Laserfiche WebLink
<br />13 <br /> <br />Mr. Koch said it would be helpful to state the findings in the motion. <br /> <br />There being no further comments, the Chair MOTIONED to deny Petition C05- <br />06(5) with the following findings of fact: 1) Letter from Robert Kluttz's of the <br />school board stating unequivocally there is not enough school capacity. 2) The <br />15 year Facility Plan does not include this subdivision or other subdivisions. The <br />vote was seconded by Ms. Burns. The vote was unanimous. <br />Petition C05-06(S) Denied <br /> <br />The Chair introduced the second item on the Agenda, Preliminary Subdivision <br />Plat Approval, Petition C05-07(S): <br /> <br />2. Applicant: Kiser Development Company <br />Request: Prelim'inary Subdivision Plat Approval <br /> <br />This was a request to the Cabarrus County Planning and Zoning Commission <br />from Kiser Development Company to have their preliminary subdivision plat <br />Pleasant Oaks approved. ':\" <br /> <br />Ms. Kassie Goodson, Plann~r addr~e~ Board presenting Petition C05-07(S) <br />and staff report stating this €\b going to be a customized residential <br />subdivision. It is going to be a t~itional residential subdivision. Staff finds that <br />the proposed subdivision meets all the development standards of the County' <br />Subdivision Ordinance. However, the subdivision does not meet the Adequate <br />Public Facilities Ordinance requirements for school facilities. Staff recommends <br />approval of Pleasant Oaks Subdivision. It is recommended that the Planning <br />Commission grant approval of the subdivision with the following condition: 1) <br />That the developer enters into a consent agreement with the Cabarrus County <br />Board of Commissioners to meet the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance <br />requirements for school facilities. 2) The developer complies with all NCDOT <br />comments in order to !receive their final driveway permits. <br /> <br />Ms. Burns said there is a memo from the City of Concord Engineering staff. She <br />said item number 10 says "the proposed iocation of the pump station and gravity <br />sanitary sewer to it does not make good engineering sense. It appears that the <br />gravity sanitary sewer is bucking grade." She asked has there been any <br />discussion of that. <br /> <br />Mr. Lentz said during [the preliminary plat stage we do not ask for full engineer <br />drawings of those utilij:y plans. He said he thinks what Concord is doing is giving <br />us a general comment. <br /> <br />E-\ <br />