MOORESVILLE – In an effort to compromise community development and town construction regulations, Mooresville Planning Board’s Board of Adjustment gave a 4-1 for the approval of a new variance with conditions that would affect cul-de-sac construction on a Linwood Road property.
In their regular scheduled meeting on Oct. 12, board members considered the application of Bradford Community Investors, LLC, which requested an approval of two cul-de-sacs that exceed the Town of Mooresville’s regulation of 400 feet in length.
The site is already zoned for apartment complexes and is part of a larger subdivision proposal. The proposed development, Gambill Forrest, is projected to be a single family subdivision on Linwood Road with construction slated to begin in the spring of 2018, according to developers.
However, Craig Culberson, senior planner for the town, said, plans for the entirety project are under review by staff and are yet to be approved.
The first cul-de-sac length change requested by the applicant was to make it 565 feet. The Linwood Road property is bound on three sides, and currently there’s no opportunity for connectivity within the subdivision. The 575 ft. cul-de-sac would support 15 lots and common open space.
The south cul-de-sac was requested for 745 feet – with the property separated from the remainder of the site. The cul-de-sac would support 23 lots and common open space. The variance request facilitated some of the design, Culberson said.
The decision of the Board of Adjustment on a variance is final and will not be voted on by the Mooresville Board of Commissioners when they vote on the project.
According to the case fact and findings, Mooresville Public Works Department had no issues with the proposed lengths as long as utilities and streets are constructed to town standards. However residents who live in and around the area were not so keen on the request, as was board member, John Robertson, who outwardly opposed the request altogether.
David Ramage, a longtime resident of Mooresville who lives on Linwood Road, said his property would be surrounded by the proposed development on three sides.
“I’ve been living in Mooresville for 43 years. I realize growth is coming, I can accept that, but we should take care of the traffic,” Ramage said. “It’s already difficult coming out of my driveway, the width of the road needs to be adjusted. I haven’t seen anything about this (development) – no drawing or anything.”
Culberson said a traffic impact analysis study was underway.
Resident Sean Kinney of Linwood Farms Community said his neighborhood was at risk with the extension of the cul-de-sacs at this depth because of traffic pains.
“We deal with 336 residents daily coming in and out of the neighborhood,” Kinney said. “Adding this cul-de-sac will add more traffic. I don’t see a point of why it needs to be extended to this size. It’ll only draw more traffic. We’re already drowning in traffic, and there are no plans to reduce to eliminate it.”
Applicant representative, Richard Brolin of Piedmont Design Associates told the planning board the reason for the request of the new depth and length of the cul-de-sac is it will give developers more freedom to add lots onto the subdivision.
“Why not let it stay 400 feet – if you leave it as it is the development will still be built,” Robertson said. “I’ve been here a long time, and I have never heard the board consider how the developer would have any impact.”
The Mooresville Fire-Rescue Department laid out conditions that would need to be met by property developers, which included cul-de-sacs staying clear at all times, no street parking or a 26 feet minimum of street clarity and appropriate fire hydrant pressures.
Planning board member, Gary West, suggested changing the request on the south cul-de-sac, from 745 feet to 615 feet. He also said all four comments from the Mooresville Fire Department must be complied. The board agreed, 4-1.
“We’re just trying to work with both the population growth of the community and developer at the same time,” West said in response to Robertson’s comment.