Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Neighbors urge adherence to land-use plan as board reviews 6‑story Cashmere mixed-use proposal on Jeton Road

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Cornelius — A conditional rezoning request for a six‑story, mixed‑use building called “Cashmere” at the Jeton Road Extension and Bethel Church Road intersection drew detailed scrutiny and multiple speakers at the April 21 Town Board meeting.

Cornelius — A conditional rezoning request for a six‑story, mixed‑use building called “Cashmere” at the Jeton Road Extension and Bethel Church Road intersection drew detailed scrutiny and multiple speakers at the April 21 Town Board meeting.

Assistant planning director David Cole told the board the project proposes 14 residential units above about 2,500 square feet of commercial space on a parcel just under half an acre. The applicants seek six stories (84 feet measured from the lower Jeton Road frontage) to accommodate a state-of-the-art underground parking garage and residential floors. Cole said the underlying Village Center zoning allows three stories by right and noted the town’s Catawba Mixed Use land‑use designation contemplates a commercial-oriented, mixed-use character but typically at lower heights and densities.

Why it matters: The request would increase permitted height and unit density well above current land‑use plan guidance for much of the corridor. Staff and the Architectural Review Board suggested additional pedestrian‑scale elements on the front façade and greater material variation to soften the ground‑floor appearance. The Town Board must weigh those design and scale concerns against the applicant’s arguments for walkable, mixed‑use development.

Applicant presentation and technical points: Applicant Adam Jones said the parcel has existing infrastructure and that the six‑story design responds to site constraints created when on‑street parking on Jeton was removed. He described an automated high‑speed garage door system and said the plan provides one dedicated underground parking space per condominium and that the site has shared-access easements to additional community parking. Jones said typical unit size would average about 1,750 square feet and price points would be estimated between $800,000 and $1.2 million.

Staff observations and ARB recommendations: Cole noted staff broadly finds the proposed uses consistent with the land‑use plan’s mixed‑use goals but flagged two primary divergences: the proposed density (approximately 14 units on roughly 0.5 acres, roughly 28 units per acre) and the six‑story height, which staff called “far more intense” than the plan’s recommended character (2–4 stories depending on location). The Architectural Review Board recommended more pedestrian‑scale treatments and material variation for the ground‑floor Jeton facade; staff asked the applicant to address parking-lot condition and provide additional open-space representation.

Public comment and neighbors’ concerns: Multiple residents said the corridor and adjacent neighborhoods are characteristically 1–3 stories and asked the board to adhere to the town’s land use plan. Stan Ott and several other speakers said an 84‑foot building would be out of scale and set a precedent that could permit taller buildings nearby. Realtor and property owner Kimberly Thaxton raised legal constraints recorded in subdivision declarations, saying some recorded documents limit heights and require owner approvals for zoning changes; she urged caution. Others asked about garage stacking space, the safety of the Jeton curve with a garage entrance, and whether the building’s ground-floor retail is viable given recent removal of on-street parking.

Next steps: Cole said the project will return to the Planning Board for formal review (staff estimated a June Planning Board date). The Town Board took no final vote at the April 21 meeting; staff and the applicant will refine materials addressing ARB recommendations, parking/staging details, and open-space calculations before Planning Board consideration.