Loading...
SEPTEMBER MEETING AGENDA PACKETNEW HANOVER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD AGENDA Andre’ Mallette Training Center New Hanover County Government Center 230 Government Center Drive, Suite 135, Wilmington, NC 28403 Members of the Board Donna Girardot, Chair - Paul Boney, Vice-Chair Thomas ‘Jordy’ Rawl – Ernest Olds – Jeffrey B. Petroff – H. Allen Pope – Colin J. Tarrant Wayne Clark, Director of Planning & Land Use – Ken Vafier, Planning Manager Planning Board - September 3, 2020 SEPTEMBER 3, 2020 6:00 PM MEETING CALLED TO ORDER (Chair Donna Girardot) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (Planning Manager Ken Vafier) APPROVAL OF MINUTES (August 2020) REGULAR ITEMS OF BUSINESS The Planning Board may consider substantial changes in these petitions as a result of objections, debate, and discussion at the meeting, including rezoning to other classifications. 1. Public Hearing Rezoning Request (Z20-13) - Request by Design Solutions on behalf of the property owner, Desirable Properties, LLC, to rezone approximately 31.31 acres of land located at the northwest corner of Sidbury Road and Dairy Farm Road from R-15, Residential District, to (CZD) RMF-L, Conditional Residential Multi-Family Low Density, in order to develop a multi-family project consisting of 288 units. 2. Public Hearing Rezoning Request (Z20-15) – Request by Design Solutions on behalf of the property owner, Redland Development Incorporated, to rezone approximately 7.15 acres of land located at 8814 Market Street (Hwy 17), north of Futch Creek Road, from R-15, Residential District, and B-1, Neighborhood Business, to (CZD) RMF-L, Conditional Residential Multi-Family Low Density District, and (CZD) CB, Conditional Community Business District, in order to construct a 60-unit townhome development and an 8,000 square foot retail/office/personal service building. 3. Quasi-Judicial Hearing Special Use Permit Request (S-603M) - Request by the Law Offices of Matthew A. Nichols on behalf of the property owner, Plantation Village Inc., to modify the Special Use Permit for the Plantation Village Continuing Care Retirement Community to allow for the redevelopment of the eastern portion of the community and to increase the maximum number of units to 300. OTHER ITEMS 1. Development Code Update (Unified Development Ordinance Project) NEW HANOVER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION MEETING DATE: 9/3/2020 Regular DEPARTMENT: Planning PRESENTER(S): Brad Schuler, Senior Planner CONTACT(S): Brad Schuler; Wayne Clark, Planning & Land Use Director SUBJECT: Public Hearing - Rezoning Request (Z20-13) - Request by Design Solu4ons on behalf of the property owner, Desirable Proper4es, LLC, to rezone approximately 31.31 acres of land located at the northwest corner of Sidbury Road and Dairy Farm Road from R-15, Residen4al District, to (CZD) RMF-L, Condi4onal Residen4al Mul4-Family Low Density, in order to develop a mul4-family project consis4ng of 288 units. BRIEF SUMMARY: The applicant is seeking to rezone approximately 31 acres of land located at the northwest corner of Sidbury Road and Dairy Farm Road from R-15 to (CZD) RMF-L in order to develop a mul0-family project consis0ng of 288 units. Under the County's performance residen0al standards, the site would be permi6ed up to 78 dwelling units at a density of 2.5 du/ac as currently zoned. The proposed 288 units equates to an overall density of 9.2 du/ac. It is es0mated the site would generate about 60-80 trips during the peak hours if developed at the current permi6ed density. The proposed RMF-L development would increase the es0mated number of peak hour trips by approximately 40 and generate about 100 trips in the AM peak and 120 trips in the PM peak. The applicant has completed a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) which has been approved by NCDOT and the WMPO. The TIA analyzed the development of 320 mul0-family units on the subject property (which exceeds the 288 units proposed). The required improvements consist of installing and extending mul0ple turns lanes on Blue Clay Road and Sidbury Road, and realigning the Blue Clay Road/Sidbury Road intersec0on to allow for eastbound/westbound free flow movement. The site has an unique shape resul0ng in the vast majority of its boundary abuDng an arterial or collector road corridor, including Interstate 40. Most of the neighboring property is either undeveloped or used for nonresiden0al purposes (NHC Schools Bus Depot, SeaTech). While the surrounding area was zoned for low density housing in the 1970s, the 2016 Comprehensive Plan recommends a mixture of higher density housing and commercial uses along the Sidbury Road corridor. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan classifies the site as Community Mixed Use. The proposal is generally CONSISTENT with the Comprehensive Plan because mul0-family development is a typical land use within areas designated as Community Mixed Use, and because the proposed number of units is in-line with the recommended densi0es for the area. In addi0on, it provides for diverse housing op0ons and an orderly transi0on from a major road corridor to areas zoned for lower density housing. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Staff recommends approval and suggests the following mo0on: I move to APPROVE the proposed rezoning to a condi0onal RMF-L district. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because mul0-family development is a typical land use within areas designated as Community Mixed Use, and because the proposed number of units is in-line with the recommended densi0es for the area. In addi0on, mul0-family housing is generally more appropriate along major road corridors like Interstate 40 than low density single-family housing. I also find APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal would benefit the community by providing diverse housing op0ons. [Oponal] Note any condi0ons to be added to the district. Example Mo4on for Denial I move to DENY the proposed rezoning to a condi0onal RMF-L district. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because mul0-family development is a typical land use within areas designated as Community Mixed Use, and because the proposed number of units is in-line with the recommended densi0es for the area, I find DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is not consistent with the desired character of the surrounding community and the density will adversely impact the adjacent neighborhoods. COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (only Manager) Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 SCRIPT for Zoning Map Amendment Application (Z20-13) Request by Design Solutions on behalf of the property owner, Desirable Properties, LLC, to rezone approximately 31.31 acres of land located at the northwest corner of Sidbury Road and Dairy Farm Road from R-15, Residential District, to (CZD) RMF-L, Conditional Residential Multi-Family Low Density, in order to develop a multi-family project consisting of 288 units. 1. This is a public hearing. We will hear a presentation from staff. Then the applicant and any opponents will each be allowed 15 minutes for their presentation and additional 5 minutes for rebuttal. 2. Conduct Hearing, as follows: a. Staff presentation b. Applicant’s presentation (up to 15 minutes) c. Opponent’s presentation (up to 15 minutes) d. Applicant’s rebuttal (up to 5 minutes) e. Opponent’s rebuttal (up to 5 minutes) 3. Close the public hearing 4. Board discussion 5. Vote on the application. The motion should include a statement saying how the change is, or is not, consistent with the land use plan and why approval or denial of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest. Example Motion for Approval I move to APPROVE the proposed rezoning to a conditional RMF-L district. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because multi-family development is a typical land use within areas designated as Community Mixed Use, and because the proposed number of units is in-line with the recommended densities for the area. In addition, multi-family housing is generally more appropriate along major road corridors like Interstate 40 than low density single-family housing. I also find APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal would benefit the community by providing diverse housing options. [Optional] Note any conditions to be added to the district. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 1 - 1 Alternative Motion for Denial I move to DENY the proposed rezoning to a conditional RMF-L district. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because multi-family development is a typical land use within areas designated as Community Mixed Use, and because the proposed number of units is in-line with the recommended densities for the area, I find DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is not consistent with the desired character of the surrounding community and the density will adversely impact the adjacent neighborhoods. Alternative Motion for Approval/Denial: I move to [Approve/Deny] the proposed rezoning to a conditional RMF-L district. I find it to be [Consistent/Inconsistent] with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because [insert reasons] __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ I also find [Approval/Denial] of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because [insert reasons] __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 1 - 2 Z20-13 Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 1 of 18 STAFF REPORT FOR Z20-13 ZONING MAP AMENDMENT APPLICATION APPLICATION SUMMARY Case Number: Z20-13 Request: Rezoning to a conditional RMF-L district Applicant: Property Owner(s): Cindee Wolf – Design Solutions Desirable Properties, LLC Location: Acreage: Northwest corner of Sidbury Road and Dairy Farm Road 31.31 PID(s): Comp Plan Place Type: R01800-003-012-001 Community Mixed Use Existing Land Use: Proposed Land Use: Undeveloped 288 Multi-Family Units Current Zoning: Proposed Zoning: R-15 (CZD) RMF-L SURROUNDING AREA LAND USE ZONING North Single-Family Residential R-15 East Northern NHCS Transportation Division, SeaTECH R-15 South Undeveloped R-15 West Interstate 40 n/a Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 1 Z20-13 Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 2 of 18 ZONING HISTORY July 7, 1972 The site was initially zoned R-15 (Area 8A) COMMUNITY SERVICES Water/Sewer Water and sewer will be provided by CFPUA. Specific design will be determined during site plan review. Fire Protection New Hanover County Fire Services, New Hanover County Northern Fire District, New Hanover County Station Castle Hayne Schools Castle Hayne Elementary, Holly Shelter Middle, and Laney High schools For more information, see the school data below. Recreation Northern Regional Park, Blue Clay Bike Park CONSERVATION, HISTORIC, & ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Conservation The Conservation Resources Map indicates that pocosin wetlands may be present on the site. The applicant’s conceptual site plan indicates that there are approximately 3.3 acres of wetlands on the site. Verification of regulated wetlands will be required during the site plan review process. Conservation space is required for pocosin or swamp forest wetlands when at least five acres of the resource exists on the property. Historic No known historic resources Archaeological No known archaeological resources Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 2 Z20-13 Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 3 of 18 APPLICANT’S PROPOSED CONCEPTUAL PLAN  The applicant is proposing to construct a multi-family development consisting of 288 units.  The units will be located within 15 buildings containing 12 to 24 units each. The buildings can be three stories with a maximum height of 45 feet.  The applicant’s proposed conceptual plan indicates that 10.7 acres (about 34%) of the site will be within open space area, exceeding the County’s requirement of providing 20% open space.  The buildings will be located a minimum of 480 feet from existing single-family homes, which exceeds the 20-foot buffer requirement between attached housing and single- family dwellings. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 3 Z20-13 Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 4 of 18 ZONING CONSIDERATIONS  Under the County’s performance residential standards, the site would be permitted up to 78 dwelling units at a density of 2.5 du/ac. The proposed 288 units equates to an overall density of 9.2 du/ac.  The subject site has a unique location in that three sides border street rights-of-way (I-40, Sidbury Road, and Dairy Farm Road). Only about 230 feet of the site boundary abuts a residentially zoned property.  While the subject property is located adjacent residentially zoned land, much of the surrounding area is undeveloped or used for nonresidential purposes. New Hanover County Schools owns about 79 acres directly east of the site along Dairy Farm Road containing a school bus storage area and SeaTECH. AREA SUBDIVISIONS UNDER DEVELOPMENT Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 4 Z20-13 Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 5 of 18 TRANSPORTATION  The site is accessed by Dairy Farm Road, a NCDOT maintained collector road. An interchange to I-40 is located north of the site on Holly Shelter Road.  As currently zoned, it is estimated the site would generate about 60-80 trips during the peak hours if developed at the permitted density. The proposed RMF-L development would increase the estimated number of peak hour trips by approximately 40. Intensity Approx. Peak Hour Trips Existing Development: Undeveloped 0 AM / 0 PM Typical Development under Current Zoning: 78 single-family homes 60 AM / 80 PM Proposed RMF-L Development: 288 Multi-Family mid-rise units 97 AM / 122 PM Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 5 Z20-13 Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 6 of 18 Traffic Impact Analysis  The applicant has completed a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for the project which has been approved by NCDOT and the WMPO. The TIA analyzed the development of 320 multi- family units on the subject property (which exceeds the 288 units proposed).  The TIA analyzed the Level of Service (LOS) in vehicle delay per second at notable intersections in the area and requires the following roadway improvements: 1. Dairy Farm Road at Sidbury Road  Extension of the eastbound left turn lane.  Installation of a westbound right turn lane.  Installation of a southbound left turn lane. 2. Blue Clay Road at Sidbury Road  Realignment of the intersection to provide stop control for the southbound approach only, allowing for the eastbound/westbound movements to operate at free flow. 3. N. College Road at Blue Clay Road  Installation of a westbound right turn lane.  Extension of the westbound left turn lane.  Signal modification. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 6 Z20-13 Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 7 of 18 Dairy Farm Road at Sidbury Road Scenario Overall LOS Delay in Seconds AM PEAK – Southbound Approach (Worst Approach) 2020 Existing B 12.9 2024 Future without Project C 15.7 2024 Future with Project C 20.9 2024 Future with Project & Improvements C 16.9 PM PEAK – Southbound Approach (Worst Approach) 2020 Existing B 12.2 2024 Future without Project B 14.7 2024 Future with Project C 19.6 2024 Future with Project & Improvements C 15.9 Required Improvements to Dairy Farm Road at Sidbury Road Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 7 Z20-13 Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 8 of 18 Blue Clay Road at Sidbury Road Scenario Overall LOS (Delay in Seconds) AM PEAK Westbound Southbound 2020 Existing C (16.5) A (4.8) 2024 Future without Project D (29.3) A (4.9) 2024 Future with Project E (48.1) A (5) 2024 Future with Project & Improvements A (0) C (18.8) PM PEAK Westbound Southbound 2020 Existing B (13.9) A (6.6) 2024 Future without Project C (20.4) A (6.7) 2024 Future with Project D (28) A (6.9) 2024 Future with Project & Improvements A (0) C (20.7) *The westbound and southbound movements are shown as they are impacted the most by the recommended improvements. The northbound movement will remain relatively unaffected, with the improvements resulting in less than a one second delay. In addition, Blue Clay Road terminates at I-40 resulting in a relatively low number of dwelling units located north of this intersection (approximately 20-25). Required Improvements to Dairy Farm Road at Sidbury Road Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 8 Z20-13 Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 9 of 18 N. College Road at Blue Clay Road Scenario Overall LOS Delay in Seconds AM PEAK 2020 Existing C 28 2024 Future without Project E 61.4 2024 Future with Project E 65 2024 Future with Project & Improvements E 58.6 PM PEAK 2020 Existing D 49 2024 Future without Project F 145 2024 Future with Project F 164.8 2024 Future with Project & Improvements F 136.2 Required Improvements to Dairy Farm Road at Sidbury Road Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 9 Z20-13 Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 10 of 18 Nearby Planned Transportation Improvements and Traffic Impact Analyses Nearby Traffic Impact Analyses: Traffic Impact Analyses are completed in accordance with the WMPO and NCDOT standards. Approved analyses must be re-examined by NCDOT if the proposed development is not completed by the build out date established within the TIA. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 10 Z20-13 Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 11 of 18 Proposed Development Land Use/Intensity TIA Status 1. Sidbury Farms  655 single-family dwellings  103 townhomes  Approved February 12, 2020  Build Out Years: o 2024 – 258 SFDs o 2029 – 421 SFDs, 59 townhomes o 2034 – Full Build The TIA required improvements be completed at certain intersections in the area. The notable improvements consisted of:  Installation of right and left turn lanes at the site’s access points on Sidbury Road (Phase 1).  Installation of southbound right turn lane and westbound right turn lane, and extension of the westbound left turn lane and northbound right turn lane at the intersection of N. College and Blue Clay Road (Phase 2).  Installation of a roundabout at Sidbury Road and Blue Clay Road (Phase 2).  Installation of a southbound left turn lane at Dairy Farm Road and Sidbury Road (Full Build) Nearby Proposed Developments included within the TIA:  Scott’s Hill Medical  Blake Farms  Scott’s Hill Village  Cape Landing  Coastal Prep Academy Development Status: Construction plans for Phase 1 are currently under review. Proposed Development Land Use/Intensity TIA Status 2. Cape Landing  126 single-family  Approved December 21, 2017  2021 Build Out Year The TIA required improvements be completed at certain intersections in the area. The notable improvements consisted of:  Extension of the existing eastbound left-turn lane at Blue Clay Road and N. College Road. Nearby Proposed Developments included within the TIA:  None Development Status: Phase 1 is nearing completion with approximately 55 homes being constructed and occupied. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 11 Z20-13 Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 12 of 18 SCHOOLS  Students generated from this development would be assigned to Wrightsboro Elementary, Holly Shelter Middle, and Laney High schools. Students may apply to attend public magnet, year-round elementary, or specialty high schools.  Seventy-eight dwelling units would be permitted under the current R-15 zoning base density, and 288 units would be allowed under the proposed zoning for an increase of 210 dwelling units.  Based on average student generation rates,* there are an average of 0.24 public school students (0.11 for elementary, 0.05 for middle, and 0.08 for high) generated per dwelling unit across New Hanover County. The proposed development can be estimated to generate 69.05 (22.57 elementary, 11.42 middle, and 16.36 high), which is approximately 50.35 more students than if developed under existing zoning. Development Type Intensity Estimated Student Generation Existing Development 0 residential unit Total: 0 (0 elementary, 0 middle, 0 high) Typical Development under Current Zoning 78 residential units Total: 18.7 (8.38 elementary, 4.24 middle, 6.08 high) Proposed Development under Proposed (CZD) MF-L Zoning 288 residential units Total: 69.05 (30.95 elementary, 15.66 middle, 22.44 high) *Average student generation rates are calculated by dividing the projected New Hanover County public school student enrollment for the 2020-2021 school year by the estimated number of dwelling units in the county. While different housing types and different locations typically yield different numbers of students, these average generation rates can provide a general guide for the number of students to anticipate. Total projected student enrollment was used, which includes students attending out-of-district specialty schools, such as year-round elementary schools, Isaac Bear, and SeaTECH. School Enrollment* and Capacity**—2021-2022 Estimates Level Total NHC % Capacity School Enrollment of Assigned School Capacity of Assigned School w/ Portables % of Capacity of Assigned School Funded Capacity Upgrades Elementary 97% Castle Hayne 483 529 91% None Middle 107% Holly Shelter 917 934 98% None High 105% Laney 2063 1903 108% None Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 12 Z20-13 Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 13 of 18 *Enrollment is based on projected New Hanover County Schools enrollment for the 2020-2021 school year. **Capacity calculations were determined by New Hanover County Schools for the 2020-2021 school year and are based on NC DPI Facility Guidelines & Class Size Requirements. Modifications refer to specific program requirements unique to a particular school. These may include exceptional children’s classrooms beyond the original building design; classrooms to serve a unique population such as ESL; or classrooms designated for art and music if the building wasn’t specifically designed with those spaces. ENVIRONMENTAL  The property is not within a Natural Heritage Area. The southern portion of the property is within an AE Special Flood Hazard Area with a base flood elevation of 31.7 to 31.8 feet.  The property is within the Prince George Creek (C;Sw) watershed.  Per the Classification of Soils in New Hanover County for Septic Tank Suitability, soils on the property consist of Class III (severe limitation) soils, however, the project will connect to CFPUA sewer services. CONTEXT AND COMPATIBILITY  The property has a unique shape resulting in the vast majority of its boundary abutting an arterial or collector road corridor, including Interstate 40.  While the area was zoned for low density housing in the early 1970s, the 2016 Comprehensive Plan recommends a mixture higher density housing and commercial uses along the Sidbury Road corridor.  The property is located near the Cape Fear Community College North Campus, which has been identified as a growth node in the Comprehensive Plan.  Most of the surrounding land is either undeveloped or used for nonresidential purposes (NHC Schools).  The proposed concept plan positions a portion of the stormwater facilities closer to the existing single-family homes to the north of the site, resulting it the proposed buildings being over 450 feet from an existing residential structure. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 13 Z20-13 Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 14 of 18 Representative Developments of RMF-L: Woodlands at Echo Farms Amberleigh Shores Stephens Pointe Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 14 Z20-13 Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 15 of 18 Representative Developments of R-15: Grayson Park Clay Crossing Plantation Landing Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 15 Z20-13 Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 16 of 18 2016 COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN The New Hanover County Future Land Use Map provides a general representation of the vision for New Hanover County’s future land use, as designated by place types describing the character and function of the different types of development that make up the community. These place types are intended to identify general areas for particular development patterns and should not be interpreted as being parcel specific. Future Land Use Map Place Type COMMUNITY MIXED USE Because of the general nature of place type borders, sites located in proximity to the boundaries between place types could be appropriately developed with either place type, allowing site-specific features and evolving development patterns in the surrounding area to be considered. Place Type Description Focuses on small-scale, compact, mixed use development patterns that serve all modes of travel and act as an attractor for county residents and visitors. Types of appropriate uses include office, retail, mixed use, recreational, commercial, institutional, and multi-family and single-family residential. Analysis The subject property is located on the corner of Dairy Farm Road and Sidbury Road. It is situated between Southeast Area Technical High School (SEA-Tech) to the east and single family residential to the north, with vacant property to the south. The entire western property line borders I-40 to the west. The CFCC North Campus Area Growth Node is located across I-40. The Comprehensive Plan indicates that multi-family residential is typical, and is an appropriate land use within Community Mixed Use place type that will allow future developments to accommodate population growth in a greater range of housing types. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 16 Z20-13 Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 17 of 18 In general, the Comprehensive Plan designates areas along roadways for higher residential densities and a mix of uses as Community Mixed Use in order to allow for an orderly transition of densities and intensities. The proposed development would serve as an appropriate transition in intensity from the interstate and CFCC Growth Node to existing residential districts and future Community Mixed Use development along Sidbury and Blue Clay Roads. Water and sewer service will be extended to that portion of Sidbury Road to serve the project. The Community Mixed Use place type provides opportunities for moderate- density housing (up to 15 units/acre) for multi-family and single-family residential, with building heights up to three stories. The overall project density of 9.2 units/acre meets the proposed density range and building height for the Community Mixed Use place type. The proposed development allows for the area to obtain the desired small- scale, compact mixed-use development pattern providing an efficient use of land between an interstate highway and areas of future development. It also assists in meeting the intent of the Comprehensive Plan by providing for a range of housing types, opportunities, and choices. Consistency Recommendation The proposed CZD MF-L zoning is generally CONSISTENT with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because multi-family development is a typical land use within areas designated as Community Mixed Use, and because the proposed number of units is in-line with the recommended densities for the area. In addition, it provides for diverse housing options and an orderly transition from a major road corridor to areas zoned for lower density housing. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the application and suggest the following motion: I move to APPROVE the proposed rezoning to a conditional RMF-L district. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because multi-family development is a typical land use within areas designated as Community Mixed Use, and because the proposed number of units is in-line with the recommended densities for the area. In addition, multi-family housing is generally more appropriate along major road corridors like Interstate 40 than low density single-family housing. I also find APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal would benefit the community by providing diverse housing options. [Optional] Note any conditions to be added to the district. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 17 Z20-13 Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 18 of 18 Example Motion for Denial I move to DENY the proposed rezoning to a conditional RMF-L district. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because multi-family development is a typical land use within areas designated as Community Mixed Use, and because the proposed number of units is in-line with the recommended densities for the area, I find DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is not consistent with the desired character of the surrounding community and the density will adversely impact the adjacent neighborhoods. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 18 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 3 - 1 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 4 - 1 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 5 - 1 APPLICANT MATERIALS Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 6 - 1 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 6 - 2 Page 3 of 7 Conditional Zoning District Application – Updated 5/2017 NEW HANOVER COUNTY_______________________ DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & LAND USE 230 Government Center Drive, Suite 110 Wilmington, North Carolina Telephone (910) 798-7165 FAX (910) 798-7053 planningdevelopment.nhcgov.com CONDITIONAL ZONING DISTRICT Application Applicant/Agent Information Property Owner(s) If different than Applicant/Agent Name Owner Name Company Owner Name 2 Address Address City, State, Zip City, State, Zip Phone Phone Email Email Subject Property Information Address/Location Parcel Identification Number(s) Total Parcel(s) Acreage Existing Zoning and Use(s) Future Land Use Classification Application Tracking Information (Staff Only) Case Number Date/Time received: Received by: CINDEEWOLF DESIGNSOLUTIONS POBOX7221 WILMINGTON,NC28406 910-620-2374 CWOLF@LOBODEMAR.BIZ DESIRABLEPROPERTIES,L.L.C. 341NORTHGREENMEADOWSDR WILMINGTON,NC28405 910-799-8483(CONTACT:BUDBLANTON) BUDBLANTON@AOL.COM NWCORNEROFDAIRYFARMROAD(SR2181)&SIDBURYROAD(SR1336) 323116.93.8897[R01800-003-012-001] 31.31 R-15/VACANT COMMUNITYMIXED-USE Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 7 - 1 Page 4 of 7 Conditional Zoning District Application – Updated 5/2017 Proposed Zoning, Use(s), & Narrative Proposed Conditional Zoning District: ______________________ Total Acreage of Proposed District: __________ Only uses allowed by right in the corresponding General Use District are eligible for consideration within a Conditional Zoning District. Please list the uses that will be allowed within the proposed Conditional Zoning District, the purpose of the district, and a project narrative (please provide additional pages if needed). ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ Proposed Condition(s) Within a Conditional Zoning District, additional conditions and requirements which represent greater restrictions on the development and use of the property than the corresponding General Use District regulations may be added. These conditions may assist in mitigating the impacts the proposed development may have on the surrounding community. Please list any conditions proposed to be placed on the Conditional Zoning District below. Staff, the Planning Board, and Board of Commissioners may propose additional conditions during the review process. ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ (CZD)MF-L 31.31 AC. PROPOSEDTHREE-STORYAPARTMENTBUILDINGSWITHACCESSORYAMENITYAREAS,PARKING& STORMWATERFACILITIES.TOTAL288DWELLINGUNITS. **REFERENCESITEPLANFORSITELAYOUT&IMPROVEMENTS Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 7 - 2 Page 5 of 7 Conditional Zoning District Application – Updated 5/2017 Traffic Impact Please provide the estimated number of trips generated for the proposed use(s) based off the most recent version of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) must be completed for all proposed developments that generate more than 100 peak hour trips, and the TIA must be included with this application. ITE Land Use: _________________________________________________________________________________ Trip Generation Use and Variable (gross floor area, dwelling units, etc.): __________________________________ AM Peak Hour Trips: ___________________________ PM Peak Hour Trips: ______________________________ CONSIDERATION OF A CONDITIONAL ZONING DISTRICT The Conditional Zoning District procedure is established to address situations where a particular land use would be consistent with the New Hanover County Land Use Plan and the Zoning Ordinance objective and where only a specific use or uses is proposed. The procedure is intended primarily for use with transitions between zoning districts of very dissimilar character where a particular use or uses, with restrictive conditions to safeguard adjacent land uses, can create a more orderly transition benefiting all affected parties and the community-at-large. The applicant must explain, with reference to attached plans (where applicable), how the proposed Conditional Use Zoning District meets the following criteria. 1. How would the requested change be consistent with the County’s policies for growth and development? (For example: the Comprehensive Plan and applicable small area plans) _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ 2. How would the requested Conditional Zoning District be consistent with the property’s classification on the Future Land Use Map located within the Comprehensive Plan? _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ 3. What significant neighborhood changes have occurred to make the original zoning inappropriate, or how is the land involved unsuitable for the uses permitted under the existing zoning? _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ MID-RISEAPARTMENTS (223) CALC'DPERDWELLINGUNIT=288 86112 Thepoliciesforgrowthanddevelopmentencouragesafeandaffordablehousingtobeavailabletoevery citizen.SustainabilityoftheCountydependsonsensiblein-fillandmaximizinguseoflandsaccessibleto services. ThetractisidentifiedintheComprehensiveLandUsePlanasaCommunityMixed-useplacetype.Theplan suggestshigherdensitiestosupportthesmall-scale,compactdevelopmentpatternsthattheplacetype promotes.Theproposeddevelopmentisanacceptabletransitionadjacenttothebusyhighwaycorridor. SidburyRoadconnectstheEast&WestsidesofthenorthernsectionoftheCountybetweenMarketStreet& BlueClayRoad,whichthenextendstoCastleHayneRoad.Thetractisadjacenttotheinterstatehighway. Single-familyresidencesarelessattractivealongabusytrafficcorridors,whereastransitionofdensityisan acceptableplanningstrategy. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 7 - 3 Page 6 of 7 Conditional Zoning District Application – Updated 5/2017 APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS Staff will use the following checklist to determine the completeness of your application. Please verify all of the listed items are included and confirm by initialing under “Applicant Initial”. If an item is not applicable, mark as “N/A”. Applications must be complete in order to process for further review. Required Information Applicant Initial Staff Initial 1 Complete Conditional Zoning District application. 2 Application fee – ($600 for 5 acres or less, $700 for more than 5 acres. An additional $300 fee must be provided for applications requiring TRC review). 3 Community meeting written summary. 4 Traffic impact analysis (for uses that generate more than 100 peak hour trips). 5 Legal description (by metes and bounds) or recorded survey Map Book and Page reference of the property requested for rezoning. 6 Site Plan including the following elements: x Tract boundaries and total area, location of adjoining parcels and roads. x Proposed use of land, structures and other improvements. For residential uses, this shall include number, height and type of units and area to be occupied by each structure and/or subdivided boundaries. For non- residential uses, this shall include approximate square footage and height of each structure, an outline of the area it will occupy and the specific purpose for which it will be used. x Development schedule including proposed phasing. x Traffic and Parking Plan to include a statement of impact concerning local traffic near the tract, proposed right-of-way dedication, plans for access to and from the tract, location, width and right-of-way for internal streets and location, arrangement and access provision for parking areas. x All existing and proposed easements, reservations, required setbacks, rights-of-way, buffering and signage. x The one hundred (100) year floodplain line, if applicable. x Location and sizing of trees required to be protected under Section 62 of the Zoning Ordinance. x Any additional conditions and requirements, which represent greater restrictions on development and use of the tract than the corresponding General Use District regulations or other limitations on land which may be regulated by State law or Local Ordinance. x Any other information that will facilitate review of the proposed change (Ref. Article VII, as applicable). 7 1 hard copy of ALL documents AND 8 hard copies of the site plan. Additional hard copies may be required by staff depending on the size of the document/site plan. 8 1 PDF digital copy of ALL documents AND plans. CAW CAW CAW CAW CAW CAW CAW CAW Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 7 - 4 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 7 - 5 Legal Description for  Conditional District Rezoning of  31.31‐acre Tract at NW Corner of Dairy Farm Road & Sidbury Road    BEGINNING at a point at an existing NCDOT right‐of‐way monument in the eastern right‐of‐way  of Interstate Hwy. 40 at its intersection with the northern right‐of‐way of Sidbury Road (also  known as SR 1336), a variable‐width public right‐of‐way; running thence from said point of  beginning with the eastern boundary of I‐40:    Along a curve to the left, having a Radius of 11,619.16 feet and Length of 931.55 feet, a Chord  of North 18057’18” West, 931.33 feet to a point; thence  North 21037’15” West, 201.28 feet to a point; thence  North 21044’49” West, 1400.22 feet to a point in the southern  boundary of Blue Clay Road (also known as SR 1318), a 60‐foot public right‐of‐way;  thence with that southern boundary of Blue Clay Road,  North 26021’58” East, 94.16 feet to a point; thence   North 79039’19” East, 25.31 feet to a point; thence  South 56008’49” East, 208.15 feet to a point in the western boundary of Dairy Farm Road (also  known as SR 2181), a 170‐foot public right‐of‐way; thence with the eastern boundary  of Dairy Farm Road,  Along a curve to the left, having a Radius of 1,039.93 feet and Length of 158.38 feet, a Chord of   South 25039’42” East, 158.23 feet to a point; thence  South 32049’48” East, 157.95 feet to a point; thence  South 34033’57” East, 1,178.51 feet to a point; thence  South 36003’00” East, 156.73 feet to a point; thence  Along a curve to the left, having a Radius of 631.97 feet and Length of 365.01 feet, a Chord of   South 49047’44” East, 359.96 feet to a point; thence  South 60006’46” East, 157.45 feet to a point; thence  South 61044’23” East, 140.28 feet to a point; thence  South 43046’25” East, 298.85 feet to a point; thence  South 26014’06” East, 140.84 feet to a point; thence  South 26019’47” East, 12.45 feet to a point at the intersection of Dairy Farm Road with the  northern right‐of‐way of Sidbury Road; thence with that northern boundary of Sidbury  Road,   South 77035’19” West, 450.76 feet to a point, thence  South 77018’33” West, 644.16 feet to the point and place of beginning, containing 31.31 acres,  more or less.      Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 7 - 6 REPORT OF COMMUNITY MEETING NOTIFIACTION BY NEW HANOVER COUNTY ZONING ORIDINANCE FOR CONDITIONAL DISTRICT REZONINGS Project Name: Sidbury Landing – a Multi-family Residential Community Proposed Zoning: R-15 to (CZD) RMF-L The undersigned hereby certifies that written notice of a project proposal and an exhibit of the site layout for the above proposed zoning application was sent to the adjacent property owners set forth on the attached list by first class mail, and provided to the Planning Department for notice of the Sunshine List on June 1, 2020. The mailing gave the recipients opportunity to contact us with questions or comments via telephone or email. Copies of the written notices and the site layout are attached. The persons responding were: Reference attached list of contacts received from calls and emails. Discussions were generally more inquiries than specific project comments. None of the respondents voiced opposition to the proposal. Date: June 29, 2020 Applicant: Design Solutions By: Cindee Wolf Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 7 - 7 Community Information  Sidbury Landing NameAddressEmail (Optional) Bob Maultsby4800 Blue Clay Rdmaultsbyestimating@gmail.com Anhony Tucker4904 Blue Clay RdTel. 910‐512‐5095 Richard Harrell4815+/‐ Blue Clay Rdreharrell38@embarqmail.com Walter ClarkSidbury FarmsTel. 704‐560‐9576 Bobby PitmanInterested Partybobbypittman417@yahoo.com Geoff KingInterested Partygking@gkinkproperties.com Deirdre Dunn110 Deerfield RdTel. 910‐212‐0611 CeCe NunnWilmington Business Journalcnunn@wilmingtonbiz.com Michael PraatsLocal Daily Mediamichael.p@localdailymedia.com Ben SchachtmanPort City Dailyben@localvoicemedia.com Cindee WolfProject Plannercwolf@lobodemar.biz Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 7 - 8 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 7 - 9 Pl a n n i n g B o a r d - S e p t e m b e r 3 , 2 0 2 0 IT E M : 1 - 7 - 1 0 AD J A C E N T  OW N E R  NA M E M A I L I N G  AD D R E S S C I T Y  / ST A T E  / ZI P S I T U S  AD D R E S S AL L S B R O O K  RO B E R T  DO U G L A S 4 9 2 9  BL U E  CL A Y  RD   CA S T L E  HA Y N E ,  NC  28 4 2 9 4 9 2 9  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE AL L S B R O O K  RO B E R T  DO U G L A S 4 9 2 9  BL U E  CL A Y  RD   CA S T L E  HA Y N E ,  NC  28 4 2 9 5 3 3 1  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE AM B E R  SU N  LL C 5 0 0 0  BL U E  CL A Y  RD   CA S T L E  HA Y N E ,  NC  28 4 2 9 4 9 1 6  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE AM B E R  SU N  LL C 5 0 0 8  CA S T L E  LA K E S  RD   CA S T L E  HA Y N E ,  NC  28 4 2 9 5 0 0 0  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE AM B E R  SU N  LL C 5 0 0 0  BL U E  CL A Y  RD   CA S T L E  HA Y N E ,  NC  28 4 2 9 5 0 0 8  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE AN D E R S O N  DE N N I S  W 1 5 0 8  MI L I T A R Y  CU T O F F  RD  #2 0 2 W I L M I N G T O N ,  NC  28 4 0 3 5 2 3 0  SI D B U R Y  RD  WILMINGTON BL U E  CL A Y  IN V E S T M E N T S  LL C 4 4 2 1  BR A N T L E Y  CI R   SH A L L O T T E ,  NC  28 4 7 0 4 8 0 0  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE BO N H A M  LA R R Y  G 4 9 1 7  BL U E  CL A Y  RD   CA S T L E  HA Y N E ,  NC  28 4 2 9 4 9 1 7  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE CA P E  FE A R  CO M M U N I T Y  CO L L E G E 4 1 1  FR O N T  ST  N W I L M I N G T O N ,  NC  28 4 0 1 3 0 1 0  ED U C A T I O N  LP  WILMINGTON CA R O L I N A  PO W E R  & LI G H T  CO P O  BO X  15 5 1 R A L E I G H ,  NC  27 6 9 8 4 6 0 0  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE CO R P O R A T I O N  FO R  IN Q U I R Y  IN C 2 5 2 5  WO N D E R  WA Y   WI L M I N G T O N ,  NC  28 4 0 1        DA R R E L L  DO U G L A S  A KA Y N E  O 5 0 0 8  BL U E  CL A Y  RD   CA S T L E  HA Y N E ,  NC  28 4 2 9 5 0 0 8  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE DE S I R A B L E  PR O P E R T I E S  LL C P O  BO X  31 2 2 W I L M I N G T O N ,  NC  28 4 0 6        FO X  BE T S Y 4 8 5 1  BL U E  CL A Y  RD   CA S T L E  HA Y N E ,  NC  28 4 2 9 4 8 5 1  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE GO N Z A L E Z  LU I S  F AN A  E P AZ U A R A 7 1 9  MI D D L E  SO U N D  LO O P  RD   WI L M I N G T O N ,  NC  28 4 1 1 4 8 3 1  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE HA R R E L L  RI C H A R D  E 1 5 9  HE N R Y  MI D D L E T O N  RD   WA R S A W ,  NC  28 3 9 8        CA S T L E  HA Y N E MA R S T O N  RI C H A R D  HE N R Y  II I 4 8 4 3  BL U E  CL A Y  RD   CA S T L E  HA Y N E ,  NC  28 4 2 9 4 8 4 3  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE MC R A E  JO H N  HE N R Y 1 5 3 8  JE S S U P  ST R E E T  AV E   BR O N X ,  NY  10 4 5 2 4 9 0 5  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE MC R A E  JO H N  HE N R Y 1 5 3 8  JE S S U P  AV E   BR O N X ,  NY  10 4 5 2 4 9 0 9  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE MI T C H E L L  JA M E S  WA D D E L L  CY N T H I A 4 9 0 3  BL U E  CL A Y  RD   CA S T L E  HA Y N E ,  NC  28 4 2 9 4 9 0 3  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE NE W  HA N  CN T Y  BO A R D  OF  ED U C A T I O N 6 4 1 0  CA R O L I N A  BE A C H  RD   WI L M I N G T O N ,  NC  28 4 1 2 5 3 0 1  SI D B U R Y  RD  WILMINGTON NI C H O L S  KE N N E T H  W DO R I S 5 0 0 1  BL U E  CL A Y  RD   CA S T L E  HA Y N E ,  NC  28 4 2 9 5 0 0 1  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE PA R K S  LA R R Y  L BA R B A R A  L 4 8 3 3  BL U E  CL A Y  RD   CA S T L E  HA Y N E ,  NC  28 4 2 9 4 8 2 3  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE PA R K S  LA R R Y  L BA R B A R A  L 4 8 3 3  BL U E  CL A Y  RD   CA S T L E  HA Y N E ,  NC  28 4 2 9 4 8 3 3  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE PI G F O R D  CA R R I E  V 1 1 0 4  2N D  ST  S W I L M I N G T O N ,  NC  28 4 0 1 4 9 0 7  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE PL A T T  MO R G A N  N 4 9 1 1  BL U E  CL A Y  RD   CA S T L E  HA Y N E ,  NC  28 4 2 9 4 9 1 1  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE TA D L O C K  DO N A L D  JE N E A N E  C 2 1 1 6  CA S T L E  HA Y N E  RD   WI L M I N G T O N ,  NC  28 4 0 1 4 9 1 5  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE TU C K E R  AN T H O N Y 1 0 1  SH E A R I N  HI L L S  DR   CA S T L E  HA Y N E ,  NC  28 4 2 9 4 9 0 4  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE WA T K I N S  ST E V E  RO S E M A R Y 4 8 0 9  BL U E  CL A Y  RD   CA S T L E  HA Y N E ,  NC  28 4 2 9 4 8 0 9  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE WO O D A L L  JE N N I F E R  P CH A R L E S  A 4 8 2 7  BL U E  CL A Y  RD   CA S T L E  HA Y N E ,  NC  28 4 2 9 4 8 2 7  BL U E  CL A Y  RD  CASTLE HAYNE Pl a n n i n g B o a r d - S e p t e m b e r 3 , 2 0 2 0 IT E M : 1 - 7 - 1 1 P.O. Box 7221, Wilmington, NC 28406 * Telephone: 910-620-2374 * Email: cwolf@lobodemar.biz Project Information Notice June 1, 2020    To: Adjacent Property Owner    From: Cindee Wolf    Re: Sidbury Landing     My clients are interested in developing a multi‐family residential community on lands within  the proximity of your property.  This proposal would require a Conditional Zoning District  approval from New Hanover County.      A Conditional Zoning District allows particular uses to be established only in accordance with  specific standards and conditions pertaining to each individual development project.   Essentially, this means that only that use, structures and layout of an approved proposal can be  developed.  A sketch plan of the project layout is enclosed.  The County requires that the developer notify the property owners within an adjacency to the  project and hold a meeting for any and all interested parties.  This is intended to provide  neighbors with an opportunity for explanation of the proposal, and for questions to be  answered concerning project improvements, benefits, and impacts.    Due to the current COVID‐19 issue, however, a meeting cannot be held at this time.  In lieu of  that, you can contact me with comments or questions at:  Telephone:  910‐620‐2374, or  Email: cwolf@lobodemar.biz    We can also set up an on‐line meeting for a forum with multiple parties if requested.  Please let  me know if you are interested in that alternative and arrangements will be made.  All contact,  comments, concerns, and recommendations must be recorded in a report delivered to the  County along with a rezoning application.    Prior to this project being reviewed by the Planning Board & Commissioners, you will receive  subsequent notices of those agendas directly from the County.  Those meetings provide public  hearings for comment on any issues pertinent to approval of the proposal.    We appreciate your interest and look forward to being a good neighbor and an asset to the  community.   Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 7 - 12 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 7 - 13 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 7 - 14 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 7 - 15 August 17, 2020 Ms. Dionne Brown, PE Davenport 4600 Marriott Drive, Suite 350 Raleigh, NC 27612 RE: Approval of the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) associated with the proposed Dairy Farm Road New Hanover County, NC Dear Ms. Brown, The WMPO, NCDOT, and New Hanover County staffs have reviewed the Sidbury Crossing Traffic Impact Analysis sealed July 8, 2020. This approval is based on the following land uses as proposed in the TIA:  320 apartments (LUC 221 Multifamily Housing Mid-Rise) Based on review of the analysis provided in the TIA report, the following improvements are required by the developer:  SR 1336 / SR 1572 (Sidbury Road) at SR 2181 (Dairy Farm Road) (stop-controlled full movement T- intersection) o Extend the eastbound left turn lane to 275 feet of storage (or maximum available without modifying the bridge). o Construct a westbound right turn lane with taper only. o Construct a southbound left turn lane with 50 feet of storage, 50 feet of full width deceleration, and 200 feet of taper.  SR 1336 / SR 1572 (Sidbury Road) at SR 1318 (Blue Clay Road) (stop-controlled T-intersection) o Realign the intersection to provide stop control for the southbound approach only, allowing the eastbound and westbound approaches to operate free flow.  US 117 (N. College Road) at SR 1318 (Blue Clay Road) (signalized full movement intersection) o Construct a westbound right turn lane with 150 feet of storage, 50 feet of full width deceleration and 200 feet of taper. o Extend the westbound left turn lane ~150 feet to connect to the two-way left-turn lane. o Revise signal. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 8 - 1 Page 2 of 2  SR 2181 (Dairy Farm Road) at Site Access 1 (proposed stop-controlled full movement intersection) o Construct the site access with one ingress and one egress lanes. o Provide stop control for the eastbound approach. o Provide 100 feet of internal protected stem on the eastbound approach. o Design site access according to NCDOT standards  SR 2181 (Dairy Farm Road) at Site Access 2 (proposed stop-controlled full movement intersection) o Construct the site access with one ingress and one egress lanes. o Provide stop control for the eastbound approach. o Provide 100 feet of internal protected stem on the eastbound approach. o Design site access according to NCDOT standards.  SR 2181 (Dairy Farm Road) at Site Access 1 (proposed stop-controlled full movement intersection) o Construct the site access with one ingress and one egress lanes. o Provide stop control for the eastbound approach. o Provide 100 feet of internal protected stem on the eastbound approach. o Design site access according to NCDOT standards. If changes are made to the proposed site driveways and/or land use, the current trip distribution may need to be modified and would require a revised Traffic Impact Analysis to be submitted for review by the NCDOT, WMPO, and New Hanover County. This approval will become null and void. The applicant is required to obtain all applicable County and NCDOT permits for access to the road network. All applicable NCDOT and County technical standards and policies shall apply. Please contact me at 910-772-4170 with any questions regarding this approval. Sincerely, Kayla Grubb, EI Project Manager Wilmington Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Ec: Mike Kozlosky, Executive Director, WMPO Bill McDow, Transportation Planner, WMPO Scott James, PE, Transportation Planning Engineer, WMPO Denys Vielkanowitz, PE, City Traffic Engineer, City of Wilmington Brian Chambers, AICP, Senior Planner, City of Wilmington Ben Hughes, PE, District Engineer, NCDOT Eva Covarrubias, EI, Transportation Engineering Associate, NCDOT Jessi Leonard, PE, Division Traffic Engineer, NCDOT Jon Roan, Assistant District Engineer, NCDOT Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 8 - 2 This report is printed on recycled paper with 30% post-consumer content. All paper is FSC Certified. The entire document, including binding, is 100% recyclable. TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS June 26, 2020 Sidbury Crossing New Hanover County, NC Prepared for HH Multi, LLC Project #: 200218 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 1 Pl a n n i n g B o a r d - S e p t e m b e r 3 , 2 0 2 0 IT E M : 1 - 9 - 2 6/26/2020 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis 1 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis New Hanover County, NC Prepared for HH Multi, LLC June 26, 2020 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction............................................................................................................. 2 Figure 1 – Site Plan ..................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2A – Site Location Map .................................................................................... 4 Figure 2B – Vicinity Map .............................................................................................. 5 2.0 Existing Conditions ................................................................................................ 6 2.1 Inventory ................................................................................................................ 6 2.2 Existing Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................ 7 Figure 3 – Existing Lane Geometry ............................................................................. 8 Figure 4 – 2020 Base Traffic Volumes ......................................................................... 9 3.0 Approved Developments and Committed Improvements ................................. 10 3.1 Approved Developments ...................................................................................... 10 3.2 Committed Improvements .................................................................................... 10 4.0 Methodology ......................................................................................................... 11 4.1 Base Assumptions and Standards ....................................................................... 11 5.0 Capacity Analysis ................................................................................................. 12 5.1 Level of Service Evaluation Criteria ..................................................................... 12 6.0 2024 Full Build Conditions................................................................................... 13 6.1 Trip Generation .................................................................................................... 13 6.2 Trip Distribution .................................................................................................... 13 6.3 2024 Future No Build Traffic ................................................................................ 13 6.4 2024 Full Build Total Traffic ................................................................................. 13 Figure 5– Primary Trip Distribution ............................................................................ 14 Figure 6 – 2024 Future No Build Volumes ................................................................. 15 Figure 7 – Site Trips .................................................................................................. 16 Figure 8 – 2024 Future Build Volumes ...................................................................... 17 6.5 Full Build Discussion of Results ........................................................................... 18 6.6 Full Build Recommended Improvements ............................................................. 22 Figure 9 – Full Build Recommended Improvements .................................................. 23 7.0 Queue Results ...................................................................................................... 24 8.0 Summary and Conclusion ................................................................................... 27 Appendix ...................................................................................................................... 28 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 3 6/26/2020 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis 2 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis New Hanover County, NC Prepared for HH Multi, LLC June 26, 2020 1.0 Introduction The proposed Sidbury Crossing is to be located across Sidbury Road between I-40 and Dairy Farm Road in New Hanover County, North Carolina. The development will utilize three (3) site accesses. All three site accesses are proposed to be full access with each located on Dairy Farm Road between Sidbury Road and Blue Clay Road. Figure 1 shows the site plan. Figures 2A and 2B show the site location map and vicinity map, respectively. The Sidbury Crossing will be analyzed for one (1) full build: • Full Build will consist of 320 apartment dwelling units. The build year for Full Build is assumed to be 2024. DAVENPORT was retained to determine the potential traffic impacts of this development and to identify transportation improvements that may be required to accommodate the impacts of both background traffic and new development traffic. The following intersections were included in the study: 1. Sidbury Road at Dairy Farm Road (unsignalized) 2. Sidbury Road at Blue Clay Road (unsignalized) 3. Blue Clay Road at N. College Road (signalized) 4. Dairy Farm Road / S.R. 2181 at Site Access 1 (unsignalized) 5. Dairy Farm Road / S.R. 2181 at Site Access 2 (unsignalized) 6. Dairy Farm Road / S.R. 2181 at Site Access 3 (unsignalized) The intersections were analyzed during the AM (7-9 am) and PM (4-6 pm) peaks for the following conditions: • 2020 Existing Conditions • 2024 Future No-Build Conditions • 2024 Full Build Conditions • 2024 Full Build Conditions with Improvements (as necessary) The Wilmington Urban Metropolitan Planning Organization (WMPO) and NCDOT were contacted to obtain background information and to ascertain the elements to be covered in this Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). The approved scope for this TIA is included in the supporting documentation section of the appendix. Information regarding the property was provided by HH Multi, LLC. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 4 FIGURE 1 CONCEPT PLAN Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 5 FIGURE 2A SITE LOCATION MAP SITE INDICATOR Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 6 FI G U R E 2 B VI C I N I T Y M A P ST U D Y I N T E R S E C T I O N S BA C K G R O U N D PR O P O S E D    SI T E   3  2  1  4  5  6  Pl a n n i n g B o a r d - S e p t e m b e r 3 , 2 0 2 0 IT E M : 1 - 9 - 7 6/26/2020 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis 6 2.0 Existing Conditions 2.1 Inventory A field investigation was conducted by DAVENPORT staff to determine the existing roadway conditions in the study area. Table 2.1 contains the results of this effort. Figure 3 illustrates the existing lane geometry. Table 2.1 - Street Inventory Facility Name Route # Typical Cross Section Pavement Width Speed Limit Maintained By N. College Road US 117 2-lane undivided Approx. 22’ 45 MPH NCDOT Blue Clay Road SR 1318 2-lane undivided Approx. 20’ 55 MPH NCDOT Sidbury Road SR 1336/SR 1572 2-lane undivided Approx. 22’ 55 MPH NCDOT Dairy Farm Road SR 2181 2-lane undivided Approx. 20’ 55 MPH NCDOT Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 8 6/26/2020 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis 7 2.2 Existing Traffic Volumes Existing traffic volumes for this project were collected by DAVENPORT staff. During scope approval of the development, it was agreed upon to use data collected from the Sidbury Farms Development that included similar intersections and to project the volumes by 1% over one year. Table 2.2 contains the dates these counts were collected. Schools were in session at the time of traffic counts. A system peak hour was used for the traffic analysis. The peak hour occurred at approximately 7:15 to 8:15 AM, and 4:15 to 5:15 PM. Figure 4 shows the 2020 base AM and PM peak hour volumes. More information can be found in the Traffic Volume Data section of the appendix. Table 2.2 - Traffic Volume Data Count Location: Date Taken: By: Blue Clay Road at N. College Road 9/24/2019 DAVENPORT Sidbury Road at Blue Clay Road 9/24/2019 DAVENPORT Sidbury Road at Dairy Farm Road 9/24/2019 DAVENPORT Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 9 ** * N O T T O S C A L E * * * Thi s d o c u m e n t , t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e c o n c e p t s a n d d e s i g n s p r e s e n t e d h e r e i n , i si n t e n d e d o n l y f o r t h e sp e c i f i c p u r p o s e a n d c l i e n t f o r w h i c h i t w a s p r e p a r e d . R e u s e o f , o r i m p r o p e rr e l i a n c e o n , t h i s do c u m e n t b y o t h e r s w i t h o u t w r i t t e n a u t h o r i z a t i o n a n d a d a p t a t i o n b y D A V E N PO R T , s h a l l b e w i t h o u t lia b i l i t y t o D A V E N P O R T , a n d s h a l l b e a v i o l a t i o n o f t h e a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n D AV E N P O R T a n d t h e clie n t . FIGURE3 EXISTING LANE GEOMETRY SIDBURYCROSSINGDEVELOPMENT NEWHANOVERCOUNTY, NC PROJECTNUMBER2002182,900SIGNALIZEDINTERSECTIONUNSIGNALIZEDINTERSECTIONTRAFFICMOVEMENTBLACK= EXISTINGROADWAYLEGEND Sid b u r y Ro a d Dairy Farm Road N College Road N College Road Blue Clay Road Bl u e C l a y Ro a d 15 0 ' 125' 15 0 ' 50 ' 75' 250' SP E E D LIM I T 45 SP E E D LI M I T 55 SP E E D LIM I T 45 SP E E D LIM I T 55 SP E E D LIM I T 55 SPEED LIMIT55 5, 1 0 0 1,800 9,300 11,500 4, 2 0 0 2018 AADTXXXX Pl a n n i n g B o a r d - S e p t e m b e r 3 , 2 0 2 0 IT E M : 1 - 9 - 1 0 ** * N O T T O S C A L E * * * 18 1 / 2 6 5 22 3 / 1 4 5 12 / 3 9 Th i s d o c u m e n t , t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e c o n c e p t s a n d d e s i g n s p r e s e n t e d h e r e i n , i si n t e n d e d o n l y f o r t h e sp e c i f i c p u r p o s e a n d c l i e n t f o r w h i c h i t w a s p r e p a r e d . R e u s e o f , o r i m p r o p e rr e l i a n c e o n , t h i s do c u m e n t b y o t h e r s w i t h o u t w r i t t e n a u t h o r i z a t i o n a n d a d a p t a t i o n b y D A V E N PO R T , s h a l l b e w i t h o u t lia b i l i t y t o D A V E N P O R T , a n d s h a l l b e a v i o l a t i o n o f t h e a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n D AV E N P O R T a n d t h e cli e n t . Sid b u r y Ro a d Dairy Farm Road N College Road N College Road Blue Clay Road Blu e C l a y Ro a d 88 / 1 1 2 12 8 / 2 0 0 47 / 8 8 231 / 253 234 / 443 123 / 109 89 / 24 418 / 278 123 / 18 5 / 16 205 / 39842 8 / 2 5 6 18 / 2 2 21 / 15 13 / 4 40 / 2 1 5 12 7 / 1 9 1 33 0 / 1 8 0 21 / 2 0 16 / 15 148 / 76 SIDBURYCROSSINGDEVELOPMENT NEWHANOVERCOUNTY, NC PROJECTNUMBER200218SIGNALIZEDINTERSECTIONUNSIGNALIZEDINTERSECTIONTRAFFICMOVEMENTBLACK= EXISTINGROADWAYLEGEND AM / PM PEAKS FIGURE4 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES Pl a n n i n g B o a r d - S e p t e m b e r 3 , 2 0 2 0 IT E M : 1 - 9 - 1 1 6/26/2020 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis 10 3.0 Approved Developments and Committed Improvements 3.1 Approved Developments Approved developments are developments that have been recently approved in the area, but not yet constructed. Per WMPO staff, there are three (3) approved developments to be considered in this analysis. The first is the Sidbury Road Development located across Sidbury Road between Edna Buck Drive and Buck Drive. This development consists of 655 single family dwelling units and 103 townhomes. The second is the Cape Landing Development located west of Blue Clay Road and N. College Road. This development consists of 126 single family homes to be built by 2021. However, 37 homes are currently built and occupied, so volumes were adjusted accordingly based on the submitted TIA’s distribution. The new trip generation and associated site trips figure can be found in the appendix and in Figure A. 3.2 Committed Improvements Committed Improvements are improvements that are planned by NCDOT, a local municipality, or a developer in the area, but not yet constructed. Per NCDOT and WMPO, there are a few committed improvements during the 2024 conditions in the vicinity of this project. Cape Landing committed improvements: Blue Clay Road at N. College Road • Extend the existing eastbound left turn lane to provide 150 feet of storage, and appropriate full-width deceleration and taper. Provide permitted + protected phasing on movement. • Restripe northbound approach between the existing painted island, south of the intersection, and the existing northbound left turn lane to provide a two-way-left— turn-lane. Provide permitted + protected phasing on movement. • Revise signal Sidbury Road Development committed improvements were not included in the analysis as the improvements were not associated with the study intersections. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 12 6/26/2020 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis 11 4.0 Methodology 4.1 Base Assumptions and Standards In general, the analysis for this project was conducted utilizing commonly accepted NCDOT standards. The following table contains a summary of the base assumptions: Table 4.1 - Assumptions Peak Hour Factor 0.90 Background Traffic Annual Growth Rate 1.0% per year for all roadways Analysis Software Synchro/SimTraffic Version 10.0 Base Signal Timing/Phasing NCDOT Lane widths 12-feet Truck percentages 2% Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 13 6/26/2020 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis 12 5.0 Capacity Analysis 5.1 Level of Service Evaluation Criteria The Transportation Research Board’s Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) utilizes a term “level of service” to measure how traffic operates in intersections and on roadway segments. There are currently six levels of service ranging from A to F. Level of service “A” represents low-volume traffic operations and Level of Service “F” represents high- volume, oversaturated traffic operations. Synchro Traffic Modeling software was used to determine the level of service for studied intersections. Note for unsignalized intersection analysis, the level of service noted is for the worst approach of the intersection. This is typically the left turn movement for the side street approach, due to the number of opposing movements. All worksheet reports from the analyses can be found in the Appendix. Table 5.1 – Highway Capacity Manual Levels of Service and Control Delay Criteria Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Control Delay Per vehicle (sec) Level of Service Delay Range (sec) A ≤ 10 A ≤ 10 B > 10 and ≤ 20 B > 10 and ≤ 15 C > 20 and ≤ 35 C > 15 and ≤ 25 D > 35 and ≤ 55 D > 25 and ≤ 35 E > 55 and ≤ 80 E > 35 and ≤ 50 F > 80 F > 50 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 14 6/26/2020 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis 13 6.0 2024 Full Build Conditions As discussed in the introduction, the full build consists of 320 single family homes to be built by 2024. 6.1 Trip Generation Trips for this development were projected based on the 10th Edition of ITE Trip Generation Manual. Table 6.1 presents the results. Table 6.1 - ITE Trip Generation Sidbury Crossing Average Weekday Driveway Volumes 24 Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Two-Way Land Use ITE Land Code Size Data Source Volume Enter Exit Enter Exit Multifamily Housing (mid-rise) 221 320 Dwelling Units Adjacent /Equation 1741 30 85 86 55 Total Trips 1,741 30 85 86 55 6.2 Trip Distribution Site trips for this proposed development were distributed based on the existing traffic patterns and engineering judgment. These distributions were reviewed and approved by WMPO and is shown in Figure 5. The directional distributions for the full build site trips are as follows: • 40% to and from the west of Blue Clay Road • 30% to and from the south of N. College Road • 15% to and from the west of Sidbury Road • 15% to and from the north of N. College Road 6.3 2024 Future No Build Traffic The 2024 future no build traffic volumes were computed by applying a 1.0% compounded annual growth rate to the 2020 base traffic volumes and adding approved development trips. Figure 6 shows 2024 future no build traffic volumes for AM and PM peaks. 6.4 2024 Full Build Total Traffic The 2024 future build traffic volumes were obtained by summing the 2024 future no build volumes and the full build site trips due to the proposed development. Full build site trips are shown in Figure 7. The 2024 future build volumes are shown for AM and PM peaks in Figure 8. More information can be found in the Traffic volume Data section of the appendix. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 15 ** * N O T T O S C A L E * * * UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION TRAFFICMOVEMENTROADWAYLEGEND BLACK= EXISTING BLUE= PROPOSED DESTINATION NODE%IN = ENTERINGOUT = EXITING Th i s d o c u m e n t , t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e c o n c e p t s a n d d e s i g n s p r e s e n t e d h e r e i n , i s in t e n d e d o n l y f o r t h e s p e c i f i c p u r p o s e a n d c l i e n t f o r w h i c h i t w a s p r e p a r e d .R e u s e of , o r i m p r o p e r r e l i a n c e o n , t h i s d o c u m e n t b y o t h e r s w i t h o u t w r i t t e n a u t h o riz a t i o n an d a d a p t a t i o n b y D A V E N P O R T , s h a l l b e w i t h o u t l i a b i l i t y t o D A V E N P O R T , a n d sh a l l b e a v i o l a t i o n o f t h e a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n D A V E N P O R T a n d t h e c l i e n t . FIGURE5TRIP DISTRIBUTION SIDBURYCROSSINGDEVELOPMENTNEWHANOVERCOUNTY, NC PROJECTNUMBER200218 Si d b u r y Ro a d Da i r y F a r m R o a d N College Road N College Road Blue Clay Road Bl u e C l a y Ro a d 15% 40 % 30 % 15 % 40 % I N Si t e A c c e s s 1 30% IN 15% IN 30 % O U T 40 % O U T 15 % O U T 85% IN 85 % O U T 85% OUT 85 % I N 15 % O U T Si t e A c c e s s 2 Si t e A c c e s s 3 15 % I N 15% OUT 60%IN 40%IN 30%IN 10%IN 10%IN 60 % O U T 30 % O U T 10 % O U T 10%OUT 40%OUT 15 % I N Pl a n n i n g B o a r d - S e p t e m b e r 3 , 2 0 2 0 IT E M : 1 - 9 - 1 6 ** * N O T T O S C A L E * * * 20 4 / 2 8 8 25 9 / 2 1 4 31 / 5 4 Th i s d o c u m e n t , t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e c o n c e p t s a n d d e s i g n s p r e s e n t e d h e r e i n , i si n t e n d e d o n l y f o r t h e sp e c i f i c p u r p o s e a n d c l i e n t f o r w h i c h i t w a s p r e p a r e d . R e u s e o f , o r i m p r o p e rr e l i a n c e o n , t h i s do c u m e n t b y o t h e r s w i t h o u t w r i t t e n a u t h o r i z a t i o n a n d a d a p t a t i o n b y D A V E N PO R T , s h a l l b e w i t h o u t lia b i l i t y t o D A V E N P O R T , a n d s h a l l b e a v i o l a t i o n o f t h e a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n D AV E N P O R T a n d t h e cli e n t . Si d b u r y Ro a d Dairy Farm Road N College Road N College Road Blue Clay Road Blu e C l a y Ro a d 10 7 / 1 2 7 18 7 / 2 5 3 85 / 1 1 6 248 / 280 247 / 467 135 / 131 100 / 46 440 / 292 142 / 60 6 / 17 257 / 53555 3 / 3 4 3 20 / 2 4 23 / 16 14 / 5 43 / 2 2 7 17 5 / 3 1 7 45 0 / 2 6 3 23 / 2 2 17 / 16 157 / 80 SIDBURYCROSSINGDEVELOPMENT NEWHANOVERCOUNTY, NC PROJECTNUMBER200218SIGNALIZEDINTERSECTIONUNSIGNALIZEDINTERSECTIONTRAFFICMOVEMENTROADWAYLEGENDFIGURE6 FUTURE NO BUILD VOLUMESBLACK= EXISTING AM / PM PEAKS Pl a n n i n g B o a r d - S e p t e m b e r 3 , 2 0 2 0 IT E M : 1 - 9 - 1 7 ** * N O T T O S C A L E * * * 0 / 0 12 / 3 4 0 / 0 Th i s d o c u m e n t , t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e c o n c e p t s a n d d e s i g n s p r e s e n t e d h e r e i n , i si n t e n d e d o n l y f o r t h e sp e c i f i c p u r p o s e a n d c l i e n t f o r w h i c h i t w a s p r e p a r e d . R e u s e o f , o r i m p r o p e rr e l i a n c e o n , t h i s do c u m e n t b y o t h e r s w i t h o u t w r i t t e n a u t h o r i z a t i o n a n d a d a p t a t i o n b y D A V E N PO R T , s h a l l b e w i t h o u t lia b i l i t y t o D A V E N P O R T , a n d s h a l l b e a v i o l a t i o n o f t h e a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n D AV E N P O R T a n d t h e cli e n t . Sid b u r y Ro a d N College Road N College Road Blue Clay Road Blu e C l a y Ro a d 13 / 8 34 / 2 2 26 / 1 7 0 / 0 0 / 0 5 / 13 0 / 0 0 / 0 9 / 26 0 / 0 26 / 7372 / 4 7 0 / 0 0 / 0 0 / 0 26 / 7 3 0 / 0 0 / 0 5 / 1 3 13 / 8 72 / 47 SIDBURYCROSSINGDEVELOPMENT NEWHANOVERCOUNTY, NC PROJECTNUMBER200218FIGURE7SITE TRIPS Si t e A c c e s s 1 Si t e A c c e s s 2 Si t e A c c e s s 3 Da i r y F a r m R o a d 18 / 52 12 / 349 / 263 / 93 / 9 51 / 3 3 26 / 1 7 9 / 6 34 / 229 / 6 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION UNSIGNALIZEDINTERSECTION TRAFFICMOVEMENTROADWAYLEGEND BLACK= EXISTING BLUE= PROPOSED AM / PM PEAKS Pl a n n i n g B o a r d - S e p t e m b e r 3 , 2 0 2 0 IT E M : 1 - 9 - 1 8 ** * N O T T O S C A L E * * * 20 4 / 2 8 8 27 1 / 2 4 8 31 / 5 4 Th i s d o c u m e n t , t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e c o n c e p t s a n d d e s i g n s p r e s e n t e d h e r e i n , i si n t e n d e d o n l y f o r t h e sp e c i f i c p u r p o s e a n d c l i e n t f o r w h i c h i t w a s p r e p a r e d . R e u s e o f , o r i m p r o p e rr e l i a n c e o n , t h i s do c u m e n t b y o t h e r s w i t h o u t w r i t t e n a u t h o r i z a t i o n a n d a d a p t a t i o n b y D A V E N PO R T , s h a l l b e w i t h o u t lia b i l i t y t o D A V E N P O R T , a n d s h a l l b e a v i o l a t i o n o f t h e a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n D AV E N P O R T a n d t h e cli e n t . Sid b u r y Ro a d N College Road N College Road Blue Clay Road Blu e C l a y Ro a d 12 0 / 1 3 5 22 1 / 2 7 5 11 1 / 1 3 3 248 / 280 247 / 467 140 / 144 100 / 46 440 / 292 151 / 86 6 / 17 283 / 60862 5 / 3 9 0 20 / 2 4 23 / 16 14 / 5 69 / 3 0 0 17 5 / 3 1 7 45 0 / 2 6 3 28 / 3 5 30 / 24 229 / 127 SIDBURYCROSSINGDEVELOPMENT NEWHANOVERCOUNTY, NC PROJECTNUMBER200218SIGNALIZEDINTERSECTIONUNSIGNALIZEDINTERSECTIONTRAFFICMOVEMENTROADWAYLEGENDFIGURE82024 BUILD VOLUMES Si t e A c c e s s 1 Sit e A c c e s s 2 Si t e A c c e s s 3 Da i r y F a r m R o a d 18 / 52 77 / 2819 / 26 68 / 256 3 / 9 51 / 3 3 26 / 1 7 9 / 6 207 / 118182 / 39 65 / 247 173 / 33 BLACK= EXISTING BLUE= PROPOSED AM / PM PEAKS Pl a n n i n g B o a r d - S e p t e m b e r 3 , 2 0 2 0 IT E M : 1 - 9 - 1 9 6/26/2020 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis 18 6.5 Full Build Discussion of Results The following section discusses 2024 full build level of service for each intersection. Recommended improvements for full build are illustrated in Figure 9. Sidbury Road at Dairy Farm Road The unsignalized intersection currently operates at LOS B in the AM and PM peaks. In 2024 future no build conditions, LOS C is expected in the AM peak and LOS B in the PM peak. In full build conditions, LOS C is expected in both the AM and PM peaks. Though there is an existing eastbound left turn, based on the NCDOT Driveway Manual, it is recommended to extend the eastbound left turn to 400 feet of storage with appropriate taper. Table 6.2 - Dairy Farm Road at Sidbury Road Scenario Overall LOS Level of Service by Approach (Delay in sec/veh) Eastbound Westbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R AM Peak Hour Existing B (12.9) SB Approach A (8.2) - (-) - (-) - (-) B (12.9) A (2) A (0) B (12.9) 2024 No Build C (15.7) SB Approach A (8.6) - (-) - (-) - (-) C (15.7) A (1.7) A (0) C (15.7) 2024 Build C (20.9) SB Approach A (8.8) - (-) - (-) - (-) C (20.9) A (2.5) A (0) C (20.9) 2024 Build + Imp C (16.9) SB Approach A (8.8) - (-) - (-) - (-) C (18.4) C (16.7) A (2.5) A (0) C (16.9) PM Peak Hour Existing B (12.2) SB Approach A (8.2) - (-) - (-) - (-) B (12.2) A (4.4) A (0) B (12.2) 2024 No Build B (14.7) SB Approach A (8.6) - (-) - (-) - (-) B (14.7) A (3.6) A (0) B (14.7) 2024 Build C (19.6) SB Approach A (9) - (-) - (-) - (-) C (19.6) A (4.4) A (0) C (19.6) 2024 Build + Imp C (15.9) SB Approach A (9) - (-) - (-) - (-) E (41.4) B (11.1) A (4.4) A (0) C (15.9) Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 20 6/26/2020 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis 19 Blue Clay Road at Sidbury Road This unsignalized intersection currently operated at LOS C in the AM peak and LOS B in the PM peak. In 2024 future no build conditions, LOS D is expected in the AM peak and LOS C in the PM peak. In full build conditions, LOS E is expected in the AM peak and LOS D in the PM peak. While a drop in LOS is not ideal, this is typical for a stop- controlled intersection of this nature (northbound and westbound being the major approach). The delay is expected to be short-lived. It is recommended to convert this intersection into an all-way stop control. This improvement will decrease the queues at this intersection. Note, these improvements are not solely the responsibility of the developer and were offered as potential interim intersection improvements and NCDOT will need to further investigate mitigations for future traffic capacity issues. Table 6.3 - Blue Clay Road at Sidbury Road Scenario Overall LOS Level of Service by Approach (Delay in sec/veh) Westbound Northbound Southbound Northbound L T R L T R L T R AM Peak Hour Existing C (16.5) WB Approach C (16.5) - (-) - (-) A (7.7) A (0) C (16.5) A (0) A (4.8) 2024 No Build D (29.3) WB Approach D (29.3) - (-) - (-) A (7.9) A (0) D (29.3) A (0) A (4.9) 2024 Build E (48.1) WB Approach E (48.1) - (-) - (-) A (8) A (0) E (48.1) A (0) A (5) 2024 Build + Imp F (62.8) WB Approach F (62.8) B (13.2) - (-) B (10.2) F (62.8) B (13.2) B (10.2) PM Peak Hour Existing B (13.9) WB Approach B (13.9) - (-) - (-) A (8.3) A (0) B (13.9) A (0) A (6.6) 2024 No Build C (20.4) WB Approach C (20.4) - (-) - (-) A (8.8) A (0) C (20.4) A (0) A (6.7) 2024 Build D (28) WB Approach D (28) - (-) - (-) A (9.1) A (0) D (28) A (0) A (6.9) 2024 Build + Imp E (40.4) NB Approach D (25.2) E (40.4) - (-) A (10.0) D (25.2) E (40.4) A (10.0) Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 21 6/26/2020 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis 20 N. College Road at Blue Clay Road This signalized intersection currently operates at LOS C in the AM peak and LOS D in the PM peak. In 2024 future no build conditions, LOS E is expected in the AM peak and LOS F in the PM peak. In full build conditions, the level of services is expected to remain the same. To address the queuing issue at this signal, it is recommended to construct a westbound right turn lane of 150 feet of storage and appropriate taper and revise the signal to accommodate the additional traffic. Note, these improvements are not solely the responsibility of the developer and were offered as potential interim intersection improvements and NCDOT will need to further investigate mitigations for future traffic capacity issues. Table 6.4 - North College Road at Blue Clay Road Scenario Overall LOS Level of Service by Approach (Delay in sec/veh) Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R AM Peak Hour Existing C (28) D (47.1) C (34.5) B (18.1) C (20) D (45.3) C (34.6) A (8.7) B (19.8) B (19.9) D (40) B (19.7) C (31) B (19.8) 2024 No Build E (61.4) F (216.9) D (53.4) D (53.9) E (56.4) E (61.8) D (40.9) A (9.4) D (49.9) D (42.3) F (121) E (55.9) D (37.4) D (43.9) 2024 Build E (65) F (220) E (58.6) E (59.8) E (74.1) E (62.2) D (41.1) A (9.4) D (51.3) D (42.6) F (123.8) E (70.6) D (37.2) D (44.5) 2024 Build + Imp E (58.6) F (220) E (58.6) E (59.8) D (41) B (13.1) E (62.2) D (41.1) A (9.4) D (51.3) D (42.6) F (123.8) D (38.2) D (37.2) D (44.5) PM Peak Hour Existing D (49) F (167.6) D (37.2) C (22.8) C (26.4) D (38) C (34.7) A (9.2) B (13.9) C (33) F (114.2) C (25.6) C (33.5) C (30.4) 2024 No Build F (145) F (615.4) F (85.6) F (93.4) F (185.8) E (66.7) D (53.6) B (17.3) C (30.8) D (43.2) F (359.9) F (164.2) D (49.6) D (41.4) 2024 Build F (164.8) F (713.6) F (110.4) F (114.7) F (225.1) E (70.1) D (53.6) B (17.7) C (31.2) D (43.2) F (404.6) F (198) D (48.1) D (41.3) 2024 Build + Imp F (136.2) F (713.6) F (110.4) F (114.7) E (75.9) A (9.4) E (70.1) D (53.6) B (17.7) C (31.2) D (43.2) F (404.6) E (68.9) D (48.1) D (41.3) Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 22 6/26/2020 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis 21 Dairy Farm Road at Site Access 1 This site access is proposed to be a full movement configuration. In 2024 future build conditions, LOS A is expected for both the AM and PM peaks. Based on NCDOT Driveway Manual, this intersection will not warrant auxiliary lanes. Therefore, no improvements are recommended for this intersection. Design site access according to NCDOT standards. Table 6.5 - Old Dairy Road at Site Access 1 Scenario Overall LOS Level of Service by Approach (Delay in sec/veh) Eastbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R AM Peak Hour 2024 Build A (9.8) EB Approach A (9.8) A (7.7) A (0) - (-) - (-) A (9.8) A (1.5) A (0) PM Peak Hour 2024 Build A (9.1) EB Approach A (9.1) A (7.6) A (0) - (-) - (-) A (9.1) A (1.2) A (0) Dairy Farm Road at Site Access 2 This site access is proposed to be a full movement configuration. In 2024 future build conditions, LOS A is expected for both the AM and PM peaks. Based on NCDOT Driveway Manual, this intersection will not warrant auxiliary lanes. Therefore, no improvements are recommended for this intersection. Design site access according to NCDOT standards. Table 6.6 - Old Dairy Road at Site Access 2 Scenario Overall LOS Level of Service by Approach (Delay in sec/veh) Eastbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R AM Peak Hour 2024 Build A (9.4) EB Approach A (9.4) A (7.6) A (0) - (-) - (-) A (9.4) A (0.9) A (0) PM Peak Hour 2024 Build A (8.6) EB Approach A (8.6) A (7.3) A (0) - (-) - (-) A (8.6) A (0.7) A (0) Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 23 6/26/2020 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis 22 Dairy Farm Road at Site Access 3 This site access is proposed to be a full movement configuration. In 2024 future build conditions, LOS A is expected for both the AM and PM peaks. Based on NCDOT Driveway Manual, this intersection will not warrant auxiliary lanes. Therefore, no improvements are recommended for this intersection. Design site access according to NCDOT standards. Table 6.7 - Old Dairy Road at Site Access 3 Scenario Overall LOS Level of Service by Approach (Delay in sec/veh) Eastbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R AM Peak Hour 2024 Build A (9.3) EB Approach A (9.3) A (7.6) A (0) - (-) - (-) A (9.3) A (0.3) A (0) PM Peak Hour 2024 Build A (8.5) EB Approach A (8.5) A (7.3) A (0) - (-) - (-) A (8.5) A (0.3) A (0) 6.6 Full Build Recommended Improvements The recommended improvements for full build are listed below: Sidbury Road at Dairy Farm Road • Extend eastbound left turn lane to 400 feet of storage and appropriate taper Blue Clay Road at Sidbury Road • Convert intersection to an all-way stop control N. College Road at Blue Clay Road • Provide a westbound right turn lane with 150 feet storage and appropriate taper • Revise signal Dairy Farm Road at Site Access 1 • Design site access according to NCDOT standards. Dairy Farm Road at Site Access 2 • Design site access according to NCDOT standards. Dairy Farm Road at Site Access 3 • Design site access according to NCDOT standards. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 24 ** * N O T T O S C A L E * * * Thi s d o c u m e n t , t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e c o n c e p t s a n d d e s i g n s p r e s e n t e d h e r e i n , i si n t e n d e d o n l y f o r t h e sp e c i f i c p u r p o s e a n d c l i e n t f o r w h i c h i t w a s p r e p a r e d . R e u s e o f , o r i m p r o p e rr e l i a n c e o n , t h i s do c u m e n t b y o t h e r s w i t h o u t w r i t t e n a u t h o r i z a t i o n a n d a d a p t a t i o n b y D A V E N PO R T , s h a l l b e w i t h o u t lia b i l i t y t o D A V E N P O R T , a n d s h a l l b e a v i o l a t i o n o f t h e a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n D AV E N P O R T a n d t h e clie n t . FIGURE9 RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS SIDBURYCROSSINGDEVELOPMENT NEWHANOVERCOUNTY, NC PROJECTNUMBER200218SIGNALIZEDINTERSECTIONUNSIGNALIZEDINTERSECTIONTRAFFICMOVEMENTBLACK= EXISTING BLUE= PROPOSED GREEN= COMMITTED IMPROVEMENTSROADWAYLEGEND Sid b u r y Ro a d Dairy Farm Road N College Road N College Road Blue Clay Road Bl u e C l a y Ro a d 40 0 ' 125' 15 0 ' 15 0 ' 100' 250' MO D I F I C A T I O N : Co n v e r t t o a n a l l - w a y s t o p co n t r o l . 15 0 ' 150' SIG N A L M O D I F I C A T I O N : Wit h t h e a d d i t i o n o f t h e t u r n la n e , i t i s a l s o r e c o m m e n d e d t o mo d i f y t h e s i g n a l t o ac c o m m o d a t e t r a f f i c . Si t e A c c e s s 1 Si t e A c c e s s 2 Si t e A c c e s s 3 ~3 ,77 5 ' ~1 ,37 5 ' ~650'~950' ~950' Pl a n n i n g B o a r d - S e p t e m b e r 3 , 2 0 2 0 IT E M : 1 - 9 - 2 5 6/26/2020 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis 24 7.0 Queue Results Below in Tables 7.1-7.4 are the queue results for all exclusive turn lanes. Table 7.1 - Queue Results AM Peak Hour Queues Scenario Sidbury Road at Dairy Farm Road Blue Clay Road & Sidbury Road N College Road & Blue Clay Road 2020 Existing EBL WBTR 0 SBLR WBLR NBTR SBLT EBL EBTR WBL 0 WBTR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBTR Max Queue (ft) 25 51 136 25 100 607 199 283 125 253 70 174 272 95th Percentile Queue (ft) 17 52 116 15 123 382 90 189 119 223 51 120 217 Storage Bay (ft) 150 50 150 75 250 125 2024 Future No Build EBL WBTR SBLR WBLR NBTR SBLT EBL EBTR WBL WBTR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBTR Max Queue (ft) 31 92 276 25 200 2903 200 387 100 580 400 174 402 95th Percentile Queue (ft) 30 66 210 14 224 3569 216 341 112 487 292 208 396 Storage Bay (ft) 150 150 150 100 250 125 2024 Build EBL WBTR SBLR WBLR NBTR SBLT EBL EBTR WBL WBTR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBTR Max Queue (ft) 53 21 115 314 53 200 2866 200 562 150 486 400 174 440 95th Percentile Queue (ft) 38 7 103 232 27 215 3267 252 527 189 421 264 206 404 Storage Bay (ft) 150 150 150 100 250 125 2024 Build + Imps EBL WBTR SBL SBR WBLR NBTR SBLT EBL EBTR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBTR Max Queue (ft) 31 22 74 104 162 92 72 200 1841 128 177 195 150 439 400 175 408 95th Percentile Queue (ft) 35 7 44 82 154 73 43 200 1957 112 157 106 185 323 213 225 368 Storage Bay (ft) 400 150 150 150 150 100 250 125 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 26 6/26/2020 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis 25 Table 7.2 - Queue Results PM Peak Hour Queues Scenario Sidbury Road at Dairy Farm Road Blue Clay Road & Sidbury Road N College Road & Blue Clay Road 2020 Existing EBL WBTR 0 SBLR WBLR NBTR SBLT EBL EBTR WBL 0 WBTR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBTR Max Queue (ft) 54 22 66 161 27 100 2866 200 372 60 202 24 175 362 95th Percentile Queue (ft) 54 7 52 115 24 100 2952 114 260 43 156 8 200 370 Storage Bay (ft) 150 50 150 75 250 125 2024 Future No Build EBL WBTR SBLR WBLR NBTR SBLT EBL EBTR WBL WBTR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBTR Max Queue (ft) 53 51 133 48 200 2890 200 1287 100 482 49 174 659 95th Percentile Queue (ft) 54 42 108 21 201 3417 260 1297 97 361 29 190 621 Storage Bay (ft) 150 150 150 100 250 125 2024 Build EBL WBTR SBLR WBLR NBTR SBLT EBL EBTR WBL WBTR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBTR Max Queue (ft) 143 70 1019 22 29 200 2885 200 1314 150 444 400 175 594 95th Percentile Queue (ft) 84 61 869 9 25 200 3650 270 1567 94 355 212 212 535 Storage Bay (ft) 150 150 150 100 250 125 2024 Build + Imps EBL SBL SBR WBLR NBTR SBLT EBL EBTR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBTR Max Queue (ft) 75 30 45 66 116 114 30 200 2885 200 775 200 149 578 400 175 556 95th Percentile Queue (ft) 73 10 35 45 104 117 33 203 3697 211 678 228 104 399 152 209 506 Storage Bay (ft) 400 150 150 150 150 100 250 125 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 27 6/26/2020 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis 26 Table 7.3 - Queue Results AM Peak Hour Queues Scenario Dairy Farm Road & Site Access 1 Dairy Farm Road & Site Access 2 Dairy Farm Road & Site Access 3 2024 Build EBLR NBLT EBLR NBLT EBLR NBLT Max Queue (ft) 42 26 66 20 95th Percentile Queue (ft) 38 15 53 17 Storage Bay (ft) Table 7.4 - Queue Results PM Peak Hour Queues Scenario Dairy Farm Road & Site Access 1 Dairy Farm Road & Site Access 2 Dairy Farm Road & Site Access 3 2024 Build EBLR NBLT EBLR NBLT EBLR NBLT Max Queue (ft) 42 52 24 18 25 95th Percentile Queue (ft) 38 39 12 13 8 Storage Bay (ft) Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 28 6/26/2020 Sidbury Crossing – Transportation Impact Analysis 27 8.0 Summary and Conclusion The proposed Sidbury Crossing is to be located across Sidbury Road between I-40 and Dairy Farm Road in New Hanover County, North Carolina. The development will utilize three (3) site accesses. All three site accesses are proposed to be full access with each located on Dairy Farm Road between Sidbury Road and Blue Clay Road. The Sidbury Crossing will be analyzed for one (1) full build: • Full Build will consist of 320 apartment dwelling units. The build year for Full Build is assumed to be 2024. Full Build’s trip generation indicates that the proposed development is expected to generate 115 trips in the AM peak, and 141 trips in the PM peak. DAVENPORT was retained to determine the potential traffic impacts of this development and to identify transportation improvements that may be required to accommodate the impacts of both background traffic and new development traffic. Based on the analysis of the development there were a couple intersections that operated below the ideal level of service. Note, these improvements are not solely the responsibility of the developer and were offered as potential interim intersection improvements and NCDOT will need to further investigate mitigations for future traffic capacity issues. The recommended improvements at the study intersections are summarized in Table 8.1 below. Table 8.1 – Recommended Improvement Summary Intersection 2024 Full Build Sidbury Road at Dairy Farm Road • Extend eastbound left turn lane to 400 feet of storage and appropriate taper Sidbury Road at Blue Clay Road • Convert intersection to an all-way stop control Blue Clay Road at N. College Road • Provide a westbound right turn lane with 150 feet storage and appropriate taper • Revise signal Dairy Farm Road at Site Access 1 • Design site access according to NCDOT standards Dairy Farm Road at Site Access 2 • Design site access according to NCDOT standards Dairy Farm Road at Site Access 3 • Design site access according to NCDOT standards In conclusion, this study has reviewed the impacts of both background traffic and proposed development traffic and has provided recommendations to accommodate future traffic. Please note the proposed site access should be designed according to NCDOT standards. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 9 - 29 PROPOSED SITE PLAN Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 1 - 10 - 1 W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WW WWW W W DO G PA R K STORMWATERPOND1.61 AC DOGPARK WE T L A N D , TY P . W W W WWWW W W W W W W W W W W WWWWWWWW W W W W W W W W X X X X XXXXXX8392ARCHCLIMBER4'5'1-8507 POSTS2-8548 DECKS8226TIC TAC TOE8365ESTRAIGHT BRIDGE8442VERTICAL LADDER 8478PSLIDE XX X X X X X W.H.F F F FF GAS EASE M E N T 5 0 ' R / W DB: 52 4 9 , P G 3 2 2 GAS EASEMENT 50' R/W DB: 5249, PG 322 X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHEOHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE TV OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE OHE WET WET WET WET WETWET WET WET WET WET WETWET WETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWET WET WET WET WETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWETWET WET WET WET WE T WET WET WET WET WE T WE T WE T WET WETWETWET WE T W E T WE T WE T WET WET WET WE T WE T WE T WE T WE T 100-YR 100-YR 10 0 - Y R 100-YR 100 - Y R 100-YR 100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR 100-YR 100-YR100-YR100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 10 0 - Y R 100 - Y R 100- Y R 10 0 - Y R 100-YR 100-YR 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 100-Y R 100-Y R 100 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 100-YR 100 - Y R 100- Y R 100- Y R 100-Y R 100- Y R 100-YR 100-YR100-YR 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 100 - Y R 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 1 0 0 - Y R 100-Y R 100-YR 100 - Y R 100- Y R 100 - Y R 1 0 0 - Y R 100-YR 100-YR 100-Y R 100-YR 100-Y R 100-YR 100 - Y R 100-YR 10 0 - Y R 100-YR 100-YR 100-Y R 100- Y R 100-Y R 100 - Y R 100- Y R 10 0 - Y R 100- Y R 10 0 - Y R 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 10 0 - Y R 100 - Y R 100-YR 10 0 - Y R 100 - Y R 100- Y R 100 - Y R 100-Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 100 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR500-YR 500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR 500-YR 500-YR500-YR500-YR 10 0 - Y R 500-YR 500-Y R 50 0 - Y R 500-YR 500-YR 500- Y R 500-YR 50 0 - Y R 500-YR 500 - Y R 500-YR 500-Y R 10 0 - Y R 100- Y R 100 - Y R 100 - Y R 100 - Y R 100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR 1 0 0 - Y R 100 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 100-YR 100-Y R 100 - Y R 100 - Y R 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 100-Y R 100- Y R 100 - Y R 100-Y R 100 - Y R 100-YR 100 - Y R 100-Y R 10 0 - Y R 5 0 0 - Y R 500-YR 5 0 0 - Y R 500 - Y R 5 0 0 - Y R 500- Y R 500-YR 50 0 - Y R 500-YR 50 0 - Y R 500 - Y R 500 - Y R 500 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 500- Y R 50 0 - Y R 500-YR 500-YR 50 0 - Y R 500-YR 50 0 - Y R 500-Y R 500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500- Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 500 - Y R 500- Y R 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 5 0 0 - Y R 500-Y R 500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 500-YR 5 0 0 - Y R 5 0 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 5 0 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 5 0 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 5 0 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 5 0 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 500-YR 500 - Y R 500- Y R 500 - Y R 500 - Y R500-YR 500-YR 500 - Y R 500 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR 500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 50 0 - Y R 100-YR100-YR 100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR 100-YR100-YR100-YR 100-YR100-YR100-YR 100-Y R 100-Y R100-YR100 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 100 - Y R 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100- Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 100 - Y R 1 0 0 - Y R 100-Y R 1 0 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 100 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 1 0 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 1 0 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 1 0 0 - Y R 100-YR 10 0 - Y R 100-Y R 10 0 - Y R 100-YR 100-YR 10 0 - Y R 100 - Y R 100 - Y R 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR 100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR100-YR 100 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 10 0 - Y R 500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR 500-YR 500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR500-YR 10 0 - Y R 100- Y R UTILITY EASEMENT DB: 1859, PG 297 TV X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 57 575656565555555454545453535353525252525251515151515050505050494949494948484848484847474747474746464646464645454545454545444444444444444343434343434342424242424242424141414141414141404040404040404039393939393939393838383838383838383737373737373737373636363636363636363635353535353535353535 34343434343434343434343433333333333333333333333333333333323232323232323232323232323232323232 32 32 3131 31 31313131313131313131313131 31 31 313131313131 31 31 31 30 303030303030303030303030 30 30 30 30 30 30 3030303030 30303030303030303030303030303030303029 29 29 29 292929 29 2929 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 2929292929 2929292929292929292929292929292929292929292929292929292929292929292929 29 29 29 282828 282828 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 282828282828282828 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 2828282828 2828282828282828282828282828282828282828282828282828282828282828282828 28 28 28 28 28 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 2727 27 27272727272727272727272727 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 2727 27 27 27 27 272727272727 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 272727272727272727272727272727 27 2727 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 2626262626262626262626 26 262626 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 2626262626262626262626262626 262626 26 26 26 26 2626 26 26 26 26 26 262626 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 262626 26 26 26262626 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 25 25 2525 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 2 5 25252525252525252525252525252525 25 25 252525252525252525252525252525252525 25 25 25 25 25 25 252525 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 252525 252525 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 24 24242424242424 242424242424242424 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 2 4 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 2424242424 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 232323232323 232323232323 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 22 22 2222 222222222222 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 212121 21 21 4' W I R E F R E N C E 4' W I R E F R E N C E 4' W I R E F R E N C E 4' W I R E F R E N C E 4' WIRE FRENCE 1800-0 0 3 - 0 0 8 - 0 0 0 ANTHO N Y T U C K E R ZONE D : R - 1 5 D.B. 59 9 2 , P G . 2 6 2 4 CP&L POWER LIN E R / W XWETLAND,TYP. ST O R M W A T E R PO N D 1. 0 7 A C Bldg 15 Type B-3 12 Unit B l d g 8 - T y p e B - 1 ( 2 4 U n i t ) Bldg 10 - Type B-1 (24 Unit) Bldg 6Type B-312 Unit Bldg 11 Type B-3 12 Unit Bl d g 1 4 - T y p e B - 1 (2 4 U n i t ) Bl d g 1 2 - T y p e B - 1 (2 4 U n i t ) G-4 ( 9 - U N I T ) Bl d g 1 3 - T y p e B - 2 (2 4 U n i t ) Bl d g 9 - T y p e B - 1 (2 4 U n i t ) B l d g 7 - T y p e B - 1 ( 2 4 U n i t ) Bldg 1 - Type B-1 (24 Unit) G- 6 ( 7 - U N I T ) G-1 (7-UNIT)G-2 ( 1 1 - U N I T ) G- 3 ( 1 1 - U N I T / 2 BA Y C A R W A S H ) Bl d g 4 - T y p e B - 1 (2 4 U n i t ) Bldg 3Type B-312 UnitBldg 2Type B-312 Unit Bl d g 5 Ty p e B - 3 12 U n i t SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS S S SS SS S S SS SS SS SS SSSSSSSSSSSSSS XXXXXXXXXXXXXXSSSSSSFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFMFM SSSSSS SS S S S S SSSSSSW W W 15 0 ' P O W E R L I N E EA S E M E N T 35 ' F R O N T S E T B A C K 30' SIDE STREET SETBACK 30 ' S I D E S T R E E T S E T B A C K G- 5 ( 1 1 - U N I T ) 20 ' W I D E B U F F E R 10 ' M A I N T E N A N C E E A S E M E N T 30 ' S I D E S T R E E T S E T B A C K 2 0 ' W I D E B U F F E R / S I D E I N T E R I O R S E T B A C K WET WE T W E T WET W E T WET WE T WE TWET WET WE T WET WET W E T WET WE T WET WET WET WET WET WET WET WET WET WET WE T WET WE T WET WE T WE T DATE: SCALE: DESIGNED: DRAWN: CHECKED: PE I J O B # : CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT: PRELIMINARY LAYOUT: FINAL DESIGN: RELEASED FOR CONST: PROJECT STATUS REVISIONS: DRAWING INFORMATION SE A L CLIENT INFORMATION: 122 Cinema Drive Wilmington, North Carolina 28403 (910) 791-6707 (O) (910) 791-6760 (F) NC License #: C-2846 1" = 100' 6/29/2020 NORTH CAROLINA NEW HANOVER COUNTY SIDBURY CROSSING CONDITIONAL ZONING SITE PLANLP - 1 20 2 1 1 . P E HH MULTI, LLC. 2919 BREEZEWOOD AVE, SUITE 400 FAYETTEVILLE, NC 28303 PRELIMINARY DESIGN - NOT RELEASED FOR CONSTRUCTION SITE DATAPARCEL ID:R01800-003-012-001CURRENT ZONING:R-15PROPOSED ZONING:RMF-LPROPOSED USE:MULTI-FAMILYPROJECT SITE AREA:+ 31.12 ACOWNER INFORMATION:DESIRABLE PROPERTIES LLC 341 NORTH GREEN MEADOWS DR I V E , S U I T E 1 0 0 WILMINGTON, NC 28405FLOOD INFORMATION:THIS PARCEL CONTAINS AREAS L O C A T E D I N F L O O D ZONE "AE" WITH A BFE OF 31.7' A S D E T E R M I N E D B Y F E M A FLOOD PANEL 3720324100K DATE D A U G U S T 2 8 , 2 0 1 8 . FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION:COMMUNITY MIXED USE & GENER A L R E S I D E N T I A L RMF-L ALLOWABLE DENSITY:10 DU/AC (311 UNITS)PROJECT PROPOSED DENSITY:9.25 DU/AC (288 UNITS)PROPOSED UNITSPROPOSED UNITS:288 UNITS(96) 1-BED UNITS(144) 2-BED UNITS(48) 3-BED UNITSDIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTSFRONT SETBACK: 35'REAR SETBACK:25'SIDE SETBACK:20' INTERIOR30' SIDE STREETBUILDING SEPARATION:20'MAX. BLDG. HEIGHT:45' (3 STORIES) N O R T H 0SC A L E : 10 0 20 0 30 0 1" = 1 0 0 ' fe e t PROPOSED 30' A C C E S S & UTILITY EASE M E N T SU R V E Y & U T I L I T Y N O T E S : 1. RE F E R E N C E D E E D B O O K I N F O R M A T I O N P R O V I D E D O N E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S P L A N . 2. UT I L I T E S S H O W N H E R E O N A R E F R O M I N F O R M A T I O N V I S I B L E I N T H E F I E L D A N D M A P S PR O V I D E D B Y O T H E R S . U T I L I T I E S O T H E R T H A N W H A T A R E S H O W N M A Y E X I S T . L O C A T I O N O F UN D E R G R O U N D U T I L I T I E S A R E A P P R O X I M A T E . 3. WA T E R A N D S E W E R W I L L B E P R O V I D E D B Y C F P U A . SI T E D A T A ( C O N T ' D ) SI T E L I G H T I N G : 1. AL L S T R E E T A N D P A R K I N G L I G H T I N G W I L L B E D E S I G N E D A N D I N S T A L L E D B Y D U K E EN E R G Y . 2. AL L L I G H T I N G O N A P A R T M E N T B U I L D I N G S W I L L B E D E S I G N E D A N D I N S T A L L E D B Y BU I L D E R . 3. LI G H T F I X T U R E S T . B . D . SI T E D A T A ( C O N T ' D ) PA R K I N G R E Q U I R E M E N T S : SE C 8 1 - 1 : M U L T I - F A M I L Y R E S I D E N T I A L : O N E A N D O N E - H A L F ( 1 . 5 ) S P A C E S P E R 1 B E D R O O M UN I T A N D T W O ( 2 . 0 ) S P A C E S P E R 2 + B E D R O O M U N I T S . PA R K I N G R E Q U I R E D : 52 8 S P A C E S 1- B E D U N I T 14 4 S P A C E S ( 9 6 U N I T S * 1 . 5 S P A C E S / U N I T ) 2- B E D U N I T 28 8 S P A C E S ( 1 4 4 U N I T S * 2 S P A C E S / U N I T ) 3 - B E D U N I T 96 S P A C E S ( 4 8 U N I T S * 2 S P A C E S / U N I T ) PA R K I N G P R O V I D E D : 52 8 S P A C E S ( I N C L U D I N G A D A A N D G A R A G E S P A C E S ) SU R F A C E S P A C E S : 47 2 S P A C E S G A R A G E S : 56 S P A C E S SE C 8 1 - 1 : C L U B S , P U B L I C , P R I V A T E , A N D A S S O C I A T E D U S E S : O N E ( 1 ) P A R K I N G S P A C E F O R EA C H O N E H U N D R E D ( 1 0 0 ) S Q U A R E F E E T O F G R O S S F L O O R S P A C E . PA R K I N G R E Q U R E D : 50 S P A C E S ( 5 , 0 0 0 S F C L U B H O U S E / 1 0 0 S F ) PA R K I N G P R O V I D E D : 50 S P A C E S TO T A L A D A R E Q U I R E D : 11 S P A C E S TO A T L A D A P R O V I D E D : 14 S P A C E S TO T A L P A R K I N G R E Q U I R E D : 57 8 S P A C E S TO T A L P A R K I N G P R O V I D E D : 57 8 S P A C E S ( I N C L U D E S S U R F A C E , G A R A G E S , A N D AD A S P A C E S ) OP E N S P A C E C A L C U L A T I O N S : OP E N S P A C E R E Q U I R E D : 6. 2 2 A C ( 2 0 % O F G R O S S A C R E A G E ) PR O V I D E D : + 1 0 . 7 0 A C AP P R O X I M A T E L O C A T I O N O F EX I S T I N G W A T E R M A I N IN T E R S T A T E 4 0 PU B L I C R O W ( W I D T H V A R I E S ) D A I R Y F A R M R D . P U B L I C R O W ( 1 7 0 ' W I D T H ) SIDBURY RD.PUBLIC ROW (WIDTH VARIES) AP P R O X I M A T E L O C A T I O N O F EX I S T I N G W A T E R M A I N GR A V I T Y S E W E R M H (T Y P . ) PR O P O S E D F I R E H Y D R A N T , TY P . PR O P O S E D 8 " W A T E R M A I N , T Y P . ; T O T I E TO E X I S T I N G W A T E R M A I N L O C A T E D WI T H I N D A I R Y F A R M R D . R O W PR O P O S E D F O R C E M A I N , T Y P . CLUB HOUSE W/ MAILFACILITY5,000 SF PROPOSED PUMP STATION AP A R T M E N T B U I L D I N G , T Y P . PR O P O S E D 8 " GR A V I T Y S E W E R , T Y P . PR O P O S E D B L O W - O F F VA L V E , T Y P . 5' W I D E C O N C R E T E SI D E W A L K , T Y P . GA R A G E B U I L D I N G , TY P . 20 ' V O L U N T A R Y LA N D S C A P E B U F F E R POOL, POOL HOUSE ANDFIRE PIT DESIGNATED P A R K I N G S P A C E S FOR CLUB HO U S E U S E FLOODWAY F L O O D Z O N E A E 3 1 . 7 F L O O D Z O N E " X " F L O O D Z O N E AE 3 1 . 7 FL O O D ZO N E " X " VICINITY MAPNOT TO SCALENORTH U.S. INTERSTATE 40SIDBURY RDBLUE CLAY RDNC HWY 117U.S. INTERSTATE 140 DAIRY FARM RDSITE TR E E S U R V E Y N O T E S : 1. A S I T E I N V E N T O R Y W A S M A D E O F T H E R E G U L A T E D V E G E T A T I O N . T H E S I T E V E G E T A T I O N CO N S I S T S P R I M A R I L Y O F 2 " - 8 " P I N E S W I T H S C R U B U N D E R S T O R Y A N D S O M E 1 " - 5 " SW E E T G U M S A N D R E D M A P L E S . F L O O D P L A I N A N D W E T L A N D A R E A S S H O W E D T H E M O S T DI V E R S I T Y W I T H B A L D C Y P R E S S , S W E E T B A Y M A G N O L I A S , W A X M Y R T L E , A N D C H E R R Y LA U R E L S ( N O N E O B S E R V E D O F R E G U L A T E D S I Z E ) . A F E W 1 0 " - 1 2 " P I N E S E X I S T E D I N B U F F E R AR E A S . T H E N O R T H E R N M O S T P O R T I O N O F T H E S I T E E X H I B I T E D A F E W 2 " - 3 " S O U T H E R N MA G N O L I A S . N O H E R I T A G E T R E E S W E R E I D E N T I F I E D O N S I T E . 2. VE G E T A T I O N I N W E T L A N D S , B U F F E R S , A N D F L O O D W A Y S A R E I N T E N D E D T O R E M A I N W I T H SE L E C T I V E C L E A R I N G O F D E A D / D I S E A S E D M A T E R I A L A N D D E B R I S . 3. NO S I G N I F I C A N T O R H E R I T A G E T R E E S W E R E O B S E R V E D O N S I T E . I F A N Y A R E F O U N D W I T H AD D I T I O N A L S U R V E Y W O R K , T H E Y W I L L B E D O C U M E N T E D A N D W I L L B E P R E S E R V E D W H E N PO S S I B L E . 4. A C E R T I F I E D T R E E S U R V E Y W I L L B E S U B M I T T E D W I T H T H E D E T A I L E D D E S I G N F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N P E R M I T T I N G . 5. MA X I M U M E F F O R T W I L L B E M A D E F O R T H E P R E S E R V A T I O N O F P R O T E C T E D T R E E S . RE M O V A L S H A L L B E L I M I T E D O N L Y T O W H A T I S N E C E S S A R Y F O R B U I L D I N G F O O T P R I N T S , PA R K I N G A R E A S , S T O R M W A T E R P O N D S , A N D O T H E R E S S E N T I A L S I T E I M P R O V E M E N T S . REV. 1 REVISE PLANS PER PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS 07/24/20 WE T L A N D R E M A I N I N G UN D I S T U R B E D : 0 . 9 6 A C WE T L A N D I M P A C T ( T H I S W E T L A N D ) : 0 . 0 9 A C WE T L A N D R E M A I N I N G UN D I S T U R B E D : 1 . 6 4 A C WE T L A N D I M P A C T ( T H I S W E T L A N D ) : 0 . 1 6 A C WE T L A N D R E M A I N I N G UN D I S T U R B E D : 0 . 4 0 A C FL O O D P L A I N / U N D I S T U R B E D W O O D L A N D : 1 . 4 7 A C FL O O D W A Y ( A L L U N D I S T U R B E D ) : 1 . 9 8 A C RE M A I N I N G P R O J E C T A R E A : 2 4 . 1 7 A C ; IN C L U D E S O P E N S P A C E , B U F F E R S , P O N D S , BU I L D I N G S , P A R K I N G , A M E N I T Y NA T U R A L F E A T U R E S D I A G R A M SC A L E : 1 " = 3 0 0 ' 20 ' V E G E T A T E D BU F F E R AREA LEFT VEGETATED ASBUFFER TO FLOODWAYPlanning Board - September 3, 2020ITEM: 1- 11 - 1 NEW HANOVER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION MEETING DATE: 9/3/2020 Regular DEPARTMENT: Planning PRESENTER(S): Gideon Smith CONTACT(S): Gideon Smith, Current Planner, Brad Schuler, Senior Planner, Wayne Clark, Planning and Land Use Director SUBJECT: Public Hearing Rezoning Request (Z20-15) – Request by Design Solu6ons on behalf of the property owner, Redland Development Incorporated, to rezone approximately 7.15 acres of land located at 8814 Market Street (Hwy 17), north of Futch Creek Road, from R-15, Residen6al District, and B-1, Neighborhood Business, to (CZD) RMF-L, Condi6onal Residen6al Mul6-Family Low Density District, and (CZD) CB, Condi6onal Community Business District, in order to construct a 60-unit townhome development and an 8,000 square foot retail/office/personal service building. BRIEF SUMMARY: The applicant is proposing to rezone approximately 7.15 acres from R-15 (approximately 6.07 acres) and B-1 (approximately 1.08 acres) to (CZD) RMF-L and (CZD) CB to construct a 60-unit townhome development and a mixture of retail sales, office, and personal services in an 8,000 square foot building. As proposed, the RMF-L por6on of the site would be 6.11 acres and the CB por6on would be 1.04 acres. The conceptual plan indicates there will be nine groups of townhomes with three buildings containing nine units each (27 total units), one building containing eight units (8 total units), and five buildings containing five units each (25 total units) for a total of 60 units. Each of the townhome buildings will be two-stories and limited to 35 feet in height. The commercial component of this proposal will be a two-story/8,000 square foot retail sales/office/personal services building and will share access with the residen6al por6on of the site, as well as the Benjamin Moore Paint commercial development to the north. The por6on of the site currently zoned R-15 would be permi>ed a maximum of 15 dwelling units, which is es6mated to generate about 16 trips in both the AM and PM peak hours. Under the proposed RMF-L zoning, 60 townhomes could be constructed on the site, which is es6mated to generate about 30 trips in the AM and 38 trips in the PM peak hours. The expected net difference in traffic associated with residen6al development would be an increase of 14 AM and 22 PM peak trips when compared to current zoning. If the B-1 por6on of the site was developed with a typical approximate 25% building footprint, an 11,000 square foot shopping center or comparable development could be built and is es6mated to generate about 158 AM and 106 PM peak hours. Under the proposed CB zoning, 4,000 square feet of retail and 4,000 square feet of office/personal services is es6mated to generate about 25 AM trips and 32 PM trips in the peak hours. The expected net difference in traffic associated with commercial development would be a decrease of 133 AM and 74 peak trips when compared to current zoning. The total trips es6mated to be generated from the site as currently zoned is about 174 in the AM peak and 122 in the PM peak hours. This proposed townhome development and retail/office/personal services building is es6mated to generate about 55 trips in the AM peak and 70 trip in the PM peak. When comparing the proposed rezoning to the current zoning, the cumula6ve impact is expected to decrease traffic by 119 trips in the AM and 52 trips in the PM peak. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 Access is provided to the subject property by US 17, just north of Futch Creek Road. As proposed, the commercial and residen6al uses will share one driveway off US 17. Preliminary NCDOT comments indicate a right turn lane will be required and specific details will be determined during the driveway permiEng process. In addi6on, the applicant has agreed to connect the proposed commercial parking lot to the exis6ng commercial lot to the north (Benjamin Moore Paint). The recently approved nearby development, The Oaks at Murray Farms, completed a Traffic Impact Analysis which studied the intersec6ons of "Old" Market Street/Futch Creek Road at US Hwy 17 and the nearby u-turn on US Hwy 17 to the north. This analysis generally indicates capacity is available at these intersec6ons and the proposed development is projected to result in a decrease in traffic compared to by-right uses under the exis6ng zoning. The site is immediately adjacent to exis6ng commercial and single-family residen6al developments fron6ng US Hwy 17. An exis6ng single-family neighborhood also directly abuts the subject site to the east. In addi6on, the proposed townhome units adjacent to the exis6ng single-family neighborhood are rotated so the ends of the units face these nearby homes to limit the visibility from windows and balconies into the exis6ng neighborhood. The site is designated as a Community Mixed Use place type, a common designa6on for areas along major roads, which is intended to provide a transi6on to lower density residen6al proper6es located away from the roadway. It is immediately adjacent to exis6ng commercial and single-family residen6al developments fron6ng the highway and rear of the property. It also borders the Villages at Planta6on Landing townhomes to the south with single-family homes and vacant land to the east. Commercial districts, like CB, are iden6fied as typical zoning categories for uses in the Community Mixed Use Place type. The CB zoning would allow for a variety of office, retail, and personal service uses that would be appropriate in this area. The design of the proposed project supports the transi6onal nature of the Community Mixed Use place type, loca6ng the two-story commercial building immediately adjacent to the highway and exis6ng commercial uses. The RMF-L zoning includes a townhome component with a moderate project density of 9.8 units per acre, in-line with the preferred density range for the Community Mixed Use place type (up to 15 units per acre). Limi6ng the height of the proposed townhomes ensures they are more in-line with the surrounding single-family and townhome developments. In addi6on, the proposed townhouse product supports the Comprehensive Plan’s goal to provide for a range of housing types, opportuni6es, and choices for households of different sizes and income levels. The proposed condi6onal RMF-L and CB rezoning is generally CONSISTENT with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because it will provide for the types of retail and office uses recommended for Community Mixed Use areas, the residen6al densi6es proposed for the townhome por6on of the project are in-line with those suggested for that place type, and the project will provide an appropriate transi6on between a major highway corridor and exis6ng lower density residen6al development. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: Intelligent Growth & Economic DevelopmentEncourage development of complete communi6es in the unincorporated countyCi6zens have daily needs met by NHC businesses and support themEnsure NHC has appropriate housing to support business growthIncrease connec6vity of residents to each other and their investment to New Hanover County RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Staff recommends approval of this applica6on and suggests the following mo6on: Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 I move to APPROVE the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) RMF-L and (CZD) CB district. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the proposed CB por6on of the project will provide for the types of retail and office uses recommended for Community Mixed Use areas, the residen6al densi6es proposed for the townhome por6on of the project are in-line with those suggested for that place type, and the project will provide an appropriate transi6on between a major highway corridor and exis6ng lower density residen6al development. I also find APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal has poten6al to provide services to the adjacent residen6al neighborhoods and could reduce the need to travel on Market Street, and would align with the Comprehensive Plan’s goal of providing more diversity of housing types. Alterna6ve Mo6on for Denial I move to DENY the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) RMF-L and (CZD) CB district. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the proposed CB por6on of the project will provide for the types of retail and office uses recommended for Community Mixed Use areas, the residen6al densi6es proposed for the townhome por6on of the project are in-line with those suggested for that place type, and the project will provide an appropriate transi6on between a major highway corridor and exis6ng lower density residen6al development, I find DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is not consistent with the desired character of the surrounding community and the density will adversely impact the adjacent neighborhoods. COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (only Manager) Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 SCRIPT for Conditional Zoning District Application (Z20-15) Request by Design Solutions on behalf of the property owner, Redland Development Incorporated, to rezone approximately 7.15 acres of land located at 8814 Market Street (Hwy 17), north of Futch Creek Road, from R-15, Residential District, and B-1, Neighborhood Business, to (CZD) RMF-L, Conditional Residential Multi-Family Low Density District, and (CZD) CB, Conditional Community Business District, in order to construct a 60-unit townhome development and an 8,000 square foot retail/office/personal service building. 1. This is a public hearing. We will hear a presentation from staff. Then the applicant and any opponents will each be allowed 15 minutes for their presentation and additional 5 minutes for rebuttal. 2. Conduct Hearing, as follows: a. Staff presentation b. Applicant’s presentation (up to 15 minutes) c. Opponent’s presentation (up to 15 minutes) d. Applicant’s rebuttal (up to 5 minutes) e. Opponent’s rebuttal (up to 5 minutes) 3. Close the public hearing 4. Board discussion 5. Vote on the application. The motion should include a statement saying how the change is, or is not, consistent with the land use plan and why approval or denial of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest. Example Motion of Approval I move to APPROVE the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) RMF-L and (CZD) CB district. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the proposed CB portion of the project will provide for the types of retail and office uses recommended for Community Mixed Use areas, the residential densities proposed for the townhome portion of the project are in-line with those suggested for that place type, and the project will provide an appropriate transition between a major highway corridor and existing lower density residential development. I also find APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal has potential to provide services to the adjacent residential neighborhoods and could reduce the need to travel on Market Street, and would align with the Comprehensive Plan’s goal of providing more diversity of housing types. [Optional] Note any conditions to be added to the district. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 1 - 1 Example Motion of Denial I move to DENY the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) RMF-L and (CZD) CB district. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the proposed CB portion of the project will provide for the types of retail and office uses recommended for Community Mixed Use areas, the residential densities proposed for the townhome portion of the project are in-line with those suggested for that place type, and the project will provide an appropriate transition between a major highway corridor and existing lower density residential development, I find DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is not consistent with the desired character of the surrounding community and the density will adversely impact the adjacent neighborhoods. Alternative Motion for Approval/Denial: I move to [Approve/Deny] the proposed rezoning to a conditional (CZD) RMF-L and (CZD) CB district. I find it to be [Consistent/Inconsistent] with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because [insert reasons] __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ I also find [Approval/Denial] of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because [insert reasons] __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 1 - 2 Z20-15 Staff Report 9.3.2020 Page 1 of 16 STAFF REPORT FOR Z20-15 CONDITIONAL ZONING DISTRICT APPLICATION APPLICATION SUMMARY Case Number: Z20-15 Request: Rezoning to conditional RMF-L and conditional CB districts Applicant: Property Owner(s): Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions Redland Development Incorporated Location: Acreage: 8800 block of US 17 7.15 PID(s): Comp Plan Place Type: R02900-003-032-000 Community Mixed Use Existing Land Use: Proposed Land Use: Undeveloped 60 Townhome Units (Row-Style) and 8,000 sf Retail/Office Current Zoning: Proposed Zoning: R-15 and B-1 (CZD) RMF-L Residential Multi-Family Low Density & (CZD) CB Community Business SURROUNDING AREA LAND USE ZONING North Professional Office, Commercial, and Institutional B-1, (CZD) B-1, R-15 East Single-Family Residential R-15 South Single-Family Residential, Commercial, Undeveloped R-15, R-7, B-1 West US 17 Right-of-Way, Single-Family Residential, Multi- Family Residential, Undeveloped R-15, (CUD) O&I Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 1 Z20-15 Staff Report 9.3.2020 Page 2 of 16 ZONING HISTORY July 6, 1971 Initially zoned R-15 and B-1 (Area 5) COMMUNITY SERVICES Water/Sewer Water and sewer services are available through CFPUA. Specific design will be determined during site plan review. Fire Protection New Hanover County Fire Services, New Hanover County Northern Fire District, New Hanover County Station Porters Neck Schools Porters Neck Elementary, Holly Shelter Middle, and Laney High schools For more information, see the full School statistics below. Recreation Ogden Park CONSERVATION, HISTORIC, & ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Conservation No known conservation resources Historic No known historic resources Archaeological No known archaeological resources Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 2 Z20-15 Staff Report 9.3.2020 Page 3 of 16 APPLICANT’S PROPOSED CONCEPTUAL PLAN  The applicant is proposing to rezone approximately 7.15 acres from R-15 (approximately 6.07 acres) and B-1 (approximately 1.08 acres) to (CZD) RMF-L and (CZD) CB to construct a 60-unit townhome development and a mixture of retail sales, office, and personal services in an 8,000 square foot building. As proposed, the RMF-L portion of the site would be 6.11 acres and the CB portion would be 1.04 acres.  The conceptual plan indicates there will be nine groups of townhomes with three buildings containing nine units each (27 total units), one building containing eight units (8 total units), and five buildings containing five units each (25 total units) for a total of 60 units. Each of the townhome buildings will be two-stories and limited to 35 feet in height. The commercial component of this proposal will be a two-story/8,000 square foot retail sales/office/personal services building and will share access with the residential portion of the site, as well as the Benjamin Moore Paint commercial development to the north. Below: Applicant’s Conceptual Plan with Staff Markups. Connection to Futch Creek Road NOT Proposed Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 3 Z20-15 Staff Report 9.3.2020 Page 4 of 16 Above: Commercial (CB) Component of the Applicant’s Conceptual Plan with Staff Markups Below: Townhome (RMF-L) Component of the Applicant’s Conceptual Plan with Staff Markups Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 4 Z20-15 Staff Report 9.3.2020 Page 5 of 16  According the County’s general watershed data, the downstream outfall of the site flows southeast to a tributary of Futch Creek. If this request is approved, direction of the downstream flow will be verified during the TRC review process when more detailed engineering design is completed. The applicant is proposing to design the stormwater facilities for the project to meet the County’s requirement to a handle a 25-year storm event (≈8 inches of rain over a 24-hour period).  If approved, the applicant will be required to obtain both a State and County Stormwater Permit prior to construction. New Hanover County Engineering will require a Stormwater Authorization-to-Construct and stormwater control measures are required to maintain the pre-development runoff rate for the 2-, 10-, and 25-year storms. In addition, analysis for the 100-year storm is required to verify that no buildings are flooded. Other New Hanover County stormwater requirements will be reviewed and verified during the TRC review process.  The open ditch that currently runs across the northeast portion of the subject site is proposed to be filled and piped to the same discharge point where it currently flows, which is to the east towards a ditch behind the homes on the northern side of New Forest Drive. The applicant has indicated that the proposed stormwater pond’s outfall will also be in this location.  County development regulations require measures to ensure the development does not erode the existing channel. Engineering staff will ensure compliance with these provisions during the technical review and stormwater permitting process if the rezoning is approved. ZONING CONSIDERATIONS  The subject site is currently split zoned. Approximately 6 acres on the eastern side of the site is zoned R-15 and the remaining 1.08 acres along Market Street/US 17 is zoned B-1.  Under the County’s performance residential standards, the current residentially zoned portion of the property (R-15/6.07 acres) would allow up to 15 dwelling units at a maximum density of 2.5 dwelling units per acre (du/ac). The applicant is proposing 60 townhome units on 6.11 acres at a net density of 9.82 du/ac.  The portion of the property zoned B-1 (approximately 1.08 acres) is generally estimated to support about 11,000 square feet of traditional commercial uses (restaurants, offices, and retail establishments) based on a typical 25% building area for this type of zoning. Alternatively, the B-1 portion of the site could be developed residentially if a special use permit is obtained. However, any dwelling units would have to be part of a mixed use development.  A 20-foot opaque bufferyard is required between the townhomes and the abutting single- family housing. Residential Commercial Typical Development under Current Zoning: R-15: 15 Single-Family Dwelling Units B-1: ~11,000 sf Proposed Development: RMF-L: 60 Townhome Dwelling Units CB: 8,000 sf Net Change: +45 Dwelling Units -3,000 sf Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 5 Z20-15 Staff Report 9.3.2020 Page 6 of 16 TRANSPORTATION  Access is provided to the subject property by US 17, just north of Futch Creek Road. As proposed, the commercial and residential uses will share one driveway off US 17. Preliminary NCDOT comments indicate a right turn lane will be required and specific details will be determined during the driveway permitting process. In addition, the applicant has agreed to connect the proposed commercial parking lot to the existing commercial lot to the north (Benjamin Moore Paint).  There is an unimproved private drive on the southwestern portion of the subject property, however, the applicant is not proposing to make this roadway connection to Futch Creek Road. The Market Street driveway is sufficient to meet the UDO requirements and preliminary Fire Services’ comments indicate that driveway is sufficient to meet access and circulation requirements for a development of this scale. The area where another connection could be possible is very narrow which would likely only accommodate one-way traffic. In addition, nearby residents have expressed a preference that a driveway connection is not made to Futch Creek Road. AREA SUBDIVISIONS UNDER DEVELOPMENT Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 6 Z20-15 Staff Report 9.3.2020 Page 7 of 16  Turning movements associated with the proposed driveway are limited to right-in/right-out because of the median along US 17. Motorists leaving the subject site would be required to travel northbound approximately 400 feet to the nearest signalized u-turn.  The portion of the site currently zoned R-15 would be permitted a maximum of 15 dwelling units, which is estimated to generate about 16 trips in both the AM and PM peak hours. Under the proposed RMF-L zoning, 60 townhomes could be constructed on the site, which is estimated to generate about 30 trips in the AM and 38 trips in the PM peak hours.  The expected net difference in traffic associated with residential development would be an increase of 14 AM and 22 PM peak trips when compared to current zoning.  The trips generated from existing B-1 portion of the property would vary based on the commercial use of the site. However, if the B-1 portion of the site was developed with a typical approximate 25% building footprint, an 11,000 square foot shopping center or comparable development could be built and is estimated to generate about 158 AM and 106 PM peak hours. Under the proposed CB zoning, 4,000 square feet of retail and 4,000 square feet of office/personal services is estimated to generate about 25 AM trips and 32 PM trips in the peak hours.  The expected net difference in traffic associated with commercial development would be a decrease of 133 AM and 74 peak trips when compared to current zoning.  The total trips estimated to be generated from the site as currently zoned is about 174 in the AM peak and 122 in the PM peak hours.  This proposed townhome development and retail/office/personal services building is estimated to generate about 55 trips in the AM peak and 70 trip in the PM peak. When comparing the proposed rezoning to the current zoning, the cumulative impact is expected to decrease traffic by 119 trips in the AM and 52 trips in the PM peak.  Any development proposed on the subject site would add traffic to the nearby roadways when compared to the currently undeveloped site, but the proposed townhomes and commercial component are expected to generate fewer trips than if the site was developed under current zoning. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 7 Z20-15 Staff Report 9.3.2020 Page 8 of 16 Intensity Approx. Peak Hour Trips Existing Development: Undeveloped 0 AM / 0 PM Typical Development under Current Zoning: 15 single-family homes 11,000 sf shopping center 174 AM / 122 PM Proposed Development under Proposed RMF-L/CB Zoning: 60 townhome units 4,000 sf of retail 4,000 office/personal services 55 AM / 70 PM Net Change under Proposed RMF-L/CB Zoning: – -119 AM / -52 PM  The recently approved nearby development, The Oaks at Murray Farm, completed a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) which studied intersections within the general area. o That analysis found that the intersection of “Old” Market Street/Futch Creek Road at US 17 will operate at a Level of Service (LOS) C when The Oaks at Murray Farm project is expected to be completed in 2023. In addition, The Oaks at Murray Farm project will install a second right turn lane at the intersection on “Old” Market Street/Futch Creek Road. o The TIA also found that the nearby u-turn lane on US 17 to the north will also operate at a LOS C (AM) and B (PM) when The Oaks at Murray Farm project is completed in 2023. o This analysis generally indicates capacity is available at these intersections and the proposed use is projected to result in a decrease in traffic compared to by-right development under the existing zoning.  A 342-unit mixed-use/Senior Living development was recently considered and recommended for approval by the Planning Board on a site approximately 800 feet south of the subject property along “Old” Market Street/Futch Creek Road. That request is scheduled to be considered by the Board of Commissioners at the September 8, 2020 meeting. Although the mixed-use development would increase the number of units in the vicinity, it is estimated to decrease the trips generated from that site than if the site was developed as currently zoned.  Staff has also provided the volume to capacity ratio for Market Street/US 17 near the subject site. While volume to capacity ratio, based on average daily trips, can provide a general idea of the function of adjacent roadways, the delay vehicles take in seconds to pass through intersections is generally considered a more effective measure when determining the Level of Service of a roadway. NCDOT Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) - 2018 Road Location Volume Capacity V/C US 17 10000 Block (north of Sidbury Road in Pender County) 38,500 31,900 1.21 Market Street 8000 Block (north of Sweetwater Drive) 42,000 43,700 0.96 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 8 Z20-15 Staff Report 9.3.2020 Page 9 of 16 Nearby Planned Transportation Improvements and Traffic Impact Analyses Nearby NC STIP Projects:  STIP Project U-4751 (Military Cutoff Extension) o Project to extend Military Cutoff from Market Street to I-140. o The project is currently under construction and is expected to be completed in late 2022/early 2023. o The project will also install a sidewalk and multi-use path along the extension of Military Cutoff and the sections of Market Street included in the project.  STIP Project U-4902D (Market Street Median) o Project to install a center median and pedestrian accessways along Market Street from Middle Sound Loop Road to Marsh Oaks Drive. The pedestrian accessways will consist of a 10-foot multi-use path on the eastern side of the street, and a 5- foot sidewalk on the western side of the street. o The project is currently under construction and is expected to be completed by early 2023. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 9 Z20-15 Staff Report 9.3.2020 Page 10 of 16 Nearby Traffic Impact Analyses: Traffic Impact Analyses are completed in accordance with the WMPO and NCDOT standards. Approved analyses must be re-examined by NCDOT if the proposed development is not completed by the build out date established within the TIA. Proposed Development Land Use/Intensity* TIA Status 1. The Oaks at Murray Farm  204 Apartments  34 Duplex Units  62 Single-Family Dwellings  Approved December 6, 2019  Full Build 2023 The TIA required improvements be completed at certain intersections in the area. The notable improvements consisted of:  Installation of a second westbound right-turn lane on “Old” Market Street at US 17  Revising signal plan to modify phase at the US 17 and “Old” Market Street intersection. Nearby Proposed Developments included within the TIA:  Waterstone Development Status: No construction has occurred at this time. *The TIA analyzed 406 dwelling units on the subject site. Shown are the 300 units approved by the Board of Commissioners. Proposed Development Land Use/Intensity TIA Status 2. Scotts Hill Medical Park  132,000 sf Office  18,000 sf Medical Office  32,000 sf Shopping Center  9,000 sf Pharmacy with Drive-Through  Approved August 5, 2019  Phase 1 & 2: 2020 Build Out Year  Full Build: 2022 The TIA required improvements be completed at certain intersections in the area. The notable improvements consisted of:  Installation of a northbound U-turn lane on US 17 south of Scott Hill Loop Road.  Installation of a southbound left turn lane on US 17 at Scotts Hill Medical Drive.  Installation of a northbound right turn lane, removal of the barrier from the southbound left turn lane, and signalization of the intersection on US 17 at the site’s southern access point. Nearby Proposed Developments included within the TIA:  Scotts Hill Village  Coastal Prep Academy Development Status: Phase 1 of the medical park has been platted consisting of 3 lots. Currently, one office building is open. No roadway improvements have been completed at this time. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 10 Z20-15 Staff Report 9.3.2020 Page 11 of 16 SCHOOLS  Students generated from this development would be assigned to Porters Neck Elementary, Holly Shelter Middle, and Laney High schools. Students may apply to attend public magnet, year-round elementary, or specialty high schools.  Fifteen dwelling units would be permitted under the current R-15 zoning base density, and 60 units would be allowed under the proposed zoning for an increase of 45 dwelling units  Based on average student generation rates,* there are an average of 0.24 public school students (0.11 for elementary, 0.05 for middle, and 0.08 for high) generated per dwelling unit across New Hanover County. The proposed development can be estimated to generate 14.5 (6.5 elementary, 3.3 middle, and 4.7 high) students, which is approximately 10.9 more than if developed under existing zoning. Development Type Intensity Estimated Student Generation Existing Development Undeveloped Total: 0 (0 elementary, 0 middle, 0 high Typical Development under Current Zoning 15 residential units Total: 3.6 (1.6 elementary, 0.8 middle, 1.2 high) Proposed Development under Proposed (CZD) R-5 Zoning 60 residential units Total: 14.5 (6.5 elementary, 3.3 middle, 4.7 high) *Average student generation rates are calculated by dividing the projected New Hanover County public school student enrollment for the 2020-2021 school year by the estimated number of dwelling units in the county. While different housing types and different locations typically yield different numbers of students, these average generation rates can provide a general guide for the number of students to anticipate. Total projected student enrollment was used, which includes students attending out-of-district specialty schools, such as year-round elementary schools, Isaac Bear, and SeaTECH. School Enrollment* and Capacity**—2021-2022 Estimates *Enrollment is based on projected New Hanover County Schools enrollment for the 2020-2021 school year. **Capacity calculations were determined by New Hanover County Schools for the 2020-2021 school year and are based on NC DPI Facility Guidelines & Class Size Requirements. Modifications refer to specific program requirements unique to a particular school. These may include exceptional children’s classrooms beyond the original building design; classrooms to serve a unique population such as ESL; or classrooms designated for art and music if the building wasn’t specifically designed with those spaces. Level Total NHC % Capacity School Enrollment of Assigned School Capacity of Assigned School w/ Portables % of Capacity of Assigned School Funded Capacity Upgrades Elementary 97% Porters Neck 475 552 86% None Middle 107% Holly Shelter 917 934 98% None High 105% Laney 2063 1903 108% None Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 11 Z20-15 Staff Report 9.3.2020 Page 12 of 16 ENVIRONMENTAL  The property does not contain any Special Flood Hazard Areas or Natural Heritage Areas.  The property is within the Futch Creek (SA;HQW) watershed.  Per the Classification of Soils in New Hanover County for Septic Tank Suitability, soils on the property consist of Class III (severe limitation) soils, however, the site will be served by CFPUA water and sewer. CONTEXT AND COMPATIBILITY  The subject property is located along US 17, just east of the intersection with the I-140 Bypass and the Porters Neck growth node.  The site is immediately adjacent to existing commercial and single-family residential developments fronting US 17. An existing single-family neighborhood also directly abuts the subject site to the east.  The proposed townhome units adjacent to the existing single-family neighborhood are rotated so the ends of the units face these nearby homes to limit the visibility from windows and balconies into the existing neighborhood.  The townhome buildings will be similar to the buildings in the Villages at Plantation Landing south of the subject site.  The proposed townhomes will function as a transition from the high intensity adjacent highway to the existing single-family neighborhood directly abutting the subject site to the east.  The proposed townhome development will be two stories and restricted to the same maximum 35-foot height that applies to the existing and adjacent areas zoned R-15.  The commercial component of the site will share a driveway with an existing commercial development to the north, which consists of two structures that are approximately 7,000 and 4,000 square feet in area. In addition, there is an approximately 2,500 square foot contractor’s office to the immediate south. Representative Developments of RMF-L: Woodlands at Echo Farms Villages at Plantation Landing Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 12 Z20-15 Staff Report 9.3.2020 Page 13 of 16 Sun Coast Condos and Sun Coast Villas off Gordon Road Representative Developments of CB: Benjamin Moore Paint Store off Market Street/US 17 Multi-Tenant Building off Market Street Representative Developments of R-15: Grayson Park Clay Crossing Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 13 Z20-15 Staff Report 9.3.2020 Page 14 of 16 Plantation Landing 2016 COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN The New Hanover County Future Land Use Map provides a general representation of the vision for New Hanover County’s future land use, as designated by place types describing the character and function of the different types of development that make up the community. These place types are intended to identify general areas for particular development patterns and should not be interpreted as being parcel specific. Future Land Use Map Place Type Community Mixed Use Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 14 Z20-15 Staff Report 9.3.2020 Page 15 of 16 Place Type Description Focuses on small-scale, compact, mixed use development patterns that serve all modes of travel and act as an attractor for county residents and visitors. Types of appropriate uses include office, retail, mixed use, recreational, commercial, institutional, and multi-family and single-family residential. Analysis The subject property is located along US 17, just east of the intersection with the I-140 Bypass and the Porters Neck growth node. It is immediately adjacent to existing commercial and single-family residential developments fronting the highway and rear of the property. It also borders the Villages at Plantation Landing townhomes to the south with single-family homes and vacant land to the east. The site is designated as a Community Mixed Use place type, a common designation for areas along major roads, which is intended to provide a transition to lower density residential properties located away from the roadway. The rezoning request consists of a 1.04-acre portion of Community Business zoning located immediately adjacent to US 17 with the remaining 6.11 acres designated as RMF-L zoning located next to existing single-family homes and townhouse neighborhoods. Commercial districts, like CB, are identified as typical zoning categories for uses in the Community Mixed Use place type. The CB zoning would allow for a variety of office, retail, and personal service uses that would be appropriate in this area. The RMF-L zoning includes a townhome component with a moderate project density of 9.8 units per acre, in-line with the preferred density range for the Community Mixed Use place type (up to 15 units per acre). The design of the proposed project supports the transitional nature of the Community Mixed Use place type, locating the two-story commercial building immediately adjacent to the highway and existing commercial uses and limiting the height of the proposed townhomes so they are more in-line with the surrounding single-family and townhome developments. In addition, the increased land use efficiency of the proposed townhouse product supports the Comprehensive Plan’s goal to provide for a range of housing types, opportunities, and choices for households of different sizes and income levels. Consistency Recommendation The proposed conditional RMF-L and CB rezoning is generally CONSISTENT with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because it will provide for the types of retail and office uses recommended for Community Mixed Use areas, the residential densities proposed for the townhome portion of the project are in-line with those suggested for that place type, and the project will provide an appropriate transition between a major highway corridor and existing lower density residential development. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 15 Z20-15 Staff Report 9.3.2020 Page 16 of 16 STAFF RECOMMENDATION The proposed (CZD) RMF-L and (CZD) CB rezoning is generally CONSISTENT with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because the proposed CB portion of the project has potential to provide services to the adjacent residential neighborhoods and could reduce the need to travel on Market Street. The community scale commercial and moderate density residential would provide an orderly transition between existing lower density residential neighborhoods and development adjacent to Market Street, and would align with the Comprehensive Plan’s goal of providing more diversity of housing types. Therefore, staff recommends approval of this application and suggests the following motion: I move to APPROVE the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) RMF-L and (CZD) CB district. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the proposed CB portion of the project will provide for the types of retail and office uses recommended for Community Mixed Use areas, the residential densities proposed for the townhome portion of the project are in-line with those suggested for that place type, and the project will provide an appropriate transition between a major highway corridor and existing lower density residential development. I also find APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal has potential to provide services to the adjacent residential neighborhoods and could reduce the need to travel on Market Street, and would align with the Comprehensive Plan’s goal of providing more diversity of housing types. Alternative Motion for Denial I move to DENY the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) RMF-L and (CZD) CB district. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the proposed CB portion of the project will provide for the types of retail and office uses recommended for Community Mixed Use areas, the residential densities proposed for the townhome portion of the project are in-line with those suggested for that place type, and the project will provide an appropriate transition between a major highway corridor and existing lower density residential development, I find DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is not consistent with the desired character of the surrounding community and the density will adversely impact the adjacent neighborhoods. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 16 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 3 - 1 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 4 - 1 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 5 - 1 APPLICANT MATERIALS Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 6 - 1 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 6 - 2 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 7 - 1 Page 4 of 7 Conditional Zoning District Application – Updated 5/2017 Proposed Zoning, Use(s), & Narrative Proposed Conditional Zoning District: ______________________ Total Acreage of Proposed District: __________ Only uses allowed by right in the corresponding General Use District are eligible for consideration within a Conditional Zoning District. Please list the uses that will be allowed within the proposed Conditional Zoning District, the purpose of the district, and a project narrative (please provide additional pages if needed). ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ Proposed Condition(s) Within a Conditional Zoning District, additional conditions and requirements which represent greater restrictions on the development and use of the property than the corresponding General Use District regulations may be added. These conditions may assist in mitigating the impacts the proposed development may have on the surrounding community. Please list any conditions proposed to be placed on the Conditional Zoning District below. Staff, the Planning Board, and Board of Commissioners may propose additional conditions during the review process. ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ (CZD)RMF-L&(CZD)CB 7.15 AC. (CZD)RMF-L=6.11ACRES/PROPOSESIXTY(60)TWO-STORYATTACHEDTOWNHOMESWITHPARKING& STORMWATERFACILITY. (CZD)CB=1.04ACRES/PROPOSE8000S.F.TWO-STORYCOMMERCIALBUILDINGFORMIXOFRETAIL, OFFICE&PERSONALSERVICESUSESWITHPARKING. **REFERENCESITEPLANFORSITELAYOUT&IMPROVEMENTS Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 7 - 2 Page 5 of 7 Conditional Zoning District Application – Updated 5/2017 Traffic Impact Please provide the estimated number of trips generated for the proposed use(s) based off the most recent version of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) must be completed for all proposed developments that generate more than 100 peak hour trips, and the TIA must be included with this application. ITE Land Use: _________________________________________________________________________________ Trip Generation Use and Variable (gross floor area, dwelling units, etc.): __________________________________ AM Peak Hour Trips: ___________________________ PM Peak Hour Trips: ______________________________ CONSIDERATION OF A CONDITIONAL ZONING DISTRICT The Conditional Zoning District procedure is established to address situations where a particular land use would be consistent with the New Hanover County Land Use Plan and the Zoning Ordinance objective and where only a specific use or uses is proposed. The procedure is intended primarily for use with transitions between zoning districts of very dissimilar character where a particular use or uses, with restrictive conditions to safeguard adjacent land uses, can create a more orderly transition benefiting all affected parties and the community-at-large. The applicant must explain, with reference to attached plans (where applicable), how the proposed Conditional Use Zoning District meets the following criteria. 1. How would the requested change be consistent with the County’s policies for growth and development? (For example: the Comprehensive Plan and applicable small area plans) _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ 2. How would the requested Conditional Zoning District be consistent with the property’s classification on the Future Land Use Map located within the Comprehensive Plan? _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ 3. What significant neighborhood changes have occurred to make the original zoning inappropriate, or how is the land involved unsuitable for the uses permitted under the existing zoning? _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ 4000S.F.RETAIL (820)/4000S.F.OFFICE (710)/60RESIDNETIALTOWNHOME (230) CALCULATEDPERGFA&DWELLINGS 4 /6 /26=3615 /6 /31=42 Thepoliciesforgrowthanddevelopmentencouragesafeandaffordablehousingtobeavailabletoevery citizen.SustainabilityoftheCountydependsonsensiblein-fillandmaximizinguseoflandsalready accessibletoservices. ThetractisidentifiedintheComprehensiveLandUsePlanasaCommunityMixed-useplacetype.Theplan suggestshigherdensitiestosupportthesmall-scale,compactdevelopmentpatternsthattheplacetype promotes.Theproposeddevelopmentisanacceptabletransitionbetweenthebusyhighwaycorridorand themoreestablishedsingle-familyhousingbeyondtheboundaryofthetract. MarketStreet(USHwy17)isamajorthoroughfareofthecommunity.Single-familyresidencesareless attractivealongverybusytrafficcorridors.Transitionofdensityisanacceptableplanningstrategy. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 7 - 3 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 7 - 4 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 7 - 5 Pl a n n i n g B o a r d - S e p t e m b e r 3 , 2 0 2 0 IT E M : 2 - 7 - 6 Pl a n n i n g B o a r d - S e p t e m b e r 3 , 2 0 2 0 IT E M : 2 - 7 - 7 Legal Descriptions for Conditional Zoning Districts  at 8814 Market Street    Rezoning 1.04 acres+/‐ from R‐15 & B‐1 to (CZD) CB:    Beginning at a point in the southeastern boundary of Market Street (U.S. Hwy. 17), a variable width public  right‐of‐way; said point being located approximately 409.5 feet along the boundary from its intersection with  the northeastern boundary of Old Market Street (a.k.a. Futch Creek Road Extension); and running thence with  the Market Street right‐of‐way:    North 42024’57” East, 155.75 feet to a point; thence  South 48001’59” East, 196.60 feet to a point in the southeastern boundary of a 30’ Duke Power  Right‐of‐way; thence  South 44028’37” East, 126.93 feet to a point; thence  South 42034’31” West, 119.60 feet to a point; thence  North 53001’58” West, 324.47 to the point and place of beginning, containing 1.04 acres, more or less.    Rezoning 6.11 acres+/‐ from R‐15 & B‐1 to (CZD) RMF‐L:    Beginning at a point located South 53001’58” East, 324.47 feet from a point in the southeastern boundary of  Market Street (U.S. Hwy. 17), a variable width public right‐of‐way; said point being located approximately  409.5 feet along the boundary from its intersection with the northeastern boundary of Old Market Street  (a.k.a. Futch Creek Road Extension); and running thence with the Market Street right‐of‐way:    North 42034’31” East, 119.60 feet to a point; thence  South 44028’37” East, 50.79 feet to a point; thence  South 47007’47” East, 135.05 feet to a point; thence  South 47020’31” East, 134.59 feet to a point; thence  South 43008’49” West, 236.54 feet to a point; thence  South 46011’17” West, 419.97 feet to a point; thence  South 49041’16” East, 105.47 feet to a point; thence  South 46005’01” West, 40.20 feet to a point; thence  North 49043’30” West, 512.22 feet to a point; thence  North 47027’07” East, 1.28 feet to a point; thence  North 00057’32” West, 33.46 feet to a point; thence  South 51018’49” East, 183.63 feet to a point; thence  North 43004’42” East, 150.37 feet to a point; thence  North 51018’49” West, 100.05 feet to a point; thence  South 43003’39” West, 47.17 feet to a point; thence  North 50054’37” West, 113.33 feet to a point; thence  North 42030’50” East, 242.05 feet to a point; thence  South 52038’43” East, 45.99 feet to a point; thence  North 42037’10” East, 75.22 feet to a point; thence  South 53004’19” East, 124.09 feet to a point; thence  North 42034’31” East, 134.89 feet to the point and place of beginning, containing 6.11 acres, more or less.  Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 7 - 8 REPORT OF COMMUNITY MEETING NOTIFIACTION BY NEW HANOVER COUNTY ZONING ORIDINANCE FOR CONDITIONAL DISTRICT REZONINGS Project Name: The Pinnacle / 8814 Market Street Proposed Zoning: B-1 & R-15 to (CZD) CB & (CZD) RMF-L The undersigned hereby certifies that written notice of a project proposal and an exhibit of the site layout for the above proposed zoning application was sent to the adjacent property owners set forth on the attached list by first class mail, and provided to the Planning Department for notice of the Sunshine List on July 14, 2020. The mailing gave the recipients opportunity to contact us with questions or comments via telephone or email. Copies of the written notices and the site layout are attached. The persons responding were: Reference attached list of contacts received from calls and emails. Date: August 5, 2020 Applicant: Design Solutions By: Cindee Wolf Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 7 - 9 Community Information  Pinacle Townhomes NameAddressEmail (Optional) Voleania Ryan  for Katherine Simmons 106 Foys Trailvoleania.ryan@gmail.com Gregory Bentley8915 Tilbury Dr gsb.emails@gmail.com Cindee WolfProject Planner cwolf@lobodemar.biz Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 7 - 10 Pl a n n i n g B o a r d - S e p t e m b e r 3 , 2 0 2 0 IT E M : 2 - 7 - 1 1 ADJACENT OWNER NAMEMAILING ADDRESSCITY / STATE / ZIPADJACENT PROPERTY SITUS ADDRESS6943 MARKET LLC 2900 MIDDLE SOUND LOOP RD WILMINGTON, NC 28411116 FOYS TRL  WILMINGTONABDULGHANI ISMAILA126 FOYS TRL WILMINGTON, NC 28401126 FOYS TRL  WILMINGTONADAMS LESLIE N117 WHITE STONE PL WILMINGTON, NC 28411117 WHITE STONE PL  WILMINGTON ANDERSON DAVID BEVERLY8916 PLANTATION LANDING DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118916 PLANTATION LANDING DR  WILMINGTON BAILEY KAITLIN B8967 PLANTATION LANDING DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118967 PLANTATION LANDING DR  WILMINGTON BALLARD AYANNA R ETAL122 FOYS TRL WILMINGTON, NC 28405120 FOYS TRL  WILMINGTON BENTLEY GREGORY S ELIZABETH I8915 TILBURY DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118915 TILBURY DR  WILMINGTON BOATWRIGHT ROY LOU ANNE121 WHITE STONE PL WILMINGTON, NC 28411121 WHITE STONE PL  WILMINGTON BOOTH SCOTT RICHARD8928 TILBURY DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118928 TILBURY DR  WILMINGTON BROWN ARNOLD ETAL8763 STEPHENS CHURCH RD WILMINGTON, NC 284118779 STEPHENS CHURCH RD  WILMINGTON BROWN WILLIAM C ETAL6941 WRIGHTVILLE AVE WILMINGTON, NC 284038841 STEPHENS CHURCH RD  WILMINGTON CLAYTON PROPERTIES GROUP INC5000 CLAYTON RD MARYVILLE, TN 37804 VILLAGES AT PLANTATION LANDING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASSN8737 STEPHENS CHURCH RD WILMINGTON, NC 284118737 STEPHENS CHURCH RD  WILMINGTON COXE GERALDINE RICHARDSON109 WHITE STONE PL WILMINGTON, NC 28411109 WHITE STONE PL  WILMINGTON CURBO DAVID M KELLI E8909 PLANTATION LANDING DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118909 PLANTATION LANDING DR  WILMINGTON FIDELITY HOLDING COMPANY LLC8804 MARKET ST WILMINGTON, NC 284118804 MARKET ST  WILMINGTON FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH TRUSTEESPO BOX 751WILMINGTON, NC 284028800 MARKET ST  WILMINGTON FOY DAVID III ETAL8857 STEPHENS CHURCH RD WILMINGTON, NC 284118857 STEPHENS CHURCH RD  WILMINGTON GOODLOW JERRY W REV TRUST ETAL 8931 TILBURY DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118931 TILBURY DR  WILMINGTON GOTTSCHALK BERNARD J ETAL8920 NEW FOREST DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118920 NEW FOREST DR  WILMINGTON GREEN DANIEL LEE DELPHINE RENA8762 MARKET ST WILMINGTON, NC 284118762 MARKET ST  WILMINGTON GREEN JERRY HRS2118 ROBERT E LEE BLV BOSSIER CITY, LA 711128865 STEPHENS CHURCH RD  WILMINGTON GREENE WYONNE H BARBARA300 BUCKHURST DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118786 MARKET ST  WILMINGTON HALL WILLIAM EDWARD JODIE BUTLER8905 NEW FOREST DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118905 NEW FOREST DR  WILMINGTON HINES JIMMIE8845 STEPHENS CHURCH RD WILMINGTON, NC 284118845 STEPHENS CHURCH RD  WILMINGTON HODGES SAMMY R LOREN L 8908 TILBURY DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118908 TILBURY DR  WILMINGTON JOHNSON LARRY E PAULA M8906 NEW FOREST DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118906 NEW FOREST DR  WILMINGTON KIRST JESSICA8912 PLANTATION LANDING DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118912 PLANTATION LANDING DR  WILMINGTON LASKO JUDITH A8963 PLANTATION LANDING DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118963 PLANTATION LANDING DR  WILMINGTON LATTER GERALD M PAMELA S8915 NEW FOREST DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118915 NEW FOREST DR  WILMINGTON LOWMAN CONRAD KAREN8537 BALD EAGLE LN WILMINGTON, NC 284118871 STEPHENS CHURCH RD  WILMINGTON MARTINEZ LORENZO LEA BARTOLOME2119 BRANDON RD WILMINGTON, NC 284058790 MARKET ST  WILMINGTON MCINTYRE DORTHA DAVID L SR216 ROCKAWAY AVE APT 8EBROOKLYN, NY 112338834 MARKET ST  WILMINGTON MCINTYRE MARY L PIERCE129 MCINTYRE TRL WILMINGTON, NC 28405129 MCINTYRE TRL  WILMINGTON MCMILLAN EUGENE LORETTA8833 STEPHENS CHURCH RD WILMINGTON, NC 284118837 STEPHENS CHURCH RD  WILMINGTON MOORE LISA D8951 PLANTATION LANDING DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118951 PLANTATION LANDING DR  WILMINGTON MOYA RAQIBA126 FOYS TRL WILMINGTON, NC 28411220 FOYS TRL  WILMINGTON MURRAY GEORGE L HENRIETTA8759 STEPHENS CHURCH RD WILMINGTON, NC 284058759 STEPHENS CHURCH RD  WILMINGTON NIXON BESSIE F ETAL 8830 MARKET ST WILMINGTON, NC 284118830 MARKET ST  WILMINGTON NIXON LIZZIE B119 FOYS TRL WILMINGTON, NC 28411119 FOYS TRL  WILMINGTON OLSEN MARC V CYNTHIA8905 TILBURY DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118905 TILBURY DR  WILMINGTON PADULA ROBERT M LORA B8919 TILBURY DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118919 TILBURY DR  WILMINGTON PALESE MATTHEW KATHLEEN8905 PLANTATION LANDING DR WILMINGTON, NC 284058905 PLANTATION LANDING DR  WILMINGTON POSTEL KEVIN T KATHLEEN G8955 PLANTATION LANDING DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118955 PLANTATION LANDING DR   PRIDGEN BERNICE HRS8801 STEPHENS CHURCH RD WILMINGTON, NC 284058801 STEPHENS CHURCH RD  WILMINGTON PRIDGEN LEROY JR HEIRS8805 STEPHENS CHURCH RD WILMINGTON, NC 284058805 STEPHENS CHURCH RD  WILMINGTON RAWLINGS KATHY I8910 NEW FOREST DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118910 NEW FOREST DR  WILMINGTON REDDICK HERBERT ETAL265 RIDGE CIRCLE RD HENDERSON, NC 27537 8802 MARKET ST  WILMINGTON REDLAND DEVELOPMENT INC6622 GORDON RD WILMINGTON, NC 284058814 MARKET ST  WILMINGTON RIGGINS MICHELLE APO BOX 11079WILMINGTON, NC 28404 8856 MARKET ST  WILMINGTON SATTERFIELD ANTHONY R DIANE S8904 PLANTATION LANDING DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118904 PLANTATION LANDING DR  WILMINGTON SCHUMAN ZACHARY ASHLEY H8909 TILBURY DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118909 TILBURY DR  WILMINGTON SHUPING MARY B TRUSTEE8743 NEW FOREST DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118915 PLANTATION LANDING DR  WILMINGTON SIMMONS KATHERINE3329 WILTON DR SUMPTER, SC 29150 SMALLWOOD BRANDON  MELANIE8900 TILBURY DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118900 TILBURY DR  WILMINGTON SMITH EDWARD L LUCI M8909 NEW FOREST DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118909 NEW FOREST DR  WILMINGTON ST STEPHENS AME CHURCH8799 STEPHENS CHURCH RD WILMINGTON, NC 284058799 STEPHENS CHURCH RD  WILMINGTON STAINBACK LYNDSEY M CHRISTOPHER8923 TILBURY DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118923 TILBURY DR  WILMINGTON STUART EDWIN T AMY C8927 TILBURY DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118927 TILBURY DR  WILMINGTON TWOMEY EDWARD A SR EILEEN17 GREEN HILLS RD LONG VALLEY, NJ 078538908 PLANTATION LANDING DR  WILMINGTON VALE MILENE OMAR M8916 NEW FOREST DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118916 NEW FOREST DR  WILMINGTON VIOREL JOHN C AILEEN W8935 TILBURY DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118935 TILBURY DR  WILMINGTON WALKER ELIZA JANE HRS1621 ANN ST WILMINGTON, NC 284018846 MARKET ST  WILMINGTON WALSH HENRY101 HUGHES RD HAMPSTEAD, NC 28443113 FOYS TRL  WILMINGTON WARD FRANK J III STACY R8936 TILBURY DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411220 CREEKWOOD RD  WILMINGTON WARD FRANK J STACY8936 TILBURY DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118936 TILBURY DR  WILMINGTON WHEELER BRIAN T DEBORAH8904 TILBURY DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118904 TILBURY DR  WILMINGTON WHITLEY CHARLES J ASHLEY B8919 NEW FOREST DR WILMINGTON, NC 284118919 NEW FOREST DR  WILMINGTON YOUNTS AVERY HAYWARD DEBRA WYNNE ROBBINS113 WHITE STONE PL WILMINGTON, NC 28411113 WHITE STONE PL  WILMINGTON Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 7 - 12 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 7 - 13 Pl a n n i n g B o a r d - S e p t e m b e r 3 , 2 0 2 0 IT E M : 2 - 7 - 1 4 PROPOSED SITE PLAN Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 8 - 1 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 8 - 2 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 9 - 1 OPPOSITION MATERIALS Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 10 - 1 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 10 - 2 Gregory Bentley 8915 Tilbury Drive Wilmington, NC 28411 August 26, 2020 New Hanover County Planning Board Donna Girardot, Chair Paul D. Boney, Vice Chair Ernest W. Olds Jeffrey B. Petroff H. Allen Pope Thomas “Jordy” Rawl Colin J. Tarrant Re: Item 2, September 3, 2020 Planning Board Meeting – Rezoning Request (Z20-15), Re- quest by Design Solutions on behalf of property owner Redland Development Corporation to rezone 7.15 acres of land located at 8814 Market Street, from R-15 and B-1 zoning to (CZD) RMF-L, Residential Multi-Family Low Density District and (CZD) CB, in order to develop 60 attached townhomes Dear Planning Board Members: This letter speaks in opposition to the captioned rezoning request (the “Rezoning Re- quest”) for the property described above (the “Redland Property”). It is submitted on behalf of the following homeowners on Tilbury Drive, New Forest Drive and Plantation Landing Drive in the Plantation Landing neighborhood, all of whom have homes adjacent to or near the Redland Property or on Futch Creek, which will be materially ad- versely affected by the Rezoning Request: • Gregory and Elizabeth Bentley, 8915 Tilbury Drive • Eddie and Amy Stuart, 8927 Tilbury Drive • Chris and Lindsey Stainback, 8923 Tilbury Drive • Cam and Angie Israel, 8919 Tilbury Drive • Kevin Davidson, 8909 Tilbury Drive • Larry and Gay Johnson, 8906 New Forest Drive • Milene and Omar Carvalho, 8916 New Forest Drive • Jeff and Stacy Ward, 8936 Tilbury Drive • Scott and Stephanie Booth, 8928 Tilbury Drive • Nick Romano, 511 Sagewood Drive • David Anderson, 8916 Plantation Landing Drive Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 11 - 1 2 We request that the Planning Board reject or, in the absence of a rejection, at least make a modification of the Rezoning Request, for the following reasons: Breach of the General Purposes and Intent Requirements of the UDO The Rezoning Request, as submitted, is inconsistent with the express purposes and intent of the Unified Development Ordinance (“UDO”) adopted by the County Board of Commission- ers and therefore must be denied, as filed. Specifically, the Rezoning Request does not satisfy the express standards of Section 3.2.1 of the UDO and therefore the current application, as written and unamended, should be denied in its entirety. UDO Section 3.2.1 (page 3-13 of the UDO) states the purposes and intent of the UDO, generally: "The residential zoning districts are intended to: (A) provide appropriately located ar- eas for residential development that are consistent with ... the public health, safety and gen- eral welfare; (B) Ensure adequate ... privacy for all dwelling units; [and] (E) Protect resi- dential districts from flooding...", among other intents. The Rezoning Request violates the bolded purposes and intents of the UDO. The pro- posed development would materially increase the risk of erosion and flooding along Futch Creek and in the lower parts of Plantation Landing. In addition, the proposed development should pro- vide increased widths of its plant buffers, to ensure adequate privacy and to reduce the increased traffic noise from US-17 resulting from removal of so many trees on the developed property be- tween our neighborhood and US-17. Creation of Additional Erosion and Downstream Flooding The Rezoning Request creates the probability that there will be substantially increased erosion and flow of storm water into the Futch Creek gully and risks of flooding, especially in homes in the lower elevations of Plantation Landing into which Futch Creek flows, without ade- quate measures to avoid this predictable result. The upper end of Futch Creek, a 15-foot deep gully that extends from the Redland Prop- erty down to the lower parts of the Plantation Landing, has suffered significant erosion of its banks in the past when hurricanes and major storms have occurred in the area. Furthermore, as Futch Creek approaches the lower parts of our neighborhood, flooding of properties up to their garage doors in Plantation Landing have occurred in past hurricanes, but not (yet) so much as to flood the houses themselves. The following two photographs show the current erosion in the Futch Creek gully, and one of them shows how close some of the homes on New Forest Drive and Tilbury Drive are to the gully: Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 11 - 2 3 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 11 - 3 4 The following photograph shows the extent of flooding of some of the properties in the lower elevations of Plantation Landing after heavy storms that would be materially worsened by increased storm water coming from an inadequate stormwater retention pond and substantially increased impervious surfaces on the Redland Property: The Rezoning Request proposes to add only a 25-year detention pond capable of han- dling only 8 inches of rain in a day’s storm before overflowing into the top end of Futch Creek. It also proposes to install a culvert under the Redland Property to replace the current feeder gully on the Redland Property transporting surface water from near US-17, dumping it into the top end of Futch Creek at the gully’s location. The Redland Property will also remove a majority of the trees currently on the 6.43 acre residential portion of the development property and create a surface that is 67.5% impermeable in nature (according of the developer’s application). We all know that our area routinely and predictably is hit every year or two by hurri- canes, tropic storms and “rain bombs” and thunderstorms dropping multiple inches of rain in brief periods. In New Hanover County, we all know that we will predictably get substantially more water than 8 inches per day in storms with some frequency. We also know that rather than much of it soaking in to the ground below the trees and bushes on the property today, at least two-thirds of it will now flow into a detention pond that is known will not – indeed, cannot by its very design – prevent substantial additional storm water from flowing into Futch Creek in major storms. This substantial additional storm water flow will predictably increase the erosion throughout the length of Futch Creek and worsen the risk of flooding in the lower parts of Plan- tation Landing. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 11 - 4 5 Moreover, the new culvert under the Redland Property would also permit faster flows of the transported water from the other side of the property, and thus permit the water to emerge from the culvert in more of a faster, “firehose” effect, again worsening erosion in the Futch Creek gully. While the developer has advised the neighbors on a recent call that the County would require the use of water-calming methods to the end or inside of the culvert, it was not prepared to provide any details on what would be installed at or in the culvert to give us assur- ance that the water flowing out of the culvert will not further erode the banks of the Futch Creek gully. To prevent such negative impacts and harm to many of our homeowners along the Futch Creek gully and in the lower parts of Plantation Landing, the Rezoning Request would need to (a) install at least a 100-year detention pond in the Redland Property and (b) commit to designing into the culvert adequate “water calming” design features to ensure that the rate of flow out of the culvert was the same as the rate of flow currently occurring in the gully transporting water across the Redland Property and will not impact the sides of the gully. This would be consistent with another recent precedent by the Planning Board when it approved the rezoning of the recent The Oaks at Murray Hill development project with such a 100-year detention pond. Conclusion Just because Redland Development Corporation asks for a change in zoning does not mean that it is entitled to one. While in an ideal world, we would be happiest if the Redland Property was left in its tree- covered condition, we do recognize that development of the property will happen. We do not object to the property being developed for multi-family use with the proposed two-story town- homes approach – provided that (a) more effective steps are taken to prevent increased storm water flows in the Futch Creek gully and the lower parts of Plantation Landing that would increase erosion and flooding in our neighborhood and (b) it has a thicker plant buffer fac- ing Tilbury, New Forest and Plantation Landing Drives. We therefore request that the Planning Board do the following with respect to the Rezon- ing Request: 1. Either deny the Rezoning Request, as submitted, in its entirety as inconsistent with the UDO’s terms, especially UDO Section 3.2.1; or 2. In the alternative, require that the Rezoning Request: a. Require that a 100-year detention pond is used to more effectively prevent ad- ditional erosion and flooding in the Futch Creek gully and lower elevations of Plantation Landing neighborhood.1 1 We note that this action is also in the developer’s interest, since the inadequacy of the 25-year detention pond under the likely circumstances discussed in this letter has now been “noticed” to the developer and the future owner of the buildings, and ensuring a more adequate detention pond will reduce the risks of Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 11 - 5 6 b. Require that the developer commit to installing strong “flow-calming” struc- tures into the cross-property storm water transfer culvert, to avoid a “firehose” effect of such water as it comes out into the top of the Futch Creek gully. c. Increase the planted buffer along the border along the Plantation Landing neighborhood from 20 feet to 35-50 feet, in order to (i) provide better screen- ing between the Redland Property and the homes on Tilbury, New Forest and Plantation Landing Drives, (ii) reduce the increased traffic noise from US-17 resulting from the removal of a majority of trees on the developed property, and (iii) have the secondary benefit of providing some additional natural habi- tat for the hawks’ nest and other animal species. • At least 8 feet of this additional buffer could come from eliminating the six parallel parking spaces next to Units ##10 and 11, and adding the 8 feet of existing-growth trees to the buffer. (Elimination of the six parking spaces would leave the fire road adjacent to these units un- changed and would leave the development with 132 parking spaces, well in excess of the required number of parking spaces (120 parking spaces, as noted on the developer’s plan).) d. Protect the tree on the back side of the property near Tilbury Drive containing the existing nest for the red-shouldered hawk family that has been living in that tree for many years. 3. We would also request the developer to conduct a full ecological survey (e.g., with Andy Woods, formerly of the Audubon Society) to identify and relocate any turtles, reptiles and animals (i.e., other than the undisturbed hawks) that will be displaced to other protected properties. I am requesting the opportunity to address the Planning Board on this matter on Septem- ber 3, 2020, on behalf of the homeowners listed on page 1 of this letter. Very truly yours, Gregory Bentley 8915 Tilbury Drive Wilmington, NC 28411 cc: New Hanover County Planning Department Wayne Clark, Planning and Land Use Director Brad Schuler, Senior Planner future litigation when flooding and erosion are worsened in the future by the use of an inadequate deten- tion pond of which it has been advised. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 2 - 11 - 6 NEW HANOVER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION MEETING DATE: 9/3/2020 Regular DEPARTMENT: Planning PRESENTER(S): Marty Lile, Long Range Planner CONTACT(S): Marty Lile; Brad Schuler, Senior Planner; Wayne Clark, Planning & Land Use Director SUBJECT: Quasi-Judicial Hearing Special Use Permit Request (S-603M) - Request by the Law Offices of Ma9hew A. Nichols on behalf of the property owner, Planta<on Village Inc., to modify the Special Use Permit for the Planta<on Village Con<nuing Care Re<rement Community to allow for the redevelopment of the eastern por<on of the community and to increase the maximum number of units to 300. BRIEF SUMMARY: The applicant is seeking to modify the Special Use Permit for the Planta$on Village Con$nuing Care Re$rement Community in order to allow for the redevelopment of the eastern por$on of the community and to increase the maximum number of units to 300. The subject site is located east of The Davis Community, and is zoned R-20. Planta$on Village was originally approved in the early 1980s. A5er several modifica$ons to the facility over the years, it currently includes 247 units (4.5 du/ac) within apartment buildings, quadplexes, duplexes, and coages, and associated ameni$es. As proposed, the special use permit modifica$on involves the demoli$on of three exis$ng apartment buildings, eight quadplexes, and several accessory structures. Thirteen new apartment buildings would be constructed on the site, ranging from 45’ to 50’ in height. The net result is an increase of 53 independent-living units. The total number of units proposed is 300 and total density is 5.4 units per acre for the overall site. The applicant’s traffic consultant, Davenport Engineering, has provided a Technical Memorandum to assess the number of projected peak hour trips and any related traffic impacts. As proposed, the expansion is es$mated to generate 23 peak hour AM trips and 32 peak hour PM trips, which is not expected to change the level of service for any of the nearby intersec$ons. Planta$on Village has been in opera$on since the 1980s, has direct access to a collector road, and will have minimal impact to traffic and schools due to the age-restric$on. The site is located adjacent to a similar senior living community and two private recrea$onal uses (Porters Neck Planta$on and the Eagle Point golf courses), and abuts exis$ng single-family residences to the north. The exis$ng buffer will remain adjacent to the single-family homes and the proposed structures will exceed the required 50' setback. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan classifies the site as General Residen$al. This classifica$on focuses on lower-density housing and associated civic and commercial services. Recommended densi$es in this place type range up to 8 du/ac. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Example Mo<on for Approval: Mo$on to recommend approval, as the Board finds that this applica$on for a Special Use Permit modifica$on meets the four required conclusions based on the findings of fact included in the Staff Report. [OPTIONAL] Note any addi$onal findings of fact related to the four required conclusions. [OPTIONAL] Note any condi$ons be added to the development: [List Condi$ons] Example Mo<on for Denial: Mo$on to recommend denial, as the Board cannot find that this proposal: 1. Will not materially endanger the public health or safety; 2. Meets all required condi$ons and specifica$ons of the Unified Development Ordinance; 3. Will not substan$ally injure the value of adjoining or abuJng property; 4. Will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in general conformity with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for New Hanover County. [State the finding(s) that the applicaon does not meet and include reasons why it is not being met] COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (only Manager) Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 SCRIPT for SPECIAL USE PERMIT Application (S-603M) Request by the Law Offices of Matthew A. Nichols on behalf of the property owner, Plantation Village Inc., to modify the Special Use Permit for the Plantation Village Continuing Care Retirement Community to allow for the redevelopment of the eastern portion of the community and to increase the maximum number of units to 300. 1. Swear witnesses: Announce that “the Special Use Permit process requires a quasi-judicial hearing; therefore, any person wishing to testify must be sworn in. All persons who signed in to speak and wish to present competent and material testimony please step forward to be sworn in. Thank you.” 2. This is a quasi-judicial hearing. We will hear a presentation from staff. Then the applicant and any opponents will each be allowed 15 minutes for their presentation and additional 5 minutes for rebuttal. 3. Conduct hearing, as follows: a. Staff presentation b. Applicant’ s presentation (up to 15 minutes) c. Opponent’s presentation (up to 15 minutes) d. Applicant’s cross examination/rebuttal (up to 5 minutes) e. Opponent’s cross examination/rebuttal (up to 5 minutes) 4. Close the hearing 5. Board discussion 6. Ask Applicant whether he/she agrees with staff findings. 7. Vote on the Special Use Permit application. Motion to approve the permit - All findings are positive. Motion to approve the permit, subject to conditions specified below: (State Conditions) _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ Motion to deny the permit because the Board cannot find: a. That the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety if located where proposed for the following reason: __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ b. That the use meets all required condition and specifications: __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 1 - 1 c. That the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property, or that the use is a public necessity: __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ d. That the location and character of the use if developed according to the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in general conformity with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for New Hanover County: __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ Example Motion for Approval: Motion to approve, as the Board finds that this application for a Special Use Permit modification meets the four required conclusions based on the findings of fact included in the Staff Report. [OPTIONAL] Note any additional findings of fact related to the four required conclusions. [OPTIONAL] Also, that the following conditions be added to the development: Suggested Condition(s): None Example Motion for Denial: Motion to deny, as the Board cannot find that this proposal: 1. Will not materially endanger the public health or safety; 2. Meets all required conditions and specifications of the Unified Development Ordinance; 3. Will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property; 4. Will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in general conformity with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for New Hanover County. [State the finding(s) that the application does not meet and include reasons to why it is not being met] Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 1 - 2 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 1 of 20 STAFF REPORT FOR S-603M SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION APPLICATION APPLICATION SUMMARY Case Number: S-603M Request: Modification to existing SUP to renovate and expand a Senior Living: Continuing Care Retirement Community in the R-20, Residential District from 247 dwelling units to 300 dwelling units Applicant: Property Owner(s): Plantation Village, Inc. Plantation Village, Inc. Location: Acreage: 1200 Porters Neck Rd. 55.51 acres PID(s): Comp Plan Place Type: R03700-002-002-002 R03700-002-011-000 R03700-002-012-000 R03700-002-013-000 R03700-002-014-000 R03700-002-015-000 General Residential Existing Land Use: Proposed Land Use: Continuing Care Retirement Community Continuing Care Retirement Community Current Zoning: R-20 SURROUNDING AREA LAND USE ZONING North Single-Family Residential (Porters Neck Plantation) R-20 East Golf Course, Single-Family Residential (Porters Neck Plantation) R-20 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 1 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 2 of 20 South Golf Course (Eagle Point Golf Club), Undeveloped R-20 West Continuing Care Retirement Community (The Davis Community), Undeveloped (CUD) R-20, R-20 ZONING HISTORY July 6, 1971 Initially zoned R-20 (Porters Neck), Area 5 August 1, 1983 SUP granted for Nursing and Personal Care Facility (S-211) April 1, 1991 SUP Modification granted for site revisions to reduce the number of dwelling units and increase acreage September 7, 1993 SUP Modification granted for site plan revisions to remove a driveway August 5, 1996 SUP Modification granted for site plan revisions to reduce the number of dwelling units and increase acreage April 5, 2004 SUP Modification granted for site plan revisions to add maintenance building June 6, 2011 New SUP granted for Continuing Care Retirement Community (supersedes S-211) to construct a new apartment building, two duplexes, and two cottages COMMUNITY SERVICES Water/Sewer Water and sewer will be provided by CFPUA. Specific design will be determined during site plan review. Fire Protection New Hanover County Fire Services, New Hanover County Northern Fire District, New Hanover County Station Porters Neck Schools Porters Neck Elementary, Holly Shelter Middle, Laney High Schools (No impacts expected due to age-restriction for senior housing) Recreation Pages Creek Preserve, Ogden Park Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 2 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 3 of 20 CONSERVATION, HISTORIC, & ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Conservation The County’s Conservation Resources Map indicates that swamp forests may be present on the site. Conservation space is required for swamp forest wetlands when at least five acres of the resource exists on the property. Preliminary analysis indicates that fewer than 5 acres exist on the site. Verification of regulated swamp forests will be required during the site plan review process. Historic No known historic resources Archaeological No known archaeological resources EXISTING CONDITIONS & PROPOSED CONCEPTUAL PLAN  The applicant is seeking to obtain a special use permit modification to renovate and expand a Continuing Care Retirement Community in the R-20 zoning district. Existing Conditions & Proposed Demolition Scope (Includes Staff Markups) Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 3 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 4 of 20  Plantation Village was originally approved as a special use permit for a Nursing and Personal Care Facility in 1983. This original approval included the construction of 252 units, a health center, and commons building, on approximately 41.4 acres. The Board approved four subsequent modifications to the original special use permit in 1991, 1993, 1996, and 2004, resulting in several changes to the property, including the site’s current size of 55.5 acres and contractual nursing service arrangement with The Davis Community.  In 2011, Plantation Village was granted a new special use permit for a Continuing Care Retirement Community. This permit, extinguishing the original 1983 approval and four subsequent modifications, resulted in the construction of an additional 33 independent-living units (3-story apartment building, two duplexes, and two cottages), 60 additional parking spaces, and a new wellness center and auditorium. The special use permit also authorized the renovation of the exterior and interior of the Commons Building and Commons parking layout.  The current use of the campus includes 247 independent-living units, made up of 3-story apartment buildings, quadplexes, duplexes, and cottages. The current overall density of the site is 4.45 units per acre. The campus also includes a centralized Commons Building, Residential Care Center that provides 24/7 nurse availability for residents, Wellness Center with indoor pool and fitness center, maintenance building, and indoor and outdoor recreational amenities. Existing Apartment (to be removed) Existing Quadplexes (to be removed)  As proposed, the special use permit modification involves the demolition of three existing apartment buildings, eight quadplexes, and several accessory structures. These structures would then be replaced by 13 new apartment buildings ranging from 45’ to 50’ in height. The net result is an increase of 53 independent-living units. The total number of units proposed is 300 and total density is 5.4 units per acre for the overall site. Net Change in Dwelling Units # of Units Density (du/acre) Current Total 247 4.45 Demo -136 -- Replacement +189 -- Proposed Total 300 5.4 Net Change: +53 units Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 4 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 5 of 20  The modification also includes a new road addition connecting the east and west sides of the property; enhancement to existing indoor amenity spaces; replacement of a 1,590 square foot hobby shop; relocation and expansion of a 6,092 square foot maintenance building; and new outdoor amenities. Conceptual Site Plan (Includes Staff Markups)  The majority of the renovation and expansion work will take place on the eastern half of the property. In order to allow existing residents to remain on the property throughout construction, the development will occur over three phases. The total number of units on the site is expected to temporarily exceed 300 and be up to a total of 330 during Phases 1 and 2 to allow all current residents to stay in a unit on-site until new units are available. The maximum number of units at project completion will be 300.  Infrastructure modifications, including the street connection and stormwater improvements, are slated to be included in Phase 1. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 5 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 6 of 20 Project Phasing Plan (Includes Staff Markups)  The existing stormwater infrastructure includes a retention pond located in the center of the campus and a retention pond along the southeastern corner. Two new stormwater facilities are proposed in the northeastern portion of the project area.  New outdoor amenities include two pickleball courts, a dog park, a community garden area, gazebo, and new water features. ZONING CONSIDERATIONS  The applicant is not proposing a change in the use of the property, which will remain a Senior Living: Continuing Care Retirement Community and is allowed in the R-20 district with a Special Use Permit.  Unified Development Ordinance standards for Continuing Care Retire Communities include height, setbacks, open space, buffers, and parking requirements. The applicant has addressed general compliance with these standards as demonstrated by the conceptual site Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 6 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 7 of 20 plan and project narrative (Applicant Exhibit A). A full review of these standards will be conducted by the Technical Review Committee should the SUP modification application be approved. AREA SUBDIVISIONS UNDER DEVELOPMENT TRANSPORTATION  Access to the site is provided by the development’s existing private street, Plantation Village Drive, which directly connects onto Porters Neck Road, a state-maintained Minor Collector road. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 7 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 8 of 20 Access to Plantation Village  An additional service access is provided by Jeanelle Moore Blvd, which is located approximately 1,200 feet from Porters Neck Road along Champ Davis Road. This access serves as the main point of ingress and egress for nursing care service trips supplied by the Davis Community. It is gated and, according to the applicant, allows emergency responder use as well as resident access.  According to the applicant, delivery vehicles will utilize the main access onto Porters Neck Road, and additional supplies and refuse will be included in the current number of deliveries and pick-ups. Plantation Village staff work on a variety of shifts, but there is no major shift change during the traditional AM and PM peak traffic hours. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 8 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 9 of 20 Porters Neck Road Entrance Jeanelle Moore Blvd Gate  The applicant’s traffic consultant, Davenport Engineering, has provided a Technical Memorandum to assess the number of projected peak hour trips and any related traffic impacts. As proposed, the expansion is estimated to generate 23 peak hour AM trips and 32 peak hour PM trips, which is not expected to change the level of service for any of the nearby intersections. Comparison of Trip Generation Scenarios - Source: Davenport Technical Memorandum Intensity Approx. Peak Hour Trips Existing Development: 247 senior adult housing units 55 AM / 69 PM Proposed Development: 300 senior adult housing units 78 AM / 101 PM Net Change: +23 AM / +32 PM  As the number of anticipated trips does not equal or exceed 100 peak hour trips for this modification, a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) is not required. However, the applicant’s Technical Memorandum concludes that the proposed expansion will have relatively minimal impact on nearby road capacity, with no queueing issues at nearby intersections and less than a second increase in delay. No improvements are recommended by Davenport Engineering. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 9 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 10 of 20 Intersections studied in the Davenport Technical Memorandum  The applicant’s Technical Memorandum analyzed potential traffic impacts of the project at the Porters Neck roundabout, intersection of Porters Neck Road and Champ Davis Road, and the Plantation Village entrance onto Porters Neck Road, in order to identify transportation improvements that may be required to accommodate the impacts of both background traffic and new development traffic. The report found that the proposed development is not expected to lower the level of service of any of the studied intersections, nor increase the delay of any studied intersection by more than 0.3 seconds per vehicle.  Staff has provided the volume to capacity ratio for nearby sections of Porters Neck Road. While volume to capacity ratio, based on average daily trips, can provide a general idea of the function of adjacent roadways, the delay vehicles take in seconds to pass through intersections is generally considered a more effective measure when determining the Level of Service of a roadway. However, the available volume to capacity data indicates capacity currently exists in this area to support the expected additional traffic. NCDOT Average Annual Daily Traffic (2018 AADT) – Source: WMPO Road Location Volume Capacity V/C Porters Neck Road West of Porters Neck Road roundabout 14,500 17,000 0.85 Porters Neck Road East of Porters Neck Road roundabout 4,100 12,500 0.33 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 10 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 11 of 20 Nearby Planned Transportation Improvements and Traffic Impact Analyses Nearby NC STIP Projects:  STIP Project U-4751 (Military Cutoff Extension) o Project to extend Military Cutoff from Market Street to I-140. o The project is currently under construction and is expected to be completed by early 2023. o The project will also install a sidewalk and multi-use path along the extension of Military Cutoff and the sections of Market Street included in the project.  STIP Project U-4902D (Market Street Median) o Project to install a center median and pedestrian accessways along Market Street from Middle Sound Loop Road to Marsh Oaks Drive. The pedestrian accessways will consist of a 10-foot multi-use path on the eastern side of the street, and a 5- foot sidewalk on the western side of the street. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 11 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 12 of 20 o The project is currently under construction and is expected to be completed by early 2023. Nearby Traffic Impact Analyses: Traffic Impact Analyses are completed in accordance with the WMPO and NCDOT standards. Approved analyses must be re-examined by NCDOT if the proposed development is not completed by the build out date established within the TIA. Proposed Development Land Use/Intensity TIA Status 1. The Oaks at Murray Farm*  204 Apartments  34 Duplex Units  62 Single-Family Dwellings  Approved August 5, 2019  Phase 1 & 2: 2020 Build Out Year  Full Build 2022 The TIA required improvements be completed at certain intersections in the area. The notable improvements consisted of:  Installation of a second westbound right-turn lane on “Old” Market Street at Hwy 17  Revising signal plan to modify phase at the Hwy 17 and “Old” Market Street intersection. Nearby Proposed Developments included within the TIA:  Waterstone Development Status: No construction has occurred at this time. *The TIA analyzed 406 dwelling units on the subject site. Shown are the 300 units approved by the Board of Commissioners. Proposed Development Land Use/Intensity TIA Status 2. Waterstone  151 Single-Family Dwellings  Approved June 18, 2015  2020 Build Out Year The TIA required improvements be completed at certain intersections in the area. The notable improvements consisted of:  Installation of a southbound right turn lane on Edgewater Club Road at the site’s northern access. Nearby Proposed Developments included within the TIA:  Porters Neck Elementary Development Status: 98 lots have been platted at this time. The right turn lane has been installed. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 12 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 13 of 20 ENVIRONMENTAL  The property does not contain any Natural Heritage Areas or Special Flood Hazard Area.  The western, northern, and eastern portions of the site fall within the Futch Creek (SA, HQW) watershed, while the southern and central portions of the site drain into the Intracoastal Waterway.  Per the Classification of Soils in New Hanover County for Septic Tank Suitability, soils on the property consist of Class I (suitable/slight limitations), Class II (moderate limitations) and Class III (severe limitations) soils, however, the project will connect to CFPUA sewer services. CONTEXT AND COMPATIBILITY  The subject property has been used as an independent senior living community since 1983.  The site is located immediately east of The Davis Community, a senior living facility of approximately 67.38 acres that has operated in the Porters Neck community for 53 years. The Davis Community site contains a 3-story 35’ assisted living structure. In June 2020, the Davis Community obtained a Conditional Use District rezoning to allow an expansion of its campus, including a four-story 50’ tall multi-family building.  The subject property is also adjacent to two private recreation uses: the Porters Neck Plantation golf course and maintenance facility to the east, and the Eagle Point Golf Club to the south.  The northern property boundary abuts approximately 18 single-family dwellings of the Porters Neck Plantation, which will be screened by the 20-foot vegetative, opaque buffer required by the UDO. Existing Vegetative Buffer along Northern Property Boundary  The conceptual site plan for Plantation Village positions the 3-story buildings away from the existing single-family dwellings to the north (the nearest of which is approximately 270’ away from the northern property line) and further south adjacent to the golf courses. This locates the 2-story buildings and the nonresidential structures closest to the homes. All of the proposed buildings will exceed the minimum setback requirements of the UDO.  Senior living retirement communities generally generate less traffic than non-age restricted residential developments.  Senior living retirement communities generally do not impact the school system. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 13 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 14 of 20 Plantation Village Plantation Village Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 14 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 15 of 20 Representative Developments of Senior Living Projects: Carolina Bay at Autumn Hall Brightmore Brightmore Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 15 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 16 of 20 Plantation Village (Southern apartment building - to remain) Representative Developments of R-20: Emerald Forest Emerald Forest Vineyard Plantation Middle Point Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 16 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 17 of 20 Middle Point 2016 COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN The New Hanover County Future Land Use Map provides a general representation of the vision for New Hanover County’s future land use, as designated by place types describing the character and function of the different types of development that make up the community. These place types are intended to identify general areas for particular development patterns and should not be interpreted as being parcel specific. Future Land Use Map Place Type General Residential Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 17 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 18 of 20 Place Type Description Focuses on lower-density housing and associated civic and commercial services. Typically, housing is single-family or duplexes. Commercial uses should be limited to strategically located office and retail spaces, while recreation and school facilities are encouraged throughout. Types of uses include single-family residential, low-density multi-family residential, light commercial, civic, and recreational. Analysis The subject property is the existing Plantation Village senior living community, a continuing care retirement community located on Porters Neck Road. The primary access to the property is along Porters Neck Road via Plantation Village Drive, the site’s existing private driveway. The site also utilizes Jeanelle Moore Blvd as a service entrance, connecting it with the Davis Community. Adjacent land uses include single-family dwellings of the Porters Neck Plantation subdivision to the north, Porters Neck Plantation maintenance facility and golf course to the east, Eagle Point Golf Club to the south, and The Davis Community senior care campus to the west, which obtained a Conditional Use District rezoning in June 2020 to allow for an expansion of their facility. Like the majority of the Porters Neck area east of the Market Street/Highway 17 corridor, the subject property has been designated as a General Residential area in the Comprehensive Plan. The intent of this place type is to preserve existing residential neighborhoods and provide opportunities for similar lower density housing and associated services. The Comprehensive Plan indicates that single family residential and duplexes are typical, but it also lists multi-family residential (including the type of retirement community proposed) as appropriate for this place type. Plantation Village has been located on this site for 37 years and was in place prior to much of the single-family development in the Porters Neck area. The proposed modification continues the senior living use currently on the site. In addition, all of the proposed buildings are consistent with the preferred height range of up to 3 stories in the General Residential place type, and will exceed the setbacks required by the ordinance. The modification proposes a total density (including existing units) of 5.4 units per acre. This is within the intended residential density range of up to approximately 8 units per acre provided for by the General Residential place type. STAFF PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS AND FINDINGS OF FACT: Staff has conducted an analysis of the proposed use and the information provided as part of the application package and has created preliminary findings of fact for each of the conclusions required to be reached to approve the special use permit request. These preliminary findings of fact and conclusions are based solely on the information provided to date, prior to any information or testimony in support or opposition to the request that may be presented at the upcoming public hearing at the Board meeting. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 18 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 19 of 20 Conclusion 1: The Board must find that the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and approved. A. Water and sewer service is currently provided by CFPUA. B. The site will be accessed from Porters Neck Road, an NCDOT-maintained Minor Collector based on the WMPO Functional Classification Map. C. According to the applicant’s transportation technical memorandum, the proposed modification is estimated to result in a less than one second delay per vehicle at all nearby studied intersections. D. According to the applicant’s transportation technical memorandum, the proposed modification is not expected to result in a change in level of service along Porters Neck Road. E. The subject property is located in the New Hanover County Northern Fire Service District. F. The site is not located within the Special Flood Hazard Area. Conclusion 2: The Board must find that the use meets all required conditions and specifications of the Unified Development Ordinance. A. The site is zoned R-20, Residential District. B. Senior Living: Continuing Care Retirement Community is an allowed use by Special Use Permit in the R-20 zoning district. C. The Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) sets forth specific use standards for Senior Living: Continuing Care Retirement Community, all of which are shown on the conceptual plan and will be confirmed by the Technical Review Committee if the Special Use Permit modification is granted. Conclusion 3: The Board must find that the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property or that the use is a public necessity. A. The surrounding area contains recreation uses, single-family dwellings, and a Continuing Care Retirement Community, The Davis Community, to the east. B. Bufferyards must be provided between the development and adjacent properties. C. To date, no evidence has been provided to show that the proposed development will substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property. Cal Morgan, MAI, SRA, AI- GRS, is currently performing a property value impact analysis and will be present at the Planning Board Hearing on 9/3/20 to present his findings. Conclusion 4: The Board must find that the location and character of the use if developed according to the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in general conformity with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for New Hanover County. A. Plantation Village has operated as a Nursing and Personal Care Facility since 1983. It has been modified over the years, however it has been comprised of office, institutional, and medical land uses since its inception. B. No changes to the use of the property are proposed with this modification. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 19 S-603M Staff Report PB 9.3.2020 Page 20 of 20 C. The property is located in the General Residential place type as classified in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan. D. The proposed modification will increase the number of dwelling units for a total number of 300 units, an overall density of 5.4 dwelling units per acre, which is consistent with the recommended density of the General Residential place type. Suggested Conditions No conditions proposed. EXAMPLE MOTIONS Example Motion for Approval: Motion to recommend approval, as the Board finds that this application for a Special Use Permit modification meets the four required conclusions based on the findings of fact included in the Staff Report. [OPTIONAL] Note any additional findings of fact related to the four required conclusions. [OPTIONAL] Note any conditions be added to the development: [List Conditions] Example Motion for Denial: Motion to recommend denial, as the Board cannot find that this proposal: 1. Will not materially endanger the public health or safety; 2. Meets all required conditions and specifications of the Unified Development Ordinance; 3. Will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property; 4. Will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in general conformity with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for New Hanover County. [State the finding(s) that the application does not meet and include reasons why it is not being met] Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 20 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 3 - 1 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 4 - 1 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 5 - 1 APPLICANT MATERIALS Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 6 - 1 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 6 - 2 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 1 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 2 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 3 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 4 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 5 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 6 EXHIBIT “A” to Application for Modification to Special Use Permit S-603, 5/11 Project Narrative: The Applicant and property owner, Plantation Village, Inc., is requesting a modification of its existing Special Use Permit (S-603, 5/11) in order to allow a renovation and expansion of the Plantation Village Continuing Care Retirement Community. The Subject Property consists of 6 contiguous parcels totaling approximately ±55 acres, located at or in the vicinity of 1200 Porters Neck Road, as generally shown below. The purpose of the request is to allow Plantation Village to renovate and redevelop some of its existing residential buildings, expand and improve amenities buildings, and continue to offer a very high quality of life through housing alternatives and recreational opportunities for New Hanover County’s growing senior population. Plantation Village is a non-profit retirement community offering independent living and access to a continuum of care for residents as needed. The community is located on a tranquil and beautifully landscaped campus, which offers residents dining, salon services, indoor and outdoor recreational opportunities and classes, a fitness center, library, resident care center and many other amenities. Plantation Village and its residents have been a vital part of the Porters Neck community since the 1980s. Plantation Village was originally granted a Special Use Permit in 1983 as a Nursing & Personal Care Facility under the New Hanover County Zoning ordinance existing at Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 7 that time. Modifications to the original Special Use Permit were made over time, and in 2011 the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners issued the existing Special Use Permit for the facility as a Continuing Care Retirement Community to replace the previous Special Use Permit and more accurately reflect the use under updated zoning ordinances. The Applicant is requesting a modification to the existing Special Use Permit to allow for the renovation and expansion of its existing facilities. As illustrated on the proposed revised Master Plan, the plan includes a net increase of 54 independent living homes, enhancements to existing indoor amenity spaces, replacement of a hobby shop and maintenance building, and new outdoor/game amenities. The master plan contemplates replacing the east side of the community independent living homes, while maintaining at the end of all the phases a total of 300 independent living units at the community. To accomplish this, during the first phases more units will be added than demolished which results in a maximum of 330 units on site at the end of phase 2A (the “Phase 2 surplus”). In the subsequent phases less units will be built than what is being replaced. This will in turn reduce the total number of units at the end of the completed project to 300 units. Thus, the maximum number of residential units requested is 330 (during the Phase 2 surplus). The Phase 2 surplus will result in a temporary increase of an additional approximately 1.5 units per acre over the current density. By the conclusion of the project once surplus units are removed the project will result in 300 total residential units (an addition of less than 1 unit per acre than is currently permitted under the existing Special Use Permit). This density is consistent with the General Residential Future Land Use placetype and will allow Plantation Village to serve more residents in New Hanover County’s growing senior population. Existing Master Plan (2011) Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 8 Proposed Master Plan (2020) Criteria Required for Approval of a Special Use Permit 1.The use will not materially endanger the public health or safety if located where proposed and approved. The proposed use will not materially endanger the public health or safety if located where proposed and approved. The best evidence of this is Plantation Village’s long history and outstanding reputation through the region. Plantation Village has existed and operated for decades on its current campus with no negative impacts on public health or safety, and no negative impacts to neighboring property owners and uses. On the contrary, Plantation Village has been an asset to the Porters Neck area for more than 30 years. Additionally, it should be noted that in 2011, in granting the existing Special Use Permit, the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners found that the use would not materially endanger the public health or safety if located and developed according to the existing Master Plan. No change in the type of use is proposed with this modification request. As stated above, the proposed expansion generally consists of the renovation and relocation of some buildings within the existing campus and a slight density increase (along with required parking for same) as illustrated in the proposed revised Master Plan. Plantation Village has adequate existing services and utilities, including sewer, water, electrical, garbage collections, and fire protection. The community adheres to all applicable State and County health and safety regulations and fire codes, and the Residential Care Center provides nurses available 24/7 for residents. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 9 With respect to anticipated traffic impacts, the increased density proposed is relatively low, and because this is a retirement community, it is anticipated that residents are less likely to travel at AM and PM peak traffic hours. Additionally, Plantation Village does not have any impact on student enrollment to the New Hanover County school system. The existing Plantation Village site has a NCDEQ State Stormwater Permit (SW8 030203) which was originally issued in 2003 and was modified in 2013. Stormwater treatment occurs in one on-site retention pond and one on-site infiltration basin. The retention pond has excess capacity to treat up to 64,573 square feet of new impervious surface and the infiltration basin has excess capacity to treat up to 42,233 square feet of new impervious surface. Because the areas draining to the existing stormwater features will have impervious area removed and replaced with impervious surfaces within the existing permitted parameters there will not be any modification to the existing features. Based on the proposed Master Plan there will be an increase in impervious surface in the currently undeveloped portion of the site. A new stormwater infiltration basin is proposed that will meet or exceed both NCDEQ and New Hanover County requirements. 2.The use meets all required conditions and specifications of the Unified Development Ordinance. As illustrated by the proposed revised Master Plan, the proposed Special Use Permit modification meets the requirements of UDO Sec. 4.3.2.2. as follows: •A minimum lot size of 20 acres. •Minimum parking spaces of 1.5 per independent living unit plus one space per employee on the largest shift. •Maximum impervious area will not exceed 40% for the total development. •There are no commercial uses on site. All amenities are private amenities for the benefit of the residents of the CCRC. •Height will not exceed 50 feet. •Plantation Village is served by sewer and water utilities through Cape Fear Public Utility Authority. •The proposed modification will meet all open space and improved recreational space requirements. •The modification will meet all buffering and setback requirements. •Porters Neck Road is a Collector Road as designated on the WMPO Functional Road Classification Map. •All other applicable required local state or federal permits or authorizations will be met. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 10 3.The use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property, or that the use is a public necessity. The proposed use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property. As the New Hanover County Commissioners found in the issuance of the existing Special Use Permit in 2011, “[t]he proposed use is a continuation and expansion of existing uses on the campus.” The proposed modification is not substantially different from that previous request. The use and operation of the facility will remain the same with some renovations, replacements and expansions of existing buildings, a slight increase in density, and an increase in parking to meet the requirements for the new units. For decades, Plantation Village has been a vital part of the Porters Neck community and a good neighbor. The properties adjacent to the east and to the south across Porters Neck Road are golf courses and residential golf course communities. The property adjacent to the west is an assisted living and nursing home facility. To the north of the project area is Hunters Green Phases I and II, a single-family residential neighborhood. Based upon the Hunters Green Phase I subdivision map (Map Book 35 at Page 132, New Hanover County Registry), the lots in Hunters Green Phase I average approximately 8,471 sq. ft. (rounding up). Based upon the Hunters Green Phase II subdivision map (Map Book 35 at Page 133, New Hanover County Registry), the lots in Hunters Green Phase II average approximately 9,823 sq. ft. (rounding up). The proposed density of the Special Use Permit Modification is only a slight increase over what is currently permitted under the existing Special Use Permit. This proposed slight increase in density will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property. 4.The location and character of the use if developed according to the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in general conformity with the New Hanover County Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The proposed modification is in harmony with the area. Plantation Village is an existing residential use that provides additional alternative housing types for seniors in the County. Plantation Village’s campus has been in existence for decades and is an integral part of the Porters Neck Community. As seen in the photos below it is a beautiful campus that is very well maintained and carefully landscaped for the enjoyment of residents and their guests. It offers: Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 11 Aesthetically pleasing entrance and streetview. Very high-quality community buildings and water features. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 12 Beautifully designed residences and open spaces. Landscaped walking trails. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 13 Opportunities to enjoy nature. The Plantation Village campus is an example of careful planning, consideration and preservation of green space and is an asset to the Porters Neck area. It complements the surrounding neighborhoods and golf courses. Additionally, the proposed modification is consistent with the New Hanover County Comprehensive Plan. The Subject Property, along with the surrounding area is designated as a “General Residential” placetype on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. As illustrated below, the General Residential placetype is intended for residential uses (including low-density multi-family residential) as well as recreational uses, both of which Plantation Village provides to its residents. Additionally, the ideal density for low-density multi- and single-family residential is 1-6 du/acre, which is consistent with the requested modification. Comprehensive Plan: Visualizing the Future p.5 states “[t]he ideal density for multi- and single family residential is low (ranging up to approximately eight units per acre).” Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 14 The proposal is also consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goal of providing a range of housing types, opportunities and choices and is consistent with the following implementation guidelines: •XV.A.3 Review zoning regulations where appropriate to accommodate populations with special needs such as the elderly and disabled. •XVIII.A.2 Encourage the inclusion of areas for physical activity in the design of residential open space areas. •XX.B.1 Sidewalks, pedestrian amenities, and residential common areas should be designed to be inclusive of persons with limited mobility. •IX.D.2 Encourage infill development to maximize use of previously developed sites for highest and best use. In summary, the proposed modification to the existing Special Use Permit meets all of the required Special Use Permit criteria, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, allows Plantation Village to improve its community spaces and residences and supports the need for housing alternatives for the County’s growing senior population. Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 15 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 16 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 17 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 18 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 19 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 20 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 21 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 22 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 23 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 24 Pl a n n i n g B o a r d - S e p t e m b e r 3 , 2 0 2 0 IT E M : 3 - 7 - 2 5 Pl a n n i n g B o a r d - S e p t e m b e r 3 , 2 0 2 0 IT E M : 3 - 7 - 2 6 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 27 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 28 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 29 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 30 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 31 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 32 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 33 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 34 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 35 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 36 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 37 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 38 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 39 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 40 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 41 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 42 PROPOSED SITE PLAN Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 8 - 1 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 8 - 2 WETLANDS WETLAN D S POND WETLAN D S DO G P A R K GARDENS WATER FEATURE COVER E D W A L K W A Y S GRASS PAVERS COVERED PARKING COVERED WALKWAYS 30 COVERED PARKING SPACES 8 COVEREDPARKINGSPACES 40 COVEREDPARKING SPACES GAZEBO EXISTINGSTORMWATERPOND EXISTINGSTORMWATERPOND EXISTINGSTORMWATERPOND PROPOSEDSTORMWATERFEATURE PR O P O S E D IN F I L T R A T I O N B A S I N WETLAN D S DO G P A R K GARDENS WATER FEATURE COVER E D W A L K W A Y S GRASS PAVERS COVERED PARKING COVERED WALKWAYS 30 COVERED PARKING SPACES 8 COVEREDPARKINGSPACES 40 COVEREDPARKING SPACES GAZEBO EXISTINGSTORMWATERPOND EXISTINGSTORMWATERPOND EXISTINGSTORMWATERPOND PROPOSEDSTORMWATERFEATURE PR O P O S E D IN F I L T R A T I O N B A S I N E NGIN E E R PR O F E S SIO N A L J O H N PHILL I P N O R RIS NO R T H C ARO L I N A VICINITY MAP PL A N T A T I O N V I L L A G E MA S T E R P L A N C1 NE W H A N O V E R C O U N T Y , N O R T H C A R O L I N A OW N E R : 19120 PL A N T A T I O N V I L L A G E I N C . 12 0 0 P O R T E R S N E C K R D . WI L M I N G T O N , N C 2 8 4 0 1 Licence #C-3641 14 2 9 A S H - L I T T L E R I V E R R D . N W AS H , N C 2 8 4 2 0 PH O N E ( 9 1 0 ) 2 8 7 - 5 9 0 0 NO R R I S & T U N S T A L L CO N S U L T I N G E N G I N E E R S P . C . 26 0 2 I R O N G A T E D R . , S U I T E 1 0 2 WI L M I N G T O N , N C 2 8 4 1 2 PH O N E ( 9 1 0 ) 3 4 3 - 9 6 5 3 SCALE: 1" = 100' PROTECTED TREES: SIGNIFICANT TREES: 6 5 78 9 10 11 2 3 1 12 13 4 Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 9 - 1 DO G P A R K GA R D E N S OU T D O O R AC T I V I T Y A R E A WA T E R F E A T U R E C O V E R E D W A L K W A Y S GR A S S PA V E R S CO V E R E D P A R K I N G 30 COVEREDPARKINGSPACES 8 COVERE D PARKINGSPACES40 COVEREDPARKINGSPACES GA Z E B O ENGIN E E R PR O F E S SIONAL JOHN PHILL I P N O R RIS NO R T H C AROLINA PROGRESS DRAWINGN O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N VICINITY MAP PLANTATION VILLAGE SIGNIFICANT TREE IMPACTST - 1 NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA PHASE 1,2, AND 3 OWNER: 19 1 2 0 -Plantation Village Inc. -1200 Porters Neck Rd. -Wilmington, NC 28401 Li c e n c e # C - 3 6 4 1 1429 ASH-LITTLE RIVER RD. NW ASH, NC 28420 PHONE (910) 287-5900 NORRIS & TUNSTALL CONSULTING ENGINEERS P.C. 2602 IRON GATE DR., SUITE 102 WILMINGTON, NC 28412 PHONE (910) 343-9653 MA T C H L I N E S E E S H E E T S T - 2 SIGNIFICANT TREES:TYPICAL TREE SYMBOLS SC A L E : 1 " = 4 0 ' Planning Board - September 3, 2020ITEM: 3- 9 - 2 AC T I V I T Y A R E A WA T E R F E A T U R E CO V E R E D W A L K W A Y S ENGIN E E R PR O F E S SIONAL JOHN PHILL I P N O R RIS NO R T H C AROLINA PROGRESS DRAWINGN O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N VICINITY MAP PLANTATION VILLAGE SIGNIFICANT TREE IMPACTST - 2 NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA PHASE 1,2, AND 3 OWNER: 19 1 2 0 -Plantation Village Inc. -1200 Porters Neck Rd. -Wilmington, NC 28401 Li c e n c e # C - 3 6 4 1 1429 ASH-LITTLE RIVER RD. NW ASH, NC 28420 PHONE (910) 287-5900 NORRIS & TUNSTALL CONSULTING ENGINEERS P.C. 2602 IRON GATE DR., SUITE 102 WILMINGTON, NC 28412 PHONE (910) 343-9653 SIGNIFICANT TREES: MA T C H L I N E S E E S H E E T S T - 1 SCALE: 1" = 40'TYPICAL TREE SYMBOLSPlanning Board - September 3, 2020ITEM: 3- 9 - 3 PLANTATION VILLAGE COMMUNITY EXPANSION | FULL PHASE | RENDERED MASTER PLAN | WILMINGTON, NC | 07.08.2020 BLUE H E R O N D R . E BLUE HERO N D R . W BL U E H E R O N D R . W PL A N T A T I O N V I L L A G E D R . HUMMINGBIRD LN. JEA N E L L A M O O R E B L V D . JEA N E L L A M O O R E B L V D . ME A D O W L A R K L N PORTER’S NECK RD. (S.R. 1491) KEY LEGEND 1. COMMONS BUILDING EXPANSION / RENOVATION 2. HERON COVE 3. MAGNOLIA WALK 4A. MAINTENANCE FACILITY 4B. CUTTING EDGE 5. CENTRAL BARK 6. PICKLEBALL COURTS 7. COMMUNITY GARDEN 8. EGRET LANDING 9. PUTTING GREEN 10. THE MERIDIAN 11. RESIDENT ACTIVITY AREA 12. SEASONAL GARDEN 13. OPAQUE TRANSITIONAL BUFFER 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 4A 4B 5 6 7 13 8 9 10 10 10 11 12 0'25'50'100'0'25'50'100' Planning Board - September 3, 2020 ITEM: 3 - 9 - 4