Developers get one-month continuance on Hopkins Town Center after parking dispute

The Mooresville Plan Commission agreed to continue consideration of the Hopkins Town Center to its April meeting after the project’s representatives said they need one more technical review to resolve a dispute over parking requirements.

Ross Holloway of Holloway Engineering, representing the petitioners, told the commission the mixed-use proposal includes about 210 residential units plus commercial space and “we have tried our very best to meet the parking requirements as you laid out in the UDO, even though we’re a PUD.” He said the UDO standard—9-by-20-foot stalls and the formula applied to the proposed mix—would require “over 700 parking spaces,” a number he called infeasible without removing units or converting green space to asphalt.

Ed Winters, identified by Holloway as a member of the Hopkins Group working on the project, told the commission the team’s site layouts produced a lower capacity. At one point Winters referenced “468” as a fitting total; a commissioner later cited an alternate calculation showing the UDO would require about 708 spaces and said the applicants reported they could only fit about 493. Commissioners and applicants acknowledged those counts differ depending on unit mix and parking configuration.

Commissioners pressed the applicants for a clear layout and asked whether alternatives—parallel parking, relocating stalls or using off-site overflow—had been explored. Holloway said the team had considered multiple options, including reconfiguring driveways and moving stalls to the end of buildings, but that meeting the full UDO standard would ‘‘create a sea of asphalt’’ and materially increase stormwater infrastructure and per-unit costs.

After discussion, a committee member moved to grant a continuance and schedule a one-hour final technical review meeting; the motion carried after a vocal vote. The transcript records the action as “motion carries” but does not give a numerical roll-call tally for the continuance vote.

The developers said they will use the technical review to present a final proposal to the commission at the April meeting. The commission did not set specific conditions for any reduced parking allowance; it approved only the schedule to return the item after the technical review.