Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />September 5, 2006 (Recessed Meeting) <br /> <br />Page 89 <br /> <br />certain conditions are made of the petitioner in order to apply for a <br />conditional district rezoning. He said this petition does not state a <br />definitive use for a large segment of property as required under Section 13- <br />11, subpart 2 as follows: "The petitioner will describe the exact land use <br />proposed for the CD district". To state that parcels will be used for future <br />office/corporate facilities or future commercial support facilities, he said <br />is too ambiguous and vague to meet the requirements under the conditional <br />district rezoning. He said this petition, as it is presented, does not meet <br />the standards for a conditional district rezoning and should be denied. He <br />said pages 3-16 of the Cabarrus County Zoning Ordinance makes several <br />statements that show this property should not be rezoned to General <br />Commercial. The Zoning Ordinance states: "The primary purpose of this zone <br />is to provide locations for large scale commercial activities. This level of <br />commercial activity usually draws clientele regionally as well as from nearby <br />neighborhoods, requires siting on major thoroughfares, and requires <br />relatively large scale off-street parking. This zone will accommodate a wide <br />variety of office, retail, and lodging land uses. General Commercial may <br />border the other less intense commercial zones or either of the two <br />industrial zones. A General Commercial zone may border a higher density <br />residential zone but care should be taken to ensure a buffer is between the <br />two". He said this project will put GC property in an area that has no major <br />thoroughfares. The roads in this area he said are secondary farm roads and <br />they are already overcrowded and cannot support any additional traffic flow <br />without creating more traffic congestion and the possibility of additional <br />wrecks. Although the Zoning Ordinance plainly states that a GC property must <br />be sited on major thoroughfares, he said Mooresville Road is currently listed <br />as a maj or thoroughfare in Cabarrus County, which must be an error because <br />the road does not meet all the criteria. He said later Mr. Colin Nolin will <br />provide details as to why Mooresville Road is not a major thoroughfare. On a <br />practical level, he said all the people in the Coddle Creek area will vouch <br />for the fact that Mooresville Road really is an overcrowded, narrow and <br />dangerous road. Because there are no legitimate thoroughfares at this site, <br />he said this rezoning petition should be denied. He said the Cabarrus County <br />Zoning Ordinance also states GC property should not border residential <br />property unless the property is of a high density, and only then if <br />sufficient buffers are put in place. He said the property up for rezoning is <br />surrounded by AO property. These properties he said are the least dense and <br />most restrictive in the County. To allow GC property to border AO property, <br />he said would be a clear violation of the Zoning Ordinance. He reported the <br />last planning staff report presented to the Planning and Zoning Board stated <br />"The intent statement of the General Commercial district does not support <br />approval of this petition based on adjacent zoning on three of the commercial <br />areas six sides". The current Planning Staff Report, he said completely <br />ignores this zoning violation. After looking at the Northwestern Cabarrus <br />Draft Land Use Plan, he said County planning staff decided to rezone all the <br />property that will abut the proposed MDR component of this project to AO. He <br />said to site MDR property in this area is a violation of the intent on the <br />northwestern area draft Land Use Plan and to allow MDR property to abut AO <br />property will result in a decrease in property values to the existing <br />residents. One of the primary reasons that the North Carolina (NC) General <br />Statues allow counties to enact zoning, he said is for the purpose of <br />preserving the value of existing property and the proposed rezoning will not <br />accomplish this requirement. He said this project will take away value from <br />all the surrounding properties and since the NC General Statues state zoning <br />should protect the value of properties, the only conclusion to be made is <br />that this rezoning should be denied. He said the proposed MDR development <br />will put additional strain on the school system and according to the Adequate <br />Public Facilities worksheet, prepared by Cabarrus County Schools, shows the <br />capacity of elementary schools in our area functioning at 128 percent. When <br />this proposed development is completed, he said the elementary schools will <br />be functioning at the following capacity: elementary schools - 214 percent; <br />middle schools - 117 percent; and high schools - 120 percent. He reported <br />these figures were provided by the school board. He asked how more <br />residential growth can be justified under the current circumstances. Next, <br />he said North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) reported many <br />improvements to the secondary roads surrounding the subject property will be <br />required. He said a copy of the map of Wayne Brothers' Corporate <br />Headquarters and Development was included in the Board's packets and shows <br />the improvements along Mooresville Road. He said Ritchie Hearne, NCDOT <br />District Engineer, acknowledged in a letter that is also included in the <br />Board's packets, there are no deeded right-of-ways on this road and the <br />required improvements will require the developer to purchase additional <br />right-of-ways. He said the improvements required NCDOT can only occur if the <br />affected property owners grant a right-of-way to Mr. Wayne. He reported he <br />spoke with each property owner and all the property owners have refused to <br />grant a right-of-way. He said the property owners are present and asked each <br />