Agenda 2007 09-04
AGE NO A NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Human Resources Training Center, New Hanover County Government Center
230 Government Center Drive, Suite 135, Room 401
Wilmington, NC
WilLIAM A. CASTER, CHAIRMAN. ROBERT G. GREER, VICE-CHAIRMAN
TED DAVIS, JR., COMMISSIONER. WilLIAM A. KOPP, JR., COMMISSIONER. NANCY H. PRITCHETT, COMMISSIONER
BRUCE T, SHELL, COUNTY MANAGER' WANDA COPLEY, COUNTY ATTORNEY' SHEILA SCHULT, CLERK TO THE BOARD
September 4, 2007 5:30 p.m.
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER (Chairman William A. Caster)
INVOCA TION (Reverend Jeff Roberts, Trinity United Methodist Church)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (Commissioner Ted Davis, Jr.)
APPROV AL OF CONSENT AGENDA
ESTIMA TED ITEMS OF BUSINESS Page
TIMES No.
5:40 p.m. 1. Consideration of Civil Workplace Protocol Resolution and Approval of 31
Proposed Personnel Policy Revisions
5:45 p.m. 2. Public Hearing on Authorizing the Approval of an Installment Purchase 43
Contract and Deed of Trust
5:50 p.m. 3.1 Public Hearing 45
Road Naming (SN -102, 08/07) - Request by Planning Staff and E-9ll to
Name an Unnamed Road to Marsh Cove Lane Located Near the 5900 Block of
Myrtle Grove Road, East Side
6:00 p.m. 3.2 Public Hearing 51
Address Assignments (AA-00l,08/07) - Request by Planning Staff and E-9ll
to Reassign Street Addresses to a Portion of Sanders Road Located Between
River and Carolina Beach Roads
6:30 p.m. 3.3 Public Hearing 57
Conditional Rezoning (Z-86l, 4/07) - Request by Shanklin and Nichols, P A
for ACI-Pine Ridge, LLC to Rezone Approximately 16.2 Acres Located offN.
Market Street at Porter's Neck Road in the Transition and Wetland Resource
Protection Land Classifications from B-1 Neighborhood Business Zoning
District to CD(B-2) Conditional District Highway Business to locate a 169,000
sq. f1. Commercial Building for up to 42 Possible Uses (Continuedfrom the
July Meeting)
7:00 p.m. 3.4 Public Hearing 159
Rezoning (Z-869, 8/07) - Request by James D. Smith, Attorney for William F.
Canady to Rezone Approximately 0.65 Acre Located West of Market Street, at
113 Sweetwater Drive in the Transition Land Classification from R-15
Residential District to 0&1 Office & Institutional District (the Applicant
Owns Adjoining 0&1 Property)
7: 15 p.m. Break
7:25 p.m. 3.5 Public Hearing 167
Rezoning (Z-870, 8/07) - Request by Withers & Ravenel for Louise Stevens
to Rezone 9.25 Acres from R -15 Residential District to R -10 Residential
District at 4451 & 4453 Gordon Road in the Transition Land Classifications
(the Change Would Result in a Density Change from 2.5 Units Per Acre to 3.3
Units Per Acre)
7:45 p.m. 3.6 Public Hearing 175
Text Amendment (A-361, 8/07) - Request by Staff to Amend Section III of
the Zoning Ordinance to Require Applicants to Conduct a Community
Information Meeting Prior to Submission of Requests for Planned
Development, Riverfront Mixed Use, or Conditional Use District Zoning
Actions
8:00 p.m. 3.7 Public Hearing 179
Text Amendment (A-362, 8/07) - Request by Staff to Amend Section 71-1 of
the Zoning Ordinance to Add Language Establishing a Policy on Resubmittal
of Denied Special Use Permit Applications
8: 15 p.m. 3.8 Public Hearing 181
Text Amendment (A-363, 8/07) - Request by Staff to Amend Section III of
the Zoning Ordinance to Establish a Policy and Procedure Relating to
Continuances of Rezoning Cases
8:30 p.m. 4. Consideration of Mason Inlet Relocation - Maintenance Cost 185
8:45 p.m. 5. NOTE: This item has been revised and will be delayed until the 189
September 17,2007 agenda.
Consideration of Revisions to New Hanover County Code, Section Five:
Animals & Fowl
8:55 p.m. 6. Consideration of Award of Bid 08-0042 and Approval of Contract 08-0042 to 191
Sam English of V A, Inc. for the Purchase of Boiler Tubes Panels for Boiler #2
at W ASTEC
9:05 p.m. Break
9: 15 p.m. 7. Meeting of the Water and Sewer District 195
10:00 p.m. 8. Non-Agenda Items (limit three minutes)
10:05 p.m. 9. Additional Items
County Manager
County Commissioners
Clerk to the Board
County Attorney
10: 15 p.m. ADJOURN
Note: Times listed for each item are estimated, and if a preceding item takes less
time, the Board will move forward until the agenda is completed.
2
MEETING OF THE WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT
Human Resources Training Center, New Hanover County Government Center
230 Government Center Drive, Suite 135, Room 401
Wilmington, NC
ESTIMA TED ITEMS OF BUSINESS Page
TIMES No.
9: 15 p.m. l. Non-Agenda Items (limit three minutes)
9:20 p.m. 2. Approval of Minutes 197
9:25 p.m. 3. Presentation: New Hanover County Water System Overview and Water 199
Treatment Plant Project Progress Update
9:45 p.m. 4. Presentation: Northeast Interceptor (NEI) Improvements Project Status Update 201
Notice of Temporary Meeting Location Change
The Board of Commissioners will conduct their meetings in
September 2007 at the New Hanover County Government
Center so that renovations may be completed at the Historic
Courthouse. The meeting location details are:
New Hanover County Government Center
230 Government Center Drive, Suite 135
Human Resources Training Center
Room 401
This page intentionally left blank.
4
CONSENT AGENDA
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ITEMS OF BUSINESS Page
No.
l. Approval of Minutes 7
2. Approval to Accept Donation of a 1994 Ford Van to the Juvenile Day Treatment 9
Center from Family Services of the Lower Cape Fear and Adoption of Ordinance
for Budget Amendment 08-024
3. NOTE: This item has been withdrawn. 13
Approval of Sole Source Award to Best Uniforms, Inc. for Customized Blauer
Rain Gear
4. Approval of Board of Education Capital Outlay Budget Amendment to Budget 17
Public School Building Capital Building Funds for Annie H. Snipes Academy of
Arts and Design and Adoption of Ordinance for Budget Amendment 2008-20
5. Adoption of Ordinance for Budget Amendment 08-025 25
5
This page intentionally left blank.
6
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Consent Item #: 1 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Governing Body Presenter: Chairman Caster
Contact: Sheila L. Schult
Item Does Not Require Review
SUBJECT:
Approval of Minutes
BRIEF SUMMARY:
Approve minutes from the following meetings:
Work Session meeting held on August 9, 2007
Agenda Review meeting held on August 9, 2007
Regular Session meeting held on August 13, 2007
Closed Session meeting held on August 13, 2007
Board of E & R meeting held on August 14, 2007
Joint Session meeting held on August 22, 2007
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Approve minutes.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
7
This page intentionally left blank.
8
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Consent Item #: 2 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Finance Presenter: Avril M. Pinder
Contacts: Beverly Thomas or John Ranalli
SUBJECT:
Approval to Accept Donation of a 1994 Ford Van to the Juvenile Day Treatment Center from Family Services of the
Lower Cape Fear
BRIEF SUMMARY:
Family Services of the Lower Cape Fear is dissolving their organization and would like to donate a 1994 Ford Van, VIN #
1 FBJS31 HB58214 to the New Hanover County Juvenile Day Treatment Center.
In order to record the donation, a budget amendment is required for accounting purposes. This budget amendment allows
for recognition of the value of the van and the addition of the van to the County's fixed asset listing. North Carolina
Department of Motor Vehicles has established the market value of the van to be $1,790. The County must pay $60 to
cover the required highway use tax and registration; thereby adjusting the market value of the van to $1,850.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Adoption of resolution accepting the donation of the 1994 van valued at $1,850 and of the ordinance for budget amendment
08-024, and direct County staff to process any required documents related to the transaction.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: No Change In Position(s) Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
~ ~
........ ........
... . . ..
Resolution fo~ acceptance of donation.doc 08-0248-22-07.doc
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: FINANCE: Approve BUDGET: N/A HUMAN RESOURCES:
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Recommend approval.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
9
RESOLUTION
OF THE
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
OF
NEW HANOVER COUNTY
WHEREAS, Family Services of the Lower Cape Fear is dissolving its organization and
would like to donate a 1994 Ford Van to New Hanover County's Juvenile Day Treatment Center;
and
WHEREAS, a budget amendment for ac.counting purposes only, is required to record the
value ofthe donation and said budget amendment is attached as part of this resolution; and
WHEREAS, the County Manager, the Finance Director, and the Juvenile Day Treatment
Center Director recommend acceptance of the Ford van and approval of related budget amendment;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of New
Hanover County that the 1994 Ford Van, vehicle identification number 1 FBJS31 HBS8214 valued at
$1,850, this market value being determined by the North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles
($1,790) plus ($60) to cover the required highway use tax, be accepted as a donation from Family
Services of the Lower Cape Fear and the budget amendment be adopted; and that the County staff is
directed to process any required documents to finalize the transaction.
This 4th day of September, 2007.
William A. Caster, Chairman
ATTEST:
Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board
--~=""
10
AGENDA: September 4, 2007
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 BUDGET
BY BUDGET AMENDMENT 08-024
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Commissioners of New Hanover County, North Carolina, that
the following Budget Amendment 08-024 be made to the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 2008.
Section 1: Details of Budget Amendment:
Fund: General Fund
Department: Juvenile Day Treatment Center
Exnenditure: Decrease Increase
Juvenile Day Treatment Center:
Capital Outlay - Motor Vehicle $1,850
Total $1,850
Revenue: Decrease Increase
Juvenile Day Treatment Center:
Contributions $1,790
Total $1,790
Fund: General Fund
Department: Juvenile Day Treatment Center/Medicaid
Exnenditure: Decrease Increase
Juvenile Day Treatment Center/Medicaid:
Supplies $60
Total $60
Section 2: Explanation
To record the donation of a van to the Juvenile Day Treatment Center. NC Department of Motor Vehicles
established the market value of the van at $1,790. The County must pay $60 to cover the required highway
use tax and registration; thereby, the market value of the van is adjusted to $1,850.
Section 3: Documentation of Adoption:
This ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of New
Hanover County, North Carolina, that the Ordinance for Budget Amendment 08-024 amending the annual
budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2008, is adopted.
Adopted, this day of ,2007.
(SEAL)
William A. Caster, Chairman
ATTEST:
Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board
11
This page intentionally left blank.
12
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Consent Item #: 3 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Sheriff's Office Presenter: Duane T. Ward
Contact: Lena Butler
SUBJECT:
Approval of Sole Source Award to Best Uniforms, Inc. for Customized Blauer Rain Gear
BRIEF SUMMARY:
The rain gear that the New Hanover County Sheriff's Office Deputies wear is made to the specifications set forth by the
Sheriff's Office. Best Uniforms, Inc. is a distributor of Blauer rain gear and has worked with the Sheriff's Office and Blauer
to redesign and customize Blauer's rain gear to meet the specifications set forth by the Sheriff's Office. This is a special
order that requires that the company shut down regular operations to produce the rain gear as required by the Sheriff's
Office.
General Statute 143-129(e)(6) provides that purchases of apparatus, supplies, materials, or equipment are exempt from
bidding when:
i. performance or price competition for a product are not available;
ii. a needed product is available from only one source of supply; or
iii. standardization or compatibility is the overriding consideration.
The Statutes require that this purchase be approved by the Board of Commissioners prior to award.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Adopt resolution approving sole source award to Best Uniforms, Inc. in the amount of $45,871 for the purchase of Blauer
Rain Gear made to New Hanover County Sheriff's Office specifications.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: No Change In Position(s) Number of Positions:
Explanation: Funding for rain gear is in Sheriff's Office FY 07-08 Adopted Budget.
ATTACHMENTS:
~
........
... .
Sole SO!J~e-Rain gea~.doc
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: FINANCE: BUDGET: Approve HUMAN RESOURCES:
13
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Recommend approval.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
The item was withdrawn.
14
RESOLUTION
OF THE
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
OF
NEW HANOVER COUNTY
WHEREAS, the rain gear that the New Hanover County Sheriffs Offi.ce Deputies wear is
made to the specifications set for the Sheriffs Office; and
WHEREAS, Best Uniforms, Inc., a distributor of Blauer rain gear has worked with the
Sheriffs Office and Blauer to redesign Blauer's rain gear to meet the specifications set forth by
the Sheriffs Office; and
WHEREAS, this is a special order that requires that the company shut down regular
operations to produce the rain gear as required by the Sheriffs Office; and
WHEREAS General Statute 143-129(e) (6) provides that purchases of apparatus,
supplies, materials, or equipment are exempt from bidding when:
i. performance or price competition for a product are not available;
ii. a needed product is available from only one source of supply; or
iiL standardization or compatibility is the overriding consideration; and
WHEREAS, the Sheriff, the Finance Director, and the County Manager recommend that the
bid be awarded to Best Uniforms, Inc. as a sole source provider for these uniforms;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of New Hanover
County that this bid for the purchase of customized rain gear for the Sheriff's Office Deputies be
awarded to Best Uniforms, Inc. in the amount of forty-five thousand, eight hundred seventy-one
dollars ($45,871) as a sole source provider.
This 4th day of September, 2007.
William A. Caster, Chairman,
ATTEST:
Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board
."~,.._----
15
This page intentionally left blank.
16
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Consent Item #: 4 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Budget Presenter: Cam Griffin
Contact: Cam Griffin
SUBJECT:
Approval of Board of Education Capital Outlay Budget Amendment to Budget Public School Building Capital
Building Funds for Annie H. Snipes Academy of Arts and Design
BRIEF SUMMARY:
Attached for review and approval is a Board of Education Capital budget amendment increasing the budget for Annie H.
Snipes Academy of Arts and Design by $492,653. The Board of Education approved the budget amendment on August 6,
2007. The County Commissioners approved the application for the funds on June 4, 2007. The funds will be used for
renovations, minor site improvements, and technology upgrades for the Annie H. Snipes Academy of Arts and Design.
Funds from the 2005 Local Bond will be used for the required local match.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Approve Board of Education Budget Amendment #1 for Capital Outlay Fund and New Hanover County Budget Amendment
2008-20.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: No Change In Position(s) Number of Positions:
Explanation: Will not impact New Hanover County Budget
ATTACHMENTS:
~
........
. ..
New Hanover County Board of Education Budget Amendment #1 2008-20 DS 8-13-07.doc
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: FINANCE: BUDGET: HUMAN RESOURCES:
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Recommend approval.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
17
AGENDA: September 4, 2007
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2007 BUDGET
BY BUDGET AMENDMENT 2008-20
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Commissioners of New Hanover County, North Carolina, that
the following Budget Amendment 2008-20 be made to the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 2008.
Section 1: Details of Budget Amendment:
Fund: $123M School Bond Project
Department: Finance
Exnenditure: Decrease Increase
Snipes Academv $492,652.73
Total $492 652.73
Revenue: Increase
Public School Capital Building Fund $492,652.73
Total $492 652.73
Section 2: Explanation
To increase the project funds for the Public School Capital Building Fund approved by the
Department of Public Instruction for renovations and improvements to Annie H. Snipes Academy
of Arts and Design. The Commissioners approved the Board of Education's application for use of
these funds at its 6/4/07 meeting. The Department of Public Instruction has approved the
application and the Board of Education approved the School's Budget Amendment at its August 6,
2007 meeting.
Section 3: Documentation of Adoption:
This ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of New
Hanover County, North Carolina, that the Ordinance for Budget Amendment 2008-20 amending the annual
budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2008, is adopted.
Adopted, this _day of ,2007.
(SEAL)
William A. Caster, Chairman
ATTEST:
Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board
18
Budget Amendment
#1
New Hanover County Administrative Unit
Capital Outlay Fund
The New Hanover County Board of Education at a meeting on the 6th day of August 2007, passed
the following resolution.
Be it resolved that the following amendments be made to the Budget Resolution for the fiscall year
ending June 30, 2008.
Code Number Description of Code Increase (Decrease)
Various See Attached $492,652.73
Revenue:
Various See Attached $492,652.73
Explanation: See attached
Total Appropriation in Current Budget $ 6,435,811,00
Amount of Increase/Decrease of above Amendment 492,652.73
Total Appropriation in Current Amended Budget $ 6.928A63.73
Passed by majority vote of the Board of Education of New Hanover County on the ,,~ day of
~ ,20~.
19
Capital Outlay Fund Amendment #1
To correct project purpose code included in the budget resolution:
4.6580.808.541.000.945.16 CBRC . Generator 118,450.00
4.9100.808.541.000.945.16 CBRC - Generator (118,450.00)
-
To increase Snipes budget for project approved by the State Public Schoof
Building Capital Fund:
4.9197.074.522.384.945 Snipes Renovation 492,652.73
revenue:
4 74490.000.000 Stale Public School Caplial Building Fund (492.652.13)
20
SCHOOL PLRNI~ING :9198073558 Jun 26 '07 13 :58 !"',U2
-.."." . ...... .~"~ .,~,._-,-"..._...-..~..."",_..,.,.._.._-~_.,.. ,.,'..
.~i;'i!VJ
:'/~;::f:\~/~"tt :;';~"<~~"J PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF NORTH CAROLINA
~~ii"';I'~ .,.", ~;~~\e.1
*~l-tJ"~I\'~~ STATE BOARD OF EDUCATl'ON Howard N" Lae, Chairman
~':;fJ~j h':< . 'j4J DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC JN$.TRVCTION June St. CL'llr Aikin:;"", l::O.P., Stete SUpedtllMdenf
'~<~~2~,("'/' \Ii\liW;"'CPUBLlCS(:flOOLS ORC
June 25, 2007
MEMORANDUM
TO: Bruce T. Shell., County Manager
New Hanover County
Carmen Gintoli, Director of Planning & Construction
New Hanover Count)' Schools
FROM' Kenneth Phelps, School P'aoning Consultant ~
NC Department of Public Instruction
endosed are the approved projects for receiving the fOllowing f~nds from the Public School Building Cllpltal FUI1l:L
Annie Snipes AC<tdel'l\Y' of Arts and Design- Renovations $ 492.,652,73
The ..,bove fund" will be transferred to the county disbursing acx:ol.lnt in the State Treasurer's Office. Since this is the
end of the fiscal yeer, I am attempting to have the money transferred before next month. Pl~se check your county
disbursing account on 6/28 or 6/2.9.
Questions concerning the dlsbursin51 account, checks, signatur~ cards, en:. should be directed to Mr. Jody Joyner,
(919) 508-5915, in the State Treasurer's Office.
A final report is rc:quired shOWing the adutll state and lotal expenditures and the actual completion date. If the
expenditures of state funds are less than the i!lmount approved and transferred to the disbursing acrount in the State
Treasurer's Offi.:;;e, request that the balance be releaS€d from the d.isbursing account for f'e deposit Into the wunty
account in the Public School Building Capital Fund fOr reallocation to additional constn.:ctlon projects.
It you haVE! any Questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Enclosure
4 q ;Q1. 0145;;;2 .) ff1( 1( )'
: : SCHOOL PLANNING DNISION 01' SCHOOL SUPPORT www,,,<:hoolcleOlrin!iln<>u.ue<.or9
;: 6319 Maii Ser\lke Center ,. Raleigh. North Carolin$ 27e99.631~ ,. 919,807,3,554 ; ; Fll:dil1 ~.807.355a
:. An (;;"W', OppN'l,.mN),IMfiffT><llive A.Glion E"'pioYGf
_m....w ---.-..-......"
21
SCHOOL PlRNNING :91980/3558 Jlln 'or 13:59 P.03
!f5)fE CG lE n \W r[ff~ "j
Inll . =-'11 Ii/ . Re~sed 101510'
APPLICATION ... iJJ~~D.1 ~
~~~L:go~;'::~t~~~~~G~~ BUll, IN;~ ~~N~r-~,c';7:l~~ved. .. (,. ... =-.-L
County: New~a.no\'/er County.... ... GOt1~ r~rson. C"rrnen Ginloli
Address; 6410 Carolina BeaCh Road. Wilmonglon NC Tille: Director. Facility Piarming S. COrustruc;tion
SChOOl Admin. Unit' 650. _ Phone (910}254.4325
Project Trtle: Arm,e H Snipes ACademy 01 Arts and Oesign _ _ _ ,___
Location 2100 Chestnul Street Wilmlnglon. NortliCarQllna 28405 a._
Type of Facility: Elementary SchOol
G.S'. 1 15C-546.2(b) "Counties shall use monies In the Fund lor capital oullay projecls inCluding the
planning, c.on5li'uction. reconstruction. enlargement. imprtlvemen\, repair, or renovation of public. $ChOOI
oUlldll"lgs and for the purchase of land for public school buildings: for equipment to implement a local
school teChnology plan lhat is approved pursuant to G.S. 11SC-1026C: or for l:1oth. Monies U$sd to
impl~m<'lnl a local school techno!ogy plan shall be transferred to the Stale School TechnOlogy Fund and
allocated by that Fund 10 the loc<ll schOol Sdminii;ltrl.llive unit for equipment. As used il1Jhis section.
'public school buildinQs' ofllYlndudes fadlities for Indlyidual :;Ichools that are used fOr in$trl..lcticmal :ef'lO
relatee OUI'OMes and does not include centralized !!ldmInlstra!!Q.I:1CJ...lJiaimenance, or other facllltie$,"
Short Description of ConStruc:,on PrOJect:
RI\Mvations 01 the orialn<il b.\ill.ginj:1; ouildino con~JruclecllU g~. minor sile imprgveml!rllS a no ieer.nalaDV
1IDtIr"'l'leli .-.. . -. -- -'-
, Estimated Costs. Stale local Imal
Purchase of Land S .. ... :$ . . ... $ 001)
Planning $--~-- $.-~ L. q.:OO
ConSlrvction $. $ $ 000
Renovation $_. 4g2,€52.73 $_ 9,853.33427 L W,345.987~O[J
I:;nl,,'gement $ ._. $ ~ D.OC.
Repair $ .... . ... $ $ 0.00
School Technology $ --- $ NlA $ _=~ 0.00
Debl Service/8end Payment $ $~_. __} .' 0.00
Total $__.492,65273 :Ii 9.853.334.27 !.-....l9.3a:5,Ql;l7.0D
Bid OatesNendors: April 10, 2008
Contracts Signed/Dates: ~a}! 5.2008 .___
ESl1mated date of begil'\l'1ing of consti"uction J.!.!r1e 9. 2008
Estimated date 01 completion12.~cembe~~1. 2009 ~.
Match; The fn$tchin$j funos oj one OOlltlr or local funas IOf every three C10llars of stale fundS. are from
(source) 2005 Local SchOOl Bond Fund
$' - . of the mc\1clling fill,ds have been expended tor!dale/descriptlo~-~
.."""'-.. ""-~~=-- =u_
RepOrting requiremenls: "<IVe, the undersigned, agree to submit a stalement of state/local amourlts
eXpelldel"l tOt lhi& pfOject wiltlln 60 days of completion of the prOJect.
The County COfl1mlssll:mer.~ ..no the Board 01 G;ducalion do hereby jOintly request approval of ih e above
project ..nd reQueSI relBalH:l tlf S 492,155273 __" from the Public School Building Capital
FunO". We certIfy that the project herein described 1$ within the p"HBmelers of 11SC-546.2{b} and that
lill of the match is available ."nd designated liIS m..1.ch of this prOject
~?~_a._G,.~ _"_ .....___ ~/o:~/o/ ..~
(~'... ture - C'ha'lr. C unty Comtr" ~l"ler$).0 .~(D . e..l
\ '/ I .. .,./ ..
-- ~ ~. ~.J _.
(Signature - Chair. Boar ate)
22
Page I of 1
M;W HANOVER fOIN"'\'1l0ARD Ot. C'OflrI\USSIONllll,; SOOK JI
REGIJLARi\tIlETING, JUNE 4.111111 PAGIlIU
.4.SSEi\tB LV
Tl;c Ni-:!" l-bm\J\.r (l>1l1lt;\ 8(\:.1.1 ,\I' C..Qml,limICI1l 111<1 j" R~lJ:ulars..'$$'~1l 011 M~",t:'.). JUlie J. li~'1,0I
in !Ir HltltMliil Rt':s.cift,D.;,IJ H~IW'\,~r Cm:W~} (;t'lf\cr:!uuellil {-L'1:lk1'. 130 (jm'c:nUtl<tI!k1
SUIW I J ~ \\'ihn.ngt4m. Nonh
"'kll;t.,,, v.cr.:~ Cha,i'nl'~HI William"-\ C:tMf.."f,; ComNlis's:U)OCf \VdIJ:un A" Kupp. fl... Cumm~~:s'k~H~f
H l'vudlC'It M"I~'~'I" lln"lit 1 Sholl; ('~I"" All"""!\ W,""b "-'I. Copl<;, 'lIId (I;.;!'I, hl ,\'" U,,,,J
L Sd,,,11
Vt,c."{~~:h,uinnJHl Rol"':ft G. Grcc"~1..;;t!;i,~1rn;C:H~ 2~(iii Cmmlli'~,WllICf led O~I~'i5. k ;.lirrhed 1'd ':0.6 pd~l.
("l..""!;;,,, C "'leI "anN 11", "'""hllg 10 "',)>0' ""d ",'!{tlI,,,,d .' Cl) Q"" p<'''''',I.
INHlCA1'ION ANI) PI,J:DGE OF :\LU:(.1.4SCE
Ri.:'\ "'i\:liihl Or ~n~l-k.'" Zunm .dt P,;tS~iQr- nf St. 1\'L:I~llkt\'f;,;!; E"\ .m~J,;hcal tUill,,'f~UI fhltlt'i.;:lt ~_jl\ ,,' t h\:t~lt (k'"IUon,
C.;)i"Hru~",i\J'IlJ.:'r R~~il'p ~1.:d-dJiO.~ ~.ltdl1,;n':A,.'liJi} lloo lill",,'d~t of A l.ktt1::Jln","( .0 11iH: nl~,
(,'h:::nntun ('tl'",H."f ll1(i\f, C()jnillill?">~mJcJ Da:\.-:i is 1 '.ac fbliftf .'"h.'r"k~\ (1;( '!!:UIKhJm iC.'~I~~l r".(w~
F.,., CilIllI'lUliil' C"lk~" >lwJ l~vuld 00 ~~r:ri,,~i'i.::: j~~ !g(liOtl ns
('Iti.'''''''' Pcild,;,n ,~, lil.'ll'~ d,e 1,,,'i!"~1I1 (,l" ,hc N,>llh ("""hI",
C''''lll<:'!'' "'''rll. e(l\m.~' ('DU~tn's"'IDn~t C,flt:~(H'Y TIle il'li;.nrd )1; beiu~
a ~,;:n.~li""'~~,~ in R.llJ,,'Ci~Ji.
OJmll'ii~:5>i~m~r Prllclu:u h,"';.o.nod dt.H bCf'i.t)H \'Ht~ fCt.'Jl;hin.\:t $1'11': i'.lN\~U\1 on 1l4.1'" 1x;,II;,1tlf
API'RO\iAL OF CON!>[ N1' A(;[NM
("litlft'lf'Ul Cfii1;,;,'r ~\lOLt"f If nnr Ui~lnb~'l ,q t ht~; fl(,ahi \~ oul4 like l<~ rt'lni)~iI,;' ;J4 n j'fl;Ul f1vm U!lil:' ('tHt~jit .'" _R,od~~
fvr'dl;;;.!;;.'us,s:iml,
1:W~ emmri(:nb. Ch:lllrUko.tU nt';leJ 1fCf.1UCSl:::d li nlh......i~)lu fHlUI tl~ BL'lHd to ~~.~ot,,, dl(' ~tcms OH the-
(\~>!:I;"il 1"I"""'d'<1.
1\1..1;..", OJ""'I\",.j"~1 l((,I"P !>IOVED. SfCO"I>El) ('Onll1!1>t101.:t f"wdlrill. j,' "1'1"0, ~ Il~, ""lIll 'J" 11'<7
(''''''''01 Age,klo"" !"'C""~<:ft l!jOOl1 ""c.. II", MOTION lTOfl
{:O/llSot:NT AGENlM.
AI'I".....'" .If MIa"l."
"D!fi: C~)lunih!):i\t.~\:t$ d:u: Jllinuh:fl; fniil:tl 11i;(."" ~li'C'1 iuS li,,'-d fm j'. ~(j(fJ ;utd ~:h~
RCt.tTlhu xsStiL,>>~ SO"",,, M"'I"!~ held ~R 11. 1(~)1. '" p""",",,'Il b: 11"" lo die lkx:.nl
'''"llf''''' 11 lit I'll'" lbll<" ~r (:"u., llllanl..l tiiI....,II..~1 !lu~'t A.....'..I........ HJ lI.... (:~1"111 O",I~~ !lud!.",'
T...mt".. ~ ill.... fl'".."~r 0""81, s......1I "'''''''M
Tbc {''''''1m.''';,..."", llI'Il"'''~''' do: "",., 1."",;1\ I;! nr.m! ,,' Ed""",i,,,, nlld~'1 J\ll".I"J~..II"'" #l Ih,~
'IPII'IlPII;It,,, fund! "" II., t1"""MU of $! ~J~lll frill" 111~ l~..r<l <:'4'<i~11 fUlld hlllrMl<.:. lb.
lbi 110" c!lild.ell d..~",,,,,,,, m l'a.,Ie, aud tbe .>f (,..Jd!, l"om"
III /\11"'''0.1 H "'';il..1:r-un iu die tiWnoun1 oft2,H!hA 7'\.17 Pan. Fl~iM!lj.ilUar~; in lhe tfJH(I<UU* of
u, b.d~ -dii.# ~am..: ilt O~e,* d.~~ C-Sl iJiII~I;\I;;'d muuililit:i;,
4N",,,',d ..r o.....d ..I' tdUtill""'" >'\Pll/ka..... I.. ..."""., .11<> Rl'k..... ..I' !'lIbl," 5<,...",. B"Udillll. ('apita!
I'QIIII. rllr Anuie Ii. Sll'\Ii" ,<\r..d.,,,,.) \Il' Art. "ud tk,l\l.ll - N\"\\ lbnowr (\"'nl' Bomrd "' ElIfl4: all,,"
The C<llllllil>"j,~W" :ljlfl<<),,-xllll<' a~'1I'l1 (>f EdllC~"mf$ jI.~I1J"\l 1011/'" 11'1",,"'1 of li-l'J.?:,MZ.iJ fn~n II"~.
fiilllk xl'ool Cnpfi,l! Fumd rm 1\:11(1\ .M"1n'i. lnilll'r """ luld IC,.;I1Il<!k'il\ r~, ,hc
Anm. 1:1, Sni.!:>:.'\ ot'AIl.llfl,i WId w.ll<)lIAxlll.., 10 ~llLlI II.: 11.~1'''M fwm "'"
1''';; l..ocal $d",,,,' fullld ;,;, II,,-;d (\.'1)rlU'l"dm2lf\;'tl
-"MINi.", ..r Re_""",,,,,, AI'pol..dnll( I\IJII R",'leu ott'kB' 1"(... lh~ ....Wllmlil.l\l.."
11", (">OlIlI""'k"l\Zl"> ~ rl."i;ohu~o~1 ail.'rfJ\l;].f~iug ,h~ ~s Map ll~,i<'" Olf,,-.:'u; I'm Ill,: ClIl "of
'\\' ilmju;1lloo fm.~' dit' C i~~.~~ s.,"TC<< fk1>11"m"",":
l<t1lmld Il $.llI"'(ll:'ld. J,5<:",,,, I'~"'i'"
J:oIll""A_ A'li-sn;;:b1C P~l~llU.y;;'
I)",I(! ~. CllIISlf"""'.olll>'\t,,,,,ll'-"
Cali n, Fanner.. Jr P,E,. Uhi'dtJiIll r:.tl2;,~IIi1;:\:'r
),,1... f'"llcrl"'I_l"'.'I~ i\illlli''''J,~I(I'
A top, Ollb" ,~,,,hfljOll " IICt~b~ 11l<'i<)'IKIMltd;,!; ","1 (jf III( "~Illltc, ""d 1$ '1;I,WaIll(lI II. fE,j""';1 IlOOk
XXX l'"~,, iU
httD:/ IwwwtmoaDDS .nhCgOV,comlwebIink7/Imae:eDisDlav .asnx?cache""ves&sessionkev= W. 1\11."i/2007
23
This page intentionally left blank.
24
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Consent Item #: 5 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Budget Presenter: Cam Griffin
Contact: Cam Griffin
SUBJECT:
Adoption of Ordinance for Budget Amendment
BRIEF SUMMARY:
The following budget amendment amends the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2008.
08-025 - Rollover of Unexpended Grant Funds from FY 06/07 to FY 07/08
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Adoption of ordinance for the budget amendment listed in the summary above.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: No Change In Position(s) Number of Positions:
Explanation: To amend the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2008.
ATTACHMENTS:
~
........
. ..
08-0258-22-07.doc
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: FINANCE: BUDGET: HUMAN RESOURCES:
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Recommend approval.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
25
AGENDA: September 4, 2007
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2008 BUDGET
BY BUDGET AMENDMENT 08-025
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Commissioners of New Hanover County, North Carolina, that
the following Budget Amendment 08-025 be made to the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 2008.
Section 1: Details of Budget Amendment:
Fund: General Fund
Departments: Sheriff's Office, Emergency Management, Planning, Health, DMC, Aging,
Library, Parks, Museum, Commissioners
Exnenditure: Decrease Increase
Sheriff's Office:
Safe Summer Program-Good Shepherd Grant $ 2,000
Salaries-Road Rage Grant 20,756
FICA-Road Rage Grant 1,618
Retirement-Road Rage Grant 1,063
401K-Road Rage Grant 1,015
Medical Insurance-Road Rage Grant 5,456
Disability Insurance-Road Rage Grant 66
Emergency Management:
Cap. Outlay-Motor Vehicles-DHS-Response Trailer 32,864
Safety Equipment-DHS-USAR Grant 25,000
Planning:
Temp Salaries-CAMA Grant 7,653
Contracted Services-CAMA Grant 2,571
Postage-CAMA Grant 1,000
Printing-CAMA Grant 3,662
Supplies-CAMA Grant 3,784
EP A Grant Expenditures 56,622
Contracted Services-Relocation Assistance-CHAF 258,331
Health:
Temp Salaries-Good Shepherd 4,651
Employee Reimbursement-Good Shepherd 300
Contracted Services-Good Shepherd 13,157
Supplies-Ministering Circle 9,494
Contracted Services-CFMF Living Well 1,466
Printing-CFMF Living Well 6,841
Supplies-CFMF Living Well 1,250
Employee Reimbursements-CFMF Living Well 511
Supplies-MaD-Baby Love 1,852
Supplies-CFMF Diabetes 3,336
Supplies-Safe Communities 2,444
Supplies-MOD Project Stop 13,557
Salaries-CFMF Family Counseling 40,324
FICA-CFMF Family Counseling 3,065
Retirement-CFMF Family Counseling 2,513
Medical Insurance-CFMF Family Counseling 8,000
Disability Insurance-CFMF Family Counseling 128
Cellular Expense-CFMF Family Counseling 50
Printing-CFMF Family Counseling 484
Supplies-CFMF Family Counseling 1,483
Employee Reimb.-CFMF Family Counseling 970
Training and Travel-CFMF Family Counseling $ 1,181
26
B/A 08-025, Sevtember 4, 2007, Pa!!:e 2
Exvenditure: Decrease Increase
Juvenile Day Treatment-DMC:
Salaries $ 8,260
FICA 542
Retirement 330
Medical Insurance 700
Disability Insurance 20
Cellular Expense 203
Printing 483
Supplies 254
Training and Travel 9,126
Aging:
Temp Salaries-Champ McDowell Davis Grant $177
Postage-Champ McDowell Davis Grant 195
Printing-Champ McDowell Davis Grant 536
Library:
Supplies-Medicine Grant 36
Parks:
Capital Outlay-Land-Spike Property Grant 29,775
Other Improvements-Middle Sound Grant 97,000
Museum:
Administrative Reserve-Grassroots Science 134,440
Total $908 $821,687
Revenue: Decrease Increase
Sheriff's Office:
Good Shepherd Safe Summer Grant $ 2,000
DOT Road Rage Grant 22,480
Emergency Management:
Dept. of Homeland Security Grant 32,864
Dept. of Homeland Security-USAR Grant 25,000
Planning:
CAMA Grant 18,670
EP A Grant 56,622
CHAF Grant 258,331
Health:
Good Shepherd Grant 18,1 08
Ministering Circle Grant 9,494
CFMF Living Well Grant 10,068
MOD Baby Love Grant 1,852
CFMF - Diabetes Supplies Grant 3,336
Safe Communities Grant 2,444
MOD Project Stop Grant 13,557
CFMF Family Counseling Grant 58,198
Juvenile Day Treatment-DMC:
GCC DMC Grant $19,918
27
B/A 08-025, Sevtember 4, 2007, Pa!!:e 3
Revenue: Decrease Increase
Aging:
Champ McDowell Davis Grant $908
Library:
Medicine Grant $ 36
Parks:
Beach Access Grant-Spike Property 22,331
Beach Access Grant-Middle Sound Park Grant 72,750
Museum:
Grassroots Science Grant 134,440
Commissioners:
Appropriated Fund Balance 39,188
Total $908 $821 687
Fund: Environmental Management
Department: Recycling
Exvenditure: Decrease Increase
Environmental Management Recycling:
Contracted Services-Waste Reduction Grant $25,000
Total $25,000
Revenue: Decrease Increase
Environmental Management Recycling:
Waste Reduction & Recycling Grant $25,000
Total $25,000
Section 2: Explanation
To rollover unexpended grant funds from FY 06/07 to FY 07/08.
Section 3: Documentation of Adoption:
This ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of New
Hanover County, North Carolina, that the Ordinance for Budget Amendment 08-025 amending the annual
budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2008, is adopted.
Adopted, this day of ,2007.
(SEAL)
William A. Caster, Chairman
ATTEST:
Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board
REGULAR AGENDA
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ESTIMA TED ITEMS OF BUSINESS Page
TIMES No.
5:40 p.m. l. Consideration of Civil Workplace Protocol Resolution and Approval of 31
Proposed Personnel Policy Revisions
5:45 p.m. 2. Public Hearing on Authorizing the Approval of an Installment Purchase 43
Contract and Deed of Trust
5:50 p.m. 3.1 Public Hearing 45
Road Naming (SN -102, 08/07) - Request by Planning Staff and E-911 to
Name an Unnamed Road to Marsh Cove Lane Located Near the 5900 Block of
Myrtle Grove Road, East Side
6:00 p.m. 3.2 Public Hearing 51
Address Assignments (AA-00l,08/07) - Request by Planning Staff and E-911
to Reassign Street Addresses to a Portion of Sanders Road Located Between
River and Carolina Beach Roads
6:30 p.m. 3.3 Public Hearing 57
Conditional Rezoning (Z-861, 4/07) - Request by Shanklin and Nichols, P A
for ACI-Pine Ridge, LLC to Rezone Approximately 16.2 Acres Located offN.
Market Street at Porter's Neck Road in the Transition and Wetland Resource
Protection Land Classifications from B-1 Neighborhood Business Zoning
District to CD(B-2) Conditional District Highway Business to locate a 169,000
sq. ft. Commercial Building for up to 42 Possible Uses (Continuedfrom the
July Meeting)
7:00 p.m. 3.4 Public Hearing 159
Rezoning (Z-869, 8/07) - Request by James D. Smith, Attorney for William F.
Canady to Rezone Approximately 0.65 Acre Located West of Market Street, at
113 Sweetwater Drive in the Transition Land Classification from R-15
Residential District to 0&1 Office & Institutional District (the Applicant
Owns Adjoining 0&1 Property)
7: 15 p.m. Break
7:25 p.m. 3.5 Public Hearing 167
Rezoning (Z-870, 8/07) - Request by Withers & Ravenel for Louise Stevens
to Rezone 9.25 Acres from R -15 Residential District to R -10 Residential
District at 4451 & 4453 Gordon Road in the Transition Land Classifications
(the Change Would Result in a Density Change from 2.5 Units Per Acre to 3.3
Units Per Acre)
7:45 p.m. 3.6 Public Hearing 175
Text Amendment (A-361, 8/07) - Request by Staff to Amend Section III of
the Zoning Ordinance to Require Applicants to Conduct a Community
Information Meeting Prior to Submission of Requests for Planned
Development, Riverfront Mixed Use, or Conditional Use District Zoning
Actions
8:00 p.m. 3.7 Public Hearing 179
Text Amendment (A-362, 8/07) - Request by Staff to Amend Section 71-1 of
29
the Zoning Ordinance to Add Language Establishing a Policy on Resubmittal
of Denied Special Use Permit Applications
8: 15 p.m. 3.8 Public Hearing 181
Text Amendment (A-363, 8/07) - Request by Staff to Amend Section III of
the Zoning Ordinance to Establish a Policy and Procedure Relating to
Continuances of Rezoning Cases
8:30 p.m. 4. Consideration of Mason Inlet Relocation - Maintenance Cost 185
8:45 p.m. 5. Consideration of Revisions to New Hanover County Code, Section Five: 189
Animals & Fowl
8:55 p.m. 6. Consideration of Award of Bid 08-0042 and Approval of Contract 08-0042 to 191
Sam English of V A, Inc. for the Purchase of Boiler Tubes Panels for Boiler #2
at W ASTEC
9:05 p.m. Break
9: 15 p.m. 7. Meeting of the Water and Sewer District 195
10:00 p.m. 8. Non-Agenda Items (limit three minutes)
10:05 p.m. 9. Additional Items
County Manager
County Commissioners
Clerk to the Board
County Attorney
10: 15 p.m. ADJOURN
Note: Times listed for each item are estimated, and if a preceding item takes less
time, the Board will move forward until the agenda is completed.
30
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Regular Item #: 1 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: County Manager Presenter: Andre Mallette
Contact: Cathy Morgan
SUBJECT:
Consideration of Civil Workplace Protocol Resolution and Approval of Proposed Personnel Policy Revisions
BRIEF SUMMARY:
New Hanover County is a member-employer of the EVOLVE Wilmington! Business Community Action Team, in affiliation
with Domestic Violence Shelter & Services, Inc. The Team has developed a peer-based civil workplace protocol as a
model for other employers. The attached resolution will demonstrate the County's commitment to being a model employer
in this area. A memo from Bruce Shell in support of the resolution is also attached.
We propose the addition of two personnel policies to formally address respectful workplace, workplace violence and
domestic violence in the workplace issues. The County has had an "unlawful workplace harassment policy" in place for
years; however, there is a recognized need to put that policy into context between the proposed "respectful workplace" and
"workplace violence" policies.
(1) Respectful Workplace Policy--On the front end, the respectful workplace policy helps shape the organizational culture by
establishing a standard of respectful conduct for all employees to follow in their dealings with each other and with the
citizens they serve. This policy addresses behaviors which may not be unlawful, but which nevertheless are detrimental to
positive communication, collaborative working relationships, employee satisfaction and retention, and service delivery.
(2) Workplace Violence Policy--With incidents of workplace violence on the rise and the potential for domestic violence to
spill over into the workplace, we have recognized the need to give the County's position on workplace violence a more
prominent place in our organizational culture. To that end, we propose a formal policy to address behaviors which escalate
from harassment to violence and endanger the health and safety of County employees and citizens on County property or
engaged in the conduct of County business.
This policy is introduced in memory of Gladys Bryant, a County employee who fell victim to domestic violence, and in honor
of County employees who have since diligently worked to honor Gladys with their active support of community services to
other victims.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Adopt the resolution and approve the two proposed additions to the County personnel policy.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: No Change In Position(s) Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
~ ~ ~ ~
........ ........ ........ ........
... . ... . . .. ... .
Resolution memo .doc Civi! VVorkp!ace Protocol Resolution.doc Respectful VVoirl<:p!ace Policy S 4- H7.doc V\!orkp!ace \'io!ence Policy S 4- H7.doc
31
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: N/A FINANCE: N/A BUDGET: N/A HUMAN RESOURCES:
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Recommend approval.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
32
NEW HANOVER COUNTY
-
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 4, 2007
TO: New Hanover County Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Bruce T. Shell, County Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution Supporting a Civil Workplace Protocol
Attached for your consideration is a resolution supporting a Civil Workplace Protocol to
be adopted by employers in the county and surrounding areas. The adoption of the
attached resolution is recommended.
As a leading employer in the region, we believe it is important for the County to set an
example by endorsing and promoting a peer~based Civil Workplace Protocol that
addresses the business need to maintain policies and procedures which encourage safe
and productive workplaces. The Protocol was developed by EVOLVE Wilmington!
Business Community Action Team, of which the County is a member, in affiliation with
Domestic Violence Shelter & Services, Inc. Employers active in this initiative are the
City of Wilmington, the New Hanover Health Network, the University of North
Carolina~Wilmington, Verizon and New Hanover County.
As a part of this initiative, the County Human Resources Department is also introducing
personnel policy revisions for the Board's approval to formally address respectful
workplace, workplace violence and domestic violence in the workplace. The adoption of
the proposed resolution and personnel policy revisions will further demonstrate the
County's commitment to being a model employer in this area.
33
RESOLUTION
OF THE
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
WHEREAS, the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners supports policies and
practices to provide a safe and productive workplace for employees and a supportive work
environment for employees who are victims of domestic violence; and
WHEREAS, the County supports the mission developed by the Business Community Action
Team of EVOL VE Wilmington! to promote a peer-based Civil Workplace Protocol that addresses
the business need to maintain appropriate policies and procedures that encourage safe and productive
workplaces, and that strive to protect the business, workplace and its employees from the effects of
domestic violence; and
WHEREAS, the County supports the goals developed by the Business Community Action
Team of EVOLVE Wilmington! for a workplace violence policy with domestic violence specific
language; policy-driven procedures; appropriate training; awareness campaigns; and making
resources available; and
WHEREAS, in this effort, the County seeks to be a model for other employers in this region;
and
WHEREAS,. as a part ofthis initiative, the County is introducing personnel policy revisions
for the Board's approval to formally address respectful workplace, workplace violence and domestic
violence in the workplace; and
WHEREAS, these policy revisions will supplement and expand the County's current
practices to promote a safe and productive work environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the New Hanover County Board of
Commissioners does support and endorse a peer-based Civil Workplace Protocol, developed by the
Business Community Action Team of EVOLVE Wilmington!, of which the County is a member.
The Protocol addresses the business need of employers to establish civil, violence-free, productive
workplaces through policy implementation, education and communication.
Adopted this the 4th day of September 2007.
[SEAL]
William A. Caster, Chairman
A TIEST:
Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board
34
Respectful Workplace Policy
PURPOSE
New Hanover County recognizes its responsibility to build and maintain a respectful workplace,
where all employees and citizens enjoy an environment in which the dignity and self~respect of every
person is valued and which is free of offensive remarks, material or behavior. This policy establishes
a standard for appropriate workplace conduct.
SCOPE
This policy covers all County employees, including regular, temporary, contract workers, volunteers,
and anyone else on County property or engaged in County business with a County employee,
whether or not on County property. Violation of this policy by any individual will be subject to
appropriate corrective action. Violation of this policy by a County employee may lead to disciplinary
action up to and including dismissal.
POLICY
It is the policy of New Hanover County to maintain a professional and respectful work and public
service environment. The County will not tolerate disrespectful behavior by or towards any
employee or other individual by employees, visitors or vendors.
This policy provides for:
. Fostering a workplace which values diversity; personal dignity; courteous conduct; mutual
respect, fairness and equality; positive communication between people; collaborative working
relationships;
. A reporting/complaint procedure for any individual who experiences or witnesses behavior
prohibited by this policy;
. A response procedure for supervisors who become aware of behavior prohibited by this policy;
. Accountability for violations or enforcement failures through appropriate disciplinary actions;
. Actions by the County to heighten employees' and supervisors' awareness of workplace violence
issues, including domestic violence as it relates to the workplace.
This policy prohibits disrespectful behavior, including but not limited to, the following:
. Offensive and inappropriate remarks, gestures, material and behavior;
. Grouping or isolating;
. YelIing;
. Belittling;
. Reprimanding in the presence of others;
. Aggressive or patronizing behavior;
. Embarrassing or humiliating behavior;
. Damaging gossip or rumors;
35
. Covert behavior, i.e., inappropriately withholding information, undermining, underhandedness;
. Unlawful discrimination or harassment as defined by federal and state laws;
EmploveeResponsibilities:
. Treat others with respect;
. Set an example by respecting the dignity and human rights of all employees and members oflhe
public;
. Recognize and refrain from actions that offend, embarrass or humiliate others;
. Raise disrespectful conduct with the employee displaying it or with a person in authority as soon
as possible;
. Do not make allegations of disrespectful behavior that are frivolous or vindictive;
. Make every effort to resolve respectful workplace, where possible in an informal manner.
SUDcrvisorv I Manae.ement ResDonsibilities:
Supervisors and managers are responsible to immediately act upon any situation involving
disrespectful behavior. They will:
. Promote awareness of this policy;
. Recognize and address actions that offend, embarrass or humiliate others;
. Treat each situation as a serious matter;
. Manage the situation towards a resolution between the parties if possible, with a view to
correcting behavior and preserving long term working relationships;
. Ensure that there are no reprisals against employees making a complaint or participating in an
investigation;
. Provide support to employees who are experiencing the effects of disrespectful behavior;
. Inform employees of Employee Assistance Program services;
. Consult with Human Resources if the situation cannot be resolved.
PROCEDURES
Reporting violations
An employee who believes he or she has been subjected to a violation of this policy who has either
opted not to try to personally resolve the situation or who has been unsuccessful in attempting a
resolution should report the violation immediately to his or her supervisor. If the employee's
supervisor is the source of the alleged policy violation, or if the employee's supervisor does not
respond to the report in a timely and appropriate manner, the employee should contact the Human
Resources Department.
Investigating Reports of Violations
New Hanover County will promptly and thoroughly investigate any verbal or written report of a
36
violation of this policy, and will respond to the reporting employee or other individual regarding the
results of the investigation,. except that specific personnel actions taken may not be revealed. The
investigation will be kept reasonably confidential; however, it may be necessary to confront the
employee who has allegedly violated the policy concerning the allegations.
Corrective Actions
Any employee found to have acted in violation of this policy shall be subject to appropriate
corrective and disciplinary actions, up to and including dismissal. Any visitor or vendor found to
have acted in violation of this policy shall be subject to responsive action as determined appropriate
by the County, up to and including being removed from the workplace and being prohibited from
returning in the future.
Retaliation
New Hanover County will not tolerate retaliation or intimidation directed towards any employee or
other individual who makes a verbal or written report of a violation of this policy or serves as a
witness to a violation of this policy. Any individual who retaliates against or intimidates an
employee making a report or a witness shaH be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including
dismissal.
37
Workplace Violence Policy
PURPOSE
New Hanover County is committed to providing a workplace which is safe, secure and free from
violence. Workplace violence includes, but is not limited to, intimidation, bullying,. threats,. physical
attacks, domestic violence, or property damage cOnllnitted by County employees or other individuals
against County employees while on County property or while in the performance of their duties.
These kinds of behaviors will not be tolerated and, if they occur, will be appropriately addressed in
accordance with this policy. Also included in this policy, are proactive provisions to heighten
awareness of violence in the workplace, including domestic violence, and to provide guidance for
employees and management in recognizing and appropriately responding to these issues.
SCOPE
This policy covers aU County employees, including regular, temporary, contract workers, volunteers,
and anyone else on County property or engaged in County business with a County employee,
whether or not on County property. Violation of this policy by any individual win be subject to
appropriate legal action. Violation of this policy by a County employee may lead to disciplinary
action up to and including dismissal.
POLlCY
This policy provides for:
. A reporting/complaint procedure for any individual who experiences or witnesses behavior
prohibited by this policy;
. A response procedure for supervisors who become aware of behavior prohibited by this
policy;
. Accountability for violations or enforcement failures through appropriate disciplinary
actions;
. Actions by the County to heighten employees' and supervisors' awareness of workplace
violence issues, including domestic violence as it relates to the workplace;
. Supporting victims of workplace or domestic violence;
. Fostering a climate of trust and respect among workers and between employees and
management; and
. When necessary, seeking advice and assistance from outside resources, including threat-
assessment psychologists., psychiatrists and other professionals, social service agencies, and
law enforcement.
This policy prohibits any acts of aggression or violence from any individual while on County
property or against a County employee acting as a representative of the County, whether on County
property or not. These acts include but are not limited to:
. Any act or threat of bodily harm or property damage, including subtle or implied threats to an
38
indi vidual or his or her family, friends, or associates. (A threat is the expression of an intent
to cause physical harm or property damage as would be perceived by a reasonable person,
without regard to whether the party communicating the threat has the present ability to carry
it out; whether the threat is subtle or overt in nature; or whether the expression is contingent,
conditional or future).
. Fighting or other physical altercations. (A physical altercation is unwanted or hostile
physical contact such as fighting, hitting, pushing, shoving, throwing objects, grabbing,
touching or any unwanted physical contact.)
. Unauthorized possession or use of any weapon or caustic/dangerous chemicals, whether
concealed or visible, on County property, except by sworn law enforcement offi.cers or other
employees as required to perfonn their job duties.
. Use or threat of use of weapon on/in County property. (A weapon includes, but is not limited
to, firearms, explosives, caustics/chemicals, ammunition, knives or other dangerous or deadly
weapons.) Use of other items as weapons, such as a tool or furniture, is also prohibited.
. Use of language which would be regarded by a reasonable person as likely to invoke
violence.
. Repeated following of another individual, known as "stalking" or threatening another person
with the intent to place the other person in reasonable fear of his/her safety.
. Making harassing or threatening phone calls, letters or other fonns of written or electronic
communications.
. Intentionally damaging or threatening to damage County or employee property.
Emplovee Responsibilities.:
Employees have the responsibility to adhere to this policy and its established preventive practices
and to report violent or threatening behavior or other warning signs, following procedures
established by this policy.
Any employee who experiences or witnesses any acts, conduct, behavior or communication which is
in violation ofthis policy, must immediately contact either his/her supervisor, department head or the
Human Resources Department, and if necessary, local law enforcement. Employees should not try to
handle a violent or potentially violent incident.
. When reporting an imminent threat ancl/or act of violence, an employee should first secure
his/her own safety, contact local law enforcement and, if possible, alert persons in the
immediate area.
. Employees threatened, assaulted or attacked, while on official duty in the field, shall
immediately report such incidents to local law enforcement and their supervisor.
. Ifanyone commits a violent act or makes a direct threat while on County property, the person
will be asked to leave by a supervisor. Should the person refuse to leave, local law
enforcement should be contacted to assist in removing the person.
. Any employee who violates the workplace violence policy will receive appropriate
disciplinary action which may include dismissal.
. Employees who know infonnation about workplace violence, but do not report it in
accordance with this policy, will be subject to appropriate disciplinary action which may
include dismissal.
39
. The County will not tolerate retaliation against an employee for reporting instances of
workplace violence. Incidents of retaliation should be reported to the Human Resources
Department immediately. Every effort will be made to protect the safety and anonymity of
anyone who comes forward with concerns about a threat or act of violence.
Supenrisorv / Manaa:ement Responsibilities:
Supervisors and managers will support the County's policies created to provide work environments
that are safe from violence, threats and harassing/aggressive behavior. To that end, they shall:
. Inform aU employees that workplace violence or other abusive, aggressive or disruptive
behavior in any form will. not be tolerated in the workplace.
. Be aware of any patterns or changes in employee behavior which could pose a concern for
the workplace_ Such behavior should be documented by the supervisor for the record.
Changes in behavior should be addressed with the employee after consultation with Human
Resources.
. Be alert to the possibility of workplace violence on the part of former employees, citizens or
others.
. Offer support to victims of workplace violence, which includes domestic violence.
. Be aware of the location and telephone numbers of community resources available in
responding to any actual or potential workplace violence, including domestic violence. The
County intends to publish, maintain, and post in locations of high visibility, a list of
resources for survivors and perpetrators of domestic violence.
. When aware of a threat or imminent danger of violence to an employee, immediately notifY
that employee of the danger and notifY law enforcement and/or the Human Resources
Department.
. NotifY law enforcement and/or the Human Resources Department when they receive a notice
or complaint of workplace violence or if they suspect that these acts are occurring or have
occurred. Take all threats seriously. Failure to appropriately respond to complaints or
observed threat or imminent danger situations may result in disciplinary action which may
include dismissal.
. Maintain appropriate confidentiality for the victim.
Domestic Violence Victim Accommodations
The County shall not discharge, demote, deny a promotion, or discipline an employee because the
employee took reasonable time off from work to obtain reliefunder Chapter SOB (domestic violence
order of protection) or Chapter 50C (civil no~contact order for nonconsensual sexual contact or
stalking). An employee who is absent from the workplace to obtain such relief shall follow the
department's usual leave request policy or procedure, including advance notice to the employee's
supervisor, unless an emergency prevents the employee from doing so. Management may require
documentation of any emergency that prevented the employee from complying in advance with the
department's usual leave request procedure, or any other information available to the employee
which supports the employee's reason for being absent from the workplace.
Consistent with the County's usual leave policies, employees may apply available personal or sick
40
leave to 0 btain medical, counseling, or legal assistance to address problems relating to workplace or
domestic violence.
Depending on the circumstances, employees who are victims of workplace or domestic violence may
also need special accommodations or adjustments to their work schedule or location in order to
enhance their safety. Management shall use their discretion to accommodate these requests and
needs whenever possible and appropriate.
PROCEDURES
Workplace Violence Resnonse:
To respond to an event of actual or threatened workplace violence, the County will use a three-level
plan of action_ The Human Resources Director or his designee will serve in the lead role and will
assemble others as needed.
Levell: Threats
When an individual states or implies a threat of violence, the employee(s) who
received or observed the threat shall immediately alert a supervisor. The supervisor,
as soon as possible, should notify and consult with the Human Resources Director,
his designee or the County Safety Officer. The supervisor will then document the
incident and any actions taken, a copy of which will be forwarded to the l-Iuman
Resources Director or his designee.
Level 2: Danger is imminent
An immediate threat of violence shall be reported in accordance with the policy set
forth above. After law enforcement personnel have been caUed to secure the
location, the supervisor will contact the Human Resources Director, his designee or
the County Safety Officer.
The Human Resources Director or his designee will conduct an investigation of the
incident and determine what other actions are needed.
Level 3: An act of violence which results in injuries or death
When a violent act occurs in the workplace, the first priority will be to attend to the
immediate danger and injuries. The first response to an actual act of violence is to
contact appropriate emergency response personneL
As soon as possible, the supervisor on location will contact the Human Resources
Director, his designee or the County Safety Officer. The Human Resources Director
or his designee will be responsible for coordinating the administrative investigation
of the incident and determining what other resources are needed for the County to
respond to the incident. The County's response will include assembling resources to
41
address employee needs and media requests. Details of the administrative
investigation will be kept confidential unless prohibited by law.
42
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Regular Item #: 2 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Legal Presenters: Wanda M. Copley, County Attorney
and Avril Pinder, Finance Director
Contacts: Wanda M. Copley, County Attorney and Avril Pinder, Finance Director
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing on Authorizing the Approval of an Installment Purchase Contract and Deed of Trust
BRIEF SUMMARY:
At its August 13, 2007 meeting, the Board of Commissioners of the County of New Hanover, North Carolina adopted a
resolution that authorized the County to proceed to pay capital costs of acquiring, constructing and equipping a six million
gallon per day groundwater treatment plant and a related well field system to serve customers in the northern section of the
County, in an aggregate amount of $42,000,000, pursuant to an installment purchase contract, under which the County will
make certain installment payments, for the acquisition, construction and equipping of the Water Project in order to make the
Water Project available to the County; and authorized the County to proceed to provide, in connection with the Contract, as
grantor, a deed of trust and security agreement under which the site on which the Water Treatment Plant will be located at
7601 Old Oak Road in the County will be mortgaged by the County to create such lien thereon as may be required for the
benefit of the entity, or its assigns, providing the funds to the County under the Contract. The improvements on, and
personal property related to the site, will also be subject to the lien provided in the Deed of Trust.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Conduct public hearing.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: No Change In Position(s) Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: FINANCE: BUDGET: HUMAN RESOURCES:
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Conduct public hearing.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Conducted public hearing.
43
New Hanover County
Certificate of Participation
Water Treatment Plant Project
Water Treatment Plant Timeline
8/13 Permission to get financing
8/14 Well drilling bids due (rebid)
8/21 Treatment plant bids received
8/27 Well drilling bids received
9/4 Public hearing on financing
9/5 Submit application to LGC
9/11 Meet with LGC to review documents
9/12-13 Meet with Rating Agencies
9/17 Recommend award of well drilling bid and budget amendment
9/17 Approval final resolution on financing
9/26 Update survey for property collateralization
9/27 Concentrate line bids due
9/28 Receive bond ratings
10/1 Recommend award of treatment plant bid and budget amendment
10/2 Receive LGC approval on financing
10/11 Close on Financing Issue
10/15 Recommend award of concentrate line bids
__m._...~._
44
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Regular Item #: 3.1 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Planning Presenter: Sam Burgess
Contact: Sam Burgess
Item Does Not Require Review
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing
Road Naming (SN-102, 08/07) - Request by Planning Staff and E-911 to Name an Unnamed Road to Marsh Cove
Lane Located Near the 5900 Block of Myrtle Grove Road, East Side
BRIEF SUMMARY:
The Planning staff received a request from several County residents to have their unimproved road named. This request by
the residents was in response to the challenges of being located in the event of an emergency and timely service delivery.
With the assistance and encouragement from E-911, approximately 10 residents out of 17 landowners chose the name
Marsh Cove Lane.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Planning Staff and E-911 recommend that the unnamed road be named Marsh Cove Lane and that new street addresses
be assigned along the road.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
~
........
. ..
SN-' 02.doc
Hewlett letter and map
ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0, effective January 30, 2008.
45
CASE: SN-l02,08/07
APPUCANT(S): New Hanover County Planning & E-911
REQUEST: Name an Unnamed Road to Marsh Cove Lane
Assign New Street Addresses
LOCATION: Near 5900 Block Myrtle Grove Road
Staff Summarv
In May, 2006, the Planning staff received a request from several County residents to have
their unimproved road named. This request by the residents was in response to the
challenges of being located in the event of an emergency and timely service delivery. The
unnamed road is located near the 5900 block of Myrtle Grove Road and extends
southeast near the Intracoastal Waterway for a distance of2,540' , the road then runs
south and parallel to the waterway for a distance of 438' (see attached map). Adjoining
landowners along the unnamed road were polled by the Planning staff approximately a
year ago on their preference for an unduplicated road name. Several efforts on the part of
staff failed to produce an unduplicated name that a majority of the residents could agree
on. In July, 2007, the Planning staff in conjunction with E-91 I revisited the unnamed
road issue and encouraged the residents living along the road to reach a consensus on a
choice of 3 street names. With the assistance and encouragement from E-9 I 1,
approximately 10 residents out of 17 landowners chose the name Marsh Cove Lane.
Staff Comments
The creation of a new road name to Marsh Cove Lane will enhance public and
emergency service delivery, a better means of neighborhood identification, and safety for
the residents who presently live along the road. If the new road name is adopted by the
Board, the County will also assign new street addresses based on adopted County
guidelines. Presently, residents living along the road use a combination of Myrtle Grove
Road and Shannon Drive addresses.
Staff Recommendation
Staff and E-9ll recommend that the unnamed road be named Marsh Cove Lane and
that new street addresses be assi.gned along the road. The County will be responsible
for creating and erecting a new street sign. An effective date of change for the residents
would be November 30, 2007.
46
NEW HANOVER COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY
COMMUNICATIONS CENTER
230 Government Center Drive, Suite 185
Wilmington, NC 28403
Phone: (910) 798-6922
Fax: (910) 798-6925
E-mail: bhewlett@uhcgov.com
Brenda Hewlett
Assistant Director
July 25, 2007
Dear Myrtle Grove Resident,
The county Planning Department has recently made attempts to name the road that
serveS as access to your property off of Myrtle Grove Road, along Shannon Dr. They
had hoped to find a name that was suitable to a majority of the property owners but
unfortunately I they were unable to do so. Therefore, the E-911 Department is
submitting the following three names that have been suggested by some of the
property owners for you to choose from:
1. Easy Street
2. John Bryan Lane (in honor of the family who originally owned the proper1[y)
3. Marsh Cove Lane
Please submit your preference to me at the contact information below by August
15,2007. A non response will be counted as a vote for the name with the most
votes.. If a majority is not reached, in the interest of public safety, the E-911
Department will select a name from the list. The selected name will be presented
to the Board of County Commissioners for their consideration. You will be
contacted by letter informing you of the name that has been selected as well as
the specific date, time and location of the meeting.
47
Sincerely I
~~
Brenda Hewlett, ENP
Assistant Director
New Hanover County Public Safety
230 Government Center Drive, Suite 185
Wilmington, NC 28403
Phone: 910-798-6922
Fax: 910-798-6925
bhewlett@nhcgov.com
48
~ ~ IFl 4)
tIl Q.l if!... Q) Q.l
" tIl "t.l l:: III I;- 4i rnl,i'J O'iJ..
~ ~ Q. .....S C ~ :." ~~ " 'U;.j
to- .S III 0 III I;;:b"'l
8~ <C N 0 .. E 0 c: c:c:....1II (,) ~ m; ~ '0 I i .J::
- ~li;E !: 3Jrn ~cee~ '0
-e :!lEe:> (0 lI'>lll l:l:c III - ....'"D..... O. !:: z.~;~~
0 $z 011I1 .-- . ~ "0 o III ~ no 0- ',-.If
(l) I'I:l """'" is.Q. W l'Il '0 g.'~ "g~:g r- ~ ~
g~ W. I Qi O--iill) 0. 0 o(l 0. ..... as ,~~. '~c: V
~t: (()Z .. Z III > III Q.c.. :a~~~ : 15
III <II ._ <(J: III a:::
~ ~ <t. (() 0 ... ,., Z 0 ~' ~~ ~o as
... (.) ii5 Q.
z ~~,~,,~..
_...~_.-
I
I
a~'3^OMEf311~AW I I/f-J
(- /1 / /1
I
I
49
This page intentionally left blank.
50
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Regular Item #: 3.2 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Planning Presenter: Sam Burgess
Contact: Sam Burgess
Item Does Not Require Review
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing
Address Assignments (AA-001 ,08/07) - Request by Planning Staff and E-911 to Reassign Street Addresses to a
Portion of Sanders Road Located Between River and Carolina Beach Roads
BRIEF SUMMARY:
In anticipation and response to the growth near and along Sanders Road and to enhance timely emergency service
delivery, several existing street mailing addresses need to be adjusted to provide proper sequential numbering and block
ranges. Four residents would be affected by the address adjustment.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Planning Staff and E-911 recommend approval of the proposed address adjustments.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
~
........
. ..
amended M-001.doc
FAO and map
ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
A motion to approve staff's recommendation and work as much as possible to accommodate the family represented during
the public hearing was approved 4-1, Commissioner Kopp voting in opposition, effective January 30, 2008.
51
CASE: AA-00l,08/07
APPLICANT: New Hanover County Planning Staff & E-911
REQUEST: Re-address Street Numbers to a Portion of Sanders Road
LOCATION: Between River & Carolina Beach Roads
Staff HistoO'
For the past several years, the southern portion of New Hanover County has witnessed an
explosion of residential and non-residential growth. One area that will be impacted by
this growth is Sanders Road. Presently, three (3) large residential developments (Willow
Glen@ Beau Rivage, Pointe South Apartments & The Village @ Motts Landing) are
under construction off Sanders Road_ A retail complex (Harris Teeter) is also under
construction at the southeast corner of Carolina Beach and Sanders Road. A bank is also
planned along Sanders Road. Recently, efforts have been made to develop other portions
of Sanders Road. Sanders Road is a NCDOT State maintained road that is approximately
5,000' in length located between River Road to the west and Carolina Beach Road to the
east (see attached map).
Staff Comments
In anticipation and response to the growth near and along Sanders Road and to enhance
timely emergency service delivery, several existing street mailing addresses need to be
adjusted to provide proper sequential numbering and block ranges. At the present time, a
variety of street addresses (double & triple digit numbers) exist along the road that do not
conform to the County's addressing standards adopted in 2002. These addresses most
likely were assigned many years ago by the U.S. Postal Service and the County. Staffin
conjunction with E-9l1 has made every effort to retain as many of the existing street
addresses as possible. As noted on the Address Map (in red), approximately four (4)
residential owners along the road will need to make an adjustment to their mailing
address.
Residents affected by the address adjustment include the following:
Bobby Harris - 22 Sanders Road (address out of sequence)
Kathy Sanders - 543 Sanders Road (out of normal block range)
Carolyn Wade - 539 Sanders Road (out of normal block range)
Sarah Sanders - 417 Sanders Road (out of normal block range)
Staff Recommendation
With anticipated groVv1h and need to enhance emergency service delivery along Sanders
Road and in accordance with Section 3.7.2 of the County's Addressing Standards and
Procedures Manual, staffand E-911 recommend approval of the proposed address
adjustments. If adopted the effective date of change would be November 30,.2007.
.__,m_,. ",.,,,,,~.___._~'M'"'''''__
52
Frequently Asked Questions
Concerning House Number Assignments
Question: Why should I change my address: I have had this one for years and have not
encountered difficulties with it?
Answer: In 1984 New Hanover County initiated a process to eliminate old rural route box
numbers and to change numbers to create a consistent street numbering pattern
throughout the geographic area. The new numbers were based on a
comprehensive grid system for New Hanover County and the City of
Wilmington. Once the numbers are assigned, they are entered into the
Emergency 911 System, which in turn, uses the street grid system for dispatching
emergency services.
Question: Why is house numbering deemed so important?
Answer: Grid system numbering for houses and businesses promote the orderly and
efficient delivery of public services, including law enforcement, fire protection,
emergency medical services, and postal delivery. In addition, the numbering
system makes it easier for various private delivery services such as parcel
services (UPS, FEDEX), building supplies, furniture, appliances, etc. to find their
destinations quickly and easily. As well as, addresses are helpful for various
private & public utility services.
Question: Why is there a gap in numbers between my neighbor's home and mine?
Answer: This numerical gap, typically in units of four or more, is designed to provide
flexibility in house number assignments. In the event an additional structure,
apartment, or unit is added to a lot, or if the lot is subdivided, then this spacing
allows for additional numbers to be available. In many cases, which may be
yours, this flexibility does not exist and therefore, a renumbering of a block
would need to occur.
Question: How much time do I have to change my address?
Answer: Typically, four to five weeks is allotted to make the transition. However, the post
office will work with the old address for up to six. months.
Question: Once the new address assignments have been made, will the County change
it again in the future?
Answer: The implementation of the grid numbering system and flexibility in numbers on a
block will eliminate the need for changes to occur again.
Question: Once my number has been assigned, what type of identification is required
for tbe home andJor mailbox?
Answer: It shall be the duty of the property owner, agent, or occupant of any house or
building fronting on a street in the county to properly display a number, which
has been assigned by the Planning Dept. The owner, agent, or occupant of such
house or building shall place such number in a conspicuous place thereon so that
it may be plainly seen and observed from the street. The number shall be at least
3 inches in size.
m____
53
:5
!II 0 ll")
C g N "'
<II II "~\",
~ " ~.., " S ~ -"i"'.
~. ..... .~ 0 ',A<","
· 0 ~ 'S - · . 0 O.S 'I-"
.. ll,.. ~.. = c'" Iii Iii 0; S ~ l ~ _ ,
H <(.,... (0 SlCll41e!ll .!::l::-w"; eCll
u= ~ '" 0 ~... 0.- .. ~"
;~ - (:) .. Oi3 C.g a.Uo!l ~
~O w' $ Z<(.21c c(J: 0
~~ (I)~ 2i 31~ z
iz <( <I:
~ u
fJfB~
~ am= 8
1Il 8 mnmn 8
~ 8 amg:m 8
~ fJJ:IJ DIrl'-L.W.J B
J: lJJIlmnmncr::m
--3~ \
'\
\---"L.--- \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \ ;;
\', ~
\ u
I \ ~
'. ~ "'.
"\ 0 e :irE
\ .. , · 0 .
\ ~ = tne
ill ill 1:::
\~, "' c .
' -- \ '0 ~
\ --- \ ~"
\..--- ,
v...... .......--\
\ ...........; \
\ ~~ '\
1"--- \ ......-
\ \"
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \ ~
\ \...---
\
- ,\
/ -~~
/ .-.......
L~,,_ ",~
""..::::::.~.......... ~---_.
54
-.-.-.---.-.-------.--..-.-..---.-.-...-..
:>, (5 ;:~ 0 g
~ 0.. _"C 01 0 1lIc:: 0 <0
'" " I'-.~ III .. c::.... .. -.. ,. C III to .i ~.
"': <C C> v'O .....- C ., ~., "
u::: ,.. - '.'0"E0::: C:C"'(l) ...1lI 91 III "CE II '.w
! ~ :E Q ~ ~ ~ (l) 0 l:s i (j;e -g it ~ i ~ g. . ti ~)\
'" O. W. 0, ... '0 ....E.. = :: :;::- W 1::.... 1:)... :::...Cl. -<I> 0 1...<= " '(('_ .. . en
'" .,; .A' 1Il.. "0 s:: - C:. ... III II "C III "C 0 > to.'- . .)1
~5 en.... -:;; Z<( Ol~ C:.(.)a/S 0.. :::"0 C"C ... l\I "I ~ ';
",2 <( <( C .; III <(::r:: ~ <<:J< Cl."C . ~
~ u VJ(/J Z >Ill' 1II l'3
< 0 W
~ I /. ... .IJ~~TrT-rrm-
a~ HO'V38 'VNIlO~\fO --
...
(I)
li
Cll
I-
.~
:a...
III
:I:
~..-' \"
-"'~ ':.
\ . . . J
(~.-~----- \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
.. \ -
\ \. ~. ~ g
\ .... ~ .s:::
'" ~ 0
\ \ ~ ..~ VJ
\ 1 ","tl 0 ~
\ ~./"": .Q"tl "1'- e
~~~ \ E~ m
\-...- \ ::Ie. =.
....--"" \ Z 0;} (J)
-I <Ill III CCl
\ _-~\ .::1 1:
\ ~...--- \ iD I:l.
V~ \ I
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\ ~\ "'"
- \ 1< ::
~, ;{\-~~~ ~~~
55
This page intentionally left blank.
56
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Regular Item #: 3.3 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Planning Presenter: Chris O'Keefe
Contact: Chris O'Keefe
Item Does Not Require Review
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing
Conditional Rezoning (Z-861, 4/07) - Request by Shanklin and Nichols, PA for ACI-Pine Ridge, LLC to Rezone
Approximately 16.2 Acres Located off N. Market Street at Porters Neck Road in the Transition and Wetland
Resource Protection Land Classifications from B-1 Neighborhood Business Zoning District to CD(B-2) Conditional
District Highway Business to Locate a 169,000 sq. ft. Commercial Building for Up to 42 Possible Uses
BRIEF SUMMARY:
The Planning Board voted 6-1 to recommend approval with conditions. This item was continued from the July County
Commissioners meeting pending information regarding access and internal traffic flow. The Commissioners also requested
that the developer meet with representatives from the Porters Neck community and DOT.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
The County Commissioners may approve or deny the conditional use rezoning portion of the request.
If the zoning is approved the County Commissioners must approve or approve with conditions the accompanying special
use permit.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
[gm [gm
Z -861-S laff Summary. doc Z-861-Pelition Summary. doc
applicant package (11) and citizen emails
ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
The conditional use rezoning and the accompanying special use permit was approved 5-0 with the three conditions
proposed by the petitioner to be completed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
57
-
CASE: Z-861, 4/07
PETITIONER: Shanldi.n & Nichols, LLP for ACI-Pine Ridge, LLC
REQUEST: From B-1 Neighborhood Business to CD (B-2)
Conditional District Highway Business for 169,112 sq.
ft. building, potential 42 retail uses.
ACREAGE: Approximately 15.6 Acres
LOCATION: N. Market St. Porters Neck Rd.
LAND CLASS: Transition and Wetland Resource Protection
PLA.J~NING BOARD ACTION: At it's June 7,.2007 meeting, the Planning Board voted 6-1
to recommend approval of the request, including conditions
of improving the access road to DOT standards along the
southwest portion of the site and requiring pervious
pavement for parking spaces in excess of minimum
requirements.
At its July 9, 2007 meeting, the Board of County
- Commissioners voted to continue this item pending
additional information on access to the site and internal
traffic fio'w. The Board also suggested that the petitioner
meet with members of the Porters Neck Community, Staff
and DOT to address these concerns.
The applicant agreed to limit to only the Building Materials
and Garden Supplies use, and to install a private well for
irrigation purposes at the July meeting. Also, applicant has
agreed to design, permit and construct a collective sewer
system to serve the site per Sanitary DIstrict specifications.
STAFF SUMMARY (revised)
The subject property is located in the northeast portion of the county in an area classified on the
2006 C.<\11A Land Classification map as transition on the southeastern portion and wetland
resource protection on the northwes.tern. The property is west ofN. Market Street, at its
intersection with Porters Neck Road and is bounded to the north by the new Highway 17 B:ypass.
Access is from N .Market Street, which is a maj or arterial roadway. Level of service has been
rated F, meaning traffic volume exceeds capacity.
The subject property is primarily vacant and wooded. There is one existing house and a fuel
pump on the site. Strip commercial uses dominate the s.urrounding area along Market Street.
The subject property is located within the Greenview watershed drainage area. The property is
-, not influenced flood hazard. l\reas of 404 wetlands are located along the northern boundary
!in.e. The sile is in a recharge area for the principal The to utilize
COUnty waler and sewer with ~'l pri\'ate welllO be installed for
Z-861 revised 1
8/30/2007 5B
t'Rev .J
58
-
As a condition for rezoning, the applicant proposes a building of 169,112 sq, fL gross floor area
and proposed use will be a Building Materials and Garden Supply store. All other minimum
requirements of state and federal rules will be me!. A companion special use permit ,,>'ill
bind the proposed use and restrictions to tills property,
Land Use Plan Considerations:
This conditional rezoning petition proposes a change from lo\ver intensity neighborhood business
uses to the business designation on a conditional basis for the purpose of developing a
building material and garden supply superstore use as shown of the companion site plan.
Bet\veen 2005 and 2006, average daily traffic volume just south of the site decreased by about
15'?,'(, _ The intersection with Porters Neck Road is currently signalized. A Traffic Impact Analysis
v,'as prepared for this pro] eet in conjunction with additional retail uses southwest of this si te and
road improvements will be required along Market Street as well as the extended Port.er's Neck
Road. Updates to the TV" were conducted in 2007. For purposes of the TL...., a home
improvement store was shown in this location and was anticipated to generate approximately
4,000 average trips. TIns site is adjacent to the proposed future alignment of Plantation
Road which would connect the Military Cutoff Extension and Murra:yville Road to the Porter's
Neck Area. Plantation Road is identified as a rural collector thoroughfare in the 2030 Long
Range Transportation Plan.
-
The 2006 Update of the Joint Ci\MA Plan describes the purpose of the Transition class as
providing for future intensive urban development on lands that have been or will be
provided with necessary urban services. The location of these areas is based upon land
use planning policies requiring optimum eftlciency in land utilization and servIce
delivery.
Based on the foregoing, this proposal would appear to be consistent with the strategies for the
Transition classification. Staff feels the area is appropriate for intensive regiQn'lL9.Q.rr!Plerciill
development based on its proximitv to major highways and established custom.erbases a,.ndjyould
reconunend approval.
ACTION #1 NEEDED:
Adopt a statement in accordance with NCGS 153A-341 which requires that "prior to
adopting or rejecting any zoning amendment, tbe governing board shall adopt a statement
describing whether tbe action is consistent with an adopted comprebensive plan and
explaining why the board considers the action taken to be reasonable and in the public
interest. "
EXAMPLE:
The County Comn:tissioners find that this request for zoning map amendment of 16.2 acres from
B-1 Neighborhood Business District to CD(B-2) Conditional District for Highway Commercial
purposes associated with a Building materials and garden supply use as presented is (or is
1. Consistent with the purposes and intent ofthe Transition and Conservation land
classifications and the associated land use policies adopted in the 2006 land use plan:
..-
Z-861 revised 2
8/30/2007 6'1
(~ev.)
59
- and in the public interest 10 allow addition of acreage outside the flood
..,
plain to be converted to intensity commercial use as outlined in a companion
use permit.
PRELTh1INARY STAFF Fll\TDINGS FOR THE COMPANION SPECIAL USE PERMIT:
1. Tbe Board must find tbat the use will not materially endanger tbe public bealth or
safety where proposed and developed according to tbe plan as submitted and
approved.
A. Public water will serve the property.
B. County sewer will be required to serve the site
C. Applicflm will design, pennit and construct a collective sewer system to serve the
site per District specifications.
D. A private well ""ri11 be installed for irrigation.
E The property accesses Market Street, an identified arterial via the intersection of
Market Street and Porter's Neck Road.
F. Traffic counts decreased in the vicinity oftms site between 2005 and 2006.
G. Fire Service is available from the Ogden PD.
H. The property is not located in a flood hazard area.
L Stonnwater retention is identified on the site plan and must meet the design
standards ofthe County's stonn water ordinance.
-
2. The Board must find tbat the use meets all required conditions and specifications of
the Zoning Ordi.nance.
A The property is zoned B.l Neighborhood Business District Trus request is made
concurrent with conditional rezoning to CD(B-2) Highway Business District.
B. Petitioner proposes off-street parking that exceeds the requirements of Article
VIII of the New Hanover County Zoning Ordinance by providing 547 spaces
compared to 423 spaces required.
C. Traffic circulation system will be via internal drives connecting to the extension
of Porters Neck Road and must provide adequate access for emergency service
vehicles.
D, A traffic impact analysis was updated in 2007 for NCDOT for this project and
street improvements will be required by NCDOT for congestion management
E. The Special Highway Overlay District applies to 2 sides oftrus property, Buffers
as required in Section 59.6 must be provided. The applicant has provided
renderings to depict the approximate effectiveness of the proposed vegetative
buffer to fully shield outside storage from view along the 1-140 overlay.
3, Tbe Board m.ust find that tbe use will not substantially injure tbe value of adjoining
or abutting property or that the use is a public necessity.
/',,, No evidence has been submitted that this project will decrease property values of
adjacent parcels,
- B. Stonnwater management must perform in compIiancewith the requirements of
the County ordinance.
Z-861 revised 3
8/30/2007 {pO
(K (}V ~
60
- The Board must find that the location and character of the use if developed
4.
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 plan of development
for New Hanover Connty.
A. The 2006 Land Use Plan identifies Ihis area as Transition, which provides for
future intensive urban development on lands that have or will have urban
servICes.
B. Other commercial uses are prevalent in this vicinity, although none are of the
magnitude of a regional superstore.
C. The Site Plan proposes improving the Porters Neck Road extension to the
Southwestern Property Boundary which would accommodate Plantation Road as
indicated in the Long Range Transportation Plan.
Staff suggested conditions:
L Staff recommends that parking spaces provided in excess of the minimum
required be constructed of pervious pavement.
ACTION #2 NEEDED:
(Choose one)
1. Motion to Grant the companion special use permit (with or 'without
recommended conditions)
2. Motion to table the item in order to receive additional information or
documentation (Specify).
- 3. Motion to Deny based on specific negative findings in any of the 4 categories
above, sucb as lack of consistency with adopted plans or determination that
the project will pose public hazards or will not adequately meet
requirements of the ordinance.
-
Z-861 revised 4
8/30/2007 Lo\
(Rev ~
61
Case: Z-861, 04/07
Petition Summary Data
OwnerlPetitioner: Shanklin and Nichols for ACI-Pine Ridge LLC
Existing Land Use: Vacant wooded land and one house
Zoning History: Area 5 (July 6, 1971) and Area 8B (July 7, 1972); rezoned March
13,2006
Land Classification: Transition and Wetland Resource Protection
Water Type: County
Sewer Tvpe: Septic system until County sewer is available
Recreation Area: Ogden Park
Access&, Traffic Volume: Market Street (US 17) at Porter's Neck Road. Just
south of the site, ADT 42,864 (4/05); ADT 36,236
(11/06); for a decrease of 15%; 2005 LOS was F,
meaning traffic exceeds capacity along this segment
Fire District: Ogden VFD
Watershed & Water Ouality Classification: Greenview Watershed - C(SW)
Aquifer Recharge Area: Primary Recharge area of the principal aquifers
(combined Castle Hayne and Peedee aquifers--confined artesian)
Conservation/Historic/Archaeological Resources: 404 wetlands; SHOD (Market
S1. and I~ 140)
Soils: Class I: Wa- Wakulla sand; Rm-Rimini sand and Class III: Mu-MurviHe; Le-
Leon
Septic Suitability: Class I-Suitable and Class III-Severe limitations
Schools: Blair Elementary
62
l/'l
.... ~
,
a:
;.'}
m
~
1l ...
~ -,
:i
:ii
c 0
J ! ~
l _.2 "8 OJ ;;;
"l:l D ~ 'fi?
T ~.""l '" -:0::: 'ID N
Olo 3, . --Ii i, ~ ~" li~ iiWI
, -.,c
Ou ~ .
~z 11. ~ ~ ~. ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~, ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~
_ilIr!S
" ~~~; , ;::'f.l1;'~ f.l1f.l1 f.l1 ::i~ f'uJ Uf.l1~
o oX .:/ ~'~ a~' . ~ a a ~ a ~ ~ .1 ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ a a ~
-. Iii:: ,
""'e~ .r ~ ,'{,~~. ~ .... Ul m ,oo.ot ~ " ~ < ~ tn,,_:~ ~ 00
Q ..."'.. J ~lalllailalill!'i!I!!iiil
~ Q.E ~ '.
U) ,,5,fQ1 c:
co g~~ I 1li~.1~_~.1h~~ -u "i!HH~~
I :l~u i ~ g' ~ g ~:::~. e ~ r', ,~~..::: ~ ~ ~ ~ ,<
N "'<t<{
i
63
This page intentionally left blank.
64
.~ _n_'"", '-11 'I'y,-I" ~ " - " "
-.... -,,,,,~.- ..1 u I. ::IN 'Al1<IlOCl>:r3^ON'o'H M3N
'''''''''''I'''j ...1'.11 1...1.1....11'.'. 5 ~mD'.,. Al.........N. nO::J~3^oN\fHM.3N...3...N...1 ";'" q
"'~"'~""= - - -- -- _ _ _ 001i~ yll~lt (~( trrr.... _ ...... . . _ I. ~ fll _. I iill. _ " ,.m ::jQ S,3MOr _ N ~
- ."" --- . I UIlil. ..... N'o'1d3lJSAWN,V;~~J a:: ~
~I. ~~ ~~
;'~I! ~ ;1 ~
.~. ; ~ ~~
Ill,
:1.1
~ ~~'fn
. : ~ ~il;!!t__..../' /
" "'~'
.' : lll' r.;; i!
<;oct <> ~ _ i - !!
Ii ~ i I
; .. "oJ. ~
~,; ~. f "~'
I. :s I '
l' ~ /'--~,-'l
jl II: I. I
,~ ,,'
G ~ I .
l~ 0' I - ill ~
'" . \ fl ill
~" ill .' 1 5111.
.,.;;: f 8~ flu.
,; I : li~ I 11:I"-
~: i J ~Ii ....
~~ r ~
f~ :.-'"1
l~ 1/11
: ~i' :
I "~~ 1 I
: 14 I
Ii'~~ 1 \
,I", I l
!Iii I!
i brr:
i ~I \
1--+/1 \
. /. \
~ \
I 1 ',,-
: '-:5
~ _1- - - ~i-
I q~ . ~
, ~J~l~ -+
! a. ~~.-. !!.'~. '.~.~~ :.'"
, iJi~ I '~i~r;~ .
I ~~~ ~::m~ .
~ l
I ~ ~
i ~.~ . i
~.~ ~,~! ! h.1
~1I ~ i ~ I~.
~'; -, ~~b" Ii ~Iil
hI Ui,-.,i,~I. .i ~.Uli~.'~
~E ~ ~~i~ ,..J~ Ua~~~ia
~ ~ ~ ~ ~!~!~! ~ ~I.~ ~~~~d' I
~ ~I~ iinnm;~I~iiio
::J._o.~ ....~,.;..r.n.a..;"',,;~::~:l':~~.:::~
'" - <iI
.. _.____,__._<<"e >>"".y_=
65
This page intentionally left blank.
66
~ '0
I--Oz
11l<(
~o .
I-- DIl-
wI--
'd.z.
1--00
~~O
~!fllD
~Ci>
......lllO
I"-I--Z
-Ciq
.0 :r
>-CL
.s:
:rwS:
~
~
r I
~i~
I . ~~
!It
..;iIflZ
[~~
~~
~-
1rl~
67
f:c:iO
If:tt Z
DC 0 .
..,.DC>-
J) ).l g
'10.0
~~()
~W Qll
6[!l>
",..,.0
-OlZ
.0 <l;
>-a...:I
s::
:r u.J 5::
ill
Z
l-
Z
ill
d ~Q~
:zr:.OIl)
l!tr t: ~ 2
:::J! !ll8 I-
<(' "I ~
~
II! .1
~~i ~i
il~z ~~
[~~
Q[)(
.~.~
68 · ~~
i=ciu
UJqZ
LUO
Ci Ci )-'
I- ~,~
(f) .>/' Z
I--U::::l
UJLUO
',LZO
Ci
<((f)fr1
2c,,>
~illO
f'-I--Z
-Ci<(
.0 "I
)- fL"
~
::rWS:
UJ
z
~
~2~
':"0
~ (!l~
2
2
[rn~
QD1
Q{lU
~
lU --
::::l(]
-J.z
rollJ
69
This page intentionally left blank.
70
APPLICANT MATERIALS
71
SHANKLIN & NICHOLS, LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAw
214 MARKET STREET
POST OFFICE Box 1 347
WII.MINGTON. NORTH CAROW.A 28402"1347
TEI.EPHONE (91 0) 762"9400. TEI.EFAX (91 0) 251-1773
E.MAIL SHANKLAW@EAFffHLINK.NET
KENNETH A SHANKl'IN" * BOARIO C iii:RTl F'1E:D 5P~Cr^UST IN
MAlTHE:W A. NICHOLS" REAL P'RO?!::.RTYLAw ~ RES,lDENTtAL; BUSiNl:E:S.s"
COMMERCIAL AND INI:JUS:rRIAL T~A.HSACfEON:$
SARAH E. MANCINEL.LI
COL.IN J. TARRANT ** A 1...50 AOMfn't::O iN NE\iV YOifU"
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Date of Submittal: August 22,2007
1. Location Map
2. Aerial View to the West
3.. Aerial View to the South
4. Aerial View to the Northeast
5. Lowes Site Plan
6. Aerial View depicting the current design of the intersection of Porters Neck Road and
Highway 17
7. Aerial View depicting Lowes site plan, existing and future traffic circulation and storm
water retention
8. Letter from NCDOT with intersection improvement requirements
9.' Traffic Impact Analysis
10. Aerial View depicting redesigned and improved intersection of Porters Neck Road and
Highway 17
11. Traffic Analysis comparing Land Uses
12. 2006 Crash Report
13. Early site plan around which intersection was designed
72
73
....... ...'
~
-
South View
75
~
76
77
f',
r:
S s:
I
Il,l
L
78
79
::;;1':\ IE (He 111 C:\ROLI,\c\
DEPi\RT\/IEl'<T Or I' j()N
.\: l. J f Ie ~,; j ! \l LYf'iI)O TII'I'UT
i,'"i'. ~f 1< ". to"' ~.~tr,:; r,.,J.',
! '), ':1)t)7
In . h':.:T
j;!l,_ \0, -:";('-::\HJo~l.'l~-;(~
,\1 E,\ IOR.\f\ DL .\1
TO: D;jt1 !{. P.l",.. t'.)!vi :Hqi. ""ir.tUil'
"J i'v }'3 it:':\ :~
fl~O,\1 : J(!;nt~,' ! 1 PT.
SIIB.lI,:( T: I.lI'1 LS II !lusin,:s',; ill S R 1"102
(!.1,: ij'l~.~r',,;, '<i;;.":::'~~,
\ i ~L. _,\ ,~~C('~: ~~\ ljj~:Dt CjfilUP ~ tilL' i I,ll]" L ami
~i f;..;' V ~ \;;.' ".\'" (}; in L' ~ik. I b:,;.;;d ('Ii t'W' it" th,.' prdi 111 ~llt:
ILL,\,,;! r(...~.;"o(;) HwI lht~ Tr;t!'!k 1111;';\c[ fTi;\}
(>~'_~'Il~c:._'t~ :nH] (;'a1~.'d C1S/u I /t~{1!. \\] ti-~ \"'\)llj,;:'d~r,[ti(lJ'; ~~!\j,","~ I I\,~' i[:",
':.~~!;. ~ra~~:0'IHn;_,i! l"';'~ L'!~'i LljL';~;', ".V(~i~) n::r :Ill.' >:,)"(.:n'~"il:.:!ll':I
I".:,., ,mml'lld,_H:' 'It; Ii \1' \"\.11" '::C'ihidcLi! I''''''
Proposc(l l)t'\'~'lo pllletlt
'\ i.~';_'~) t;'t! 11: t1, 1 ;';. i lI1~' ~/\+ Uk' ;nY}I;HIS~,;\..! t,i, ~rt\:r' - ht..'ck Il tu he h.h':;H~'d ;..1I tiS
7 I)usia~::..<~ ~;:. ~J t~. t ~IO':: {t~,"'n\,~i"S ~e~-k: l{i 'ilk '1'1:\ :,Id,':; lilt d'/I c.I"I'T",'11 i:, 1(1 b.,:'
<:t'ln:;,~nl~:>"...'I..J h:l 2(H;t) ;n:\j ~'\,i i~:unsbl ....i"lhr. j~ II
e t l.l.tJOn"'1l1,U\' :',',,:1 ;",'I-Ium>: ,~,; up'....:.l'~;t()f!,.'
" i "',I.I.):\[I 'qUI!": 1--.',:1 ' I'll:,.'
.. I" [.0(11) 'liU:II'': ','d "~,I'
.'\.l....c't.\;,;.; in 1h:.: ::; pn ~'pi l~;':~'d \'da on,," ( , ) ;1':'1 ~rjlrIV;.,' j:'E('Ht jj;~':;"'i_-~!.'\
~l!,lllt ':;,It):i !/_';"~:.l"j i .\,1-:':l1;::'I',-~I':
~,li\l!,]I.t;.';' :",:i"JI.!I'E.:; re.: '. .- ;.'-);:AT:'),'~ '
"'I','". '.' '. 1'....'.
, ,1'
".,_t ',,," i:I".
80
Dan K Cwnbo. P.E.
January 19, 1007
Page:2 uf7
Stud)' Area
@J t
, N
PI ~~f~;):);:J
1 ~J~tlll.ll ~u: I' RU~j;J t~ il '~\'~(,'CI
LKk:UKl;):
\ l.i.; '7 i ~VhTrko:,;"[ Stl't~...:'t J
l!1\;\tlHI:g1,liAR' ---.-.. lJD
AAOT i .t)OiJ ypd
Sn;;:('d. LilHU )5 Il1Pl1
J,...
vpd
l.''" """ ,,,,,,"',,.<< '" ""
rW\) r,~~n..:
N'll A/\D [
:;i.Pt'l~tj L~,~' It t5 lhl "
I !;.J
.J "
10iJ) {"i\ f)"f ~ -.!;.JOH \'j:~l
@2006 ';'",)91". Map ~2:)Ci6
Note: f{,)ute classi tkations shmvn arc according 10 the !v1ay 3. 1999 Greater Wilmington Urbtll1
An::a l'v!t:trop<llitnn Planning Organiz<lli0111'11orotlght~\l'e Plan,
TIP PI'o.iects/Str~ltegic High\\'ay Corridors
A\;curdillg to the: North Carolina Departmellt ofTransporlalion (NCDOT) 2U06-2012
Tral!.lporlalion improl'CmCIII Program (TIP j, there is \llle (1) active TIP project located in the
vie il1ily of the proposed development.
. R-2045A proposes to build US 17 (1~4-0 Conl1~c\or) ti'om t'<lS\ of 1-4-0 lnterdmllge to
Northeast ofSR 1517 (Scotts Hill Loop Road). This project was let in October 2003 and is
scheduled 10 be completed ill November 2006,
According to lhe NCDOT ('orridor., Vision as adopted hy Ihe \J,'rth
C'flmlma B,1ard <)!' t US 1 i is dclined as a fr'~eway wilhin the area. The
purpose Dr the Corridors is to enlwnce the melbilily and cOlUleclivily
ofi.hc system. AJciilic'{MI i.nformml.:'n II Corridor F ae i Ii ty
Illay lk ikc'C~s<::d \ :a tlK' Inkrnci at:
II Itf' ://wlI'lI'.lln!or.llrg/dl/hlpl'cOl/lSfn let, 'pb::}"} I Cifl/(f./;'\ CDO 7'- Fildl h)'_I:Vfle.i.p'y
81
Dan K Cuml',"},!'.E.
Jaml;ll') 19. 2007
Page} of 7
Trip Generation
Based on appr0priate methodology outlined in the ITE Trip Gelleration/danua!. Edilioll).
the is pro.iccted 10 generate approximately 20,702 vehic Ie Irips pel' day.
lhe following table the expected unadjusted peak hour volumes during a typical
weekday:
~j>~akI~_2!I~_I~. _ IN +- OUT --~
291 193
~_~-\!L-l 903 ___.1= ----j
, PM : 960 I
Crash Analysis
Based on an of crashes that occurred along US 17 (iVlarket Street). 184 crashes have
occurred Oil this stretch of US 17 (l'vhlrket Street) within the Insl three years. One hundred sixty-
eight uf these crashes involved possible injuries (lype C) or w'cre property damage only crashes,
The 1\;ll1allllng sixteen cmshcs were severe inclllding disubling injury (Type A) or evident injury
il) crasl,<.:s, with two fatal crashes. The majority of crashes were "left turn, different
roadways" and "rear end, slow or Slap" crashes.
o bservl1 tions/Reeo In men cia tions
111 order to accommodate the site-generated traffic safely and efficiently, while also altempting to
protect the fUllctionallntegrity and operational capacity of the adjacem roadway facilities, we
otfer' the comments and recommendations for your consideration.
GCllcnd TIA Commcnts
. The access ruin!:; for this development an:: proposed \vithin the immediate vicini.!y of active
TIP Projcctl{-2405A. therefore. rccommeJ1d\:.~d inlprovcrm:l1ts should not only be for
the build-out year of the development (2009), but also the design year of 1'1 P Project R-
2405A (202U).
. The report states thai Level-of-Seryice (LOS) D was assumed to be the minimum standard
t~lr operations. l-Iowever, it should be noted tllnt even if <111 intersection operates at LOS D
mel'all, it is not acceptable to have a major movement operating at LOS E or LOS F, A
single movemel1l experkncing extensive queuing cun cmlse back-ups eXlending to adjacent
I IlterscctiOl1s.
Pl'Oposed Plantation Road Extension
It should be noted that ii' Plamation Road EXlension IS proposed as n public road, the internal and
parking aisle access poip!s \vill need 10 be reviewed further.
US 17 (IVhlrk.ct Street) llnd SR 1402 (portel"s Neck Road)/Proposed Plantation Road
Extensioll Intersection (Signalizcd)
Duo: to the impact> tlut the additiol1;]! Ir,lflk volumes associated with ,his
development may' hnn: Oil tll..: :Lljntt'llt lrafnt fadl iti...", and with various other geomdric
tl1:u me\> ",'('U-. this imers<:o:\hm m~\y signal modilica.ic:ns tu
:J(1,.:UllIIHi,Jdali...:' 1;lisad:dit~<ijlaI1t"a,j"ji\.: \ lllilll1('.
82
Dan J,t Cumbo. P.E.
.!an oary I 9, 2007
I':lge 4 of 7
Based upon our revi<:w, the multiple movements are anticipated to operate at a pOor level of
service with excessive queuing intlle peak hOllr in the TIP design year The following
recommendations should accommodate the site.generated traffic., but do not include all
improvements necessl1ry to nllow tile intersection to attain acceptable levels of service with
au.:eptable queuing.
Northbound US 17 (Markd Stred)
. We recommend providing an additionallen~lurn lane to provide duallefHun1 lanes \vith 300
feet (minimum) each of full storage and appropriate transitional tapers. To accommodate the
dualleft.turH lanes, uUlIl-recei\ing lanes will be required on the Proposed Plamation Road
Extellsion caslbmll1u departure. The additiol1al receiving lane should extend a minimum of
I feet (minimum) of full slor,lge and appropri,ite transitiol'lnl Illper.
SOllthbtllllld USl7 {Market Street I
. \Ve concur \.vlth the TIA recommcndation (0 extend Ihe existing right-tllnllane, however, we
recommend providing 400 feet (mininUlm) of full storage and appropriate deceleration taper.
Eastbound D:Ql2.oSGd.PJantatlol1 Road Extension
. We recommend providing a six (6) lane cross-sectlnn consisting of two (2) ingress lanes and
four (4) egress lanes \vith 500 feet (minimum) of internal. protected storage before crossing
maneuvers and parking should be allowed. The egress lalieS should consist of exclusive dual
lefHmn lath:S, a through lane and an exclusive right-turn lane,
liS 17 (Market Street) and SR 1363 (Bayshore Drive)/SH 2717 (Torchwood Boulevard)
Intcrsection (Signalized)
13ased upon our review, the multiple movements are anticipated to operate at a poor level of
service with excessive quelling in the peak hour in the Tl P design year (2020).
No flllllJ'C improvements are necessary nt this intersection at this time to mitigate site-generated
trnmc.
Generlll
[t should be noted that the comments and recommendations contained in this review are subject
to tlve ;lpproval of the local District Oft1ce.
Cross-access to adja~<:nt properties is strongly encouraged to reduce repetitive trips and provide
future alternative routes of ingress/egress.
Due to. but not limited to. the comments and recollnnend,itiol1s from lllis rl;'view of Ih<: proposed
development. changes in the imernal cil'clllatiollll1ay be necessary to ensul'1." that driver confusion
is minimized 10 the maximum extent pc'ssiblc.
/\n)l signal revisions. or additions llccessiwted by the should be
ctlordinated with Ib,;: , lh,;: Division 'rmCfic Engil1l'i:!". tile Signals and
Geometries Scctiun. and Ihe \.,f Wilmillgwl1.
Any pavement reI isk'lh!moJi li.:.ltiol1s nec;,;ssil<ltc'd the den:"'pI1K'1l1 ShC'lild be thl'
oCtile: tin;! ';OcII\!il1al<.:J II. ilh the Dh'i"ion Trafn~
83
Dan R. 01lnbo. P.L
January ] 9, 20G7
Page 5 of7
Any rmv..lway m()Jilic.\tions 01' improvements necessitated by the development sl1t'uld be thlt
responsibility of the developer unless othenvis~ nuted.
Reference should ::ds\) be made to the information included in the "General RecommendatioHS
Anachme Ill."
Once the drivewa: permit has been approv~J <lnd a copy oHhe final driveway permit
requin:mcnls should be forwarded to this olliCt. If \\le can pl"Ovide further assistanco;;, please
contact me or Regina P:lge at (919) 250-4151.
.1111); "criss
1.'0..:: I LA. Pope, P. E.
t\, Law
B. D. Taylor. P.E. U\ Hentlon: D. Byrd)
J. K. Lacy, P.E., C.P.M.
'1'. 1\1. Hopkins. P.E. (Attention: A. D. \,Vyatl, P.E.l
Iv!. P. Butler, P.E
G. A. Fuller. P.l::. (Attention: R. E. Mullinax, P
L. L. Cove. P.E. (Anenlion: J. H. Dunlop, r.E.)
B. L. Johnson, r.E.
84
Dan R. (umbo, r.E
Janunry 19. 2007
Page 6 of 7
GENERAL IlF:COl\Ii\HINDA TJONS ATT ACH1\ilENT
(For 5C-2006-086 / Porter's Neck Crossing)
Adcqunlc horizont.al and vertical sight dlstal1(;CS should be reserved at all entrances.
foliage that interferes \l.'ltl1 $iglll Ji~tal1co: ~h(}LJld be cut back to prott'l:t lines of sight The
District Engineer should determine if all dm inage facilities are adequate. Curb Cllts and curb
ramps should be constructeD in conformance with t.he "Guide:lillesfo/' Curb CUls and Ramps
DisaNo'd Persons, " ifapplicabJe.
The developer may be required to obtain :.111 "pproved encroachment agreement covering
proposed wLWk within tbe state right.-uf-way. [fthis is the case, the encroachmem should be
cross-referenced to this review.
A II street Rne! drivew<I)' entrances 'Onto state system roadways should he controlled with
appropriate traffic control devices, including but not limited to, stop. yield, dit'ectionaL
regulatOl'Y. and advisory and pavement markings, All traffic control devices sball ctlnform
to the requirements set forth in tbe Manual on Unifol111 Traffic Control Devices.. Final pavement
marking and signing plans should be submitted to the Division Traffic Engineer for approval
to the installation of any signs and/or pavement markings.
Unless othenvise noted. a recommended width of 40 feet (curb face to curb face) should be llsed
<It each drive. 11 is !llso recommended tbm 40 foot (minimum) radii should be used at. each drive
to accommodate any serviee type vehicles or truck traffic that may v isitthc site,
I f the developer antic ipatcs or petitioning for addition to the state system, all roads/streets
should be and <.:onstructed in ("onformance with the current North Camlina Departmem
ofTraniipol"latio)1 design and construction guidelir.es.
AI I "outparcels" or "excluded areas" should be served intcmally with no additional access onto
abuuing n\lldways. The developer should COI1\'I':;,-' this condition in <Iny lease or sell agreements,
As required by the "/'olh:r 011 Slreel fIml Driveway Access /0 North Carolina Highways," dated
July 2003. the applicant is responsible for identifying all right-of-way andior control-or-access
limits and for including this information on all submilt<lls. Failure to accmtllely disclose R!W
and CiA limits could reSlllt in the denial or closure of access points,
Adequate right-of-way fur widening and sight distance lrinngles should be reserved.
COllsidemlion should be given to lhe possible future need for signalizatioll and the associated
span poles, controller and and guy wires at the intcl'scctlons along US 17 {Market Street).
Any additional dcvl:!;Jjw1.cm. either within this site or adjacllllt to thb sit.:. IImt intends on llsing
this dc\'elopmem's aLees." \\. i II an driv~'\\ay permit .md n:-e\ :tlUlIti\1-Il f'(
geol11dr.ic and lr:\i'iic Cl)iHn>! nee,b,
85
Dan R. ClImbo, P.E.
January i 9.2007
Page 7 of?
GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS ATTACHMENT
(For SC-2006~086 / Porlel"s Neck Crossing; conlinued)
/1.1l widening should include appropriate transitional and deceleration tapers. Recommended turn
lane and lransitionillrrciltm.ents are shown on pages 78 and 79 of the "Policy on Streelllud
Driveway Access 10 Norlh L'aru!it/il Highw({l'S. "dated July 2003.
Where possible. opposite side driveways should be aligned to prevent the operational and safely
problems caused by offscl driveways.
This development's formal access request should be coordinated with lht;' ongoing TIP Project
R-2405A. Roadway Design should be advised of any approvals and associated geometric
rev isions associated with this development. Right-or-way that is identit1ed as necessary to
accommodate TIP Project R-2405A should be dedicated.
86
MEMORANDU.M
To: Jimmy Black, Alliance Commercial
Frorn: Lyle Overcash, Martini Alexiou/Bryson, PLLC
Date: August 21, 2007
Subject: Porter's Neck - Additional Analysis for LO\ve's Home Improvement
This memo serves as an update to the original I\1ay 2006 Traffic Impact (rIA) and
addresses some of the comments that surfaced at recent and discussions with the New
Hanover County Commissioners and with concerning the operations of the US 17
(:\larket Street) and Porter's Neck Road intersection. This analysis includes updated counts
from this summer and also includes an analysis of Saturday operations at the request of the
neighbors. \Xle have reviewed the accident data from the and the North Carolina
Deparrment of (NCDOT) and have included a summary of the information. In
addition, we've included trip generation estimates from other uses in the New Hanover County's
B~1 classiHcation for comparison purposes to the Lowe's development.
The Porter's Neck Crossing is proposed in the north\l.lestern comer of the US 17 (Market Street)
and Porter's Neck Road intersection, immediately adjacent to the recently completed
1-140 17 Bypass) to the additional retail development to the south, vacant
land to the west, and US 17 to the east. additional access to the north and east are
not possible due to NCDOT control of access on those facilities. An additional connection is
proposed that would provide access directly to the existing adjacent shopping center from US 17
and a stub out to the west will be provided.
The Lowe's site is anticipated to open during 2008, ahead of the overall retail site that was
analyzed in the !VIal' 1, 2006 TIl\ by MIA/B. The original study analyzed a total of 435,000
square feet (sf) of retail development, consisting of a 134,000 sf home improvement store, a
120,fJ{)0 sf free standing discount store, and 181,000 sf of general retail. Since the completion
and approval of that the home improvement use is no\V slated to be approximately
170,000 with an additional 100,000 to 190,000 sf of retail development left to be developed.
The ultimate completion date of the rema.inder of the site is unknown.
Final Intersection Design
The eastbound approach of the Market Street and Porter's Neck Road signalized intersection
currently is composed of 3 egress lanes (I left, 1 through, and 1 right) and 1 lane. The
\vestbound approach consists of 3 egress lanes, (2 lefts and 1 through-right) and 2 ingress lanes.
The northbound and southbound Market Street approaches consist of 1 left, 2 throughs, and 1
right, with 2 receiving lanes on the departing
The eastbound approach, referred to as Porter's Neck Road currently serves the
commercial development on the south side of the driveway ancl ends 300
feet to the west of Market Street. This roadway will be extended to the west to serve the overall
retail site only.
87
NCDOT performed their revie\v (dated January 19, 2(07) of the TlA and required the following
improvements for the overall Porter's Neck Crossing site;
. Provide 4 egress lanes and 2 ingress lanes on the eastbound Porter's Neck Road
Extension
. Restripe the eastbound approach to provide dualleft-turrl lanes, 1 through lane, and 1
right-turn lane with 500 feet of internal protected stem.
. Extend the southbound right-turn lane to provide for 400 feet of full storage and
appropriate deceleration taper along Market Street.
. Widen the northbound US 17 approach to provide duallefHurn lanes \vith 300 feet
of fuB storage and appropriate tapers. At this time, the current site plan shows the
hvo lanes extended all the way to the first full access drivev.ray after the 500
feet of internal stem.
. Upgrade the signal phasing and timing to accommodate the recommended
intersection improvements.
Additional improvements, beyond what has been required NCDOT, to further improve
traffic operations are now proposed as follows (intersection
. Construct an exclusive \vestbound right-turn lane Porter's Neck Road that
provides at least 100 feet of storage.
. Widen the southbound US 17 approach to provide dual left-turn Lanes with 250 feet
of full storage and appropriate tapers. Modify the westbound Porter's Neck Road
approach to accept the dualleft-tum lanes
. the signal phasing and timing to accommodate these improvements.
Analysis
This analysis is to determine the level of service for the llS 17 (l\larket Street) and Porter's Neck
Road intersection under three conditions for the A.M., P.NL and Saturday peak hours Existing
(2007), No-Build (2008) and Build (2008). The proposed Lowe's was assumed to be a maximum
of 170,000 sf. The trip generation is shown in Appendix B.
A ne,v intersection turning movement count was performed on June 12, 2007. In
addition, at the request of the neighbors, an additional intersection turning movement count was
collected on Saturday, August 25, 2007 and was utilized for the Saturday peak period analysis.
These volumes and current intersection geometries were used to update the Existing (2007)
conditions analysis, as 1-140 was not completed at the time of the original study. The 2007
turning movement counts are shown in Appendix A.
The No-BuHd (2008) consisted of adding the same developments as in the original Tlj\.,
but utilizing 75{~;() of the toral approved developments' traffic as analyzed in the original TIA to
adjust for portions of the uncompleted developments by 2008.
Trip generation estimates for the Lowe's site was performed for A.M., P.M., and Saturday peak
hours and areinduded in Appendix A. It should be noted that the trip generation accounts for
pass"by which are trips that are already .in the traffic stream, that divert to the proposed
development, and then continue on their original The Build (2008) analysis consisted of
adding the site trips from to the No"Build (2008) volumt:s, and assumed the full
88
improvements NCDOT at the OS 17 (Market and Porter's Neck Road intersect.ion, as
well as the additional improvements detailed above Z).
The intersection geometries are shown below and the volumes tor each scenario are
shown in Appendix A:
Figure 1- Existing Geometries and Volume Scenarios
200' 250' ~
) ~ ~ ~ ,- 400'
,- Porter's Neck Road
J "tt (
---tlIo-
, conI. 400'
us 17
The results of the analyses ;ue listed in Table 1,
Table 1- LOS Results
Exi$tlng (2007) Build (2008)
P.M. P.M.
C 0
Figure Z - Build (2008) Geometries
'- 100'
400' 250' ........--
)! ~ ~" ,- 400'
,- Porter's Neck Road
250' J "ttr
J
300' 400'
---tlIo-
250'
,
us 17
Based on the the US 17 (i\1arket Street) and Porter's Neck Road intersection is projected
to operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS D) during the A. 1\1. , P.M., and Saturday peak
hours when the LO\ve's is completed and the intersection has been fully built~out>
89
Land Use Scenarios
An analysis was performed 10 determine different land use scenarios under the current B-1
zoning that could be constructed in of the proposed Lowe's without rezoning. Based on a
constraint of 1 sf, the following scenarios were to compare their trip generation
characteristics (Table 2). Also shown are the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) in vehicles per day
(vpd), based on the corresponding trip genemtion codes included in the rrl:. J;ip Gmeratioll
Alml!l(l~ 711' that could be generated by each scenario:
Table 2 - Trip Generation Comparison
Scenario Land Use Size (sO Weekday ADT
1 Home Improvement Stott (Lowe's) 170,000 sf 4,652 IIpd
2 Free"StandinlJ Discount Superstore I\Valmart/Targctl 170,000 ~T 8,}66 t'/Jd
3 General Retail 17(),OOOJ!' 9,588 l'Pd
As shown, rezoning this site from B-1 to B-2 and the proposed Lo"\ve's
development on this site would genemte far less vehicles per than would be expected by any
of the other typical B-1 scenarios listed above.
Accident Summa.ry
The intersection of US 17 (Market Street) and Porter's Neck Road has not been ranked within
the top 15 (#18 in 2004; #19 in 2005; unlisted in top 15 in 2006 in the annual list of
highest accident intersection locations in New Hanover County for the past three reporting years
(dating back to August 2(03). There are other locations Market Street that have a greatet
incidence of crashes than the l\larket Street and Porter's Neck Road intersection. With the
improvements implemented at this location in coni unction with the completion of 1-140
(including new/widened pavement and signalization), it could be expected that the number of
crashes at this location may decline.
I f you have any regarding this summary please contact me at (919) 829-0328. You can
also reach me emall at iyleovercash{Wmabtrans.com.
lE
90
~ '0
1-- 0 Z
UJ <1:
~o.
t- Ol c:
if) Z
'U.:::J
1-00
It! ~O
~1J}0l
::?c..~
~.lIJO
r--- ~;'.' Z
-'-'<1:
O:{
r- Ct .
s: ...".
:::r '.>J it
Z
I---
Z
w
Z2. ,.".1
'!i <i.
(!) 12 9 16
-.1 ~ "'0
-.Ii l'l8':
<!~ ~ I-
:, 9
I "'^
01
W
U)
o
0_
o
DI
CL
Q
I.ot ~
"t .~.
II. ~i.
~i~ ~~
~~t.
[t~~
QI:J(
Eli UJ
I~
. - ~~
muJ
91
Appendix A
Trip Generation
Volume Scenarios
Crash Data
Turning Moz!ement Count.r
92
A.M. Peak Hour Total Trips
ITE Land USE Gsf/Units ITE MANUAL RATES"
Use Code ADT I A.M. El1ter I A.M. Exit I A.M. Total
862 Home improvement Slore pO,oao sf 4,65.2 I 110 I 94 I 204
P.M. Peak Hour Total Trips
ITE Land USE Gsf/Untts
Code ADT P.M. Total
862 Home ImprOVel'lfH,:-nt Store no ,oon 5 f 4,652 417
Saturday Peak Hour Total Trips
ITE Land USE Gsf/Units
Use Code ADT Total
862 Home 1m >mvement Slore 170,0(1) sf i,764 918
P.M. Peak Hour Pass-By Trips
lIE Land USE Pass-by % ITE MANUAL RATES"
Use Code ADT I P.M. Enter I P.M. Exit I P.M. Total
862 Home Improvemem Store 48%, 4,652 I 100 Ii HlO I 200
Saturday Peak Hour Pass-By Trips
lIE lalld USE Pass-by % ITE MANUAL RATES"
Use Code ADT I Enter I Exit I Total
862 l'lome Improvemem Store 3flYo i,}64 I 138 I 138 I 276
A.M. Peak Hour Non-Pass-By Trips
iTE Land USE Gsf/Units
Use Code A.M. Total
862 Home 1m rovemem Sto.:re: 170,000 sf 204
P.M. Peak Hour Non-PaS$cBy Trips
iTE Land USE Gsf/Units ITE MANUAL RATES"
Use Code ADT I P.M. Enter I P.M. Exit I P.M. Total
862 Home Improvement StoIC 170,000 sf 4,652 I % I 121 I 217
Saturday Peak Hour Non-Pass-ByTrips
ITE Land USE Gsf/Units ITE MANUA.l RATES*
Use Code ADT I Enter I Exit I Total
862 Home Improvement Store 170,(lOO sf 7,764 I 349 I 293 I 642
* ITf 7th Edition Trip GeneraU<>n Manual
93
LEGEND
xx A.M, P€!'.3k Hour TlJf!'!ing MJ1,i@mel"lt VoMJ:~ E"'x1'l'/i'JI~ f2(){)7J ...tl}d, }}.M. dNtI.f(}rJJrddV Pt'l'lk HMIf' t/O/fllllf5
(XXI P.M, Peak Hour Twming Mi:rvel'l'"lent V~T'!M!S
(XX) Sa:turd.ay P-eak Hour T wming Mt'Wsmenl: Volumes M<lrkel Street
{52} {1(30) (92)
(55) (966) (167) "- 99 11(4) {66)
25 9197 126 - 30 (47) {31}
Porter's Neck Road ) + \. (428) {359} Porters Neck Road (SR 14(2)
{75} (95) 25 J r
{51} (65) 22 - 7 762 274
{31} 1291 3 ~ (24) (1000j 1334)
P9} 17M) {2&l}
Market Street
NQ-Build t20f"!S} ,dO-.M.. 1</1,1., md,\;'attmlal' Pl.wk f:'-Mrt"/O/WNd
Market Slreet
{53} {1(51) {142}
(56) (98) (229j "- 130 1125) {69}
26 1017 149 - 44 (57) {42}
Porte ($ Neck Road ) + \. (553) {50'3) PMers Neck Road (SR 14(2)
{n} (97) 26 J r
{S6) (96) 31 - 7 777 326
(32) (30) 3 ~ (24) (1102) (497)
{19} {B14) (391)
Market street
Build (200<~J' /L\J ,_ P,A{ ,--mud Idfurdq.l' Pmk H(}urV(,lIMtJ.f~
Ma rket Street
{279} {982) {142}
(149) (935) (229) "- 130 (125) {B9}
76 1017 149 - 66 fl6) {112}
Porler's NeCk Road ) + " (553) (503) Portefs Neck Road' (SR 14(2)
{27a) (201) 68 ~ r
{145} (120) 50 _ 40 m 326
{HI9) (116) 31 ~ (103) (1052) (497)
{193) {745J {391)
Ma rket Street
94
. -"" -.. ........ '.........;;;....... .'... .................................... ~ ~. ~".,--.--..--..'---..-_." -...... .................. - -~ ~.' ~. ..' .'..."" "...... -.................. ............... ~ .'__....:..___..'__..__" _" ................ ''''m ......... .." ................"..".
High Accident Intersections in New Hanover County for the period
8/1/2003 through 7/31/2004 with a milnimum of 10 accidents within 100
feet of the Intersection
.."...... "'............. ~ -- ~. - _....- - - - --.... .........;; '...... ...... .."'--""---..--............................. ~ ~.'~. - ...... -"....-.............................. ...,...._........ '.... ........... _............... Or _ _ _....~" __.._.._.._."'"' .'...........'... ...... _.... "... '. "...._.".
Hi~h Accident Intersections
SerIal Number of
NlImber Crashes Road A Road 8
1 30 US 421 SR 2501
2 20 r~ARKET SEVENTEENTH
3 19 'fHIRD WOOSTER
4 19 KEfm MARKET
5 19 COLLEGE WILSHIRE
6 16 US 117 SR 2046
17 COLLEGE MARKET
8 16 GREENVILLE OLEANDER
9 16 COLLEGE OLEANDER
10 16 F'l PTH MARKET
11 16 COLLEGE NEW tENTER
12 .\5 US 117 SR 1322
13 14 US 421 NC 13)
14 13 INDEPENDENCE WRIGBTSVILLE
15 12 MARKET SIXTEENTH
16 12 01.EANDER PINEGROVE
17 12 COLLEGE R.I\NDAL L
18 12 US 17 SR 14 02
19 11 COl.LEGE SEVENTEENTH
11 US 17 SR .\929
21 10 COLLEGE PEACHTREE
22 .\0 HAWTHORN OLEANDER
23 10 SEVENTEE:NTH WOOSTER
24 10 mOE PENDENtE OLE:ANDER
25 10 DAWSON SIXTEENTH
26 10 US 421 SR 1187
Accident Types at High Accident Intersections
Number of
Crashes Ruad A Road .8 Accident Type
13 VS 421 SR 2:>01 REAR END, SLOW O~ STOP
10 US 421 SR 2501 LEFT "tURN, SANE ~OA[)WAY
J US 421 SR 2501 RIGHT TURN, DIFFERENT ROADWAYS
?;,. -.'... ......-....'.. ~'. ~." '.. -.-..-......... ;;;"... ....,. .................. ~.. ',. - - .................... _.. _ ~.. _ _."'.. ....... m.....;; '... ~__.._____...""""'''''''~' ~ ~... ".._................... ~ ."..__-__.-............ _ ~.;".. _. _...........;;... .... ~ ___....._ _ _.... ...."... ~.' ~ ~:.:;;::';;.'"
01131/2005 NCDOT-TEAAS Accident Summary Report - High Accident Intersections Page 1 0(5
95
High Accident Intersections in New Hanover County for the period
10/1/2004 through 9/30/2005 with a minimum of 11 accidents with iln
1 00 feet of the Intersection
High Accident Intersections
Serial Number of
Number Crashes Road A Road B
1 31 COLLEGE MARKET
2 25 MJ'...RKET SEVENTEENTH
3 24 THIRD WOOSTER
4 24 COLLEGE NEW CENTER
5 21 US 421 SR 2501
6 1.9 US 11 7 SR 21J4~
7 18 KERR MARKET
8 18 INDEPENDENCE SHIPYARD
9 17 US 421 SR 2566
10 16 GORDON MARKET
H 16 COLLEGE WILSHIRE
12 16 US ~21 NC 133
13 16 US 11 7 SR 1322
14 15 US 421 NC 132
1.5 14 MARKET NEW CENTER
16 1A COLLEGE MA.RTIN LUTHER KING
17 14 COLLEGE P EACHT i~ EE
18 14 US 7 SR 1403
19 13 SEVENTEENTH WOOSTER
20 13 EASTWOOD RACINE
21 13 DAWSON THIRD
22 12 CASTLE SEVENTEENTH
2J 12 BARCLAY HILLS MARKET
24 12 US 421 SR 1524
25 12 US 17 SR In9
26 12 COLLEGE RANDALL
27 12 EASTWOOD MARKET
28 12 CINEMA MARKET
29 12 US 17 SR 14 02
30 11 NC 132 SR 1565
31 11 TNDEDENDE:NCE WR.IGHT8VILLE
32 11 NARKET THIRD
33 11 MARKET S IXTEl':wm
34 11 MARKET DR lNCESS
j5 11 COLLEGE HOLLY TREE
36 11 MILITARY CUTOFP WRlGi1TSVl LLE
02/0212006 NCOOT.TEAAS Accident Summary Report. High Accident Intersections Page 1 of 7
96
Wllmiogtoo Metropolitan Planning Orgaoization 20'06 Crash Report.
www.,wmpo..org Analysis of High Crash Intersections within the Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Area -
2006
Identified High Crash Intersections
The potential for vehicle conflict created by the convergenee of two or more traffic patterns at a
common location is the primary reason why vehicle crashes most often occur at roadway intersections.
These areas can frequently create complex traffic patterns that are sometimes difficult to safely navigate.
Table 3 ranks the fifteen intersections within the WMPA that experienced the highest number of vehicle
crashes during 2006.
Table 3: High Crash Intersections within the WMPA -2006
Intersection Road A Road B Total # of Jurisdiction
Rank! Number Crashes
1 S. College Rd. (US 117, NC 132) New Centre Dr" 38 City of Wilmington
2 $, College Rd. (US 117, NC 132) Market SI. (US 17 Business) 34 City of Wilmington
3 S. 3rd SI. (US 17 Business) Wooster SI. 31 City of Wilmington
4 Carolina Beach Rd. (liS 421) SR 2501 27 New Hanover County
5 N. College Rd. (US 1i17. NC 132) Gordon Rd. 27 New HanovEjr County
6 Kerr Ave. Markt:lLSI (US 17 Business) 26 City 01 Wilmington
7 N. Kerr Ave. Martin Luther King., Jr. Pkwy. 21 City 01 Wilmington
8 S. College Rd.. (US 117, NC 132) Oleander Dr. (US 76) 20 City 01 Wilmington
9 Carolina Beach Rd. (US 421) S. College Rd. (NC 132) 20 New Hanover County
10 Dawson SI. S. 16th SI. 19 City of Wilmington
11 S. Cgllege Rd. (US 117, NC 132) Randall Pkwy. 19 City of Wilmington
12 Carolina Beach Rd. (US 421) Anto i n,ette Dr. 19 New Hanover County
13 Covll Ave. Market St (US 17 Business) 18 City of Wilmington
14 Ocean Highway (US 17-74-76) Village Rd. (NC 133) 17 Town 01 Leland
15 S. College Rd. (US 117, NC 1'32) Martin Luther Ki'n ,Je Pkwy. 16 Cilyof Wilmington
Source: NCDOT TEAAS
Since the City of Wilmington is the most urbanized and heavily traveled area within the WMPA, it
comes as no surprise that it contains a majority of the high crash intersections (10) as recorded in 2006.
The remaining high crash intersections, as identified by this analysis, werc located in New Hanover
County (4) and the Town of Leland (1).
Figurc 12 graphically depicts thc location of the fiftcen highest crash intersections within the WMPA.
Looking at the distribution of these intersections, it is evident that a majority of the high crash
intersections are within the City of Wilmington's incorporated limits or on major thoroughfares typically
used to commute to and from the City. Given that fact, one may assume that the vehicle crashes
occurring at these intersections could be caused by traffic moving in and around the City of Wilmington.
Intersections within the WMPA that expcrienced the greatest number of vehicle crashes in 2006 were
generally located on major roadways. Seven of the fifteen highest crash intersections of the WMPA in
2006 were located on College Road (North and South). A majority of the remaining high crash
intersections were located on major roadways such as Market Street, Carolina Beach Road, Kerr
Avenue, and the Martin Luther King, Jr. Parkway.
IJ
97
MartinI Alexi ou/Bryson, PLLC
4000 WestChase Boulevard, Suite 530
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone: 919.829-0328, Fax: 919-829-0329 File Name: Porters Neck
Site Code : 00000001
Start Date : 6/12/2007
Page No : 1
i,,~' [fit
(,
,
I -wl').
, 4:'i,'} 4J{'l
, I:J 141'4 j"p
{j],j)O/;'1.1 , 0 " " !1}7 I IS{I h\ l , l , , l S~;i(
O,:ISAI\.1 , :w 1.1;' " ~.~ I I, , , (j It 10: 71;(1
m:~O^r.l " '" , .n LH IUl " .f, " 0 IJ
~n:4.\.i\M__. % , ~4 1.'1'~ : In n , , I, If; 7fl{.
T()t:.:ll lit N~ - 'M , ~IJ 7W ;~\I " " , " 25 2i,*\1
(IijA1OAM };fr 1:91 , , ni' ~9 U: , 79 6 ns Ir l I] " IJ 640
(lH'I~.AM " t~,~ , CUI!,; '!N , ]A] ~~~ , 2.10 , 4 " " 6 5~;.t
IH 1'9f] , 2:.\7 n 1"1 , ." 0 m.; ID , ''1' 4 6Sf,;
Jo1 tllN :;:\2 , " , 71 4 21:!< , J! " ,
ns iJ7 'M!1 .'4 H1.1 ~:<< HI (,l4l ~~ , 7(, '"
~".'I'{Khl\K~n~
JO '" n Hi S;i " 1:4 I 1(,;;. " " 1:50 "" ~) l 42 2{1 i;'~1
-- IWi , (, ~'~4 lI}] " -- j . 101t ()H 1:1 1:41) iN '" " , 42 l~ 1>47
IN iLi 0 l~(i 1.;1 j'- y,\t ". H , 2 H
)I.;! 21)9 ~HI (, :NI~ "' '0 JOr; ~.~ ~J I
102 7M. ifj(i ) '1~5 .m -" H'li\-J' " "' if
II:i"X) I'M )9 119 ~, 27':1 t'J.l ~- " 14~ " 1H T!.l .1'1 H 1-1, i'S 7~l)
I~,L~ 1'~1 2ffJ I~ (l; HI n I~i I ~ l')i~ 0(, U n N 10 Z~ f~~
11:30PM i:~ j'if) " , 20! ~~, ml H , II:S 1.1 120 70 ~', .l1 ~~ P " i~ 7(1<1
~4 !.~I " W I~ , $ I.,.~ .""~ H 1~ 16 j u:
(If) 1"iJ 71 1:1 ~J'(' ?~ < .Ji~ S2'7 11.11 I;!I\ " 5.1 of>2
~J ~n 9 16 " , 129 9 ~j{1 '.lol- l 1\),' 17 ~ '" ii II ~', ?J !\'''H
n ~ ~~ 24 " 1(, " In,s 9 :;,,~ ''I '!' 31~, is , ,11 ~\W
II} 11.1 ]I (4 " , li.t , ~).(, ~1 , ,JI Ji " " Hi
1:5 L74. n 15 ]6 [f ill? , ~1:\ ~ 2~~ 14 l~ iI , i~ 6,1
~a H9 ~'d M M"J +f,4 lj HiS I~j~ SI" -liH l:MVi
~n'iJRb\K'u,
n.:mj'j'M 2:10 f;;} , n 25 , " Y'i , J\l~
2<16 7g 1(. II " " ),9 1:2 J'S5
J'~ , :NJ J,l , " , ~~'1
19J ,f;';l , ~~ J~ ,
26 111.1.10. ~f/l 19 *'4 7l U
14(, , , .1.j 0 IB , ':n , l75 " " " :\ H47 Mif
144 " J " , IS* , 1(12 , nf, ~* 14 , "
2:65 '" , :i'il' , 114 , Ii) , 167 ~O 9 ) ,
~,~4; I": Q ~'1 , ~A (I IS ..... , ~-
"i7'iJ ~:;. , If.n , .171 L1 HS 63 " Z4
Mi}() I'M l' Iii -t ~.- , 14[, n , Mti 2:g {, (, 4< nr,
()lk.ISI'M q no 9 ij " , 200 ~... ;1i'>~ 19 HI " :11 c.Jv
(1(1.-30 I'M N,l Hi' 19 n I~;";' 7S " ~(,J 24 t,~ l (i ~~ 6.1.1
If; f\f! 9 J4 , 214 ~.s [I ;1~ ~ " , jJ 27 ~~4
1~4 iOH P N " fiH ~$? , II~.; ~] 4i 0 14.{ 16[10
T2Ji 3"iS 115 KflN )10) lok U;4 " 1'1',12 2513 t65 9-~6.s 613 4f.;!'; 21):5 II l2:!H~ 3Lli 241.22 244:15
*J.4 4.3 no K6 17.& 72.9 25.) 47.7 J(d I };;:~
In 1:6 J6 I.U ".Z m1.8 29.E i{l-4 40.9 2.5 L9 o.:s $J I.J 98.7
98
MartinI Alexiou/Bryson, PLlC
4000 WestChase Boulevard, Suite 530
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone: 919-829-0328, Fax: 919-829-0329 File Name: Porters Neck
Site Code . 00000001
Start Date : 6/12/2007
Page No :2
us 17 Porter'. Nee k Road US 17 Portu', Neck Road
Southbound Westbound Norlhbound Exten.ion
East?ound
Start Time Left Thru Rghl Left Tim.! Rghl App. Lell Thru Rghl Let! Thru I Rght Ill!.
Teml Total
Peak Hour From 06:00 AM 1009-45 AM . Peak I (,f I
Peak 110m for IlllcTS.celion Begins at 07: 15
07:15 AM 35 277 .) 317 20 m 0 187 53 240 6 4 I II 700
0730 AM 27 283 10 320 33 125 2 186 71 259 (> 7 0 13 717
(1745 AM 36 246 4 286 24 139 I 197 71 269 2 8 I Ii 705
30 191 6 22 123 4 192 79 275 II 3 I
128 997 25 I 99 519 7 762 274 1043 25 22 3 50 2762
86.7 19.1 73.1 26.3 6
.881 .967 .867 .948 .750 .963
y
Peak Hour Data
....
.. .
ND~h
~ Peak Hour Beg,", "lll715 AM l
All Vehicles
... ...
~ '!'
99
Martin/Alexioo/Bryson, PLLC
4000 WeslChase Boulevard, Suite 530
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone: 919-829-0328, Fax: 919-829-0329 File Name: Porters Neck
Site Code .00000001
Start Date : 6/12/2007
Page No :3
Porterl's Neck. Road US]7 Porler's Neck Road
Weslbound Norlbbound EXlension
Ea.lbon n d
J{ght ,_!<pp. T~~~,l Tbm Le fI, Tllrll Rght App. T>i)tal Len Til;~ I Rgbl AP1tT\');l:11! In:.
AM to 01:45 PM - Peak I of I
Intersection Begin, at II A5 AM
29 209 12 250 90 22 19 131 208 94 24 23 7 54 743
29 2]9 22 270 103 24 16 143 214 70 14 ]4 57 765
22 203 16 241 86 13 22 121 194 66 24 10 67 701
8Ji II 18 220 70 13 692
365 70 78 513 836 300 I 44 247 290]
71.2 13_6 71 25,5 17.8
.886 .7"29 .950 .798 _786 ,895 ,948
Peak Hour Data
..
...
NOllh
. p",," Hour B"lli"" at 11 A5 AM .
V~~JGI~$
..
...
~
L,,~
42.
100
Martin/Alexiou/Bryson, PllC
4000 WestChase Boulevard, Suite 530
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone: 919-829-0328, Fax: 919-829-0329 File Name : Porters Neck
Site Code : 00000001
Start Date : 6/12/2007
Page No :4
USl7 Porler', Neck Road lJS 17 Porter's Neck Road
Southbound Wesll)ouod Norlhbound ["cusion
Enstboulld
Slart Tirne Len ,.'1.pp. T;;;lJ.i1 Apj'!. TNaJ Left TOro Rghl i\pp. l()_~l1;1 Thru j\pp. T~}1.l'd ltli. Tm~tl
p,,"k Hour From t" 06:45 PM - Pe"k I I
Peak Ho~~ r for II\IC,scGlion Begins "t D4:30 PM
(14:30 PM 37 229 t6 282 114 18 29 161 9 271 72 .152 20 B 9 52 &47
04:45 PM 51 247 15 .113 95 9 2.1 127 7 291 87 JllS 25 12 11 48 873
05:0(J PM 38 246 9 293 102 6 25 1.13 4 298 73 375 22 16 8 46 847
41 244 15 J(JO 117 14 27 158 4 220 102 326 28 14 I 43 827
167 966 55 1188 428 47 104 579 24 1080 334 14.18 95 65 29 189 3.194
14.1 81.J 4.6 7.1.9 8J 18 U 75, I 23.2 .14.4 ISJ
.819 .978, .859 949 .915 .653 .667 9D6 819 .934 .7(J7 ,659 .972
...
Peak Hour Data
...
North
~ Peak Hour Begins .01 ()4 :30 PM i
AI! Vehicle'
..
101
Martin/Alexiou/Bryson, PLLC
4000 WestChase Boulevard, Suite 530
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone: (919) 829-0328; Fax: (919) 829~0329 File Name : Saturday
Sile Code :00030380
Start Date : 8118/2007
Page No : 1
All Vehicle,
US Ii (Markel Slree!) US I i (Market Street) 1'0 rter' S Neck Road
Soulllllound Northbuund Ea.s.t.hj)und
Start Time Thrn Len Rghl
It:OOAM 163 2 4 15
I Ll5 AM 29 179 3 0 7 20 699 699
11:30AM 17 171 7 I 3 13 665 666
11:45 AM 22 23 2 () ') 21 769 773
Total 43 106 63 14 I 23 69 7 2750 2757
12,00 PM 13 247 26 I 16 10 97 (J 66 210 5 4 13 II 12 0 5 726 731
12:15 PM 10 243 16 0 23 4 101 0 53 161 6 0 6 18 25 0 0 666 666
12:30 PM 7 242 27 0 16 5 85 0 72 219 6 0 3 II 20 0 0 71J 713
12:45 PM 10 247 32 I() II 59 0 65 210 II 0 6 II 18 I 3 690 693
Total 40 979 101 65 30 342 0 256 SOO 28 4 28 51 75 I 8 2795 2803
01:00PM 11 227 25 I 21 21 104 {) 61 208 3 1 J 11 23 0 2 718 720
01:15 PM 9 215 38 0 18 15 79 {) 53 199 S 2 '7 IS 26 1 3 682 685
01.:30 PM 10 239 27 0 20 3 76 0 48 22(l 6 I (, 10 17 (l I 682 68.1
(lIA5 11. 219 28 0 16 .~I 76 0 242 4 (l 4 8 15 0 696 69.6
TOlal 43 900 118 1 75 50 335 0 869 21 4 20 44 81 I 6 2778 2784
G mnd TOlal 126 2885 325 8 203 138 1002 2 731 2390 63 9 71 164 225 2 21 8323 8344
i.1'/~ 3.8 86.5 9.7 15.1 10.3 74.6 23 75.1 2 15:4 35.7 48,9
% 15 34.7 3.9 2:4 L7 12 8.8 28.7 O.S (j,9 2 2.7 0,3 99.7
102
Martin/Alexiou/Bryson, PLLC
4000 WestChase Boulevard, Suite 530
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone: (919) 829-0328; Fax: (919) 829~0329 File Name : Saturday
Site Code : 00030380
Start Date : 8/18/2007
Page No :2
Porter's Neek Road US 17 (Market Street) Porter's N eek Roa d
NorthlJ.oUIld hit Tota I: 'I
Sl1IrtTitne Tllm 1\f1;,J~:I;/I1 Rglu Thru Letl !\P1't, T(jt((l Rght Tllru. n)l;';~
Peak Hour 11:00 AM 1001,45
Peak Hoof 1<" Entire Inters.clio" Beg;n, at 11:45 AM
] 1:45 AM !2 298 23 343 12 76 99 69 208 2 279 9 2t 18 48 769
12:00 I'M 13 247 26 286 10 97 123 66 210 5 281 13 11 12 36 726
12:15 I'M 10 243 16 269 4 lOt 128 53 161 6 2.2.0 6 18 1:5 49 666
12,30 7 242 27 5 85 1(j6 n 2t9 6 297 3 .II 20 713
Toml Volume 52 W3(l 92 I 31 359 456 260 798 19 Ion 31 61 75 2874
ApI'. Total 4.4 7 7.8 6.8 78.7 24, I 741 1.8 18.6 365 44.9
PHI' 591 ,852 .646 ,889 ,891 9Cl3 911 .792 .907 596 .726 .750 .852
" .
~
Peak Hour Data
...
l'
North
. Pa.,k Hour 8"9in. al 11:4 S AM "
All \lanic.l<1.
...
.,.
~ .
103
Appendix B
Intersection Capacity Analysis
104
Map. Porter's Neck Crossing Existing (2007) AM
Levels of Service 8/21/2007
~
cj~:/:
~.. /
, .~~~
" ~/# ./
" . ~/~//
" ~" ~ / /'
",~ ~~~
"'\ ' ./
\;:~, ~, /( /
~, '. /'
"', ~~ .....-/'" ../
,'. .,,~ /'. Y /'
..... ". ......... / / '
10 "'\,,'., ~ ,II' / .../ /
~" ",~,.',~"~ />/,//< //
~~",~""',,,~ "" /// ,/// </
0" ". "', "" / / // / /:,\
~""", , ~ ,/.. / / "
O~''''', ~'1)W ///// / s
0' ~ ~,,~~:> Jo!~~@;{~:<:/ V
:t ' .';::....,. t // .../, /
7.; .,~>:~~ . ;'>:;;;::>'/0 .
<9..., ":">:;" 'c. ~'I,#/ //'// I
<S'. ,,:~ '~1f':// //
"0 S:::, . ,If .
".~><'> ~ ~
<.2,.~ C '. 'lir9
Jl " ,,4....;.19
~ '.. /~>rpO
/ /.//it<:, ." >:~:.:S'~ 10
//';'/$/" ~::, ", .O~
'///.//::~ ,*,>,<<<., ''"
./ / :?;::0/'~ ',,'(, ""'" <9A
~r lJ ~,. """"" '" '"
~. ///~ ^\~~ " ""~~,,+
/ ~00 ""<" 1>0
~!1:// / ~~ '" ~~~
. / ftJ " " ""'\
/ // / ~ ", '>~
.. / ~flj '" '",.
/ /0,'~ " ""
%/ ^\ , ':- '"
/ ' / ". , ',,,~
/ / ///.::;,0 '<~ ~,,~
,/ /// "'\'. " '."
,/ / /,// '" '''....,......., ."
/. , / " ",,""
? / ...... ,
/~,////., ',"'"'"
// ,./ ,'"
..~/ ' .......
.. . / '"'
,:;( />~ ~
/ / ,
/ .
/ ,/ .-
:;(///~
/ ,/ /
.. /
/~
MfAlB P:\TrafficITIA\Home DepollWilminglonlLowes (082007)IPhasing with Satlexisting (2007) am.syn
105
Porter's Neck Crossing Existing (2007) AM
1: Plantation Road Extension &U$17 (Market Street) 812112007
.,} ~ .(" 4- 4... "\ t I'" \. ~ .;
-+
Lane Group ESl EST EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBl S8T SBR
Lane Configurations 'tj t ." 'tj'tj f+ 'tj ++ ." 'tj ++ ."
Volume (vph) 25 22 3 390 30 99 7 762 274 128 997 25
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Grade ("!o) 2% 3% 2% 0%
Storage length (11) 350 350 400 0 0 400 250 200
Storage lanes 1 1 2 0 1 1 1 1
Taper Length (11) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25
lane Util. Factor tOO 1.00 tOO 0,97 1.00 tOO 1.00 0,95 1.00 1.00 0.95. lOO
Frt 0.850 0.885 0.850 0.850
Fit Proleeted 0.950 0,950 0,950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prol) 1752 1844 1568 3382 1624 0 1752 3504 1568 1770 3539 1583
FII Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.183 0.187
Said. Flow (perm) 1752 1844 1568 3382 1624 0 337 3504 1568 348 3539 1583
Right Tum on Red No No No No
SaId. Flow (RTOR)
Link Speed (mph) 25 45 55 55
Link Distance (f1) 300 679 565 300
Travel Time (s) 8.2 10,3 7.0 3.7
Peak Hour Factor 0,90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0,90 0,90
Adj, Flow (v ph) 28 24 3 433 33 110 8 847 304 142 1108 28
Shared lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 28 24 3 433 143 0 8 847 304 142 1108 28
Turn Type Splil pm+ov Split pm+pt Perm prn+pl pm+ov
P rolected Phases 4 4 5 3 3 5 2 1 6 4
Permitted Phases 4 2 2 6 6
Delector Phase 4 4 5 3 3 5 2 2 1 6 4
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7,0 7.0 14,0 14.0 7,0 14.0 7,0
Minimum Splil (3) 22,2 22.2 13.5 22.2 22.2 13,5 22,6 22.6 13.0 22.6 22.2
Tolal Split (s) 22.2 22,2 13.5 28,0 28.0 0.0 13.5 54.8 54.8 15,0 56.3 22.2
Total Split (%) 18.5% 18.5% 11.3% 23.3% 23.3% 0.0% 1t.3% 45.7% 45.7% 12.5% 46.9% 18,5%
Maximum Green (s) 16.0 16,0 7.0 21,8 21.8 7.0 48.2 48.2 9.0 4n 16.0
Yellow Time (s) 4,7 4..7 4.0 4..7 4.7 4.0 5,1 5,1 4.0 5,1 4.7
All-Red Time(s) 1.5 l.S 2,5 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2,0 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjlusl (s) -1.2 -1.2 -1.5 -1,2 -1.2 1.0 -1.5 -1.6 -1.6 -La -1.6 -1.2
Total L031 Time (s) 5,0 5,0 5.0 5,0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0' 5.0 5,0 5.0 5.0
Lead/lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead lag Lag Lead Lag Lag
l.ead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 30 3.0 3,0 3.0' 3.0 3,0 3.0
Minimum Gap (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Time Before Reduce (3) 0.0 0,0 0.0' 0.0 0.0 0.0 15,0 15,.0 0.0 15.0 0.0
Time To Reduce (s) 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 30,0 30.0 0.0 30.0 0.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min None Min None
Act Elfcl Green (s) 9.1 9.1 16.4 18.1 t8.1 39.5 30.7 30.7 45.4 43.9 53.1
ActuatedglC Ratio 0,10 0.10 0.17 0.21 0.21 0.41 0,36 0.36 0,53 0.52 0.61
vIe Ratio 0.15 0.13 0,01 0,60 0041 0.03 0,67 0.54 0.41 0.61 0.03
Control Delay 44,0 43.6 31.0 36,7 37.1 13,7 26.4 26,6 15.0 18.4 5.9
Queue Delay 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.,0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0,0 0,0
T 01131 Delay 44.0 43.6 31..0 36.7 37,1 13,7 26.4 26.6 15.0 18.4 5,9
M/NB P:\TrafficITIAIHome DepotlWilmingtonlLowes (082007}IPhasing with SatleJdsting (2007) am.syn
Martin Alexiou Bryson, PLLC
106
Porter's Neck Crossing Existing (2007) AM
J: Plantation Road Extension & US1]jMarket Street) 8121120'0'7
~ " .. 4- '- .... t ,.. \. ~ ..;
-.,.
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
LOS D D C D D B C C B B A
Approach Delay 43.1 36.8 26.4 17.8
Approach LOS D D C B
Queue Lenglh 5O'th (f1) 14 12 1 109 67 2 20'3 131 37 20'S 4
Queue Lenglh 95th (f1) 48 44 10' 20'3 155 9 297 229 78 410' 14
Internal Link Dist (f1) 220' 599 485 220'
Turn Bay Length (f1) 350' 350' 40'0' 40'0' 250' 20'0
Base Capacity (vph) 322 339 268 895 430' 269 1704 762 360' 1986 976
Starvation Cap Reductn 0' 0' 0' 0' 0' 0' 0 0' 0' 0' 0'
Spill back Cap Reducln 0' 0' 0' 0' 0' 0' 0' 0' 0' 0 0'
Storage Cap Reductn 0' 0' 0' 0' 0' 0' 0' 0' 0' 0 0'
Reduced vie Ra!to 0'.0'9 007 0.0'1 0'.48 0'.33 0',03 0',50' 0.40 0.39 0'.56 0,03
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Olher
Cycle Length: 120'
Actuated Cycle Length: 85.1
Natural Cycle: 85
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordtnated
Maximum vie RattO: 0.67
Intersectton Signal Delay: 25,1 Intersection LOS: C
Inlersection Capacity Utilization 66.7% ICU Level of SeNice C
Analysis PeriOd (min) 15
Spltts and Phases: 1; PlantationRoad E:denSton & US 17 (Market Slreet) _
~.it:::=: r ~ ,
M/NB P:lTraffic\TIA\Home Depot\Wilmington\Lowes (0820'07)\Phasing wtlh Sal\existing (2O'(7) am.syn
Martin Alexicu Bryson, PLLC
107
Map. Porter's Neck Crossing Existing (2007) PM
Levels of Service 8/21/2007
",
',""
~~
~--~
\ '~""
'~:'~'''~''
",',.', '~"'-
',", "
MIAfB P:\TrafflcITlA\Home DepotlWllmingtonlLowes (082007)IPhasing with Satlexlsting (2007) pm.syn
108
Porter's Neck Crossing Existing (2007) PM
1: PlantationRqad Extension & US 17 (Market Strt3et) 8121/2007
--' ,. .- +- "- "\ t .,. \.. ~ ../
-tI>
Lane Group EBl EBT EBR WBl WBr WBR NBl NBT NBR SBl SBT SBR
lane Configurations '" t ." "'''' ft '" t+ ." '" t+ ."
Volume (vph) 95 65 29 428 47 104 24 1080 334 167 966 55
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Grade (%) 2% 3% 2% 0%
Storage Length (1I) 350 350 400 0 0 400 250 200
Storage lanes 1 1 2 0 1 1 1 1
Taper Le ngth (1I) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor tOO 1.00 1.00 0.97 MO 1.00 1,00 0,95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.896 0.850 0.850
Fit Protected 0.950 0.950 0,950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 1752 1844 1568 3382 1644 0 1752 3504 1568 1770 3539 1583
I'll PermiUed 0.950 0.950 0.162 0.080
Said. Flow (perm) 1752 1844 1568 3382 1644 0 299 3504 1568 149 3539 1583
Right Turn on Red No No No No
Satd. Flow (RTOR)
Link Speed (m ph) 25 45 55 55
Link Distance (It) 300 679 565 300
Travel Time (5) 8.2 10.3 7.0 3.,7
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0,90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 106 72 32 476 52 116 27 1200 371 186 1073 61
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 106 72 32 476 168 0 27 1200 371 186 1073 61
Turn Type Split pm+ov Split pm+pt Perm pm+pt pm+ov
Protected Phases 4 4 5 3 3 5 2 1 6 4
Permilled Phases 4 2 2 6 6
Detector Phase 4 4 5 3 3 5 2 2 1 6 4
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (5) 7.0 7.0 7,0 7.0 7.0 7.0 14.0 14,0 7.0 14.0 7,0
Minimum Split (5) 22.2 22.2 13.5 22.2 22,2 13.5 22.6 22.6 13.0 22.6 22.2
Total Split (5) 22.2 22.2 13.5 26.0 26,0 0,0 13.5 55,8 55.8 16.0 58,3 22,2
Total Split (%) 18,5% 18,5% 11.3% 21.7% 21.7% 0.0% 11.3% 46.5% 46.5% 13.3% 48.6% 18.5%
Maximum Green (s) 16.0 16,0 7.0 19,8 19.8 7,0 49.2 49,2 10,0 51.7 16,0
Yellow Time (s) 4.7 4.1 40 4.7 4,7 4.0 5.1 5,1 4.0 5.1 4.7
Ail-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 2,5 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.0 1.5 1.5
lost Time Adjust (s) -1.2 .1.2 -1.5 -1.2 -1.2 1.0 -ts -1.6 -1.6 -to -1.6 -1.2
Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5,0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5,0 5,0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Exlension (s) 3.0 3.0 3,0 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3,0 3.0
Minimum Gap (s) 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0 3,0 3.0 3,0 3,0
Time Before Reduce (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15,0 15.0 0.0 15,0 0.0
Time To Reduce (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 30.0 30.0 0,0 30,0 0.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min None Min None
Act Eifel Green (5) 13.0 13,0 25.5 19.7 19.7 53,3 44.8 44,8 58.8 50A 64.7
Actualed glC Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.23 0.18 0,18 OA8 OAl 0.41 0.54 0.46 0,60
vie Ralio 0,50 0,33 0,09 0.78 0.56 0.11 0.83 0.57 0,.77 0.65 0.06
Control Delay 55.5 50.2 34.7 53.5 50.9 12.7 34,8 29.2 45A 26,1 6.0
Queue Delay 0.0 0,0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0,0
Total Delay 55.5 50.2 34.7 53.5 50,9 12,7 34,8 29.2 45.4 26.1 6.0
M/AJB P:ITraffie\TIAIHome DepotlWilmington\lowes (082007)IPhasing with Sat\exisling (2007) pm.syn
Marlin Alexiou Bryson, PLLC
109
Porter's Neck Crossing Existing (2007) PM
1: Plantation Road Extension & U$1Z(Market Street) 812112007
~ ... #" <It- , "\ t I" \. ~ ..I
-tl>
lane Group EBl EBT EBR WBl WBT WBR NBl NBT NBR SBl SBT SBR
lOS E D C 0 D B C C D C A
Approach Delay 50.5 52.8 33.1 27.9
Approach LOS 0 D C C
Queue Length 50lh (f1) 74 49 18 172 113 8 397 201 81 321 11
Queue length 95th (f1) 134 96 46 #257 197 23 514 314 #210 418 22
Internal Link Dist (f!) 220 599 485 220
Turn Bay Length (f1) 350 350 400 400 250 200
Base CapaCity (vph) 269 284 359 652 317 255 1560 698 247 1701 965
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8pillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
810rage Cap Reducln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced vie Ratio 0.39 0.25 0.09 0.73 0.53 0.11 0.77 0.53 0.75 0.63 0.06
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 108.6
Natural Cycle: 95
Control Type: Aclualed-Uncoordinated
Maximum vie Ratio: 0.83
Intersection Signal Delay: 35.6 I nlerseclion LOS: 0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.8% leu level of Service 0
Analysis Period (min) 15
# 95th percenlile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer,
Queue shown is maximum afler two cycles.
~~'''f- ~ ,
MINB P:\TrafficITIAIHome Depot\WilmingtonlLowes (082007)\Phasing with Sat\existing (2007) pm,syn
Martin Alexiou Bryson, PlLC
110
Map - Porter's Neck Crossing
Levels of Service
MIA/B P:ITraffic\TIAIHome Depot\WilmingtonlLowes (082007)\Phasing with Sat\existing (2007), sat.syn
111
Porter's Neck Crossing Existing (2007) Saturday
1: Plantation Road Extension & US 17 (Market Street) 8f21 12007
./' "'t .f --- '- '\ t I" \,. ~ .I
-+
lane Group ESt EST EBR WBt WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBt SBT SBR
lane Configurations ., i- 7' ."., f+ ., t+ 7' ., tt 7'
Volume (vph) 75 61 31 359 31 66 19 798 260 92 1030 52
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 19DD 1900 1900 1900 190D 1900 1900 19DO
Grade (%) 2% 3% 2% 0%
Storage L.e ngth (ft) 350 350 400 0 0 400 250 200
Storage Lanes 1 1 2 0 1 1 1 1
Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 tOO tOO 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0,95 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.898 0,850 0.850
Fit Protecled 0,950 0.950 0,950 0.950
Said. Flow (prol) 1752 1844 1568 3382 1648 0 1752 3504 1568 1770 3539 1583
Fit Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.121 0.202
Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 1844 1568 3382 1648 0 223 3504 1568 376 3539 1583
Right Turn on Red No No No No
Said. Flow (RTOR)
Link Speed (mph) 25 45 55 55
Link Distance (f1) 300 679 565 300
Travel Time (s) 8,2 10.3 7.0 3.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0,90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0,90 0.90 0,90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 83 68 34 399 34 73 21 887 289 102 1144 58
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 83 68 34 399 107 0 21 887 289 102 1144 58
Turn Type Split pm+ov Split pm+pt Perm pm+pt pm+ov
Protected Phases 4 4 5 3 3 5 2 1 6 4
Permitted Phases 4 2 .2 6 6
Detector Phase 4 4 5 3 3 5 2 2 1 6 4
Switch Phase
Minimum Inilial (s) 7.0 7,0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 14.0 14,0 7.0 14.0 7.0
Minimum Split (s) 22.2 22.2 13.5 22.2 22.2 13.5 22.6 22.6 13.0 22,6 22.2
Total SplU (5) 22.2 22.2 115 27.0 27.0 0,0 13.5 57,8 57.8 13,0 57.3 22.2
Total Spllit (%) 18.5% 18.5% 11.3% 22.5% 22,5% 0.0% 11.3% 48,2% 48.2% 10.8% 47.8% 18,5%
Maximum Green (s) 16.0 16,0 7.0 20.8 20.8 7,0 51.2 51.2 7.0 50.7 16.0
Yellow Time (s) 4.7 4,7 4.0 4.7 4.1 4,0 5.1 5,1 4.0 5.1 4.1
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.0 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (5) -1.2 -1.2 -1.5 -1.2 .1,2 1.0 -1.5 -1.6 -1.6 -to -1,.6 -1.2
Total tost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5,0 5.0 5,0 5,0 5.0 5,0 5,0 5,0 5,0 5.0
LeadlLag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag lead Lag lag
Lead-lag Optimize?
Vehide Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Minimum Gap (s) 3.0 3,0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0
Time Before Reduce (s) 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 15.0 15.0 0.,0 15.0 0.0
Time To Reduce (s) 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.0 30.0 0.0 30.0 0,0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min None Min None
Acl Effct Green (s) 11.9 11,9 20.,9 18.7 18.7 43,9 38,6 38.6 44.4 41,2 50.7
Actuated glC Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.22 0.21 0.21 0.46 0.43 0.43 0,48 0.45 0.54
vlc Ratio 0.37 0.29 0.10 0.57 0.32 0.09 0.59 0.43 0.33 0.71 0.07
Control Delay 48.3 46.3 32,2 40.7 40,8 12.1 24.0 23.6 15.1 25.5 6.1
Queue Delay 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 O.D
Toll'll Delay 48.3 46.3 32.2 40.1 40.8 12.7 24,0 23.6 15.1 25,5 6,1
M/AtS P:ITraffic\TIA\Home Depot\Wilmington\lowes (082007)\Phasing with Sallexisling (2007) sal.syn
Martin Alexiou Bryson, PlLC
112
Porter's Neck Crossing Existing (2007) Saturday
1: Plantation Road Extensi()l1& US 17 (Market Street) 8121/2007
.,.;. .. f 4- " '\ t I" \. ~ otI.
-+
lane Group ESl EST EBR WBl WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBl SBT SBR
LOS D D C D D B C C B C A
ApproaCh Delay 44,6 40.7 23.7 23.8
Approach lOS D D C C
Queue length 50th (Il) 49 40 16 119 59 6 224 127 29 322 9
Queue Lengtl195th (Il) 109 93 48 201 129 19 326 225 64 460 22
Internal Link Disl (II) 220 599 485 220
Turn Bay length (Il) 350 350 400 400 250 200
Base CapaCity (vph) 320 336 342 849 414 246 1808 809 307 1863 867
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spill back Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced vlc Ralfo 0.26 0.20 0.10 0.47 0,26 (109 0.49 0,36 0.33 0.61 0,07
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle length: 120
Actualed Cycle Length: 90.6
Natural Cycle: 85
Control Type: Acluated-Uncoordinated
Maximum vie Ratio: 0.71
Intersection Signal Delay: 27.7 Intersection lOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.7% leu level of Service B
Analysis Period (min) 15
elD4
M/A/B P:ITrafficlTIAIHome DepotlWilmingtonlLowes (082007)IPhasing with Sal\existing (2007) satsyn
Marlin Alexiou Bryson, PLLC
113
Map - Porter's Neck Crossing
Levels of Service
M/AlB P:\Traffie\TIA\Home Depot\Wilmington\lowes (lJ82007)\Phasing with Sat\background (2008) am.syn
114
Porter's Neck Crossing No~BuHd (2008) AM
1: Plantation Road Extension & US 17 (Market Street) 8/2112007
--" ~ I'" ~ "- ~ t /" \.. + .cI
-+
Lane Group ESL EST EBR WBL WBT WBR NBt NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configu rations 'i t ." 'i'i 1+ 'i tt ." 'i tt ."
Volume (vph) 26 31 3 575 44 130 7 177 326 149 1017 26
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Grade (%) 2% 3% 2% 0%
Storage Lenglh (ft) 350 350 400 0 0 400 250 200
Storage Lanes 1 1 2 0 1 1 1 1
Taper Length (fI) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.888 0.850 0.850
Fit Protected 0.950 0.950 0,950 0.950
Said,. Flow (prol) 1752 1844 1568 3382 1629 0 1752 3504 1568 1770 3539 1583
Fit Permitled 0.950 0.950 0.142 0.173
Satd, Flow (perm) 1752 1844 1568 3382 1629 0 262 3504 1568 322 3539 1583
Righi Turn on Red No No No No
Said. Flow (RTOR)
Link Speed (mph) 25 45 55 55
Link Dislance (fI) 300 679 565 300
Travel Time (s) 8.2 10J 7,0 3.7
Peak rtOU r Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0,90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 29 34 3 639 49 144 8 863 362 166 1130 29
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 29 34 3 639 193 0 8 863 362 166 1130 29
Turn Type Split pm+ov Split pm+pl Perm pm+pl pm+ov
Protected Phases 4 4 5 3 3 5 2 1 6 4
Permitted Phases 4 2 2 6 6
Detector Phase 4 4 5 3 3 5 2 2 1 6 4
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7,0 7.0 7.0 14.0 14.0 7.0 14.0 7.0
Minimum Split (5) 22.2 22.2 13.5 22.2 22,2 13.5 22.6 22,6 13.0 22.6 22,2
Total Splil (s) 22,2 22.2 13.5 33.0 33,0 0.0 13.5 50.8 50..8 14.0 51.3 22.2
T alai Split 18,5% 18..5% t1.3% 27,5% 27.5% 0.0% 11.3% 42.3% 42,3% 11.7% 42.8% 18.5%
Maximum Green (s) 16.0 16.0 7,0 26.8 26.8 7.0 44,2 44.2 8.0 44.7 16.0
Yellow Time (s) 4.7 4.7 4.0 4.7 4.7 4,0 5.1 5.1 4,0 5,1 4.7
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2,5 1.5 1.5 2.0 1.5 1.5
Lost Time Adjust (s) -1.2 -1,2 -1.5 .1.2 -1.2 1.0 -1.5 .1,6 -1.6 .1.0 -1.6 .1.2
Tolal Losl Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5,0 5.0 5,0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5,0 5.0
Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (5) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Minimum Gap (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Time Before Reduce (s) 0,0 0,0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0,0 15.0 15,0 0.0 15.0 0.0
Time To Reduce (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 30.0 30,0 0.0 30.0 M
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min None Min None
Act Effcl Green (8) 9.3 9.3 17.5 24.1, 24.1 42.7 34,0 34.0 47.1 44.1 525
Aclualed glC Ratio 0.10 0.10 0.17 0.26 0.26 0.42 0,36 0.36 0.50 0.47 0.54
vie Ratio 0.17 0.19 0.01 0.74 0.46 0.03 0.68 0.64 0.55 0.68 om
Control Delay 48.2 48.3 34.3 39,9 37.0 140 28.9 31.6 21.0 24.,9 7.8
Queue Delay 0,0 0,0 0,0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0,0
T olal Delay 48.2 48.3 34.3 39.9 37.,0 14.0 28,9 31.6 21.0 24.9 7.8
MINB P:\Tralfic\ TIA\Home Depot\Wilminglon\Lowes (082007)\Phasing with Sat\background (2008) am.syn
Martin Alexiou Bryson, PLLC
115
Porter's Neck Crossing No~Build (2008) AM
1: Plantation Road Extension & US 1] (Market Street) 8121/2007
/' .. .. +- "- '\ t I" \. ! .I'
-+
lane Group ESl EST EBR WBl WBT WBR NBl NBT NBR SBl SBT SBR
LOS D D C D D B C C C C A
Approach Delay 47,6 39.3 29.6 24.0
Approach lOS D 0 C C
Queue Length 50th (It) 17 20 1 181 98 2 240 188 55 263 6
Queue length 95th (It) 50 56 10 293 195 11 328 303 101 462 17
Internal Link Disl {It) 220 599 485 220
Turn Bay Length {It) 350 350 400 400 250 200
Base Capacity (vph) 295 310 270 997 480 238 1546 692 308 1737 883
SIa rvalion Cap Redueln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reduetn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced vie Ratio 0.10 0.11 0.01 0.64 OAO 0.Q3 0.56 0,52 0.54 0.65 0,03
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle length: 120
Actuated Cycle length: 93.8
Nalural Cycle: 95
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum vie Ratio: 0.74
Intersection Signai Delay: 30.1 Intersection LOS: C
Interseelioo Capacity Umization 69,5% leu level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
w2 eW4
i!l6
MINB P:\TrafficITIAIHome DepotlWilmingtonllowes (082007)IPhasing wilh Satlbackground (2008) am,syn
Marlin Alexiou Bryson, PllC
116
Map. Porter's Neck. Crossing N!o-Build (2008/) PM
Levels of Service 812112007
~
0
c:;;..s
e;.
?}?
~'?i
"\~
"
vC:;;
M/NB P:.\Traffic\TIA\Home Depot\Wilmington\Lowes (082007)\Phasing with Sat\background (2008) pm.syn
117
Porter's Neck Crossing No-Build (2008/) PM
1: Pl(jl1tation Road Extension &ljS 17 (Market Street) 8/2112007
..J- ... f <lIl- "- '\ t r \. ~ .,I'
-+
Lane Group ESt EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL S8T SBR
Lane Configurations 'i t " 'i'i f+ 'i t+ " 'i t+ "
Volume (vph) 97 96 30 553 57 125 24 1102 497 229 985 56
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 190'0 1900 1900
Grade (%) 2% 3% 2% 0%
Storage Lengll1 (f1) 350 350 400 0 0 400 250 200
Storage Lanes 1 1 2 0 1 1 1 1
Taper Lengll1 (It) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25
La n e Util. Factor 1.00 LOO 1.00 0.97 tOO 1.00 1.00 0.,95 1,00 toO 0.95 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.897 0,850 0.850
FIt Protected 0,950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Said. Flow (prol) 1752 1844 1568 3382 1646 0 1752 3504 1568 1770 3539 1583
Fit Permitted It950 0.950 0,152 0.078
Said. Flow (perm) 1752 1844 1568 3382 1646 0 280 3504 1568 145 3539 1583
Right Turn on Red No No No No
Satd. Flow (RTOR)
li nk Speed (mph) 25 45 55 55
link Distance (II) 300 679 565 300
Travel Time (s) 8.2 10,3 1,0 3}
Peak Hour Faclor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0,90
Adj. Flow (vph) 108 107 33 614 63 139 27 1224 552 254 1094 62
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 108 107 33 614 202 0 27 1224 552 254 1094 62
Turn Type Split pmtov Spill pm+pt Perm pmtpt pmtov
Protected Phases 4 4 5 3 3 5 2 1 6 4
PermiUed Phases 4 2 2 6 6
Detector Phase 4 4 5 3 3 5 2 2 1 6 4
Switch Phase
Minimum InWal (s) 7.0 7.0 7,0 7.0 7.0 7.0 14,0 14.0 1.0 14.0 7.0
Minimum Split (s) 22,2 22.2 13.5 22.2 22.2 13.5 22.6 22,6 13.0 22.6 22.2
Total Splil (s) 22.2 22.2 13.5 28.0 28.0 0,0 13.5 52.,8 52.8 17,0 56.3 22.2
Tota) Splil 18.5% 18.5% 11.3% 23.3% 23.3% 0.0% 11.3% 44,0% 44,0% 14.2% 46.9% 18.5%
Maximum Green (s) 16.0 16,0 7.0 21,8 21.8 1,0 46.2 46,2 11.0 49.7 16.0
Yellow Time (s) 4.7 4.7 4.0 4.7 4.7 4.0 5.1 5.1 4.0 5.1 4.7
All-Red Time (s) 1..5 1.5 2,5 1.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2.0 1.5 1.5
Losl Time Adjusl (s) -1.2 -1.2 -1.5 -1.2 -1.2 1.0 -1,.5 -1.6 -1..6 -1.0 -1.6 -1.2
Tala I Lost Time (s) 5.0 5,.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5,0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5,0
Lead/Lag Lag Lag lead Lead Lead Lead lag Lag Lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimi.ze?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Minimum Gap (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Time Before Reduce (s) 0.0 0,0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0,0 15,0 15.0 0,0 15.0 0.0
Time To Reduce (s) 0,0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.0 30.0 0.0 30.0 0.0
Recall Mode None None None NOrl€ None None Min Min None Min None
Acl Eifel Green (s) 13..2 13.2 25.8 22.9 22.9 54,1 45,6 45.6 61.5 52.1 66.5
Actuated glC Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.22 0..20 0.20 0.46 0040 0.40 0.54 0.46 0.58
vie Ratio 0.53 0,50 0.10 0,90 0.61 0,11 0.81 0,88 1.02 0.68 0.07
Control Delay 57.8 56.1 35,4 62.9 51.8 13.8 39.9 49.0 92.7 28.1 6,5
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay 51.8 56.1 35.4 62.9 516 13,8 39.9 49,0 92.1 28.1 6.5
M/AlB P:ITrafficlTIAIHome DepotlWilminglon\Lowes (082007)IPhasing wilh Sat\background (2008) pm.syn
Martin Alexiou Bryson, PlLC
118
Porter's Neck Crossing No~Bund (2008/) PM
1: Plantation Road Extension & U$J 7 (Market Street) 8121/2007
~ t .f -+- '- '\ t .t" ..... + .cI'
-f>
lane Group EBl EBT E.BR WBl WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
LOS E E D E D B D D F C A
Approach Delay 54.1 60,1 42.3 38.8
Approach LOS D E D D
Queue length 50th (II) 77 76 20 235 140 9 430 370 -153 342 12
Queue Length 95th (II) 137 134 47 #356 229 24 554 #606 #336 444 24
Internal Link Dist (II) 220 599 485 220
Turn Bay Length (f1) 350 350 400 400 250 200
Base Capacity (vph) 256 270 347 684 333 237 1444 646 250 1624 945
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced vlc Ratio 0.42 DAD 010 a.90 0.61 0.11 0,85 0.,85 1.02 0.67 0.D7
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 113.9
Natural Cycle: 105
Control Type: Actuated.Uncoordinaled
Maximum vlc Ratio: 1.02
Intersection Signal Delay: 45.2 Intersection LOS: D
Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.4% leu level of Service D
Analysis Period (min) 15
- Volume exceeds capacity, queue is IheorelicaUy infinite.
Queue shown is maximum aller two cycles.
# 95th percentile volu me exceeds capacity. queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum aller two cycles.
Splils and Phases: 1: Plantation Road Extension & US 17 (Markel Street)
~f:==: r- ~ 1
MIAfB P:ITraffic\ TIAIHome DepotlWilmington\lowes (082007)IPhasing with Satlbackground (2008) pm.syn
Martin Alexiou Bryson, PLLC
119
Map. Porter's Neck Crossing
Levels of Service
""
MIAfB P:\Traffic\TIA\Home Depot\Wilmington\Lowes (082007)\Phasing with Sat\background (2008)satsyn
120
Porter's Neck Crossing No-Build (2008) Saturday
1: Plantation Road Extension & US 117 (Market Street) 8/2112007
..;. " .. +- 4:... "" f !" \. J ..;
-+
Lane Group EBL EST EBR WBL W8T W8R N8L NBT NBR SBl S8T SBR
lane Configurations 'i + 7' 'i'i ~ 'i tt 7' 'i ++ 7'
Volume (vph) 77 86 32 503 42 89 19 814 391 142 1051 53
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Grade (%j 2% 3% 2% 0%
Storage length (It) 350 350 400 0 0 400 250 200
Storage Lanes 1 1 2 0 1 1 1 1
Taper length (It) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25
Lane Uti!. Factor 1,00 1.00 tOO 0,97 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 tOO 0.95 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.898 0.850 0.850
FII Protected 0950 0.950 0.950 0.950
SaId. Flow (prot) 1152 1844 1568 3382 1648 0 1752 3504 1568 1770 3539 1583
Fit Permitted 0,950 0,950 0.097 0,167
Satd. Flow (perm) 1752 1844 1568 3382 1648 0 119 3504 1568 311 3539 1583
Right Tum on Red No No No No
Said. Flow (RTOR)
Link Speed (mph) 25 45 55 55
Lir\k Distance (It) 300 679 565 300
Travel Time (s) 8.2 10.3 7.0 3.7
Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0,90 0.90 0.90 0,90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow lvph) 86 96 36 559 47 99 21 904 434 158 1168 59
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
lane Group Flow (vph) 86 96 36 559 146 0 21 904 434 158 1168 59
Turn Type Split pm+ov Split pm+pt Perm pm+pt pm+ov
Protected Phases 4 4 5 3 3 5 2 1 6 4
Permilted Pha ses 4 2 2 6 6
Delector Phase 4 4 5 3 3 5 2 2 1 6 4
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 7.0 7.0 7,0 7.0 7.0 7.0 14.0 14.,0 7.0 14.0 7.0
Minimum Splil is) 22.2 22,.2 13.5 22.2 22.2 13,5 22,6 22.6 13.0 22,6 22.2
Total Split (s) 22.2 22,2 13.5 31.0 31.0 0.0 13,5 52.8 52.8 14.0 53.3 22.2
Tolal Split(%) 18.5% 18.5% 11.3% 25.8% 25.8% 0.0% 11.3% 44,0% 44.0% 11.1% 44.4% 18.5%
Maximum Green(s) 16,.0 16,0 7,0 24.8 248 7.0 46,2 46.2 8.0 46.7 16,0
Yellow Time (s) 4.1 4,7 4.0 4.7 4.1 4.0 5,1 5.1 4.0 5,1 4.7
All-Red Time (s) 1.5 1.5 2.5 1,5 1.5 2,.5 1.5 1.5 2,0 1.5 1.5
Los! Time Adjus! (s) -1.2 -1.2 -1.5 -1.2 -1.2 10 -1.5 -1.6 -1.6 -1.0 -1.6 -1.2
Total Lost Time is) 5,0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5,0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
lead/Lag Lag lag lead Lead Lead lead Lag lag lead Lag Lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Exlension (s) 3.0 3,0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Minimum Gap (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3,0 3.0
Time Before Reduce (s) 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 15.0 15.0 0.0 15.0 0.0
Time To Reduce (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 30.0 30.0 0,0 30.,0 0.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None Min Min NOM Mir\ None
Act EIfel Green (s) 12.3 12.3 24.8 22.8 22.8 48.2 39.6 39.6 50.4 43.6 57.3
ActualedglC Ratie 0.12 0.12 0,23 0.22 0.22 0045 0.38 0.38 0.48 0.42 0.55
vIe Ratie 0.42 0.44 0.10 0.76 0.41 0.10 0,68 0.73 0.57 0.79 0,Q7
Con!rol Delay 52.5 52.7 34,6 46,9 41.3 14,8 30.2 36.4 23.1 32.8 7.5
Queue Delay 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0,.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0,0
T elal Delay 52.5 52.7 34.6 46.9 41.3 14.8 30,2 36.4 23.1 32,.8 7.5
MIMB P:\Traffic\TIA\Home Depot\Wilmingtonllowes (082007)\Phasing with Sat\backgreund (2008) sal.syn
Martin Alexiou Bryson, PllC
121
Porter's Neck Crossing No-Build (2008) Saturday
1: Plantation Road Extensi()r}& US 17 (Market Street) 8121/2007
..} ... .- 4- ...... '\ t I" \.. ~ .I
--Ii"
lane Group E8l EST E8R WBl WST W8R NBl NBT NBR SBl SBT SBR
lOS D D C D D B C D C C A
Approach Delay 49.6 45.8 32,0 30.6
Approach LOS D D C C
Queue Length 50th (II) 58 65 20 189 88 7 272 255 57 386 13
Queue Length 95th (ft) 113 123 49 275 163 21 365 400 102 510 26
Inlemal Link Dist (ft) 220 599 485 220
Tum Bay length (ft) 350 350 400 400 250 200
Base Ca pacity (vph) 281 296 363 830 404 207 1502 672 279 1582 901
Starvalion Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spil'lback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced vlc Ratio 0,31 0.32 0.10 0.67 0,36 0,10 060 0.,65 0.57 0.74 0,07
Inlersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 120
Actualed Cycle Lenglh: 104,3
N alu ra I Cycle: 95
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum vie Ratio: 0.79
Intersection Signal Delay: 35.2 lnlersection LOS: D
Intersection Capacity Utilization 71.7% leu Level 01 Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 1: Plantation Road Extension & US 17 (Market Slreel)
[; E::::=. r- ~ ~
MIA/B P:\Traffic\TIA\Home Depot\Wilmington\Lowes (082007)\Phasing with Sat\background (200S) sat.syn
Martin Alexiou Bryson, PLLC
122
::Er--
<8
-N CO'
<:0 .......
OT"" Q
o~ Q
!:;::!..oo !:;::!..
B B
'5 "5
1II a:l
......
):'
<
/:)
x:
w
w
3:
--
00
Q
0
N
l/)
W
~
>-
..J
Z
0
::=..
r--
0
Q
N
00
e.
III
~
0
..J
C
.s
Cl
c
"e
~
15
Q.
III
/:)
1lI
E
0
::I:
-
<
i=
U
&:
III
...
t::
c.:
en
.E:
III
III
0
....
U
.ll:
U
III
Z
III
\..
III
t: m
o 1/1 ~
a. III
. E ::E
0..2
III 0
::E>
123
Porter's Neck Crossing Build (2008) AM
1: Porter's Neck Road & US 17 (Market StrE)et) 812112007
; -+ t f ..- "- "'\ t I" \. J. ..;
Lane Group EBl EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBt NBT NBR S8t S8T SBR
Lane Configurations .,., t , .,., t , .,., tt , .,., tt ,
Volume (vph) 68 50 31 575 66 130 40 777 326 149 1017 76
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Grade (%j 2% 3% 2% 0%
Storage Lengll1 250 0 400 100 300 400 250 400
Storage Lanes 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1
Taper Length (f1) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25
la ne UtiL Factor 0.97 LOO 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 0,97 0.95 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850
Fit Protected 0.950 0950 0,950 0.950
Said, Flow (prot) 3399 1844 1568 3382 1835 1560 3399 3504 1568 3433 3539 1583
FII Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 0950
SaId. Flow (perm) 3399 1844 1568 3382 1835 1560 3399 3504 15tl8 3433 3539 1583
Right Tum on Red No No No No
Satd. Flow (RTOR)
Link Speed (mph) 25 45 55 55
Link Distance (f1) 345 726 773 557
Travel Time (5) 9A 11.0 9.6 6.9
Peak Hour F aclor 0.90 O.9O 0,90 0.90 0,90 0.90 0.90 0,90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0,90
Adj. Flow (vph) 76 56 34 639 73 144 44 863 362 166 1130 84
Shared lane Traffic (%)
lane Group Flow (vph) 76 56 34 639 73 144 44 863 362 166 1130 84
Turn Type Split pm+ov Split pm+ov Prot pmtov Prot pm+ov
Protecled Pha ses 4 4 5 8 8 1 5 2 8 1 6 4
Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 4 4 5 8 8 1 5 2 8 1 6 4
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (5) 7,0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7,0 7.0 14.0 7.0 7,0 14.0 7.0
Minimum Split (5) 22.2 22.2 14,5 22.2 22.2 14.0 14,5 25.5 22.2 14,0 22.6 22.2
Total Split (5) 22.2 22,2 14.5 33.0 33.0 15.0 14,5 49.8 33.0 15.0 50.3 22.2
Total Split (%) 18.5% 18.5% 12.1% 275% 27.5% 12.5% 12.1% 41.5% 27.5% 12.5% 41.9% 18.5%
Maximum Green (s) 15.2 15.2 7,5 26.0 26,0 8.0 7.5 42.8 26.0 8.0 43.3 15,2
Yellow Time (5) 5,0 5.0 5,0 5.0 5,0 5.0 5.0 5,0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
AII.Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2,0 2.0 2,0 2.0 2.0 2,0 2.0
Lost Time Adjust (5) .2.0 -2.0 -2.0 -2,0 -2.0 -2.0 -2,0 -2.0 -2.0 .20 -2.0 -2.0
Total Lost Time (5) 5.0 5,0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5,0 5.0 5.0 5,0
lead/Lag Lead Lead lead lag lead Lag
Lead-lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (5) 3.0 3..0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,1) 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0
Minimum Gap (5) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Time Before Reduce (5) 0.0 0.0 1),1) 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 15.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 0,0
Time To ReduC€ (5) 0.0 0.1) 0,0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 30,0 0,0 0.0 30.0 0.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min None None Min None
Act Effd Green (s) 11.1 11.1 20.3 26.1 26.1 41.2 9,2 38.,2 64.3 10,0 42.5 58.7
Actuated glC Ratio 0.10 0,10 0.19 0.25 0.25 0.39 0,08 0.313 0.61 0.09 OAO 0.55
vlc Ratio 0,21 0.29 0.12 0.77 0.16 0.24 0.15 0.68 0,38 0.51 0.80 0,10
Control Delay 47.8 50.8 20,5 45.1 35.0 25,0 50.1 31.8 6.5 54.4 34.2 13.0
Queue Delay 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.,0 0.0 0,0 0,0 0.0 0,1) 0,0 0.0
Total Delay 47.8 50.8 20.5 45,1 35.0 25.0 50,1 31.8 6.5 54..4 34.2 13.0
MINB P:\TrafficITIA\Home DepotlWilminglonllowes (082007)\ONL Y LOWES 2008 (WEEKDA Y)\Build (2008) AM.syn
Marlin Alexiou Bryson, PLLC
124
Porter's Neck Crossing Build (2008) AM
1: Eorter's Neck Road & US 17 (Market Street) 8/2112007
..J "'t .- +- '- "\ t !" \.. ~ .,;
-.
Lane 13rou p EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
LOS D D C D D C D C A D C B
Approach Delay 43.2 40.9 25.2 35.4
Approach LOS D D C D
Queue Length 50lh (II) 26 38 11 218 41 69 15 263 48 59 375 28
Queue Length 95th (II) 50 80 28 303 85 126 35 346 88 100 489 54
IntemalUnk Oisl (It) 265 646 693 477
Tum Bay length (It) 250 400 100 300 400 250 400
Base Capacity (vph) 529 287 297 888 482 590 298 1406 968 330 1486 917
Starvalion Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillbaek Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced vie Ratio 0.14 0.20 0.11 0.72 0.15 0.24 015 0,61 0.37 0,50 0.76 0.09
Intersection Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle length: 120
Aclualed Cycle Lenglh: 105,8
Natural Cycle: 95
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum vlc Ratio: 0.80
Intersection Signal Delay: 315 Intersection LOS: C
Intersection Capacity Utilization 69,5% ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
~. 08
MIA/B P:\Traffic\TIA\Home DepotlWilmington\lowes (082007)IONL Y LOWES 2008 (WEEKOAY)\Build (2008) AM.syn
Martin Alexiou Bryson, PLLC
125
':E r-.
a..g
--- ('oj
0:) --
0'"
o~
~.oo
:2
':;
l:D :2
'5
g!
~
0
~
w
w
!
00
0
0
N
(fJ
w
?:
0
...J
>-
...J,
Z
9
~
0
0
N
00
~
III
;
0
...J
C
.e
Cl
c:
~
~
0
Q.
<lI
0
<lI
E
0
:r
<i
i=
U
IE
f!.
!::
a.:
Cl
c:
'iij
III
0
U
.lO:
U
<lI
Z
III
"l..
<lI
1::
o III
a.. <lI
. E l:D
a.;;J ~
/G-
:e~ :E
126
Porter's Neck Grossing Build (2008) PM
1: Porter's Neck Road & US 17 (Market Street) 8/21/2007
./' ... ~ 4- "- '" t I" \.. ~ '"
-+
la ne Grou p EBl EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
lane ConFigurations '1'1 + ." '1'1 + ." 'i'i H ." '1'1 ++ ."
Volume (vph) 201 120 116 553 76 125 103 1052 497 229 935 149
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Grade (%) 2% 3% 2% 0%
Storage length (It) 250 0 400 100 300 400 250 400
Storage lanes 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1
Taper length (It) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25
Lane Uti!. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 tOO 0.97 0,95 toO 0,97 0.95 1.00
Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850
Fit Protecled 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prot) 3399 1844 1568 3382 1835 1560 3399 3504 1568 3433 3539 1583
Fit Permitted 0.950 0,950 0.950 0,950
Satd, Flow (perm) 3399 1844 1568 3382 1835 1560 3399 3504 1568 3433 3539 1583
Right Turn en Red No No Ne No
Satd. Flow (RTOR)
li n k Speed (mph) 25 45 55 55
link Distance (ft) 345 726 773 557
Travel Time (s) 9A 11.0 9.6 6.9
Peak Hour Factor O.S\} 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0,90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Adj. Flow (vph) 223 133 129 614 84 139 114 1169 552 254 103S 166
Shared Lalle T raffie (%)
lane Group Flow (vph) 223 133 129 614 84 139 114 116S 552 254 1039 166
Turn Type Split pm+ov Split pm+ov Prot pm+ov Prot pm+ov
Protected Phases 4 4 5 8 8 1 5 2 8 1 6 4
PermiUed Phases 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 4 4 5 8 8 1 5 2 8 1 6 4
Switch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 7.0 7,0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7,0 14.0 7.0 7.0 14.0 7.0
Minimum Splil (5) 22.2 22.2 14.5 22.2 22.2 14.0 14.5 25,5 22,2 14.0 22.6 22.2
Total Split (s) 22.2 22.2 14,6 31.0 31,0 16.0 14.6 50,8 31.0 16.0 52.2 22.2
Total Split (%) 18.5% 18.5% 12.2% 25.8% 25.8% 13.3% 12.2% 42,3% 25.8% 13,3% 43.5% 18,5%
Maximum Green (s) 15.2 15.2 7.6 24.0 24.0 9,0 7.6 43.8 24.0 9.0 45.2 15.2
Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5,0 5,0 5.0 5.0 50 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
All-Red Time (5) 2.0 2,0 2.0 2,0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2,0 2.0 2.0 2,0
lost Time Adjust (s) -2.0 -2,0 -2.0 -2.0 -2,0 -2.0 -2,0 -2.0 -2.0 -2.0 -2.0 -2.0
Total Lest Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5,0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5,0
Lead/lag Lead lead lead lag Lead lag
Lead-Lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Minimum Gap (s) 3.0 3,0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.,0 3.0 3.0
Time Before Reduce (5) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15,.0 0,0 0.0 15.0 0,0
Time To Reduce (5) 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.0 0.0 0.0 30,.0 0.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min None None Min None
Ac! Effet Green (s) 14.9 14.9 24.4 25,1 25.1 41.2 9,5 43.0 68.2 11,1 44,6 64.5
Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0,13 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.36 0.08 0.38 0,60 0.10 0.39 0,56
vie Ratio 0.50 0.55 0,39 0.83 0.21 0.25 0.40 0.89 0.59 0.76 0.75 0.19
Control Delay 51.0 56.7 24,2 53.6 39.5 28,3 56.0 42.9 10.3 67.2 34.5 12.7
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0
Tolal Delay 51.0 56,7 24.2 53.6 39.5 28.3 56,0 429 10.3 67.2 34,5 12.7
M/NB P:\Traffie\TIA\Home Depol\WilmingtonlLowes (082007)\ONLY LOWES 2008 (WEEKDAY)\Build (2008) PM,syn
Marlin Alexiou Bryson, PllC
127
Porter's Neck Crossing Build (2008) PM
1: Porter's Neck Road & US 17 (Market Street) 812112007
.,} .. . +- , "'\ t I" \.. ~ .I
~
Lane Group EBl EST EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SaL SBT SBR
lOS D E C D D C E D a E C B
Approach Delay 45.4 48,0 33.9 37.7
Approach LOS D D C D
Queue le nglh 50th (II) 82 96 50 232 53 75 43 428 117 99 351 57
Queue length 951h (II) 123 162 85 #321 100 129 74 533 181 #166 441 94
Internal Link. Dist (fl) 265 646 693 477
Turn Bay Length (II) 250 400 100 300 400 250 400
Base Capacity (vph) 503 273 336 767 416 563 287 1375 942 333 1433 908
Starvation Cap Reducm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SpHlback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced vie Ratio 0.44 0.49 0.38 0.80 0.20 025 OAO 0.85 0.59 0.76 0.73 0.18
Inlerseclion Summary
Area Type: Other
Cycle Lenglh: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 114.2
Natural Cycle: 95
Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinaled
Maximum vie Ratio: 0.89
Intersection Signal Delay: 38.9 Intersection LOS: D
Intersection Capacity Utilizaljon 70.6% leu Level 01 Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may 00 longer.
Queue shown is maximum aller two cycles.
Splits and Phases: 1: Porter's Neck Road & US17 (Market Street)
~.~r J!:..... ,
MIN8 P:\Traffie\TIA\Home Depol\Wilmington\Lowes (082007}\ONLY LOWES 2008 (WEEKDAY}\Build (2008) PM.syn
Martin Alexiou Bryson, PLLC
128
c
>d'" >.
mo lI)
'tIO ~
"N 0(
::::J.....
.... ... VJ
,t'a ~
VJ(O
;)
0
0
~
:!2
"5
CO
og
=
0
N
VJ
W
~
..J
>-
..J
Z
9
;::-
0
=
N
(0
e-
ll)
Gl
~
0
..J
1:
0
m
c
~
~
0
0.
III
Q
Gl
EE
0
:c:
<i
~
is
E!
!::
a:
:=:"1
en PO~.'\
.5 \ i v
w '"
w Ii.
e
u U
.>II: (ll
<..I Z
III '"
Z ~r;..-.
w ~
... 0
Gl 0-
1:
o w
Q. Gl co
' EE ~
0.::::J
m 0 :IE
::E>
129
Porter's Neck Crossing Build (2008) Saturday
1: Porter's Neck Road & US 17 (Market Street) 8/21/2007
/' .. . ....... "- '*\ t /" \.. ~ .,,;
-+
Lane Group EBL EST EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Conflgurati ons 'i'i + ." 'i'i + ." 'i'i ++ ." 'i'i ++ ."
Volume (vph) 278 145 189 503 112 89 193 745 391 142 982 279
Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Grade (%) 2% 3% 2% 0%
Slorage Length (II) 250 0 400 100 300 400 250 400
Storage Lanes 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1
Taper Length (It) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25
Lane Util. Factor 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0,97 0,95 1.00 0.97 0,95 1.00
Frt 0,850 0.850 0.850 0.850
Fit Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (prol) 3399 1844 1568 3382 1835 1560 3399 3504 1568 3433 3539 1583
FII Permitted 0.950 0,950 0.950 0.950
Satd. Flow (penn.) 3399 1844 1568 3382 1835 1580 3399 3504 1568 3433 3539 1583
Righi Turn on Red No No No No
Satd. Flow (RTOR)
Li nk Speed (mph) 25 45 55 55
Link Distance (II) 345 726 773 557
Travel Time (s) 9.4 11,0 9.6 6.9
Peak Hour Faclor 0,90 0.90 0,90 0.00 0,90 0.90 0,90 0.90 0,90 0,90 0.90 0,90
Ad), Flow (vph) 309 161 210 559 124 99 214 828 434 158 1091 310
Shared Lane Traffic (%)
Lane Group Flow (vph) 309 161 210 559 1.24 99 214 828 434 158 1091 310
Turn Type SpHI pm+ov Split pm+ov Prot pm+ov Prol pm+ov
Protecled Pha ses 4 4 5 8 8 1 5 2 8 1 6 4
Pennitted Phases 4 8 2 6
Detector Phase 4 4 5 8 8 1 5 2 8 1 6 4
Swilch Phase
Minimum Initial (s) 7.0 7,0 7.0 7,0 7,0 7.0 7,0 14.0 7,0 7.0 14.0 7,.0
Minimum Splil (8) 22,2 22.2 14.5 22.2 22.2 14.0 14.5 25.5 222 14.0 22.6 22,2
Total Split (s) 22,2 22.2 16.0 30.0 30.0 15,0 16.0 52,8 30,0 15.0 51.8 22.2
Tolal Split (%) 18.5% 188% 13.3% 250% 250% 12,5% 13,3% 44.0% 25,0% 12.5% 43.2% 18.5%
Maximum Green (s) 15.2 152 9.,0 23.0 23.0 8.,0 9,0 45,8 .23.0 8.0 44.8 15.2
Yellow Time (s) 5.0 5,0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5,0 5.0 5.0 50 5,0 5.0
All-Red Time (8) 2.0 2,0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2,0 2,0 2.0 2.0
Losl Time Adjust (s) -2.0 -2.0 -2,0 -2.0 -2.0 -2.0 -2.0 -2,0 -2,0 -2,0 -2.0 -2.0
Total LoslTime (s) 5.0 5,0 5,0 5.0 5,0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5,0 5,0 5.0
Lead/Lag Lead L.ead Lead Lag Lead Lag
Lead-lag Optimize?
Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Minimum Gap (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 30 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0
Time Befora Reduce (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 15.0 0.0 0,0 15.0 0.0
Time To Reduce (s) 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0,0 3110 0.0 0.,0 30,0 0.0
Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min None None Min None
Act Elfe! Green (8) 16.2 16..2 21,2 23.9 23.9 38,9 11.0 42.6 66.,5 9.9 41.6 62.8
Aclualed g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0,24 0.21 0.21 0.34 0.10 0.38 0.59 0.09 0,31 0.56
vie Ratio 0,63 0.61 0.56 0.78 0.32 0.18 0.64 0,63 0.47 0.52 0,84 0,35
Conlrol Delay 52.6 51,0 26.5 51.4 41.7 28.7 60.4 31.1 8.5 57.7 39,3 15.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0,.0 00 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0
Tolal Delay 52.6 51.0 26.5 51.4 41.7 28.7 60.4 31.1 8.5 57.7 39.3 15,1
MINB P:\TrafficITIA\Home Depot\WilminglonlLowes (08200 7)ION L Y LOWES 2008 (SATURDAY)\8uild (2008) SAT,syn
Martin Alexiou Bryson, PLLC
130
Porter's Neck Crossing Build (2008) Saturday
1: Po rte r"s Ne-9k Road & US 17 (Market Street) 812112007
..J- -+ .. #'" +- "- "'\ t I' \. J. ./
Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
LOS D E C 0 D C E C A E 0 B
Approach Delay 45.6 47,0 28.7 36.4
Approach LOS 0 0 C 0
Queue Length 50th (ft) 114 115 82 206 80 52 81 262 88 60 387 121
Queue Lenglh 95th (II) 166 193 137 278 140 98 126 328 129 97 474 180
Inlemal Link Disl (II) 265 646 693 477
Turn Bay Length (f1) 250 400 100 300 400 250 400
Base Capacity (vph) 517 280 379 746 405 522 334 1424 932 307 1407 888
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reducln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced vlc Ratio 0.60 0,.57 0,55 0.75 0.31 0.19 0,.64 0,58 0.47 0.51 0.78 0.35
Inlerseclion Summary
Area Type: Olher
Cycle Length: 120
Actuated Cycle Length: 112.8
Nalural Cycle: 85
Conlrol Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated
Maximum vie Ratio: 0.84
Intersection Signal Delay: 37.1 Inlersection LOS: D
Inlersection Capacily Utilization 71.6% leu Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min) 15
~~E::::tS"f- ~ ,
MINB P:\Traffic\TlAIHome DepotlWilminglon\Lowes (08200 7)\ON L Y LOWES 2008 (SATURDAY)\Build (2008) SAT.syn
Martin Alexiou Bryson, PLLC
131
~<"l\OCo
""\Ot:::Q
.Il:: \Off)""
~-.?oOO\
.~
VIl..~
"" 00
ceo
,,"000
N .~ ~ ~
.... R R R
(/).............
""
'"
::>
] ?:::
J 0
+-J'
VJ
...
0
.~
=.......("..1....,
t::
en
132
_..~ ~,~,~='.-'-_..""-- ...'^'-- ,.~~.~-
I
~"~,'~O i
f\ :of,
ok"
!'f-.J
"-.:::::' C)
',<
j''''i
i/'.
'1
"II,
/[./ (i l"b: j\ii;;]
[xlstu"9 Lone.,ge
hi - :"i',-,.--:I '"_....::.'T.
l S t-QI"-o-ge Le('i,;t,h~
..~,~~., ~f,,'pro)qm-o~~(! C1~t;!)'~.ce~
" 1 ~ 1: I;~;;1I 'S; ,~.-~ e:
I
133
134
. ,I,,,,,,^I.~,(,,, """'L';,"
.. ..... ......... .. r.r'l' ".f";'I ''.It (};\. P'.J"""'i"'"
~ . . J ~ . ... ." .'J.i' , \r .", , ,,." "~'
;',11' r" ,f'JflJ'dil1:....,
II . .
:' I
MEMORANDUM
To: Jimmy Al!i~IKe Commercial Propcl'tics
I"wm: Lyle Overcash, Martin! Akxiou/Bryson, PILe
Date: July 26, 2007
Subject: Poner's Neck Crossing - Additional Analysis
-.-. ~--~~.._-_.....~._~~...................~~~~' --~-,,_.........,~-
This memo iu.ldresses some of the comments [hal surfaced nt the recent New H~nover Coumy
Comn'lissioners meeting concerning the operations of the US 17 (Markel Street) and Pottet's
Neck Road intersection once the NCDOT required improvements are fully constructed. In
addition, we've included trip generation estimates from other uses in the New llanover County's
B-1 'Zoning classification for pmposes to the Lowe's development. The Pottcr's
Neck Crossing is pwposed in )h,~ northwestern comer of the US 17 (Market Street) and Porter's
Nee k Road signalized inter:;('c lion, immediately l1djacenl to the recently cOlnplcted ] -140 (US 17
Bypass) to the north, additiQrlill existing retail development to the south, V(lCilOl land to the west,
and US 17 to the ea:;t. Therefore, additional access to the north and east are not pos$lble due to
NCDCr' contl'Ol of "ecess on those facilities. Connections to the shopping cenlcrare
on the site plan and a st\1b out 10 the west will be provided.
The Lowe's site is anticipated to open during 2008, ahead of the overall retail site tbat was
analyzed in the May 1,2006 TIA by MIA/B. fhe original study analyzed a total of 435,000
st]uare feel (sf) of retail dcvelopm<:mt, consisting of a 134,UOO sf !VJfne improvement store, :\
120,000 sf free slanding di~c0lmt store, ami 1 HI ,GOO ~f of general rdnil. Since the
and appwvnl of Ihat study, the home improvement u~e IS now slated 10 be appruxllllatdy
170,000 ~r, thetch)' rcducing the size of the other retail planned for the site allJ keeping tbe tolal
squnte footage within the projected 435,000 sf.
&allntersecdon Design
Tit,. eastbound appl'Oflch of the Markel SITcet and Poncl"~ Neck Road intersection
currently is composed Qf 3 egress Ian\.::; ~1 left, I and 1 right) and 1 ingrcsslal1(" T!if
westbound approach consists of 3 egress laucs, (2 lefls and 1 thl"Ough-nght) and 2 ingte:;s lanes.
The northbound and southbound Market Street approaches consist of '1 Left, 2 throughs, and 1
right, with 2 receiving lanes on the depfll'ting approaches,
The easrbotmd l\pprom:h, referred to as Porter's Neck Road serve, tbe
cxiBting C'OmmcrCllll development on the south side of the driveway and er.ds approximately JOO
feet to the wc~t of IVlarku Street. This roadway will be extended to the west to serve the overall
retail site only.
NCDOT puformed their t.cvievi J'-'1uary ! 'i, of the 'ITA "nd rhe
fni.' the overall Port<:r's Neck site:
· Provide 'I c!!cl"t'% l:lllt" :md :: bne; un Ihl' e""l!l,ymd ppl'[.<.:r's Neck RC~IJ
!~;;, 1(.,',,)01\
135
. Rcstripe the eastbound to provifk du~l lefl-turn lanes, 1 through and 1
righHUtl1 !ane \\.~tb 500 feel ofinlem~l stem.
. Extend the southboLlOd right-turn lane to provide for 400 feet of rult storJlge and
appropriate deceleration tapel' along MiI!'!tet Street.
. Widen the northbound US 17 approach to provide dunllefHuln hmes with 300 feet
of full stomge (each) and appt(,prLate tapers. At thls time, the cunent site plan shows
the twO ingress lanes extended all the way to the fLrSt full access driveway after tbe
500 feet of internal stem.
. Upgrade the signal phasing and w accommodate tbe recommended
intcl"scction imp rovcmcnts.
Analysis
This analysi:,; is to determine ,he level of service for the US ! 7 (Mnrkcl Street) and Porter's Neck
Rone! intersection under three col1e!il'ions - (200?), No.Build (2008) and Build (2(08).
The pruposcd Low,:', fOIlI-print /lOW is now fl InaximulU of 170,000 sf The trip gencrntion is
ShUWll in 'I'ltblt I.
Table 1- Lowe's Trip Generation
A.M. Peak Hour Total Trips
jT!:'. Land USE G.i'/U'lit5 nT'. :'vrANUAL l\i\TES'
US~ Code ADT AM, Emcr A.M. EX!l A.lvL Tot~l
86t Home Impwvemem Store 170.000 sf 4,652 110 94- 2(1'1
1.,1111I1 !Jr, Tol,t/" /lO,OGO tj 4,6J2 I/O 94 204
P,M. Peak Hour Total Trips
ITELmd ust:. C,fjUn;N n12 Mt\NL':\L RATES'
Use Code ADT P.M, Enter I J>,M, Exit P.M, Tot~!
862 Home Imnwvcmenl SWl'C 170,000 sf 4,652 196 T 221 417
Land U" 1~IIIl.r /70,11004' 4,652 196 T 221 417
P,M. PeaK Hour Pass-By Trips
[1'E Land USE Fa" by % ITE lVlr.NCAL RAIES'
Us", Code ADT fJ,M. Enter I'.M.E~it P.M. Total
862 Home fmprm'cme,H Store 48% .1,652 100 100 20C
Lmd tiff Toft/!, t\/A 4,6;2 100 tOo 200
A.M, Peak Hour Non.Pass-Sy Trips
lTELll'1d USE Gs ftUnits nE Ivl.ANUi\J. RATES'
U,e Code ,\DT t\,M, Erne.. A.M, Exit ;\,10.,[. Tol:.l
862 H~)J"!:tc Ity).t)i'ovcmcnr ~tOi'(~ 170,000 sf 4,652 llO 94 204
I..iIlNi Ui<' '[,)fll Ie 170,000 ,/ 4,6)2 flO 94 21).1
P.M. Peak Hour Non.Pass-By Trips
n'F J ,~nd fJSj,~~ C;~fl[Jnlts !TE MAN U:\ L RATES'
U,,, Co(1e ,\DT P.M. t::mcr P.i\!, r:~it 1'.,"", Tnm'
1',62 l-iunw In:lpi\J\lelult:ll[ ~tOl'C 1 :(1,00:) ,f 4,652 % 121 2.17
[.<t!!dU5<'TiJ!".Ij' 170,000 !i 4,652 96 127' 21l
[TF 7rh P,(Et:l)ll T:-!p Ct;th~:1Iri\m f\.hnti:;i;:
2
136
'rhe overal! site analyzed in the TIA genenlted approximately 20,647 dady trips, 485 A.M. peak
hour nips (292 entering, 193 exiting), and 1,861 P.M. peak hour trips {902 entering, 959 exiting}
When comparing the Lowe's trips to the overall site's trips, it amounts to approximately 20%,
i\ new intersection movement cOllnt was performed on June 2007. These volumes
and currell[ intersecrion geometries were used to update the Existillg (2007) conditions amdysis,
r,s 1~140 was nor completed at the time of the original study. The No.Build (2008) analysis
consisted of adding the Sllme developments as in the original TIA, but utilizing 75% of the total
approved developments' traffic as analyzed in the original TIll. to lldjust for portions of tlie
uncompleted dcvelopmc:lts by 2008, Finlllly the Build (2008) analysis consisted of adding the
site trips from Table 1 to the No..Build (2008) volumes, aod assumed the full required
improvements by N(:DOT at the US n (Market Street) and Porter's Neck Road intersection
(Figure 2).
The imcrsection volumc~ for rhese scel1llrlos arc ,hown below:
Figure 1- Existing Geometries and Volume Scenarios
(Lcgmd: xx" t\.M, vdu",o." (XX) '" P.M, ,."hHnc;)
B:xiJ/tt(1, (2007) Gcoi!Jctda I~v.i.rti1lg (2007J Trali( VO/lImc.>
~ (55) (966) (167) ~ 99 (104)
200' 250' ,-- 400' 25 997 128 .............. 3() (47)
Porler's Neck Road ) l ! " 400' ) I \.
,-- ,- 390. (428) Porter's Neck Road
J '\ tt ( (95) 25 J '\ t (
..-----....
'"' cont 4o.Q' (65) 22 ............... 7 762 274
(29) 3 , (24) (1080) (334)
US17 US 17
,/'..,jo.l3l1t1d(2008! Tmjp. '.oilp'IleJ l3/tiM (20081 'ftq/lk I/O/110m
(56) (985) (229) "- 130 (125) (149) (935) (229) '- 130 (125)
26 1017 149 .............. 44 (57) 76 1017 ....-- 66 (76)
Porler's Neck Road ) t " (553) ) + (553) Parler's Neck Raad
(97) 26 J ( (201) 6B (
(96) 31 - 7 m 326 (120) 50 ~ 40 777 3213
(30) 3 , (24) (11021 (497) (116) 31 , (103) (1052j
usn USH
3
137
The rcsults of the analyses arc listed in Table 2,
Table 2 - LOS Results
Intersectfon and Approach No.Build (2008) Build (2008)
A.M. P.M. A.M. P.M.
US 11 (Markel SUMI) and rouer's C D C D
Road
.,.."
Figure 2 - Build (2008) Geometries
(Lcg,,,1d; xxx fUnitT iIitiC gCiHHcrrics)
400' 250' ~
) l ! \. ,- 400'
r 400'
Porter's Neck Road
300' -' \\ttr
-'
300' 300' 400'
__>_
300' ,
USH
fhl.';ed on the results, the US n (Market Streer) and Porter's Neck Reild intersection is projected
to oper:lte at an acceptable level of service (LOS C Ilnd LOS D) during both th<~ A.1vl. and P.M
peak hOllrs, respectively, \vhcn the Lowe's development is completed ami the intersection has
IH~('ll b\.liIH)1.1t.
Laud Use Scenarios
A!l analysis was performed to determine diffcren t land llse scenarios under the current B.1
that could b{' conslnlCted ill place of the proposed Lowe's without rezoning. Based 011 a
col1stnint of 170,000 the following scenarios were analyzed to COmp\lre theit generation
characteristics. Also shown are the Average Dailj' Traffic (ADT) in vebicles pCI' ciaI' (vpd), based
on the wlTcsponding trip generation code:; included in the ITE Generation !'vItl/lllal, 7"
that could be generated by each scenario:
ADT
. .li:fJ./JLI70 # 1 {Proptmoll 4,652
0 H o!l!e .'lIon' -. i ,r{
. 8, .>66 Ppti
0 rJ.';.f~y)/flJ! - 170JI00 -:1'
. /5,476 It,,{
0 eMenll gi:!/Ii! -. 14.?,OOO sF
C FtJJr [-""i)fNII(,;ilduJ'{udr 1Pt!/; l)rip!f- if'!rft (4. -+,001) S'/,iIIIY -- /6,000 ,,t
138
0 T~I"fI1}V&r (Sit Down) Resk/#rafJ/- 6,000 if
0 (7rJIIIJtnidllte r'ood JirJn ,- 2,000 Jf
0 Balik Ivitb D rive~ Thnl- 4,000 {/ (3 driw.llma)
. Sqnaria #4 (Groc~ry Sto/'C Anrhor Jvith Outpan"tLrJ 19,310 lpd
0 GtWtry Stlin - 60,000 sf
0 Genml! Relail-- 75,000 sf
0 Drug S ton 15,000 ~(
0 Fmt fI(>Od RestatlrtlfltJ Jvith Drivt-Thru (2 @ 4,000 - 8,000 if
0 lligh JimlOb'dT (Sit DI'ilVfI) ReJtaul"I1II! - 6,000 .'If
0 COf/lJ(!tlfem'1l Poat! Ston - 2,000 ~f
0 13elll.!,; illi/Ii l)rivt,:rhm - 4,DUO
As shown, rew:ling this sire ftom B-1 to 13.2 and cOfJStrtlcling the proposed Lowe's
development 011 tbl3 ~i.te would generate far less Ire-hide, pel' day than would be by any
of the other B.l scenarios liw~d above,
I f you h~\ vc a ny 'Illes lions this S\II1HTI<1ry ple:'..~e COllt~ct me lit (919) 829.(J32fL Y 0\.1 can
also teac 11 me via email H [
139
140
141
20H6 ('f'f~S~]
The for vehicle the convergence more (falrle a
common ]o<.:[nIOI1 is crashes. mosl often OCCllI"
Thest' areas can <':I"eare dUll are difficu] I
Table ranks. the fifteen intel'sections within the WMPA that ti,e number of
crashes
Table~: High Crrlsh IlI!~rs~(:ti(ll1~ 1\illdalhe \\':'\11',\ 201h"
Intersection Road A Roadfiil Total # of J!lrlsdlctiofl
Crashes
Since the of is. the 1110S.t urbanized and travcled area within tIll? il
comes. as. no s.urpns.e that it l'i.1llIains. li intcrseClions. ( I (JI recorded in
The Cl'asb were located in Nc\\ HU110\el'
and the Town of Leland ] ).
]2 the location of the fi fteen crash intersection:; \\ithin the \V;vl Pill.
at the dbtribtl1ion these it i~ evidelll that crasl]
interSeClions are v,;ithin the g limits
used to conm1uk 10 nnl! 1rom !he , G !yell [hm EICL one may assume that the vehide crashes
at lhcse im~:rseclions could be caused tnlHic in and arOllnd the
ilHLT';L'('lion.;
and
142
II Pr:J ~1 U'ltflg o rgf!.fl b!'r,~ri(jn
Figure 12: lOClllimJ of the Crash IIHN'M~cti(Hl, ,,11hil1ln(' ,Y"U'A - 2006
74
'1 'I 7~
'42'71
12
9
-"_.__.~
"
I"""""~=~'-
I
II
143
'.I~/ilmhlg~ufl f\i'~('n'-rj;p~;~l1t,Hi Pliknnln~ OIr'Mrr~11i1::iH~Ol11
Figure 14: E~tinH,ted T(lt~1 Proper!)' Dtllllllge 2006
~
'"
~
E
~
0
~
')
'"
0
d:
"
!
.~
~
w
~
E
r
I
I
l'ntliIl'rs.:ecUtH1 ~ Uifi1:bii:"'i'W
Tolal Crash
crash exposure rates for vchicle at intersections is critical for
oven,ll of a vehicle at each IDeation involved in a crash. 'rile benefit of
exposure nll(~S as to other of crash data fbr of these locations is
common unit of measure for evalwltion estimated crashes per million vehicles an
To calculale crash exposure rales, currenl data relaled to lotal ,/ehicle crashes and anmml
traffic mllst be available. 8ecause the \VMPO l~ollecls traffic counl. data
the nrefL current 2006 data was available for these calculations. The NCDOT
TEAAS c!,llcuhned each crash exposure rate based upon the most crash dam availuhlc
and iTamC count d3la collected
144
\ ~'l.~t'11:i'l1! gf[}l] (\;1: C'rl"O pnl i lfl t1 1;'~H ~l~~.j:ng
Tllble :;.: Tvt,d Crllsh R~lc - 2()O6
Intersection Total Crash Intersectioll Intersection
Rank/Number Rate* Number
per
Source: f>JCDOT TEA.AS
145
i,ll'nl rlgt1;}fi !\,~ it'! l'''UpH~~t~~n
16: Locati':H1 of'lhe mabeS1 Cmsh Inlerseclioll' "ithlll rC;l, OIl' ,\i\~" U:HlfI\ \.'1"
2(11)(1- ::w II (,.
76
r"'-~'~'=~"~"=~'~~I
~__________________i
-----
146
~ 8.
~ ~ "'-1
'0..
...w'
~
(5
1-
~
:t::
~
;:'1 0:
:J<
i( f"
c
f- i;OQ
il5 ~
~. -J =.i ",,,: c'rl..,.,)1.....t ...J...J
- - -. :< ,,'"~ ~ :;:;:;'
~~1'Sf!'m~1S f;i ~.~
m!t~~tk~~ [E l","~
~ ~~.
CJ.....:~OO[1jik~~_4j-
Z
..:(
-I
!l.
ill
'1--
4;; (J)
z
Cl
ill
l-
..:(
0
l-
:J
0
0
z
...:
..J
<:(
z
<IS
a:
0
147
This page intentionally left blank.
148
CITIZEN EMAILS
149
Page 1 of I
O'Keefe, Chris
From: Anthony Giordano [agiordano@ec.rr.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 19, 20073:42 PM
To: O'Keefe, Chris
Subject: Porters Neck Rd Shopping Center Traffic
Dear Mr. O'Keefe
As a resident of Porters Neck Plantation and Country Club I am more than just concerned about the traffic impact of the addition
of a Lowes and other stores at the planned locations.. II am supportive of the stores themselves, but I envision another Military
Cutoff which was a very good example of poor planning. Anything that can be done to take care of the expected problem before it
occurs would be good for the residents of this area, the retailers and future retirees. Traffic congestion becomes a disincentive 10
utilize retailers in congested areas. Those in this community who are prospering from the areas growth stand to lose at least
some future growth because prospective retirees don't want traffic congestion.
I was recenlly looking at a magazine which listed the 10 top areas to live and retire in. Several of the key winning features
included green space, walking and bicycle paths, the lack of traffic congestion, and moderate year round temperatures.
Wilmington has the last feature and is sorely lacking in the other areas. As a transplant to the area, I would like to have pride in
the fact that I live in Wilmington. There are so many positives here that it would be a shame to let traffic congestion be a deterrent
whether at Porters Neck or anywhere in this city.,
I would appreciate your passing my thoughts on to the county commissioners and I thank you for the opportunity to weigh in on
the subject
Anthony Giordano
436 White Columns Way
Wilmington, N.C, 28411
agiordano@ec.rr,com
!SIG:46c89ddc196701603013703!
8/21/2007
150
O'Keefe, Chris
From: Maclellan, Michael M (GE Infra, Energy) [michael.maclellan@ge.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 15,200712:32 PM
To: O'Keefe, Chris
Subject: Porters neck Development- Lowes
Nr. Okeefe,
Please pass my concerns along to the commIssioners prIor to the Sept 4 meeting regarding
the proposed Lowes in the Porters neck area ~ ~ ~
I do not oppose development but strongly oppose development thout adequate
infrastructure n place prior to the development. Military Cutoff is a perfect example of
irresponsIbility in providing the infrastructure to suppcrt the development. It is a mess
and t is dangerous. It is unbelievable that ary cutoff road construction has been
going on for >5 years now when the infrastructure should have been in place irst. \~e need
to be smart enough and responsible enough to learn from past mistake and avoid those same
mistakes in the Porters Neck area.
The deve 1 ope.r (as wi h any developer) does not really have our best erest in mind. For
themE it is about making money. I do not fault the developer for this, that's economics.
But as our county commissioners, you should be concerned about the community, our F.....ishesf
safety. It is your responsibility, as our representatives, to ensure that
infrastructure is first place to support any in this T that
you all hold your responsibility to tht citizens county as as you should
and that you do not let us dO\.-Jr'l in this matter.
I respectfully request that you insist on adequate infrastructure prior to development. As
you know, our roads in New Hanover county are alre dy dangerous and congested enough and
we lead the state in car accidents .. ..a race we s ould not be You no'w have an
opportunity te start making a difference. You batt e cry be .. . Infrast.ructure
first . ~ ~ Then development 1
Please do not let us down.
Sincerely,
Mike MacLellan
Engineering TechQical Training Leader
GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GHE
'1' 910-602- 856
F
582~48 6
michael.maclellan@ge.com
3901 Castle Hayne Road
P.O. Box 780, M/C L30
, NC 284 02 OS,I\
!SIG:46c32a89l967047 9611322 I
1
151
Page I of 1
O'Keefe, Chris
From: JERRYClEM@aol.com
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 20074:16 PM
To: O'Keefe, Chris
Cc: Burgess, Sam; brink4245@ec.rr.eom; twest2@ee.rr.eom; dbauereis@ee.rr.com; jcapellini@ee.rr.com;
dkellam@bizee.rr.eom; PinkstonFB@aol.eom; msnave@bellsouth.net
Subjlect: Sepl 4 Co Commissioners Meeting
Chris, will you insure the commissioners receive a copy of this note prior to their Sept 4 meeting?
Proposed Lowes Development at Porters Neck
Although I have been in Minnesota for the past 7 weeks, I have kept up with the proposed Lowes
development. In my June 19, 2007, e&mail to you and Sam, I mentioned the need for an independent
traffic study to be done at the intersection of Porters Neck and Market St along with one showing traffic
thru the exiisting PN Shopping Center. There is no way that exiting traffic from Lowes can use the PN
Shopping Center~~~either in front of the Food Lion or behind the 1st Citizens BankJ/Port City Java delivery
alley.
The only way to handle the increased traffic is to open up a NEW exit other than PN Rd. This can be
done in one of these ways:
1. Require the Developer to purchase/lease the property behind the Food Lion and build a new road
that would tie in to Market St just south of the Food Lion.
2. Make plans to extend PN Rd to Plantation Rd.
3. Build a new frontage road parallel to Market St all the way to the ABC store or thereabouts.
4. Widen Market St more than the developer has proposed.
It is very inappropriate to block 500 feet of PN Rd on the west side of Market St just to allow Lowes
access/egress. This would severely limit the 1st Citizens Bank to operate and also would prevent north
bound traffic to exit from PN Shopping center. A person was killed last year as he tried to eX.it north on
Market St without using the existing stopliight. The two current exits from PN Shopping Center(south of
Port City Java) are not designed for left(going north) turns.
I would hope that the developer and/or Lowes try further to assist in the long range traffic planning for this
area. Additional traffic studies and access/egress plans are needed before approvals are given to the
developer.
Thanks again for your considerations,
Jerry Brown
Get a sneak peek of the all~new AGLeom.
ISIG:46c753911684914462129431
8/21/2007
152
Page 1 of 1
O'Keefe, Chris
From: Robert Lawrence [RLAWRENCE13@ec.rr.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 14,200710:05 AM
To: O'Keefe, Chris
Subject: New Lowes on Porters Neck Rd.
While we welcome more services in this northern area of the county, we heartily agree that this proposed Shopping center needs
more than the one entrance off of Porters Neck Rd. Please forward this comment to the county commisioners prior to the Sept
4th meeting, Thank you. Rob and Joan Lawrence, 744 Zekes Run, Wilmington, NC 28411 (910) 681-0118
rlawrence13@ec.rr.com
Protected by Spam Blocker Utility &
Click here to protect your inbox from Spam.
!SIG:46c1 b67e1684931i 18411604!
8/21/2007
153
Page] of]
O'Keefe, Chris
From: Carol Calderwood [carolc@cape-fear,net)
Sent: Monday, August 13, 20071:14 PM
fo: O'Keefe, Chris
Subject: Lowes Development, Porters Neck Area
Dear Mr. O"Keefe:
I am writing this to ask you to let the New Hanover County Commissioners know thai a single entrance for traffic into this
proposed development would be, at best, foolish. The existing infrastructure, even with additional turning lanes is tOlally
inadequate for the find of traffic this kind of development will generate. I am sure NOONE who uses this intersection daily would
vote positively for such a plan. Wouldn't it be wonderful to have a Responsible Developer one day propose sufficient
improvements prior to presenting a plan that the neighborhood would embrace the project as GOOD for the neighborhood. This
couid happen in this instance with the Developers reasonable acceptance of responsibility for good traffic flow, both immed,iately
and into Ihe future. The fact of having a Lowe's is welcome, but only with aforethought to traffic impact.
Sincerely,
Carol Calderwood
8421 Emerald Dunes Rd.,
Wilmington, NC 28411
l SI G :46009148230468636410735!
8/21/2007
-~,--.,..
154
O'Keefe, ChriiS
From: Andel [bjandel1 @bellsouth.net]
Sent: Tuesday, August 21 , 2007 11 :49 AM
To: O'Keefe, Chris
Subject: Lowes at Porters Neck
Dear Nr. O'Keefe,
I am a resident of Plantation Landing in the Portersneck area and am deeply concerned
about the proposed building of Lowes in our area and especia 11' the prospect of another
shopping center. The increased traffic to this area would be absolutely unmanageable.
The only way it should even be considered is if both the entrance and exit were on 14
before the Wilmington exit.
That would be the only way to keep he increased traffic OFF Market street.
We need to carry out the appropriate infrastructure improvements BEFORE any shopping
center dEcisions are carried out to avoid anothe debacle ike Military Cutoff occurs
Please pass my email alon.g to the County Commissioners before the Sept. 4th meeting.
Sincerely, Judy Andel
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked P,VG Free Edition.
Ve,rsion: .5.1184 / Virus Database: 269.12.1/963 - Release Date: 8/20/2007
5:44 PM
!S G:46cb09581684912 3432085!
!
155
August 12, 2007
Mr. Chris O'Kieffe, AICP
Sir,
Reference the upcoming County Commissioners' Meeting on September 4,
subject the Lowe's Plus Shopping Center. Please forward my comments to the
Commission.
A single access to the proposed area and the project developer's traffic
estimates seem woefully inadequate, even on a cursory level. I submit for
your consideration that there are, in addition to present residents, three
developments and their attendant densities still under development along
Porters Neck Road. Additionally, logic will tell us that residents north of
Military Cutoff and those living in Hampstead and communities north will
be frequent visitors to the Lowe's plus (as opposed to the one at Eastwood
and Market). I suggest that this logic compels us to conclude that a
second, major, access be designed and approved before project approval.
In this regard, an intergovernmental study group should be funded to
provide the Planning Director and County Commissioners with some
solid traffic estimates, present and future.
~~
Hu~h Phi. ips
428 White Columns Way
Wilmington, NC 28411
Philhug@verizonmail,com
156
JOHN R. JEFFERIES, AlA
WilLIAM G. FARIS. ARCHITECT EMERITUS
Mr Chris O'Keefe, Director August 22, 2007
New Hanover County Planning Department
230 Market Place Drive
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
Re; Modification to Zoning Ordinance
Dear Chris;
I am writing to suggest a modification to the allowable uses for the B-1 zoning.
This need came to light in the recent meeting of the Board of Commissioners
relative to the requested rezoning of property at Porters Neck Road for
construction of a Lowes Home Improvement Store.
The present definition ofthe B-1 zoning is.....
". . .. to provide convenient shopping! facilities primarily of necessary goods
and personal services required to serve a neighborhood. The district's principal
means of ingress and egress shall be along collector roads, minor arterials, and
or major arterials as designated on the County's Thoroughfare Classification
Plan,"
The list of allowable uses includes, among other things, the following:
Apparel and accessory store
Furniture, home furnishings & equipment
General merchandise
Miscellaneous retail
Government offices
I interpret this definition to mean that any allowable use would not normally
attract traffic from any great distance from the neighborhood. This list allows
construction of major retail stores such as WalMart and Target. These stores will
generate a lot of traffic outside of the neighborhood and are, in my opinion, more
appropriate for B~2 zoning
( which is intended for heavy traffic ).
Is it not true that WalMart and Target generate more traffic than Lowes or a
Home Depot?
.1. JEFFERIES & FARIS ASSOCIATES
ARCHITECTS. PLANNERS
100 A OLD EASTWOOD ROAD SUITE 111
WILMINGTON, NC 28403 TEL: (910) 793-5753 FAX: (910) 793-5754
E-MAI L: jfa@jefferies-faris.com
157
Chis O'Keefe
August 22,2007
Page 2
My suggestion to remedy this inconsistency is to limit the size of the allowable
uses for B-1 zone to a squarefoota.ge appropriate for limiting traffic to the
neighborhood, say 10,000 SF to 20,000 SF.
I w uld value your opinion on this, and hope that a change of this nature can take
pia
158
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Regular Item #: 3.4 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Planning Presenter: Chris O'Keefe
Contact: Chris O'Keefe
Item Does Not Require Review
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing
Rezoning (Z-869, 8/07) - Request by James D. Smith, Attorney for William F. Canady to Rezone Approximately 0.65
Acre located West of Market Street, at 113 Sweetwater Drive in the Transition land Classification from R-15
Residential District to 0&1 Office & Institutional District (the Applicant Owns Adjoining 0&1 Property)
BRIEF SUMMARY:
At its August 2,2007 meeting, the Planning Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval of an amended version of the original
request which included two lots with one fronting on Country Haven Drive. Several residents of Country Haven spoke to
express concerns relating to drainage, potential traffic on their private street and potential violations of their restrictive
covenants. Subsequently, the Board offered to support an amended version to include only the lot at 113 Sweetwater Drive
and not the lot fronting on Country Haven Drive. The applicant concurred with the Board's offering.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
The County Commissioners may approve or deny the petition.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
~ ~
Z-869, 8-07-Staff Summary.doc Z-869, 8-07-Pelition Summary.doc
map and applicant materials
ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
159
CASE: Z-869,8/07
PETITIONER: William Canady by James D. Smith, Attorney
REQUEST: From R~15 Residential to 0&1 Office & Institutional District
ACREAGE: Approximately 0.65 acres (amended from 1.5 Acres)
LOCATION: 113 Sweetwater Dr.
LAND CLASS: Transition
PLANNING BOARD ACTION: At its August 2, 2007 meeting, the Planning Board voted 7~
o to recommend approval of an amended version of the original request which included two
lots with one fronting on Country Haven Drive. Several residents of Country Haven spoke
to express concerns relating to drainage, potential traffic on their private street and
potential violations of their restrictive covenants. Subsequently, the board offered to
support an amended version to include only the lot at 113 Sweetwater Dr. and not the lot
fronting on Country Haven Drive. The applicant concurred with the Board's offering.
STAFF SUMMARY
The subject property is located off Market Street in the northern portion of the county and is
classified as Transition on the 2006 land classification map. Primary access for the proposal will
be from Sweetwater Drive.
The access road is a local public road, unimproved along the frontage of this lot and no Level of
Service has been designated. The street intersects with Market Street, which is classified as a
major arterial with LOS F in this location meaning traffic counts exceed design capacity. The
Special Highway Overlay District (SHOD) applies on this the easternmost portion ofthe subject
property .
The subject property is currently zoned R~ 15 and is bordered on the west by existing residential
use. Directly north of the subject property is also zoned R-15 with residences in place. To the
east, the applicant owns 8001 Market Street (Canady Exterminating) directly adjacent which is
zoned 0&1 Office & Institutional and property to the south, associated with Country Haven
subdivision is zoned R-15.
The subject property is located within the Greenview watershed which carries a water quality
classific.ation of C(SW). It is within the primary recharge area for the Castle Hayne and Pee Dee
aquifers. The property is not located in a flood hazard area. Soils are primarily Class I, Kureb
sand.
Public water and sewer are available in the vicinity. Fire protection is provided in this location by
the Ogden Volunteer Fire Department.
Land Use Plan Considerations:
8/22/2007 Page 1 of2 2-869
160
The 2006 Update of the Joint CAMA Plan describes the purpose of the Transition Class
as providing for "continued intensive urban development on lands that have been or will be
provided with necessary urban services.
This rezoning petition proposes a change from the moderate density residential zoning to
an office & institutional district, expanding an existing 0&1 zoning district. The site has
reasonable access through and existing office park and is consistent with adjacent land uses to the
south and east.
Staff Recommendation:
Based on the above analysis, staff feels that this proposal is consistent with the policies of the
land use plan. Several residents from the Country Haven neighborhood have called with concerns
about specific uses on the tract. However, 0&1 zoning is considered to be a transition district
between residential and other higher intensity uses. This parcel is an extension of an 0&1 district
and is across the street from 0&1 zoned property. Staff recommends approval of the zoning
change.
ACTION NEEDED:
Adopt a statement In accordance with NCGS 153A~341 which requires that "prior to
adopting or rejecting any zoning amendment, the governing board sball adopt a statement
describIng whether the action is consistent witb an adopted comprehensive plan and
explaining why the board considers the action taken to be reasonable and in the public
interest."
EXAMPLE:
The County Commissioners find that this request for zon ing map amendment of 0.65 acres from
R-15 Residential Districtto 0&1 Office and Instilutional District is (or is not):
I. Consistent with the purposes and intent of the Transition land classification and the
associated land use policies adopted in the 2006 land use plan;
2. Reasonablc and in theoublic interest 10 allow transition of residential acreage to
office and institutional use in this location.
8/22/2007 Page 2 of2 Z~869
161
Case: Z-S69, OS/07
Rezone 0.65 acres from R-15 to 0&1
Behind 800 I Market St. at 113 Sweetwater Dr.
Petition Summary Data
Q\vner/Petitioner: William F. Canady by James D. Smith, attorney
Existing Land Use: Residential and vacant
Zoning History: Area 8B (July 7, 1972)
Land Classification: Transition
Water Type: Public
Sewer Type: Public
Recreation Area: Odgen Park
Access & Traffic Volume: Sweetwater Drive (No traffic counts) intersects with
Market Street ADT 11/06 = 36,236; ADT 4105 =
42,864
LOSF
Fire District: Odgen Volunteer Fire Department
Watershed.1X, Water Quality Classification: Greenview, C;SW
Aquifer Recharge Area: Primary recharge from principal aquifer
Conservationffiistoricl Archaeological Resources: None
Soils: Kureb sand and Murville soil
Septic Syitability: Class I-Suitable and Class III - Severe limitations
Schools: Blair
Other: SHOD applies
8/2212007
cc
162
~
"
~
.J
JH "
<::
"
'" u ~ ~
"
C''''~' 0 ...J ~
\1:!;lJ;I'''- IUB
',) 9il ~ ~ ffi
~UH
~ u iffi ii:l " ~ '::l
Ou.. ~'~ g ~~~g ~ ~ ~
~-~~- ~ ~ 8l1lU ~ i i
I I< Ii! '"
00 ..or:; '.:I ~-i ~ ,~, :>
c:;;;:: gJ
~I :: ':i.
e. ::J.. ' OJ ~ ~ "'
0<1:
163
APPLICANT MATERIALS
164
Z-869, 8/07
EXHIBIT B
1. How would the change be consistent with the County's Policies for Growth and
Development?
Growth in the area has led to increased traffic. There are a number of businesses
adjacent to the property. The traffic and noise make 0&1 use more practical than
residential. There is a greater demand for 0&1 than residential in this area.
2. How would the requested zone change be consistent with the property's
classification on the Land Classification Map?
The proposed change is consistent with growth along the Market Street Corridor.
The land requested to be rezoned is currently vacant except for an unused
building which would be removed if the property is rezoned.
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?
Growth in the area has led to increased traffic. There are a number of businesses
adjacent to the property. The traffic and noise make 0&1 use more practical than
residential. There is a greater demand for 0&1 than residential in this area.
4. Explain briefly the expected effect on the neighborhood if the proposed zoning
map amendment is approved.
The effect on the neighborhood would be beneficial. The lots would be cleared
and a two story building would be erected on the Canady property. The effect
on the traffic flow would be minimal as these tracts are close to Market Street
(U5-17) and any traffic for usage of the tracts to be rezoned would stop at them
and not otherwise impact the neighborhoods adjacent to them. Current 0&1
tracts extend as far into the R-15 areas as the tracts requested to be rezoned.
165
This page intentionally left blank.
166
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Regular Item #: 3.5 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Planning Presenter: Chris O'Keefe
Contact: Chris O'Keefe
Item Does Not Require Review
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing
Rezoning (Z-870, 8/07) - Request by Withers & Ravenel for Louise Stevens to Rezone 9.25 Acres from R-15
Residential District to R-10 Residential District at 4451 & 4453 Gordon Road in the Transition Land Classifications
(the Change Would Result in a Density Change from 2.5 Units Per Acre to 3.3 Units Per Acre)
BRIEF SUMMARY:
At its August 2,2007 meeting, the Planning Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval. The same proposal had been heard
and recommended earlier this year but the petitioner withdrew the request in order to address drainage issues raised by
neighbors at that meeting. No one from the public spoke at this hearing.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
The County Commissioners may approve or deny the petition.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
~ ~
Z-870, 8-07-Staff Summary.doc Z-870, 8-07-Pelition Summary.doc
map and applicant materials
ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
167
CASE: Z-870,8/07;
PETITIONER: Withers & Ravenel for Louise M. Stevens
REQUEST: From R-]5 Residential and AR Airport Residential
District to R-I0 Residential District
ACREAGE: Approximately 9.25 Acres
LOCATION: 4451 and 4453 Gordon Rd.
LAND CLASS: Transition
PLANNING BOARD ACTION: At its August 2, 2007 meeting, the Planning Board voted 7-
l} to recommend approval. The same proposal had been heard and recommended earlier
this year but petitioner withdrew the request in order to address drainage issues raised by
neighbors at that meeting. No one from the public spoke at this hearing.
STAFF SUMMARY
The subject property is located in the northern portion ofthe county in an area classified as
Transition on the 2006 CAMA Land Classification map. The property is on the westernmost
segment of Gordon Road, west of 1-40 and near the intersection with Brienvood Drive. Gordon
Road is an urban arterial road according to the Wilmington Urban Area 2030 Long Range
Transportation Plan. Level of service has been rated A&B along this segment, meaning traffic
flow is free and stable.
The subject property is currently used for single family residential purposes. Adjacent to the east
is Brierwood Subdivision which is zoned R-l O. The Airport Residential zoning district abuts on
the west side, and a small portion of the subject property is included in the AR district, but the
property is not within the airport approach zone.
The subject property is located within the Smith Creek watershed drainage area which is
classified C(S W) and is listed on the 303( d)1 ist of impaired waters. The property is not
influenced by flood hazard although drainage appears to be an issue on properties to the south.
The site is in a primary or secondary recharge area for the principal aquifers. Public water and
sewer are present in the vicinity,
Land Use Plan Considerations:
This rezoning petition proposes a change from lower density R-15 Residential to R-l 0
Residential designation. Such action would result in the following possible density scenarios:
Maximum potential Maximum potential
Units (Performan~ Units (High Density w/SUP)
R-15 23 92*
R-lO 31 92*
*Density limitations for HD attached dwellings within 200' of detached dwellings would apply.
8/22/2007 Page 1 of2 Z-870
168
This property is classified as Transition in the 2006 Update of the WilmingtonfNew Hanover
County CAMA Land Use Plan. The Plan describes the purpose of the Transition class as
providing for future intensive urban development on lands that have been or will be
provided with necessary urban services. The location of these areas is based upon land
use planning policies requiring optimum efficiency in land utilization and public service
delivery.
Based on the foregoing, this proposal would appear to be consistent with the strategies for the
Transition classification. Staff recommends approval.
ACTION NEEDED:
Adopt a statement in accordance with NCGS 153A-341 which requires that "prior to
adopting or rejecting any zoning amendment, the governing board shall adopt a statement
describing whether the action is consistent with an adopted comprehensive plan and
explaining why the board considers the action. taken. to be reasonable an.d in the public
in.terest."
EXAMPLE:
The County Commissioners find that this request for zoning map amendment of 9.25 acres from
R-15 Residential District to R-1O Residential District is (or is not):
I. Consistent with the purposes and intent of the Transition land classification and the
associated land use policies adopted in the 2006 land use plan;
2. Reasonable and in the public interest to allow increase in base density from 2.5 units
per acre to 3.3 units per acre in this location adjacent to existing R-1O districts.
8/22/2007 Page 2 of2 2-870
169
Case: Z-870, 08/07
Rezone 9.25 acres from R-15 to R-lO
4451 & 4453 Gordon Rd.
Petition Summ.ary Data
Owner/Petitioner: Withers & Ravanel for Louise Stevens
Existing Land Use: Residential and vacant
Zoning History: Area 8B (July 7, 1972)
Land Classification: Transition
Water Type: Public in the vicinity
Sewer Type: Public in the vicinity
Recreation Area: Odgen Park
Access & Trame Volume: Gordon Road: ADT 12/06 = 4,567; ADT 4/05 = 4,799
LOS F (-5%)
Fire District: Wrightsboro Volunteer Fire Department
Watershed & Water Ouality Classification: Smith Creek, C;SW; 303(d) impaired
Aauifer Recharge Area: Primary or secondary recharge from principal aquifers
ConservationIHistoricl Archaeological Resources: None
Soils: Baymeade; Pantego Loam; Seagate
Septic Suitability: Class II ~ moderate limitations and Class III - Severe
limitations
Schools: Blount
8/22/2007
cc
170
l~
I ./ ..., \~:;~='i! / Ii I
, 0- ~":'~oj l 0;'
0, .. Q~.ilI~
':~ (Co"" ' .....": '..'
p:.1:l'""i
...............,
! ;(\ 2=-~ ,'::1.
II ,.)/// =~.. ~7/~1
1;'
II int3 7 l ..
-
--... :::....~.
,.'
:::-<:::::::::::--...:::
/
)~ ~k"~ / =) ,
. :4 ~~~t ..- --rT \J II :'I=- .
, " .~;;' ~(:::;~<(;s: :~:= =< :
. "':l;Jf:J:~'- C'".. I '
". " ~ :::> ,.-
! .,.. ",' ,.. _ :.!~"f", ,- - ... I I ~. I :
:b, I..... gj,. ~;;,;>,
rsJ..~ -"!; .~~~:~~~:' '. :~~Z~~~.. ! I 1'i I \;,
{/''''' ~(~ ~'f .....i..-; ',,/ 0 ~
"~~ ~~7 'k:I<; <.. .~
~"'" /0 ~ ~ ~ -. ~;:? / II
,/c"~ ~ ............ ~ ~J j /Tlij
.. ....... ..' ,-".. t
r~: I"-"'-"'-'~ ~, i ~:"Z7':
II )__" .-..'''.... '"_,, .... l"'c::,::: ;::..
,C ..--..-...
! ..-....r'-,............... -"'"''1''''''' ....~
/ _...j-- =J
Ie. ..--;1 ....'"
. /f--
.' i""--'''-",,,,,,,-,, '....,,_.. j II ""~"1 '. .. "
II r'.................-.....,........- .. .. .
II 9: ;_...
....
! N M ~ ~. ~ ~ ~. ~ 0 ~ N n ~ ~ ~ ~. ~. ~ ~". N <M- '"'"
.- ..... ..... ... ...-. .... """ ...... "'" ""' ('\I N N N -~..
'" I j
0
~
z ~
'5 It
., .:;: .5
m .;:;{
i' 'a. ~ 0
, 'll ~ ~ I"" f--
"~. g .~;[J .., -. f...... ~!
,~, fl
11 1l ~ '..".. -,
II " I ' ~ ~ !i >
'M ~ ~ ~ ~ ],~~ ,;)2
~ ~~
"" . .~
! 0013 <5
I .; " w >-
.~ <l":
I ii ~:.::" ,
, "
II. ;'; i q ~ !
j,,'
"--"-
171
APPLICANT MATERIALS
172
Z-870, 8/07
WHAT YOU MUST ESTABLISH
FOR A CHANGE OF ZQNING
Your intended use of propel1y upon rezoning is completely irrelevant, except for conditional use district proposals. The
North Carolina General Statutes require that zoning regulations shall be made in accordance with a comprehensive plan.
Tbe governing board is required to adopt statements that the change is or is not consistent, reasonable, and in the
public's interest. Since amendments to zoning maps should also be based on a Land Use Plan,. you must explain how your
request satisfies each of the following requirements: (Fill in Below or attach additional pages).
I. How would the requested change be consistent with the County's Policies for Growth and Development?
The policies for growth and development encourage safe and affordable housing to be available to every citizen.
Rezoning Ihis property for a slightly higher-density of residential development would be consistent with the concept of
transitioning uses, and in~filling vacant parcels where existing utilities can readily be extended and urban services are
available.
2. How would the requested zone change be consistent with the property's classification on the Land Classification
Map?
The CAMA Land Use Plan identifies these tracts as being in a Transition Land Classification. the intent ofthis
classification is provide lands for future intensive urban development that are, or will be provided with necessary urban
services.
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?
Development of the Murrayville area has been active in the past several years. The adjacent subdivision of Brierwood iis
zoned R~ 10. Sanitary sewer mains have been constructed along Gordon Road, providing service from a public system,
where previously the only option was individual septic systems. Public water is also available. The property is near the
highway interchange for easy access to major transportation corridors into, and out of, the City.
4. How will this change of zoning serve the public interest?
Inml of vacant properties with services and transition of useS in developed areas are important strategies to quell the
inherent problems of the past urban sprawL
In signing this petition, I understand that the existing zoning map is presumed to be correct and. that I have the
burden of proving why a change is in the public interest. I further understand the singling out of one parcel of land for
special zoning treatment unrelated to County policies and the surrounding neighborhood would probably be iUegal. I
certify that this application is conlplete and that all information presented in tbis application is accurate to the best of
my knowledge, information, and belief.
\)~~~.~ \0:Y'\~~lL Wo~
Sign~ture 0 Petitioner.amlfor Pro i rty Ow~er Print Name
~~<
Page 201'2
ZMA-02/07
173
This page intentionally left blank.
174
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Regular Item #: 3.6 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Planning Presenter: Chris O'Keefe
Contact: Chris O'Keefe
Item Does Not Require Review
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing
Text Amendment (A-361, 8/07) - Request by Staff to Amend Section 111 of the Zoning Ordinance to Require
Applicants to Conduct a Community Information Meeting Prior to Submission of Requests for Planned
Development, Riverfront Mixed Use, or Conditional Use District Zoning Actions
BRIEF SUMMARY:
County Planning proposes a text amendment to require community information meetings prior to
application for Planned Development, Riverfront Mixed Use District, or Conditional Use Zoning District
rezoning requests. A new section similar to the language used by the City would be added to the County's
zoning ordinance.
The Planning Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval of this amendment. No one from the public spoke
on this item.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
The County Commissioners may approve, modify, or deny the text amendment.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
[gm
A-361 TEXT AM END MEN T -Community M eeting:s Section. doc
ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
175
CASE: A-361 Applicant: Staff
REQUEST: Text Amendment - Require community information meetings prior to
application for certain rezoning requests. Add a new section similar to
the language used by the City.
See.111-2.1. Required comm.unitv information meetine before consideration.
Before an application will be accepted as complete for a zoning amendment
for proposals iuvolving Planned Development, Riverfront Mixed Use District, or
Conditional Use Zoning District, the petitioner must include a written report of at
least one (1) community information meeting held by the petitioner. The community
meeting shan be held prior to submission of the application for map amendment.
The primary purpose of the meeting is to explain the upcoming proposal and field
questions from people in the surrounding area.
At a minimum, written notice of such a meeting shall be given to tbe adjacent
or immediately affected property owners (usually considered to be property owners
or leaseholders within 100 feet of the subject property) and any organizations
entitled to notice based on a standing written request on file with the Clerk to the
Planning Board ("Sunshine Law"). The meeting should focus on information
exchange between an applicant and the specific invitees but should be open to the
general puhlic as well.
The report shall include, among other things:
l. a listing of those persons and organizations contacted about
the meeting and tbe manner and date of contact;
2. the date, time and location of the meeting;
3. a roster of the persons in attendance at the meetingj
4. a summary of issues discussed at the meetingj and
5. .a description of any cbanges or adjustments to the rezoning
petition made by tbe petitioner as a result of the community
meeting.
[n tbe event the petitioner has not held at least one (1) meeting pursuant to
tbis subsection, the petitioner sball file a report documenting efforts that were made
to arrange sucb a meeting and stating the reasons such a meeting was not beld. The
adequacy of a meeting held or report filed pursuant to this section shall be
considered by tbe Planning Board in its deci.sion and by the County Commissioners,
as appropriate but .shall not be subject to judicial review. ,
ACTION NEEDED:
Adopt a statement in accordance with NCGS 153A~341 which requires that "prior to
adopting or rejecting any zoning amendment, the governing board shall adopt a statement
desc=ribi.ng whether the action is consistent with an adopted comprehensive plan and
8/22/2007 Page 1 of2 A-361
176
explaining wby tbe board considers the action taken to be reasonable and in tbe public
interest. ..
EXAMPLE:
The County Commissioners find that this request for zoning text amendment as presented herein
is (or is not):
l. Consistent with the purposes and intent of land use policies adopted in the 2006 land
use plan;
2. Reasonab.le and in the public. interest to establish a requirement that certain
development proposals must hold a community infonnation meeting prior to
submission of an application for certain zoning changes.
8/2212007 Page 2 of2 A~361
177
This page intentionally left blank.
178
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Regular Item #: 3.7 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Planning Presenter: Chris O'Keefe
Contact: Chris O'Keefe
Item Does Not Require Review
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing
Text Amendment (A-362, 8/07) - Request by Staff to Amend Section 71-1 of the Zoning Ordinance to Add Language
Establishing a Policy on Resubmittal of Denied Special Use Permit Applications
BRIEF SUMMARY:
The Planning Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval of this amendment. No one from the public spoke on this item.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
The County Commissioners may approve, modify, or deny the text amendment.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
~
A-362 TEXT AM END MEN T -rehearingS U P. doc
ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
179
CASE: A.362 Applicant: Staff
REQUEST: Text Amendment. Resubmittal of Special Use Permit
Applications after prior denial.
ALL NEW SUBSECTION
Section 71-1(10)
Resubmittals. An application for a special use whicb bas been
previously denied may be resubmitted only if there has been a change in
circumstances as determined by tbe planning director or the director's
designee.
Evidence presented in support of the new application shall initially be
limited to what is necessary to enable the planning director to determine whether
there has been a substantial cbange in tbe facts, evidence, or conditions of the case
and shall include:
1. Circumstances affecting the property that is the subject of tbe application
which have substantially cbanged since the denial; or
2. New information available since the denial that could not with reasonable
diligence bave been presented at a previous hearing.
If the planning director deems the evidence substantially changed,
tbe proposal may be resubmitted as a new application.
Appeal ofthe planning director's decision may be made to the
Board of County Commissioners.
ACTION NEEDED:
Adopt a statement in accordance with NCGS 153A.341 which requires that "prior to
adopting or reJecting any zoning amendment, tbe governing board sball adopt a statement
describing w'betber tbe action is consistent with an adopted comprehensive plan and
explaining wby the board considers the action taken to be reasonable and in tbe public
interest."
EXAMPLE:
The County Commissioners find that this request for zoning text amendment as presented herein
is (or is not):
I. Consistent with the purposes and intent of land use policies adopted in the 2006 land
use plan;
2. Reasonable and in the public interest to establish more definitive guidance for
circumstances under which a denied special use request might be eligible for
rehearing.
8/2212007 Page 1 of 1 A.362
180
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Regular Item #: 3.8 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Planning Presenter: Chris O'Keefe
Contact: Chris O'Keefe
Item Does Not Require Review
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing
Text Amendment (A-363, 8/07) - Request by Staff to Amend Section 111 of the Zoning Ordinance to Establish a
Policy and Procedure Relating to Continuances of Rezoning Cases
BRIEF SUMMARY:
The Planning Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval of this amendment. No one from the public spoke on this item.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
The County Commissioners may approve, modify, or deny the text amendment.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
~
A-363 TEXT AMENDMENT -WITHDRAWALS-CONTINUANCES.doc
ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
181
CASE: A-.363 Applicant: Staff
REQUEST: Amend Section 111 to establish policy on continuances of
zoning amendment requests.
BACKGROUND
WITHDRAWALS:
When a project is withdrawn, the case is closed and any further request for
action becomes a new request,. subject to new submission deadlines and new fees..
Withdrawals of map amendments (rezonings) are subject to the limitations of
Section 111-3(4) and (5). Specifically, if the petition is not withdrawn ~rior to
delivering the Planninll Board advertisement of public hearing to the newspaper, a
12 month waiting period applies and is counted from the advertised hearing date,
CONTINUANCES:
A continuance delays decision~making from the advertised hearing date to
some future meeting. From time to time, circumstances beyond the control of an
applicant may arise to necessitate delaying a request before the Planning Board or
Board of County Commissioners. The current ordinance does not specifically
address this subject Understanding that these situations do arise, but also
acknowledging significant inconvenience to the public and the boards, as well as
the resultant additional costs of staff time, notice expense, and production costs,
some mechanism to discourage abusive use of continuances is advisable.
At a minimum, additional fees should be charged when continuances are
requested, The fee would help offset the added cost of the correction notices, staff
time, fuel, and re-advertising the item the following month.
REQUEST:
Add tlte following new section
Sec. 111 ~3 (6) All requests for continuances of proposals and petitions involving a
change of zoning shall be subject to the fonowing policies:
L If an applicant requests that an item be delayed for consideration on the
Planning Board agenda, the request must be in writing to the Planning Director
and must include the reason(s) for the requested delay. If the request is received
a. prior to notice being sent to the newspaper for advertising,
the Planning Director may remove it from the agenda and calendar it for
the next meeting. No additional fee will be required. Only one
administrative continuance is allowed per permit application.
8/22/2007 Page I of2 A~363
182
b. after notice has been sent to the newspaper, the item will
remain on the agenda and the planning board will act on the request for
continuance of the item at the meeting. The board is under no obligation to
grant a continuance. If continued, a fee in accordance with the adopted fee
schedule will be charged and the item will be rescheduled for the next
upcoming meeting of the board or some other date certain. If the applicant
fails to appear at the meeting or fails to pay the additional fee by the
publication deadline, the proposal will be deemed withdrawn, and a new
application process will be required.
2. If an applicant requests delay of consideration from the Board of County
Commissioners agenda, the request must be in \'.'riting to the County
Manager, copied to the Planning Director, and must include the reason(s) for
the request If the request is received
a. prior to notice being sent to the newspaper for publication,
the Planning Director will remove the item from the list of planning items
being sent for the Manager's agenda and calendar it for the next regular
night meeting. The Planning Director will immediately cause correction of
the signage posted noticing the public hearing. A fee in accordance with
the adopted fee schedule will be paid to the NHC Planning Department to
offset the cost of fuel and staff time to correct the signage.
b. after notice has been sent to the newspaper, the item will
remain on the agenda and the Commissioners will act on the request for
continuance of the item at the advertised meeting. The Commissioners are
under no obligation to grant a continuance and may choose to hear the
item and act on it. If continued, a fee in accordance with the adopted fee
schedule will be paid and the item will be rescheduled for the next regular
heari.ng meeting or some other date certain. If the applicant fails to appear
at the meeting or fails to pay the additional fee by the publication deadline,
the proposal will be deemed withdrawn, and a new application process
will be required.
ACTION NEEDED:
Adopt a statement in accordance with NCGS 153A-341 which requires that "prior to
adopting or rejecting any zoning amendment, tbe governing board shall adopt a statement
describing wbetherthe action is consistent with an adopted com.prehensive plan and
explaining why the board considers the acti.on taken t.o be reasonable and in the public
interest."
EXAMPLE:
The County Commissioners find that this request for zoning text amendment as presented herein
is (or is not):
1. Consistent with the purposes and intent of land use policies adopted in the 2006 land
use plan;
2. Reasonable and in tbe public interest to establish a definitive process for granting
continuances and charging fees to recoup recurring costs associated with a
continuance.
8/22/2007 Page 20f2 A-363
,~----
183
This page intentionally left blank.
184
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Regular Item #: 4 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Finance Presenter: Avril Pinder, Finance Director
Contact: Avril Pinder
SUBJECT:
Mason Inlet Relocation - Maintenance Cost
BRIEF SUMMARY:
At the August 9th Commissioner Work Session, Mr. Frank Pinkston of the Mason Inlet Preservation Group presented to the
Board a request to reduce the cost to the property owners for the upcoming Mason Inlet Assessment. The request was
based on the Room Occupancy Tax (ROT) received from properties along the northern end of Wrightsville Beach. At the
August 13th Commissioners' meeting, staff was directed to analyze the ROT receipts from properties along the north end
of Wrightsville Beach. The properties are Shell Island Resort, Wrightsville Dunes, Dune Ridge, and Cordgrass Bay.
The County Finance Department reviewed ROT collections for the above referenced area. Annual collections are
estimated at $416,000. Of these funds, $125,000 is designated to Beach Renourishment.
The Board of County Commissioners will receive a request on 9/17/07 to approve the special assessment process.
Currently Wrightsville Beach will be assessed $2,728,205 and Figure Eight Island will be assessed $561,178. Staff is
seeking direction of any reductions in these assessment amounts.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Give staff direction on amount to assess.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
~
-.
....J:.!.:.I:t:
MIPG Resolution.pdf
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: N/A FINANCE: BUDGET: HUMAN RESOURCES:
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Give staff direction on amount to assess.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
A motion to direct staff to assess the MIPG $2,728,205 and Figure Eight Island $561,178 as stated in the agenda item
passed by a vote of 5-0. A motion to include MIPG (to be present, not to vote) in all negotiations and contracts in the future
passed by a vote of 5-0.
185
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF PROVIDING NON-REIMBURSABLE FUNDS
FROM THE ROOM OCCUPANCY TAX (ROT) TO COVER A PORTION OF
TIlE CONTINUING COST FOR MAINTAINING THE RELOCATED MASON
INLET
WHEREAS, New Hanover County, a county of the state of North Carolina, is the
location of the recently relocated Mason Inlet; and
WHEREAS, the New Hanover County Commissioners have long recognized that
the Atlantic Coast beaches of the County are an important natural resource which serves
as an important recreational asset and provides storm protection for the adjoining towns;
and
WHEREAS, the New Hanover County Commissioners further recognize that
oceanfront residential properties and business interests are greatly enhanced by the
existence of healthy, non~eroding beaches in the Town of Wrightsville Beach; and
WHEREAS, the New Hanover County Commissioners agreed that the relocation
of Mason Inlet was critical to preserving the imminently threatened stroctures on the
North end of Wrightsville Beach; and
WHEREAS, relocating Mason Inlet prevented potential closure of the inlet and
thereby protected the marsh and associated fish and wildlife habitat; and
WHEREAS, the New Hanover County Commissioners endorsed and provided up
front funding for the Mason Inlet Relocation Project from the Room Occupancy Tax
Fund; and
WHEREAS, the Mason Inlet Relocation project was successfully completed
during the period of January 2002 through. April 2002; and
WHEREAS, the 1044 benefitted. property owners on Figure Eight Island and the
North end of Wrightsville Beach (known collectively as the Mason Inlet Preservation
Group -lv1IPG) have reimbursed the Room Occupancy Tax Fund, in full, fOIthe initial
cost of the project, through County Assessments in the amount of$6.8 million; and
WHEREAS, these benefitted property owners, through the funding of this
project, have protected the New Hanover County tax base, both Real Property Tax and
Room Occupancy Tax, for properties on the North end ofWrightsville Beach, as well as
Figure Eight Island with tax values in the hundreds of million dollars; and
186
WHEREAS, included as part of the Project is a coastal bird sanctuary which
creates and protects a very valuable bird habitat that has become a great tourist attraction;
and
WHEREAS, many of these benefitted properties (Shell Island Resorts,
WrightsviUe Dunes, Duneridge Resorts, Cordgrass Bay and privately owned homes and
condominiums on Figure Eight Island and the north end of Wrightsville Beach) have
contributed heavily to the Room Occupancy Tax (ROT) fund. The Shell Island Resort
along has contributed an average of over $200,000 per year and Figure Eight Island has
contributed an average of$85,OOO per year; and other condominium units and private
home rentals on. the north end of Wrightsville Beach have probably exceeded these
figures in ROT contributions; and
WHEREAS, there has never been any direct financial benefit received by these
property owners from the portion of the Room Occupancy Tax fund devoted to beach
nourishment (the ongoing beach nourishment program stops at the Holiday Inn
Sunspree); and
WHEREAS, Wrightsville Beach properties to the south of this special assessment
district have received extensive direct benefit from the Room Occupancy Tax fund
through beach nourishment as well as for other projects; and
WHEREAS, there are follow-on costs for engineering and bird monitoring,
maintenance d.redgin.g, etc. associated with the Project in an amount approaching
$3,000,000 that have not yet been assessed against the benefitted properties; and
WHEREAS, the beaches of New Hanover County are a County-wide asset and a
direct benefit to all property owners and residents as well as the general public; and
WHEREAS. maintaining the stability of the Mason Inlet is a major factor in the
preservation ofWrightsville Beach, and insures the continued viability of the tourist trade
of New Hanover County; and
WHEREAS, the benefitted property owners ofWrightsviIle Beach realize their
commitment to the long term maintenance of this Project and are willing to continue
paying a fair share of the cost to insure the stability of Mason Inlet and protect the
shoreline; and
WHEREAS, these benefitted property owners feel that New Hanover County
should recognize the benefits of the Project to New Hanover County residents and visitors
and should recognize the contributions of Wrightsville Beach and Figure Eight property
owners to the ROT fund by paying some of the continuing costs of the Project with non-
reimbursable contributions from the Room Occupancy Tax fund: and
187
.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the New Hanover County Board
of Commissioners to support and provide non-reimbursable funding assistance from the
Room Occupancy Tax. fund to help defray the current un~assessed costs and any future
cost for the continued maintenance of Mason Inlet and the continued compliance with the
Project pennits. The non-reimbursable assistance is to be 50% of the outstanding un-
assessed balance with the other 50% being assessed to the benefitted property owners.
William A. Caster, Chairman
New Hanover Board of Commissioners
188
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Regular Item #: 5 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Health Presenter: Dr. Jean P. McNeil, Animal Control Services Manager
Contact: Dr. Jean P. McNeil
SUBJECT:
Revisions to New Hanover County Code, Section Five: Animals & Fowl
BRIEF SUMMARY:
Suggested change to the New Hanover County Code regarding control of animals as enforced by Animal Control Services
(ACS). Issues have been reviewed and supported by County Legal, ACS staff, and the ACS Advisory Committee.
Clarification on the procedure for dangerous or potentially dangerous dog appeals required rewording for better
understanding of the process for hearing notification.
CURRENT: Sec. 5-63(b). Procedure.
The owner may appeal the determination of a dangerous dog or potentially dangerous dog. Notice of appeal is by filing
written objections with the appellate board appointed by the board of public health within ten business days after receiving
written notice, together with such appellant's filing fees as may be established by the county board of health. ....... The
appellate board shall, within ten business days of the filing of the appeal, schedule a hearing. .......Until the appeal
is final, the dog must be controlled and confined pursuant to the ruling from which the appeal was taken. Any appeal from
the final decision of such appellate board shall be taken to superior court by filing notice of appeal and a petition for review
within ten business days from the final decision of the appellate board.
PROPOSED: Sec. 5-63(b). Procedure.
The owner may appeal the determination of a dangerous dog or potentially dangerous dog. Notice of appeal is by filing
written objections with the appellate board appointed by the board of public health within ten business days after receiving
written notice, together with such appellant's filing fees as may be established by the county board of health. ....... The
appellate board shall schedule a hearing of said appeal and the dog owner and complainant will be notified of the
hearing date ten business days prior to said hearing. .......Until the appeal is final, the dog must be controlled and
confined pursuant to the ruling from which the appeal was taken. Any appeal from the final decision of such appellate
board shall be taken to superior court by filing notice of appeal and a petition for review within ten business days from the
final decision of the appellate board.
The revision was approved by the Board of Health on August 1,2007, and is hereby presented to the Board of County
Commissioners for adoption.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Accept and approve the revision to the New Hanover County Code, Animals & Fowl, Section 5-63(b) Procedure.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: No Change In Position(s) Number of Positions:
Explanation:
(revised)
189
ATTACHMENTS:
N/A
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: FINANCE: N/A BUDGET: HUMAN RESOURCES:
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Recommend approval.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
The item was withdrawn.
190
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Regular Item #: 6 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Environmental Management Presenters: Avril Pinder and AI Canady
Contacts: Teresa Horsboll or Lena Butler
SUBJECT:
Award of Bid #08-0042 and Approval of Contract #08-0042 to Sam English of VA, Inc. for the Purchase of Boiler
Tubes Panels for Boiler #2 at WASTEC
BRIEF SUMMARY:
A Request for Bids was published in the Star News on Sunday, July 29,2007. On Thursday, August 16, 2007, bids were
opened and read aloud. The results are detailed below:
ABT, Inc. $224,380 Lead time: First Quarter 2008
Joe Moore & Company $234,892 Lead time: 42-45 weeks
Sam English of V A, Inc. $287,000 Lead time: 16 weeks
Based on the information provided by the three (3) bidders for Bid #08-0042, Sam English is the most responsible,
responsive bidder, taking into consideration quality, performance and the time specified in the bids for the performance of
the contract. This is based on the fact that ABT, Inc., cannot provide the eight wall boxes required to replace the boiler
tubes and has a lead time of approximately seven (7) months. Joe Moore & Company can provide the panels as specified;
however, the company has a lead time of approximately eleven (11) months. Sam English, although the highest bidder,
has a lead time of approximately four (4) months. Each month that boiler #2 remains inoperable costs WASTEC about
$147,000 in lost revenues as a result of not burning trash. In addition, each month that boiler #2 is down, WASTEC loses
approximately 900 megawatts (MW) of power. If one estimates that each MW of electricity cost $40.67, then $36,603 will
be lost in revenues per month each month that boiler #2 is down. The additional lead time required by Joe Moore &
Company will result in excessive lost revenues making it less expensive to use Sam English.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Adopt resolution awarding Bid #08-0042 and Contract #08-0042 to Sam English of VA, Inc., in the amount of $287,000 and
authorize the County Manager to execute the contract.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation: Funding was approved in the FY07-08 Adopted Budget under Wastec's M&R account 70080600 700430.
ATTACHMENTS:
~
........
... .
G8{:{i.t;2 Resolution .doc
191
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: FINANCE: Approve BUDGET: Approve HUMAN RESOURCES:
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Recommend approval.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
192
RESOLUTION
OF THE
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
OF
NEW HANOVER COUNTY
WHEREAS, after due advertisement, bids were received and publicly opened by the
Purchasing Agent at 2:00 P. M. EST on Thursday, August 16,2007, for the purchase of Boiler Tube
Panels for Boiler #2 at W ASTEC - Bid # 08-0042 and the following bids were received; and
AST, Inc. $224,380 Lead time: First Quarter 2008
Joe Moore & Company $234,892 Lead time: 42-45 weeks
Sam English of V A, Inc. $287,000 Lead time: 16 weeks
WHEREAS, Sam English of V A, Inc., was recognized to be the most responsible, responsive
bidder taking into consideration quality, performance and the time specified in the bids for the
perfonnance of the contract; and
WHEREAS, this recognition was based on the fact that Sam English of V A, Inc. can supply
the needed equipment and has a lead time of approximately four (4) months; whereas, ABT, Inc. can
not provide the eight (8) wall boxes required to replace the boiler tubes and has a lead time of
approximately seven (7) months and Joe Moore & Company can provide the panels as specified;
however, the company has a lead time of approximately eleven (11) months; and
WHEREAS, it is estimated that each month that Boiler #2 remains inoperable costs
W ASTEC about $147,000 in lost revenues as a result of not burning trash. In addition, each month
that Boiler #2 is down, W ASTEC loses approximately 900 megawatts (MW) of power which equates
to approximately $36,603 in lost revenues per month; and
WHEREAS, a shorter lead time would be most advantageous to the County and the
Environmental Management Director, the Finance Director and the County Manager recommend that the
bid and contract be awarded to Sam English of V A, Inc. the most responsible, responsive bidder in the
amount of Two hundred eighty~seven thousand dollars ($287,000); and
WHEREAS, funds have been budgeted this Fiscal Year in Account # 70080600~ 700430 to cover
this contract;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of New
Hanover County that the contract for Boiler Tube Panels for Boiler # 2 at the W ASTEC Facility of the
Environmental Management Department, Bid # 08-0042 be awarded to Sam English of V A, Inc. in the
amount of Two hundred eighty-seven thousand dollars ($287,000) and that the County is hereby
authorized and directed to execute the contract, contract form to be approved by the County Attorney.
This 4th day of September, 2007.
William A. Caster, Chairman
ATTEST:
Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board
193
This page intentionally left blank.
194
MEETING OF THE WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT
Human Resources Training Center, New Hanover County Government Center
230 Government Center Drive, Suite 135, Room 401
Wilmington, NC
ESTIMA TED ITEMS OF BUSINESS Page
TIMES No.
9: 15 p.m. 1. Non-Agenda Items (limit three minutes)
9:20 p.m. 2. Approval of Minutes 197
9:25 p.m. 3. Presentation: New Hanover County Water System Overview and Water 199
Treatment Plant Project Progress Update
9:45 p.m. 4. Presentation: Northeast Interceptor (NEI) Improvements Project Status Update 201
195
This page intentionally left blank.
196
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Water & Sewer Item #: 2 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Governing Body Presenter: District Chairman Kopp
Contact: Sheila L. Schult
Item Does Not Require Review
SUBJECT:
Water and Sewer District - Approval of Minutes
BRIEF SUMMARY:
Approve minutes from the Water and Sewer District Regular Session meeting held on August 13, 2007.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Approve minutes.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
197
This page intentionally left blank.
198
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Water & Sewer Item #: 3 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Water & Sewer District Presenter: Jordan Peck
Contact: Dennis Ihnat
SUBJECT:
New Hanover County Water System Overview and Water Treatment Plant Project Progress Update
BRIEF SUMMARY:
Bids for the Water Treatment Plant were opened on Tuesday, August 21,2007. The bids are under review. Bids for the
Wellfield Projects (north and south) were opened on Tuesday, August 14, 2007 receiving only two bids. The re-bid will be
held on Monday, August 27,2007. Wells M and N at Ogden Park are under construction. The concentrate and potable
water lines (east and west) are scheduled for bid opening on September 27,2007.
This is an informational briefing on the Water Treatment Plant and the District's water systems.
Additional information will also be presented related to:
Progress with ongoing strategies that increase the amount of water supplied to the system prior to completion of the
plant; and
Progress with permitting, design and construction of the pipeline's water towers necessary to maintain pressure and
transport water to various locations in the County.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
No recommendation or requested actions at this time.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: No Change In Position(s) Number of Positions:
Explanation: Wellfield and Water Treatment Budget
ATTACHMENTS:
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: FINANCE: N/A BUDGET: N/A HUMAN RESOURCES:
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Hear presentation.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Heard presentation.
199
This page intentionally left blank.
200
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Water & Sewer Item #: 4 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Water & Sewer District Presenter: Chris Ford, P.E., Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Contact: Dennis Ihnat
SUBJECT:
Northeast Interceptor (NEI) Improvements Project Status Update
BRIEF SUMMARY:
There are several NEI mandated repairs required by the NC Division of Water Quality as a condition of the NEI Moratorium
and the Special Order of Consent (SaC). These are the Deficiency Identification and Repair Program (DIRP), Bradley
Creek Pump Station Influent Junction Box Replacement, Interim Pump Station Improvements, and the 24-inch Force Main
relocation.
Mr. Chris Ford, P.E., of Kimley-Horn and Associates is the Project Manager for the City of Wilmington for the NEI
Improvements Project, and will provide an update briefing.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Hear presentation.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: No Change In Position(s) Number of Positions:
Explanation: Water and Sewer District Fund
ATTACHMENTS:
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: FINANCE: N/A BUDGET: N/A HUMAN RESOURCES:
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Hear presentation.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Heard presentation.
201
This page intentionally left blank.
202
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 09/04/07
Additional Item #: 1 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Governing Body Presenters: William A. Kopp, Jr. and Nancy H. Pritchett
Contacts: William A. Kopp, Jr. and Nancy H. Pritchett
Item Does Not Require Review
SUBJECT:
Consideration of a Resolution Requesting Governor Easley Call a Special Session of the General Assembly in the
Fall 2007 to Discuss Local, Regional and Statewide Transportation Funding Issues
BRIEF SUMMARY:
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 4-0.
203
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
RESOLUTION REQUESTING GOVERNOR EASLEY CALL A SPECIAL SESSION OF THE
GENERAL ASSEMBLY IN THE FALL 2007 TO DISCUSS LOCAL, REGIONAL AND
STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING ISSUES
WHEREAS, the state of North Carolina's rapid growth has placed an increased strain on the
state's current transportation infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, the growth trend is expected to continue with a 42 percent increase in population by
2030, thus ranking the state of North Carolina as the 7th most populous state in the country with over 12.2
million residents; and
WHEREAS, due to the increases in construction costs for steel, concrete, and asphalt (93.1%
between 2002 and first quarter of 2007); the North Carolina Department of Transportation has
experienced a significant funding shortfall over the past several years; and
WHEREAS, this funding shortfall is expected to continue and additional funding sources are
needed to construct important local, regional and statewide transportation projects; and
WHEREAS, onc opportunity to construct important transportation projects, the North Carolina
Turnpike Authority (NCT A) was created by law in October 2002 and currently is authorized by the
General Assembly to construct, operate and maintain up to nine toU roads in North Carolina; and
WHEREAS, however no funding is currently available to the NCT A for the construction of any
of the identified potential toll road projects; and
WHEREAS, until additional funding sources are available to fund local, regional and statewide
transportation projects, the state of North Carolina will continue to fall farther and farther behind in the
construction of important transportation infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, in light of the recent tragedies with the collapse of the 1-35 bridge in Minneapolis,
NCDOT has identified several bridges that are structurally deficient and in need of improvements; and
WHEREAS, the impacts of inadequate transportation infrastructure will result in increased
congestion, negative impacts to environmental resources and air quality, and negative human impacts to
the state's residents; and
NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved that the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners
recognizes the importance of transportation infrastructure to the state of North Carolina and strongly
urges Governor Easley to call a special session of the General Assembly in the fall 2007 to discuss local,
regional and statewide transportation funding issues.
ADOPTED the 4th day of September 2007.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY
[SEAL]
William A. Caster, Chairman
A ITEST:
Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board
204