; eight testified in opposition after being sworn in (quasi-judicial hearing). The applicant’s representative, Jason Dolan, presented first.
  • Lamar Keller (1672 Union Road, 27-year resident) cited 95 accidents on Union Road between Niblick and Wall from January 2022 to present, including a fatality at Firestone Wesley Church. He argued traffic speed (50-55 mph) and inadequate sight lines make the intersection dangerous.
  • Charlotte Brown (1118 Dumbarton Road) questioned animal migration routes, noting the site is heavily wooded with no allocation for displaced wildlife besides the greenway.
  • Dean McGuinness (1622A Union Road, Union Commons condo) expressed frustration with cumulative development, property value concerns, and described Union Road as a “four-lane racetrack” where cars frequently crash into brick walls.
  • Charles Johnson (1654 A Union Road, HOA president) argued adding 108 units would worsen traffic in a curve with limited sight distance, and noted the state’s U‑turn plans do not mitigate speed or safety risks.
  • Charles Murdoch (1696 Union Road) stated he received no notice of the community meeting (he claims notices were sent to a deceased person), that the meeting was held 3.5 miles away, and that the first notification was the zoning sign two weeks prior. He recounted near-misses with fire trucks on Union Road.
  • Brenda White (1630 B Union Road) asked how pedestrians would safely cross Union Road to access the proposed greenway path; staff responded that the sidewalk would run along the property’s side of Union Road without a crosswalk.

Discussion Items

The Grove at Airport Road

  • Staff presentation: Veronica Bateson (Senior Planner) described the proposal: 13 duplexes (26 units) on 4.65 acres, with fiber cement siding, stone/brick accents, tree save of 0.7 acres, and compliance with the 2050 Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommended approval.
  • Applicant absent due to emergency; staff relayed that the applicant had made concessions (sold land, reduced units) and was comfortable proceeding.
  • Commission discussion: Commissioners noted that Airport Road is very narrow (no lane markings) and that density was too high for the area. Safety concerns (airport runway proximity, traffic, wildlife) and strong community opposition weighed heavily.
  • Vote: Motion to deny by Commissioner Howe, seconded by Commissioner Chapman. Denied 6‑1 (final action because vote > 3/4).

1735 Union Road Apartments

  • Staff presentation: Maddy Groce (Senior Planner) explained the SUP request for 108 apartment units on 4.75 acres under OLC zoning. The site is nearly entirely within the 100‑year floodplain; a flood study and no‑rise certificate were approved in February 2025 but may need revision. The property also falls within the NCDOT Union Road widening project (U‑5961), with right-of-way dedication required. Conditions include stormwater detention, greenway connection, landscaping, and building materials (brick/fiber cement). No staff recommendation was provided (SUP).
  • Applicant presentation: Jason Dolan (civil engineer) stated the developer will elevate buildings above flood protection elevation, provide 144 parking spaces (1.3/unit), meet tree save/open space requirements, and construct a loop road for safety. He acknowledged a building count discrepancy (106 vs 108 units; 2 units used for leasing office).
  • Commission questions: Queried floodplain impacts, traffic study (none required), sight distances, utilities (Two Rivers Utilities confirmed capacity), and school notification (not consulted). Commissioners also discussed the timing conflict: construction expected 2027-2028 vs. NCDOT widening starting 2028-2030.
  • Condition amendment: Commissioner Garcia successfully moved to add “buildings should not exceed three stories” to Condition 1. The applicant agreed.
  • Legal guidance: City attorney clarified that this is a quasi-judicial hearing; the burden of proof is on the applicant to demonstrate compliance with four findings (public health/safety, UDO standards, no substantial injury to property values, harmony with area). Failure to prove any one is grounds for denial.
  • Commission deliberation: Several commissioners expressed doubt about public health/safety (traffic speed, flood risk, Emergency response) and whether the applicant met the evidentiary burden. A motion to deny based on failure to present competent, material, and substantial evidence for all four findings was made and seconded.
  • Vote: Denied 6‑1 (outcome subject to appeal to Superior Court within 30 days).

Key Outcomes

  • The Grove at Airport Road (File #202600008): Denied 6‑1. The rezoning from RS‑12 to RS‑8 CD was not approved. This is a final decision (vote > 3/4) unless appealed by September 18, 2026.
  • 1735 Union Road Apartments (File #202600251): Denied 6‑1. The special use permit for OLC zoning was not granted. Applicant may appeal to Gaston County Superior Court within 30 days.
  • Condition amendment (Union Road): Condition 1 was modified to explicitly limit buildings to three stories; applicant agreed.
  • Meeting adjourned at approximately 8:00 PM.

Meeting Transcript

So you're all in the right spot. So good evening. My name is Chad Gorley. I am the chairman of the Gastonia Planning Commission. On behalf of the Commission, I would like to welcome you to today's meeting. I will now call the September 3rd, 2026 meeting of the Gastonia Planet Commission to order. If you plan to address the Commission in favor or in opposition this evening, please sign the appropriate sign in sheet on the table outside the door. Item one roll call sound check. Commissioners go around the room now asking state your name and if you had any calls or contacts. We'll start from my left. Meg Mason Chapman, no calls, no contacts, Ward 6. Julie Coffee, Ward 5, 3 contacts. Jeff Howe, Ward 3, no contacts. No contacts. Deanna Murfrey, Ward 2, no contacts. Welcome to Clarch Number 1, no contacts. Chad Gorley, Ward 1, no contacts. Hereby declare a quorum for the meeting. Item 3, 3A, approval of August 6, 2026 meeting minutes. Are there any corrections or additions to the August 6, 2026 meeting minutes? Here are none. Is there a motion to adopt the meeting minutes as submitted and/or revised? Motion. Second. All those in favor of the motion, please raise your right hand. Motion carries. Rules of procedure. Before we begin the public hearings, let me first explain the procedures that will be followed. A time limitation policy is used to conduct the meeting. Generally, we ask that opponents and proponents limit their total time to a total of 20 minutes, distributing this time to two to three minutes per speaker. Time will be available for rebuttals if needed. At any time following the opening of the public hearing, the planning commission may consider continuing the hearing to a later meeting or in order that sufficient information may be obtained for the commission to make a decision. Following the hearing, the planning commission will consider action on the request. The commission may take action this evening or delay an action to another meeting. Actions of the Planning Commission for rezonings may include granting the item requested, granting granting the request with request with a reduction in the area requested, granted a more restrictive rezoning than the one requested or denying the request. If the decision of the Planning Commission for rezonings is by three-fourths vote and no one appeals our decision, then the decision of this body shall rest as final action. On the other hand, if our vote is by less than three fourths, then the case will automatically go on to the city council for a new hearing and their consideration. Also, regardless of how the planning commission voted, if anyone appeals our decision, the case will go on to City Council for a new hearing and final action. Any such appeal must be filed with a city manager or city planning office by 5 p.m. on Friday, September 18, 2026, unless otherwise noted at the beginning of the hearing. Notice of any potential or required hearings before the city council was given with notice of the hearing. Therefore, no separate notification will be made if there is a city council hearing. If you would like to be notified of any appeal hearing before the city council, call or email the planning department. Item 4a, public hearing, the Grove at Airport Road, file number 2026 00008. Subject hearing involves a request to rezone approximately 4.65 acres from RS 12, single family residential minimum 12,000 square foot lots to RS8 Conditional District, single family residential, minimum 8,000 square feet lots, conditional zoning district. The subject properties are located at 440 Airport Road and 450 Airport Road and are owned by the Development Solutions Group LLC. I'd like to recognize Veronica Bateson, AICP, Senior Planner for Staff's Presentation. Thank you, Chair. As you stated, the owner is development solutions group and the applicant is Kent Olson. These two parcels are located at 440 and 450 Airport Road for a total of 4.65 acres and are located within Ward 3.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com