[{"_1":2,"_98":-5,"_99":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6527865,"mediaKeyId","3524211-85d112dae248861978f0270ed1667e78","parentId",3524211,"title","Mooresville planning board recommends denial of cottage development text amendment after parking, scale concerns","audioSeconds",2715,"startMs",1040000,"endMs",3755000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3524211-85d112dae248861978f0270ed1667e78&start=1040&end=3755","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3524211-85d112dae248861978f0270ed1667e78/thumbnail_1040000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6527865/Mooresville/Iredell-County/North-Carolina/Mooresville-planning-board-recommends-denial-of-cottage-development-text-amendment-after-parking-scale-concerns","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6527865-c3f7ee25a011327b1f7027cee9316b34/orig.mp4?Expires=1771197396&Signature=G1ut6bTrmKnS9QGubl4fh4natKL-4~6eP1FrAVA91YndpjMbUmLtczr-IsTdRG-rNLs3MuGgP9~9rPTKmR2eAGrlv0U7Jf0r03ttnIyCQR6RqGJ9vyT5zjFv60R~ypWszF5s39zVYVeVAplhJX0UGetMES2P0TWktpQui5Fq3UslPoMe~2WWuSKlCh7DUlxBzRYDuMS4y-AT7fTY3C-pQf9d6YTfLHCdMMW1zuDbmnXjfIG0Q2Y9be0~Tt6kMcsANi~ybyP5XWBk27AglD71tQzlBDF0KxyU2gLKjMfXvFjg~qaCSsZidWq~TelIrQJvNUt3~bUfW99GLGUAsT~kzg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Mooresville","date","2025-05-27T20:49:21Z","article","The Mooresville Planning Board on May 20 recommended denial of TA-2024-10, a text amendment that would change the town’s rules for “cottage” developments, including larger allowed house sizes and more flexible parking options.

The amendment would have required that 50% of cottage homes be 1,600 square feet or less of heated gross floor area and allow the remaining 50% to be as large as 1,950 square feet; it proposed reducing minimum lot area to 1,000 square feet, clarifying setbacks and lot-area rules, reducing the size of common greens while allowing larger community buildings, and permitting parking at individual cottage homes rather than requiring aggregated parking lots. The applicant, Cove Point Development Group, said the changes are meant to improve project feasibility, encourage a mix of home sizes and increase affordability.

Proponents and the applicant said the changes would make it easier to deliver smaller, walkable neighborhoods. \"We wanted to work closely with staff and come up with something that could really unleash the potential of cottage development,\" said Adam Hayes of Cove Point Development Group. He described cottage communities as compact houses oriented toward a shared green and said the current code, which caps floor area at 1,100 square feet for many homes and requires relatively large lots, makes some projects financially impractical.

The board and staff discussed multiple points of implementation and oversight. Planning staff indicated the change would permit on-street parking to count toward parking requirements in some cottage projects and retain an option for common parking lots. Board members and staff emphasized that projects would still go through site-plan review and that parking proposals would be scrutinized at that stage, but several members said the language as written created too much uncertainty for neighborhoods.

\"I don't love the thought of not having a say in only depending on public parking,\" said one board member, who raised concerns about narrow neighborhood streets and the potential for spillover parking. Other commissioners asked whether on-street parking would be enforced or whether the town could be left to react after problems arose.

Board members specifically debated whether the revised language would allow developers to build high‑density subdivisions and simply call them cottage developments. One commissioner described examples elsewhere in the country where cottage-style projects required residents to park multiple blocks away. Another asked for a clearer mechanism that would require off‑street parking when on‑street parking alone could not meet demand.

Staff noted the proposed amendment includes a two‑car maximum garage limit and said the town’s parking table requires two spaces per dwelling, with on‑street spaces allowed as a partial reduction under certain conditions and subject to parking studies if applicants seek more flexibility. Still, board members said the draft removed a previous explicit requirement that all required off‑street parking be provided in common parking areas away from the dwellings, and they expressed concern the deletion would change the character that cottage regulations were meant to protect.

After deliberation the board moved to recommend denial. Commissioner Cole made the motion to recommend denial, citing incompatibility with the town’s walkable, pedestrian‑oriented goals and an objection that the draft increased the primacy of automobile‑oriented design. Commissioner Temple seconded, and the motion carried.

The board did not adopt alternative language at the hearing; members suggested staff and the applicant could return with clearer draft provisions that limit use of on‑street parking and explicitly require relief to be demonstrated at site plan review rather than relying on as‑of‑right interpretation. The Planning Board’s recommendation will be forwarded to the Town Board for final action.

Clarifying details from the discussions: the proposed amendment would allow up to 50% of cottage homes to be 1,950 square feet; staff said existing UDO language currently limits many cottage units to about 1,100 square feet and a 4,000 square foot lot area. The applicant proposed reducing minimum lot area to 1,000 square feet. Parking standards discussed: two off‑street spaces per dwelling remains the base requirement; on‑street spaces can count under the UDO in certain configurations and up to a 20‑space reduction is referenced in the parking table. The board requested clearer draft language on when on‑street parking may be used and how site plan review will enforce parking adequacy.

The Planning Board’s recommendation to deny the amendment is advisory; the Town Board will consider the text amendment and any revised language at a future meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Planning Board - May 27, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Mooresville Planning Board on May 20 recommended denial of TA-2024-10, a text amendment that would change Mooresville’s cottage development rules to allow larger homes and more flexible parking arrangements.","taxTitle","Mooresville, Iredell County, North Carolina","taxId",52387,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6527859,"Planning board recommends denial of conditional rezoning for convenience store, gas station and drive‑through at NC‑3 and Harris Crossing",1207,3643000,4850000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3524211-85d112dae248861978f0270ed1667e78&start=3643&end=4850","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3524211-85d112dae248861978f0270ed1667e78/thumbnail_3643000.jpg","/articles/6527859/Mooresville/Iredell-County/North-Carolina/Planning-board-recommends-denial-of-conditional-rezoning-for-convenience-store-gas-station-and-drivethrough-at-NC3-and-Harris-Crossing","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6527859-f531c4e1b8930a5c93c42a88e2eed7ac/orig.mp4?Expires=1771197396&Signature=kYh7zGyC2ZHmMAnIO~3FS0Q5z4Ccv6ok5PlJ~B7YcWJiZj1~t9yD2C2SOXMy4sDUhArfP5RbX~25YMSHRlrRcVCg7Y3qv-hGoNSgXD8A3Eb5gkBDS~T7WrBd-PtMVFWyocWFayRqMOfSNNmrbL0iqLSr5dE6zE9cg5Azb6g3EY3pNYQCZXkmE5ikBA-KHjWSirHI0DKJetzBFUt-~ZOAsW8b9rUWdFR2X4zzhPr1JOKwd5-qXri0Q2LQLE9BPSmwNsjIWDaJx3D2Z4Esq92iRvFJSul~lkU1sRSAKNSPVWg1Q~68Kv26uwqWH23ZVysXShG3-ZKjcIGLJOzfahWPTg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Mooresville Planning Board on May 20 voted to recommend denial of CZ‑2025‑08, a conditional rezoning application for a 4.88‑acre site at NC‑3 (Cottle Creek Highway) and Harris Crossing Boulevard that would replace an earlier conditional approval for a pharmacy with a proposed 7‑Eleven convenience store with fuel pumps and a Wendy’s with a drive‑through.

Planning staff presented the application and described the proposal’s conditions, which include a 30‑foot buffer, an 8‑foot masonry wall (the UDO minimum is 6 feet), a proposed berm and additional landscaping, and traffic mitigation measures such as a dedicated deceleration lane on NC‑3 and an elongated “pork chop” island to prevent left turns from the site onto NC‑3. Staff recommended denial, citing incomplete assurances that the uses and conditions as proposed would achieve compatibility with adjacent residential properties and the 1 Mooresville plan.

Parviz Mousavi, planner III with Community Development, reviewed the site history and the proposed concept plan and said staff found map amendment standards 1–3 met but standards 4 and 5 (compatibility and consistency with character area guidance) only partially met. He summarized neighborhood meeting input and described resident concerns about noise from drive‑through speakers, all‑night lighting, loitering and crime, and potential fuel leaks and odors.

Todd Mankie of GenMark, the applicant’s representative, and tenant representatives told the board they had met neighbors and proposed several design measures to reduce impacts: relocating the Wendy’s order box away from the closest homes, lowering order‑box speaker volume, adding an 8‑foot wall with a berm and extra landscaping, redirecting the order box to face less‑sensitive directions, providing security cameras, downward‑directed lighting, and repairing a chain‑link fence and pond area. Mankie said underground tanks would be double‑walled and equipped with leak detection sensors and that the tanks would sit about 150 feet from the nearest residence.

Neighbors and dozens of commenters who spoke at the hearing and submitted a petition and written comments opposed the rezoning. Common points raised included the presence of multiple existing gas stations within 2 miles of the site; worry about increased traffic and cut‑throughs in the subdivision; schoolchildren who walk or wait for buses near the intersection; concerns about stormwater and groundwater runoff near the existing retention pond; and fear of increased late‑night activity and crime. Several speakers said the 2007 conditional approval for a pharmacy—part of a larger mixed‑use concept—had never been implemented except for a Walmart neighborhood market, and they urged the board to preserve the original intent.

Proponents included a local real estate broker and a retired police officer, who said a developed, well‑lit site with cameras would be safer than a vacant lot and that the uses were consistent with the town’s neighborhood commercial node designation. Owner representatives noted deed restrictions tied to Walmart that limit pharmacy options at the corner and said national tenants had identified market need.

After nearly three hours of public comment and deliberation, Commissioner Temple moved to recommend denial, saying although the future land‑use map contemplated neighborhood commercial uses, the specific configuration and conditions proposed “fall short of ensuring compatibility” with adjacent homes. The motion was seconded and carried by voice vote. The Planning Board’s recommendation will be forwarded to the Town Board for final consideration.

Clarifying details: the applicant says underground fuel tanks will be more than 150 feet from the nearest residence and equipped with modern leak detection; proposed buffers include an 8‑foot wall plus an earthen berm and 10% additional landscaping beyond UDO minima; staff cited that standards 4–5 (compatibility and character) were only partially met; neighbors submitted a petition of about 170 signatures opposing the proposal.

The Planning Board’s decision is advisory; the Town Board will review the conditional rezoning request and any additional conditions the applicant offers.","The Planning Board voted to recommend denial of a conditional rezoning that would allow a 7‑Eleven convenience store with fuel pumps and a Wendy’s drive‑through on a 4.88‑acre site at NC‑3 and Harris Crossing Boulevard.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6527854,"Planning board recommends approval for Lake Norman Tennis Center expansion to enclose courts",0,8702000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3524211-85d112dae248861978f0270ed1667e78&start=8702&end=8702","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3524211-85d112dae248861978f0270ed1667e78/thumbnail_8702000.jpg","/articles/6527854/Mooresville/Iredell-County/North-Carolina/Planning-board-recommends-approval-for-Lake-Norman-Tennis-Center-expansion-to-enclose-courts","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6527854-ee978b65b341d31a9a8b8a38101c5be5/orig.mp4?Expires=1771197396&Signature=XNt2HJOdqgNtaGGLlKMfNy0kiDnNP~TspeU-K2NScWAlw5PI~w9rFhhTtOxHAoM-PFrKw9e~Qs58keMie3qprVu15FWlmbjLO27f0Dbu8hbWs4BhATuaxo0hsgiVcDZAh2tc3cpFNHUpskkqsfgyYCKJYXA5pSwCSuUwRqRqXdSok7qD4LjYcpRilqgkYLcBS3uHQnWgGSf6Qry4F21O9PmkRJDmZUxNtmEmlps1cpmwwhtJyaxU44gmzihxJhvyeTEWJpt10gxiSchK2IfC4Uj7Vry5s6PCSQnXVhR~goCL~GUlz-elz0TRSaWt6OBew4ZtR~veQWF59QJriFVXnQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Mooresville Planning Board recommended approval of CZ‑2025‑06, a conditional rezoning that updates the concept plan for the Lake Norman Tennis Center to enclose five existing outdoor courts in an unconditioned indoor structure and to relocate open space and fire access as shown on the concept plan.

Planning staff said the proposed change updates the 2013 conditional zoning concept by replacing five outdoor courts and tree‑preservation areas with an indoor court building, adding a fire turnaround to meet emergency access requirements, and relocating open space and stormwater features. Staff found the amendment consistent with map amendment standards and recommended approval; no neighborhood members attended the single neighborhood meeting held on March 18 and no public opposition was recorded.

Brian Cone, an engineer representing the owner (Lake Norman Tennis Center LLC), told the board the enclosure is intended to extend usable months for the courts and is an unheated, naturally ventilated structure. He said the project includes reestablishing tree plantings and cleaning and restoring the on‑site stormwater pond to functioning condition. Cone noted a proposed two‑story office/meeting building was included in the concept materials as a future option, but the immediate request is limited to the indoor court structure and related site adjustments.

Commissioners discussed conditions in the draft ordinance and confirmed the applicant’s agreement with the listed conditions. Commissioner Mack moved to recommend approval with the agreed conditions, the motion was seconded and carried by voice vote.

Staff will forward the Planning Board’s recommendation to the Town Board for final action. The applicant may submit final construction plans consistent with the conditional zoning concept and the UDO.","The board recommended approval of CZ‑2025‑06, a conditional rezoning to allow the Lake Norman Tennis Center to enclose five outdoor courts within an unconditioned indoor structure and update the concept plan. Staff recommended approval and no neighborhood opposition was recorded.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Mooresville planning board recommends denial of cottage development text amendment after parking, scale concerns

Planning board recommends denial of conditional rezoning for convenience store, gas station and drive‑through at NC‑3 and Harris Crossing

Planning board recommends approval for Lake Norman Tennis Center expansion to enclose courts