Plan Comm 03-11-2021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mooresville Planning Commission, March 11, 2021 mentioned that a couple she had assisted had been looking for a home for more than two years; both are teachers and paying as a household $1,300 in rent each month. Jeff Turley read a prepared statement, with the following key points in summary: • He reminded the Commission that in 2006, after months of research, public meetings and painstaking planning put into the PUD -R, the Mooresville Planning Commission approved the development, and then the housing bubble burst in the recession of 2008. He stated that since that time, the economy and the housing market have recovered, but no progress has been made on the approved development plan. • He stated that the current petitioner is requesting substantial reductions of construction minimum specifications from the 2006 plan, and he believes that this proposal is wrong for the Mooresville Community, as homes of lesser quality will steer community progress in the wrong direction. • He stated the petitioner previously indicated a home density of less than 2.2 units per acre, but the petitioner further outlined a minimum lot area of 12,00 SF and average lot size of 14,500 square feet, which would translate to 3.0 — 3.6 units per acre. • He stated that the petitioner's description of the proposed homes is misleading. The images shown included homes with masonry, roof pitches greater than 6/12, and some metal roofing. The voluntary commitments however, outline exteriors of "ANY type of material acceptable to the developer." He and his family believe that the standards outlined in the approved 2006 PUD -R, including masonry, 8/12 roof pitch, foundations on crawl space or basement, and a minimum of 1,800 SF of living space is essential to maintaining a needed construction standard for the development. • He stated that average price per square foot of living space in Mooresville is currently $165, which indicates a "starter home". While this type of buyer is essential to any community there are existing starter home developments, but fewer middle income developments, thus there is no where for these families to go in Mooresville to upgrade. As well first home buyers are more likely to experience foreclosure, especially in a declining economy. • In conclusion, he outlined the following points as reasons to stick to the 2006 approved PUD -R o Homes would be more attractive, of better quality and better value to potential buyers o Homes would have less long term depreciation due to better quality construction and materials o Community property values would be maintained, or may increase o Homes would provide more diverse community members with "middle housing" options o Fewer foreclosures o Assessed values would inereate tax revenue for the community o Builder indicated compliance with 2006 PUD -R would increase home prices by $20K - $25K, which, at current mortgage rates would translate to an additional $95/month. Carl Atwell addressed the Commission stating that prior to 2006, a flood had disrupted SRI 44 and washed out a large culvert near his property. In 2006 the property owners altered the property sufficiently that all drainage flows from the west and washes out his property. He stated he'd lived on his property for 36 years and he feared being washed out from both the west and the east sides of his land. He asked when the owners would put in a holding pond, how they were going to contain drainage and where the drainage would be diverted. Eileen Mathers stated that she and her family have grown and established a hardwood tree farm, and were the sole south border property owners for the proposed development. Her property also borders a similar starter home development, Grandview, and she outlined three points for consideration: