Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Erin Kirkpatrick explains Historic Ventures vote

Town commissioner Erin Kirkpatrick was the only dissenting vote for the revised Historic Ventures project that passed in late March, previously mentioned here.

She wrote a letter to the editor of the Union County Weekly in the Apr 9th-15th issue. I was unable to find the text of the letter on the Union County Weekly website.

So in some rare downtime, I scanned the article from the paper & ran it through some OCR software to see what it could do.

The result was pretty good, although I had to go through the whole thing to check for words that inexplicably couldn't be converted to text. Since I went to all this trouble, I figured I might as well share it here for posterity's sake.

Without further ado, here's town commissioner Erin Kirkpatrick's letter to the editor explaining her dissenting vote, preserved here for posterity's sake.
Historic Ventures project wrong for downtown Waxhaw

The availability of county water and sewer couldn't and shouldn't be sagely dismissed. The Historic Ventures project application with the submitted density and layout lacks harmony due to its scale, density and misinterpretation of the intent of Waxhaw's Comprehensive Plan. This parcel is located immediately adjacent to historic single-family homes. The applicant was unwilling to increase the vegetation buffer to 50 feet to help minimize sound, light and visual disruptions.

The project was resubmitted with virtually minimal change from the initial conditional-use permit zoning application. The multifamily and day care uses were removed, but proposed uses didn't replace them. A rezoning applicant should perform due diligence by submitting all uses. Fortunately, a condition was placed for the undesignated portion that prevents the applicant from submitting (another) plan for those areas for a minimum of two years.

My third rationale for voting against the rezoning at this time was due to the foreseeable traffic congestion I believe will severely impede motorists accessing our historic Main Street corridor, To that extent, the project as proposed has taken on the role of a foreground versus a background to our historic Main Street and actually shifts focus onto the
applicant's project versus our downtown core. Our town has been focusing on reviving this district.

Last, the intent behind smart, sustainable growth is to minimize impact on natural areas and not necessarily to create urban settings. This doesn't mean density should be the same as a large city but rather a potentially higher density compared to Waxhaw's existing density. The Historic Ventures project proposed roughly 18,000 square feet per acre of structure, equating to 200,000 square feet total with more to come. This figure is comparable to big-box development. Traffic for this size development has been determined in the past to be more than our main artery can accommodate with current infrastructure, especially given our railroad challenge. This was a pivotal time for Waxhaw to determine what the increased density for Waxhaw should be.

Finally, the Historic Ventures project doesn't offer much by way of green design, which is clearly the intent of the Waxhaw Comprehensive Plan in exchange for density increase. This project doesn't tread lightly on Waxhaw's culture, history or natural environs.

Councilwoman Erin Kirkpatrick
Waxhaw


No comments: