The Town Council of the Town of Weddington, North Carolina, met in a Regular Session at the Weddington Town Hall, 1924 Weddington Road, Weddington, NC 28104 on August 9, 2010, at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor Nancy D. Anderson presiding.
Present: Mayor Nancy D. Anderson, Mayor Pro Tem Daniel Barry, Councilmembers Thomisser and Councilmember McKee, Town Attorney Anthony Fox, Town Planner Jordan Cook, Finance Officer Leslie Gaylord and Town Administrator/Clerk Amy S. McCollum Absent: Councilmember Robert Gilmartin
Visitors: Walker Davidson, Basil Polivka, John Temple, Dan Polivka, Charlie Debbout, Stephen Overcash, Phillip Anderson, Eric Anderson, Richard Hancock, Cindy Furell, Sally Holmes, Christy Martinez, Mans McCloud, Robert Porter, Tommy Price, Bill Price, Janice Propst, Elizabeth Propst, Walter Staton, John Wasylyd, Dennis Taylor, Jim Schumacher, W.L. McLeod, Stephanie Belcher, Jim Vivian, Sue Fitch, Barbara Harrison and Pat Harrison Mayor Pro Tem Daniel Barry led in prayer prior to the opening of the meeting.
Excerpts below are from the minutes pertaining to Polivka MX rezoning and land use amendment:
C. Public Hearing to Consider Polivka Land Use Plan Amendment and MX Rezoning Application.
Councilmember McKee moved to recuse Mayor Anderson from participating in the public hearing because she is an adjacent property owner to the request. All were in favor, with votes recorded as follows:
AYES: Councilmembers Thomisser, McKee and Mayor Pro Tem Barry
NAYS: None
Mayor Pro Tem Barry opened the public hearing to consider the Polivka Land Use Plan Amendment and MX Rezoning Application.
The Town Council received the following which is attached to the minutes as an Exhibit:
• Conditional Zoning Application – CZ01-07
• Aerial Image
• Zoning Map
• Section of the Land Use Plan – Future Land Use Map Classifications
• Weddington Future Land Use Map
• Illustrative Plan and Notes
• Illustrative Elevations
• Open Space and Phasing Plan
• Sanitary Sewer Exhibit
• Colored Drawings of The Gathering at Weddington
The Town Council received the following memo from Town Planner Cook:
Polivka International Company, Inc. requests a Land Use Plan Amendment and an MX Rezoning for a 52,675 square foot office/retail development located at 13700 Providence Road, Weddington, NC.
Application Information Date of Application: December 14, 2007 (project on hold since then per applicant’s request) Applicant Name: Polivka International Company, Inc. Owner Name: Polivka Parking Solutions LLC Parcel ID#: 06-150-045 Property Location: 13700 Providence Road (Between Hunter Farm and Weddington United Methodist Church)
Existing Land Use: Traditional Residential
Proposed Land Use: Business
Existing Zoning: R-40
Proposed Zoning: MX Existing
Use: Vacant House
Proposed Use: 22,675 square feet of office and 30,000 square feet of retail
Parcel Size: 4.84 Acres
General Information-Land Use Plan Amendment
• A Land Use Plan Amendment is required per the Town of Weddington Zoning Ordinance when rezoning to an MX district.
Text from Section 58-60 reads as follows:
“Rezoning to an MX district shall only be applicable to areas designated for future retail/office development in the town's land use plan.”
• Therefore, the applicant is proposing a Land Use Plan change from Traditional Residential to Business. By accomplishing this Land Use Plan change, the applicant can then apply for an MX Rezoning. Land Use Map and Land Use Classifications included in materials.
• On April 26, 2010 the Planning Board reviewed the proposed Land Use Plan change. The Planning Board gave the Land Use Plan amendment an unfavorable recommendation. Therefore, the Planning Board did not make a recommendation on the Rezoning portion of this project.
• The Planning Board asked that if the Town Council approves the Land Use Plan change, the Rezoning portion be sent back to the Planning Board for a more formal review. The Planning Board will then conduct a detailed review of the Rezoning Site Plan and make a recommendation on the Rezoning portion of the application.
• The Rezoning portion of the plan would then come back to the Town Council for Public Hearing and Consideration after the Planning Board’s recommendation. General Information-MX Rezoning
• The applicant proposes a 52,675 square foot retail/office development along Providence Road. There are 22,675 square feet of office and 30,000 square feet of retail within the proposed project. The 52,675 total square feet will be distributed between five 1-2 story buildings on site. Actual building sizes may change depending on tenants but the site plan, square footage and general layout will remain the same.
• Per Section 58-60 (2)g of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance, no individual use within an MX district development shall have a gross floor area greater than 8,000 square feet, except for supermarkets, libraries, town and government facilities, which may be as large as 25,000 square feet. Furthermore, individual retail uses having a gross floor area of greater than 20,000 square feet shall not comprise greater than 25 percent of the total gross floor area in the development devoted to retail use.
• Section 58-60 (2)e of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance states that the Town Council may allow a floor area ratio to exceed 0.20. The Town Council may approve a floor area ratio of up to 0.25, the proposed project has a floor area ratio of 0.25.
• There are three phases of this project (displayed on RZ 1 and RZ 3). Phase I will consist of entrances and Buildings C, D and E. Phase II will consist of Building B and Phase III will consist of Building A. All required buffers, roadways, parking and landscaping will be provided on a phase by phase basis.
• The required Public Involvement Meetings for this project were held on November 12 and 19, 2009. The meeting on November 12th was held on site at 13700 Providence Road. The meeting on November 19th was held at Weddington Town Hall.
Minimum Standards for Office and Retail Uses in the MX Zoning District:
• Minimum Front Yard Setback- 25 feet from any public road right-of-way • Minimum Side Yard - 28 foot buffer is required, not a setback
• Minimum Read Yard - 28 foot buffer is required, not a setback
• The applicant complies with all required setbacks and buffers Access and Parking:
• The site will be accessed by two entrances from Providence Road. One entrance will be in the middle of the site while the other will be located at the northern edge of the site. Both entrances will have 22 foot travel lanes with a 10 foot landscaped median (cross-section provided on RZ 2). 6
• The middle entrance will serve as the main entrance to the site. There may be a left turn lane installed on Providence Road to access the site if approved by NCDOT.
• The applicant is required 76 parking spaces for the 22,675 square feet of office (1 per 300 square feet) and 150 parking spaces for 30,000 square feet of retail (1 per 200 square feet). The applicant has provided 226 parking spaces, therefore complying with Section 58-175 of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance.
• Parking spaces and loading zones also meet the minimum size standards set in Section 58-175 and 58-176 of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance.
• A Traffic Impact Analysis was submitted on May 8, 2009 and has been reviewed by the Town Traffic Engineer. Comments for revisions to the Traffic Impact Analysis from the Town Traffic Engineer have been given to the applicant for review and comments.
Screening and Landscaping:
• Screening and landscaping will be provided by using several types of trees and shrubs. The applicant is required a 28 foot buffer around the perimeter of the property per Section 58-8 of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has provided a 28 foot buffer around the perimeter of the property. The applicant will also provide internal landscaping within parking areas and islands.
• The proposed landscaping plan does comply with Section 58-8 of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance. All proposed plants are permitted in Section 58-384 of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance.
• The MX zoning district requires 10% of the gross acreage of the project to be open space. The applicant is required 21,071 square feet of open space and has provided 22,104 square feet of open space, therefore complying with Section 58-60 (2)n of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance.
Elevations:
• Elevations of all buildings have been provided (RZ 2). Materials on the buildings are a combination of hardie plank siding, brick, stone, canvas awnings, fiberglass shingle roofing, etc. • Proposed buildings are within scale and have similar physical relationship as abutting properties as required in Section 58-271 of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance. Proposed building height also complies with Section 58-60 (2)f of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance.
• Because this project was submitted prior to the Design Review Board’s creation, the Planning Board will act as the Design Review Board for this project.
Additional Information:
• Adjacent Property Uses are as follows: North: Parcels containing single family house and farmland (Hunter Farm) South: Weddington United Methodist Church East: Providence Road and Weddington Corners Shopping Center West: Parcels containing single family house and farmland (Hunter Farm)
• A lighting plan has been submitted and will be reviewed by the Town’s Lighting Engineer.
• Water and Sewer to be provided by CMUD (plans included).
• Building B may have a non-restaurant drive-thru window when tenant is finalized.
Conditions of Approval:
1. Water and Sewer Plans must be approved by appropriate agencies;
2. Lighting Plan must be approved by Town Lighting Engineer;
3. All engineering plan(s) must be approved by Town Engineer;
4. NCDOT driveway permit must be submitted and approved by NCDOT;
5. NCDOT must approve left turn lane into property; 7
6. Traffic Impact Analysis must be approved by Town Traffic Engineer;
7. All signage must comply with Chapter 58, Article 5 of the Weddington Code of Ordinances;
8. Any future revisions to the approved site plan and other approved documents must comply with Section 58-271 (i) of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance.
Staff has reviewed the application and submitted documents and finds the Land Use Plan Amendment Application and MX Rezoning Application is in compliance with the Town of Weddington Zoning Ordinance.
Town Planner Cook - Polivka International Company, Inc. submits an application for a Land Use Plan change and an M-X Rezoning Request.
These two requests are for a 52,675 square foot retail office development at 13700 Providence Road. It is between the Methodist Church and Hunter Farm. The applicant proposes 30,000 square feet of retail and 22,675 square feet of office within five buildings on the 4.84 acre site which is outlined in red on the aerial image.
The parcel currently has a land use designation of Traditional Residential and a zoning of R-40. Both of those items would need to be changed to have full approval of the project. The first request is for the Land Use Plan change and the applicant is asking for a land use designation of business as opposed to traditional residential. Secondly, they are requesting a change in the zoning to MX which is mixed use.
This land use change needs to occur before the rezoning because to be rezoned to MX you have to have a business designation on the Land Use Map. On April 26, the Planning Board did review the Land Use Plan change. They gave that an unfavorable recommendation but did not vote or do a full review of the actual rezoning and the site plan. The Planning Board asked that if the Land Use Plan change was approved tonight that the Town Council send it back to them for a full review of the actual rezoning.
This is the first conditional zoning project that we have had in the Town. It is not a quasi-judicial process. It is a legislative process so there are no Findings of Fact.
We have had public involvement meetings for this project.
Councilmember McKee - You said the Planning Board did not want to consider the land use? They did not want anything to do with it?
Town Planner Cook - The Planning Board did review it and gave it an unfavorable recommendation. The Planning Board decided not to recommend a change to the Land Use Plan. After they did that they said there was no reason to review the entire site plan.
Attorney Fox - What is before the Council right now needs to be whether or not you are going to amend your Land Use Plan. That is the first step in the process. If there is a favorable determination, then you move to the rezoning application. Your Planning Board has said if you do decide to amend your Land Use Plan, let us have a look at the rezoning application.
Mayor Pro Tem Barry – It is zoned residential R-40 and can only be used for that purpose. This decision tonight is whether or not we would allow any other use than residential.
Attorney Fox - The use for this property is traditional residential. The question is whether or not this Council is willing to change its Land Use Plan from traditional residential to business and they cannot move forward with MX without getting a business designation.
Councilmember McKee - Is our scope of discussion limited to the Land Use Plan? Can we ask questions about what is going there as part of the discussion of the Land Use Plan?
Attorney Fox – You can do that. The only decision that you need to make initially is whether or not you are comfortable with changing your Land Use Plan. In order to make that determination, you as a Council Member, could get into that level of detail.
8 Mayor Pro Tem Barry - If the Land Use Plan change occurs tonight, then there will be another set of public hearings based on the site plan and the MX rezoning.
Attorney Fox – You have the ability under the conditional zoning process to actually have the discussions about proposed uses, elevations and square footages. Can you consider the elevations and the proposed drawings that have been provided to you? I would say yes you can.
Mayor Pro Tem Barry - The hearing that we have opened is only for discussion in the change of the Land Use Plan from residential to business.
Mr. John Temple – I am a member of the “Gathering at Weddington” project team that was formed several years ago and in recent days has been accelerated as we have been working with different friends to get input regarding this potential project.
We are honored and blessed that you have given us this time tonight to address you. We thank you in advance for your attention and for any questions you might have that would be helpful to us as we work through this particular process.
The other members of our team are Basil Polivka, who is the owner of the property and President of Polivka International, his brother Dan Polivka and Charlie Debbout who is a team member. The four of us make up the project team.
We are here tonight with two primary purposes. Our first purpose is to seek approval of the amendment regarding the Land Use Plan for the Polivka Property at 13700 Providence Road in Weddington. We understand the ramifications and the process of the MX rezoning and all those issues. Our primary purpose is to deal with the land use.
The second thing in conjunction with the land use is we are excited tonight to share with you how we envision the use of this property. We believe that with the widening of Providence Road that there is real call or cry for change to actually happen in Weddington. We want to be sensitive to that change and work with that change.
We believe that with your consideration and approval tonight we can start to move ahead through the process. We are anxious to work with you as a Council and the committees and the community and all involved with it. What you see tonight is not written in concrete. It is flexible. There are things in it you may not like. We are willing to work with that.
We want to be friends and neighbors as we work through this project because we believe ultimately this project will benefit the citizens of this community by offering office space and upscale retail space in a new and fresh way.
As we have studied the use of the land we believe, because of the widening of the road, that residential probably is not going to be fitting. We believe there needs to be something else there. We believe we have something that you can be proud of as a Council.
This is neither a small project nor an inexpensive project. This is going to be a very upscale project. We hope you will give us this opportunity and at the end of our presentation we will be glad to answer any of your questions and to engage with you at that time.
The first speaker is Basil Polivka. I have known Basil for over 16 years. He is a man of integrity. What he says, he will do. He lives in this community.
Mr. Basil Polivka – I want to thank the Mayor, Council and Planning Board for working with us for the last three years. Our family lives here in the Skyecroft Development. We are part of the community as well. I want to show you our vision. Our office building will be in the back. There are two other offices that surround the center court which is the gathering area. This area was increased due to input from the community.
We have a gazebo, trellis and some water features and to the right a possible coffee shop or ice cream shop. This area would be more entertaining for the community. Architecturally we tried to complement the surrounding buildings. We are flexible and are willing to work with the community. In the front there are two buildings.
One on the right hand side we envision a restaurant with some outdoor seating. We also offer this building for a potential library. The other building we envision as a Whole Foods place or market. We have extensive landscaping around the whole site.
We have worked with NCDOT regarding the traffic access to the site. We have a left turn lane in that has been approved through NCDOT. If you want to head back into Charlotte from our site you will turn right and go to the light, make a U-turn and head north. It is a 30-year design.
Councilmember Thomisser – You said there was a left turn into the project? If you are coming out that entrance, will you be able to go across Providence Road?
Mr. Polivka - No. If you come out of that project, you will go right and then to the light and then make a U-turn. We have contracted with the Isaacs Group and we are working with them to minimize our runoff. We have alternative paving services that reduce the flow of water. We are going to be addressing the drainage for alternative methods to reduce the runoff.
We also have had discussions with the Catawba Lands Conservancy about building a trail on one of their pieces of property. We have designed the sewer to pick it up at Highgate and it runs behind the properties at Highgate. There is a stream through there. It comes through Hunter Farms and the CLC property and comes through our project.
Currently the design has been complete. We already have the Corps of Engineers permit. We are very flexible with our design and we will continue to be so. We think that the “Gathering at Weddington” is going to be a great addition and we hope you do as well.
Mr. Dan Polivka – How did we get to this point? We sought much community input. My son and I walked every abutting property and talked to people and asked them what they wanted in the area. We sent out postcards, distributed fliers, signage on property, held on-site public input meetings and conducted door-to-door interaction as well.
I appreciate Jordan working with us and every official who took time to meet with us and to get your input to help us with the vision. We want this to be a gathering place and yes we want our offices there. We want it to be something we can all be proud of. We have listened and incorporated that into our plan. It has been a moving target for almost three years. We want your consideration and want you to support this project.
Mr. Charlie Debbout – Thank you so much for the time that you shared, the information, direct feedback that we were able to use to improve the project. It speaks that you care enough about the community that you are here, that you spent time with us at the public involvement meetings, on the computer doing the internet survey and also you phoned in.
The survey asked just a few questions:
Do you want to see change?
If you want to see change – what changes do you want to see?
How does the “Gathering at Weddington” fit into this space or does it fit in?
Do you support our vision?
Do you want to see change? – 87.3% said they want change.
We had nearly 500 people take time out of their day to do this survey and 450 people actually completed the survey.
What changes do you want to see? - 62.3% would like to see some form of a sit down family restaurant to add to the sense of community in Weddington, 51.5% would like to see Downtown Beautification and a Town Green, 49.8% would like to see a library. We originally pictured a roundabout in front of this building. What came out loud and clear from the survey was green space. We added a trellis, pergola and water feature with a stone fence for safety. Unique and retail shopping that is different. People from Weddington don’t want another Blakeney or Arboretum. It is unique here and historical.
I am going to read from the survey:
Understanding that this project includes new office and retail space which includes a restaurant, coffee and ice cream shop along with a public courtyard and trail network and requires a zoning change; do you support this project – the Gathering at Weddington? - 72.8% said that they were in favor of our project.
Mr. Temple - We wanted to share with you how we would use the land. It is not totally perfected. We have worked hard. We have Steven Overcash who has been working with us as the designer/architect. We have a representative from NCDOT that will help us with the traffic issues.
We feel very strongly that we have attempted to answer the questions that were raised months and months ago by different concerned citizens as well as different Councilmembers. This is a unique project, one of a kind, upscale. If this project is not allowed or the land use is not approved, what will go there? It is zoned R-40 right now. I would question whether someone would want to build a house on a five-lane highway. This is a project that comes together with clarity, vision, excitement and answers what the citizens are telling us. 10 Citizens are looking for change. We are willing to work to see it happen.
We respectfully ask for your consideration tonight. I ask that you would approve it so we can continue the process.
Councilmember Thomisser - I am interested in the consequences of amending the Land Use Plan. One of my concerns is stormwater drainage. Can you address that? Where would the water go?
Mr. Basil Polivka - We are going to do a combination of underground storage and above ground storage. We are going to use an alternative paving surface that allows water to be permeable which will help reduce the runoff. We will address that over and above the normal procedure.
Councilmember Thomisser – Can you expand on this so called green pavement? How many have you done and how long have these been in existence and how do they hold up?
Mr. Basil Polivka - We have put in over 350 acres of our product from Canada to Mexico. They have been in service since 1999. We are looking at 11 years. It is not actual pavement but a similar surface. It is a plastic type of asphalt surface. It looks like a carpet but it is very durable for traffic. Water drains right through it. You can stripe it like a regular parking lot.
Councilmember Thomisser – Will any of that water run down Providence Road and into Six Mile Creek?
Mr. Basil Polivka - Water will run down hill. What we are doing is above and beyond the call of what normal people do. We are using these surfaces to reduce our flow significantly. The other areas like roofing and sidewalk that are not permeable, we will use a combination underground and above ground storage. There are piping systems under the parking lot and when it rains really hard those systems will fill up with water so it will retain water underground and it will have an overflow that will let water flow out at a slower rate. It will store it under the parking lot and actually leak out at a slower rate and won’t create downstream issues.
Councilmember Thomisser – Will any of the water run across the Hunter Farm?
Mr. Basil Polivka – All of the water now runs down there. There is a stream that runs right in front of the property and right across that farm. Currently it drains there now. We are not going to change that drainage flow. We are going to find alternative solutions to reduce the flow.
Councilmember Thomisser – The stormwater will run down the Hunter Farm and also down the side of Providence Road to Six Mile Creek.
Mr. Basil Polivka - Just like it does right now. We are just going to reduce the amount of water coming off of our property.
Councilmember McKee – On the sewer line that you have running through there – have you secured the right-of-way across the farm?
Mr. Basil Polivka - We got it as far as the County – we were supposed to send them a check but at that time we didn’t want to buy the sewer before we had the zoning. We have not gone to the next level.
Councilmember McKee – Did you have a conversation with Weddington United Methodist Church?
Mr. Temple – Yes, we had a conversation with Senior Pastor Dr. Moore. I also had conversations with the Business Manager. I also have three emails that were sent to the church. One of the emails outlined that we were anxious to meet with the trustees to talk about the project. We weren’t seeking anything 11 from the church nor their approval or disapproval. All we wanted to do as good neighbors was find out if they wanted to know what was happening with this potential project. I never heard back from that email. When I was in town I talked to the Business Manager. He gave me the name of the Trustee of the church and I have that in my file. I emailed him but never heard back from him. About two weeks ago I emailed the Pastor that we had been waiting to hear from the Trustees from the church. I assume that there is no interest. He responded to me that it was the correct assumption.
Councilmember McKee – Are you aware that the Senior Pastor does not make these types of decisions and doesn’t have input to it? Did he tell you that?
Mr. Temple - Yes he did but he said he would pass my email along to the Trustees.
Councilmember McKee – Did you request to get on the agenda of the Trustees?
Mr. Basil Polivka - Originally when we started this project three years ago, we were on the Trustee’s agenda and we did present the project to them.
Councilmember McKee – You have not recently? The Trustees change every year. What is the size of the gathering place?
Mr. Polivka - It is a combination of grass and brick pavers. It is 10,000 square feet.
Councilmember McKee – Was the survey written up by professionals or something that you wrote up in house?
Mr. Debbout - In house – I wrote it but I am not a professional survey writer.
Councilmember McKee –You didn’t send out a survey to every resident of Weddington to get a result?
Mr. Debbout - We sent it out to just under 3,000 households. The list we used was data files provided by the Town of Weddington. From there it directed people to either call in or to go to the internet. We had 39 people who phoned in and the rest went to the internet.
Mr. Basil Polivka - The survey mirrored some of the previous surveys that you guys did.
Councilmember McKee – When someone went on your website to take the survey, how do you know they were residents of Weddington?
Mr. Debbout - I went through the file. The file of 300 was cross referenced to the 3000 data base file. You make a valid point. It was not 100%; however, statistically 5 out of 300 the percentage was 1.6.
Councilmember McKee – Anyone could have gone on the website from Waxhaw and put in their opinion.
Mr. Basil Polivka – No, that is not correct. Only five people outside of Weddington took the survey out of 300.
Mr. Polivka - They could enter it. I went through each and every entry and cross referenced it.
Councilmember McKee – On the survey people had to put their name and address.
Mr. Debbout - I thought people might be hesitant to put their name on it. I thought it would be good to ask for the street number and street name.
Councilmember McKee – You could not actually say that all the results came from Weddington. Mr. Polivka – 1.6% out of 300 was not from Weddington.
Councilmember McKee – How do you know that those 98.4 were? Mr. Polivka - They put their address in and we cross referenced addresses to what we sent out.
Mayor Pro Tem Barry – Is there a breakpoint on your pro forma if we limited your square footage dramatically? You have three phases. If we came back and said you can put your offices and two other buildings and they are all one story does that kill your pro forma for the scope of your project?
Mr. Polivka – We would have to review that.
Mayor Pro Tem Barry - The elevations, footprints, square footage and layout is up for discussion and you would work with the Planning Board on that.
Mr. Polivka – Yes.
Mayor Pro Tem Barry – Councilmember Thomisser and I spent some time trooping through the woods Thursday looking at the potential runoff issues that you will have going on the backside of the property and then down the front through the conservation area into the open ditch where it ultimately ends up in a creek. I understand all you are really doing is slowing down the flow – water doesn’t stay in those tanks forever. You are going to reduce the flow into the creeks ultimately. Have you had an engineer that can validate whether or not there will be any flooding downstream from this as a result of the increased surface area pavement and rooftop?
Mr. Polivka - We have contracted with the Isaacs Group. We will continue to consult with them and work through those details.
Mayor Pro Tem Barry - Flooding is an issue here.
Mr. Polivka - We understand that Highgate and other areas are very sensitive to this. That is why we have offered to use our permeable surface to reduce that.
Mayor Pro Tem Barry – If we decline your request for a Land Use Plan change, what will your next step be?
Mr. Polivka - I am not going anywhere. I live down the road and will be back again.
Councilmember Thomisser – What would happen if we had two or three days of constant rain? I understand the surface area is meant to slow the water down but water eventually will go either down the Hunter Farm or down Providence Road into Six Mile Creek. Am I correct?
Mr. Polivka - Yes, that is correct. When you design a drainage system, you design it based upon how fast the flows are and there are a lot of calculations going into that. We would use standards that are stringent.
Mayor Pro Tem Barry – During our MX process, we require our engineers to review the building and design to make sure we don’t show rises?
Town Planner Cook - If this were to be approved, the construction documents and the storm water management plan would be reviewed by our engineer.
Attorney Fox - This is a conditional zoning process and if this does get to the next step the Town Council will have the ability to impose reasonable conditions on the applicant to address some of the concerns that have been discussed here this evening.
Councilmember Thomisser – Did you have an opportunity to go door-to-door in the Highgate subdivision?
Mr. Polivka - We did talk to the President of Highgate. He was concerned about the drainage and that is why we added in our permeable solution to reduce the flow.
Councilmember Thomisser – My understanding is that 3,000 postcards were sent out and fliers were also sent out?
Mr. Polivka - We sent out initially 3,000 postcards and then I believe about a week ago we sent out another 1,000.
Councilmember Thomisser – A total of 4,000 postcards went out and you received 450 responses?
Mr. Polivka - That is correct.
Councilmember Thomisser – Did you go door-to-door in Steeplechase?
Mr. Polivka – Yes, we did.
Councilmember Thomisser – I am looking at the proposed sewer map. Do any of the sewer lines go over a property in Highgate?
Mr. Polivka - There is one piece of property that it will go across.
Mayor Pro Tem Barry – Councilmember Thomisser, you should disclose the fact that you live on Kings Manor Drive in the Highgate Subdivision.
Councilmember Thomisser – I do live there. I do not have a problem with stormwater. You said the Town Green is 10,000 square feet. How long is it and how wide is it? Mr. Stephen Overcash - 110 x 90.
Councilmember Thomisser – You also stated that you wanted a library. Does this mean you are going to build a library for Weddington?
Mr. Polivka - We would welcome the library to go there. We would like to work with Union County.
Mayor Pro Tem Barry – Would you dedicate the surface area for them to build the library?
Mr. Polivka – No, we will not dedicate it but we will build and lease it to them.
Councilmember McKee – Did you say that you have approval from all the property owners to lay this sewer line? What happens if someone says they don’t want it coming through here?
Mr. Polivka – North Carolina has a law regarding the placement of sewer lines. If they did not have this law in place, you could not extend sewer lines. There is a law that they would take it by imminent domain.
Councilmember McKee – Anyone that does not want to participate, the land could be taken away from them? Mr. Polivka - Not the land – they will still own the land. Mr. Dan Polivka - We are hoping it is going to be so good that no one is opposed.
Mr. Polivka - This sewer line that we are putting in is at no tax dollars. We are going to pay for the whole sewer line. We are benefiting this whole community by adding the sewer.
Mr. Phillip Anderson – I live at 13624 Providence Road which is the Hunter Farm. I have two primary issues with this. The first has a direct permanent impact on me and our ability to operate our property as a farm.
The first issue is the sewer line that goes through our parking lot. We have approximately 20,000 visitors to the farm every year. In the fall we will have 12,000 children and school buses and cars coming out there. That is our primary parking lot. If there are manholes or covers rising above the ground, that will have a direct impact on safety and the maneuvering of vehicles around in that parking lot.
The second thing is the water runoff. I was told when this shopping area went in by the engineers that they would not impact our property with the water runoff. That amused me. The runoff from this area runs into our farm. What is not shown here are the contours. Everything from 84 half of the church property up here from Weddington School Road to the back parking lot of Weddington Church all along this ridgeline up to the rise in the hill straight across from the emergency entrance into Highgate runs onto our farm. That is a lot of acres and every acre of asphalt or roof top results in 10 acres of runoff.
I have had to rebuild my spillway on our main irrigation pond seven times. That was with just the shopping area. Now we are up to over 300 acres of runoff into that pond. I have a dam behind my house that the water runs over the top of it and it is a dry containment pond. The water right now in a strong rain runs over the top of that. The water comes up within seven feet of our house on the backside of this property. I understand about slowing water down and that makes an impact in the volume of water that will flow at once into those ponds. But right now I have a problem and no one seems to be sensitive to that issue.
One of our strawberry fields is right adjacent to this property. Water right now runs into the first three rows and collects on there. It damages the strawberry plants there. If you add any more rooftop or anything that drains that way, that will go in there.
On the survey it talked about restaurants, libraries, shops, trails. I don’t know where those trails are going to be but I am not going to have a bunch of people walking through our farm on trails where we have cows and horses. I am not going to alter my lifestyle to allow people to walk onto that farm.
The Catawba Lands Conservancy has 2.5 acres down in the front that is snake infested. If people want to walk down there, I am not opposed. For 27 years this Town has been here and the feeling of the people expressed back in 1983 and ever since then has been no commercial west of Highway 16.
Anybody who has run for the office as a Mayor or Councilman has run on the platform of limited commercial or no commercial. Do we want a restaurant, library, shops or trails? Fine, but not there. I am in favor of all of those things.
Mayor Pro Tem Barry – You and I spent 1.5 hours together last Friday night. One of the observations that we made was the manhole covers had an 18” elevation.
Mr. Anderson - They are above ground manhole covers. There is one that is shown on the diagram right in the middle of the parking area. The other one is down to where the sewer line would cross the branch that parallels the road and feeds where the gate was. Then any construction of a sewer line that goes back behind the pond, around the pond and parallel to where Highgate is those trees are coming out and that is the screening for Highgate. They will lose all of those trees.
Mayor Pro Tem Barry – When we talked I asked you if it wasn’t just development – it was any development of that property that was going to create runoff. Residential would be less because you don’t have the surface area. But you can still have the same issues with your detention ponds. I asked you point blank if you saw other uses of that property.
Mr. Anderson – That is correct. I don’t see a use other than what it is right now or residential. That property is no different from the corner of Hemby and Providence. We have six acres up there that we are just paying a lot of taxes on it and that is all we will ever do is pay a lot of taxes on it. I don’t think anyone is ever going to build a house there and it will never go commercial.
Mayor Pro Tem Barry – You didn’t tell me you thought there was a better use for that property?
Mr. Anderson - I don’t think I ever said it was commercial because you would have to put in the sewer line and the sewer line alone would cause me problems. If your recollection is different from mine please refresh mine.
Mayor Pro Tem Barry – Under that tree that afternoon I asked you point blank what you saw on that property. I asked if you believed it would ever be used for residential space or was there another use for that property. You said I don’t see them building houses ever on that property. It would probably be used for something else. I asked you then if you could control the level or type of development to mitigate its impact to your property, does that give you a lot of heartburn? Your answer was I got water issues no matter what they do with that property.
Mr. Anderson - That is essentially what I said. That is not a desirable property for residential.
Councilmember Thomisser made this an issue when he was running for office. I did ask for a left hand turn lane to go into our property because of the school buses and the traffic. We were denied that left hand turn lane because of its proximity to this corner and to the entrance to the shopping area. Now all of a sudden we have a left hand turn lane and we were denied.
Mr. Eric Anderson – Because of the way the fences are on the farm, when they do put in that sewer line in that location, there is no place for me to put my cows. The construction workers will have to dig up that pasture. One of my concerns is if there is ever a problem with the sewer line, what would I do with the cows?
Mayor Pro Tem Barry – We have had numerous conversations prior to my getting on Council about the congestion on Providence Road and the flow of traffic quickly through the intersection of Hwy 84. Now we have added a U-turn at 84 and a left turn into their development.
Mr. Richard Hancock – I will not say that it has been approved. In working with Mr. Polivka and the development, we agreed to review the traffic impact analysis. They came to us and provided a document that looked at what the potential use of the property would be. The document actually indicated a little more square footage than what they have said tonight. Based on what those type of uses would potentially generate in traffic and also looking at the traffic models of what would be generated in peak hours, we looked at their engineering analysis assuming a left hand turn would be put in that location. Our folks in congestion management agreed that would work. At this point, if you were to approve the 16 land use modification they would still have to come back to us to go through the driveway permit process. We agreed that a left over would work there with 100 feet of storage. We would want to maximize the distance that we left between there and 84 with a left turn moving southbound.
Mayor Pro Tem Barry – With a U-turn how much heartburn would that give you?
Mr. Hancock - I have not looked at all the numbers because I am not a traffic engineer. We depend on a specialized group we have in Raleigh. When we get into 2030 timeframe, we could potentially have issues with the traffic that would be going into those left turn lanes on 84. We could potentially get into issues with those backing up.
Mayor Pro Tem Barry – But if you accelerated Rea Road…
Mr. Hancock - We are probably going to have those issues up and down this corridor in the design year in review of the traffic impact analysis.
Councilmember McKee – The U-turn from a safety standpoint, we are going to come out of there in the right lane and whoever comes out that wants to make the U-turn to go back towards Charlotte is going to have to make their way over two lanes of ongoing traffic in order to get up to a light hoping that when they make a U-turn there is not somebody making a right turn onto 84. Have you looked at that from a safety issue?
Mr. Hancock - When you increase those movements anytime I can’t argue with the fact that there is a conflict point. We are utilizing more and more of those situations in a divided highway where we don’t allow full movement and left out because of right turn movement. Even having to go down some distance to merge and make the U-turn movement you concentrate on one conflicting direction at a time. It is a much safer movement. The sketch shows a single left turn lane. There is actually dual left turns. There would be a dedicated left turn phase.
Councilmember McKee – You have to get all the way over to make a U-turn even though there are two lefts. You can’t make a U-turn.
Councilmember Thomisser – Going north on Highway16, there will be left turn in. Is that a slam dunk or under review? Mr. Hancock - We had agreed at the developer’s request to review a traffic impact analysis and to look at the traffic engineering projected volumes of the space that they are proposing and based on that analysis and our review it will work. We have not issued a driveway permit. We would not issue a permit until such time that the Council had approved the use of the property. We would do that concurrently with your review of the site plan. I can’t say that it is a slam dunk. If you all approve the use of this property as they are proposing, the likelihood is yes we would approve that left turn.
Councilmember Thomisser – What would be the rationale?
Mr. Hancock - The volume of traffic that was projected.
Councilmember Thomisser – The Andersons said they were denied a left turn lane in.
Mr. Anderson - We have 20,000 visitors and 12,000 reservations based on school kids.
Mr. Hancock - I was not involved with that request. If we are talking somewhere about 3,500 vehicle trips generated a day given this traffic, there is a difference in traffic volume generated here.
Councilmember McKee - Where did the projection of 3,500 come from?
Mr. Hancock - By their engineers and traffic analysis.
Mr. Tommy Price – I am not affected by the runoff or where the sewer is going. I too have great concerns about the traffic and U-turns on Highway 84. We did not get a left turn out of the shopping center because they didn’t want to clog traffic. Are you going to change residential zoning to commercial? What that piece of property is open for use for is none of the Council’s problem. It is not a Town issue. It is an owner’s issue. No more than any other piece of property in the Town. Before the Town of Weddington was incorporated, that parcel was in the County and was zoned commercial. The very first Council changed that to protect that corridor from the Highway 74 syndrome with commercial on both sides. Hopefully tonight your decision is whether you are going to be the very first council in my 23 years here to change a residential piece of property in Weddington to commercial. Most of you ran on the preference of no more commercial in Town. So ultimately I am asking you not to be the first Council to set that precedent.
Ms. Janice Propst – As a long time resident of this community, I ask for you to vote positively for the Polivka project. I was introduced to Basil Polivka and “The Gathering at Weddington” back in early spring. I see the Gathering as a positive addition to our downtown core area.
Currently Weddington’s downtown includes Weddington Corners, our historic Town Hall, a few doctors’ offices, Weddington United Methodist Church with its large campus of offices, an elementary school, daycare and Family Life Center and The Hunter Farm and the year-round Weddington Activity Center. Where does the Polivka Property sit - right in the middle of all that downtown activity.
You have an opportunity today to vote for one of the best projects ever presented to the community. The Gathering would mean so many things for every age group in our Town. Wouldn’t it be great to live and work in Weddington? There are people that would love to locate their small office space right where they live.
Wouldn’t it be an asset to have Trader Joes or a Fresh Market or a unique grocery store? Wouldn’t it be nice to go grab a bite after church at a local restaurant in our own Town? Wouldn’t it be nice to meet friends for a neighborhood dinner on a Saturday night and take a few minutes to sit outside and talk near the fountain as you eat your ice-cream in Weddington, not Mecklenburg County?
One day this parcel will be developed and it will be developed commercial. It can be done now or it can be done later with a different Council and a different vision for our Town. You have a wonderful opportunity in front of you with a beautiful project and people that are willing to work with this community to do the right thing. I ask you to vote in a positive way for the Polivka Family and the Polivka project. Soon we can be sitting together at the Gathering here in our own little community.
Ms. Barbara Harrison – I also wish that you would vote for this for multiple reasons. When I heard how many surveys – I thought that was great because the last survey was 795 that were responded to in 2007 with some of the most leading questions I have ever had. I went and knocked on doors when I was campaigning last year. Every subdivision in Weddington including Bromley which was only one person said they wanted a place that was local. You have four subdivisions where people weren’t here in 2007. They have only been here 2 ½ years. You seem to not count the newer residences in this Town. I want you to make a decision, not based on a church or Highgate, but based on what everyone in Weddington is asking for. We are asking for a place where we can come and sit. I go down to the Java Brewery on New Town Road and you can walk in there anytime for coffee and there are 10-15 people sitting there. Let’s do something for Weddington residents.
18 Mr. Jim Schumacher – I have volunteered the last three Friday nights at Weddstock. That has been an opportunity to learn a little bit more and get into the discussion of this development. Weddstock has been a very positive event for our community.
I have been in Weddington 17 years and filled out a number of those surveys over the years and throughout that time have always supported a small degree of additional commercial development for Weddington and have generally had the opinion that it needed to take place contiguous to Weddington Corners and to be very compact and small relative to the overall size of the community.
The five acres across the road is in a very unique situation. As others have said, it is surrounded by the church, farm, Providence Road and commercial directly across the property. R-40 use on that relatively small piece of land doesn’t seem to make sense under the circumstances.
Commercial development going across Providence Road is also something I am struggling with.
Where I am leading is to say that we should look at some use other than R-40, something other than four or five homes on that piece of land but something that preserves and compliments what we have in Hunter Farm. We have heard a lot about the issues that may impact the farm. I have not heard anything about what we might do that preserves, protects and enhances the farm. That would be the concept that I would like to see as the plans go forward.
The petitioner has proposed several features that are positive and increasingly desired by the Town – restaurants and a gathering space. Generally I thought this should be here on this side of the road. How you do it on the other side of the road needs to be very carefully thought through. In terms of the process, I would advocate that you would take the first step which is to amend the Land Use Plan from residential to business but do not take the step tonight of approving the zoning plan. Refer the plan back to the Planning Board as they requested that you do to give them and the rest of the planning process the opportunity to try to address all of these questions and all of these issues. If at the end of that process we all don’t have a plan that you as Councilmembers can support, you don’t have to approve the zoning plan at that time.
Ms. Cindy Furell – I feel the heart of those who are land owners and the heart of the history of Weddington and how we value our nature and our family here but I think we have to also be realistic that change is going to happen. The opportunity of the community resident who is willing to take everything that we have to say and incorporate what we want into the project and he is going to be accountable to us because he lives here and we will make him accountable to us.
I think it is an opportunity for this generation to take what we value and incorporate it into an aggressive move that is going to happen and there is no denying it. This generation can do that much better than probably the next generation. We want to hold up the historical nature and the values. We want to protect the farm land and the heart of Weddington. This generation can do that. We can do it and still provide some of the things that the community wants as the demographics have changed and will continue to change where people are moving here from. The needs are going to change. I feel strongly that we can do that in an extremely well way now whereas it may not be that case later. I hope that we take the opportunity to really bring together everything that we desire and make it the best possible situation.
Ms. Sally Holmes – I think balance seems to be our key word here. There is a way to do things in harmony. I have been a resident for four years and was in Charlotte the other 21 years. You have such a jewel here that is tucked away. It is beautiful and it is what drew me here to have space, nature and to actually have land with the home and to yet be accessible to things around me. This community is also important.
I think the Polivkas are genuine people from my time spent with them. I think they are for what is in the best interest of the community and they are willing to be flexible and work on things so it works for everybody.
I also understand the Hunter Farm’s situation. I have been a speech pathologist with Charlotte Mecklenburg Schools. We take special needs children there. It is a wonderful thing to offer and it is very special. I think we also need to protect Hunter Farm as well at the same time and hopefully there is a way to gather to do that and make it happen. I would like to see more opportunities for community in Weddington.
When I moved here, I was surprised that the area was as small as it was for community opportunities. I use the word community instead of retail or development. I think that is a very cold terminology. I think community is where we should focus. I heard that as well with this 19 development proposal tonight. I would like to see us give this a chance. I would like to see Weddington expand its community opportunities to not just be residential. I think we can preserve the nature and history that is around us and at the same time we can come together more as a community and really have something special for others to look at.
Ms. Elizabeth Propst – Several weeks ago I had the privilege of being introduced to the Polivkas and their proposed project “The Gathering at Weddington.” I was impressed by the overall design and setting of the structure and its potential to the citizens of Weddington. The idea of nature trails, green spaces for community activities, upscale shopping and dining facilities would enhance our community and our quality of life.
Our dear friends Bobby and Lucy Helms previously owned the property. Bobby wanted something built on that site that would be an asset to this community that he dearly loved so much. I hope that all of you can be open minded and realize that many seniors and residents in this part of Union County would benefit from such an upscale facility. It would also provide much needed taxes for Weddington and Union County.
With unemployment around 10% it would open job opportunities. There are hundreds of small and large towns across America who would love to have this facility. I hope you approve this with open arms for this community. I hope to see all of you at “The Gathering at Weddington.”
Mr. Walker Davidson – Of all the outcomes we get out of this, I hope that we don’t get that there with that traffic flow. If you look at what is going on at 16 and 84 everything I have heard from DOT is it is about moving traffic. They don’t have any interest in how we get around town as far as how Weddington’s residents use this road.
I don’t understand like Mr. Anderson how the Hunter Farms didn’t get a left turn lane and these guys did. The U-turn drives us crazy. It looks like they are better at getting things out of DOT than we are. If you approve this, why don’t you approve it contingent upon getting a light at the northern entrance of the existing shopping center that would open up the shopping center and perhaps save the shopping center? It will help their stores and might help the Hunter Farm.
I know they did not want to put the light there because of messing up traffic and slowing it down. When you look at that traffic pattern with all of that circling, you can’t get from one place to another. It is going to slow it down anyway.
Mr. Anderson also made a reference to politicians and the promises they make when they try to get elected. Some of us make general statements about no more commercial growth, limited commercial growth. I have a document here that is very specific. What I have is a flier that was handed out before the most recent election and it says “Is the attached what you want? If you don’t want bulldozers behind Steeplechase then vote for Mayor Pro Tem Barry and Councilmember Thomisser on Tuesday, November 3. No personal agendas – no nonsense leadership.” Is the attached what you want?
The attached is the meeting notice for public involvement meetings for 13700 Providence Road - this piece of property. I just want to remind Mayor Pro Tem Barry and Councilmember Thomisser about their campaign flier.
Ms. Christy Martinez – I have only been in the Weddington area for the last 3 ½ years but I am an entrepreneur. Unfortunately when I have all of my business meetings, I spend my tax dollars in Mecklenburg County because I don’t have a good place to meet here in South Charlotte. If we want to continue to build a community or want to draw entrepreneurs to this area, then I think having a place to gather or meet as professional business people is very important.
In my personal life I like to go out to dinner with my neighbors and with my friends and every time I do I spend my money in Mecklenburg County. Having a place here where I can support the local community and local environment I think is important. Having one that is built in a manner that is proposed here I think is important because it holds the integrity of the community.
I happen to know Basil and his wife and their children. We live in the same community and I just want to speak to the character of the family which in my opinion is what they say they will do they will do. I work very closely with Basil on the homeowners association and community.
Everything that he has always recommended for our community where he lives has always 20 been the highest quality and he has always followed through on his promises for us as a community. I am very much in support of the proposed project.
Mayor Pro Tem Barry – Walker Davidson, are you in support of the change in the Land Use Plan?
Mr. Davidson - I am not in support of it.
Mr. Mans McCloud – I have lived in the Weddington area since 1993 but I grew up in Charlotte and had a farm on Twelve Mile Creek Road at one time. I am in support of the Land Use Plan change. Something some day will go in that parcel and clearly everyone is convinced that R-40 is not what it should be.
I appreciate the concerns of the Hunter Farm. They have a water issue now that needs to be addressed regardless of this project and the Polivkas seem to be willing to bend over backwards to work with whomever to make the changes that need to be made to make it a first class type arrangement and development.
I know for years we talked about we don’t want change. Change has come. Providence Road is what it is. Most people will drive through Weddington. They don’t drive to Weddington. They are going to Waxhaw, Rea Road or Wesley Chapel.
I know there has been talk about a Town Center. What does this accomplish? It accomplishes a gathering spot that I don’t think without using that tract I don’t know where else the Town Center will go. There is not much left. Now you are faced with changing the Land Use Plan. I think you should. Yes, there are traffic issues. Those will have to be dealt with. Traffic is not going to get less and so we are going to have to deal with that issue at some point.
Mr. Robert Porter – I am very much in support of the land use change. I moved to this area because I saw the potential to have a small community. I never did see any development until recently. I am also a member of the church next door. I can tell you that as a large Sunday School Class that tries to go somewhere afterwards for food or other things, we go to Waxhaw or Charlotte.
This project is a good project. All of these things that have been discussed this evening can be developed and worked out as time goes on. That is what the construction document phase does. It gives everyone the opportunity to voice their opinions and to work these issues out.
Mr. Walter Staton - Most of you know my deep affection for this small, unique, rural Town. I was instrumental in helping start Weddington in 1983. I am here tonight to speak to you about our Land Use Plan. Our Land Use Plan is the way it should be. I ask all of you Councilmembers to vote no. Leave it the way it is. Why? The 2007 Weddington official survey says 72% of the good citizens of Weddington want no more retail establishments and 54% of the citizens said again absolutely no more commercial development in our unique, rural Town. We paid Hadenstanziale to say where Weddington needs more commercial. They said the citizens of Weddington had rather drive 5-10 miles near here than put up with all of the traffic.
The current Weddington Shopping Center has space now for lease. They have worked and worked trying to get someone to come in. One of the owners of the establishment there is fixing to move out, build his own building and get away from Weddington. We are in the worst economic recession since the Great Depression and I question whether any further commercial development can survive here.
The Enquirer-Journal Newspaper on August 15, 2009 quoted Councilman Mayor Pro Tem Barry as saying the Weddington Land use Plan looks good and many Weddington people want to protect its rural character. Councilman Thomisser stated in his campaign literature that he supported the wishes of 72% of the Weddington citizens that did not want further commercial development. Councilman Thomisser said we must protect the Weddington Land Use Plan in order to maintain the Weddington rural character.
Mr. Polivka – There has been discussion about our survey. We sent out 3,000 cards and people went to the website and took the survey. It is just as official as the one you guys sent out. I have looked at three other surveys that you did and every survey said they wanted a restaurant. That has not changed. They said they wanted a library. When someone said they didn’t want any commercial that is not true. They said they wanted a restaurant which is commercial. A total of 87% said they wanted change and 72% said they would approve “The Gathering at Weddington” on that side of Providence. Thank you for the comments for and against.
Councilmember McKee – When is Phase II and Phase III going to be built?
Mr. Polivka - Initially we are going to finish Phase I. That should take 18 months. We have about a year on the sewer and another eight months for construction. We have a year to close the deal on all of those tenants. We have initial interest in the front. We are hoping it will all be built together.
Councilmember McKee – You have ice cream, coffee shop? Is that exactly what will go in there?
Mr. Polivka - That is our vision. We are putting this 10,000 square foot gathering there for a reason. The specific reason is for people to go there, sit down and have coffee. Whatever it is will complement the gathering area.
Councilmember McKee – There is no new housing going up in Weddington. We have large developments like Bromley that are way underdeveloped. My biggest concern or question is if you build this, will these be empty store fronts?
Mr. Polivka - We are hoping we get it all together but we are being realistic. That is why we are phasing it. With there being no further comments or questions, Mayor Pro Tem Barry closed the public hearing.
C. Consideration of Polivka Land Use Plan Amendment and MX Rezoning Application.
Councilmember Thomisser moved to not amend the Land Use Plan to include this parcel located at 13700 Providence Road.
He stated, “There is no doubt that the people of Weddington and the majority of the
people tonight want a restaurant, a gathering spot, a library and a unique shopping experience. Our
charge here today is this particular parcel of land and what we feel is the best use and in my opinion
although the people of Weddington do want a restaurant, gathering spot, library and a unique shopping
experience, I do not feel this is the place to have that.”
Councilmember McKee – I do not think the timing is good because of the economy and also the location
right across from an existing shopping center is the not the best location.
Mayor Pro Tem Barry – It is an interesting dynamic. I want to thank you for the work that you have
done. During the public comment section, we have had three opposing, two of which called me, and 10
affirming your change in the Land Use Plan.
Councilmember Thomisser and I spent an hour and half on a four-wheeler looking at what the impact would be on the farm and the impact that it would have in theTown of Weddington. We have a donut hole of development. You cannot see it on this picture but it is surrounded by commercial enterprises. For the record, I was adamantly against the project the first time I heard about it and sat in the parking lot and said what in the world will you put there because no one in their right mind is going to buy a house on Providence Road for a million dollars because that is what it will cost to get your money out of it. If not residential what will it be? Maybe the best thing is to stop and think when we have folks that are willing to put their own capital at risk for the betterment of the community. I would have voted to approve the change in the Land Use Plan on this.
The vote on Councilmember Thomisser’s motion is as follows:
AYES: Councilmembers Thomisser and McKee
NAYS: Mayor Pro Tem Barry
***Minutes can be found at :
https://www.townofweddington.com/search
Search Polivka August 9, 2010 to see full minutes
TOWN OF WEDDINGTON
REGULAR PLANNING BOARD MEETING
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2012 - 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
Application Information
Date of Application: April 24, 2012
Applicant Name: Polivka International Company, Inc.
2
Owner Name: Polivka Parking Solutions LLC
Parcel ID#: 06-150-045
Property Location: 13700 Providence Road (Hwy. 16)
Existing Land Use: Business
Existing Zoning: R-40
Proposed Zoning: MX
Existing Use: Vacant House
Proposed Use: 15,000 square foot office building
Parcel Size: 5.06 Acres
General Information-MX Rezoning
• The applicant proposes a 15,000 square foot, two-story brick office building on Providence Road.
• The office building will be accessed by two driveways along Providence Road. The required
Public Involvement Meetings for this project were held on July 25th and August 16th, 2012. The
meeting on July 25th was held on site at 13700 Providence Road. The meeting on August 16th
was held at Weddington Town Hall.
Minimum Standards for Office Uses in the MX Zoning District:
Minimum Front Yard Setback-25 feet from any public road right-of-way
Minimum Side Yard Setbacks-28 foot buffer is required, not a setback
Minimum Read Yard Setback-28 foot buffer is required, not a setback
Access and Parking:
• The site will be accessed by two entrances from Providence Road. Both entrances will have 18
foot travel lanes with a ten foot landscaped median. NCDOT has provided feedback on the
proposed plan and has stated that the proposal will have no significant impact on surrounding
roads and/or intersections.
• The middle entrance will serve as the main entrance to the site. There may be a left hand turn
lane going north off of Providence Road if approved by NCDOT.
• The applicant is required 50 parking spaces for the 15,000 square feet of office (1 space per
employee during the shift with greater employment plus 1 space for each 300 square feet of gross
floor area.). The applicant has provided 70 parking spaces, therefore complying with Section 58-
175 of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance.
• Parking spaces and loading zones also meet the minimum size standards set in Section 58-175
and 58-176 of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance.
• A Traffic Impact Analysis was submitted on August 9, 2012 and has been reviewed by the Traffic
Engineer hired by the Town and reviewed by NCDOT. The applicant and the Town’s traffic
engineer have exchanged comments and continue to work through the Traffic Impact Analysis.
Screening and Landscaping:
• Screening and landscaping will be provided by using several types of trees and shrubs. The
applicant is required a 28 foot buffer around the perimeter of the property per Section 58-8 of the
Weddington Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has provided a 28 foot buffer around the perimeter
of the property. The applicant will also provide internal landscaping within parking areas and
islands.
• The proposed landscaping plan does comply with Section 58-8 of the Weddington Zoning
Ordinance. All proposed plants are permitted in Section 58-384 of the Weddington Zoning
Ordinance.
3
• The MX zoning district requires 10% of the gross acreage of the project to be open space. The
applicant is required 21,041 square feet of open space and has provided 74,202 square feet of
open space, therefore complying with Section 58-60 (2) n of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance.
Elevations:
• Elevations of all buildings have been provided. Materials on the building include: hardy plank
siding, brick veneer, fiberglass columns and fiberglass shingles.
• Proposed buildings are within scale and have similar physical relationships as abutting properties
as required in Section 58-271 of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance. Proposed building height
also complies with Section 58-60 (2) f of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance.
• The Planning Board will serve as the Design Review Board for this project.
Additional Information:
• Adjacent Property Uses are as follows:
North: Parcels containing single family house and farmland (The Hunter Farm)
South: Weddington United Methodist Church
East: Providence Road (four lane highway with concrete median)
West: Parcels containing single family houses and farmland (The Hunter Farm)
• A lighting plan has been submitted and will be reviewed by the Town’s Lighting Engineer (plans
included).
• Water to be provided by Union County Public Works once rezoning is approved by the Town
Council.
• Sewer to be provided by septic tank approved by Union County Health Department.
• Stormwater management to be handled by sand filter/detention pond in accordance with
Weddington Zoning Ordinance and NCDENR.
Conditions of Approval:
1. Water Plans and allocation must be approved by Union County Public Works;
2. Lighting Plan must be approved by Town Lighting Engineer;
3. All engineering must be approved by Town Engineer;
4. NCDOT driveway permit must be approved by NCDOT;
5. Traffic Impact Analysis must be approved by Town Traffic Engineer;
6. All signage must comply with Chapter 58, Article 5 of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance;
7. Prior to the commencement of any construction, the Town Council must approve Construction
documents in accordance with Section 58-271 (h) of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance;
8. Applicant must provide detention volume controls for a 25-year storm; (Town Planner Cook
advised that this condition is above and beyond due to the sensitivity of the Highgate
neighborhood. He stated, “You have heard some of the complaints from the Highgate neighbors
about the water/stormwater runoff. Based on conversations with our engineer they have
recommended that the applicant provide these volume controls for a 25-year storm. We typically
ask for a 10-year storm.”
9. Any future revisions to the approved site plan and other approved documents must comply with
Section 58-271 (i) of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance.
Staff has reviewed the application and submitted documents and finds that the MX Rezoning Application
is in compliance with the Town of Weddington Zoning Ordinance with the aforementioned Conditions of
Approval.
The Planning Board also received a copy of the following:
ƒ Conditional Zoning Application
4
ƒ Aerial Map
ƒ Zoning Map
ƒ Land Use Map
ƒ Letter from Mike Garbark with Union County Public Works dated September 20, 2012 advising
that the site plan for 13700 Providence Road has been reviewed by Union County Public Works
and county water is accessible along Providence Road; however, county sewer is not accessible.
ƒ Union County Health Department – On-Site Wastewater Treatment and Disposal System
Improvement Permit
ƒ Sets of Plans include Illustrative Plan and Notes, Illustrative Elevations, Open Space Plan and
Proposed, Landscaping Plan, Grading, Storm Drainage, and Stormwater BMP Plan, Stormwater
BMP Details and Drainage Map and Electrical Site Plan
It was advised that any lighting plans would need to be reviewed by a lighting engineer contracted by the
Town.
Chairman Sharp – What about hours of operation? We specified lighting restrictions with the Daycare
Center that after a certain time of night lighting was only for security purposes and the structure could not
be lit up. The Council has approved the change of this parcel on the Land Use Plan Map from residential
to business but what we are looking at tonight is a request to rezone this particular parcel. It has not been
rezoned to business and it has only been indicated that the Council believes it is appropriate for that parcel
to be future business. The advantage of the MX zoning is what you see is what you get. If we
recommend the rezoning, we are recommending the rezoning for this particular project and if they decide
not to do this project it reverts back if the Town Council does not vote to approve it.
Mr. John Giattino - Are there any changes to the architecture or anything?
Chairman Sharp - The architecture itself will come during the construction phase. The picture is not what
we are looking at tonight. We are looking at the site plan and the fact that it will be a 15,000 square foot
two story office building.
Town Planner Cook - You can look at the elevations and make some type of determination of what you
think the building may look like. You have a comfort level knowing that they are going to have to come
back again through the construction document process and the Planning Board is going to serve as the
Architectural Review Committee. Those elevations could certainly change but this site plan should not
change.
Chairman Sharp - They could change the actual look of the building between now and the time
construction documents are submitted.
Mr. John Temple – I represent Polivka International. We have one intention. We just want to build an
office building and have our team work out of that building. We also understand that the design process
will come though this board. We have an initial design that we like with brick and it has a southern
colonial look to the building. We also will work with whatever group we need to work with if we are
successful in working through this project. Steven Overcash is our architect.
Mr. Vivian - Is there a set purpose in mind for the two entrances as opposed to one?
Mr. Overcash - It has to do with the one being able to get in a little easier and one is furthest north. The
one in the middle the owner really liked this center drive which would be the main drive for most people
when you are really focusing on the building as you come up the hill.
5
Chairman Sharp - NCDOT has not indicated that they have any issues with two curb cuts?
Mr. Overcash – No, they have reviewed it and they said it would have a minimal impact the way it is
designed with the left over.
Mr. Vivian - When I went on the subject property, there are two structures there. In talking with Mr.
Temple he said that Providence VFD plans to burn one of the structures as practice. There is an
unbelievable old tree there and if you are having this campus setting and trying to set it off on the hill, I
think it is a shame aesthetically to risk torching that tree.
Mr. Temple – The tree is on the top of the hill to the right. We are definitely taking that into
consideration. One of the things that I have really appreciated working though the process is that we have been listening to what people have said to us regarding certain issues. That was an issue that was brought to my attention and I have discussed it with the owner.
Vice-Chairman Dow - The problem with that is on the topo the dotted lines are the current. The solid
lines are after construction. They are going to move about 4’ of dirt. That tree has to come down with
this design.
Mr. Overcash - Not necessarily. There are ways to create retaining walls. It looks like it could be very
close to being in this courtyard. We could certainly do a retaining wall to maintain the root structure and
drip line and save that tree. We need to get it located on the survey accurately.
Mr. Temple - The fire department has asked us for permission to use the house as a burn practice. We are trying to figure out how to do that. What we wanted to do was use the garage to store materials during construction and then after construction that would go. We don’t want to leave materials out in the open. We want a neat construction site.
Mr. Perryman read sections from the traffic plan. He questioned if DOT’s approval or statement saying
that there is no significant impact is contingent on the left turn lane?
Town Planner Cook - DOT has reviewed and provided comments based on the same site plan that we are looking at. DOT has provided their no impact statement based on that left hand turn lane. The traffic
impact analysis was prepared by the applicant and was sent to both our traffic engineer and to DOT.
There is a little bit of disagreement between our traffic engineer and DOT. DOT does not think there is a
huge impact. Our engineer thinks that the left turn lane or the other entrance is not necessarily needed.
These are DOT roads. It is going to be up to the Planning Board or Town Council to make those
conditions. I am not sure how much our traffic engineer can make all of these recommendations if DOT
is not requiring it.
Mr. Perryman - That left turn lane was part of their list?
Town Planner Cook – Yes, they have reviewed that and said there is no impact but they will also have to
approve a driveway permit for that driveway cut.
Chairman Sharp - That second bullet says that the middle entrance will serve as the main entrance and
Providence Road may have a left turning lane accessing this entrance. It looks to me like the left turn
lane is for the north entrance. That bullet needs to be corrected before it goes to the Town Council. The
left turn lane is not for the main entrance which is the center one. It’s the north entrance.
Town Planner Cook - They have not approved the cut. They have said that based on the site plan there is
not a significant impact by putting that left turn lane in or really by putting both of those driveway cuts in.
Mr. Perryman - The final approval on that traffic analysis is the Town Council?
Town Planner Cook - Yes the Town Council can take the traffic engineer’s comments and make those
conditions.
Mr. Overcash - The Town Engineer recommends to go down the road where there is an existing left over.
We felt that there was some danger there because everybody goes so fast. It is a safer maneuver than
trying to u-turn it 700 feet north of the site.
Mr. Vivian - Has there been any consideration given for the surface material?
Mr. Overcash - We have talked about it but we have not done an in-depth study. The detention pond was
not designed with impervious material. We wanted it designed for the worst case. This is designed to
asphalt and concrete. We certainly want to consider those more impervious surfaces.
Chairman Sharp – I think when the applicant was here previously he had indicated that he was planning to use some type of impervious surface.
Mr. Temple - Yes, he has a product that he has developed. Since his product has come out another
product has come out as well. He is using it exclusively on some major projects and it allows the water to
seep through it. We are very much committed to build it as green as possible.
Chairman Sharp - Would you have a problem with that being a condition? We could make it a certain
percentage would need to be impervious.
Mr. Temple - As a Planning Board we are listening to what you are saying but we are very open to going
as green as possible.
Mr. Perryman - I know on some previous projects that had come before the Planning Board where they
were planning to build using a septic system initially with the plans being that when county sewer became
available then there would be a connection option. Is that the intent here?
Mr. Overcash - We have not even discussed that. It is so far out in the future. We are living with the
septic system for now. Who knows if you get sewer in 20 years what we will do at that point.
Vice-Chairman Dow - In the beginning I thought this was going to be an office building for Polivka
International. Now I understand that a great deal of the space will be leased. I assume now since you
have applied for MX office business you are looking at the list in that category office only.
Mr. Overcash - Including potentially medical office which is broken out separately in your list.
Vice-Chairman Dow - You have no idea what they will be obviously. You don’t have tenants?
Mr. Temple - We have confidentially talked with people who are interested and they are physicians.
Chairman Sharp - The number of parking spaces was one space per employee. If half the building is
going to be leased, how did you come up with a number of employees when calculating parking?
Town Planner Cook - They assumed that 15,000 square feet would be used for office.
Mr. Overcash – The reason we are a little over in parking is to anticipate medical.
Vice-Chairman Dow – How many do you think will be on the top floor with Polivka?
Mr. Temple - There are over 100 employees that work for Polivka but that is all over the United States.
At the present location which is just down the road they have seven people working out of there. The
objective is to move the accounting office from Ohio to Charlotte which would be another three which
would be ten. We are also looking at hiring another potential estimator to help come on the team. You
could have 11 to 12 people work out of that office.
Mr. Overcash - Healthcare is usually 1 per 200 which translates into 37-38 spaces.
Vice-Chairman Dow - Jordan you mentioned that our traffic engineer was having some problems. What
are the concerns that they have to work through?
Town Planner Cook – The traffic engineer disagrees with the recommendation for a left over at Access 1.
The second bullet states, “An analysis should occur that includes the mid block u-turn section between
Hemby Road and the proposed site Access 1. This attractive and efficient option will replace the need to
have a left over constructed at Access 1. This will provide adequate access to the site maintain the
integrity of the left lane storage while significantly reducing the cost of construction. The third item –
considering the proposed site design in the deletion of the left over would be an option to delete one of the driveways from the site. It appears that one driveway can handle the number of trips for a 15,000 squarefoot office building. Further analysis can provide if my assumptions are correct that the deletion of a driveway will improve the capacity of NC 16 while also reducing the cost of construction. If the
driveway is deleted is preferred that the southern most driveway go away.”
Mr. Overcash - They went to great length to talk about stacking here at 5:00 p.m. and someone trying to
turn left. The beauty of an office building is you are not trying to get into the office building at 5:00 p.m.
You are leaving at 5:00 p.m. He just ignored the fact that we don’t have coffee shops and restaurants
where people are trying to get in there. I see very few people trying to turn left in there at 5:00.
Chairman Sharp - Leaving the office building you would have to turn right?
Ms. Propst - They are going to have more than one option to turn. When they turn right they can turn left
at Providence at 84. If they can’t make it through those three lanes of traffic to get over they are going to
have another light almost 100’ down the road.
Mr. Temple - I understood the logic when I read the report except for if you are heading south and if there
was a turn lane you could go in there to make that left it would be less dangerous. I have actually tried
that myself. People coming out of that light at Weddington pick up speed and you are in the left hand
turn lane and if there is traffic coming the other way now they are waiting behind you or they are going
around you. I almost got hit the first time. It is a safety issue for me to say that left over further up the
road is a better deal. I would question the safety of that decision.
Vice-Chairman Dow – No, it staggers out with a long acceleration lane. You can go 45 miles an hour and
get in the left hand lane. The one that is right across from Highgate’s second entrance and it has a cutout
on the other side so you can make the left hand turn.
Mr. Temple - I stand corrected. I will look at the other one.
Vice-Chairman Dow – On the retention pond - when I look at the topos and I am not an engineer but I
know water levels. You are going to have to build up the Providence Road side of that retention pond.
How high will that go – six or seven feet?
Mr. Overcash – We are digging down and landscaping. It is not berming up.
Vice-Chairman Dow – So on the top side you are cutting down.
Ms. Propst - It says plus emergency bypass for 50 year storms. You are really saying this pond covers a
50 year storm.
Mr. Overcash – It would. We are designing to the 25 year storm because we were asked to. I talked to
the engineer it is up to 50. It is less water leaving the site than it is today. We are bettering the situation.
Vice-Chairman Dow - I see the perimeter lighting and the parking area lighting. Are you going to want
lights on the building like flood lights from the ground up at the façade in the evening?
Mr. Overcash - I don’t think so. We have that porch so we might leave a couple of lights on that porch
for security so it is not so dark up there.
Vice-Chairman Dow - It talks about brick and hardy plank. Am I to assume that the back will be hardy
plank?
Mr. Overcash – The whole thing is brick. Sometimes we make the eves out of the hardy plank. It is 95%
brick on four sides.
Vice-Chairman Dow – Back on the topo, I want to make sure that the other members understand and that
I understand if I am reading this right. I am on Page RC-5 and it talks about the site area being 4.84. Is
that incorrect?
Mr. Overcash – Yes Jordan asked us to correct that. It is 5.06 acres - the difference came between a tax
map and a survey.
Vice-Chairman Dow - It talks about a disturbed area plus or minus all of it. I want you to understand that
we are clear cutting this entire lot minus anything you can fight for. All of the planting around that will
grow hopefully. It looked to me like this flattened up this area through here and you cut into this and
steepen that property line bank a good bit.
Mr. Overcash – Yes, at the back.
Vice-Chairman Dow - And then let it flood down through here. What concerned me was that it looked
like a lot of the runoff from this high area here was going to come down across your road and there was
no catch on this side. What am I missing or is it all going to dump out here?
Mr. Overcash looked at the map with Vice-Chairman Dow and discussed at the table with the members.
Town Planner Cook - USI has looked over the plans twice. I can certainly ask them to look at that.
Mr. Vivian - Has there been recently any conversation with the church to make common connectivity at
the rear so that people could come out with the light?
9
Mr. Overcash - I think that bridge was burned.
Mr. Temple – I do not know if it is burned but the answer is no there hasn’t been any conversation.
Mr. Vivian - If it means that we can work with it and avoid some of these left turns are you open to that?
I am saying that I could be a part of that conversation. I am a member of that church. It seems that is a
perfect way to come out and turn left. It is overflow parking and it is a win-win.
Mr. Temple - No one has approached us and we have not approached them. If they approached us would
we engage in conversation? Absolutely - we would listen to what the proposal would be.
Town Planner Cook – The first submittal a year and half ago I did bring that up with them and I know
there was some conversation.
Chairman Sharp - I think the church didn’t want any extra traffic coming from the office complex through
their property especially because they have school children there. They did not want increased traffic on
the church property.
Mr. Vivian – Can I try to find out about that?
Mr. Overcash – Connectivity is good. It helps everyone.
Chairman Sharp – Is the school not at the rear of the church.
Mr. Vivian – It is in the new building.
Ms. Propst – There is a nursery school still here which has lots of cars during the middle of the day.
Vice-Chairman Dow - Did our engineer come up for a 15,000 square foot building and this type use what
a typical in and out day is?
Town Planner Cook - Their engineer did and NCDOT replied to that and said that is not going to have
enough of an impact.
Vice-Chairman Dow – I am not worried from a traffic standpoint. I am just asking trips in and trips out.
Chairman Sharp – A lot of that would depend on who the tenants are.
Town Planner Cook - The study assumptions were taken from ITE trip generation manual 8th edition and
a 15,000 square foot office building would generate 310 daily trips.
Chairman Sharp – Jordan has provided us with nine conditions of approval. We have come up with some
other ideas that we may want to attach as conditions.
The Board asked that the language be found that was done recently for the daycare center regarding
lighting after hours.
Mr. Vivian – Is there a requirement that the lighting has to be can fixtures?
10
Chairman Sharp – The actual fixtures have to be on the approved list. They have to be hooded and
shielded.
Mr. Giattino - Typically office buildings are cleaned after hours.
Chairman Sharp – I am talking about the parking lot not in the building.
Vice-Chairman Dow - Do you have any intended hours of use of this building?
Mr. Overcash – 8-5.
Vice-Chairman Dow - You aren’t envisioning putting a 24-hour veterinary office.
Mr. Overcash – We are not planning to have a 24-hour call center.
Ms. Propst – But the vet cannot have overnight care at this vet.
Chairman Sharp – We are not talking about interior lighting.
Chairman Dow - Minimal lighting for security after a certain time of night we can add as a condition.
Mr. Giattino discussed some type of condition that they do not have any type of 24-hour office use.
Chairman Sharp – I do not believe we can restrict who they lease to. If they wanted to have a 24 hour
urgent care veterinary or medical clinic we cannot restrict that. If you are concerned about that then you
might not want to recommend the rezoning.
Mr. Temple - The people that I am in contact with are just physicians. They want to move from Charlotte
to Weddington with their practice. We are not planning to be open 24 hours. To drive by and see black is
not healthy. I do not think it should be lit up like Christmas either.
Ms. Propst - I don’t think you can ask someone to save a tree. This town is going to build Rea Road and
cut down 150 acres of trees. If they can save the tree, that is great.
Chairman Sharp - We could say if they can’t save the tree they need to submit documentation to Jordan
explaining why not. Also, what about the asphalt being some type of impervious surface.
Mr. Perryman - That is a worthy goal but not sure about the percentage.
Town Planner Cook – I think that is similar to the tree. If possible if it works, I think it is a great idea.
Mr. Propst - We didn’t ask the church to do it.
Chairman Sharp – Do we want to make some sort of condition regarding that or do we want to leave that
alone.
Mr. Vivian – I think you can have a statement saying every effort will be made.
Chairman Sharp – That is not measurable. The condition needs to be measured.
11
Mr. Perryman - It would only be helping you if you were able to do that because that would negate the
need do all this grading.
Chairman Sharp - Regardless of what they do, they have to follow this plan that would not affect
anything.
Gentleman from Audience - The retention pond is so close to Providence Road. That can really become
an eye sore and then you have some fencing that would have to go around that?
Chairman Sharp - There is sufficient landscaping between Providence Road and the retention pond.
Gentleman - I live in Steeple Chase Subdivision. Originally there was a sewer line that was going to go
across Hunter Farms down through my back yard. Can you make a condition so that in the future that
would never happen? A condition that says they must tap in at Providence Road?
Chairman Sharp - A condition that any sewer connections in the future must be at the front of the
property.
Mr. Propst - How would it ever happen anyway?
Gentleman - If they come to you guys and want expansion on a property and no longer use the existing
septic system and now we have to revisit going through Steeplechase to tie-in at Highgate.
Chairman Sharp - Any future sewer connections to a sewer system must be through the front of the
property. You can’t cut across Hunter Farms and go to Steeplechase or over to Kings Manor Drive.
Town Planner Cook – In the conditional zoning district of our ordinance it does say that the Planning
Board can suggest and the Town Council may request that reasonable and appropriate conditions be
attached to the approval of the application. Any such conditions may relate to the relationship with the
proposed use to the surrounding property to the proposed support facilities screening, landscaping, etc.
Town Administrator McCollum read information regarding the previous lighting condition placed on the
daycare - Security lights in the parking lot can be turned on one hour before starting business and one
hour after closing business.
Chairman Sharp - If the office building opens at 8 and closes at 6 then the lighting would go off at 7am
and on at 7pm.
Town Administrator McCollum also read the following: The lights will be on from dusk to dawn or
approximately between the hours of 5:30 p.m. until 7:30 a.m. during winter months and 7:30 p.m. until
6:30 a.m. during summer months. In the actual approval it says security lights in the parking lots can be
turned on 1 hour before starting business and 1 hour after closing business.
Chairman Sharp - Exterior lighting is minimized to security lighting only from one hour after the last
business closes until one hour before the first business opens.
Mr. Giattino – That is not what that says. That may be what we want.
Ms. Propst - He doesn’t want the place to be totally black all night long. Mr. Overcash talked about
having some type of lighting somewhere on the building that is minimal like a porch light.
12
Chairman Sharp – The porch lights and the parking lights is the only lighting that you can have.
Vice-Chairman Dow - During the construction phase and for the first several years after this is built, I
have read that the buffering is going to be predominately new around the perimeter where the buffer is.
You can’t plant very large trees and hope they will make it. They are going to be smaller trees, correct?
What is our biggest tree that goes in the first year?
Town Planner Cook – We have size requirements in our landscaping text. All trees shall have a minimum
caliber of 2” measured 6” above the ground at the time of planning.
Vice-Chairman Dow - I walked around the perimeter of the property. The Anderson’s house is right
behind the building. This is a higher spot than the house. Do you want to try and make use of some of
the larger trees that are already growing but I guess because of the grading you may not be able to?
Town Planner Cook - I always prefer that landscaping be met by existing vegetation if possible.
Mr. Temple - Nowhere in our plan did we plant trees this big. We plan to put some significant height to
it. We want this to add to the beauty of our building. If we put small trees our building will be dwarfed.
It takes time for trees to grow. Mr. Polivka has in his mind bigger trees to plant around the perimeter.
We are not planning to clear cut. We are planning on trying to save as much as we can in this project.
We only will cut what we need to cut to provide for the septic and building. We would like to keep as
many of those pines as we can especially to the south of us.
Town Planner Cook - This is going to come through the construction document process which will also
include a grading plan which could also include a tree save area plan.
Vice-Chairman Dow - It is very clear on the topo where they are going to change the elevations by
several feet along the border. If you are going to drop down two feet you are going to take a tree down to
do that. I was simply wondering if there was a way we could help accelerate the growth of the perimeter
border by leaving some of the stuff that was there.
Chairman Sharp – We hope to see some of that during the construction phase. I would like to see a
condition. We have a sidewalk going across the front of the property. I would like to see cross walks
painted for walking across the entrances on Providence Road where the existing sidewalk is.
Mr. Temple - We will probably use pavers there.
Chairman Sharp – The other condition was to have our engineer examine the runoff on the south side of
the property.
Mr. Overcash - We have to come back eventually for them to review anyway.
Chairman Sharp – It would be to determine if some sort of mitigation is going to be needed to keep the
runoff from the south side of the property from going over Providence Road especially in the winter time.
Mr. Overcash – These are looked at in Raleigh.
Vice-Chairman Dow – I would be satisfied with our engineer looking at.
Town Planner Cook - I was going to call Bonnie to look at it. I don’t think it needs to be a condition.
13
Chairman Sharp – Satisfying USI comments is a condition already. Does not need to be listed as a
separate condition?
Town Planner Cook - We require 10% open space but do not require them to save any trees.
Chairman Sharp – The question is should we make a recommendation to the Town Council to approve or
not to approve rezoning this property for this project to create District MX-001 which would have its own
zoning classification and set conditions.
Mr. Perryman - I think the project as presented meets our design codes and I think compared to what is on
the property currently it would be received favorably by the Town Council. I think that office use is
appropriate for that parcel.
Mr. Vivian – I concur with Jeff and my concern is the number of curb cuts and the traffic flow and I do
not believe we need that many.
Mr. Giattino – I too would rather have one curb cut than two.
Chairman Sharp – A lot of it depends on who ends up leasing the ground floor. The traffic engineer
recommended just having the northern entrance.
Mr. Vivian – The northern one seems to be predicated upon that as soon as you could have a left into it.
It is my understanding that when they tried to get one into the Hunter Berry Farm that was turned down
and they send you further north and then you turn. That is why in my mind I think it is worth the effort to
contact the church and to see if there is any type of connectivity that could be arranged.
Mr. Perryman - I think that if they want two entrances it is his piece of property and they should have it.
As long as it does not constitute a major safety hazard or DOT comes back and says no. If it does not
violate a DOT traffic parameter and if the property owner wants it I would say let them have it.
Town Planner Cook - NCDOT said they would approve two.
Ms. Propst – NCDOT builds roads.
Chairman Sharp – NCDOT said they would approve two curb cuts or entrances. Our traffic engineer said
that the northern entrance should be the only curb cut.
Town Planner Cook - DOT has also looked over this site plan and said this site plan with that left hand
turning lane does not create any significant impact on traffic.
Ms. Propst – Two entrances will be easier and safer for all traffic especially since NCDOT said it was
fine. NCDOT should be the law.
Mr. Giattino – Ingress and egress would be quicker if there were two.
Vice-Chairman Dow – Maybe I am getting out of touch. We have maybe 310 in and outs a day –
roundtrip - probably more like 200 and that will depend and could change based on tenants. I think it is
great to give a guy anything he wants and I understand why he would like that very attractive driveway at
the front. But I also understand that NCDOT would tell you this that every time he cuts the road you add
incrementally to the danger for traffic incidents. While they say they will approve it I don’t think that
14
means that is the way to do it. We hire an engineering firm to look out for what we want. They have
questions and I would wait until they settle it.
Mr. Giattino – NCDOT is going to look at the minimum standards.
Vice-Chairman Dow – NCDOT planned the ingress and egress to this shopping center when they
widened Providence Road. Great job!
Mr. Overcash – From the engineer memo – they are just saying by the way if you want one you can save
yourself some money. Considering the proposed site design and the deletion of the left over it would be
an option to delete one of the driveways from the site. It appears that one driveway can handle the
number of trips.
Mr. Propst – NCDOT said it is fine and they build roads all over North Carolina.
Town Planner Cook - We hired our engineer to look over this but the applicant does reimburse all
engineering costs. They will be paying for this review. Comment #1 the traffic engineer is saying I
disagree with the recommendation for a left over at Access 1. The addition of a northbound 100 foot turn
lane at Access 1 would necessitate the shortening of the dual 600 southbound left turn lanes at NC 84
based off of the 2030 analysis conducted for the State TIP both 600 foot southbound turn lanes were
warranted.
Vice-Chairman Dow – My point is if we have an expert we hired we ought to let them finish their job.
Chairman Sharp - Why not include a comment to Town Council that the Planning Board has some
questions about two entrances versus one. The Town Council makes the final decision anyway. If we are
not coming to a consensus, let’s bring the concerns up to the Town Council. Do we want to recommend
that if both entrances are kept that they do not put in the left turn lane? Our engineer said the left turn
lane was not necessary but it was on the drawing. If they don’t have the left turn lane then they would
have to go up and make a u-turn. Our traffic engineer said that would cause issues with traffic at
Providence and Highway 84.
Mr. Giattino - I think u-turns are dangerous.
Chairman Sharp - The Planning Board has possible concerns about two entrances versus one and a left
turn lane on Providence Road.
Councilwoman Hadley asked how many believe that it would be better for them to have just a single
entrance - 4 out of 7 of the Planning Board members had concerns.
Chairman Sharp - How many of you have a concern with the left turn lane into the property?
Vice-Chairman Dow – When NCDOT addressed the widening of Providence Road they went through
hours with us advising that u-turns are safer than making left hand turns.
Mr. Temple - If DOT had one ounce of a concern they would have listed that as a bullet.
Vice-Chairman Dow - I am not a traffic engineer that is why we hired the people. Let’s just wait and see
what they have to say.
15
Mr. Temple – NCDOT says one thing – engineer who we paid for says that they disagree. I agree earlier
with the statement that they are still working on and let them come back.
Chairman Sharp – We are just saying that we believe this is something that should be further studied.
Vice-Chairman Dow – We do not have to make a decision tonight. We can wait until the next meeting.
There are nine bullet points on this that we cannot answer.
Town Planner Cook discussed that half of the conditions may be met if the applicant was to wait another
month.
Ms. Propst – Are you going to make them have everything exactly perfect before it goes to the Town
Council for them to have a discussion? I do not know why we can’t work through these things that we
discussed tonight. They have all their permits. They have done all of their engineering. Why can’t this
move forward to the Town Council.
Vice-Chairman Dow – I think we can.
Ms. Propst – I think we should. We put them off last month.
Chairman Sharp – The ordinance says that the application must be complete. Jordan could not bring it to
us until the application was complete.
Town Planner Cook – I did not have a complete application last month.
Ms. Propst - We have a property that has a 15,000 square foot building on five acres of land. They saved
74,202 square feet of open space. They could build five houses with asphalt covered all over that
property. You would not have any choice of what they do on that property. This is a beautiful asset to
our community. If we have it restricted so they can only put office space that is doctors, attorneys or
professionals – what an added addition to this community. I feel that we have nit picked them to death.
Let’s move forward with something that is an asset to this community. I feel bad for the way we treated
these people.
Chairman Sharp – It is our job.
Vice-Chairman Dow – I am not going to fight the Land Use Plan battle again. What we are supposed to
do is look through the conditions and see that it fits within our community. Those conditions are clearly
stated. I am concerned that it is not pedestrian friendly. It begins a crossing of Providence Road that is a
safety hazard. I don’t think we want to come off as promoting people walking across Providence Road.
It is not between two commercial enterprises. It is between two residential enterprises. Don’t get
confused legally. I am concerned and am interested to hear your renditions to DOT. I sat with NCDOT
for hours listening to how dangerous left hand turns were and how they needed to stack up here and they
would not give anyone a left hand turn in that area. Why they changed their mind, I have no idea.
Town Planner Cook - Upon making a recommendation the Planning Board shall advise and comment on
whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the comprehensive plan that has been adopted and
with any other officially adopted plan that is applicable.
Mr. Perryman moved to send a favorable recommendation to the Town Council for the Polivka M-X
Rezoning with the following conditions and found the plan to be in compliance with all applicable Town
16
Codes and Ordinances as contained in the Land Use Plan, Lighting Plan, Noise Plan and Transportation
Plan:
Town Planner Cook’s Conditions
ƒ Water Plans and allocation must be approved by Union County Public Works;
ƒ Lighting Plan must be approved by Town Lighting Engineer;
ƒ All engineering must be approved by Town Engineer;
ƒ NCDOT driveway permit must be approved by NCDOT;
ƒ Traffic Impact Analysis must be approved by Town Traffic Engineer;
ƒ All signage must comply with Chapter 58, Article 5 of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance;
ƒ Prior to the commencement of any construction, the Town Council must approve Construction
documents in accordance with Section 58-271 (h) of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance;
ƒ Applicant must provide detention volume controls for a 25-year storm; (Town Planner Cook
advised that this condition is above and beyond due to the sensitivity of the Highgate
neighborhood. He stated, “You have heard some of the complaints from the Highgate neighbors
about the water/stormwater runoff. Based on conversations with our engineer they have
recommended that the applicant provide these volume controls for a 25-year storm. We typically
ask for a 10-year storm.”
ƒ Any future revisions to the approved site plan and other approved documents must comply with
Section 58-271 (i) of the Weddington Zoning Ordinance.
Additional Conditions of the Planning Board:
ƒ Exterior lighting is minimized to security lighting only from one hour after the last business
closes until one hour before the first business opens.
ƒ Save the existing old tree on the property or provide to the Zoning Administrator as to why it
cannot be saved.
ƒ Any future sewer connections must occur along Providence Road.
ƒ Crosswalks either painted or pavers installed for walking across the entrances on Providence
Road where the existing sidewalk is located.
Concerns of Planning Board:
ƒ The Planning Board has possible concerns about two entrances versus one and a left turn lane on
Providence Road.
The vote on the motion is as follows:
AYES: Vivian, Perryman, Propst, Giattino and Romaine
NAYS: Vice-Chairman Dow
Item No. 6. Update from Town Planner. The Planning Board received the f
