Mebane’s city council heeded the pleas of rural neighbors on the northeastern outskirts of the city this week as its members unanimously rejected the annexation of 16 acres in western Orange County that a Greensboro homebuilder had hoped to turn into a new townhome development.
The council ultimately voted 5-to-0 against the annexation request, which Dwight Stone of Greeensboro-based D. Stone Builders had presented as a prelude to a rezoning request for 80 townhomes along Lebanon Road. The council’s members were instead swayed by the objections of neighboring residents, who deemed Stone’s plans to be inconsistent with the large lots and spacious dwellings that now dominate the unincorporated area north of Mebane’s municipal limits.
Stone’s plans for this project had also met the same buzz-saw of opposition in July when his proposal went before Mebane’s municipal planning board. The planning board’s members went on to issue a unanimous recommendation against the development. In response, Stone made changes to his plans in preparation for his hearing before Mebane’s city council on Monday. Yet, in the end, these tweaks were insufficient to persuade neighbors, or the council, to support the development.
The primary changes that Stone and his attorney, Mike Fox, pitched to council on Monday were the addition of a right turn lane into the subdivision and the slight rearrangement of the clustered townhouses to eliminate any need for him to request exceptions, or variances, from Mebane development rules – and in particular the minimum distance of 8 feet that the city requires between buildings.
During the planning board meeting, one resident, Sally Merryman, had focused on the lack of turn lanes in Stone’s plans for the development – which she noted are present in several other subdivisions along the same stretch of road.
[Story continues below graphic of new layout of the proposed townhouse subdivision.]
At the time, Fox had emphasized that the N.C. Department of Transportation had deemed a turn lane unnecessary given the relatively small size of the development. Stone nevertheless reworked his plans to add in this feature, which resulted in a two-month delay of his hearing before Mebane’s city council from its original date in August.
On the agenda for the council’s meeting on Monday night were two items concerning Stone’s proposed townhomes. The first one was the proposed annexation of the property along Lebanon Road while the second was a rezoning request that would’ve allowed him to break ground on 80 townhouse units.
[Story continues below special subscription offer.]
TO KEEP UP WITH THE LATEST LOCAL NEWS – INCLUDING THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE MEBANE NEWS (ON BOTH SIDES OF THE COUNTY LINE) – SUBSCRIBE TO THE ALAMANCE NEWS. Both in print each week and online every day, there’s nowhere you’ll find more LOCAL NEWS. JUST $50 FOR UNLIMITED ONLINE ACCESS – and for Alamance County residents, price includes a print copy by mail.
The council ultimately never voted on the rezoning request since it had been rendered effectively moot with the demise of the annexation proposal. The council nevertheless heard the particulars of the Stone’s plan for the project when it convened a public hearing which considered both the annexation and the rezoning requests.
A succession of speakers during the two-hour hearing termed the proposal “incongruent with the area” (John Frank), saying it “does not fit in” (Rita Gross), was “out of character” (Whitney Watson), and was “not in the spirit of our rural community” (Ed Kubacki).
[Story continues below photos of some of the various speakers who opposed the project.]
RURAL RESIDENTS OUT IN FORCE TO OPPOSE TOWNHOUSE PROJECT
The developer had previously told the planning board that the two-story townhomes, with were to have had one- or two-car garages, were estimated to be priced from the mid $300,000s to mid $400,000s.
Attorney Fox emphasized that the $300,000-plus townhouses would provide more “affordable housing” that the alternative of what he estimated to be the $600,000 to $800,000 cost for single-family homes.
But residents in the area, most of whom live outside of Mebane’s city limits as well as its extraterritorial jurisdiction, pleaded that the townhouse development would be out of synch with their neighborhood’s single-family character as well as the prevailing lot size of an acre or more.
The section of Orange County where this development was slated to go is so far beyond Mebane’s present municipal limits that it is not even within its extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ).
Fox also emphasized the $30 to $32 million increase in the city’s tax base, which prompted audible groans from residents who have felt that the zeal for more tax revenue had been the guiding principle for city officials as they evaluated this project.
When assistant city manager Preston Mitchell had calculated the actual revenue impact of this project, he estimated that the $32 million tax base increase would result in about $150,400 in additional annual property tax revenue.
Fox also stressed the “compact nature of the design” for the townhouse complex, emphasizing that Mebane’s “growth areas are limited.”
At the planning board meeting, the architectural renderings of the townhouses were described as “drab, detail-less, unremarkable” and “nondescript” by Tenly Perry-Trautman, who, like many of the protesting neighbors, lives across the street on Doe Run Road.
Her husband, Charlie Trautman, led off the firing line of opponents Monday night. “There are no other two-story townhouses between here and Mebane,” he told the council before he warned its members about the “precedent your decision will set.” He pointed to another vacant property with the same owner that lies across the street and speculated that it could end up with the same fate: a proposed townhome site in the otherwise rural community.
Trautman and several other speakers also raised their frustration at having no electoral ability to influence the council members. Inasmuch as they live outside the city limits, Trautman said he and his neighbors “have no recourse. We can’t vote you in or out of office.”
Ed Kubacki emphasized that “you don’t represent us.”
Gary Clark was one of several speakers who challenged the city’s “encroachment,” as he termed it, into Orange County. Like Trautman, he worried about the potential “snowball effect” that such a development would have in prompting similar requests for more dense zoning, including other townhouse developments, along Lebanon Road.
Rita Gross questioned whether the city had sought the opinions of Orange County schools or other Orange County government entities.
Another frequent theme of the opponents was traffic, both the volume and the speed. “Traffic is horrendous,” said Victor Scott.
Complaints about speeding along Lebanon Road, which is currently listed as 45 miles per hour, ultimately prompted council member Katie Burkholder to ask whether the city could “pursue a change in the speed limit” in the area.
It was noted that because Lebanon Road is a state road, it is entirely within the determination of the state department of transportation to set the speed limit for the area. The city council can ask DOT to reconsider the speed limit, but it is within DOT’s sole discretion to change it.
However, in response to Burkholder’s concern, Mebane police chief Mitch McKinney said the city’s police could patrol more frequently along Lebanon Road as long as they remain within one mile of the city limits.
After two hours, with the public hearing concluded, councilman Jonathan White moved to deny the annexation request, which was adopted unanimously by the council. By virtue of the denial, the rezoning issue died without a vote.
Mayor pro tem Tim Bradley took the occasion to agree with the residents’ sentiment that the townhouse development was “out of character with the area.” However, Bradley gave a generic chastisement to residents who he felt had not been respectful in some of their comments toward the council.
Bradley took particular umbrage at those who contended the city shouldn’t be expanding into Orange County. “You’re about 50 years too late,” Bradley admonished, adding that the city has long been annexing properties, upon owners’ request, in Orange County.
While historically the city’s population has been predominantly in Alamance County, more and more of Mebane’s growth in population over the past decade has been in Orange County. As a result, the 90 percent or more of Mebane that has historically been within Alamance County had fallen to 80 percent by 2024, with the remainder in Orange County, based on recent census estimates.
Read other recent Mebane news stories:
City council approved application for grant to study potential merger with Orange Alamance Water System: https://alamancenews.com/mebane-oks-city-application-for-grant-to-study-potential-merger-with-private-utility/
State picks Cone Health over Duke/Novant to build 46-bed hospital in Mebane: https://alamancenews.com/breaking-news-cone-wins-out-over-duke-to-build-mebane-hospital/
Mebane annexes site for future Koury shopping center, residential development: https://alamancenews.com/mebane-annexes-site-of-mixed-use-development-with-explicit-exemption-of-land-county-still-owns/
