BC 2006 09 05 RECESSED - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

September 5, 2006 (Recessed Meeting) Page 92 opposed to the project and asked the Board to consider all the facts and not sacrifice the community's interest. Tim White of 11291 Olde Cedar Court in Davidson stated he is a resident of River Ridge, which has approximately 100 homeowners. Although he was not speaking on behalf of the homeowners or the Home Owners Association, he said an overwhelming maj ori ty of his neighbors are opposed to the proj ect. He said several months ago he attended a meeting of the Cabarrus Planning and Zoning Commission, when the original petition was heard. He said Mr. Wayne passionately petitioned the rezoning of the subj ect property. During the ini tial meeting, he said Mr. Wayne communicated that the success of his company was dependant on his success in securing the property and having it rezoned to accommodate his company's growth. He reported Mr. Wayne talked about his strategic business plan, how time was of the essence and how imperati ve it was that he obtain this particular piece of property. In the face of opposition, he said Mr. Wayne's plan has changed over the past several months. At that point in time, he said Mr. Wayne was solely focused on the concrete business. The revised plan, he said now has a different feel and includes tree lined streets, homes, retail and grocery stores. Although Mr. Wayne has not said specifically what he plans to do with the total build out, he said the new plan seems palatable. He asked the Board to not loose site of his original plan; he said there are no utilities in place and there are no plans for utilities at this point in time. He asked what part of Mr. Wayne's plan has changed that can now accommodate something that looks so different from what he presented several months ago. At that time, he said an office building, truck storage yard and a concrete fabricating plant were discussed and were considered crucial to the growth of his company. He asked what has changed. He said he doubted if the 77-year old woman that lives across the street from the subj ect property will ever be able to step foot into the grocery store at that site. He said the ability to site a grocery store there is not possible. He said this growth is not the type of growth the community needs or was originally planned. He reported the intersection of Odell School Road and NC Highway 73 now requires three Sheriff Deputies at 7: 30 a .m. to direct traffic. He said traffic continues to gridlock in that area, especially when school is in session. He said the community wants growth, but wants to control growth and it does not make sense that the core essence has changed so significantly. In closing, he asked the Board to not contribute more to the problems that already exist and deny the petition for the rezoning. Richard Simone of 11301 Olde Cedar Court in Davidson reported there have been three deaths on Shiloh Church Road since the last Cabarrus Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Two days later, he said left his neighborhood, which is River Ridge, and there was a car lying on its side in someone's front yard on Davidson Road. Last week, he said there was a cement truck lying in a field about a mile from the subject property. He said the concrete plant is moving away from Park Creek and next to River Ridge. He said he too would support the rezoning petition if the concrete plant was moving out of his backyard into someone else's. He said he really believes this proj ect is a "dog and pony show" and everyone knows that the retail component cannot happen until there are city services in the area. He said the most important thing to Mr. Wayne is to get the corporate headquarters built, but it is only an office with a truck yard. He said equipment will be maintained and there will be contaminants. In closing, he asked the Board to reject the project. Daniel Grundman of 5430 Ashbury Lane in Davidson stated he lives in the River Ridge community near the proposed rezoning site. Utilizing a PowerPoint presentation, he presented the following reasons why the Board should vote "no": the project does not accurately depict what will be built; the information up to this point has been somewhat deceptive; the project is not desired by the community; the proj ect is incompatible with the Zoning Ordinance and Land Use Plan; the plan is not sensitive to existing residents; the project does not make sense for the County; approval of this plan by the Board would send a negative message to the County. He said does not want an experimental sewage plant in his backyard. He said the issue is really about trucks and the lay down yard, not a grocery store. He reported there was very little information in the plan for the proposed lay down yard, which was eloquently ignored by the petitioners. He said the general requirements are not being met and the petition does not maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property. He said the residents need assurance of the adequacy of sewage disposal facilities, solid waste and water; these items are not included in the application, therefore, it is incomplete. He reported Chapter 8 of the Zoning Ordinance requires shopping centers 100,000 square feet or more to have a complete description of the facility including: days and hours of operation, proj ected number of uses per weekday and weekend days,