Councilman Wayne Smith, who stayed after council adjourned, declined immediate comment on how he might vote when the matter comes to council at its May 3 meeting.
Frank Jones, a Roanoke Rapids attorney representing the developer, MaSuki Incorporated, also declined immediate comment when asked whether the planning board's vote would bode well for the project when it comes before city council at the 5:15 p.m. meeting at the Lloyd Andrews City Meeting Hall on Jackson Street.
Before the hearing opened, council members disclosed they met with the developer of the project on March 24 and also visited the site of the proposed development off Highway 125.
City Attorney Gilbert Chichester said the meeting was not a violation of open meeting laws because council members met with the developer two-by-two and not together. Planning and Development Director Kelly Lasky said no promises or offers were made during those discussions.
Ford's motion came with stipulations previously recommended by the planning department concerning requirements the 17 acres of land should be limited to a maximum of 144 multi-family residential units divided among six residential buildings. Those conditions also address screening and buffering, state Department of Transportation access agreements and compliance of a proposed swimming pool at the complex.
Speaking of Good News Baptist Church, which the proposed development surrounds, Ford said, “The church didn't seem to have a problem with it. I don't see where there will be a problem.”
During the public hearing the church's pastor, Jimmy King, said, “The church has no qualms with the apartment buildings. You're going to bring more people over to our church.”
King also said the church's deacon board discussed the matter and had no problems with the project.
Jones said the proposal has substantially changed from the last time MaSuki went before the planning board and council. “The number of units have been reduced. The amount of acreage has been reduced.”
The attorney said the project meets all the requirements for the issuance of a conditional use permit and is not expected to affect property values of single-family homes in the community. “The only property it adjoins or abuts is property owned by MaSuki itself. There is already R-3 within the Cross Creek subdivision.”
Jones said the project is a way to encourage growth within the community. “If you're not growing, you're dying. We've been experiencing a slow death. This is an opportunity for MaSuki to come here and invest in our community with more than $10 million. It adds to the tax base.”
The most vocal opponent to the project, Donald Vincent, who lives in the Cross Creek community, told the panels, “I'm concerned nothing's changed. I didn't buy with rental property in mind. I bought with the intention of home ownership.”
Vincent also questioned how a state Court of Appeals ruling on MaSuki's original proposal would affect the proposal currently on the table.
“That application has nothing to do with this one,” Chichester replied. The court of appeals has thus far made no ruling on the matter.
“Now they're trying to do the same thing,” Vincent said. “If they lose one, they can win the other. They're playing the odds.”
Reggie Baird, who lives in the community, said he believed there is a difference between rental R-3 and residential R-3. “We don't think it counts. That R-3 is not our R-3. There's a difference between renting and home ownership.”
