[{"_1":2,"_110":-5,"_111":-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",[32,74,86,98],{"_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":56,"_73":56},"mediaId",6060268,"mediaKeyId","3292777-1c9a48b1da2c10efe6d6e238843399c1","parentId",3292777,"title","Residents urge Matthews commissioners to release bond funds for East Charles Street railroad crossing","audioSeconds",1917,"startMs",5865000,"endMs",3948000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3292777-1c9a48b1da2c10efe6d6e238843399c1&start=5865&end=3948","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3292777-1c9a48b1da2c10efe6d6e238843399c1/thumbnail_5865000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6060268/Matthews/Union-County/North-Carolina/Residents-urge-Matthews-commissioners-to-release-bond-funds-for-East-Charles-Street-railroad-crossing","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6060268-525ee6e0166ed666267956c0e3b7877d/orig.mp4?Expires=1775269734&Signature=ExTDQpYsA2SLJemY65S4m8bkLdDGwoD73iEoZyb-tWsXFz36a6liZSikEY5n32UMIBMaq4njdrkPimV6-GNbmCJrVc~ZY8pPjiL4veayli6-jUWO-GAp72FaPbB0rAZt6C5k1qCYz~C7WFF1kWKhDRx~gdrJJNPLlM8ftbj0gtjklBr94gK-puWDuA0lo4vequkuEp8vS59gBV-Lw5fx0-2j1gxhex1bb73quh2iV7LEyckFgAMYZdCQqvRkhrpfaOeCe-pQtEDzu2XZdP1pKlLiz0L9HmjATh48Qyv8MhqYMvHP5ylrRLarewjET-X9cM9Bi5iVuFiEGquxUrwqSA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-05-14T07:49:05.12Z","article","Several residents from the Cresthill neighborhood and nearby churches asked the Matthews Board of Commissioners during public comment on May 12 to direct bond funding to safety work at the East Charles Street crossing and the Cresthill railroad crossing, saying the location has become a recurring hazard for pedestrians and vehicles.

The immediate request: Petitioners asked the board to “lift the bond fund for East Charles Street and Cresthill Railroad Crossing,” a phrase repeated by Pastor Larry Whitley, who presented a petition the speakers said contained roughly 75 signatories from the neighborhood and local churches.

Why it matters: Petitioners said large vehicles regularly get stuck at the crossing, sometimes blocking both lanes of travel; Pastor Whitley and others said there have been dangerous incidents, including what they described as a pedestrian death in the last year tied to the tracks. Residents said sightlines and overhanging trees on the railroad right‑of‑way make the crossing more hazardous and that congestion is increasing as the corridor becomes a more used thoroughfare.

What petitioners asked the commissioners to do

- Release bond funds identified for transportation and downtown street improvements (petitioners used the phrase “lift the bond”) so the town can address the railroad crossing and East Charles Street improvements.

- Inspect and remove or trim trees overhanging the track and address other immediate safety hazards at the crossing.

Speakers and statements

- Pastor Larry Whitley (Crestdale community): “We...come before you tonight with a couple of things. We are here tonight... requesting that you release the bonds fund for East Charles Street and Cresthill Railroad Crossing.” He also noted petition signatories from local churches and urged the board to make the crossing a priority.

- Fred Baylor (resident): Described repeated incidents of tractors and lawn‑service vehicles getting stuck on the track. “I use Crestdale Road and East Charles Street quite a bit... I’ve seen a lot of mishaps right there.”

- Reverend Chris Whitley (Mount Moriah CDC): Told the board she often intercepts truck drivers whose GPS routes send them toward the crossing; she said drivers frequently become stuck and that residents regularly have to redirect traffic to avoid collisions.

Town response and next steps

Town staff told the speakers they would look into the tree concerns and coordinate with CSX as appropriate. Assistant Town Manager Malia James said staff would “get in contact with CSX depending on where they are and our ability to take care of them.” No formal action was taken at the meeting; the petitioners’ request will be a matter for staff follow‑up and potential future agenda consideration.

City context and background

Speakers noted the community supported the town’s bond package at the ballot; petitioners asked that funds from the voter‑approved bond be applied to this crossing rather than using general fund dollars. The board did not vote on reallocating bond proceeds at the May 12 meeting; the bond proceeds were discussed elsewhere on the agenda in the budget presentation and in a separate action to create a capital project fund to hold bond proceeds as required by statute.

Ending

Residents said the crossing is a long‑running safety problem and asked commissioners to prioritize using bond proceeds to fix it. Staff committed to follow up with CSX and to examine the specific tree and roadway concerns raised by petitioners.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Board of Commissioners Meeting - May 12, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Residents from Crestdale and representatives from local churches asked the Matthews Board of Commissioners on May 12 to move voter‑approved bond funds toward repairs and safety work at the East Charles Street/Cresthill railroad crossing, citing repeated truck entrapments and at least one pedestrian fatality.","taxTitle","Matthews, Union County, North Carolina","taxId",56171,"location","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":81,"_51":82,"_53":83,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":84,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":85,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6060259,"Commissioners critique Acadia Matthews elevations; architects told to refine materials, landscaping and gateway facades",3184,12971000,16155000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3292777-1c9a48b1da2c10efe6d6e238843399c1&start=12971&end=16155","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3292777-1c9a48b1da2c10efe6d6e238843399c1/thumbnail_12971000.jpg","/articles/6060259/Matthews/Union-County/North-Carolina/Commissioners-critique-Acadia-Matthews-elevations-architects-told-to-refine-materials-landscaping-and-gateway-facades","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6060259-8db42db70002ce781379ea08aa9b935e/orig.mp4?Expires=1775269734&Signature=EDVcoQz1EVrTV2dMIDPFgePYX~sOcNPH9JqEmuppAp1WZbRQCSETknhY5-FJ6uC8ns9~6xD0GVvw3VhYYCvBYX6O5rsysApG49b4IdgGq6JDKW2mHYNEhKCAo9Kknex6Pf-cMwHbxuEk14cOccnk7xwbrRGFDt10l3YbFNvHZ~3BzIRsTeA9OPTb-PCIAuIrYfu3IR5qj9cCKgCXUjDRNYUMGN43GrlesVHKgHKkAHv3DGb2AjiZgb4grdX1GA-zyYJQcjYzJ1AX21LLM0Pbke-RfQDnTZ6DHB5lF507MaLAkyE4hYJebcqEyVr7z5axv1xg5A0UDuEVjC9iejo1aA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Pappas Properties and its architects presented architectural elevations and pattern‑book visuals for Acadia Matthews — a mixed‑use master plan that includes a grocery anchor, village retail, medical office, 55+ housing and cottages — and commissioners gave detailed, sometimes blunt feedback on May 12.

What the developer showed

- The presentation included concept elevations for the grocery anchor (a major retail tenant), multi‑tenant retail buildings, village retail with a small stage/green, the medical office building, senior flats and cottages, and illustrative materials (brick base, lighter upper materials, wood‑look accents and glazed “colored” inset panels intended as biophilic accents).

Commissioner and staff reactions

- Materials and color palette: Commissioners welcomed the project’s ambition but repeatedly asked the design team to reassess a prominent glazed “green” panel motif that appears throughout the commercial block. Several commissioners said the continuous bright‑green tile effect as rendered read as a dominant, repetitive brand and advised using a broader material palette, more restrained accents, or live/plant‑based elements in selected, purposeful locations rather than repeating the same panel on every building.

- Gateway/Idlewild elevations: Multiple commissioners asked to see the elevations that face Idlewild Road and the roundabout (the project’s public gateway), and asked for a stronger, warmer “first impression” from that frontage. Commissioners repeatedly requested full, four‑sided elevations for key buildings so staff and the board could evaluate how buildings will appear to motorists and pedestrians approaching the site.

- Texture, scale and human‑scale elements: Commissioners urged more human‑scale treatments at pedestrian entrances — deeper canopies, glazing bays, awnings and materials that break down large building faces into more comfortable, walkable elements.

- Landscaping and the public realm: The board emphasized the need for a strong landscape plan along Idlewild and within the village green. Several commissioners urged a more visible “wow” factor in landscaping at the gateway and recommended considering living walls, trellises with plantings, or masonry/brick elements as accents rather than repeating the same panel motif.

- Civic elements: The village green and small stage were noted positively; commissioners asked for details on stage size and activation (some said stage depiction looked small and asked that the developer explain programming scale and likely events).

Architects’ response and next steps

- Architects and the applicant said the green/biophilic panels are intended as a modest accent (glazed brick or tile) and not living walls, and that finishes can be tuned; they noted some tenants (grocers) constrain landscaping/plantings close to building facades. The team emphasized the intent to preserve tree canopy and to use a palette of warm gray brick, cast stone, and wood‑look materials for pedestrian‑facing canopies.

- Commissioners and staff asked the team to return with: (1) full street‑facing elevations for Idlewild/Ottawa and other approaches, (2) alternative material and accent palettes (including tempered/varied accents rather than identical green panels everywhere), (3) larger or clarified stage dimensions and programming details, and (4) an illustrative landscape plan showing a stronger gateway treatment.

Board action

- The board continued the design review and asked the applicant to return with refinements. Staff and the applicant agreed to bring revised material samples, updated elevations (all four facades for key buildings), and an updated landscape/planting approach for the June 9 meeting, with the remainder of the development’s elevations to follow in July.

Ending

Commissioners described the package as a strong start but asked the applicant to organize the design language more clearly: choose a limited set of purposeful architectural moves, show how the project will look to approaching motorists on Idlewild, and provide a more deliberate landscape and material palette.","Pappas Properties presented elevations and a pattern‑book concept for Acadia Matthews on May 12; commissioners praised the vision but asked the team to refine materials, tone down a repeated green panel motif, and provide full street‑facing elevations and a stronger gateway landscape.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_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":56,"_73":56},6060263,"Developer seeks bigger industrial building at Tempus Campus Ridge; officials press for truck access details",1735,6828000,8563000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3292777-1c9a48b1da2c10efe6d6e238843399c1&start=6828&end=8563","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3292777-1c9a48b1da2c10efe6d6e238843399c1/thumbnail_6828000.jpg","/articles/6060263/Matthews/Union-County/North-Carolina/Developer-seeks-bigger-industrial-building-at-Tempus-Campus-Ridge-officials-press-for-truck-access-details","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6060263-cce4f3413c65029a4f9dc104246f3fc8/orig.mp4?Expires=1775269734&Signature=dwwAr1S9sU-7Ol2IRensF~zaOTW6K-ZWqLcB7SKYj81lYI6Lh~OHDNjXk1BP7jynWRajhIuh7M-WORGa8qCq1eXjx-VhThIuKSMtiEJBcMlSv00SQmaHTupNGHEvByNIPhPRoI8U2pSEoSKkAP9ORBR8igJAanBK90NrIoRnAUkHRjahKWWeBfSIsf9PHC2~~rTwv4tj2H0LmAyhJEOaw1vMVpRKUVqZA3wbwHhHLkqNqBAx7zaJz400SB3aYFkDKvmMETS7P3byY-VBR8kakNckoaMuVlDnYJOlamPz7mvGqDF8LsX~Jff7F5GbZG27sNye7mmznHj1hISYzY3umg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","An applicant for the Tempus Campus Ridge property updated the Matthews Board of Commissioners on May 12 and requested approval of an amended site plan and building elevations for an industrial/warehouse site that had been rezoned to I‑2 CD in 2022.

Attorney Suzanne Todd, representing Tempus Campus Ridge, said the company now has the 20‑acre property under contract and seeks a modest increase to the maximum building area from 150,000 square feet (the limit approved in 2022) to 185,000 square feet to accommodate the likely tenant mix and project economics.

Why it matters: The property sits along the CSX rail line and Campus Ridge Road; it was previously a constrained brownfield (past medical‑waste/incinerator use was cited). The 2022 rezoning limited permitted uses to indoor manufacturing/assembly, warehouse/distribution and related uses and required that any construction return to the board for site‑plan approval. Commissioners and residents pressed the applicant for details about truck trips, loading bays and the likely traffic routes to and from regional highways.

Key application details and questions from the board

- Scope: The applicant proposes the same uses as approved in 2022 (I‑2 CD) but with an increased maximum building square footage, new site plan circulation, and updated facade elevations. Todd said the new plan pulls the building farther from Campus Ridge Road and preserves tree canopy in a “tree‑safe” area of more than an acre.

- Building size: Asked for an increase from 150,000 square feet to 185,000 square feet; applicant said the additional space makes a more workable layout while holding to previous use limitations.

- Trucking and access: Commissioners repeatedly asked how trucks would reach the property and how many loading bays would be active. The applicant’s team said the tenant mix will determine truck types, but that on‑site circulation is designed to serve over‑the‑road tractor‑trailers, delivery vans, and straight trucks. Applicant representatives indicated most truck traffic is expected to come from I‑485 and approach via Old Monroe/John Street/Campus Ridge type connectors rather than John Street through downtown Matthews. During the hearing staff and applicants discussed the number of docks the plan shows for tenant loading and how on‑site queuing and overnight truck parking would be managed.

- CSX coordination: Planning staff asked the applicant to engage CSX regarding proximity to the line and potential future rail access; applicant said they have reached out and will continue discussions, noting CSX had expressed interest in some nearby properties.

Public comments and planning board note

- The applicant said the site will be multi‑tenant flexible industrial and that the building design would accommodate a range of users, from logistics to light manufacturing.

- Planning staff noted the prior rezoning used a Transportation Technical Memorandum (TTM) rather than a full traffic‑impact analysis; staff said the applicant’s current design remains within TTM assumptions. Commissioners asked whether additional study or limits on overnight truck staging might be required if a single large tenant with heavier truck traffic occupied the site.

Next steps

The application remains under review. The board did not take a final rezoning vote on May 12; staff and the applicant will continue the site‑plan review and CSX outreach. Commissioners requested clearer, quantified trip and queuing information, and flagged possible follow‑up conditions on outdoor storage and on whether a single large tenant would trigger additional traffic mitigation or limits.

Ending

The board accepted the revised site plan materials for review and asked staff and the applicant to provide refined traffic/circulation details, including likely truck routes and queuing/overnight parking plans; CSX outreach was encouraged to clarify any potential rail access or proximity restrictions.

","An affiliate of Tempus Realty Partners asked the town to approve an amended site plan and raise the allowed building size from 150,000 to 185,000 square feet on a 20‑acre former brownfield on Campus Ridge Road (I‑2 CD zoning). Commissioners and staff focused questions on truck traffic, site access and potential CSX rail coordination.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6060272,"Matthews manager proposes 1.3¢ property tax rise, 6% pay plan in $37.6 million FY‑26 recommended budget",4189,79000,4268000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3292777-1c9a48b1da2c10efe6d6e238843399c1&start=79&end=4268","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3292777-1c9a48b1da2c10efe6d6e238843399c1/thumbnail_79000.jpg","/articles/6060272/Matthews/Union-County/North-Carolina/Matthews-manager-proposes-13-property-tax-rise-6-pay-plan-in-376-million-FY26-recommended-budget","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6060272-12e9b2e5a17b8ef7dcfa2442edb31be8/orig.mp4?Expires=1775269734&Signature=LP~TIbRGdhxO7NuM~mmOaxoFr8EfMUxR3RzXX2RHZt4ZTxqtELh-vEWdbK0pVj7CDhSjB5VQ6dah1FaRYIIxJrd8SAkQoQT7fKLQxxUkcwXIQgbQcyzxNhDnQvBxHvQq7y8TS8Mbqzbj1IwH1rkveUnHfggVut3HfOlFBx--c4-picR4z6S-tr5vDa5RXzQicP029agnY1IEixZogSyUahTFkGl9gjBV-GDpJ4bIKkThy2dYXGZI95nqPFrsnliairRXwYFiEffpEhV7FEZay5WFIb0g8cNj6N~ufd6QRBk0cZvNyjONJBOK8jdQdxI466uLxAllgHMSxseDqxu3sg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Town Manager Becky Hawk presented the manager’s recommended budget for fiscal year 2026 at the Matthews Board of Commissioners’ special meeting on May 12, laying out a plan that would raise the property tax rate 1.3¢ to finance debt service on $11,000,000 in general‑obligation bonds and that prioritizes employee compensation and maintaining services.

Hawk said the proposed tax change is “specifically to repay the debt service on the $11,000,000 in general obligation bonds that was issued earlier this year, predominantly for park projects.” She added that the recommendation includes a 3% cost‑of‑living adjustment and a separate 3% merit pool for staff, describing that as the town’s primary priority for the coming year.

The nut graf: The package would raise the town’s recommended FY‑26 budget from roughly $36.0 million in FY‑25 to about $37.6 million in FY‑26. The tax increase is targeted to cover bond debt service; other revenue changes include a previously approved stormwater fee increase and stronger‑than‑expected sales taxes. The manager emphasized the budget attempts to hold the line on other spending while preserving market‑competitive pay and basic capital needs.

Most important budget elements

- Property taxes and bonds: The recommended property tax rate would rise by 1.3¢ from 26.65¢ to 27.95¢ per $100 of valuation; Hawk said that increase is to repay the debt service on the $11,000,000 general‑obligation bond sold earlier this year. Using the town’s averages, Hawk showed an owner of a home with a taxable value near the town average of $429,000 would see an annual tax increase of about $55.81 (approximately $4.65 per month).

- Employee compensation: The budget includes a 3% COLA and a separate 3% merit pool, a combined budgeted cost of approximately $1,100,000 all‑in for salaries and fringe benefits. Hawk told the board the town must be competitive in recruitment and retention to avoid losing employees to neighboring employers.

- Stormwater fee: The board previously approved a stormwater fee increase; Hawk said Matthews homeowners will see average increases of about $2.12 per month. The stormwater program in FY‑26 is being moved into its own enterprise fund so revenues and expenditures are easier to follow.

- Major drivers of expense growth: Hawk identified health insurance (an estimated $172,000 increase, with state plan rates set in the fall), mandated increases in state retirement contributions (about $123,000 projected), electricity and street‑lighting costs (electricity and Duke Energy related increases), and a CPI escalator in the solid‑waste contract (an estimated $141,000) as significant non‑discretionary pressures on the budget.

- Capital and vehicle replacements: Capital improvements are modestly increased — the manager proposes a $1,000,000 capital improvements program (CIP) for FY‑26 and $729,000 in capital outlay items (smaller one‑time equipment purchases), continuing a multiyear program for police vehicle replacement and funding for public works equipment. Major lines highlighted included elevator modernization, sidewalk improvements (an estimated $3.5 million program over multiple years to address ADA/noncompliant sidewalks), and stormwater equipment financed over multiple years inside the stormwater fund.

- Public safety and facilities: Fire and EMS net operational expenses declined compared with FY‑25 because the Idlewild Volunteer Fire Department contract concluded when Station 3 opened. Police training budgets were increased to support professional development; the budget also includes funding to open and operate Station 3 and modest increases to facility maintenance.

- Tourism and events: The tourism fund is projected to be just north of $2.1 million next year; the recommended budget moves some event overtime for Matthews Alive into a contingency so the board can decide whether to continue funding overtime once discussions with Matthews Alive conclude. Tourism capital includes partial funding for pottery site development and continuation of the Downtown Loop/Tank Town Road project banked until the town has cash to proceed.

Board items and other changes

- Board compensation and technology allowance: The recommended budget proposes a 3% COLA for board salaries (budgeted to start July 1). The town manager said the technology reimbursement policy (up to $3,600 per term per commissioner) remains in policy; staff reduced the budgeted line to better reflect historical utilization while preserving the full reimbursement policy. Hawk told the board the town maintains records of reimbursement requests by fiscal year and term and can provide that spreadsheet on request.

- Budget presentation changes: Hawk said staff rearranged capital outlay from departmental budgets into a single list to make multi‑year comparisons easier and to distinguish one‑time capital purchases from ongoing operations.

Board discussion and next steps

Commissioners pressed staff for numbers and options. Several asked how the town might avoid a tax increase; Hawk and finance staff explained that using fund balance to cover ongoing debt service would be a poor fiscal practice because debt service is recurring and voters approved the bond program through the referendum, creating a long‑term repayment obligation. Hawk said staff can prepare a version of the budget without a tax increase if the board directs; she cautioned that removing the $909,000 in debt service from ongoing revenue would require drastic cuts to operations and capital.

Hawk also noted that the bond proceeds are tracked in a separate capital project fund, per statute; she sought board permission to create the fund (see separate agenda action) so the town’s finance department could account for issuance proceeds and spend down project allocations as projects proceed.

What remains unsettled

The board did not adopt the budget at the May 12 meeting; managers said there will be multiple follow‑up budget sessions where commissioners can ask for line‑by‑line reviews and alternative tax scenarios. Hawk said staff will provide more detailed backup on pension, health‑insurance scenarios, and options for using fund balance if commissioners want to explore alternatives to the proposed tax increase.

Ending

The recommended FY‑26 budget prioritizes staff pay and debt service for projects approved by voters, while keeping most operations flat and modestly boosting capital outlays. The board signaled it will scrutinize individual lines in future budget sessions and asked staff to prepare supplemental scenarios on tax and fund balance options.

","Town Manager Becky Hawk presented a $37.6 million FY‑26 recommended budget that includes a 1.3¢ increase in the property tax rate to repay $11 million in general‑obligation bonds, a previously approved stormwater fee increase averaging $2.12 per month, and a 6% total pay increase (3% COLA plus 3% merit) for staff.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Residents urge Matthews commissioners to release bond funds for East Charles Street railroad crossing

Commissioners critique Acadia Matthews elevations; architects told to refine materials, landscaping and gateway facades

Developer seeks bigger industrial building at Tempus Campus Ridge; officials press for truck access details

Matthews manager proposes 1.3¢ property tax rise, 6% pay plan in $37.6 million FY‑26 recommended budget