Charles39
Chathamite
 
Offline
Last Login:January 26, 2012, 06:43:00 PM
Date Registerd:July 17, 2007, 12:28:32 PM
Posts: 456
|
 |
« Reply #45 on: November 21, 2008, 04:02:51 PM » |
|
Charles 39,
Good point. It would seem that all projects in town should be treated the same diligence, care and application of the rules.
It is my understanding that due to water pressure issues near the end of Springdale, Chatham Forest changed its original entrance from Springdale to Thompson Street. When that change was made the planning board recommended a turning lane on Thompson Street, which was built. Subsequently the town signed plat number 2000, page 415 which connected Springdale to Fox Chapel. That was in the year 2000.
Now if one were to apply the standards equivalently then West Cornwallis should have been improved and had traffic calming devices installed by the developer of Willow Springs. (Willow Springs has 64 lots.)
It appears all parties are trying to find an equitable solution.
Isn't Voller involved with the Willow Springs project? That would go against political witchhunt idea.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
billwillcox
Chathamite
 
Offline
Last Login:February 06, 2012, 04:17:12 PM
Date Registerd:May 19, 2008, 03:00:28 PM
Posts: 241
|
 |
« Reply #46 on: November 21, 2008, 04:44:36 PM » |
|
I don't know about Willow Springs, but I have been to every Town Board meeting in the last year and there is a core group of Chatham Forest residents who have been really pushing to get Springdale opened. They have been very emotional at times. At first they focused on Voller Realty to pay for the turnlanes, then they focused on the town. Everything was stuck. Then Harrington brought a 2007 contract prepared by the Town Attorney for Voller Realty to sign. Voller Realty could put a line through anything they were unwilling to do, but the Board would have a contract they could discuss. That idea developed into a negotiation between the Town Manager, the two attorneys and now Hugh Harrington to iron out a contract that both parties will be happy with. The question of who should pay is very complicated. I don't understand it. The Town Manager said you could study the issue for a week or a month and still be confused on the issue. That is my feeling, too. But to me, the exciting thing is that they have arrived at a reasonable compromise. Voller will pay $30,000 but he will have less to accomplish inside Chatham Forest. But don't look for the road to open anytime soon. The timeline is this...final plan by March and all work completed a year later...i.e. March, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
natvrabit
Chathamohican
   
Offline
Last Login: Yesterday at 08:01:24 PM
Date Registerd:March 08, 2008, 02:45:06 PM
Posts: 6478
|
 |
« Reply #47 on: November 21, 2008, 05:00:32 PM » |
|
Fact or fiction: Were people that bought homes there told SD would be an access at the time of sale as a promotional thing? As the (cost) issue progressed, were CF residents asked via part of HOA to bear part of the cost? (I had a friend living there that felt at some point in time they were being asked to pick up part of the 15-501 access tab that they were lead to believe was part of the original plan/approval and not via HOA funded and they were furious. They no longer live there).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Charles39
Chathamite
 
Offline
Last Login:January 26, 2012, 06:43:00 PM
Date Registerd:July 17, 2007, 12:28:32 PM
Posts: 456
|
 |
« Reply #48 on: November 21, 2008, 06:09:34 PM » |
|
Fact or fiction: Were people that bought homes there told SD would be an access at the time of sale as a promotional thing? As the (cost) issue progressed, were CF residents asked via part of HOA to bear part of the cost? (I had a friend living there that felt at some point in time they were being asked to pick up part of the 15-501 access tab that they were lead to believe was part of the original plan/approval and not via HOA funded and they were furious. They no longer live there).
Do you mean it is a fact the developer told buyers fiction? I think if you talk to several of the original owners they can share their views on the subject. Many of them are happy to talk about it.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
natvrabit
Chathamohican
   
Offline
Last Login: Yesterday at 08:01:24 PM
Date Registerd:March 08, 2008, 02:45:06 PM
Posts: 6478
|
 |
« Reply #49 on: November 21, 2008, 06:21:00 PM » |
|
Doesn't matter to me, nor I guess to my friends that once lived there. You are more involved in the politics and the slamming than I. These type of situations do trigger some curiosity on my end as to how the events come about and how taxpayers become involved in it esp. in a paying portion.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Linda Felt
Chathamohican
   
Offline
Last Login:November 22, 2010, 04:21:53 PM
Date Registerd:July 19, 2007, 12:56:13 PM
Posts: 1284
|
 |
« Reply #50 on: November 21, 2008, 07:45:10 PM » |
|
The guy to ask is Tom Orlandi. He's lived in CF longer than just about everyone else and knows the facts of this situation.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Charles39
Chathamite
 
Offline
Last Login:January 26, 2012, 06:43:00 PM
Date Registerd:July 17, 2007, 12:28:32 PM
Posts: 456
|
 |
« Reply #51 on: November 21, 2008, 07:58:28 PM » |
|
The guy to ask is Tom Orlandi. He's lived in CF longer than just about everyone else and knows the facts of this situation.
Just the one guy? Should anyone talk to Rick Murray, Dan Walsh, Nick from Maple Leaf, Performance Auto, J Henry, Southern States, what's his name with 10K judgement, tax collector, Chatham Forest HOA, other residents of Chatham Forest..............
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
thinkinboudit
Chathameister
  
Offline
Last Login:October 13, 2009, 10:26:22 PM
Date Registerd:August 19, 2006, 05:53:26 AM
Posts: 541
|
 |
« Reply #52 on: November 21, 2008, 11:27:34 PM » |
|
I'm surprised there's no discussion about the Town of Pittsboro paying for half of the cost of Sprindale Dr. No one taking exception to that?
Jay, I posted this last week on another topic after the local paper printed the story naming the attorney Bill Willcox wouldn't name in his post above. "The Chatham Record had an article this week where coalition Kathie also put the screws to us taxpayers by working a deal for her client, Voller Realty. It seems the long standing opening of Chatham Forest to 15 and 501 highways which we know from past posts was Voller Realty's obligation will now be shared between the taxpayers and Voller Realty at $30,000 apiece. Sweet deal for coalition Kathie's client, sour deal for the rest of us. Maybe if it were her money being spent, she would be more cautious of the spendthrifts among us. Since it isn't, what is another little jab in our ribs to her? Junket to California, taxpayer payment of another's obligation and what else is on the horizon?" W still look like suckers for a mere thirty thousand to fix the long standing problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Linda Felt
Chathamohican
   
Offline
Last Login:November 22, 2010, 04:21:53 PM
Date Registerd:July 19, 2007, 12:56:13 PM
Posts: 1284
|
 |
« Reply #53 on: November 22, 2008, 12:28:25 AM » |
|
The guy to ask is Tom Orlandi. He's lived in CF longer than just about everyone else and knows the facts of this situation.
Just the one guy? Should anyone talk to Rick Murray, Dan Walsh, Nick from Maple Leaf, Performance Auto, J Henry, Southern States, what's his name with 10K judgement, tax collector, Chatham Forest HOA, other residents of Chatham Forest.............. I see you're already starting the 2009 campaign, Ex-Mayor Devinney.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
belle
Guest
|
 |
« Reply #54 on: November 22, 2008, 03:57:36 AM » |
|
Ex-Mayor Devinney, would you show exactly where it is written, these requirements? Wasn't the original connection approval based on a small 15-20 house subdivision? And as plans changed and grew to be bigger and bigger Chatham Forest, requirements changed? Posted on: Yesterday at 02:13:28 PM
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
mamacash
Chathamohican
   
Offline
Last Login:May 12, 2009, 12:25:57 PM
Date Registerd:April 02, 2008, 04:02:10 PM
Posts: 2299
|
 |
« Reply #55 on: November 22, 2008, 04:42:55 AM » |
|
The guy to ask is Tom Orlandi. He's lived in CF longer than just about everyone else and knows the facts of this situation.
Just the one guy? Should anyone talk to Rick Murray, Dan Walsh, Nick from Maple Leaf, Performance Auto, J Henry, Southern States, what's his name with 10K judgement, tax collector, Chatham Forest HOA, other residents of Chatham Forest.............. I see you're already starting the 2009 campaign, Ex-Mayor Devinney.Linda, There are probably secret meetings going on already...trying to decide WHO is going to take the current mayor down in 2009...I find this small town politics to be a dirty business...always has been that way...there is no reason why it has to be that way but it sure smells of back rooms and cigar smoke even today when smoking is taboo. Has Mayor Voller done a bad job for Pittsboro? Every time I have been around him, I think he talks with a great deal of knowledge and common sense...something I find lacking in a great deal of folks these days...is the only problem with him this Springdale Drive issue? Or is there a laundry list of offenses? We are not close friends as I am old enough to be his mother but I have enjoyed any time I have been in his company. I can usually spot a snake when I see one but I don't feel that way about them. I would hate to see Pittsboro head in the wrong direction just because of personality conflicts. You would think that grown people would be able to sort out their differences and get along for the better good of the community...but I guess I am full of wishful thinking.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
First do no harm
|
|
|
Hugh
New Member
Offline
Last Login:February 07, 2012, 05:21:13 AM
Date Registerd:September 02, 2007, 06:18:20 PM
Posts: 10
|
 |
« Reply #56 on: November 22, 2008, 08:11:21 AM » |
|
The following from the July 14, 1997 Town Board meeting is provided for contextual completeness: “Manager Cornatzer reported that the Town has received a preliminary plat for a 16 lot residential subdivision on a 5.9 acre tract of property located to the east of the existing Springdale Drive. The property is zoned R-12 and each of the proposed lots meet minimum lot area and frontage. It proposes to extend 730 lt. of public r-o-w (Springdale Drive) and to serve the subdivision [sic]. The proposed utilities meet town specifications in terms of size, location, fire hydrant location, manhole location and valving. The proposed street width, r-o-w width, gradient and curvature meet Town requirements. He additionally proposed to construct a temporary turn around at the eastern terminus of the new r-o-w. He proposed to meet required recreation needs in a payment in lieu of taxes.” In fact if you go back to page 319 from the minutes of the July 14, 1997 Town Board meeting you will find the following:
Motion was made by Commissioner Bryan and seconded by Commissioner Brooks to approve the preliminary subdivision request from Voller Realty and Construction with the following conditions:
1. That if any damage is done to the Springdale Drive due to construction it will have to be repaired before final plat approval.
2. Dedication of additional r-o-w to the property.
3. That a "temporary turn around" area be noted on the final plat:
a) Increased to allow for emergency vehicles 60' x 40' in size
b) Written easement obtained from owner.
Vote Aye-4 and Nay-0
Hugh Harrington
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
natvrabit
Chathamohican
   
Offline
Last Login: Yesterday at 08:01:24 PM
Date Registerd:March 08, 2008, 02:45:06 PM
Posts: 6478
|
 |
« Reply #57 on: November 22, 2008, 04:09:11 PM » |
|
I'm more worried about the "monkey junction" around the Lowe's 64-15-501 area. Just like it was when I use to traverse the 55/54 intersection and no stop lights. I didn't want to be part of the quota kill quantifier there, nor do I want to be for this one.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
WolfpackFan
Chathamohican
   
Offline
Last Login: Today at 07:33:41 AM
Date Registerd:February 23, 2006, 04:33:05 PM
Posts: 6861
|
 |
« Reply #58 on: November 22, 2008, 07:07:04 PM » |
|
I'm more worried about the "monkey junction" around the Lowe's 64-15-501 area. Just like it was when I use to traverse the 55/54 intersection and no stop lights. I didn't want to be part of the quota kill quantifier there, nor do I want to be for this one.
The place that surprises me is the west bound exit from 64 that turn south (heading towards PBO). I have gone that way a couple of times, and it is a cr*p shoot for traffic.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
More today than yesterday - Mindy
|
|
|
Hugh
New Member
Offline
Last Login:February 07, 2012, 05:21:13 AM
Date Registerd:September 02, 2007, 06:18:20 PM
Posts: 10
|
 |
« Reply #59 on: November 24, 2008, 05:21:14 AM » |
|
It is my understanding that due to water pressure issues near the end of Springdale, Chatham Forest changed its original entrance from Springdale to Thompson Street. When that change was made the planning board recommended a turning lane on Thompson Street, which was built. Subsequently the town signed plat number 2000, page 415 which connected Springdale to Fox Chapel. That was in the year 2000.
From the June 25, 2001 Town Board of Commissioners minutes: REQUEST TO AMMEND PRELIMINARY PLAT CHATHAM FOREST PHASES 3, 5, 6, 7 & 9 “Manager Montgomery reported the Planning Board discussed this request at their meeting. Mr. Randy Voller has requested an amendment to the Preliminary Plat for Phases 3, 5, 6, 7 & 9 of Chatham Forest to provide for the connection of Springdale Drive and Fox Chapel Drive. Manager Montgomery introduced the agenda item and indicated to the Board that Public Hearing comments were in the agenda. Mr. Voller presented several maps, which showed how the connection would be made to Springdale Dr. and shown as a gentle curb. Mr. Voller indicated that the Subdivision Ordinance requires such connections from adjoining subdivision and that the stop signs would prevent the use of Springdale as a cut through to Thompson Street. Following discussion the Board requested that Manager Montgomery request from NCDOT consideration for a stoplight and the potential need for an acceleration/deceleration on Springdale due to the potential increases in the volume of traffic associated with the connection. The Planning Board gave a favorable recommendation for the amendment.” The board asked about the proposal to connect to Park Drive? Mr. Voller stated he did not own the property. He stated further that he did not have access to the property earlier that he is requesting the additional connection on). There was discussion about the water issue. Motion made by Commissioner Burns seconded by Commissioner Griffin to deny the request. Vote Aye-4 Brooks/Bryan/Burns/Griffin Nay-1 Cotton “ [sic] hh
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 24, 2008, 05:36:02 AM by Hugh »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|