HomeMy WebLinkAbout200410 Oct PBM
MINUTES OF THE
NEW HANOVER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD MEETING
October 7, 2004
The New Hanover County Planning Board met Thursday, October 7, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. in
the County Court House, 24 North Third Street, Wilmington, NC to hold a public
meeting.
Members Present: Staff Present:
Walter Conlogue, Chairman Dexter Hayes, Planning Director
David Girardot, Vice Chairman Baird Stewart, Senior Planner
David Adams Sam Burgess, Planner
Sue Hayes Holt Moore, Assistant County Attorney
Robin Robinson
Members Absent:
Frank Smith
Sandra Spiers
Chairman Walter Conlogue opened the meeting by welcoming the audience to the public
hearing. Sam Burgess led the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
Chairman Conlogue proceeded with the approval of the minutes. David Girardot made a
motion to approve the September minutes. Sue Hayes seconded the motion. The Board
approved September 2, 2004 minutes by a vote of 5-0.
Item 1: Subdivision Appeal (Continued Item) - Request by Ocean Forest Lakes
HOA & Lords Creek HOA to appeal the decision by the County Technical Review
Committee to Approve Woodlake @ Lords Creek a 386 unit performance
residential subdivision. (SA-23, 06/04).
Chairman Conlogue and David Adams recused themselves from discussion and voting on
this agenda item. They were both present during at least one of the TRC meetings that
discussed Woodlake @ Lords Creek subdivision and David Adams is a Board member of
Coastal Land Trust, which had an interest in the property at one time.
Alan Toll, of Stevens, McGhee, Morgan, Lennon & Toll, LLP representing residents of
Lords Creek stated that he had the following four objections to the appeal process for this
item. His objections were as follows:
1. A total of twelve minutes was allowed for the petitioners to present their
entire case. He stated that this violates due process, fair play, and the
spirit of the ordinance.
2. The Planning Board continued to ask the Planning Staff if Woodlake
could do this project. He added that this stacks against his client and it is
not impartial.
1
3. Each issue must be addressed and the Board can modify the Plan that was
approved by the TRC.
4. The subdivision was approved with two parcels to get a higher density.
Bill Mason representing the developer (Dominion Land Corporation), stated that his
clients did consult with the Planning Department for their expertise because they were
aware of the contiguous issues pertaining to the property.
Sue Hayes made a motion to continue this item due to a lack of a quorum and schedule
the item at the next Planning Board meeting. Robin Robinson seconded the motion. The
Board approved the motion to continue this subdivision appeal to the November 4, 2004
Planning Board meeting by a vote of 5-0.
Item 2: Subdivision Appeal - Request by the Bayshore Group, LLC and Graham &
Joyce Swift appealing a requirement to construct and connect a road stub approved
by the County Technical Review Committee in 2002 and affirmed during the
approval of a preliminary site plan extension to Bayshore Crossing a 60 unit
performance residential subdivision. (SA-24, 09/04)
David Adams recused himself from participating in discussion and voting on this item
since he was present at the TRC meeting that discussed this project.
Sam Burgess presented the slides and gave a brief review of the site's history, agency
comments and related information.
Holt Moore, Assistant County Attorney provided the guidelines for the appeal process.
PROJECT HISTORY:
In September, 1994 the Planning Board's Technical Review Committee (TRC)
preliminarily approved a revised site plan for Wendover North subdivision. The
preliminary approval of the 61 lot revision included a road stub. This road stub abutted
undeveloped property to the north owned by Bayshore Estates, Inc. and was designated
as a public right of way. A final plat displaying the same road stub with a 50 foot right of
way was recorded in March, 1995 (see attached plat) under the subdivision name of
Willow Brook: Section 3. At that time, the road stub was not built.
On August 21, 2002, the County's Technical Review Committee (TRC) preliminarily
approved Bayshore Crossing for 60 lots. As a part of the preliminary site plan approval
for the project, the TRC required that Thai's Trail be redesignated from a "private" to a
"public" road to allow inter-connectivity between Bayshore Drive in Bayshore Estates
subdivision and Bright Leaf Road in the Wendover North development to the south. The
purpose of the connection was to provide alternative access to nearby residents seeking
services in the Ogden/Middle Sound area and improve travel distances and the timely
delivery of public services.
2
On August 16, 2004, the County Planning Department received written notification from
the developer's surveyor asking for a one year extension of the Bayshore Crossing
preliminary site plan. A final plat for the entire project was also submitted the same day.
The Bayshore Crossing preliminary plan request was reviewed by TRC on August 25,
2004. In a vote of 3-0, the TRC granted the preliminary extension request to Bayshore
Crossing for one (1) year with all original terms and conditions noted in the August 22,
2002 site plan approval. In their approval of the site plan extension, the TRC clarified to
the developer the construction requirements for the road stub connection between Bright
Leaf Road and his project.
Two (2) separate appeals have been made to the Planning Board based on the TRC's
decision requiring the developer to connect and construct the road stub as a part of the
preliminary plan approval. Both of appellants as noted below have "standing" according
to the County Legal Department.
Bayshore Group, LLC Issues of Concern
1) Appellant submitted a final plat based on the August, 2002 plan within 24 months of
the approval date and contrary to Section 33(2) was induced to apply for an extension
request.
2) Even if required, the TRC was without authority to make the approval of the
extension application contingent on the construction of the road stub.
3) The TRC's decision went beyond its authority under Section 33-3 which limits the
TRC review of the preliminary plan when no such road stub was ever agreed upon.
4) The decision of the TRC erroneously infers the "intent" of the parties was that the
appellant would build the road stub and the evidence shows no such intent existed.
5) The TRC's conditional approval of the extension application requiring an additional
road be constructed contradicts Section 32-2(12) in that the road stub was not
indicated on the approved preliminary plan.
Graham & Joyce Swift's Issues of Concern
(Adjoining homeowners of road stub & residents of Willow Brook subdivision)
1) Under Article III plat preparation and approval procedure (Section 32-2) states that a
traffic study is required.
2) Under Article IV Design Standards Section 41, Item7: In the Bayshore folder, there is
no clear and concise statement as to what type of road Bright Leaf is presently
designated to be or what type of road it will become when the connection is made.
3) No wetlands study relating to the road connection was located even though it is
mentioned by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS).
4) Bright Leaf Road and Wendover are subject to flooding.
5) Notification was not sent regarding the Technical Review Committee meeting on
Bayshore Crossing. (Section 32-3(2)(d))
6) Section 32-3(4) indicates that people have the right to appeal. However, the value of
that statement seems null & void when there is "No right to inform".
3
Brian Edes representing Bayshore Group LLC stated that this appeal is premised on two
grounds. 1) A member of TRC induced them to file for an extension when no extension
was required and by doing so TRC allowed themselves to add this additional condition of
building a road connector. 2) Even if an extension was required, the addition of a new
condition two years after the approval of the preliminary plan constitutes an Ultra virus
Act for which TRC had no legal authority.
Graham Swift provided handouts for the Planning Board members and staff. Mr. Swift
stated that New Hanover County has too many people, too much traffic, and has no grand
design for transportation.
He stated that the TRC made an error in making their decision on this project. He added
that the traffic study should be accurate and verifiable and that there are questions that
need clarification such as traffic delays, large amounts of traffic diverted to streets with
no sidewalks, no wetland study, no drainage study, all traffic being diverted to one focus
point, and no notification to the community prior to the TRC decision.
Trish Gibbon, of Gorman Plantation, stated that Hawk Road was opened in her
subdivision and they are now dealing with major traffic issues. She added that if the road
connector were put into this subdivision there would be traffic problems just as in her
subdivision.
Carol Odom, 7400 Brightleaf Road stated that she has a five year old and expressed her
concerns for her child's safety regarding traffic issues. Therefore, she encouraged the
Board to reconsider the TRC decision.
A petition was provided for public record that contained 490 signatures from neighboring
residents who are against the road connector.
Mark Tinkler, TRC Transportation Planner responded to the statements made regarding
traffic impact stating that two routes were tested as alternatives to the connector road. He
added that based on a study of Bayshore Development the estimated trip generation
during peak hours is below the official traffic impact assessment policy of 100 vehicles
an hour. He further stated that NCDOT's position is to not add new traffic signals to this
area and that it is their intent to handle traffic issues on a case-by-case basis.
Brian Edes stated that allowing the condition to stand is contrary to the advice given to
TRC by New Hanover County's legal department.
Graham Swift disagreed with the information provided by the Transportation Study.
Holt Moore, Assistant County Attorney stated that he listened to the tapes from the TRC
meeting which reaffirmed that there is no indication that the original intent of the TRC
was to require the developer to pave the connector road to the subdivision in the future.
Robin Robinson asked what the result would be if the Planning Board agreed with the
appellant. Dexter Hayes, Planning Director replied that the subdivision approval would
be extended as originally approved.
4
David Girardot stated that it would be a stretch to require the developer to put in the road
stub now. He added that the issue is whether the TRC made a technical error or not.
Sue Hayes stated that she was not clear from the legal office if the TRC could add the
new condition when they reviewed this project.
Holt Moore, Assistant County Attorney stated that it is allowed if it would not throw off
or derail the project. But when someone comes in for an extension of time TRC does not
have the authority to add a new condition. If it had expired and a new plan had to be
brought in then it would require a whole new review and approval.
Chairman Conlogue stated that he agreed with the attorney and did not feel that the TRC
has the right to add a new condition unless it was a new plan.
Dexter Hayes stated that the current situation leaves a dilemma for the developer if the
plan was not approved with a dead-end street. Presently, NCDOT will not accept a dead-
end street without a turn around. Therefore, the developer will still have to revise the
plan and add a turn around at which time the TRC will have the opportunity to review.
Dick Thompson stated that NCDOT is in the process of approving the road in question as
a public road and did issue a driveway permit with a dead-end.
David Girardot made a motion to sustain the appeal. Robin Robinson seconded the
motion. The Board approved the motion by a vote of 4-0.
Item 3: Special Use Permit (Expansion) - Request by Stan Bullock & Chip Hicks
for Margaret Olsen to expand a Special Use Permit for a Youth Soccer Facility to
add lighting, parking and two soccer fields located at 6101 Murrayville Road (S-452,
10/4)
Baird Stewart presented the slides and gave a brief review of the site's history, agency
comments and related information.
Doug Darrell, representing Olsen Farms Soccer Fields and Soccer Academy of
Wilmington explained the need for this expansion and additional lighting and additional
time of use.
David Shook, 229 Rockwell Road made reference to a petition signed by surrounding
property owners requesting that stormwater issues be addressed prior to approval of this
special use permit expansion. He stated that the property should be properly graded and
piped and the existing drainage ditch should be corrected prior to approval.
Doug Darrell stated that the drainage ditch is not on the Olsen property. However, they
have made contacts requesting that the ditch be taken care of.
David Adams asked David Shook which lots he owned and if this project has caused him
any problems. David Shook replied that the only problems that he has experienced are
traffic problems.
5
STAFF SUMMARY:
The petitioner is requesting a modification of an existing site plan and Special Use Permit
originally granted in March 2000. The petitioner has successfully operated a youth
soccer program for 500 to 700 youth players per week. The petitioner would like to
expand the program by adding lighting as well as fields. The first phase of the expansion
is to relocate some of the existing lighting, add lighting to the existing field that abuts
residents on Rockwell Road and add some lighting in the parking area The lighting is
proposed on taller 45-foot high poles.
The applicant is also requesting a modification of the condition on the current Special
Use Permit, which requires the lights to go off by 7:00 p.m. The petitioner is requesting a
change to 9:00 p.m.
Expansion of the fields and parking to the north reflect future plans to accommodate the
increasing demand for recreation facilities. The petitioner needs to get proper land
disturbance permits and wetland delineations prior to any clearing or grading.
Chairman Conlogue asked what criteria was placed on the project when approved in
2000.
Dexter Hayes replied that the four conditions placed on the project are 1) Provide a 25'
buffer along the parking area and along field "A" where the adjacent property owners
request buffering 2) Buffer should be planted to the satisfaction of the adjacent residents
but does not have to exceed three rows of vegetation as described in the New Hanover
County Zoning Ordinance 3) Directional lighting only permitted for field "B". Lighting
must go off by 7:00 p.m. 4) No spectator bleachers, PA system or street parking
permitted.
Chairman Conlogue asked if there is sufficient buffering. Dexter Hayes replied stating
that there is a wooded buffer with a ROW. He added that the drainage ditches are
wooded as well which may contribute to the drainage not running as well as it should.
Sue Hayes asked if this expansion would increase the drainage issue. Dexter Hayes
replied that it should not.
David Girardot stated that an adverse affect would be created by adding 45' light poles
and extending playing times to 9:00 p.m. He added that when you clear-cut a green space
as large as this you would have a lot of additional runoff. He stated that he is not in
favor of granting this expansion.
Robin Robinson stated that lighting is not an issue to the adjacent property owners and
the lights would be facing away from their homes.
David Adams stated that the neighbors are not complaining about the existing facility.
He stated that he is concerned about land use. He recommended that they address only
the lighting since the expansion is not expected to take place for quite some time.
6
Robin Robinson asked how the additional time to 9:00 p.m. and the higher lights would
benefit the applicant.
Doug Darrell stated that request for increased time is to benefit the children for after
school training and the lights help the children with this training and improve scheduling
conflicts.
David Shook stated that there is neighborhood concern regarding the 45' pole lighting
and that other neighbors may not understand the requested lighting changes.
Chairman Conlogue recommended the applicant withdraw the request to allow time for
any remaining homeowners to respond regarding the lighting.
Chip Hicks stated that it would be difficult to go back to get funding without the
expansion included since they are volunteers and a non-profit organization.
Robin Robinson made a motion to extend the timeframe to 9:00 p.m., expand the lighting
to 45' poles, and add a restroom facility but not to allow expansion of the planned
recreational space (The restroom facility is needed to comply with Plumbing and Health
codes.). The Board approved the motion by a vote of 3-2. (Girardot and Conlogue
opposed)
Item 4: Rezoning - Request by Jeffrey Keeter for Robert & Deborah Jones to
rezone approximately 10.56 acres of property located in the 9100 Block of Market
Street on the west side between the Kirkland Community and Sidbury Road, from
R-15 residential to CD (B-2) Conditional Use Highway Business for a mini
warehouse project (Z-786, 10/4).
Baird Stewart presented the slides and gave a brief review of the site's history, agency
comments and related information.
Jeffrey Keeter, applicant, explained the intended use of the property. He explained that
there would be no retail on the property and that the well and septic tank permits have
been issued.
Jim Martin explained that he has been a self-storage operator for the past five years and is
spokesperson for Self-Storage Association of America and chairs the Legal Affairs
Committee for NC Self-Storage Association Board in which they completed the
Standardized Statewide Homeland Security Procedural Protocol. He was also National
Facility of the Year winner. Mr. Martin explained the features in the design of the project
and that these facilities generate very little traffic. He further stated that the Highway
Overlay District requirements are met and the project retains natural beauty with minimal
visual impact.
John Klein, Wrightsville Engineering Services, explained the design layout for the
project stating that the Highway Overlay District setbacks have been met as well as
meeting the requirements for parking area setbacks. He also stated that the design layout
includes maximized tree preservation and that the visual impact from the roadway
7
corridor is minimal. There are two 16' buildings on the plan for RV storage that are
shielded by trees. He added that the trip count is typically minimal for this type of
facility.
Dexter Hayes provided the staff summary.
STAFF SUMMARY:
The petitioner is requesting a Conditional Use Highway Business to locate a mini-
warehouse facility with an onsite resident manager, and an additional 2500 square foot
office or retail building on approximately 10.5 acres north of the I-140 interchange. The
proposed project is on the west side of Market Street approximately 300 feet from the
County Line. While areas south of the interchange have been actively developing for the
past couple of years, no significant Commercial, Office & Institutional or residential uses
have been established on either side of Market Street north of the I-140 Interchange.
Staff recently recommended approval of a conditional use office and institutional project
on the east side of Market Street across from the subject property. However, that project
was proposed in the context of a larger professional medical facility and residential
development that would establish a transition from the commercial zoning in Pender
County back to other residential uses to the south. Recognizing the problems with
establishing another commercial strip, which is prevalent along many of our major
corridors, staff has historically been reluctant to support additional rezonings in this area.
Although, the site is subject to the restrictions of the Special Highway Overlay District
and the proposed project is setback a significant distance from Market Street. A
residential community on the subject property could be similarly situated to protect the
future residents and preserve the corridor. While staff recognizes that Commercial
Zoning along Market Street has already been established in Pender County, policies in
the Comprehensive Plan as well as Policies established by the "Task Force For Planning
Development on US Highway 17 Bypass," do not support rezoning this stretch of
highway. This property is already a focal point for visitors and travelers entering the
County and should be developed in the most attractive manner possible. As described
above the subject property is within the rural land classification and while the 17-Bypass
Task force recommended changing the classification of some of the land immediately
north of the interchange however, this property was not included within their
recommendation.
Based on a concern for establishing an undesirable strip development pattern and the
inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan as well as other land use studies for the area,
Staff recommends Denial.
David Adams asked if the Corps of Engineers has checked the plans for this project.
John Klein replied that they have and that mitigation is being done.
Chairman Conlogue stated that the Martin projects are well designed projects.
8
Robin Robinson asked what other uses would be appropriate for this property. Dexter
Hayes stated that residential uses would provide a better aesthetic appearance for entering
New Hanover County from Pender County.
David Girardot stated that even though this is an attractive project he questioned the idea
of the first view coming into the county being a mini-warehouse
Sue Hayes agreed with David Girardot.
David Girardot made a motion to deny the rezoning request. Sue Hayes seconded the
motion. The Board passed the motion by a vote of 3-2 (Robinson & Conlogue opposed).
Sam Burgess gave an update on the Technical Review Committee's activity during the
month of September 2004.
The TRC reviewed four performance residential developments:
1. Village of Mott's Creek
• Classified as Developed and Transitional on Land Use Plan
• 170 Lots w/County sewer and private water
• Approved w/three conditions
o Water letter form Aqua NC stating adequate fire protection
o Gates leading into the private portion of the project need to be
reviewed by Fire Services
o Transportation improvements required along intersections of
Sanders and Carolina Beach Roads
2. Edgewood at Porter's Neck Plantation
• Classified as Resources Protection on Land Use Plan
• 18 Lots w/County sewer and community water system
• Approved w/two conditions
o Water Protection plan to Fire Services
o T Boxes be installed to accommodate future fire hydrants
Also waivers were granted on curb radii, sidewalks, street lights and
cul-de-sac length.
3. Lake Brewster
• Classified as Developed on Land Use Plan
• 137 Lots w/City water and County sewer
• Approved w/two conditions
o Recreational space adjusted on the plan for adequate amount of
active of space
o Environmental impact disclaimer statement be displayed on
Preliminary Plan and incorporated into the homeowner covenants
4. Snow's Cut Landing
• Limited Transition and Conservation on Land Use Plan
• 54 Lots
9
• Approved w/new subdivision requirements and four conditions
o Redesign of entrance and coordinated with Dot and MPO
o Addition of sidewalk and street lights
o Addition of Recreational Space
o Water letter from Aqua of NC
Being of no further business, David Girardot made a motion to adjourn the meeting.
Robin Robinson seconded the motion, which the Board unanimously approved. The
meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
Dexter Hayes, Planning Director
10