Fayetteville City Council Update – April & May

 

Fayetteville City Council Meetings Update:

New Rezonings that were approved by Council:

  • Rezoning of property from single family/residential/neighborhood commercial to mixed residential.  The property is located at 8363 Cliffdale Road and is owned by Ethel Pate.  The site plan calls for a 96-unit housing complex.
  • Special Use permit approved on property zoned light industrial district for industrial use within 500 feet of a residential zoning.  The property is located at 914 North Street and is owned by DRA LLC.  The owners intent on this property is to build a cement distribution center.  A rail yard will need to be constructed for material to loaded and unloaded.  The property abuts residential property by 250 feet.
  • Rezoning of property from agricultural residential to mixed residential conditional.  The 6 acres of property is located at 2454 Gillis Hill Road and is owned by Janet and Jesse Kimball.  The developer (United Developer) will construct a 56 unit apartment complex.  Accessibility will be on Gillis Hill Road.  Two hundred residents from the gated subdivision of Lancaster signed a petition against the proposed development. Voting in opposition were councilmembers Bill Crisp and Ted Mohn.

Bill Owens (employee of United Developers) – “There has been a lot of development out there…but hasn’t been any affordable housing development.”

Faye Lockamy (resident) – “The traffic is terrible now, they need to do something about the roads before they approve anything like that.”

The following item was discussed at the May work session.

  • The council considered water options for the Bullard Circle neighborhood due to high arsenic levels found in their wells.  At the end of discussions, the council voted for option 2 in their city memo.  Voting in opposition were councilmembers Mitch Colvin, Chalmers McDougald, Jim Arp & Mayor Pro-Tem Kady Ann Davy.  Councilman Larry Wright was absent from the meeting.

Option 2 – Pursuant to Policy 150.2, set a date to consider exempting the Bullard Circle property owners from the requirement for annexation prior to receiving services.

Sidebar – Cumberland County suggestion was option 2.  Option 2, according to the county would be the most expedient way to provide water services.

What’s Next: The Council will take a formal vote on this item later this month.

What Was Said:

Ted Voorhees (City Manager) – “Annexation creates thoughts and memories of annexations carried out against your will.  This is within the MIA and an area that should be annexed.  I think we have a compelling story to be in the city.  Join the team and get the team discount or don’t join and the residents and county pay for it.”

Councilman Mohn – “The county and PWC should negotiate, there is no advantage to annex.”

Mayor Robertson – “What is the cost?”

Steve Blanchard (CEO PWC) – “$475,000.”

Robertson – “How much will the city absorb?”

Blanchard – “Up to 25% of main cost, PWC pays 25% and county is assessed 75%.”

Councilman Crisp – “There is no gain in annexing.  Everyone desearves God’s water.  Nothing is black and white.  They belong to the county.  Let the county deal with this.”

Councilwoman Jensen – “I’ve spoken with them and they really don’t care if they get water.  They’ve been living with it this long.  They do not want to be annexed.”

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email