TOD discusses how Davidson Pointe water will spur development

It has been a while since aShortChronicle posted anything.  Covid-life has just not allowed for it.  However, something just floated over the transom regarding a former storyline covered here that may interest readers.

Way back in 2017, before the earthquake that hit Davidson Town Hall, there was contentious rezoning effort for land off of NC115 and Bridges Farm Road just over over Iredell County line.

Check here, here, and here for the backstory on all that.  It culminated with this embarrassing moment at Mooresville Town Hall when the Mooresville Board couldn't vote for it after it became clear what was going on behind the scenes.

Well, development along this corridor is likely to become a hot topic again as Covid winds down, but this time the conversation involves actions at Davidson Town Hall.  It has to do with extending Charlotte Water service to the Davidson Pointe neighborhood which is not contiguous with Davidson in Mecklenburg but still part of the Town.  The discussions of extending water to the neighborhood were put on hold last year just before the pandemic but is now back on the agenda.

In this year-old Lake Norman Citizen piece it's made clear this extension has nothing to do with development.

"At the meeting, Justice said when the Davidson Pointe neighborhood was approved, the water service extension was not available and a community well system was installed as a temporary measure until Charlotte Water was ready to extend services.

And Mayor Rusty Knox emphasized, multiple times, the extension has “zero to do with development” but is designed to provide permanent water service – and subsequently more reliable fire protection services – in Davidson Pointe."

Fire service improvements have largely to do with water pressure.  At the February 23rd Davidson Board meeting it was noted by Fire Chief, Ryan Monteith, that with the water service extension water pressure would be about 1000 gal/min versus the 700 gal/min the fire department can achieve by supplementing the Davidson Pointe well system with DFD equipment when on site.  Per discussion at that meeting it was noted that Davidson  Pointe is the only neighborhood in town that needs such supplemental support in the event of a fire.  It was also made clear that extending water service has been in the plan since this neighborhood was approved in the late 1990s.

However, a year after discussions were paused and after the February 23rd Board meeting at Davidson Town Hall, those statements by Davidson officials that this isn't about development no longer seem to be entirely accurate.

Town Manager Justice explained that extending the line opened up other "opportunities to serve" for future development and that Davidson has been in discussions about a "boundary agreement" with Mooresville that would eventually redefine the border between the two towns mentioning that the area south of Bridges Farm Road could eventually become part of Davidson proper once development occurs calling the division as defining "Future Mooresville" and "Future Davidson".  Justice also stated that this discussion wouldn't be complete until later this year.  The proposed water line going to Davidson Pointe would be on the Davidson side of this line.

There was some discussion initiated by a question from Commissioner Fort to the Charlotte Water representatives asking if Davidson's policy on approving water sewer extensions would apply to future development along this line.  The response was less than reassuring  "There is not an answer to that question. It depends" was the response from Charlotte Water's David Czerr.  However, Czerr did go on to explain that the largest 80 acre parcel on the Future Davidson side would almost certainly require an extension which would need approval from Davidson under the Town water and sewer extension policy.  Mayor Rusty Knox also asked about the possibility this new line could facilitate development north of Bridges Farm Road in the Future Mooresville area.  The answer here was "I'm not going to say it can't, but it can't go far".  This is due to engineering and capacity issues.  It was also stated that if there was any development north of Bridges Farm Road off of this line it would need to come before Davidson as an extension approval.  Manager Justice then pointed out that this was part of the boundary discussions with Mooresville.

At the end of this discussion, Commissioner Sitton gave a vigorous response saying that bringing up all these development issues at the "eleventh hour" after saying all along that this was only about fire service felt less than transparent and looks "deceptive" and "sneaky".  Commissioners Fort and Campbell responded that the input from the neighborhood had been received and that they felt comfortable with the process.

The Board is set to vote on this approval this Tuesday, March 9th.

After watching this discussion, recognizing the impacts the virtual setup Covid has required, and recognizing (now) that new development will be in the cards with this water extension it seems a couple things should happen prior to any vote to ensure no future surprises.

The prudent thing would seem to be to make sure (at least) this pending boundary agreement with Mooresville is fully worked out and the Town officially and fully understands from Charlotte Water the possible development impacts of this extension.

But...prudent doesn't always happen.

Plum Creek Greenway Under Construction

Major construction underway for the past several weeks has the new Plum Creek Greenway coming into shape.  This will connect the West Branch greenway in Davidson up to Bailey Road across from Hough High School in Cornelius.

Plum Creek Greenway 

View from Davidson Greenway 

Bridge End View

Bride Side View
from Westbanch Pkwy 

View from Bailey Rd
Trailhead

Davidson stumbles past legal/enforcement problems with multiple coronavirus votes on Tuesday

Davidson's Board met on Tuesday for a marathon meeting to discuss options on how to make local coronavirus controls more restrictive as the State moves towards Phase 2 reopening as soon as this Friday.

The most contentious item up for discussion was whether or not to impose a mask wearing requirement in public spaces, specifically inside businesses, set to reopen with Phase 2.

After lengthy discussion the Board initially voted 4-1 to "require" businesses to post a sign stating the mask wearing policy of the business with Commissioner Autumn Michael being the sole dissenting vote.  Commissioner Michael preferred waiting a couple of weeks to see how things went with reopening before making any mandatory requirements. The Board then voted 2-3 against a motion to make mask wearing mandatory by employees with Commissioners Matthew Fort and Jane Campbell voting for the requirement and Commissioners Jim Fuller, David Sitton and Autumn Michael against.  If there was any surprise in this second vote it was with Commissioner Sitton voting against it.  After being the most outspoken along with Commissioner Fort in support of mandatory mask requirements, it was surprising to see him vote against it.

However, things quickly unraveled on the passed signage requirement when Police Chief Penny Dunn and Economic Development Director  Kim Flemming began asking questions about enforcing it.  It soon became clear that making the signage required had unintended consequences.  Because it was being required it would need to be an amendment to the State of Emergency Proclamation signed by Mayor Knox on March 23rd, violations of which could be a Class 2 criminal misdemeanor.

Oops!

After much more discussion and hypothetical scenario pondering, the Board then undid the 4-1 vote making signage required to making the signage just recommended.  That motion passed unanimously.

Disaster averted!

The Town was no longer at risk of making the nightly news for inadvertently making some of its business owners misdemeanor criminals for not having a sign or for not enforcing a sign they did have.

The good news is that encouraging (not requiring) mask wearing is hardly a bad idea, and that's where the Town ultimately ended up.  The saying "sometimes it's better to be lucky than good" comes to mind.

So, what set the stage for the messy decision making process by the Board?

That part is pretty simple - poor preparation and advice on the part of Town Attorney, Cindy Reid.  The Board and the Mayor never would have been put in the position they were and hours of stressful discussion could have been avoided,  if their attorney had given them good and complete advice going into it.

Any requirement, any mandatory restriction put in place under emergency powers would have required updating the Emergency Proclamation and imposed penalties for violating it.  That complete advice should have been given to the Board before the discussion.  Instead, the Board was just told they had the authority to make more restrictions, but not the real implications of doing so - charging violators with a misdemeanor.  When it did come up it should have been the Town Attorney doing so, not the Police Chief.  Instead, throughout the discussion, whether it was on points of order with motions, or with this more critical legal advice, the Town was lucky to have others such as the Chief and Commissioners Michael and Fuller, both attorneys, to point out the issues.  The Board really deserved better from the Town Attorney on what was potentially the stickiest legal situation the Board has dealt with in many years.

Again, sometimes it's better to be lucky than good, but when it comes to things this important, it's important to be good.

To end on a more positive note, the Town also agreed Tuesday to move to Phase 2 along with the County and State when that occurs.  They also will be looking at helping local restaurants by figuring out ways to have more outside seating which should definitely help restaurants along Main Street serve more people under Phase 2 capacity restrictions.  That's something which will be a big help as those critical businesses to the community try to get back on their feet.  There will also be mask wearing signage printed up which will encourage, not require, use.

Davidson Board to hold Special Meeting on Tuesday to consider more stringent coronavirus restrictions

At the May 12th regular board meeting, Davidson electeds spent 2 hours discussing the coronavirus pandemic. The beginning of the first hour was spent hearing updates from NC Senator Natasha Marcus and NC Representative Christy Clark on the happenings in Raleigh.

About 15 minutes in, the Board members went around the virtual zoom table with each asking questions.  This was kicked off with Commissioner Fort asking right off the bat if Marcus and Clark agreed with the move to Phase 1 of reopening.  Without answering directly if their personal opinions differed from that of Governor Cooper's on the decision to move to Phase 1, Marcus and Clark both indicated that they received updates from NCDHHS and that they trusted the experts there.

After the Senator and Representative left the conference, Davidson's Board spent the next hour discussing the Town's response, and specifically, whether or not the Town of Davidson could/should be more stingy with its own reopening plan - something both senior management and the Town Attorney assured them they could do under its own emergency authority.  Again, this part was opened with Commissioner Fort asking that the Board vote on whether or not it agreed with Cooper's decision to move to Phase 1 of opening.  The Board never voted on this last week, but Fort did say that if the Board was to vote to just accept what the County and State decided it would likely not be unanimous with him voting against such a hypothetical.

During the solid hour of discussion, much attention with no real detail was had around the subject of masks.  Should the Town require them inside businesses?  Could the Town require them in parks?  What and how did Durham implement more restrictive changes?  How would any such requirements be enforced?

The answer to the parks mask wearing requirement idea was that for Fisher Farm and Abersham the Town has no authority since they are owned by the County.  This of course implies it's possible for the Town to require them at Town-owned parks and greenways.  However, making masks required in Town Parks wasn't specifically discussed during the meeting other than in reference to having the possible authority to do so.

In fact most of the conversation on masks centered around possibly requiring them inside businesses and presumably any lines outside them.  This rightfully led to consideration of enforcement and asking the question "what happens if someone does not comply?"  Police Chief Penny Dunn was not on the call to provide her insights.  Mayor Knox glossed over the question saying compliance shouldn't be a problem in Davidson.  Commissioner Fuller did however acknowledge the possibility of having to deal with situations like the one in Raleigh recently where 2nd Amendment advocates protested such public orders.  That protest was around stay at home orders and did not involve protesting a mask requirement, but the idea is worth considering.  What might be the unintended consequences from an enforcement perspective of Davidson going out on its own with added restrictions?

This portion of the meeting ended with staff being directed to come up with some options.  Those can be found here on the agenda for Tuesday's Special Meeting.  A special webinar registration link is also included for those citizens who would like to participate in the discussion.

The options range from the most extreme restriction of staying in Phase 1 when the State and County move to Phase 2 (possibly as soon as the end of this week), to modifying certain aspects of moving to Phase 2 such as opening restaurants but with only outdoor seating, to requiring masks in public places, to moving to Phase 2 when everyone else does.  Much of the attached deck of slides focuses on a possible Town information campaign encouraging mask wearing.

Interestingly, there is no attached resolution or ordinance that might be voted on at the meeting.  Typically, such documents are included in the agenda.  That could be a sign of the fluidity of the situation with no specifics readily available to even draft one, or it could mean no such documents are needed if the actions just include directing staff to conduct a public information campaign.  Per comments at the meeting last week this could also mean a document to vote on isn't really needed because the power to do these things is really vested solely with the Mayor under emergency powers.  This last possibility could mean some document will be pulled together after the meeting for the Mayor to sign.  However, Mayor Rusty Knox did indicate last week that he intended to follow the Board majority and not make any of these decisions alone.

Tune in this evening at 6pm.  It is sure to be an interesting one.

Note to Readers:  This is the first real post in quite a while here at aShortChronicle, and several readers have reached out to ask "where have you been?"  The absence hasn't been because of any health issue, overwork elsewhere, or because of a lack of possible Town Hall topics to discuss.  Rest assured, or maybe not, the number of questions, comments, and information received here at aShortChronicle on Town shenanigans and tomfoolery has not slowed down.  However, for the time being judiciousness in choosing what to cover will be the norm.

FOUND: Missing Teen in Davidson contact the Town with any information

UPDATE: The Davidson Police Department is happy to announce that Ket Barrington was located on March 11, 2020 and is safe.  Thank you to everyone who called, inquired and assisted during the search.  

The Davidson Police need assistance in locating a missing 16 year-old. Bereket “Ket” Barrington left his home on Grey Road in Davidson during the early morning hours of Monday, March 9, 2020.  Ket did not take his phone, computer and wallet or have any means of transportation.  Ket is known to frequently walk in Abersham Park and attends William A. Hough High School in Cornelius.  A distinctive feature is his deep voice and slight Ethiopian accent.  If anyone has seen or spoken to Ket since Sunday night, please let us know he’s safe.  Any information that you can provide would be much appreciated.

NC73 widening...no left turns at Davidson-Concord Road again in the plan...

At the February 11th Davidson Town Board meeting there was a lengthy discussion on the proposed widening of NC73.

Town officials discussed a draft resolution covering 7 items of concern - a list that was eventually expanded to 8.  The list spanned everything from landscaping to affordable housing to historic preservation to mobility to development and yes, most importantly, public safety.  This list and draft resolution was the result of several officials attending an NCDOT meeting for public officials back on January 27th.  An open house for the general public was held on the 28th.

For Davidson residents who travel through the NC73/Davidson‐Concord Rd intersection and for those who live on the east side of Davidson along NC73 the safety and mobility issues will likely bubble to the top of this lengthy list of concerns.

aShortChronicle reported on the proposed lack of left turns at the NC73/Davidson-Concord Rd intersection a year ago in February of 2019.  See here for that story.  The update to that story indicated the issue had been resolved with a signal at this intersection and that the lack of left turns was an "error" on the map.  However, based on the discussion at Davidson Town Hall last week that error now seems to be the actual plan with the NC 73 widening project - no left turns a NC73/Davidson-Concord Rd.

It was mentioned that this no left turns plan could possibly change if there is development on the Huntersville side of this intersection on the south side of NC73.  There is apparently an unnamed developer for an unnamed project looking at that location who would be on the hook to do a traffic study showing that a left turns across NC73 is warranted.  However, Town Manager Jamie Justice stated that may just be for left turns on the road crossing NC73, and not for left turns from NC73 onto Davidson-Concord Rd or into this new development.  Those lefts would still need to use the u-turn format of passing the intersection then doing a u-turn and coming back to it to make a right.  See below for the pictures of how this will work.

The primary safety concern with this intersection stated at last weeks meeting has to do with public safety response, particularly for swift access to the Davidson East and Summers Walk neighborhoods on NC73.  Davidson Fire and Police service will have to navigate these unwieldy intersections that needlessly add distance and increase response times.

Unfortunately, this plan by NCDOT should surprise nobody.

This is not the first time NCDOT plans have sacrificed safety for Davidson residents for the benefit of pushing a little more traffic a little faster on area roads.  Long-time readers of aShortChronicle may remember the fight to reduce speeds on Davidson-Concord Rd as another recent example.

NCDOT initially did not want to reduce speeds from 55mph on sections of this road down to 45mph south of Beaver Dam.  They also didn't want to reduce the speed to 35mph from there into downtown.  It took a concerted effort by citizens to make the case and stand up to NCDOT staff to get this done.  Ultimately, it took bringing NCDOT staff to Davidson Town Hall to hear directly from the people to get the job done.

In addition to passing a strongly worded resolution, Davidson Town Hall should consider doing the same thing now and request NCDOT come to speak to residents.  Resolutions are nice.  They may even be necessary, but Davidson passed plenty of resolutions on the speed limit reduction before it got done.  Ut took citizen involvement to make that actually happen.

Questions for the Davidson Cottages Public Input Session on Wednesday

Last Thursday, Davidson Town Hall put out the below notice for a public input session for the new Davidson Cottages project as part of the Davidson Commons East development that includes Woodies..

aShortChronicle previously reported on this project here and last week asked some questions about the overall Davidson Commons East development last week.  See here for that story.

As stated before, the Davidson Cottages project seems like one that meshes well with the surroundings.  It's close to the commercial and transit services at Exit 30.  It will include built affordable housing and market price housing at the more affordable end of the spectrum for Davidson.  It also has a quality builder/developer in Saussey Burbank.

The only obvious drawback from the perspective of aShortChronicle is the possible/expected use of "density averaging" to achieve the planned footprint.  From the Town website on the Board of Adjustment page density averaging (also known as built upon area (BUA) averaging) is described as

Built-Upon Area Averaging is a program whereby parcels located within a protected watershed may obtain additional impervious coverage rights by averaging the total impervious area of the developing lot with the total impervious area of an undeveloped/less developed lot within the same watershed. Essentially, the "receiving lot" obtains additional impervious square footage allowance when the "giving lot" establishes a non-revocable easement containing undeveloped, vegetated area. The amount of this easement area may be transferred from the giving lot to the receiving lot by Final Plat recordation, subject to applicable criteria and processes. Davidson Planning Ordinance Section 17.8 outlines the process and requirements for obtaining a Density Averaging Certificate, which must be approved by the Board of Adjustment. 

Another way to look at this is it is a gimmick to benefit developers that has little to nothing to do with water quality. Less expensive land, possibly unbuildable land, can be bought for relatively cheap then "set aside" to allow more density on high dollar land.

Any developer desiring to use density averaging should present the exact potential donor lot or lots that might be a part of any such equation in its public information session.  Would these donor lots be buildable at the same scale?  If not then density averaging doesn't really add value from an overall water quality perspective.  In fact it could take away value if the donor lot is unbuildable anyway and would never have impervious development but "saving" it allows more density elsewhere.

Importantly, under the current Davidson ordinance the final density averaging decision does not occur until a Board of Adjustment hearing after the rest of the plan is approved.  This sets up the situation where a lot of time and effort has been expended before the BOA hearing.  What are the chances the BOA turns down the request for density averaging at that point?  There will obviously be a lot of pressure on them to approve.  It would be much better if this was done earlier, but it is not.

With this particular development there is also a lot of history on the subject already.  aShortChronicle would like to see a full explanation of the history of this project and the possibility of using density averaging at the public information session.  It is very unlikely that will happen however.

Public records requests completed over the past few years show that the possible use of density averaging on this parcel has been under discussion as early as late 2016 during the swirl around the neighboring Griffith Street Hotel project. Records show there have been multiple times the density averaging subject on this particular parcel was planned to go before the BOA - as early 2017 - in both July and October of that year.  Former Town Attorney Rick Kline was engaged by the developer for this 2017 work.  The October 2017 hearing was suddenly pulled at the last minute in what appears to be a Town decision, but the record contains no explanation of why.  However, the latest records request received earlier this month also appears to be incomplete.  If this idea was pulled by the Town in 2017, why would the Town even be considering it now?  Was there a process mistake in 2017 that required it to be pulled or some other reason?  These concerns were all presented to elected officials last week for comment, but none has been received as of this posting.

Again, the Davidson Cottages project seems like a very good one.  This isn't really about that.  However, in the interest of transparency for this project and future ones, all of these concerns about how the Town and Town Staff handle these things need addressing.

New/Old project in the works for former Griffith Street Hotel site?

Last week, aShortChronicle encouraged Davidson Commissioners to go slow in approving new developments on the remaining Davidson Commons East development sites.  These are the vacant parcels on either side of Woodies including the two closest to Griffith Street that had been designated for the now defunct hotel project and the one furthest from Griffith Street now designated for the Davidson Cottages project.

During Tuesday's Board meeting there were multiple interesting and some concerning discussions that could impact this land.

During the agenda item discussion on possibly allowing CFA Church to take over the former Healthy Home Market space at Sadler Square, something the Board declined to support, Mayor Knox asked the CFA representative if they had checked the possibility of building on the former hotel sites.  That discussion ended with this seeming to be a possibility.  Something like a church on that site certainly wouldn't generate the type of response as the old hotel project, so that was an interesting suggestion.

Next in the meeting agenda relating to Davidson Commons East was discussion on extending water and sewer to the new Davidson Cottages development proposed by Saussey Burbank on parcel 4D of Davidson Commons East.  That's the parcel furthest from Griffith Street highlighted in green.  Parcels 4A and 4B are the parcels formerly designated for the failed hotel project.  Parcel 4C is Woodies Auto.

Davidson Commons East

After much discussion on the possibility of having to use a gimmick called "density averaging" to allow the Davidson Cottages project to be built, the Board did eventually approve the water and sewer extension but only for this specific project, meaning if this project doesn't happen, another project doesn't automatically get the water sewer extension.  A public input session for the Davidson Cottages project is scheduled for January 29 at Town Hall.  More details on that to come.

aShortChronicle has no issue with approving the water/sewer extension, the Saussey Burbank project seems like a good one.  However, there were multiple points made in the discussion around density averaging as well as vested rights that raise some serious concerns.  aShortChronicle has asked Davidson electeds for comment on these concerns for a follow up story, so stay tuned.

The crux of the problem is this.  Density averaging is a gimmick that allows a developer to use impervious built upon area (BUA) from another non-contiguous parcel to allow for more density in a target parcel.  In the case of DCE the total BUA applies to all 4 parcels including Woodies which is already built and needs to be divided among all four parcels.  The only reason for the Saussey Burbank project to need to employ density averaging is if there is not enough unallocated BUA remaining because of what is supposedly allocated for parcels 4A and 4B, the old hotel parcels.  To their credit, multiple Commissioners, particularly Commissioners Matthew Fort and David Sitton, asked a number of questions probing why this is the case and what they can possibly do to prevent density averaging from being used.  The answer was briefly mentioned, but it boils down to something called "vested rights".

Vested rights is a legal determination that allows a developer to build a plan based on various approvals.  This is also where we get to the possibility of a new project for DCE parcels 4A and 4B.

After some delay, this past Friday, aShortChronicle finally received the results of a records request on DCE.  This request was for anything to do with DCE since January 1, 2017 through December 20, 2019.  aShortChronicle has been asking questions since August regarding the former hotel parcels, this records request would hopefully fill in the blanks.

In this request, there are numerous emails with Town staff making it clear the land owner/developer for DCE has been planning to implement a new project on the former hotel parcels, and things have been in motion for quite some time.  This in spite of Town staff repeatedly telling aShortChronicle over many months that they hadn't heard anything from the "hotel developer".

The earliest mention in the records request is an email from Planning staff member David Cole to the land owner/developer on July 12, 2019 - less than one month after the State Appeals Court decision invalidating the hotel zoning.  This email was in reference to obtaining building permits for 127 and 151 Gateway Drive.  Those are the two former hotel parcels.  There is a later email in November indicating the land owner/developer is eager to get started on this new project.  aShortChronicle did receive a message from Town Staff on December 5th saying the land owner would be refilling plats to specifically allocate BUA to the 4 parcels making up DCE.  While it did not specifically mention a new project, it did mention "vested rights" for the zoning prior to the entire hotel debacle.

So, what is the project?

For those who followed the hotel debacle from the beginning you may remember (or not) that the developer/landowner had a previously approved plan that was never built.  It was a plan for 2, 3-story mixed use buildings on parcels 4A and 4B. This plan was used to attempt to cudgel the public into supporting the hotel.  In fact Commissioner Jim Fuller who was the only current Commissioner on the Board back then made a vague reference to this at last Tuesday's Board meeting during the DCE related conversation.  Here is a link to a 2016 story on this.

However, the key to this new/old/new again plan is this concept called "vested rights".  If there are no vested rights the plan would have to start over from the beginning.  The requirements for vested rights are very complex and this DCE development is particularly complex with multiple plans and amendments since 2007 and now a court case to be factored into the equation.  This also now impacts the BUA calculation for lot 4D and the Davidson Cottages because if 4A and 4B do not have vested rights then some of the BUA needed for lot 4D could be moved to that project negating the need for density averaging there.

On December 4th, December 6th, December 20th, and January 9th, aShortChronicle followed up with the Town for an explanation on how these supposed vested rights were determined and how long they would be valid.  To date, there has been no response from the Town or the Town Attorney other than acknowledgement of receiving the requests.  This is very similar to the non-response received when aShortChronicle was asking these same questions back in 2017.  See this post for more on that.

Frankly, Davidson's Town Attorney, Cindy Reid, is not a career real-estate attorney and the Town Planning Director, Jason Burdette, isn't either.  Without an unbiased and unencumbered third party opinion on this complex issue of vested rights the Town runs the risk of putting the citizens through another Griffith Street Hotel situation, and that's something to be avoided at all costs.

Check back for more.  This story is just beginning.

Continuum sale update from Tuesday's Davidson Board Meeting

On Monday, aShortChronicle reported on the update expected at this week's Board of Commissioners meeting.  In that earlier post information indicated the dollar amount cleared for Davidson may be smaller than many expected due to some previously undisclosed (or at least undetailed) post sale expenses.  The update Tuesday shed little light on that.

However, here is where the numbers land as of now.

After paying off the outstanding debt, the deferred liability to Mooresville, and the known transaction costs, Davidson's portion of the net proceeds from the sale equals just over $2.5 million dollars.  There is $2.75 million in two different escrow accounts to cover any post sale items that pop up.  This includes:

• $750,000 in operations contingency to cover Bill's that my need to be covered by the Towns within the next 90 days.  
• $2 million indemnification escrow

If the escrow money is not used, that money eventually would be split between Mooresville and Davidson based on the 70%/30% ownership.  If zero of it is used, an unlikely scenario, it would bring Davidson's likely highest dollar amount from the sale to $3.325 million.

There was a very brief mention of the other possible costs mentioned in Monday's post.  These are
 still being addressed involving claims by Cornelius, Mecklenburg County, and the State Retirement Plan.  Specific dollar amounts were not mentioned, but obviously if any of these need to be covered they will eat into the net amount on the transaction.  It is the understanding here at aShortChronicle that these costs are not directly related to the sale of the company to TDS, but related to agreements that created Mi-Connection in the first place more than a decade ago that may need to be met if the company was sold.

Aside from these things, Mi-Connection/Continuum cost Mooresville and Davidson taxpayers a net loss overall since 2007 is estimated to be between $31m - $39m over the life of the project.

See the whole presentation here under the first agenda item.

Town of Davidson Hires First Town Arborist (press release)

DAVIDSON, N.C. – The Town of Davidson announces the hiring of Peter Grisewood as the first Town Arborist. Peter will serve as the subject matter expert for all municipal tree efforts, arboriculture, public tree planting and management, tree removal, and urban forest management, including development and interpretation of regulations through the town’s newly revised tree ordinance. He will also lead community outreach efforts, build partnerships, and coordinate public education.

With extensive experience, Peter comes to us most recently from the City of Charlotte, where he has served as Urban Forestry Supervisor since 2016. Previously, Peter worked as an arborist, engineering technician, and tree climber mainly in the Charlotte region. He brings over 20 years of leadership in Urban Forestry and Arboriculture, 10 years of public service at the federal, state, and local levels, and has also been at the top of the industry as an ISA Board Certified Master Arborist for 10 years.  He is currently pursuing a Masters in Public Administration at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.

Originally recommended by a resident-based advisory committee (livability board), the creation of this position is vital to the successful implementation of the town’s tree ordinance, which is a priority identified by the mayor and board of commissioners. It also equally executes the strategic vision the community set forth in the new Davidson Comprehensive Plan, which calls for the town to create an effective tree canopy management plan. This ultimately enables the community to best preserve and enhance tree canopy throughout town - something that has long been a priority for both Davidson residents and town staff alike.

“We are excited about the level of expertise Peter will be able to bring to the town,” said Davidson Town Manager Jamie Justice.  “We are looking forward to how he will help us build upon the critical work we have been doing to preserve our tree canopy and educate everyone in the community about this important issue.”

Peter begins in his role on January 27th and may be reached at pgrisewood@townofdavidson.org.

NorthMeck bus route changes on way with MetroRapid service starting Feb-3

NorthMeck bus riders will be getting some new options and a couple of new routes in early February to speed commuter traffic to/from Uptown.  The service, branded as "MetroRapid", features the following:

• a new 290 local circulator will serve the Davidson-Concord Rd area of Davidson between Main Street and the Rocky River Road roundabout
• a new 63x direct from the Huntersville Gateway Park and Ride with mid-day service to Northcross.
• a modified 48x serving only the Northcross Park and Ride
• a modified 77x serving the Davidson and Cornelius Park and Rides
• 53x unchanged on the NorthMeck end
• Uptown dropoff/pickup points significantly changed to use Church and College streets utilizing the Express Lanes direct access ramps on 277.  This will primarily impact riders to the Gateway/Johnson &Wales side of Uptown.

This service all starts on February 3rd.  Routes and schedules below.  This information was obtained at the Tuesday open house event in Uptown at the Main Library.

Town should go slow on Davidson Commons East development to avoid another "Griffith Street Hotel" situation

Tuesday evening, the Davidson Town Board is set to vote on a water/sewer extension for a proposed Saussey Burbank project called "Davidson Cottages".  aShortChronicle strongly encourages the board to hold off on this decision.

To be clear, the proposed development itself is not at all a bad one.  Saussey Burbank is a quality builder and a residential project in that location makes sense with its proximity to services and transit.  However, this project is also part of the larger Davidson Commons East development site that includes Woodies and the former Griffith Street Hotel parcels.  Considering the very recent history of flawed process and procedure on other parcels of this development, those formerly intended for the hotel, it is imperative any further development at DCE be done with absolute transparency.

To date it is hard to say that test has been passed.

There are multiple complicated zoning/planning concepts that potentially come into play with the remaining parcels of Davidson Commons East.  These include vested rights, built upon area (BUA) limitations due to watershed, and density averaging.

Any development on the parcel for the "Davidson Cottages" project potentially impacts the other possible development on the remaining two parcels (the former hotel parcels) because of BUA limitations for the entire DCE master plan that includes the former hotel parcels, Woodies, and now this Davidson Cottages project in question.  The developer of Davidson Cottages has indicated in multiple public meetings that they may use something called "density averaging" to allow them to build a higher density of footprint on their project.  Density averaging allows a developer to use some of the permitted built upon area from a non-contiguous parcel elsewhere in the same watershed to allow more density on their development.  The unbuilt BUA on the donor parcel is then permanently protected.  It is a relatively new and gimmicky tactic to benefit developers, and Davidson's Planning Department and Town Attorney don't have much experience in it.  To the best of aShortChronicle's knowledge, density averaging has not been previously used on an approved project in Davidson.  Importantly in this case, by saving some BUA on the overall DCE project if density averaging is used on Davidson Cottages, that allows more density on the remaining DCE parcels.  The public deserves to know what that might be built on these remaining parcels and if anything else is in the works for these remaining parcels.  Transparency into this would also prevent the sequencing of projects on the DCE property by Town Staff to avoid unwanted public scrutiny - something which has been a problem on this property in the past during the hotel debacle.

To that point, aShortChronicle has for months been trying to find out from Town Hall exactly what might be buildable on the former hotel pieces of this development now that the former hotel project is defunct.  To say we've been "getting the runaround" is putting it politely.  Starting in August of last year, a request to Davidson's Town Attorney, Cindy Reid via the Communications Director, Amanda Preston, aShortChronicle asked some simple questions to get at what can be built on those parcels now.  After months of saying more research needed to be done, when a response was finally received in early December it was nothing more than a copy and paste of a section of the original July 2018 court order invalidating the hotel zoning - information the Town Attorney clearly had for a year and a half which does not even really answer the question.  A follow-up question regarding how any supposed vested rights for this zoning has been calculated has yet to be answered.  Vested rights is a legal term in land development identifying a legal permission to build/develop something on a piece of land.

Finally, after the December Board of Commissioners meeting where the Davidson Cottages was again on the agenda, in an attempt to get to the bottom of all of this before any votes are taken, aShortChronicle filed a public records request where the results will very likely shed some light on all these things.  The Town has yet to respond with anything.

Confused and concerned yet?  You probably should be.  These are complicated zoning issues being handled by the same Planning Department leadership and Town Attorney that landed the Town in court on the Griffith Street Hotel.

With all this in mind, while tonight's scheduled vote on water/sewer is just the first of multiple votes required for Davidson Cottages, prudence dictates going slow on any approval for any project on any parcel of Davidson Commons East until the community feels comfortable everything is being done with 100% transparency.  This community should not be put through another situation like the Griffith Street Hotel, and it is the current Board's responsibility to make sure that does not happen.

Big fish chasing Continuum sale proceeds?

The sale of Continuum in late 2019 was arguably the most positive financial decision in Davidson town history.  It freed taxpayers from endless $1 million per year subsidies.  It extracted the town from the cutthroat telecommunications industry where there was little likelihood of long term success.  It also allowd the town to focus its financial energy where it needs to be in the future - providing critical public services such as Police, Fire, and Parks.

For all these reasons voters approved the sale of the company this past November with 94% voting yes to getting the company off the books.

However, that doesn't mean discussion of the company and its various financial impacts is quite over at Davidson Town Hall.  On Tuesday's agenda, the Board is set to hear an update on the disposition of proceeds from the sale.  aShortChronicle has received information that this may not be the entirely positive discussion that most people would expect.

The word received here at aShortChronicle is that multiple outside government bodies as well as some private entities are looking to get what they see as their respective pieces of these proceeds, and the numbers are not small - potentially running into the millions.

If true, this would significantly eat into any one-time infusion of cash Davidson receives from the proceeds of the sale.  This of course would not make the decision to sell Continuum a bad idea.  Getting into the cable business was the single worst and most damaging decision in the town's history, so getting out of that situation was an imperative at any reasonable cost.  However, it would be highly disappointing and should lead citizens to wonder why this wasn't known to the public before the referendum.

aShortChronicle contacted the Town last week in an attempt to confirm this information.  Town Communications Director, Amanda Preston, declined to provide that confirmation stating only that the Board would be receiving an update on Tuesday.

So, Tuesaday it is.

This is one post where aShortChronicle really hope's the information received was off the mark, but if it was not, then Town Staff will certainly have some explaining to do.  Citizens should be on watch to see how forthcoming Staff is in this update.  aShortChronicle certainly will.

2019 saw major "cleaning" in Davidson, but 2020 poses further work to do.

Belated Happy New Year and welcome to the 2020's!

After taking a few weeks off from covering Davidson Town Hall, it is time to get back at it here at aShortChronicle.  For those keeping track, 2019 was a "slow" year for what this blog does, generating only 52 posts for the year.  That was the fewest by far of any year since the blog's inception at the beginning of 2012...down from an average of over 150 posts per year.  When things are going well, the regular news media can tell the story.  We're glad to let them do it since they get paid and we don't!  From that perspective, a slow year here at aShortChronicle means likely a good year for things here in town.

However, with 2019 now firmly in the rear view mirror, aShortChronicle wanted to take a few minutes to reflect back on what was accomplished last year in Davidson before looking to the challenges of 2020.

2019 was the year when the general mess left by the former administration(s) at Davidson Town Hall finally go cleaned up.  Is it "eat-off-the-floor clean" yet?  No, that would not be recommended.  But, for many there is no longer the sense Davidson Town Hall has a significant "sanitation problem" either.

Here is just some of the "cleaning" that happened during 2019.

• Beaty Street Park became a reality with the land now protected under a permanent conservation easement.  This is a big one and is the culmination of the Save Davidson citizen uprising of 2017.
• The Griffith Street Hotel saga came to an end with citizen plaintiffs settling with the Town to re-coup a portion of their attorney's fees.  The Town Planning Department and Town Attorney should now be on notice that they actually have to follow the rules.
• The Public Facilities Bonds passed with just under 70% support.  This was slightly higher than Bonds passed in 2017 and a firm rebuke of the position the former regime held that citizens could not be trusted with a vote for something as important as Police/Fire and a new Town Hall.
• Davidson and Mooresville sold Mi-Connection/Continuum and got the Towns out of the cable business.  More than a decade ago, citizens were not allowed to vote on purchasing the cable operation.  When Davidson citizens were allowed to vote on selling it, they voted 94% FOR the sale.

As a result of these things and others, Davidson's elected officials were all re-elected with minimal opposition.  There wasn't a divisive election season and the year ended on a high note with the closing of the Mi-Connection deal.

2020 may be a different story though as the cleaning crews over the last decade just hit the main public areas.  There's still unfinished work to be done in the garage, a junk drawer to clean out, and we won't even talk about the attic.

With the economy hitting on all cylinders managing growth will be a constant pressure and stopping bad smelling projects a consistent worry.  Here are some of the things that will likely swirl in the next 12 months that could make things messy again.

• The Potts Street massive apartment complex still in legal limbo will likely get some sort of resolution.  This project if it goes forward will be something that forever changes that area of town.
• Ditto for the Hoke Lumber redevelopment proposal.
• The Davidson Commons East sites will also see more action with a new residential proposal already in the works on the south side of Woodies Auto. The former Griffith Street Hotel parcels also need to be watched now that they are back on the market.
• Commercial projects like the ones already proposed at Exit 30 and on South main also need to be watched closely to make sure the designs mesh with the surroundings.

Citizen efforts like the one at this blog and to an even  greater degree the efforts of the group over at Save Davidson to keep things clean are often mischaracterizing as being "anti-development", but nothing really could be further from the truth.  Instead, these efforts are all about ensuring the right developments happen in the right places.  If that means working to sanitize some truly bad and foul smelling ideas when they come up, so be it.

Take a look sometime at the Town Planning Department page.  There are currently 30 projects on that page ranging from big to small, from residential to commercial.  The majority of them have never warranted even a mention by citizens much less organized opposition.  Why?  Because they are reasonable.  Because they are good.  Because they fit with the character of the town.

Now think about this.  What if citizens had never stood up against efforts like the Catalyst Project, or developing the Beaty Street land instead of keeping it as a park, or stopping the Griffith Street Hotel?  What would Davidson look like then?  Would it be recognizable as a picturesque small college town?  Or, would it be something much different.

All of those things were stopped in the last years of the last decade.  Things were kept clean by citizen cleaning crews.  It wasn't easy work, but things look pretty good now...on the outside.  In the 2020's it will be time to tackle the garage, the junk drawer, and maybe even that attic.

#GriffithSreetHotel saga quietly comes to an end...New Davidson Cottages begins

Tuesday night, at around 7pm, the long-running Griffith Street Hotel saga quietly came to an end at Davidson Town Hall.

As part of the "consent agenda" of uncontested items needing Board approval, the Davidson Board approved a settlement with plaintiffs in the lawsuit against the Griffith Street Hotel thus ending the citizen effort to prevent this unwanted hotel project sandwiched between CSD's K-7 building and residential neighborhoods.

See this link for posts on the entire 4 year history of this hotel proposal.

This settlement will pay the plaintiffs $17,300 to cover their outstanding attorney's fees.  The original motion filed by plaintiffs sought over $43,000.  To that effect, a memo from Town Manager Jamie Justice to Commissioners included the following:

"The Town of Davidson has reached a settlement agreement in the case of Charde et. al. versus Town of Davidson. The settlement is in the amount of $17,300. The town has made the determination that it is in the best interest to settle the claims for attorney’s fees as applicable under state law. The town makes this business decision in the best interest of the taxpayers by evaluating the risks, analyzing the cost-benefit, and seeking final resolution to the case. This would be the last action that concludes all matters related to Charde et. al. versus the Town of Davidson."

Readers may remember that both the Town and developer were defendants in this lawsuit.  This settlement is being paid by the Town, but aShortChronicle has verified with lead plaintiff, Luke Charde, that this concludes all legal action involving the plaintiffs regarding this lawsuit.

In a related item, aShortChronicle has confirmed with the Town why the hotel project has been removed from the Town website.  Per Town Public Information Officer, Amanda Preston, "regarding the Davidson Commons East hotel project, our understanding is that the developer no longer intends to build a hotel on that site."

For those who have been fighting the ill conceived idea of a hotel at this location since early 2016, all of this is certainly welcome news.

Finally, as another sign development in this section of the Circles@30 area is moving on, the Board also heard an update on something called the Davidson Cottages o  Tuesday.  This project recently showed up on the Town website after first being mentioned back in March.  See this post on that original public conversation.  The Davidson Cottages project is on the other parcel in the overall development including Woodies and the parcels previously slated for the hotel.

The Davidson Cottages project by Saussey Burbank, proposes 30 single family homes and two duplexes on the parcel up Davidson Gateway on the other side of Woodies furthest from Griffith Street.  These will be narrow footprint, 3-story homes.  When this project was discussed back in March, the developer was inquiring about the possible need to use density averaging to build the project.  This was presumably because if the hotel project had gone forward, this tool would be needed to be allowed to build at this density due to the impervious surface limits on the overall Davidson Commons East site including all of these parcels.

At the time, the Board indicated this project should come up again when the Hotel issue was resolved.  It should not be lost on readers that this developer wasted no time doing so, bringing it up in the same meeting as the hotel lawsuit settlement.  While theoretically density averaging should no longer be needed since this project can utilize some of the built upon area previously designated for the hotel, as of Tuesday, it was the impression at the Planning Department that density averaging was still a possibility on this site.   Per Amanda Preston...

"Davidson Cottages is a conditional planning area map amendment. The developer has indicated that they will need to use Built-Upon Area (BUA) Averaging (density averaging). Per the ordinance, BUA Averaging can only occur after the board of commissioners has approved the conditional master plan."

This project if it goes forward will require multiple approvals, any if which could derail it.  It needs an approval for water and sewer.  It needs a conditional map amendment approval.  It also needs an approval from the Board of Adjustment if density averaging is ultimately used.

So, as one development project wraps up, another begins.  aShortChronicle will be following this one as well all...along...the...way.

Linden Mill (aka Metrolina Warehouses) has new project in the works...Public Meeting December 9th at Ada Jenkins

Thanks to an eagle eyed community member, aShortChronicle has learned of a possible new project on the Linden Mill site on Depot Street.  This is the same site as the now defunct Davidson Depot project on the long-standing Metrolina Warehouses parcels contaminated by the former Carolina Asbestos Corp.  However, rather than an unpopular, large-scale, multi-family development as proposed by Davidson Depot, this new project appears to be entirely commercial.

The below information hasn't been fully verified with the Town or developer due to the Thanksgiving holiday.  The project is also not listed on the Town Planning Department website, but since this important public meeting is only a week away we wanted to get this information out there.

According to documents on the NCDEQ website, a notice dated November 22nd went out to neighboring residents for a project by 301 Depot Holdings, LLC.  This LLC  is wholly owned by Lat Purser & Associates, Inc with offices in Charlotte.

The notice is for a public meeting on Monday, December 9th, at 630pm at the Ada Jenkins.

Based on the documents filed, the project appears to be more of a conversion/rehab of the existing buildings rather than a teardown of the existing site.  It also looks to be entirely commercial without any large scale residential.  Both should be welcome relief to neighbors as this type of plan should limit environmental concerns over a complete redevelopment of the site, and wouldn't bring hundreds of new residents.  Both were concerns with the previous Davidson Depot plan.

See the renderings below.  These were posted to the NCDEQ website on 11/26.  Plan on attending the Ada Jenkins meeting on 12/9 for confirmation of this information.

1

What if the Public Facilities Bond vote was to fail in Davidson?

As Davidson voters head to the polls this election, deciding two referendums impacting the Town will likely be the biggest choices voters make seeing that the Mayoral race is unopposed and the Board outcome is assured a solid majority of incumbents.

Those referendums include approving the sale of Continuum/Mi-Connection and $14 million in Public Facilities Bonds.

aShortChronicle thought it would be useful to look at the four possible outcomes between these two votes since both directly impact future finances of the Town, particularly the Town's options for addressing public facilities needs.  Here are the combinations.

A) Both referendums fail
B) Continuum fails / Bonds pass
C) Both referendums pass
D) Continuum passes / Bonds fail

For Options A and B, the outcome for the Town as it impacts the public facilities projects would effectively be the same.  In the unlikely scenario where voters don't choose to sell Continuum

• the $1 million per year subsidies to the cable operation would continue indefinitely
• the Town would not receive any money from the company's sale after paying off the remaining debts owed
• the Town's hands would remain tied on Public facilities because of the hefty tax increases that would be required in either of these scenarios

These outcomes effectively eliminate freed up money for public facilities with the only way to fund these projects being an unpopular unilateral decision by the future Board to borrow money against voter wishes and pay for it with significant tax increases.

Without the passage of the Continuum sale referendum, any significant public facilities spending is unlikely - illustrating the importance of this sale going forward.

Option C provides the most money for obvious reasons.

• The sale of Continuum provides an unspecified one-time infusion of cash to the Town after all related debts are paid.
• The sale of Continuum frees up $1 million per year currently used to subsidize the cable system.
• $14 million in additional approved Bond debt specifically for public facilities.

This option will bring the Town's total approved bonds to $29 million including the $15 million approved in 2017 for parks, roads, and greenways.  If all of it is issued residents would likely see significant tax increases over time, or commitment of the entire freed up $1 million annual money from the Continuum sale to prevent these tax increases.  Commitment of this $1 million per year in savings to servicing bond debt however, prevents that money from being used for something like lowering the Town's onerous solid waste fee - meaning taxpayers effectively receive no relief from selling Continuum after years of subsidizing it.

Option D is maybe the most interesting scenario.

What could happen if the sale of Continuum is approved, but the Public Facilities Bonds are not?

In this event, the Board could offset the portion of the public facilities projects for Police and Fire with whatever one-time funds come from the sale of Continuum.  The Town has conspicuously not talked about what it would do with any one-time funds received from a Continuum sale or even how large an amount might be cleared from a sale.  However, that number could be significant.  Based on the numbers that are publicly known ($80m sale price; $59m outstanding debt; roughly $1.8m owed to Mooresville under the interlocal agreement, plus the $1m set aside already for that Mooresville debt) Davidson could receive enough to make a big dent in the costs to renovate the existing Town Hall for Police and Fire.

$80m minus a 6% underwriting commission on the sale yields $75.2m.  Paying off the $59m outstanding debt leaves $16.2m.  Splitting
 that based on the 70%/30% ownership between Mooresville/Davidson leaves roughly $4.8m for Davidson minus another roughly $800k net owed to Mooresville beyond the $1m Davidson already has set aside.  That means Davidson could clear as much as $4m as a best case scenario.

Again, it would have been better for the Town to provide this calculation in more detail.  This calculation presented here is just for illustrative purposes.  If there are other expenses that come up as part of the sale the amount cleared to the Town could certainly be lower.  For example, maybe the commission is higher, or maybe there are some unexpected things that need to be addressed before closing.  However, the amount cleared can only go to zero as a worst case, and that still leaves the $1m per year that is freed up by eliminating the annual subsidy that could be directed towards public facilities in some portion.  Using this money this way would prevent lowering the solid waste fee, but likely for a shorter delay than if committed to a 20-year bond.

Regardless, if the Board after the election sees Police and Fire as a top priority (and they should) this part of the Public Facilities plan should be able to move forward in some fashion.  If the Public Facilities Bond fails to pass it is the belief here at aShortChronicle, it will be because of the overall cost, not because the public does not support the portion for Police and Fire.  Of course as part of moving public safety forward, the remaining staff would need to be accommodated somewhere until a new, less expensive plan can be devised for the 251 South Street facility.

That could be accomplished a number of ways such as: Phasing the public safety upgrades; Renting office space for staff; Making the most efficient use possible of all Town owned space;  Incrementally upgrading select space in 251 South Street.  It certainly might be difficult, but it could be done.  It being difficult also should not be used as an excuse for not moving forward with Police and Fire - again, if the Board sees that to be a priority.

The good news is that the sale of Continuum, if approved, gives the Board options no matter what happens with the Public Facilities Bond.

Main Street Halloween march TOMORROW! (Press Release)

DAVIDSON, N.C. – Put on your costume and join us at town hall on Friday, October 25 at 5:00 p.m. for the Halloween March down Main Street.  Davidson’s retailers, and other participants, will be handing out treats along Main Street, starting at town hall and going down to (and including) Depot Street.  Marchers may start lining up at 4:45 p.m.

“This is such a fun event for everyone – please come out to join us,” said Kim Fleming, Economic Development Manager.  

Want more information on what’s going on in Davidson? Be sure to visit our website often, follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, and sign up for our eCrier email distribution list.

How much will new public facilities projects really cost Davidson?

There has been a lot of talk about the need for expanded public facilities in Davidson over the past several years.  Various proposals have looked at different ways to do this and each came with different costs.

One can go all the way back to the Catalyst Project which got its start in late 2014 which envisioned a complete makeover of the existing Town Hall site with a mix of uses including offices for the Town as well as residential, retail, and even a hotel right on Main Street.  That project was controversial.  It gave rise to the Paradise Lost Facebook group.  It made it sound like the Town could almost get new public facilities for free.  Well, not exactly "free".  The cost may very well have been the Town's soul plus a healthy commission - but it would have included some shiny new offices for staff.  Fortunately, by August 26, 2016 that project collapsed in the face of stiff citizen opposition led by now Mayor Rusty Knox.

In the aftermath of the Catalyst Project, the former Board pushed the idea forward of a new Town Hall paid for by the public.  That 2017 plan would have built a new facility on Main Street in front of the existing Town Hall while upgrading the existing building for the exclusive use of police and fire.  That proposal came in with an initial estimate of $17 million.  That number got people's attention - particularly because the former board was clear that they would not put this expenditure up for a vote.  After a minimal cost trimming exercise, estimated costs were lowered to $15.4 million.  This plan died with the 2017 election of a new Board (the current one) which (thankfully) indicated they would not spend that kind of public money without voter approval.

That brings us to the current plan.

In 2018, Davidson purchased the old IB Middle School property on South Street from CMS at a cost of $2.46 million with the intention of it becoming the eventual Town Hall and community center with an auditorium and space for non profits to use.  The existing Town Hall would be refurbished for police and fire like the other plans.  Costs for the remodel of 251 South Street however are not going to be cheap.  After starting at over $16 million, the Board settled on putting a $14 million bond on the Ballot this November.  This cost does not include renovating the old gym on site, so that will remain unusable.  However, that's not all.  According to Town Finance Director, Piet Swart, "on June 11, 2019, the Board reviewed the project options and moved forward with a total cost of $14,405,114.  The $400K over the proposed $14 million in GO Bonds would come from the capital projects fund."

All together, with the initial purchase of South Street, the proposed Bond, and the planned additional funds from the Town, the current Public Facilities proposal comes in at $16.9 million - making it the most expensive option given serious consideration to date.

The question for voters before heading to the polls and voting on the Public Facilities bond is this...

"Is this too much money to put on the taxpayer while still having $15 million in unspent 2017 bonds hanging out there AND with no plan to reduce the Town's solid waste fee which is the highest in the area AND coming on the heels of a property revaluation that resulted in significantly higher tax bills for many?"

New office building proposed for former Wells Fargo drive through site on South Main

When the Wells Fargo drive through kiosk closed, speculation began on what would become of the site.

With a new proposal on the Town Planning Department website, now we know.  A group called Davidson NoSo Commercial Development, LLC submitted an application dated September-19 for a 3-story commercial office building.

The plan proposes a 15,000 square foot building with 31 parking spaces (25 on site with 6 new on street spots.)  A Transportation Impact Analysis will be required as will Design Review Board approval.

Here at aShortChronicle, initial impressions are that it would be nice if this project had street level retail and a design that fits more with the surroundings.  Those are topics likely to come up during the DEB review process.