Planning Board/Board of Adjustment — Cornelius, NC
Date: 2024-11-26

Minutes

 TOWN OF CORNELIUS PLANNING BOARD MEETING
 Assembly Room
 October 14, 2024
 6:30 p.m.

Members Present Members Absent Staﬀ Present
Phil Bechtold-Chair Rachel Bernard Rox Burhans, Planning Director
Bill Sykes Mamie Lee Heather Barﬁeld, Planner
Michael Buttner Rechelle Ward, Administrative Assistant
Colin Furcht
Ava Callender
Travis Jullian
Fred Westaway




VISITORS
Kent Voss
Johnathon Cox

DETERMINATION OF QUORUM
Chair Bechtold called the Planning Board meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. and noted a quorum was present. All
members will be voting. Chair Bechtold identiﬁed the members voting tonight: Phil Bechtold, Colin Furcht, Bill
Sykes, Ava Callender, Michael Buttner, Travis Jullian, and Fred Westaway.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE


APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chair Bechtold entertained a motion to approve the September 9th, meeting minutes. Mr. Westaway made a
motion to approve, and Mr. Furcht seconded. All were in favor and the motion was approved.

In Favor: Chair Bechtold, Mr. Furcht, Mr. Sykes, Opposed: None
 Ms. Callender, Mr. Buttner, Mr. Jullian, and Mr. Westaway
CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL
VAR 09-24 Seaboy Wall Sign
I will entertain a motion to suspend the Planning Board meeting and open as the Board of Adjustment. Mr.
Buttner made a motion to approve, and Mr. Westaway seconded. All were in favor and the motion was
approved.

In Favor: Chair Bechtold, Mr. Furcht, Mr. Sykes, Opposed: None
 Ms. Callender, Mr. Buttner, Mr. Jullian, and Mr. Westaway

Chair Bechtold read the deﬁnition of a variance and the procedural process for the quasi-judicial hearing. (See
attachment)

Chair Bechtold entertained a motion to open the public hearing for VAR 09-24 Seaboy Wall Sign. Ms. Callender
made the motion, and Mr. Buttner seconded. All were in favor and the motion was approved.

In Favor: Chair Bechtold, Mr. Furcht, Mr. Sykes, Opposed: None
 Ms. Callender, Mr. Buttner, Mr. Jullian, and Mr. Westaway

Chair Bechtold called forward those wishing to testify. The oath was administered to Heather Barﬁeld, Planner
and Kent Voss.

Chair Bechtold asked if any Board members visited the property or had a conﬂict of interest in this case?

Chair Bechtold recognized Ms. Barﬁeld and asked if she was ready to present VAR 09-24 Seaboy Wall Sign.

Ms. Barﬁeld stated her name and presented VAR 09-24—Seaboy wall sign request with its associated exhibits.

Exhibit 1- The Application; the applicant, Mr. Jonathan William Cox, owner of Seaboy Restaurant and Bar, is
requesting a variance from Chapter 10 and Chapter 5.2.4 K of the Cornelius Land Development Code to allow a
front-facing, wall-mounted sign at 20822 N Main St., on an approximately 0.4 acre parcel. The building, formerly
Daniel San Restaurant, is estimated to open as Seaboy on December 2, 2024.

Exhibit 2- Illustrates a proposed sign featuring non-illuminated channel letters, ﬂush-mounted to the wall.
Measuring 138 inches wide by 35.7 inches high, the total area is 34.21 square feet. This falls well below the 100-
square-foot limit and remains under 10 percent of the establishment’s front façade, ensuring compliance with
LDC Chapter 10.4.1 General Sign Provisions. Surrounding the property, to the west, north, and south, are
commercial properties, while to the east are single-family homes.

Exhibit 3- The property is zoned as Neighborhood Mixed-Use and is within the Transitional Residential Overlay,
which does not allow wall signs. The purpose of this overlay is to protect, preserve, and enhance residential areas
while allowing commercial uses that are compatible with adjacent residential properties. The Transitional
Residential Overlay extends from South Main to North Main and along Catawba Avenue.



 Planning Board Meeting
 October 14, 2024
 Page 2 of 10
Exhibit 4 & 5- The property itself is located between Cornelius Street and Pecan Street, just south of the YMCA
and north of Carolina Cones and The Chair Factory, as indicated on the vicinity map. The property map shows that
the building is approximately 40 feet back from the road and 180 feet from the rear property line.

Exhibit 6- shows similar sites on Main Street within the Transitional Residential Overlay, including Howell & Sons,
located 350 feet north of Seaboy, the Cycle Path, which is adjacent to the subject property, and Townie on North
Main, directly across the street. Other nearby businesses include Locksmith & Color Visions Flooring, 80 feet
south of Seaboy, the Post Oﬃce, 0.27 miles south, Tire Doctor, 0.33 miles south, and The Restore, 0.4 miles south.

Exhibit 7- Provides a map of the surrounding signage. Wall signs are prohibited in the Transitional Residential
District Overlay, as stated in two sections of the code.

Exhibit 8- Displays the sign regulations table, conﬁrming that wall signs are not allowed in the TRD-O. Additionally,
Chapter 5, Section 5.2.4 K of the Land Development Code speciﬁes that each property in the TRD-O is permitted
one projecting or arm sign; however, wall signs are prohibited.

Exhibit 9- Shows current photos of the property, including front-facing, right side, and left side views.
Based on the evidence and the presence of similar signage surrounding Seaboy, staﬀ recommends that if the
variance is approved, a condition should be set to prohibit internal illumination while allowing external
illumination using a down-mounted gooseneck light. This approach is consistent with the two closest buildings to
the subject property.

Ms. Barﬁeld asked if the Board had any questions for staﬀ?

Chair Bechtold asked if the signs on the other buildings, whose variances have been approved, will all be covered
under the same guidelines?

Ms. Barﬁeld stated VAR 09-18 allowed internal illuminated channel letters for Color Vision Flooring, it did receive
an approved variance in 2018. The other ones like the Locksmith, the Tire Doctor, and all other signs are
grandfathered in.

Mr. Westaway stated The CyclePath and NY Butcher are newer than 2008.

Ms. Barﬁeld stated that CyclePath did a façade update in 2006. The design of their new signs is quite similar to the
previous sign. The change was more of a sign-facelift, which is why it was approved. The signage was in place
before the code change. Similarly, The Restore had an existing wall sign and was granted permission to keep it.

Mr. Westaway asked if the Meadows and New York Butcher which is literally across the street, did that fall into
that same type of situation?

Ms. Barﬁeld stated in the Land Development Code , it is considered a nonconformity according to Land
Development Code Section 15.6 C:"A nonconforming sign may not be moved or replaced (including but not
limited to replacing copy or changing names or symbols) except to bring the sign into complete conformity with


 Planning Board Meeting
 October 14, 2024
 Page 3 of 10
this Code. Once a nonconforming sign is removed from the premises or otherwise taken down or moved, said sign
may only be replaced with a sign which is in conformance with the terms of this Code.

Mr. Jullian asked if this is not approved, what other options they have for signage?

Ms. Barﬁeld stated that they do have the option for a projecting arm sign, a ground mounted arm sign which
commercial areas in the TRD-O typically utilize. Multitenants, like that of the property to the right of Seaboy, are
allowed a placard on the building. They are looking for a wall mounted sign for higher visibility in addition to the
ground mounted arm sign.

Mr. Jullian asked if they were going to have two signs?

Ms. Barﬁeld stated that is correct.

Ms. Callender asked if you plan for any other lighting in the front of the facility other than the gooseneck lighting.

Ms. Barﬁeld stated, no, not for the signage.

Ms. Callender asked if any other lighting for the signage?

Ms. Barﬁeld stated that may be something they can take a look at that. Typically with lighting, it does have to
abide by Chapter 7 of our code.

Mr. Burhans stated that this building is located within our Downtown Planning area. As you can see, there are a
lot of existing buildings that already have wall signs on diﬀerent types of buildings but are very prevalent. This is
something we will be asking our consultants Kimley-Horne to give us some feedback on

Mr. Jullian asked when are they planned to open?

Ms. Barﬁeld stated that they are planned to open December 2nd.

Chair Bechtold asked if there were any more questions?

None

Chair Bechtold asked the applicant to come forward to state your name and address for the record.

Mr. Kent Voss introduced himself as the General Manager at Seaboy. My address is 9829 Starwood Drive,
Harrisburg. It is a pleasure being in front of all of you. We look forward to being a part of the community.

Chair Bechtold asked if there were any questions?

Mr. Furcht asked your predecessor struggled for a number diﬀerent reasons. Do you feel the signage was a factor
and this is why you are bringing this to our attention?

 Planning Board Meeting
 October 14, 2024
 Page 4 of 10
Mr. Bost stated it could have been the concept, hospitality, it could have been a lot of things. In order for us to be
on the playing ﬁeld to have curbside visibility, the signage up there it’s minimalist and not gaudy.

Mr. Furcht stated that its important for us to understand the impact that it could or couldn’t have on the business
and certainly want every business in Cormelius to ﬂourish.

Chair Bechtold entertained a motion to close the Public Hearing for VAR 09-24 Seaboy Wall Sign. Ms. Calender
motioned, and Mr. Westaway Seconded. All were in favor and the motion was approved.

In Favor: Chair Bechtold, Mr. Furcht, Mr. Sykes, Opposed: None
 Ms. Callender, Mr. Buttner, Mr. Jullian, and Mr. Westaway

Chair Bechtold asked if there were any other deliberations from the Board?

Mr. Furcht stated that he thinks that any business in that part of town potentially struggles because of traﬃc and
people didn’t know it was a restaurant. He personally didn’t know there was a restaurant at this site for quite
some time. The sign is tasteful, it’s appropriate for the area.

Mr. Westaway noted the simplicity of the sign and it is not gaudy. It just lets you know that they are there and
the business needs that sign in order to thrive.

Mr. Jullian stated he had previously driven by the property and did not know a restaurant existed.

Ms. Callender stated that it would be great if it was backlit, but I guess that is a great expense. That would really
be good at that location especially.

Chair Bechtold asked what is the position from the Planning Department on backlit signage?

Ms. Barﬁeld- In any other area other than the transitional residential district overlay, wall signs that are front lit
are allowed, open channel letter lighting is not allowed.

Chair Bechtold asked if there are any signs in the transitional residential overlay district overlay that are backlit?

Ms. Barﬁeld, no most of those signs are lit by gooseneck external lighting.

Ms. Callender stated that we should think about businesses open in the evening. Maybe some exceptions for
them, a restaurant, you want to see it as you drive up to it.

Chair Bechtold asked if the gooseneck lighting, is that signiﬁcant to see it from the road, or should it be backlit?

Mr. Westaway stated with the red on the white background with the light hitting the red, will make it pop.



 Planning Board Meeting
 October 14, 2024
 Page 5 of 10
Mr. Westaway asked a question for planning, if there were any examples of signage similar to this that was denied
in the past 10 years?

Ms. Barﬁeld stated there are no variance applications in the archives that were denied previously, just the one
that was approved for the Color Vision sign that is a front lit sign.

Ms. Callender stated that this restaurant is tucked away among many businesses that might not seem open at
night. That’s why we emphasize backlighting—so people can clearly see the restaurant as they approach, rather
than just passing by without noticing it.

Mr. Buttner asked if that was something they were requesting from you, a backlit sign?

Ms. Barﬁeld stated no, not in this particular case.

Mr. Furcht asked for clariﬁcation the original request was an open face channel letter sign which is not allowed
anywhere in the town?

Ms. Barﬁeld stated, correct open face is not allowed

Mr. Burhans stated that we do recognize this is an older area of the community and this has an older architecture
character with original homes. We want to make sure that if that is the direction that the Board was heading
(approve variance), that the lighting is subtle and is consistent with what it is surrounding and not something that
is glaring. If you put an internal luminating sign at this location, it is much more modern and contemporary in
appearance and may not be appropriate. That was the intent behind staﬀ’s recommendation.

Mr. Sykes asked if that is 12 feet across for the sign itself? What if instead having one gooseneck light in the
middle that would cover the whole area. Why wouldn’t we have one or two goosenecks, one on each side to
make the Seaboy sign pop more?

Mr. Furcht asked if we would have to approve the lights too or would that come from the discretion of the
Planning Department?

Ms. Barﬁeld stated it would be for the lights as well.

Mr. Westaway asked is the number of gooseneck lights part of the request being asked, or is that ﬂexible based
upon the fact that we go with the design and if they wanted to put 15 gooseneck lights and as long as it looks
reasonable and matches what’s around, that is okay or if its one, two or four? We are trying to see if they can
have additional lighting on the sign and not be back lit, but be consistent with what’s on the street already but
give them additional light.

Ms. Barﬁeld stated that since this is in the transitional district overlay doesn’t allow wall signs in its entirety.

Mr. Furcht asked if they asked for two goosenecks?


 Planning Board Meeting
 October 14, 2024
 Page 6 of 10
Ms. Barﬁeld stated that they did not ask directly for two. If the applicant would like to clarify, two rather than just
one, we can certainly look into that.

Mr. Furcht asked if that was something we could do now or something that could happen after?

Mr. Burhans stated a request of a non-illuminated wall sign has been requested by the Board, so the Board needs
to render a decision on that. Staﬀ has recommended if you are inclined to approve it, to clarify that you do not
wish to have an internally illuminated sign and that any lighting should be externally illuminated with the
gooseneck lights. The ordinance allows up to two, the Board does not need to say anything further on that
matter and we can make a note in the ﬁle as a reference point, they won't have to come back and ask for another
one.

Chair Bechtold asked if there were any additional questions from the Board?

None

Chair Bechtold stated we will read each ﬁnding of facts. I will entertain a motion to approve or deny each ﬁnding
of fact.

Ms. Callender- Read Finding #1
FINDING #1

 • Unnecessary hardship would result from the strict application of the ordinance. It shall not be
 necessary to demonstrate that, in the absence of the variance, no reasonable use can be made of the
 property.

 I move that the ﬁnding has been met, and Mr. Westaway seconded the motion. All were in favor and the
 ﬁnding was approved.

In Favor: Chair Bechtold, Mr. Furcht, Mr. Sykes, Opposed: None
 Ms. Callender, Mr. Buttner, Mr. Jullian, and Mr. Westaway

Mr. Jullian- Read Finding #2
FINDING #2
 • The hardship results from conditions that are peculiar to the property, such as location, size, or
 topography. Hardships resulting from personal circumstances, as well as hardships resulting from
 conditions that are common to the neighborhood or the general public, may not be the basis for
 granting a variance.

 I move that the ﬁnding has been met, and Mr. Buttner seconded. All were in favor and the ﬁnding was
 approved.



In Favor: Chair Bechtold, Mr. Furcht, Mr. Sykes, Opposed: None
 Planning Board Meeting
 October 14, 2024
 Page 7 of 10
 Ms. Callender, Mr. Buttner, Mr. Jullian, and Mr. Westaway


Mr. Furcht- Read Finding #3

FINDING #3

 • The hardship did not result from actions taken by the applicant or the property owner. The act of
 purchasing property with knowledge that circumstances exist that may justify the granting of a
 variance shall not be regarded as a self-created hardship.
 I move the ﬁnding has been met, and Mr. Jullian seconded. All were in favor and the ﬁnding was
 approved.

In Favor: Chair Bechtold, Mr. Furcht, Mr. Sykes, Opposed: None
 Ms. Callender, Mr. Buttner, Mr. Jullian, and Mr. Westaway

Mr. Buttner- Read ﬁnding #4

FINDING

 • The requested variance is consistent with the spirit, purpose, and intent of the ordinance, such that
 public safety is secured, and substantial justice is achieved.
 I move that ﬁnding has been met, and Mr. Westaway seconded. All were in favor and the motion was
 approved.
In Favor: Chair Bechtold, Mr. Furcht, Mr. Sykes, Opposed: None
 Ms. Callender, Mr. Buttner, Mr. Jullian, and Mr. Westaway


Chair Bechtold entertained a motion to approve VAR 09-24 Seaboy Wall Sign including staﬀ recommendations on
no internal lighting. Mr. Furcht motioned. Mr. Westaway seconded. All were in favor and the motion was
approved. Variance is conditionally approved.


In Favor: Chair Bechtold, Mr. Furcht, Mr. Sykes, Opposed: None
 Ms. Callender, Mr. Buttner, Mr. Jullian, and Mr. Westaway
Chair Bechtold entertained a motion to suspend the Board of Adjustment and open the Planning Board. Mr.
 Furcht motioned, and Mr. Westaway seconded. All were in favor and the motion was approved.

In Favor: Chair Bechtold, Mr. Furcht, Mr. Sykes, Opposed: None
 Ms. Callender, Mr. Buttner, Mr. Jullian, and Mr. Westaway




 Planning Board Meeting
 October 14, 2024
 Page 8 of 10
OLD BUSINESS
It was requested that citizen feedback guidance be placed on the agendas. It is comparable to what is on the Town
Board agenda.

NEW BUSINESS
Downtown Master Plan Follow up with Kimley Horn from Town Board presentation. A few highlights and key
phrases.
 • Downtown pedestrian focus
 • Arts and History present (Downtown History Museum)
 • Social Gathering opportunities, places for shopping, eating or just hang out
 • A vibrant centerpiece, active
 • Unify the East and West side of Cornelius

Currently in the Visioning and Analysis stage working on speciﬁc pieces marketing analysis and parking analysis
and other features

Goal is to have the project completed by Spring or Summer 2025.

Downtown Master Plan survey is active until the end of October.

We have also done a lot of community engagement over the summer, including Stakeholder meetings which
include business owners, residential, developers and civic communities. Received a lot of great feedback.

Hosted our community meeting with about 90 residents attended.

We have a teen advisory council which are residents of Davidson, Cornelius, and Huntersville which are High
School students.

If you google Downtown Cornelius Master Plan it will take you directly to the survey

Ms. Callender asked if any stakeholders mentioned the importance of plate glass windows to make the
establishments more approachable?

Mr. Burhans stated that was something they did not hear, however that’s something we look for with new
development.

Mr. Burhans provided an overview of the Transportation highlights and Catalyst sites

Mr. Burhans wants to keep the Planning Board involved in the Downtown Master Plan, you are always invited to
any of our meeting whether its Town Board or Public engagement if your schedule allows. Please share the
survey.



 Planning Board Meeting
 October 14, 2024
 Page 9 of 10
ADJOURNMENT
Chair Bechtold entertained a motion to be made to adjourn the meeting at 7:52 p.m. Mr. Furcht moved and Mr.
Westaway seconded. All were in favor and the motion was approved.

In Favor: Chair Bechtold, Mr. Furcht, Mr. Sykes, Opposed: None
 Ms. Callender, Mr. Buttner, Mr. Jullian, and Mr. Westaway


NEXT MEETING
November 12, 2024

Respectfully submitted:

___________________________ __________ _________________________ _________
Phil Bechtold Date Rechelle Ward Date
Chairman Administrative Assistant




Enc: Town Staﬀ PowerPoint Presentation




 Planning Board Meeting
 October 14, 2024
 Page 10 of 10
Planning Board
 10.14.2024
 Agenda
 VAR 09-24
 Exhibit 1 - Seaboy Wall Sign Application

• Applicant: Jonathan William Cox,
  Seaboy Restaurant and Bar
• 20822 N Main Street
• Approximately 0.402 +/- acres
• Variance (VAR) to allow front-
  facing wall-mounted sign
 VAR 09-24
 Exhibit 2 – Sign Elevations


• Non-illuminated channel letter,
  flush-mounted wall sign.
• Dimensions: 138” W x 35.7” H
• 34.21 Sq Ft
 VAR 09-24
Exhibit 2 – Sign Elevations
 VAR 09-24
 Exhibit 3 - Zoning Map
 Zoning Map
 Variance Number: VAR 09-24

• Surrounding
 Applicant: Jonathan William Cox
 20822 N Main St.

  properties to the
  West, North and
  South are
  commercial and to
  east are single-family
  residential
• Zoned Neighborhood
  Mixed-Use (NMX)
• Is within the
  Transitional District
  Overlay (TR-O)
  which prohibits wall
  signs
 VAR 09-24
 Exhibit 4 & 5 – Vicinity & Property Map
 Vicinity Map
 Property Map Variance Number: VAR 09-24
 Applicant: Jonathan William Cox
 Variance Number: VAR 09-24
 20822 N Main St.
Applicant: Jonathan William Cox
 20822 N Main St.
 VAR 09-24
Exhibit 6 – Surrounding Signage
 Howell & Sons
 VAR 09-24
Exhibit 6 – Surrounding Signage
 The Cycle Path
 VAR 09-24
Exhibit 6 – Surrounding Signage
 Towne on North Main
 VAR 09-24
 Exhibit 6 – Surrounding Signage
Locksmith & Color Visions Flooring
 VAR 09-24
Exhibit 6 – Surrounding Signage
 Post Office
 VAR 09-24
Exhibit 6 – Surrounding Signage
 Tire Doctor
 VAR 09-24
Exhibit 6 – Surrounding Signage
 Restore
 VAR 09-24
Exhibit 7 – Surrounding Signage
 Restore
 VAR 09-24
Exhibit 8 – LDC Chapter 10 Sign
 Regulations Table
 VAR 09-24
Exhibit 8 – LDC Chapter 5 Section 5.2.4 K
 VAR 09-24
Exhibit 9 – Front of 20822 N Main St
 VAR 09-24
Exhibit 9 – Right Side of 20822 N Main St
 VAR 09-24
Exhibit 9 – Left Side of 20822 N Main St.
 VAR 09-24
 Recommended Condition of Approval


The sign must not be internally
illuminated. However, it may be
illuminated externally using a
down-mounted spotlight
directed toward the sign.
 VAR 09-24




Questions for Staff?
 VAR 09-24




Hear From the Applicant
 VAR 09-24
 Facts of Finding – Finding #1

• Unnecessary hardship would result from the strict application of the
  ordinance. It shall not be necessary to demonstrate that, in the
  absence of the variance, no reasonable use can be made of the
  property.

• The Board Members shall make statements as to whether the
  evidence supports or does not support this finding. A motion,
  second and vote as to whether this finding has been met.
  4/5thmajority will apply.
 VAR 09-24
 Facts of Finding – Finding #2

• The hardship results from conditions that are peculiar to the
  property, such as location, size, or topography. Hardships resulting
  from personal circumstances, as well as hardships resulting from
  conditions that are common to the neighborhood or the general
  public, may not be the basis for granting a variance.

• The Board Members shall make statements as to whether the
  evidence supports or does not support this finding. A motion,
  second and vote as to whether this finding has been met.
  4/5thmajority will apply.
 VAR 09-24
 Facts of Finding – Finding #3

• The hardship did not result from actions taken by the applicant or
  the property owner. The act of purchasing property with knowledge
  that circumstances exist that may justify the granting of a variance
  shall not be regarded as a self-created hardship.

• The Board Members shall make statements as to whether the
  evidence supports or does not support this finding. A motion,
  second and vote as to whether this finding has been met.
  4/5thmajority will apply.
 VAR 09-24
 Facts of Finding – Finding #4

• The requested variance is consistent with the spirit, purpose, and
  intent of the ordinance, such that public safety is secured, and
  substantial justice is achieved.

• The Board Members shall make statements as to whether the
  evidence supports or does not support this finding. A motion,
  second and vote as to whether this finding has been met.
  4/5thmajority will apply.
 VAR 09-24
 Final Vote to Grant/Deny Variance




• Were all findings of fact met or not met?

• Five positive votes are required to grant variance.
CORNELIUS
DOWNTOWN
 OUR VISION l Downtown Cornelius will be a
 thriving pedestrian-focused destination that
 builds on the strengths of its history and art
 scene, creates unique shopping, dining, and

MASTER PLAN social gathering opportunities, and ultimately
 establishes a vibrant centerpiece that
 reconnects the community.


KIMLEY-HORN / COOPER CARRY
09.16.2024
OVERALL PROJECT SCHEDULE



 We are here

  SUMMER
 2024
AUGUST
Stakeholder Engagement Meetings

• Day 1 | 08.20.2024
 • Cain Center for the Arts
 • Arts, Culture, Civic
 • Board, Town Staff, Neighboring Governments

• Day 2 l 08.21.2024 Yuri & Cain Center for the Arts
 • Site Walk
 • Meet with Cain Center Staff
 • Meet with local artists and Town Hall Staff for additional questions

• Day 3 | 08.22.2024
 • Business
 • Real Estate and Development
 • Residential

 • Police Station Facility Review
SEPTEMBER SCHEDULE
Stakeholder Engagement Meetings

Community Meeting #1
• Gather input on issues, needs, and opportunities
• Raise awareness of plan


Online Survey #1 Launch
• Gather input community-wide and raise awareness of plan


Town Board Work Session #2
• Provide feedback on goals
• Catalyst sites evaluation progress and review
• Transportation alternatives review and discussion


Pop-Up Event #1 (Tawba Walk Arts and Music Festival)
• Community-wide to raise awareness to the project
STAKEHOLDER INPUT
Input Summary

Consistent Themes: Key Takeaways:

• A more walkable and vibrant downtown with wayfinding and signage that supports • I-77 and the DDI interchange create a significant
 restaurants and retail barrier to the downtown, making residents reluctant
• Create a pedestrian friendly atmosphere with more retail opportunities within the main to visit Downtown Cornelius
 corridors of Downtown Cornelius within walking distance of gathering spaces • Town leadership should establish a vision and a set of
• Beautifying Downtown Cornelius through public art and landscaping standards for all future developments that preserve
• A set of guidelines and structure to the Town’s development standards to include setbacks, the character, history, and consistency of Cornelius
 street trees, lighting, parking, and room for pedestrians and cyclists at a balanced pedestrian and vehicular scale
• A thoughtful approach to preserving the history and character of Cornelius to provide a • To flourish, Downtown should promote a vibrant and
 connection and a sense of belonging for residents inviting environment to keep people coming back
• Gateways to indicate a sense of arrival to Downtown Cornelius
• A local means of transportation like a shuttle or trolley throughout the downtown area
• Create a downtown management plan for communication and events to unite the
 combined efforts between the Town, Cain Center for the Arts, and other non-profit
 organizations
• A thoughtful approach to residential housing and ownership that supports Downtown and
 small businesses
ADDITIONAL INPUT
 Teen Advisory Council

Key Takeaways: Downtown Wishlist:

• Perception of Downtown Cornelius: churches, sporting events, Tawba Walk, local Improvements that you would like to see In Downtown?
  businesses, and walkability.
• Aesthetic Appeal: appreciate the current downtown aesthetic, particularly the • Preserve the older buildings but enhance them
  historic buildings and street trees that contribute to the small-town atmosphere. They • Promote local businesses/restaurants so people know where they are
  also mentioned the brick streets as a positive. There was a suggestion to preserve • Enhance the town's vibrancy by introducing more local events, while
  the exterior character of the existing historic buildings while renovating the interiors maintaining a balance to avoid overcrowding
  for more engaging uses, with Gem St. Theatre in Kannapolis being referenced as an • More art
  example.
• Dining Preferences: There’s a strong preference for quality food options over fast What activities/events would you like to see in Downtown?
  food, with an emphasis on healthier choices in the downtown area (ex. Cava). They
  mentioned having more food court like areas like what’s in Charlotte. • Live music/concerts
• Public Spaces: They expressed a desire for more green spaces where people can • Festival parades (my guess is likely Memorial Day and Thanksgiving
  sit, socialize, and relax without the need to spend money—providing areas to gather Parades)
  and enjoy the town. • Add more visibility to downtown holiday events
• Safety: There was a consensus that downtown feels safe during both the day/night.
• Local Favorites: Popular gathering spots mentioned include Pelican’s and David What Amenities/Businesses would you like to see in Downtown?
  Dunn’s Car Wash.
• Event Suggestions: To attract more foot traffic, they suggested hosting more events • Activity businesses (Adventure parks, arcades, DIY Art Studios, Escape
  like Second Friday, Food Truck festivals, and Events centered around sports: They Rooms, etc)
  referenced the community-driven events held at Truist Baseball Stadium (cultural • More lively noticeable local boutiques
  celebrations, family activities, and special local promotions) which we could draw • More retail that’s in walkable distance
  similar engagement, potentially at Legion or Smithville Park during sporting events.
Project Website




 https://cornelius.org/government/departments/
 planning_/downtown_master_plan/index.php
Social Pinpoint – Online Survey


 https://engagekh.myso
 cialpinpoint.com/DTCor
 nelius
TRANSPORTATION
TRANSPORTATION
CATALYST SITES
Initial Sites Identified
CATALYST SITES

Sites/Opportunities Refined Based on Feedback
 CATALYST SITES

Initial Thoughts & Blocking
Character Imagery
Q&A / DISCUSSION