an
I still think it's afternoon
just in case you didn't realize
that we needed more people to
come and sing to us.
You're welcome to come down and
be a part of our opportunities
to have people come in and
serve our city as the people
that we all really know that
we're doing.
So I love the signs on my that
is that's great.
Reminds me of my old church
buildings and what I used to
do.
But anyway never work.
I'm bylaws and I serve was a
member of this council and what
we want to do is start off with
a welcome and a call to order
and so why don't we start with
our city clerk?
I mean it's our council member
I'm sorry a city clerk here we
are billy tines, deputy city
clerk carrie hagler gray senior
assistant city attorney mayor
at-large member victoria
watlington at large julie mayo
representing district three
dante anderson and congratulate
us to the carolina hurricanes
from the state with and it's
just one loving it all right
allison craig deputy city
manager law serving as mayor
james mitchell mayor pro tem I
have to say a special shout out
to my lovely queen will be
celebrating our 14 forward
anniversary tomorrow.
I love you very oh, that is
great.
>> I wouldn't know how much you
paid for that.
No.
Great.
She's a great woman.
I don't know that he'd ever
know.
He never tells people that she
was one of the very first
astronauts truly in this in our
country and so I think that's a
big year for me.
>> so thank you.
And so now I've lost where we.
>> all right.
Kimberly owens representing
district six malcolm graham,
district two at drake's
district seven the want to
mayfield council member at
large I want to thank our
charlotte crowd yes
congratulate them because they
did win yesterday.
>> all right jd MR. Arias
probably representing the east
side district five and go next
to new york.
>> good afternoon.
I'm rene johnson and I'm
honored to represent district
four.
>> I want to say that we begin
our meeting with an invocation
which includes express your
expressions and inspiration
followed by the pledge of
allegiance.
The invocation is by the city
council member and is intended
to solemnize our proceedings.
We celebrate all of us but we
also understand that there is
diversity in what we do with
our faith and we make sure that
everyone has the opportunity to
be proud of whatever faith they
choose and we will do that.
And so we tonight have a
religious program about this
for our using council member
johnson to open our act our
opportunities for beginning to
work with what we're doing
tonight.
MS. Johnson thank you, madam
mayor.
And when we come back on our
heads if you'd like and
otherwise just a moment of
silence.
Heavenly father, we come
together with gratitude for the
opportunity to serve our
community.
We ask for your presence among
us and for your wisdom to guide
our thoughts, decisions and our
actions.
Grant us the clarity when faced
with difficult choices courage
when challenges arise and
humility as we seek the
well-being of those entrusted
to our care help us to lead
with integrity, compassion and
fairness always mindful of the
diverse needs and hopes of our
community.
>> place your protection over
our leaders, our families, our
first responders, our schools,
businesses and our residents
and all who call this community
home keep us safe from harm,
strengthen us in times of
uncertainty and unite us in a
spirit of cooperation and of
mutual respect.
MAY we be instruments of peace,
builders of trust and faithful
stewards of the resources and
opportunities before us.
Guide us to work together for
the common good and to create a
future marked by justice,
prosperity and hope.
We ask for your continued
blessing, protection and
guidance as we serve.
>> amen.
Amen.
Thank you all.
If you don't if you choose to
be take along a pledge of
allegiance.
I pledge allegiance to the
american and to the republic
for which it stands one nation
under GOD and justice for all.
>> thank you all.
All right.
So we are going to do a brief
crumb first to agree a brief as
consent around explanation of
the zoning process.
It's I think most of you
probably already know that.
But we're going to use the make
sure that we have the
opportunity so that the
questions or comments come up
and prepare for that.
So the rezoning process begins
with applications submitted to
the planning staff for review.
There are two types of cases on
the agenda decisions and
hearings.
Decisions are on cases for
which a public hearing has
previously been held and
there'll be no further comments
for public hearings.
Anyone wishing to speak is
asked to see the clerk before
the start of our hearing staff
will provide a presentation and
the petitioner will have three
minutes combined to present the
case unless there are opponents
signed up to speak or our staff
is in opposition if they are
and if there are opponents
assigned to stand up to speak
or the staff is in opposition
the petitioner will have ten
minutes to present followed by
opposition suit speakers who
will have ten minutes combined
to present and the petitioner
has a two minute rebuttal no
one if no one is signed up to
speak.
Staff provides a short
presentation and the public
hearing MAY then be closed.
So with that I'm going to turn
it over to douglas who would
add I believe help us
understand how many people are
supporting you and all of the
work that they do for our city.
>> douglas thank you very much,
MADAM Mayor.
My name is W.C. Welton and I am
the CHAIRMAN Of the zoning
committee of the planning
commission.
Allow me to introduce my fellow
commissioners and they include
melissa gaston, aaron shaw,
teresa macdonald, robin stewart
and carolyn millen.
And right next to me today
michael caprio only.
The zoning committee will meet
on tuesday AUGUST fourth at
530.
At that meeting the zoning
committee will discuss and make
recommendations on the
petitions that have a public
hearing here tonight.
The public is welcome to that
meeting but please note it is
not a continuation of the
public hearing that is being
held right now.
Prior to that meeting if you
are you are welcome to contact
us and provide input.
You can find contact
information and information on
each one of the petitions that
is being heard here tonight at
the city's website at charlotte
planning.Org.
Thank you very much MADAM Mayor
.
>> it is all yours.
Thank you very much for the
work that you do for our
communities.
So the next item that we want
to do is deferrals and
withdrawals and that's going to
be done with holly kramer who
reads this and makes it come
alive for us.
>> so thank you.
Thank you.
So we have a couple of
deferrals to go through.
I'm number 11 petition 25 dash
series 37 by short development
group requesting a deferral to
their of their decision to the
AUGUST 17th meeting which is
our next zoning meeting just as
a reminder since we do not have
one in JULY.
Item number 12 requesting a
deferral.
This is petition 1430 5-0 86 by
pence for development
requesting deferral of their
decision to AUGUST 17th.
I'm number 15 petition 2025 133
by michael barnes.
Also requesting deferral of
their decision to AUGUST 17th
and finally we have item number
17 decision 20 6-0 27 by sea
for investments requesting
deferral of their public
hearing to the AUGUST 17th
meeting.
>> so all right.
Do we have a motion for
deferral?
So move my second motion and a
second all in favor please
raise your hand.
Anyone in opposition hearing
none.
That's our next step and then
we will go to the rezoning
petition items.
Number three through ten of the
consent agenda MAY be
considered in one motion except
for those items pulled by a
council member.
Please note that these petition
petition ends meet the
following criteria.
Had no public opposition to the
petition during the hearing
staff recommends approval
zoning committee recommends
approval and there are no
further changes to the zoning
committee's report
recommendation.
Do we have anyone that would
like I see MS. Mayfield would
like to have comments.
Item number four for separate
vote and comment.
>> right.
We have an item number for
petition 2025 141 by doorway I
can't speak for now so correct
name dalmiya I guess and they
will be one of the petitions
that we will have for
consistency.
Thank you.
I mean that consistency and
separate vote.
All right so four items from
okay MS. Johnson I'm sorry.
That's okay.
I items number or agenda item
number six and seven.
All right so two additional to
exclude and have a petition on
six and seven thurman brooks
and good properties is that the
correct one MR. Okay well
that'll be coming up as well.
Okay so for the 2 to 3 so we
have three and I'm trying to
make sure we have 335 all right
good.
Yeah it's nine and ten.
Yes.
All right.
So here we go.
The next thing is MAY I have a
motion to approve the petition
with those that we've
recommended not be done?
>> so of my second we have a
vote and a second all in favor
.
>> you need to read this.
We need to read all of the
names to petition.
Item number three petition 25
dash 31 with queen city land
llc item four petition to amend
I'm sorry five go to five
petition 20 204 by shoot
chowder demo now I'm not doing
that very well but we'll do the
very best I can.
All right.
And eight, nine and ten are
also set set up for on 20.
All right.
We had thurman books good
properties had by had holdings
llc that's also in can also and
consent and avatar holding llc
as well and petition by
orangeburg media for the
charlotte hornets.
With that we'll move on to the
next as we go there is no I
don't have a motion second
second all in favor anyone
opposed?
>> all right sorry.
>> can I just get the motion to
clear to adopt the zoning
committee statement of
consistency he she wanted to
add that kind of stuff in the
motion for multiple things at
one time.
>> so the motion saying and to
approve the consent agenda and
adopt the zoning committee
statement or consistency yes we
will do that.
We're going to approve the
petition for the agenda for
excluding those petitions and
that they were pulled for a
separate vote and we're going
to adopt the zoning committee
statement of consistency for
each as these petitions as they
appear on our agendas as the
council their own.
Yeah.
All right.
Let's so much for for I really
do I did yes I do you going to
do item for councilmember
mayfield so I'm not going to
motion for this to be approved
so someone at the I want to
prove they need to make a
motion because I'm speaking to
it so I will move to approve
it.
So we have a motion to approve
and we did I hear a second.
All right.
We have a second now discussion
and now we have a second right.
>> thank you, MADAM Chair.
So I have concerns on this
particular petition for a quiet
this is a single family street
that we are talking about at
the corner basically creating
an apartment complex, many
apartment complex down on the
end of this where we currently
have two single family homes as
we're looking at attempt to do
infill this to me is not
infill.
I've had concerns regarding udl
and the impact that judoka have
so when we talk about that this
request is going chroma in 1b2I
am one see everyone see this
district allows for single
family duplex triplex and
complexes in some situations
basically only thing we did is
reduce the lot size from
8000ft to 6000ft or greater
but this does not specify
exactly what is going to be
right and I will clarify they
wouldn't be able to do a
quadruple plex on this site
because they'd have to be
located along an arterial road
for this zoning district unless
you're doing the in one
standing district for all the
other in one districts you'd
have to be located on a
frontage type that this does
not qualify as.
>> so that is not what I
language this so the fact that
our language does not clarify
that what our language has on
the planning staff review is
what the existing zoning is and
what qualifies what the
proposed zoning is and what
qualifies.
And then we have the proposed
request this details but we
also know that this is a
conventional rezoning petition
with no associated site plan.
So there is no language in here
where we state what it cannot
be according to was here in one
c this district allows for a
single family duplex triplex
and quads are plexus so it
doesn't specify since there is
no associated site plan what
this cannot be right so and
that language is put in there
to describe what the zoning
districts allow for and the
language does state in some
situations quadruple taxes
which is applicable here it is
the situation in which a
quadriplegics would not be
allowed to wear.
We keep that language in there
to describe the intent of all
of our zoning districts to give
you an idea of what they could
aspire to essentially and their
maximum development levels just
so that there isn't any
illusion about what could be
developed and where's the line
that says what is not going to
be this is as you noted, a
conventional petition.
So there's no description and
clarification and focuses I see
as I mentioned because what
happens is what's in the
contract so not having any
language that actually
identifies what you just share
as far as what is not going to
be in 3 to 5 years a very well
could be acquired and what the
developer and or community will
read is this language because
the language that you just
stated without actually being
in writing doesn't go anywhere.
I had a lot of ideas around
with a district.
Guess what it didn't make it
into the contract.
So therefore isn't that ballot
seven years later?
So for that reason and because
it is not clearly stated which
we have done where we have
except since we clearly type a
little line in air regarding
exceptions because that is not
in here.
That is why I have concerns
when you look at this single
family residential street and
imagine that there potentially
can be because it's
conventional and there's no
site you're saying it can't be
who not is not written there
could not be a quadriplegics on
this site unless the uda were
to be changed to allow for
quadruple access because this
is on cochran drive which is
not an arterial the prescribe
conditions of a quadriplegics
for this zoning district
stipulate that it has to be
located.
The site would have to be
located on an arterial this is
not an arterial frontage thank
you.
We have a motion on the floor
and second all those in favor
of this petition please raise
your hand.
>> all those opposed to an
opposition.
>> okay.
Thank you.
MAY I have a motion to approve?
Petition number 2026 005I
thurman brooks and to adopt the
zoning committee committee
standard consistency for each
of these petition as they
appear now agendas as the
council zone so move move
moving proper second I question
I think this was poor by
council johnson that
councilmember johnson thank you
mayor pro tem speaking of
exceptions we talked about it
and was in language added
regarding this petition yes so
as you likely recall at the
public hearing you asked about
the data center use in this
zoning district they converted
to a conditional type petition
to prohibit telecommunications
and data storage facilities
which is the data center use in
our udl.
Thank you because the only
condition of the plan but that
is now a prohibited use on the
site because originally it was
filed as a conventional right
is correct and like
councilmember mayfield was
saying with conventional we
just don't get a lot of
details.
I don't know why we're moving
toward that more but I
appreciate the change and the
the language so I will be
supporting.
Thank you.
any more discussion?
All those in favor petition
please raise your hand although
oppose.
>> okay.
Thank you.
I have a motion to approve
petition number 2020 6-006 buy
good properties and to adopt
the zoning committee standard
statement of consistency for
each of these petition as they
appear and agendas as the
council's own council member
just the second the move by
council member male second and
councilmember anderson I'm a
recognized council member
johnson thank you mayor pro tem
same question this is a
conventional we talked about
this this is the the old
medical office and they want to
keep it some type of medical
facility.
Right.
That I understand.
>> well, so as you said, it is
conventional so they wouldn't
be obligated to disclose that
or note that at this time.
But during their public hearing
they did say that they are
wanting to keep the urgent care
facility that's on that site
and that just utilize better
the portions of the site that
don't have anything developed
on it.
I think that's the intent of
the petitioner.
>> and is this zoning type
would this allow data centers?
>> no, it would none.
Okay.
And that's what I wanted to
know.
Thank you.
I'll be supporting this more
question all those in favor
rezoning petition please.
Assurance all those oppose now
I just would take the time the
mayor would like for COUNCILMAN
Manderson to continue to run
the zoning committee meeting.
I'm turning over council member
anderson thank you mayor pro
tem and we will now advance to
our non consent decisions and
we'll begin with item number 13
petition number 25 027 by
mission city church and freedom
communities.
This one had changes since the
zoning committee made their
recommendation and council is
required to send the petition
back to zoning for further
review unless council by a
three fourths vote of all
members present presented a
determination that it doesn't
need to go back.
So I'm going to hand it over to
MS. Cramer so she can walk
through those changes.
>> yes.
This petition or revise these
notes on their conditional
planned to add that new parking
signage will be installed along
sommerville road and oak street
and they'll be installed on the
odd numbered side of somerville
from valley dale road up to
edge street and the new parking
signs will be installed on the
even numbered side of oak
street from somerville road to
freddie alexander boulevard.
I understand that there is some
conversations happening in the
community in regard to this.
So stuart trust those concerns.
We believe that the change is
minor and does not warrant
additional review by the zoning
committee.
Thank you.
is there a motion to not send
back to the zoning board of
second?
Okay.
All in favor of not sending
back oh, I'm sorry MISS
Mayfield.
Have a question.
>> thank you.
So question was there because
I'm looking at an email that
was sent regarding the family
dollar deed of easement with
that MAY not be a part of this
conversation and as far as
additional information I'm I'm
familiar with the email you
might be okay you have a
receipt you did me say that I
do not believe so.
Thank you.
Any other comment hearing none.
All in favor raise hand to not
send back any oppose all right.
That is unanimous.
Is there a motion to approve
petition number 2025 027 and
adopt the zoning committee's
statement of consistency as it
appears in our agenda and on
the screen as council's own.
So move second.
>> okay.
Any comment?
MR. Graham?
Thank you councilmember
innocent I had the opportunity
yet again to go to the site
last week and visit with the
petitioner, members of the
congregation as well as those
who are still oppose of this
rezoning.
This is one that's been with us
for well over a year for the
petitioner and the church has
made a number of considerations
of on behalf of being a good
citizen.
You heard tonight additional
language that they're trying to
do to ensure that this is and
compliance with the local
community standards over there.
It goes without saying this is
a policy that still continues
to to grow and still has a lot
of state owned roads that make
our rezoning decisions
difficult at best.
But this is one that I'm going
to give a nod yes to.
I hope that the council will do
the same.
Thank you, MS..
Mayfield.
>> no comment.
No comment.
All right.
Any other comment?
>> hearing none.
All in favor please raise hands
.
>> any oppose you have, MR.
Mayfield that is opposed and so
we will now advance to item
number 14 petition number 2025
058 by studio one nine
architecture plc.
It also has some changes since
the zoning committees made
their recommendation and as I
just mentioned we are required
to have three fourths of vote
to not send back at this time
and pass it back over to MS.
Cramer so she can share the
changes.
>> thank you.
Thank you.
So this is for a proposal for a
multifamily attached townhome
style dwelling units after
zoning committee's
recommendation they were trying
to address some outstanding
issues and in order to comply
with some tree save
requirements but also meet the
street extension that is coming
through their site.
They had to reduce dwelling
units from 20 to 16.
They also just meet a small
technical revision to note that
maximum height would be defined
by the adu we believe that the
changes are minor and do not
warrant needing to be sent back
to the zoning committee.
>> thank you.
Is there a motion not to send
back to the zoning committee?
>> move second.
Okay.
Any discussion?
Hearing none.
All in favor raise hands any
opposed?
That is unanimous.
Is there a motion to approve
petition number 2025 058 and
adopt the zoning committee
statement of consistency as it
appears in our agenda and on
the screen.
So move second.
Okay.
Any comment hearing none.
>> all in favor raise hands any
opposed that is unanimous.
>> so now we will see hear we
will move on to item 16.
Is there a motion to approve
petition number 2025 meeting
one three I'm sorry 15 and get
the final list if you get
together.
Thank you.
Yes.
Is there a motion to approve?
Petition number 2025 133 and
adopt the zoning committee
statement of consistency as it
approves as it appears in our
agenda.
>> sorry 13636136.
Yes.
I'm sorry.
Yes.
petition number 2025 136 and
adopt the zoning committee
statement of consistency as it
approves as it appears on our
agenda so moved second.
All right.
We have a motion in a second.
Any comment, MISS Johnson?
Thank you.
Council member anderson I had
the pleasure of meeting MR. And
MRS. Cooper larry and that I
think I saw them.
Did I see them?
Yes.
Thank you.
I look forward to supporting
it.
This is a couple this is their
property and their and this is
when the idea was approved.
These this is one of the one of
the benefits of the udot allows
individuals flexibility with
their lots so when we talk
about generational wealth and
opportunities I look forward to
supporting this so congrats it
to be honest thank you.
>> any additional comment?
Hearing none.
All in favor raise hands any
oppose that is unanimous.
Thank you.
So now we will proceed to the
public hearings portion of
tonight's meeting item number
17 and 18 were deferred and so
we will begin with item number
19 petition number 20 26 001 by
m p v properties and mission
properties is approximately
12.67 acres located south of
mount holly road north of there
to creek road and west of rye
road in the east T.J. Closest
to councilmember graham's
district, the site is currently
zoned manufac turing and
logistics one and propose
zoning is neighborhood to be
conditional staff does not
recommend approval of this
petition in its current form
and we do have some speakers
who are signed up to speak
against this one.
Can I just check if MR. Greg
powell is present as is MR.
Greg powell present?
Okay.
In which case then we don't
have anyone signed up since he
is not here.
So with with that after staffs
presentation then we will have
a three minute presentation.
>> thank you.
Just I'm sorry, councilor.
I thought I got ten minutes and
staff does not support staff
opposes it.
>> he gets ten.
Yes.
Okay.
Yes, go ahead.
>> all right.
Good evening.
Petition 2026 001 is a 12.67
acre site located south
mountain high road just west of
I-45 plan proposed the
development of up to 176
multifamily stock apartment
residential units on a site
containing a single family
house site is currently zoned
eml one manufacturing and
logistics the proposed zoning
is into b cd neighborhood to be
conditional 2040 policy map
recommends the manufacturing
and logistics placed over the
site and the plan is not in
alignment with this place type.
The rezoning proposal calls for
up to 176 multifamily stacked
apartment units, construction
of an eastbound and westbound
left turn lanes on mount holly
road as well as an eastbound
right turn lane to the site on
mount holly road there will be
a 25 foot class b landscape
yard along the eastern and
western property boundaries and
along the railroad right of way
on the southern portion of the
site and the building facades
buildings facing mount holly
road all to use at least 40%
brick facades.
>> the plan is inconsistent
with the goals and policies of
the west outer community area
plan the abutting manufacturing
logistics place type of the
south, south, east and west are
not preferred adjacencies to
the neighborhood to place type
and the plan would not
facilitate any community area
plan priority goals staff does
not recommend approval this
petition in current form as the
proposed rezoning is
inconsistent with the newly
adopted west.
Our community area plan and
2040 policy map the site
directly above significant
manufacturing logistics uses
and there's an active freight
rail terminal running through
the property site is also
lacking safe pedestrian
infrastructure or that would
allow it to access nearby
activities centers and nearby
bus stops.
However, the site is within a
housing gap and the less
intense zoning district for
townhome development MAY be a
better balance between the
needs and the surrounding
community and the adjacent
industrial uses.
Happy to take any questions
following the petitioner's
presentation MR. Floyd, you
have two minutes.
Thank you.
Councilmember anderson, members
of council.
I'm john floyd with more of an
allen here on behalf of the
petitioners mission properties
and pb properties who are
working on this together, I'm
joined tonight by jason
mcarthur and bailey patrick who
are here in the audience in
case there are questions that I
can't answer we understand that
relaxed have support for this
petition but we're pleased to
say that we do have the support
of the mountain lake community
association who is active in
this area.
We engage with them early on in
the process, kept them informed
throughout our discussion with
staff and I'll talk a little
bit about some of the
commitments that the
petitioners have made in
discussions with the mountain
hamlet community association,
the property we're talking
about is about 12.5 acres
located along mount holly road
close to I-45 and close to the
entrance of pine island country
club.
A couple of key things that I
want to point out on this slide
that will come back to there's
a commercial node about three
quarters of a mile up mount
holly road where you have a
grocery store, gas station
restaurants, personal services
establishments to help our
service residents in the area.
You have a self-storage
facility immediately adjacent
to the site and then you have
this railroad easement that
runs along mount holly road and
the southern side of the
property on the railroad
easement that was originally
included as part of the
petition we received a letter
from csx objecting to inclusion
and we are therefore going to
amend the petition to remove
that right away easement or
remove that easement from the
petition that doesn't have any
practical impact on the site
proposed development.
But you might have received a
letter about that.
>> we're addressing it.
There is not a lot of
consistent zoning in this area
.
You do have some residential
developments close by, some
single family here and here
apartment complex across the
street and down closer to 485.
You also have a new townhome
community that was recently
approved just on the other side
of the self-storage facility.
And then again you've got
manufacturing logistics which
is on the south side of that
rail easement.
Existing zoning on the side is
in mill one.
We're seeking to go to and to
be conditional to allow the
development of 176 unit
multifamily development.
This slide shows the policy map
that was in place at the time
of filing this petition earlier
this year and I just want to
show you how things have
changed over the last couple of
months.
The site originally had a
neighborhood one designation
with some manufacturing
logistics adjacencies.
you also had neighborhood two
across the street which remains
there and then you have these
two community activity center
areas that's between the site
and I-45 which is over here.
Fast forward to the adoption of
the revised policy map and now
the place type of the site is
manufacturing logistics the
area on the other side of the
self-storage is now has a
neighborhood two place type.
The areas that were community
activity centers have been
changed to a neighborhood
activity center.
An additional neighborhood to
the manufacturing logistics
really hasn't changed except
for the fact that this site has
been changed to manufacturing
logistics.
My point here is that the idea
that you shouldn't arizona to
be simply because you've got
manufacturing logistics and a
rail line nearby really doesn't
carry a lot of water because
you've already got things that
are dealing with those
conditions in the immediate
vicinity that have been
transitioned to that
neighborhood to place type.
This slide shows what the
policy map manual says are
things that should be
considered when you change to
the neighborhood to place type.
We're well over the minimum
acreage requirement although we
have some manufacturing
logistics adjacencies.
Again it's self-storage to one
side and then an area that is
separated by a large railroad
easement to the south.
>> one thing I'll add regarding
that railroad easement is that
the right of way is not
considered when determining
your buffer.
>> so not only do you have the
railroad easement separating
the site from the manufacturing
logistics uses to the south,
you also then on top of that
have the standard buffer that
would be required between a
manufacturing logistics and an
end to be place type.
And then if you look at the
other criteria for transfer to
into b, I mean a lot of those
factor in favor of this move
particularly we look at the
proximity to services and the
proximity to public
transportation.
This slide shows the location
of bus stops along mount holly
road which are very close.
You've got one here and here
both within less than a half
mile.
You know, MR. Oliver mentioned
in the report mentions a lack
of sidewalks allowed along
mount holly road.
But again you have developments
going online here and here that
will require shared use pass be
constructed I believe.
And so what you're doing is
that connectivity to those bus
stops is being provided as
development on this corridor
increases.
This slide contains information
from the west outer community
area plan and shows the
existing profile of that area
and the goals.
Two things that I thought were
interesting when reviewing the
profile of the area is that
number 133% of the west outer
development is characterized as
neighborhood one not
multifamily which is a pretty
large percentage.
And the other thing is 26% is
characterized as manufacturing
logistics.
So there's already a lot there
.
And then you look at the goals
in that community area plan ten
minute neighborhoods housing,
diversity, housing access,
transit oriented development
and then diverse and economic
opportunity.
Look at what the community area
plan says are the benefits of
redeveloping a property to a
neighborhood to development
along a major thoroughfare with
two bus stops and it looks to
us like it would have a
positive impact on four of the
five goals of the community
area plan.
Again this isn't my slide.
This is taken directly out of
the community area plan to show
what happens when you take the
vacant land and transition it
to a neighborhood two place
type.
And so we think that the
community area plan absolutely
supports a transition to
neighborhood to this is the
proposed site plan.
You see three buildings along
mount holly road with all the
parking on the interior of the
site and no one is driving or
living across from parking lot
at the request of the mountain
and lake community association
we included a condition that
40% of the facades facing mount
holly road would have stone or
brick masonry along this
facade.
So you'll get a you know, a
higher end view along that
stretch you've got the central
buildings in the middle that'll
also include, you know, some of
the units as well as clubhouse
an amenity area I'll talk about
in a minute and then you have
pretty significant buffers
around the entire exterior.
But again this is self-storage
.
You had approval for
multifamily over here next to
self-storage and then all of
this is the right of way for
the railroad that the developer
can't really do anything with.
>> you have three minutes left.
Thank you.
The petitioner has agreed to
make traffic improvements that
exceed what is required under
the video or requested by ncdot
or see that the development has
one widen access point right
across from stoney ridge which
was requested at the community
meeting and the developer will
be constructing a right and
left turn lane into the site a
left turn lane for stoney ridge
and three lanes in each
direction right there in front
of the site.
So providing those left turn
lanes in addition to the three
lanes hopefully will prevent
traffic back up in that area.
Mount holly road, we understand
that's not going to alleviate
all the traffic that's on mount
holly.
That's an area that keeps
coming up.
That is something that needs to
be dealt with.
We don't disagree with that.
But what the developers try to
do is take a practical,
reasonable approach to
improvements that they could
make that will, you know,
mitigate their own traffic as
well as try to provide some
benefit to the median area.
The last point I'll make on
traffic is if you look at trip
generation data, the proposed
use generates much less traffic
than some of the other uses
that could be developed with
the email.
One zoning staff report has
some information about trip
generation but it's based
solely on one lesser intensive
use.
Yes someone could put an 88,000
square foot warehouse on that
site but there are a lot of
other uses that could go on
that site as it's currently
zoned that would increase
traffic and then looking at
amenities on the project you
certainly have kind of the
normal things like a pool
fitness center, dog park that
you would expect to see two
other interesting amenities
that I want to point out.
One is an upgraded business
center.
The idea there is that you
would be able to do more than
just print or make copies.
It's someplace where somebody
who lives there could leave
their house if they work from
home but still have a place to
go so they wouldn't have to go
to starbucks or local library,
keep them off the road.
And then also the second thing
is a small market something
along the lines of what you
might see in a hotel or again
you need some detergent, you
need a bag of chips, a frozen
pizza, something like that.
You can go pick that up on site
without having to get on the
roads and get somewhere else.
So both those things all the
services to that the community
themselves are also helping to
reduce traffic.
And lastly we just have some
sample elevations here.
These are ideas of what it
might look like.
Mission properties is an
experience developer in the
region and so we have photos of
their other some of their other
projects here in the charlotte
region.
No architectural plans yet but
it's consistent with what you
should expect at this location
.
That's really all I have.
Again, we think this is a
quality project that makes
sense in this location we
worked hard to get community
support on this one and we hope
that each of you will support
as well.
>> with that I'm happy to take
any questions that you have.
Thank you.
MR. Floyd.
Any questions?
MR. Graham thank you for the
presentation.
A question for staff so my eyes
and ears the mountain lake
homeowners association are in
agreement with the project so
with your and readiness based
on I'm not having staff
approval it's primarily based
on the place type
recommendation.
So the cap as we all know was
adopted in APRIL just a couple
months ago which updated policy
map and that envisioned
manufacturing and logistics for
the site.
so I feel like it's difficult
after all that community
engagement and discussion
around the community area plans
to kind of go against that
recommendation at this point
and you know there is quite a
bit over 1,000,000ft of
development just across that
railroad right of way of
manufacturing and logistics in
the area and that
recommendation is not subject
to change based on some of the
leeway still made for their
project in terms of trying to
traffic county from the other
things.
So we do recognize that it is
in a housing gap and you know
we feel that maybe something a
little less intense than
stacked multifamily, maybe a
townhome project or a single
family project MAY be more
appropriate for the site than
for a full apartment
development.
Okay.
I would love to come out and
walk the site.
I'm very I do that often
especially in the the mountain
bike area because I am too
concerned about the traffic
congestion and infrastructure
over there and so sometimes
seeing it is better than in
person is better than on the
map.
So if you can contact my office
would love to come out and just
want to say I would love to set
that up with you too for you to
join me if you can and so we
can make sure that we're all on
the same page.
Absolutely.
Okay, MR. Mayor, thank you so
staff thank you so much very
for your due diligence.
I'm reading and based on your
notes here it states that there
is an active freight rail right
of way which makes up a quarter
of this site along its southern
boundary.
Can you pull that up here on
the map so the freight rail
traffic I'm concerned it MAY be
incompatible easier and
impactful to this future
residents who will be living on
the site.
I think there needs to be some
measures that we need to
discuss around noise and air
pollution.
>> okay.
So if you can just tell me
where where is that freight?
>> it's it's a double tracked
line.
So there's a northern track
right here where the pointer is
and then there's a southern
track right around the southern
boundary where you see this
yellow running concurrently
with that yellow line that
marks the site boundary.
Yes, I do agree with staff's
recommendations here.
I think we are looking at
potential air pollution as well
as noise pollution for our
future residents that might be
living here also, have you
considered a less intense
zoning district?
I think we looked at certainly
a lot of options.
I think the issue that you have
here with the railroad track is
that takes a lot of things out
of play, right?
Like single family residential
right next to a railroad track
is probably not something
that's going to gain a lot of
traction.
An apartment complex is
different.
I mean my first department when
I moved to charlotte was
carrying south end or excuse me
camden cotton mills which is
right along the railroad track.
That's just what you do when
you're younger.
You know you live with the
noise.
It's not that bad.
But to think if somebody is
going to buy a home in that
location probably not.
But yeah, we considered it and
felt that multifamily was the
best thing for the site.
>> okay well in its current
form I don't think it's a good
idea.
>> and other thing just a
second.
So I do see this site is right
next to manufacturing logistics
as well as to the south to the
south east and we are talking
about one point 2,000,000ft
manufacture and logistic
facility, am I correct?
>> so yes, a long run road to
the south and southeast.
The site there's currently
approximately one point
2,000,000ft of industrial
development under construction.
>> yeah.
So you know, staff rarely
provides opposition or doesn't
support it.
So when they do I think we need
to take it seriously because we
MAY not get calls now but once
the residents do move in there
might be calls coming about air
pollution, noise pollution and
many more.
So I, I just think we need to
take this thing through this
and consider the staff's
recommendations because I hear
from the petition are pretty
clear they are not willing to
lower the intensity of the
development and that concerns
me.
MR. Floyd that's all I have.
Thank you.
>> thank you, MS..
Mayor.
Thank you.
Would job at all be open to
spending more money on the
quality of the windows to kind
of impact sound for, you know,
future residents that are going
to be there just so I mean
obviously I would need to talk
with the development team but I
don't want to say that we're
opposed to anything.
I mean I think the development
team here has shown a
willingness to take feedback
from the area residents to
incorporate a lot of the
feedback that we got in the
community meeting.
That's how we got support from
the community is hearing their
feedback and going back in
there so can't say yes, can't
say no.
I'm happy to to have the
development team to look into
that and see what the options
are.
>> okay.
Okay.
And just one last while you're
looking at the this additional
tools also if you can ask your
development team to decrease
the number of units and lower
the intensity of development.
Thank you.
That's all I have.
Thank you.
I'm going to pass it over to
mr. Graham to close out comment
yeah and that's why it's so
important for me to walk it
right and kind of see the
proximity to I see the line
right before I get it and also
to talk to the neighborhood
association they don't grant
their approval lightly and so I
was pleasantly surprised that
they were already on board.
But I still have a couple of
questions I want to ask based
on staff's comments, but I'm
very open and looking forward
to the visit.
>> happy to do it.
>> thank you.
Okay.
MISS Mayo has a final comment.
>> thank you so much.
Would you at all be open to
adding like in some of the
conditions like undisturbed
tree canopy like between where
you're going to be putting the
apartments in the actual
railroad?
>> I'm just thinking, you know,
oftentimes if you leave those
trees there that will help with
sound and if if it's being
undisturbed that will help with
some of the noise and the
pollution and that's something
we've really learned from
silvery acres.
>> just thinking through how
can we put some things in place
in the front end so we're not
having to deal with issues in
the back end?
Yes, ma'am.
>> you asked him that is
understaffed.
Yes.
So we've got here's kind of the
part of the tree safe area this
whole area here is also that is
the right of way area.
that doesn't mean that the
tracks are right up next to
this line.
Right.
The tracks are shown down here
and all this is currently
trees, you know, so there's a
pretty significant gap not only
between the railroad and but
you've got all those trees then
you've got the planting and
then you've got the parking lot
and then you've got the
building.
So it's pretty significant
distance there.
See we can't do anything in
that area, right?
It's if they own the property
but the railroad has the
easement and has all control
over what can go on there.
So that's certainly not a
problem we don't have any plans
on taking any of these trees
down.
It provides privacy, provides
noise reduction.
It provides a whole bunch of
benefits that we're in support
of.
>> all right.
Thank you.
>> is there a motion to close
public hearings?
The second.
>> all right.
All in favor raise hands any
oppose that is unanimous and so
we will now move on to item
number 20 petition number 2026
009 by david simone signature
homes llc.
It's approximately three acres
located south of all providence
road east of jones ridge drive
and west of mary butler way and
council member drake's district
.
the site is currently zone
neighborhood one b and the
proposed zoning is neighborhood
one d conditional staff does
not recommend approval of this
petition in its current form so
the petitioner will have ten
minutes to speak to to this
item after staff's presentation
and yes MR. Smith is this MR.
Smith and MR. Crater all right
after staff's presentation
you'll have ten minutes.
Thank you.
The sites approximately three
acres along the south side of
old providence road east of
jones road drive and west of
mary butler ray right.
Sorry.
In an area where we have
predominantly single family
uses some institutional uses
and multifamily uses though
further from the site more
eastern along providence road
current zoning is neighborhood
one b they are proposing to go
to neighborhood one d
conditional that is in
alignment with the policy maps
recommendation for the
neighborhood one place type for
this site as well as the
surrounding area.
The proposal includes a couple
of conditional nodes so they
stipulate that they would have
ten single family detached
residential lots.
The minimum lot with would be
50ft and they would have a
minimum lot area of 6000ft and
just for a point of reference
from where they're going to
where they're starting with the
and b district and where
they're going to fit in one d
district they are proposing a
greater width and area than the
minimum standards of n1d and
the n1b with where they're
starting at has minimum area of
8000 in lot with of 60ft.
This area is within the south
middle community area plan
which does call for the
neighborhood.
One place type as I noted does
not directly facilitate
priority goals or comprehensive
plan goals and we did assess it
using the place type five
criteria.
That's an assessment tool that
we have under the creating
complete communities section
under every community area plan
which helps us evaluate
rezoning petitions requesting a
more intense neighborhood one
zoning district in order to see
if what is being requested
meets essentially or ensures
appropriateness review stablish
community character in the area
with what form and development
.
So when we look at this area
there is a real established lot
pattern and with what you see
with the lots to the east and
to the west here I'll exclude
these because they're bit of
outliers these large lots
directly to the west but the
ones along jones ridge drive in
mary butler way these are
predominantly developed to
minimum standards of what you
would see in the in one b
classification and sometimes
with greater law areas closer
to and one a classification or
somewhere in between a and b so
what they're proposing would be
a bit smaller than that or a
bit out of line with what we
think is the established lot
pattern in the area.
It is a long and arterial road
which is a point in its favor
in terms of the five criteria
but it is also located
mid-block which isn't
necessarily preferred when
we're stepping up the intensity
in our neighborhood.
One zoning districts on this
type of site so on I would say
they're not that far off from
what we'd like to see in the
area but stop does that
recommend approval of this
petition in its current form?
We think that we can work with
the petitioner to try and get
this plan more in alignment
with that.
Please type five criteria to
ensure that the proposals in
creating a law pattern that's
out of context with the
established development that we
see along this corridor which
demonstrates a pretty
consistent characteristics in
terms of what area width and
setback.
So with that I'll leave my
comments me and address any
questions after petitioner
presentation.
>> okay.
MR. Smith and MR. Kreider you
have ten minutes in aggregate.
>> thank you very much.
Rumors of the council.
My name is sunny kreider work
for david simone signature
homes work crew serving in east
for over 43 years and the
request is theresa owned to and
one d this is a this three
acres at 7000 old providence
road it is a two david is a
really special opportunity to
create not just a single family
home here and there but to
create a real community and
give that our whole company is
really excited about the
possibility for what david can
do with his vision that he'll
create something with lasting
contribution and enhanced
values to the whole area.
Just a couple examples of the
school that's going is our
presentation on in that I'm not
in there I'll ask questions
generally MR. Time is there are
we having a technical issue?
I believe they're looking for
their slides and I will see if
somebody else has them.
Well the studio is part of the
time while we find the slides.
>> thank you so we're working
of the best way I can say it is
we have we can see holes in
okay okay pretty close.
And your name is street.
That's yeah he said he have we
determine if we have the slide
I believe I do not have them on
hand.
We're trying to see if they can
send them to somebody else
right now.
Okay well we are using the next
one and then come back.
Yes.
So why don't we do this because
we want to continue to advance
in the agenda.
>> so while you all are looking
for your slides, we're going to
move to the next petition and
after that petition will return
if you have your slides
available.
>> okay.
All right.
Thank you, MR. Smith and MR.
Crater.
>> so who's the last one to be
with that then we're going to
advance to agenda item 21 and
we'll come back when your
slides are ready.
Agenda item 21 is petition
number 2026 017 by kevin curran
it's approximately 7.85 acres
located north of avondale drive
west of shalamar drive and east
of in tour avenue in the 80 j
closest to MR. Graham's
district.
The site is currently zone
neighborhood one eight in the
proposed zoning is neighborhood
one see conditional once again
staff does not recommend
approve all of this petition in
its current form so the
petitioner will have ten
minutes to speak following
staff presentation and MR.
Sharkey I see you are in the
audience and you are signed up
to speak against this petition.
So after staff's presentation
the petitioner will have ten
minutes.
MR. Sharkey you'll have ten
minutes and then there'll be an
opportunity for two minute
rebuttal.
>> thank you.
Petition 20.6017 is a 7.85 acre
site located on riverdale drive
shalamar drive and winter
avenue plan proposes nine units
including seven single family
detached dwellings and one
duplex on a site that is
currently developed with the
single family house current
zoning is neighborhood one a
proposed zoning is in one c cd
neighborhood one c commercial
conditional excuse me the 2040
policy map recommends the
neighborhood and one place type
for the site.
The plan is in alignment with
the neighborhood one place type
the rezoning calls for the
development up to nine rolling
units as I mentioned that would
be on eight lots including up
to seven single family detached
dwellings and one duplex
dwelling containing two units
each lot will have a minimum
lot area of 10,000ft which is
the minimum lot area for in one
a district and all lots will
gain access from existing
public streets.
There will be no new public
streets on this site while the
plan is in alignment with the
policy map, it is inconsistent
with the goals and policies of
the west middle community area
plan.
The proposed plan does not meet
the policy type five five
criteria from the community
area plan 55 criteria are
utilized to ensure new
development within the
neighborhood.
One place type fits existing
neighborhood patterns focusing
on lot size street frontage and
parcel location within a block.
The proposed rezoning does not
fully meet pt5 expectations
because the lots width and lot
dimensions are significantly
smaller than those of the
surrounding neighborhood.
So even though it meets that
minimum lot area for in one a
it's not the proposed lots
would typically be smaller than
those in the existing
neighborhood and this plan
would not facilitate in
community area plan priority
goals staff does not recommend
approval.
This petition in its current
form for this plan does not
meet the five criteria in
regards to lot dimensions in
relation to the adjacent single
family development pattern and
the plan does not forward any
priority goals.
The community area plan however
the plan proposes with low
intensity primarily single
family detached dwellings along
public streets which is in
keeping with the character of
the neighborhood.
Proposed dimensions and
setbacks should be revised to
better match the existing lot
pattern in the area.
I'm happy to take any questions
following petitioner's
presentation.
>> okay.
Thank you and MR. Shark I
misspoke you on the next one
right.
This is now.
Yes, sir.
This is MR. Curran and he just
signed up which is why he's not
on our own.
Our pieces of paper colleagues
so MR. Curran, you have ten
minutes.
Yes.
Thank you.
Thank you, council, for all the
work that you do.
So yes, my name is kevin curran
and the reason why I'm here
today is to ask for this
rezoning to move from in one 8
in 1 c specifically for the
purpose of just gaining two
more lots excuse me there are
some some some very important
people to me that I have been
friends with for a very, very
long time now with the church
and they would like to stay
close together as a family.
This one family has grown into
three separate households and
the children would like to stay
close to their parents but
really finding affordable land
to build three homes in
charlotte beside each other is
proven to be a difficult task
for this lease.
These ones and so since I have
this land that I'm willing to
sell to them at below market
costs for them to be able to
fulfill their desire for two to
out of their parents but at the
current zoning I just do not
have enough land to also
fulfill the plans that I have
for this property and to
address the staff's disapproval
.
I'm just really asking for
leniency on the lot with I am
willing to comply with all the
conditions of the n1a zoning to
keep the 10,000 square foot
minimum lot sizes and I'm
willing to conditions to comply
with the 27 foot setbacks from
the front and the 40 foot rear
setbacks as well into to follow
all the ordinance when it comes
to the air quality in the
erosion control during any
construction that would happen
now my understanding is that I
can achieve the number of
dwelling units that I am
seeking by currently building
duplexes and triplexes by right
under the existing zoning and
the existing entitlement does
allow up to 23 dwelling units
on this property but in my
opinion that would be way more
out of character with the
surrounding neighborhood than
what I'm proposing as part of
this petition.
I know in the in the community
meeting there do not to be
appeared to be any strong
objections to what was
proposing.
The discussion did seem to
center primarily on the traffic
and stormwater and regarding
the concerns about the traffic
staff did an analysis and they
determined that based on the
entitlement up to 23 dwelling
units it would equate up to 261
trips a day.
But my petition would limit the
numbers of dwelling units to
nine which would only add 110
per day.
So those are well below what
current time is that?
I would not have to seek for
rezoning on and on regarding
the concerns about the
stormwater runoff I did contact
an engineer about it and they
told me I will have to conduct
a 100 plus one stormwater
analysis to establish the flood
elevation of the creek that
runs adjacent to this property
and whenever these lights would
be developed we will make sure
to design the grades in a way
to keep the runoff from flowing
into the neighboring lots as
these lights that we're
currently proposing are at low
point in the neighborhood they
mostly drain to the creek that
flows to the property that I
own already has it here.
So we just want to address the
the neighbors concerns and tell
them we're going to do as much
as we can to to keep their
concerns at a minimum I am
going to amend this petition
later on to take off a portion
of the property on ventura.
I was informed that I do not
need to keep that property on
there so which would drop off
language of the the duplex as
well.
so really only the five locks
on shallow more is what we're
going to be seeking eventually
not even the eight lots so what
that's all I have I'll take
questions if you do have okay
any questions?
I do, MR. Mayor.
Thank you again, staff great
job with your due diligence to
the petitioner, are you willing
to revise the dimensions and
setbacks so that this
development better matches the
existing lot written in the
surrounding neighborhood?
Does this currently doesn't
align with the current current
setbacks in one a is 27 foot
that's what we are willing to
go to 27 foot yes ma'am okay so
the staff recommends that so
currently please stay to be
replaced by five right?
>> yes the criteria okay.
And so I know that your well in
in your analysis you had
mentioned the dimensions and
setbacks.
What would that be?
I guess how much should they be
revised to better fit the
existing neighborhood?
>> yeah, I don't have the
dimensions in front of yes.
So something staff can work
with you on if you're willing
to work with staff on that
because we want to make sure
that it fits into the
neighborhood's character so it
doesn't look out of place as we
often get complaints about
that.
Yes ma'am.
I'm willing to to do whatever
work is necessary.
They are long there would be
long lots but there is that
creek that runs behind it so
there is a buffer stream buffer
there in order to do setbacks
from the stream and setbacks on
the front there is a in an
allowable building area.
I'm not sure of what that is
but yes, maximum sure has.
>> so yeah, we're we're going
to work with the petitioner on
this.
So you're not recommending
anything current form that
means there kind of is a we
feel there is a path forward to
get to a place where we could
recommend approval.
>> so we'll we'll work with the
petitioner on this.
Yes, I would I would suggest
that you continue to work with
staff to get their approval so
that it fits into the
neighborhood's character that's
all right.
>> thank you.
Thank you, MS..
Mayor.
I would agree with
councilmember are just hoping
that you'll continue to work
with staff I'd love to see some
site plans this you know, being
conditional I just felt it's a
little broad particularly as
staff is given some very
specific things that they're
looking for.
So I would just like more
specifications so that we
understand exactly what we
would be approving right now I
don't feel comfortable in its
current form but oh okay.
Any other comment?
No move to close the hearing
second.
>> all right.
All in favor of closing public
hearing raise hands any oppose
thank you.
that's unanimous and have we
and thank you MR. Curran have
we resolved the technical
issue?
Okay.
So then let's let's backtrack
back to item number 22 crater
and once your slides are up MR.
Smith and MR. Crater you will
have eight minutes if the
studio could set the timer back
to the eight minutes that's how
many minutes you had.
Okay.
Thank you very much.
All right.
Are presentation is up there as
I was referring to earlier were
to show you some examples of
david's vision and what he can
create other than when he gets
a neighborhood that he can do
other than just a single family
which are incredible.
Yeah, the first one this is
from current grants is a
mixture of french villas and a
little one in cobblestone
street this at the back
appellant would the first time
I saw this I thought walt
disney had done this
neighborhood and I think that
you would probably agree if you
were to view it itself the the
talent and the energy that it
took him to create this is just
is mind boggling.
The second one is chipping
campden which is on vernon
drive between wendover and
providence road.
This is an english village that
david created based on
townhomes with terraces
overlooking the english garden
that at the time in 2002 was
about half million dollars just
for the garden.
The town homes here now selling
$2.5 million range is an
interesting story is that the
english press covered this in
several newspapers and actually
did on air interviews with bbc
with the couple agents and we
also had a couple from the
cotswolds come visit chip in
camera to see that it was real.
That's how dynamic this
development was.
So again we're excited about
that opportunity.
Three properties current lives
own in one be requested zoning
is in one day.
There's 2 to 3 acres and we the
proposal is for single family
ten lots 50ft wide is a minimum
and 6000ft I'll get to a
preliminary site plan in a
moment that preliminary layout
actually there been a lot
majority lot sort of 55 and
closer to 60 700ft and as far
as density it's at 3.4 units
per acre which is less than
than the neighborhood here.
And here is again our really
our clientele are four age
targeted.
That's the majority of who we
we build to and sell to and
that I expect no different
here.
It's one of the reasons that
we're very intentional about
having a certain lot size and
yard area so that we could keep
that to a minimum and so it's
like say it really works well
if you get approved here are
just some other neighborhoods
nearby this is the neighborhood
subject neighborhood and again
the lots on our site now which
I'll show you in a moment is
55ft wide and there is 60
700ft.
Mason next door there and there
was in the report said that
there's 63ft and they're
actually the flats that are 58
and 59.
This little difference there
and a little higher density
also and hopefully a couple of
you got emails from mason
neighborhood expressing their
desire to see this go forward
we dealt with them before we
even applied for rezoning and
they were overwhelmingly in
favor of what we were proposing
to do.
We got a couple other
neighborhoods you've got these
are 60 foot lots.
They're all deeper but I can
see why that would happen.
Then you've got for some reason
old man or white matter didn't
make that the cut of of the
what was analyzed but they're
50ft wide and 60 200ft deep as
you can see over here this is
one of the mary one of the
neighborhoods that was used
lots here and a few other
places.
One thing that stands out to me
and we're we're all on board
with the little plan with the
2004 area plan where we diverge
from planning staff is the
place type five which the
statement is that it's
inconsistent with the
predominant lot pattern.
I would suggest to you that
between this one and this one
and this one and all of those
there is not a template or
predominant lot pattern in this
neighborhood.
You have 2.5 minutes.
>> okay.
That's pretty much all I have
to say.
>> I have okay.
thank you.
I will go to MR. Driggs and
then I have a mismatch here.
>> so MR. Crater, you wrote to
me a couple of times I was on
vacation.
I apologize for not scheduling
a meeting and it looks like we
ought to be able to work
something out here.
I would just say colleagues,
what we're seeing actually is
ironic because we started our
2040 process and we said
density density density that's
the answer to rising housing
costs and now what's happening
is that because of
considerations like the
discussions we had around 2.1
where we appear to be kind of
backing from there.
So I think we haven't yet fully
solved the question of how we
achieve the density that is
needed in order to keep housing
costs down and compatibility
with area sensitivity to the
surroundings.
This looks to me like a
creative proposal so I hope it
doesn't get stopped because of
the wording in our plan.
And what I'd like to do is in
the next couple of weeks if you
could give me some dates we'll
get together, go over it and
then perhaps I can discuss it
also with the staff and we'll
see where we go.
The vote wouldn't be until
AUGUST anyway.
Your chance for me to show just
a couple more slides I can get
to do that.
We've got to get thrown out of
kilter there.
Okay, well you I think I'll
send it to some of you but the
houses that david has already
started with design he sort of
goes ahead of it a little bit
but they're incredible.
>> okay.
Absolutely.
I didn't ask you a question
just now so I'm sorry we can't
discuss it at the moment.
I'm just suggesting we will get
together and talk to you.
Okay.
>> that's great.
I want to close with lake
henry.
>> we have MISS Ash mira and
then we have MISS Johnson.
>> okay, so thank you.
So couple of question, MR.
Crater.
First of all, simone, is it
your company you work for the
company?
>> yeah.
You have some of the best
developments but I love the
first few examples that you
showed with the garden in the
middle.
>> it's beautiful.
Well first so I'm again similar
to the previous rezoning
petition this is a gaining not
compatible with surrounding
residential so so you talked
about there is no template or
there is no rhythm in in in
this neighborhood what do you
mean by that?
Well, what I was showing you is
that there are a lot of
different developments that the
lots are not there.
They're all over the place
quite honestly in the one we
are immediately above mason
we're right there with them in
terms of the lot size and
pretty close into the mansion.
We actually average about 57ft
wide and so the when you look
at other developments there
again there's not a there's not
a pattern that you could say
okay, we're breaking the
pattern because so so if you
can hold on to that because
staff if in your recommendation
you mentioned that there is a
noticeable mismatch in lot size
and scale within this area I
guess because of the lower
density development as opposed
to what they are proposing
which is a hardened city is
that what you're referring to?
Not necessarily with density is
just when we consider the
proposal on a whole is slightly
out of step with what we
consider to be the law pattern
in the area.
They're not that far off.
It's really not that far off.
I think we have a way forward
certainly but when you consider
the holistic perspective of in
one d or any in one district
with your setbacks, your lot
your and your lot with all of
those dimensional standards
combining to create a look and
feel it's more than just one
number and so that's what we
were looking at when we are
comparing the lot pattern in
the area.
>> but it it doesn't that far
off they are most similar to
the compact development that is
to their east on mary butler
way a little smaller than those
lots and they would have
smaller setbacks than those
lots certainly under in one d
but it would be closer to those
lots than the other ones in the
area which are larger.
So it's good to hear that we
are not too far apart here.
Right?
right.
Oh, what stands out here
because this this site is not
located on a corner lot so if
there is a mismatch it
immediately stands out as I
hope that you will continue to
work with our staff to figure
out how we can align in terms
of it doesn't stand out from
the neighboring properties
because there needs to be some
transition between neighboring
properties in yours.
Well that's all I have.
>> thank you.
Thank you, MS. Johnson.
Thank you.
Still seem pretty far apart to
me but I'll tell you where I
think these would fit
wonderfully is in district four
well to have the research park
we've got tiaa vanguard banks,
we've got the blue line.
It's a great area so that's a
$2 million apiece.
They don't you know I mean
we've have the talk so anyway
yeah I think they're what I
wanted to know is and I think
steph answered the question
it's interesting this is like
the third or fourth petition
tonight the staff does not
recommending so I appreciate
the diligence right in looking
at the petitions but is there
something specific that they
would need to do do you think
in order for staff to recommend
we don't have a specific
preschool option in mind in
terms of a magic number but
we're willing to work with them
because we haven't we haven't
looked at or been able to
analyze a formal site plan so
if they're working with
specific site constraints as to
that are dictating certain
standards for them and making
some of those smaller than what
we would prefer, then we're not
sure where to go from there.
So if we could have more
conversations on that and
understand what needs more
flexibility in terms of a
smaller standard of standard
and where they could create
maybe a larger dimensional
standard so we don't have a
specific specific specific
prescription in mind excuse me
but we would just like the look
and feel to be more in line
with what we believe to be
established in terms of the
overall holistic neighborhood
one dimensional standards when
you look at with area setbacks
etc..
Thank you.
>> thanks.
Okay.
Thank you.
And certainly district one is
open to some lovely homes as
well.
Is there a motion to close
public hearings?
So move second all in favor
raise hands any opposed that
see that in this.
Thank you both.
We will advance to item number
22 petition number 2026 025 by
olympia and right homes it's
approximately 3.8 acres located
south of the almond road west
of hampton place and east of
mineral ridge way located and
councilmember johnson's
district the site is currently
zoned institutional condition
four and proposed zoning is
neighborhood one e staff once
again does not recommend
approval of this petition in
its current form and there are
speakers at signed up to speak
against this petition so the
petitioner will have ten
minutes after staffs
presentation and then MR.
Sharkey you will have ten
minutes and there will be a two
minute rebuttal available for
you.
MR. Brown thank you.
>> thank you.
This site is little under four
acres along the south side of
drummond road west of hampton
place and east of mineral ridge
way in an area where we have
predominantly single family
residential development here
with the more mix of uses
occurring east of the site
along benfield road currently
zoned institutional conditional
an old plan for every sonic
lodge requesting to go to the
neighborhood one e zoning
district.
This is the conventional
request so there's no site plan
or associated conditional notes
the request is considered in
alignment with the
neighborhood.
One place type called for on
the site five the 2040 calls
map it is within the north,
middle and outer community area
plan again it's in alignment
with that neighborhood one
place type recommendation but
it's not directly facilitating
any priority goals for the area
plan and it is the conventional
request and as noted at the top
staff does that recommend
approval this petition in its
current form?
But we had a different side so
I apologize.
I was going to walk you through
the place type five criteria
here which is also at play
similar to the other petitions
that we've talked to and talked
about in this meeting here.
So please I five again we're
considering that when looking
at requests for a higher
intensity neighborhood one
zoning district this one in
particular is the neighborhood
one e zoning district though
it's not currently a
neighborhood one zoning
district itself we would still
wanted to consider it because
it sits within a residential
area with an established lot
pattern and there is in one b
zoning that it abuts and our
six conditional zoning a lot of
those lots are developed out to
lot with ranging from maybe
high 40s to 70ft in lot with an
areas around 11,000 maybe a
little bit less than the n1 e
district.
So in comparison would allow
for a lot standards that are
pretty different than what we
have existing in that area.
So in one e would have a
minimum lot width of 30ft and a
minimum floor area of 3000ft
and you have a front setback of
ten feet let me pretty
different than what we see
established along that corridor
along the south side of diamond
road there.
So that's what's really driving
staff's recommendation and why
we believe it's inconsistent
with the goals and policies of
the north middle and our
community area plan is when we
take a look at the place type
five criteria unlike the last
petition where we were talking
about I think it's it's close
in some regards we're not that
far off.
I think the neighborhood one is
zoning district.
It's just is too far beyond
what we find to be appropriate
for the site considering the
established lot pattern.
We don't have any conditions as
to what's occurring on the site
or if they would like to
condition out for different
dimensions that are greater
than the minimums allowed in
one e we haven't seen seen or
heard of those so far so that's
where staff recommendation is
stemming from.
Happy to answer any questions
following comments.
>> okay.
Thank you MR. Brown.
Great your pro tem council
members then you committee
members colin brown on behalf
of olympian right kind of
continuing the theme of tonight
where we got some
inconsistencies or non support
from staff I will go and say is
holly mentioned and this is
followed as a conventional
petition I saw councilmember
johnson shaking her head and
I'll go ahead and let the cat
out of the bag.
We're going to convert this to
a conditional petition so you
MAY say well, this is a little
premature to have the hearing
tonight.
But the reason we're proceeding
with this I think you're going
to hear from some folks in the
community we've had a good
amount of community engagement
on the site.
This is a site where everyone
we've talked to says hey, you
know what?
we know something is going to
happen here.
The main feedback that we've
gotten from the community is a
request to condition this two
single family homes only which
the the petitioner is willing
to do.
The other challenge that the
main challenge I think from
some some of the neighbors
we've heard from and that you
MAY hear from tonight you know
is often the stub street
requirement that we run into
and so we do have a stub street
here to an existing
neighborhood.
We've got a tough site you can
see it's a triangle so there's
not a lot there's a lot of
challenges for us already.
So one of the real reasons I'm
proceeding with the hearing
tonight is to to let you have a
little feedback from the
neighborhood.
This would be something and
we're working with the
neighborhood and expect to have
some follow up meetings with
this hoa here to talk about the
options.
Right.
We know that the ordinance does
encourage this.
The uda likes this
connectivity.
It is very difficult for us to
find a solution for that.
So you know all that to say we
we will convert this to a
conditional rezoning we will
commit to single family only
and we will work with the
community on this connection.
Now we have to have again I did
want you to hear from the
community about their concerns
on this parcel to see if
there's some traction, if it's
something the city's open to us
finding an alternative.
If not, then we will we can
figure out a way to make this
work.
We did have some neighbors
attend the meeting dyarman road
as you know, prosperity church
is right down the street there
concerned with traffic impact.
We had questions that you know
could you guys install a median
we'd be open to all of those
things right so I think that's
a conversation we're going to
be willing to continue to have
with the neighborhood.
We did have a speaker sign up I
think she signed up in office
and support.
>> I'm not sure she's actually
supportive but I did want to
give her an opportunity to
speak.
She I think represent is coming
from this neighborhood here
who've reached out and said
look, we know something is
going to happen on the site.
You know our request or could
you do single family homes?
We don't want apartments.
We don't want townhomes.
You know, single family we
could consider.
But their main concern is this
connection.
And so I'm happy to devote some
time to her.
We probably would and brought
this but with kind of the
summer break we at least wanted
to start this conversation let
you all hear some feedback for
the community about the
connectivity issue and see if
we can find a way forward that
way if we can then we will
amend we'll make the
commitments to single family
I'm not sure we'll we'll
probably still be having a
little bit of the conversation
about well what is the right
size of lots and hallways right
you've got some giant lots here
you've got some medium sized
lots here.
You've got some smaller lots
here as you all know and you've
heard from some in any team and
they're doing $2 million houses
on the small side you can get
you know it is about the value
of land and you know if we're
committing not to do apartments
and not to do townhomes we do
need frankly as much
flexibility as we can get on
the lot sizes we're we're all
talking we'll talk with our
design team about whether we
can come we're going to be in
one place type but whether we
can get to an end one c or d
probably that's going to come
down to what the fate of the
street is.
So if we have to bring the
street through we might need
more flexibility if there's a
way for us to, you know, not
make that connection that might
give us a little more
flexibility.
So that's where we are.
Mayor pro tem like I said,
there was a speaker that signed
up in favor.
I'm not sure if she's in favor
but I'll give her some of my
time.
>> so is this a talia nazario
that you're speaking of that is
that you see are you wanting to
speak in favor of this
petition?
Because if you're not in favor
you can't speak now against but
she's welcome to so my time I
think I know what she's going
to say so we have you on the
paper as being for the petition
.
Okay.
I'm just learning about the
n1eab okay.
>> okay.
As long as she has time to
speak, we're happy.
You want to see she's walking
our time.
All right, we're going to go.
Sorry.
Okay.
Please come down, MR. Nazario
and it's kind of when you get
to the podium the balance of
your time.
MR. Brown is five minutes and
48 seconds to MR. Sharkey go.
>> you know he spoke against
this guy five and she's against
you know she signed up for our
and she's all here twice for oh
well thank you.
My name is selena zaria and I
see was mentioning I live on
ridgeline and my property is
almost on that lot the
neighbors around we gathered
not everybody could attend a
meeting that was held over zoom
but we are all concerned about
extending ridgeline towards the
almond as cities there's a lot
of traffic on that road we know
we already knew there were
plans to add sidewalks and
there's a lot of tree cutting
going on right now and then we
are learning oh they're going
to put like a something right
in the middle of the road
that's going to actually make
traffic worse for the people
that need to go in and out of
the subdivisions.
We also just learned that
there's a petition for
townhomes on a corner lot down
department for townhomes.
So we're really concerned about
what all of this sudden
development could mean.
And he was saying we know that
you know something was going to
happen on that parcel of land
when we the neighbors gather we
weren't sure like how big are
the lots we didn't know what
n1e whatever that means.
That's probably too small for
the for the area for the
neighborhoods.
I know the thing that we're
concerned is that our
neighborhood fought really hard
to restrict rental us and
airbnbs and that sort of thing
and there was a development 2
or 3 years ago that that popped
up near us that is just for
rental homes.
I think those things might
change the character of the
neighborhood that parcel of
land like we're almost next to
the highway and there are
fireflies on that lot and they
come out at this time of year
it's that area in north
charlotte it's like this little
pocket of residential or single
family homes and we do not want
that to change.
The neighbors across the street
are really worried that they
might be forced out especially
if rich lane is extended just
to fill that with apartments
and townhomes and more homes.
So we're really concerned about
that.
So we're not really you know,
the neighbors around me we're
not that opposed to having
something build there but we
don't want the street extended
that's going to increase
traffic and as cities already a
lot of people if you see the
map people use hampton place
they forget their stop signs
there and they just ran through
to avoid the street on diamond
ridge lane is opened traffic is
going to get horribly worse
across our neighborhood and
there are children playing on
the street.
It's just a quiet little
neighborhood and we don't want
that road extended and we don't
want too much you know,
residential density more than
it needs to be and we're not
opposed per say to you know, to
having something built there
more like okay, thank you MR.
Sharkey if you would like to
come down and you you're the
only one who signed up opposed
to this petition so you will
receive ten minutes I think to
a roundabout well even though
that is yeah I know that last
we were used to the client
didn't know what kind I was.
Good evening counsel.
I'm sure many of you on the
council know who I am in my
other role but today I come
before you in my role as the
PRESIDENT Of hampton place
property owners association and
I stand here before you today
to be against this rezoning and
as she has already shared with
you, there are a lot of things
going on associated with this
that makes us concerned about
what's going to happen to our
subdivision as part of this she
she alluded to a couple of the
things.
First and foremost we know that
the dearman road improvement
project is going on.
it's going to put a center
aisle in there as well as
sidewalks.
Dearman road turns into a
parking lot every day and if we
extend ridge line by adding
this additional properties in
that's going to make it even
worse.
So that's the first thing that
I want to bring to your
attention is we do not want to
extend ridge line.
Second thing is that you've
already heard and it was good
to hear some of the comments if
we're going to do some
development there.
It needs to be single family
homes.
It needs to be the same as what
is there now if you go just a
couple of blocks up the street
we've got townhouses going all
up all over our neighborhoods.
So we need to make sure that we
keep the what made that
particular area the place that
people want to live the same
for when these new houses get
built if we move forward with
this single housing I think
that still is a doable plan
right there that we can do some
of the things you did hear
about is still concerns for
hampton place subdivision which
is that we should be I think
we've been approved for hampton
place drive to get speed bumps
in am I asked a city council
can we get them like in the
next couple of months because
it's getting really bad.
But the other thing that I will
say is that if we if for
whatever reason this does get
approved by you guys we need
speed bumps to throughout
hampton place because it is a
speed zone.
It's like they just like you've
heard in the previous
respondent they've turned it
into a cut through so that they
could get to dearman road to
get to 485 and without those
speed bumps nobody's nobody is
stopping at the stop sign.
So we're having kids almost get
hit daily in our neighborhood.
So I petition to the city
council this evening here to
hear our appeal here to not
approve this as it stands if it
is going to get approved it has
to be single family only just
like what we have now with that
I yield.
>> okay.
Thank you.
Thank you, MR. Brown, you have
two minutes to add some.
Thank you.
You know the comments were
frankly what we expected.
I don't know.
I don't think we disagree with
any of that.
I think we're we're prepared to
do to go with single family.
We've got to figure out
ridgeline I did want you to
hear you say this MAY be a
little premature but I did want
you to hear from the community
on that.
We will work with the staffs to
see if our options perhaps
there could be a pedestrian
connection to get folks through
so they can take advantage of
the sidewalks but not bring the
traffic through.
We'd also I think we'd be open
to the commitments on you know
like I said before sale housing
we MAY also be able to
participate in some funding of
of the speed bump so we've got
two months to work with the
folks we've heard from tonight.
We've got contact information
on from them so we will be
working on that have an
answering questions.
>> okay.
Thank you.
So I have MS. Watlington and
then I have MS. Mayor, thank
you.
A couple of things you already
spoke MR. Brown towards the
speed mark slash road diet or
pedestrian connection there.
My question I think as it
relates to that is highly this
seems to be an amicable
discussion here and there are
some solutions that I that
sounds like are coming forward
so I'd like to know and you
don't have to answer it tonight
but I would like a report out
on what in our policy needs to
change such that this is the
rule rather than the exception.
I don't want folks to have to
go through a conventional than
conditional to have this kind
of conversation if there is a
way that we can bake it into
our policies, I, I, I would
prefer that.
So again, I don't expect you to
answer it tonight but if you
all could come back to me with
what places in our policy could
we codify what's being
described here that would be
helpful I yeah I think we
haven't had a lot of
conversations with them about
the possibility of conditional
because we've expressed that we
preferred to see the site go
conditional from the start of
this process and we just
haven't heard back frankly.
So I'm glad to hear that it
will be changing the request
and we look forward to working
to improve that and see a
better plan moving forward.
But I don't know that we could
have prevented tonight's
situation because they were
also just looking for more
input on this forum frankly to
understand where they can go
from there and understanding
that they do have a timeline
situation where they could
feasibly resubmit a conditional
request by mid-JULY to come
back before you in AUGUST with
a conditional request for this
allows them a chance to get
twice the amount of feedback
essentially.
Sure.
And I'm not talking about
necessarily how to prevent what
occurred here.
What I'm saying is I think I
like the way this is shaping
up.
If there is if there are points
in our policy that can get us
here as a matter of course
rather than just being relying
on the professionalism or the
generosity if you will, of the
petitioner or the petitioner's
agent.
That's what I want to
understand.
So I'm not sure who the right
person necessarily to take that
back is.
Yeah.
If you all could come back to
me with maybe a white paper on
that that right right.
I think and I think there are
portions I will just say I will
follow up with that in a report
out but I do think there are
portions of our committee area
plans and specifically what the
police type five criteria
speaks to is setting up for the
conversation that we had here
and for other petitions moving
forward.
So that is a big part of it.
But we will outline more
specifically how we can do that
more moving forward.
>> awesome.
Thank you.
And then my second question
just I'm just from my own
understanding as you all think
about moving from multifamily
to single family, I'm just
curious from a price point
standpoint how that how that
shakes up.
The reason I bring that up is
because earlier in the
conversation and here tonight
we talked about density and
affordability.
>> and so I'm just curious what
that looks like versus the
houses that are already on the
ground.
>> you know, it's funny and the
the per square foot price and I
don't have the answer.
I'm happy to give that to you
and let the petitioner answer.
But the per square foot price
of these homes is to me
substantially higher just
because that's that's what new
build is looking like this this
petitioner is comfortable with
going to the single family.
You know most of the stuff we
see is townhomes because that's
all we can build.
The people can afford this is a
unique site here where he does
think that he can offer single
family homes.
They MAY be slightly smaller
than the lots we have out there
but I want to throw out a
number but I'll get back to you
on that that that would be
fine.
Yeah.
I just want to make sure that
we're current and just thinking
about as we're asking for
different types of housing
we've got a good sense of what
that means relative to the
surrounding area and we'd be
happy to share that because
there is as that lot gets
larger that home price
multiplies pretty quickly.
>> so it's a great question.
Awesome.
Thank you.
>> okay.
I have MS. Mayo followed by
MRS. Mira.
>> thank you so glad to hear
collin that your looking in the
conditional rezoning I just
wanted to address some of the
community's concerns so
thinking through ways that
everyone's kind of heard my
story about how we've been able
to keep corporate landlords out
of my neighborhood for the last
11 years by enforcing our
bylaws in order to have owner
occupied units.
Are you all amenable to doing
something similar with the ccr
or some bylaws?
I think so.
The last olympiad right deal we
did they were comfortable with
that.
That was in your district so
okay so maybe like 20% only two
or I don't know if I'm allowed
to talk about something.
>> it's okay.
I'll I'll talk with you about
anything.
>> okay.
Sorry.
i'm what about a conservation
easements?
So thinking through like
ridgeline where connex had a
neighborhood can we go to the
other side?
>> that's a lot.
This is not as great.
Yeah.
Yeah, that one.
Could we do like a conservation
easement potentially to help
with some of those homeowners
for just a little privacy so
you all we're not going to be
oftentimes I'll see developers
clear cut and then they'll add
trees back but you know it's
going to take 20 or 30 years
for those trees to be half of
the size that the existing
trees are.
So I think that MAY be
something that the neighbors
made me appreciate keeping
those existing mature trees
there so they have some privacy
and it's not just you know,
they can see in the other
person's yard or windows.
So if you could take that back
to the petitioner as well
potentially putting an easement
kind of along that one part of
the triangle closer to
ridgeline and maybe the other
part but just for some privacy
but you all can I can talk
about that.
>> I just wanted to throw that
out there.
Holly, have you ever thought
about talking to the
neighborhood at all and asking
if they're at all interested in
having like the planning
department do their roadshow?
>> oh, I can certainly follow
up with them.
We haven't had a lot of i
haven't had direct
conversations with these
neighbors but we can follow up
with you with information on
the community area plans road
show which as he noted is the
planning tool and it allows
communities to learn a little
bit more about their community
area plans and potentially how
to use those area plans as an
advocacy tool.
So I will connect them with our
long range planning team which
sets those up.
>> thank you holly.
I think that would be really
helpful just going forward.
It seems like there's quite a
bit of land in the area that
you know MAY potentially be
redeveloped in future years.
So I always think it's
important to have the
opportunity to be the most
effective advocate so
definitely would take that
opportunity up with staff.
I think that has been helpful
for a lot of different
communities.
And lastly seerat is here
hopefully you see that if y'all
can chat with them later about
the traffic calming that that
would be yours kind of domain.
So if you all can get back with
them about you know if those
speed bumps have been or
traffic calming has been
approved what's the timeline
for that?
But we want to make sure we're
being responsive to residents.
>> thank you.
Thank you.
I have MS. As mira followed by
MS..
Johnson thank you.
>> I agree with councilmember
maile in terms of the speed
bump requests, I think that's
something city staff can
address while working with the
neighborhood and you heard from
MR. Sharkey who is the
PRESIDENT Of the tree so if you
could please connect with him
that would be great.
Well, MR. Brown thank you and
you always find a way to
address communities concerns.
I appreciate your and the
petitioners willingness to
address some of the concerns in
terms of the large size and
address concerns around single
having lesser density so having
single family homes so that it
aligns with the existing
neighborhood and surrounding
homes because going from 11,000
square foot lot to 3000 it's
pretty significant and I think
it's a noticeable difference.
So I would like you to continue
to work with them so that we
can ensure that there is not a
mismatch in this new
development versus what
currently exists there.
So currently this rezoning
request is for n1 e which is
more intense.
So if we were to go less
intense road we'd go back to
something lesser than n1 e
right they could consider one
or the other in one district as
you can see in this map here
what is zoned next to them is
in one b and this is some old
conditional single family
zoning and the development in
terms of the lot dimensions
these lots often exceed the n1b
dimensions they are developed
out before the ada long before
it but they could consider a
less than ten zoning district
which is what we discussed with
them during the previous middle
meeting before this was even
filed in one e is certainly not
something that we were wanting
to consider on this site and if
they have constraints that
they're trying to work around
and they do that in a
conditional request but still
commit to white dimensions or a
product type that feels
consistent with the
neighborhood, then we can have
that discussion.
But I think and one is still
too intense of a district.
Yeah well I appreciate again
staff's due diligence you're on
a roll as a planning
department.
We appreciate it and I'm sure
that it will be continued
conversations.
MR. Brown to come to a middle
ground here and I appreciate
the neighborhood for coming out
to speak.
It's only adds value and
hopefully we can come to a
better outcome.
Thank you.
Thank you, MS. Johnson and
thank you, councilmember
anderson.
I wanted to ask MR. Sharkey the
hoa PRESIDENT Just to come down
for a moment please you don't
mind while he's coming down
I'll ask colin.
Colin from MR. Brown thank you
so so you have you met with the
district four coalition on this
?
We we have kind of given them
an intro on the site.
This is so close to this
neighborhood.
That's who we're concentrate
on.
the key to it is we've got to
figure out what happens with
ridge ridgeline.
Okay.
And then we'll know more and of
course we'll present that to
district four.
But that's a real threshold
question okay.
>> so and MR. Sharkey, I wanted
to ask you thank you for coming
down.
>> thank you also for your
diligence to your community eye
are you part of the district
four coalition?
Is your neighborhood a part of
that coalition?
>> I'll talk to you about it
afterwards if you're not I'm a
part of everything so that's
why I'm here this evening.
Okay, good.
And I have your email so there
are pending speed bumps for
your neighborhood, right?
>> correct.
Yeah.
Hampton place is on on the
schedule but I don't know when
it's going to be done so we
need we need those now and we
need more.
>> right.
So and I just forwarded an
email to to councilmember to
the at-large council members
we're waiting on the chief the
fire chief to give us a
timeframe.
So this is on the radar.
They've already requested it.
He's already worked on that.
So we'll get that answer for
you this week.
>> we certainly appreciate it.
This is this is we've been
working on trying to get speed
bumps for about 4 to 5 years
and we finally made some
progress over the last couple
of years and I want to thank
council woman renee for helping
me in that part to get it moved
up on a chain there but I can
use all the help in the
neighborhood because I'm
telling you the people are
going to we're going to have
some people get hit by cars
here real soon.
>> okay.
Thank you.
Okay.
Thank you.
And then I have a question for
cedar or jake about the
ridgeline extension or similar.
Thank you.
Thank you, MR. Sharkey, jump in
or that was a good evening.
>> council travis miller will
see that.
>> hello.
How are you?
So the concern is ridgeline
opening up.
>> ridgeline?
Yes.
So rude.
>> what does it take for a
waiver for a neighborhood to be
exempt from opening or from
expanding or opening that
stuff?
>> it's a possibility under
ordinance.
The subdivision ordinance there
are some specific requirements
that they have we have not
reviewed a site plan or
anything like that.
So I made note of it.
Okay.
We'll reach out to the
subdivision to see if there's
any possibility for some type
of alleviation there.
But we'd have to coordinate
with them to do that.
>> okay.
Thank you.
No problem.
So MR. Brown, when when they
told me about this petition
earlier at the noon meeting and
I heard it was conventional and
staff didn't recommend it, I'm
just like in this district for
I mean so I'm glad that you all
have reconsidered and it will
be a conditional we do need
more information especially
this close to residential.
It's not fair the current
residents to to just to me in
my opinion just to file for a
petition and they have no idea
what's going to be involved.
So I think that the site plan
will be helpful so that cedar
can review it and also the the
neighbors and s okay.
Thank you.
So I have moved to close
second.
>> all right.
All in favor of closing public
hearing raise hands any oppose
that is unanimous.
Thank you and we will move on
to petition item number 23
petition number 20 25 03130 by
maruti hotel inc approximately
3.97 acres located on the west
side of the business center
drive south of tucker S.G. Road
and east of colton lane and
councilmember mayo's district.
The site is currently zoned as
manufacturing and logistics one
and airport noise disclosure
overlay and the proposed zoning
is general commercial
conditional airport port noise
disclosure overlay staff
recommends approval of this
petition upon resolutions of
outstanding issues.
>> there are no speakers
against this petition and so
after staff's presentation is
this MR..
>> MR. Brown again you'll have
three minutes.
Thank you.
>> evening.
This site is right at four
acres is located west of little
rock road south of tucker S.G.
Road and north interstate 85.
It is wooded and surrounded by
residential uses to the north
and west with commercial uses
to the south and east along
little rock road.
Current zoning is iml one and
do airport noise disclosure
overlay with the proposed
zoning of C.G. Conditional
eight and do you the 20 40
policy map recommends the
manufacture sharing and
logistics please state the
petition would allow for a
hotel with 160 rooms.
There is an extension of
kanimbla drive proposed through
the site.
Petitioner does note an intent
to abandon and a portion of the
right of way and not construct
the extension.
There would be a 25 foot type b
landscape yard along the
northern property boundary open
space areas along a beside the
building and along the business
center drive frontage
petitioner is committing to
certain preferred common open
space standards be an eight
foot planing strip and six foot
sidewalk along business center
drive position is consistent
with the goals and policies of
the west middle community area
plan and MAY facilitate goal
eight diverse and resilient
economic opportunity by
generating a range of jobs
across different skill skill
levels.
This does not directly
facilitate any comprehensive
plan goals.
Request to amend the policy map
to commercial place type does
meet minor map amendment
criteria staff recommends
approval this petition upon
resolution of outstanding
issues related to
transportation vision and the
environment.
The site is adjacent to both cg
zoning and the commercial place
type and meets my amendment
critical year for a change to
commercial place type.
The proposed hotel and zoning
architecturally appropriate
given the site's location in
the little rock road commercial
corridor near I-85 and
charlotte douglas airport and
also the proposed hotel is less
intense and impactful to the
adjacent residential uses than
many uses permitted under the
existing imo one zoning I'm
taking questions following
petitioners comments MR. Brown
mayor pro tem council members
and committee members colin
brown on behalf of the
petitioner joe gave a good
overview.
I do want to give quickly to a
couple of things so site is
currently zoned industrial and
continuing this theme about
unwanted connectivity.
The ordinance would require us
to extend kanimbla into the
site.
That is the last thing this
neighborhood a very low density
single family homes wants
council room there has been i
think up to speed on this
petition for a while.
I do want to recognize craig
and cynthia devereaux who are
here.
They are the closest property
owners they live right here.
I met with them this morning.
They're there and the main
concern of the neighborhood is
they do not want a road coming
through the site.
How are we proposing to do
that?
We are actually going to
petition to abandon the portion
of right away that is unopened.
So we have filed an abandonment
petition.
The neighbors have signed on to
that.
If we abandoned this then that
would not require connectivity.
So I did not ask everyone to
come out tonight and hollering
about that but I think the
neighborhood will will email
you about the importance of
that.
The other item that is
important for the devil rose
and I'll point this out we
provided tree safe next to
their site because that's often
what the neighbors would like
to see in this case.
>> and I met with the devil as
this morning on their site
there are trees out there in
very poor condition and that
have fallen on their home and
continue to fall on their home.
So they have asked we're going
to have our engineer come out
and meet them and we would like
to remove some of those trees
that are a problem and replace
them with an appropriate buffer
.
So I think you'll hear from
them on that.
We need to make sure we can
still meet the audit's
requirements.
Right.
We've got to have tree saved
there.
So that's what we will continue
to work on before we submit a
revised plan.
Okay.
I have my sash mirror thank you
.
>> well, MR. Brown,
congratulations.
>> you have staff support on
this.
>> that's a to close the
hearing no other okay.
So I'll hang on.
I have MS..
Johnson.
He's done it well and this is a
question for staff and maybe we
can talk offline.
I'd like to know more about
this abandoned road option that
avoids the connectivity.
Well, there's the abandonment
and then there's also the the
ordinance requirement to extend
the public street.
There's a subdivision
requirement.
There is a process separate
from abandonment and there's a
process to not constructed
based on topographical
challenges.
But I think the abandonment
will be there will be a
different process by which they
could petition to to remove
that portion of the the public
street that is currently
touching the property.
It okay can you explain the
abandonment?
It's different in this
situation this situation this
area in the green and yellow is
dedicated already and it's it's
on our site so there's an area
for us to abandoned in the
previous one.
There's not an area for us to
abandon so I'm not sure that
we're going to continue talking
to see if that's an option.
>> okay.
>> in in four terms I've never
heard that term.
I'd like to hear more about it
and how that option applies to
residents so we can talk
offline.
>> okay.
Yeah, I think this might be
unique situation but we're
happy to follow up with you on
that.
>> okay.
All right.
Thank you.
Okay.
Is there a motion to close
public hearing?
I moved to make it all in favor
raise hands any oppose that is
unanimous.
Thank you, MR. Brown.
We will move on to petition
item number 24 petition number
2026 015 by katie trading llc.
So proximately 5.71 acres
locate at south of reagan drive
west of wilson lane and east of
transporting ocean boulevard
and my district district one
the site is currently zoned
light industrial conditional
and the proposed zoning is
manufacturing and logistics one
conditional staff recommends
approval of this petition and
there are no speakers signed up
to speak against it.
So MS. Thompson lisa thompson
you will have three minutes
after staff's presentation.
>> thank you.
Thank you.
This site is a little under six
acres located along reagan
drive west of wilson lane and
east of transportation
boulevard.
>> this is in an area where we
have a lot of industrial uses
as well as commercial uses and
some single family residential
uses east of the site along
wilson lane it is currently
zoned light industrial
conditional they are proposing
to go to manufacturing and
logistics one conditional that
is considered in alignment with
the manufacturing logistics
place type that's on on the
site of as per the 2014 policy
memo excuse me the proposal
itself there is new site plan
but they do provide conditional
notes.
Part of this proposal and they
note prohibited uses which
include a noxious uses that we
wouldn't want to see on the
site especially given
residential adjacency.
Also just wanted to point out
the prohibited use of
telecommunication and data
storage facility.
They call out a six foot class
a landscape yard along the
southern portion of the site.
They would also leave prohibit
development along the eastern
portion of the site and
dedicate a permanent greenway
easement to mecklenburg county
park and rec along the east
side of the site.
So essentially the entire
eastern portion of the site
would remain on developed and
they would also prohibit access
from wilson lane which is that
residential street.
So access could only come off
of reagan drive the petition is
considered consistent with the
goals and policies of the north
intermediate area plan.
It MAY further goal seven
because it limits development
adjacent to the residential
areas and provides an easement
to mecklenburg county park and
rec for future greenway
development staff recommends
approval of this petition.
We think although is proposing
manufacturing logistics uses
currently zoned for light
industrial uses from an old
plan and it provides adequate
sensitivity for residential
uses that's adjacent to the
site along the eastern side and
to the side.
Given the class eight landscape
yard and commitment for a
greenway easement and also the
fact that it prohibits access
from wilson lane, the
residential street east of the
site.
So with that I'll take
questions following petitioner
comments.
>> okay MR. Johnson you have
three minutes.
Thank you.
Mayor pro tem members of
council on zoning committee my
name's lisa thompson land use
consultant with more in been
alan happy to be here tonight
on behalf of katie trading
staff describe this as a clean
up from an old 1980s
conditional rezoning plan.
By updating the plan we are
able to be more aligned with
the current udr and eliminate a
outdated site plan.
So we are pleased to have staff
report no outstanding issues
and I'd be happy to answer any
questions.
>> okay I have a question in
the back of in the back of this
packet there are some permitted
and prohibited uses that we've
we've outlined.
Yes or to be do we what is the
intention of this site?
>> it'll be for sale but for
all and the one uses besides
the ones that we are
prohibiting through the tier
one conditional rezoning.
Okay okay this particular area
is an area that has been
struggling for years around
certain activity so I thank you
for having these prohibit it
uses there to preclude anything
negative for coming into the
community.
Any other questions?
The closing or second all
right.
>> all in favor of closing
public hearing raise hands any
opposed that's unanimous.
Thank you, MISS MR. Thompson.
We will advance to item number
25 petition number 2026 018 by
S.R. Mosley properties llc
approx whitley 3.8 acres
located north of fred alexander
boulevard east of oak street
and south of 10th street and
MR. Graham's district.
The site is currently zoned as
general industrial conditional
on the proposed zoning is
manufacturing and logistics one
conditional staff recommends
approval of this petition and
we also have no opposition
here.
So after staffs presentation
MS. Thompson you're back up for
three minutes.
>> thank you.
all right.
Petition 2026 018 is a 3.8 acre
site located north of fred
alexander boulevard just west
of brookshire boulevard.
Plan proposes the development
of up to 135,000ft of
self-storage sites currently
zoned I two cd general
industrial conditional present
mill one cd manufacturing and
one just x one conditional
sorry sorry the presentation
was just having a take a moment
to catch up the rezoning
proposal the plan is in
alignment with the 2040 policy
map for the manufacturing and
logistics place type.
The rezoning proposal calls for
a self storage facility with
outdoor accessory, outdoor
storage all other use is
permitted by right or with
prescribed conditions no one
zoning district are permitted.
However, the plan prohibits
certain uses such as car
washes, drive thrus,
restaurants, bars, vehicle
sales, gas stations, data
centers, parking lots and other
more noxious uses and
undisturbed undisturbed class a
landscape yard with an eight
foot fence will be installed
along the boundary with the
adjacent neighborhood one
zoning the plan is in alignment
with the policy map and is
consistent with the goals and
policies of the west middle
community area plan staff
recommends approval of this
petition as again as consistent
with the plan and the policy
map and it also reduces the
intensity of the previous
entitlements under the I to
district while maintaining the
buffer and screening standards.
I'm happy to take any questions
following the petitioners
presentation.
All right.
Thank you.
Thanks again.
Lisa thompson, land use
consultant with more than been
out more than we now and happy
to be here tonight on behalf of
the sara moseley team our staff
describe this is actually a
down zoning it brings the site
into alignment with the current
ordinance and maintains
consistency with the adopted
land use plan.
Again, happy to have staff
support and no outstanding
issues and I'd be happy to
answer any questions any
comment during none is there
emotional close public hearing
so moved seconded all in favor
raise hands any oppose that is
unanimous.
Thank you MS. Thompson.
We will advance to item number
26 petition number 2026 zero 19
by acr road development
services.
>> it's approximately 22.89
acres located north of morehead
road west of stone lane and
east of old holland road in the
80 closest to MS. Johnson's
district.
The site is currently zoned as
neighborhood one, a and
proposed zoning is
manufacturing and logistics to
conditional staff recommends
approval of this petition upon
a resolution of outstanding
issues.
No no speakers are sign up to
speak in opposition so after
staff's presentation MR. Floyd
you will have three minutes.
thank you.
>> thank you.
This site is just under 23
acres located along morehead
road east of old holland road
and west of stolen.
This is along the conveyors
county line and an area where
we have some residential but in
existing industrial facilities
that this would be an expansion
of currently in a neighborhood
one a and it is asking to go to
be manufacturing logistics to
conditionals and in district
history this would be
considered out of alignment
with the policy map which does
call for the neighborhood.
One place type at this site.
>> the proposal itself calls
for industrial uses which MAY
include manufacturing
fabrication and shop research
and development among other
uses that are permitted and
mailed to district.
>> all of those uses would be
fully enclosed though and it
also lists a number of
prohibited uses so it really
tries to limit the number of
amount to uses on the site
trying to be sensitive to the
fact that it is in an area that
has some neighborhood one
zoning even if there aren't
other existing neighborhood one
uses in the area in terms of
our landscaping improvements
provides a 100 foot class
landscape yard as well as 25
foot class b landscaping yards
that's along old holland road
and the morehead road frontages
in terms of streetscape access
to the site would be the old
holland road and team hendrick
way and provides a for planting
strip and 12 foot wide shared
use path along moorehead road
and 12 for shared use path also
along old holland road it is
considered and consistent with
the north middle and outer
community area plan.
It's not quite in alignment
with that neighborhood.
One place type as I noted but
it MAY facilitate that priority
goal eight by providing jobs
for the area as part of the
expansion of the motor sports
industry in the hendricks
facility, staff recommends
approval this petition upon
resolution of our outstanding
issues in a more rural area of
charlotte c t j and it is an
expansion of an existing use
that we have on this site
though in the adjacent county
although it's in adjacent to
neighborhood y in place type it
is providing adequate
sensitivity not only by the
limitation of uses on the site
but by noting that all uses
that would occur would be fully
enclosed.
They also have those large
landscape yards is typically
stipulated by the ordinance so
we have a couple of outstanding
issues the clean up including
potentially enhancing those
class b landscape yards which
are of a 25 foot wide ones.
But we think that we can find
resolution of those having to
take any questions following
your comments.
>> okay.
MR. Floyd thank you, john
forward again here on behalf of
accuro development services and
joined by greg hartley with
acro I was here in case we have
any questions.
Don't have a lot to add for ms.
cramer's presentation.
We certainly appreciate having
staff support on this one.
Just really quick again this is
a tier one conditional rezoning
that really is seeking to
expand the hendrick motorsports
campus most of which is in
county.
This property is right on the
county line.
You going to go to immelt to to
allow flexibility with future
motorsports r&d and development
but what we've done there is
included conditions to really
kind of dial that back.
I mean hendrick wants
flexibility to be able to do
what they need to do but then
include a bunch of conditions
to eliminate the possibility of
a need to call it industrial
type impacts on neighboring
property.
So things like we have a
condition that all the primary
uses onsite have to be indoor
so everything has to be
enclosed.
We've eliminated a whole bunch
of uses that are things that
hendrick just really doesn't
have any need to do.
This property is technically in
the t j it's not in the city of
charlotte.
We've included a condition that
says we'll comply with all the
requirements.
The city of charlotte's noise
ordinance and then as as MS.
Cramer mentioned there's
enhanced buffers and things
along that one edge and we'll
continue to have discussions
about the 25 foot class b
buffer although it wasn't
included in the initial
application.
>> the petitioner has agreed to
include a data center as one of
the excluded uses on this site
so that's not something bi has
to worry about and with that
happy to answer any questions
that you all have.
Okay.
MS. Johnson I just wanted to
thank the petitioner for for
adding those additional and for
the attention and
responsibility to the community
moved to close second all in
favor of closing public hearing
raise hands any oppose that is
unanimous.
Thank you MR. Floyd.
We will move on to item number
27 petition number 2026 020 by
two will occur pappas it's
approximate lee 10.9 acres
located on the east side of
carmel collins boulevard
commons boulevard pardon me
south of pine ville matthews
road and north of bennington
road and MR. Dirks district the
site is currently zoned mixed
use development district
optional and the proposed
zoning is mixed use development
district optional site plan
amendment staff recommends
approval of this petition and
we have no opposition.
So MR. Brown you will have
three minutes after staff's
presentation.
Thank you.
The site is 10.9 acres located
on the east side of carmel
commons boulevard south of
pineapple matthews road and
north of bennington road.
This is in the carmel
activities center community
activity center site is
currently developed with an
office building and associated
parking and surrounded by a mix
of uses commercial office as
well as multifamily residential
current zoning which was
established by a 2022 petition
is mud optional this is a site
plan amendment with the
proposed zoning of mud osp the
2040 policy map recommends the
community activity center place
type and the proposal would
allow for 360 residential units
across both development areas
on either side of the public
street you see on your screen
would preserve an option to
maintain the existing office
building would remove
entitlements for 10,000ft of
medical office and 40 700ft of
coffee shop with drive thru
uses of from this area but
would allow for some
development flexibility to
spread out those 360
residential units existing or
completed transportation
commitments have been removed
from the conditional notes
would require a minimum of 80
500ft of open space across
both development areas with a
minimum of 30 500ft of open
space in each development area
.
>> the petition is consistent
with the south middle community
area plan and in alignment with
the 2040 policy map though it
does not directly facilitate
any priority or comprehensive
plan goals staff recommends
approval this petition it would
maintain entitlements of the
previously approved plan while
allowing for residential uses
to be spread across two
development areas.
I'll turn it over to the
petitioner team.
thank you MR. Brown.
>> you MAY have heard him
council members and committee
members colin brown on behalf
of wilbur pappas creative
review from joe this is a
continued redevelopment of an
early eighty's office park that
just kind of fell out and so
very successful mixed use
redevelopment as joe mentioned
this is really just a tweak to
provide a little more
flexibility, almost a down
zoning I will say on our
revised plan we we are going to
adjust from 360 units to 366
but very straightforward.
We had attendees at our
community meetings and business
owners they were very pleased
with the changes.
>> okay MR. Driggs so I just
want to note that right here if
you look at this is where I had
my bicycle accident about ten
years ago oh and
notwithstanding that I expect
I'll be supporting this and I
will move to close the hearing
if I get a comment.
>> okay.
All in favor closing public
hearing raise hands with bike
lane any any oppose that is
unanimous.
Okay so we are at our final
item tonight item number 28
petition number 2026 0 to 1 by
hines.
>> so proximately 1.63 acres
located south of east
westinghouse drive east of blue
central road and west of prompt
road in councilmember mayo's
district.
The site is currently zoned as
urban residential commercial
conditional and the proposed
zoning is urban residential
commercial conditional site
plan amendment staff recommends
approval of this petition upon
resolution of outstanding
issues and after staff's
presentation MR. Thompson will
join us for three minutes.
Thank you.
This site is 1.63 acres located
on the south side of
westinghouse drive east of blue
central road and west of krupp
road.
The site has been used most
recently as a staging area for
construction of the neighboring
townhome community.
Traditional residential uses to
the south and east with
commercial and industrial uses
across westinghouse boulevard
to the north ern zoning as you
are see conditional.
This is also a site plan
amendment where you are see as
a proposed 20 40 policy map
recommends the neighborhood to
place type would allow for to
development of nonresidential
uses 14,500ft of gross floor
area some prohibited uses which
include drive through windows
automotive sales, automotive,
automobile serviceable repair
and gas stations.
There is a condition that if
your restaurant use is
developed that hours of
operation could not go past 11
P.M. There's a 50 foot wide
class c landscape yard with a
berm including a 50 foot wide
undisturbed buffer along the
southern property boundary
where adjacent to establish
single family residential.
The petition is consistent with
the south myrtle community area
plan and in alignment with 2040
policy map recommendation for
the neighborhood to place type
of partition MAY facilitate
goal one ten minute
neighborhoods by providing
amenities, goods and services
to the surrounding community.
Staff recommends approval of
this petition upon resolution
of outstanding issues related
to transportation and the
environment.
The petition is a site plan
amendment requesting to amend
permitted uses and site plan
layout without increasing the
maximum square footage of
developable area area
established in the original
approved plan.
I'll turn over to the
petitioner team.
>> okay westampton you have
three minutes.
Thank you.
We have thompson land use
consultant moore with moore and
van allen.
Happy to be here tonight on
behalf of hines to close out
this evening this is very
limited narrowly focused of
site plan amendment rezoning it
really is to allow more
flexibility to attract the
neighborhood servicing
businesses on the site.
We're pleased to have staff
report will address any
outstanding issues and I'll be
happy to answer any questions.
>> okay.
Any comment voted close to
here.
>> second all in favor of
closing public hearing raise
hands any opposed.
>> okay.
That is unanimous.
Thank you, MR. Thompson.
well, to adjourn second we have
a motion to adjourn and a
second it is 750 for the sun