HomeMy WebLinkAboutC.054.93010_0656 (2)were scheduled before all of the homes were built. He said the Brawley School Road was
scheduled to be improved in 2005 (right-of-way acquisition) and 2007 (construction). Smith said
that several road improvements at key intersections had already helped to move the traffic. Mr.
Smith said he understood the Department of Transportation planned to construct a t
Brawley School Road from Will, hird lane on
amson Road to Chuckwood Road. Mr. Smith said the zoning
ordinance was amended in 1998 to require 30,000 sq, ft. of area, per dwelling unit, for property
that utilized Brawley School Road to access Williamson Road. He said Crescent's proposal had
an overall density of one unit per 37,784 square feet. In conclusion, Smith said Crescent was
requesting permission to develop its project using the current ordinance. He said approval of the
vesting rights would give Crescent the authority to plat the lots under the current regulations fur
a time between two and five years. Smith said that in May of 2001, the planning board
recommended denial of the request in a 7-2 vote. He said, however, the planning board reviewed
a request composed of 994 acres and 828 lots.
Commissioner Bowles asked the timeline for the Brawley School Road widening (three -
lanes) and if the state had funding available.
Smith said he understood that Frank Johnson, a Department of Transportation (DOT)
board member, was in support of the project and was trying to "push it through." Smith said he
had also talked to a local DOT engineer and was told the state would seek bids on the project
this spring.
Chairman Tice said she was understanding the three lanes would extend from Williamson
Road all the way to The Pointe.
Commissioner Williams said he recalled that when the planning board heard the case, it
was unclear as to whether there would be enough space for a school.
Smith said that last May, Crescent had not made a definite decision on a site to be set
aside for a new school.
Mr. Smith said he was recommending approval of the request since Crescent had met all
of the technical aspects and standards of the county's ordinance. Smith said he was also more
comfortable with the request, now, due to the slated road improvements.
Bowles asked how many more projects, of this magnitude, might be in the future for
Brawley School Road.
Smith said probably none. He said there was land left, but it wasn't in large tracts.
Commissioner Johnson asked Smith about the possibility of Crescent selling the property
to another developer(s). He asked if Mr. Smith envisioned that other developers would build an
upscale development similar to what Crescent was proposing.
Smith said Crescent usually provided amenities that other developers might not include,
e.g., curb and gutter. Fie said he couldn't determine the quality of development that might occur
with other developers; however, with the investments that Crescent already had in the area, it
was pretty safe to say the company would not undermine its own interests.
Bowles asked about site specific plans.
time. Smith said he had seen the most site specific plans that could be rendered at this point in
Bowles referred to Mr. Johnson's question about the possibility of the tracts being split
up and sold off to smaller developers. He asked Smith if he felt this might happen if the request
were denied.
Smith said there was a demand for home sites in the Brawley School area. He said the
most development in the county was occurring in the Davidson Township. He said this had been
happening for the past six or seven years.
Tom Webb with Crescent Resources, said his company was asking permission to
develop the parcels over several years under the same regulations. He said that for a custom-