Nov 1 PB Agenda Package
NEW HANOVER COUNTY PLANNING & INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT 230 GOVERNMENT CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 110 WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403 TELEPHONE (910) 798-7165 FAX (910) 798-7053 NOTICE OF PUBLIC
HEARING NEW HANOVER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD NOVEMBER 1, 2012 The New Hanover County Planning Board will hold public hearings on Thursday, November 1, 2012 beginning at 5:30 p.m. or thereafter
at the New Hanover County Historic Courthouse, 24 North Third Street (corner of Third and Princess Streets), Room 301 in Wilmington, NC to consider the following items: Approval of October
Planning Board Minutes Item 1: Rezoning Request (Z-923, 11/12) -Request by Walter Pete Avery on behalf of Bladenboro Properties, LLC to rezone approximately 2.12 acres of right-of-way
and land at 2616, 2620, & 2624 Castle Hayne Road from R-20 Residential to CZD (B-1) Conditional Zoning District Business. The site is classified as Transition according to the 2006 CAMA
Land Classification Map. Item 2: Text Amendment (A-405, 10/12) -Request by Staff to amend “Section 112-6” of the Zoning Ordinance to clarify the process for obtaining a formal extension
of an approved planning action. This item was continued from the Planning Board’s October 4, 2012 meeting. Item 3: Text Amendment (A-408, 10/12) -Request by Staff to add “Section 53.1”
to the Zoning Ordinance to create a by right R-7: Medium Density District. This item was continued from the Planning Board’s October 4, 2012 meeting. Item 4: Text Amendment (A-409, 11/12)
-Request by Staff to amend “Section 23: Definitions” of the Zoning Ordinance to clarify the term Building and/or Structure. Item 5: Text Amendment (A-411, 11/12) -Request by Staff to
amend “Section 69.11: Building Setbacks” of the Zoning Ordinance to clarify when roof overhangs are used as the reference point to measure building setbacks. Technical Review Committee
Report (October) The Planning Board may consider substantial changes in these petitions as a result of objections, debate, and discussion at the meeting, including rezoning to other
other classifications. Petitions for the above items may be viewed or inquiries made by contacting the Planning & Inspections Department at 798-7165, 230 Government Center Drive, Wilmington,
NC. All interested citizens are invited to attend. Chris O’Keefe, AICP Planning & Inspections Director Dennis Bordeaux Inspections Manager Shawn Ralston Planning Manager
Item 1: Rezoning Request (Z-923, 11/12) -Request by Walter Pete Avery on behalf of Bladenboro Properties, LLC to rezone approximately 2.12 acres of right-of-way and land at 2616, 2620,
& 2624 Castle Hayne Road from R-20 Residential to CZD (B-1) Conditional Zoning District Business. The site is classified as Transition according to the 2006 CAMA Land Classification
Map.
Z-923, 11/12 Page 1 CASE Z-923, 11/12 Petitioner: Request: Rezone from R-20 Residential
to CDZ (B-1) Conditional Zoning District Neighborhood Business Acreage: 2.12 (includes land & right-of-way frontage) Location: 2616, 2620, 2624 Castle Hayne Road Land Class: Transition
STAFF SUMMARY Zoning History The subject properties (3) are located near the northeastern corner of the intersection of North Kerr Avenue and Castle Hayne Road. These properties
are an original part of an R-20 Zoning District dating back to July, 1974. Property Characteristics The subject properties have direct access off Castle Hayne Road (SR 2812), an urban
principal arterial roadway. The rezoning proposal for all three properties consists of 2.12 acres which includes the rightof-way frontage (.66 ac) along Castle Hayne Road. Most of the
property is vacant with the exception of two residential homes located at 2616 & 2620 Castle Hayne Road. According to the petitioner, one of the homes is totally dilapidated while the
other home is in good shape but has been foreclosed by the lender. Both homes are planned to be removed. Character of Area The current zoning of the properties is R-20 Residential with
a very small shoehorn of AR Airport Residential property located at the northeast property line of 2620 Castle Hayne Road. The R-20 district allows for the principal use of land to be
developed in a low density residential or recreational manner. The district is intended to discourage any use because of its character that would interfere with the development of residents
and which would be detrimental to the quiet residential nature of the areas included within the district. Zoning districts that presently encompass the properties include R-20 to the
north, AR Airport Residential to the east, and B-1 Neighborhood Business to the south. Other zoning districts located nearby include an established SC Shopping Center across the street
from the subject properties created in the early 1980 northwest of the proposal, and B-2 Highway Business (see attached map).
The properties are also a part of an adopted plan from 1991 Wrightsboro An Eye on the Past . Observations
and concerns from the residents who participated in the development of the plan included transportation issues such as the proposed construction of a bypass (I-140), unsafe travel conditions,
traffic delays at major intersections along with needed improvements to Castle Hayne Road. Other concerns included in the plan included lack of public transportation and
Z-923, 11/12 Page 2 other alternative modes of travel, development of a drainage plan for the area, and creation of recreational facilities. Proposed Zoning: The purpose of a conditional
district is to address situations where a particular use would be consistent with the New Hanover County Land Use Plan and the objectives of the zoning ordinance where only a specific
use or uses are proposed for a project. This tool is intended primarily for use with transitions between zoning districts of very dissimilar character (e.g. R-20 & B-1) where a particular
use or uses with restrictive covenants provide mitigation measures to safeguard adjacent land uses and create a more orderly transition benefiting all affected and the community at-large.
The purpose of a B-1 Neighborhood Business is to provide convenient shopping facilities primary of
cipal means of access shall be along collector roads and major/minor arterials. The petitioner is proposing
to construct a one-story, 8,050 square foot retail structure (unspecified) approximately 21 feet in height with 34 parking spaces. Based on the site plan submitted, twenty-one spaces
are required per Section 81-1 of the Zoning Ordinance. A small storm water pond in accordance with local applicable regulations is planned near the eastern property boundary. Landscaping,
foundation plantings, setbacks, buffer yards and street yards are also displayed on the plan and appear to meeting zoning ordinance requirements. Traffic Castle Hayne Road is an urban
arterial roadway. Access to the subject properties will require a driveway permit and applicable encroachment agreements from NCDOT. The Average Daily Trip (ADT) count near the intersection
of Castle Hayne Road and North Kerr Avenue is 14,372 based on the Traffic Impact Worksheet supplied by the petitioner. The Level of Service (LOS) fronting the subject properties is E,
meaning that the roadway is operating at design capacity with traffic experiencing delays at intersections. The Traffic Impact Worksheet also revealed that the proposed retail structure
when fully developed will generate an AM peak of seven (7) trips and a PM peak of 42 trips. Based on this trip generation, a Traffic Impact Analysis would not be required. Community
Services Water will be provided to the project through the CFPUA. Sewer is proposed by individual septic tank. A preliminary soils report produced by Land Management Group for the petitioner
indicates soils in the area are provisionally suitable for septic tanks. The petitioner plans to work with Environmental Health to obtain a septic tank permit. Fire protection will be
served by New Hanover County, North District. Land Classification The subject properties are located in the north central portion of our jurisdiction in an area classified as
ve 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.
Z-923, 11/12 Page 3 Environmental Characteristics The subject properties are located within the Ness Creek watershed drainage area and classified as C:SW. The properties do not have
conservation, historic or archeological attributes. The properties do not lie within the 100 year flood zone. Onslow is the primary soil type. This type soil is marginal for septic tank
use. Plans & Policies Policy 4.3 of the 2006 CAMA Land Use Plan states the need to maximize effectiveness of commercial uses by assuring that land is available for such uses within close
proximity to the markets they serve and by ensuring that such commercial uses do not diminish the quality of life to nearby residential uses. Staff Position The conditional district
proposal from R-20 Residential to B-1 Neighborhood Business appears to be a logical extension with the existing B-1 District adjacent and south of the property. Presently, the petitioner
or his client has not revealed a specific use or uses. development encourage the placement and development
of commercial uses along major and minor arterials and within reasonably close proximity to commercial nodes or intersections. While it should be noted that encroachment into established
residential districts is discouraged, these properties have lost their residential appeal they once had due to the overall growth of the County that exploded beginning in the early nineties
-. Residential growth has created demand for commercial services. This proposal is estimated to have a minimal
impact on traffic. The proposed buffers and setbacks should mitigate negative impacts to adjacent residential properties to the north and east. Therefore, staff recommends approval of
the rezoning request with the following conditions: 1) Retail hours be limited between 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. to mitigate any adjoining residential property concerns, 2) Specifying a
specific use or uses for the property, 3) Include in the petition a small shoehorn shaped portion of AR Airport Residential zoning located in the northeastern corner at 4620 Castle Hayne
Road, 4) Placement of lighting be erected in a downward fashion to reduce light pollution, 5) The construction of a transit site (based on WAVE standards) with shelter fronting the property,
6) Approval of a septic tank permit and, 7) The mitigation of trees (pecan, dogwood, and oak) located on site.
CaseZ923,(11/12) RezoningtoConditionalZoningDistrictCZD(B1)fromR20Residential PetitionSummaryData ParcelLocation&Acreage:2616,2620&2624�
�CastleHayneRoad,2.12acres Owner/Petitioner:PeteAveryonbehalfofBladenboroProperties,LLC ExistingLandUse:MostlyVacant ZoningHistory:
Area10A(July1,1974) LandClassification:Transition WaterType:Public SewerType:Private RecreationArea:CapeFearOptimistPark(N.KerrAvenue)
Access&TrafficVolume: AverageDailyTrips(ADT)onN.KerrAvenue(BetweenCastleHayneRoad/NorthKerrAvenue)has increasedfrom7,436(2010)to8,864(2011
FireDistrict:NewHanoverCountyNorth Watershed&WaterQualityClassification:NessCreek(C:SW) AquiferRechargeArea:Secondary(blendofCastleHayne&Pee�
�DeeAquifers) Conservation/Historic/ArchaeologicalResources:None Soils:Onslow SepticSuitability:Marginal Schools:N/A
12 14 8 57 6 13 10 4 9 1 3 2 11 KERR AVE N CASTLE HAYNE RD LAUREL DR WIND SAIL DR HARRELLS LN HORNE PLACE DR PRIVATE FERN DR SHERIDAN DR LONG LEAF D R PRIVATE CASE MAP Z-923, 11/12 Notes:
Request to rezone approximately 2.12 acres of land and right-of-way from R-20 Residential to CZD(B-1) Conditional Zoning District Business. Location: 2616, 2620, & 2624 Castle Hayne
Road Applicant: Walter Pete Avery on behalf of Bladenboro Properties, LLC ±Z-923 0 200 400ft Label Property Owner Receiving Notification 1 DAVIS ISABEL JOSENHANS 2 DAVIS J S MRS HRS
3 HUGHES RONALD JOYCE S 4 HUGHES RONALD JOYCE S 5 HUGHES RONALD M 6 JOHNSON KEITH LANDON 7 LAURINBURG KFC TAKE HOME INC 8 MCDOWELL FRED AUSTIN SHELVIA S 9 RHAMES ISAAC SYLVIA J 10 SMITH
HUBERT L JR CYNTHIA W 11 SMITH HUBERT L JR CYNTHIA W 12 WILLIAMS JANET HERRING ETAL 13 WRIGHTSBORO PLAZA 14 WRIGHTSBORO PLAZA Z-923
R-20 AR B-2 SC B-1 R-15 SC O&I B-1 KERR AVE N CASTLE HAYNE RD LAUREL DR WIND SAIL DR HARRELLS LN HORN E PLACE DR PRIVATE FERN DR SHERIDAN DR LONG LEAF D R PRIVATE CASE MAP Z-923, 11/12
Notes: Request to rezone approximately 2.12 acres of land and right-of-way from R-20 Residential to CZD(B-1) Conditional Zoning District Business. Location: 2616, 2620, & 2624 Castle
Hayne Road Applicant: Walter Pete Avery on behalf of Bladenboro Properties, LLC ±Z-923 0 200 400ft Z-923
APPLICANT MATERIALS
Item 2: Text Amendment (A-405, 10/12) -Request by Staff to amend “Section 112-6” of the Zoning Ordinance to clarify the process for obtaining a formal extension of an approved planning
action. This item was continued from the Planning Board’s October 4, 2012 meeting.
A-405, 10/12 Page 1 A-405, 10/12 AMENDMENT TO THE NEW HANOVER COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE APPLICANT: STAFF Staff proposes to amend Section 112 (and subsequently Sections 53.6, 59.7, 59.10,
59.9 and 71), to add a section to clarify what occurs when a building permit has not been issued within 24 months for a previously approved zoning map change. Proposed changes are in
red and underlined. Section 112-6: Failure to Proceed in a Timely Manner If within 24 months from the date of approval of the petition for a special use permit, conditional use district,
conditional district, exceptional design zoning district, or riverfront mixed use district, a building permit has not been issued for the subject tract(s), the Planning and Inspections
Director shall consider a request for an extension if submitted in writing to the New Hanover County Planning and Inspections Department prior to the expiration. The Planning and Inspections
Director may grant a one (1) year extension so long as site conditions have not substantially changed since the original petition was approved. If site conditions have substantially
changed, the Board of County Commissioners will consider whether an extension shall be granted during a regularly scheduled public meeting. The total vesting period for extensions may
not exceed five (5) years.
A-405, 10/12 Page 2 Section 53.6 Exceptional Design Zoning District (EDZD) 53.6-12 Effect of Approval Any area designated as an EDZD shall thereafter be developed using only the exceptional
design standards and proposed conditions under which the EDZD is approved. Any reduction in the prerequisite standards after approval shall be considered a violation of the terms and
conditions of approval. In accordance with NCGS153A-344.1(c) and (d), approval of the master plan shall establish a vested right. After 24 months from the date of original approval,
if no construction activity has been permitted, the approval of the original concept plan and any approved final plan shall expire and new approvals based on standards existing for EDZD
districts at that time shall be required. Extensions of vested rights beyond the first 24 months may be approved in accordance with Section 112-6. by the TRC based on relevant circumstances,
including but not limited to the size and phasing of development, the level of investment, investment, the need for the development, economic cycles, and market conditions, but the total
vesting period may not exceed 5 years. Section 59.7 Conditional Use District 59.7-6: Enforcement (1) Failure to Proceed in a Timely Manner If within 24 months from the date of approval
of the Conditional Use District, no building permit has been issued for the subject tract, the Planning and Inspections Department may schedule a hearing for the Planning Board to consider
progress made. If it is determined that active efforts are not proceeding, the Planning Board may send forward a recommendation to the County Commissioners to simultaneously revoke the
Special Use Permit and rezone the Conditional Use District to its classification prior to approval. (10/7/91 and 12/3/07) If an extension is desired, a request must be submitted in writing
to the New Hanover County Planning and Inspections Department prior to the expiration. Extensions may be granted in accordance with section 112-6 of the Ordinance. Section 59.10 Conditional
District 59.10-6: Enforcement (1) Failure to Proceed in a Timely Manner If within 24 months from the date of approval of the Conditional district, no building permit has been issued
for the subject tract, the Planning Department may schedule a hearing for the Planning Board to consider progress made. If it is determined that active efforts are not proceeding, the
Planning Board may send forward a recommendation to the County Commissioners to simultaneously revoke the Conditional District and rezone the district to its classification prior to
approval. If an extension is desired, a request must be submitted in writing to the New Hanover County Planning and Inspections Department prior to the expiration. Extensions may be
granted in accordance with section 112-6 of the Ordinance.
A-405, 10/12 Page 3 Section 59.9 RFMU Riverfront Mixed Use District 59.9-6: Procedural requirements for the establishment of a RFMU district (4) Failure to Proceed in a Timely Manner
If within 24 months from the date of approval of the petition for a riverfront mixed use district, a building permit has not been issued for the subject tract(s), the Planning and
Inspections Director shall consider a request for an extension if submitted in writing to the New Hanover County Planning and Inspections Department prior to the expiration. The Planning
and Inspections Director may grant a one (1) year extension so long as site conditions have not substantially changed since the original petition was approved. If site conditions have
substantially changed, the Board of County Commissioners will consider whether an extension shall be granted during a regularly scheduled public meeting. The total vesting period for
extensions may not exceed five (5) years. Section 71: Special Use Permits Issued by the Board of County Commissioners (4) In granting the permit the Board of County Commissioners may
recommend and designate such conditions in addition and in connection therewith, as will in its opinion, assure that the use in its proposed location will be harmonious with the area
in which it is proposed to be located and with the spirit of this Ordinance. All such additional conditions shall be entered in the minutes of the meeting at which the permit is granted
and also on the certificate of the Special Use Permit or on the plans submitted therewith. All specific conditions shall run with the land and shall be binding on the original applicants
for the Special Use Permit, their heirs, successors and assigns. A Special Use Permit, issued by the Board of County Commissioners shall become null and void if construction or occupancy
of the proposed use as specified on the Special Use Permit is not commenced within twenty-four (24) months of the date of issuance. If an extension is desired, a request must be submitted
in writing to the New Hanover County Planning and Inspections Department prior to the expiration. Extensions may be granted in accordance with section 112-6 of the Ordinance. . Time
extensions for Special Use Permits may be granted by the Board of County Commissioners provided applications for extensions are submitted in writing to the New Hanover County Planning
and Inspections Department prior to expiration. Although the Board of County Commissioners may grant more than one extension of a permit, no single extension shall exceed a period of
six months. A Board of County Commissioners decision on a extension may be appealed in conformity with the requirements of Section 71-1(6) of this Ordinance. (5/2/83), (10/7/91)
Item 3: Text Amendment (A-408, 10/12) -Request by Staff to add “Section 53.1” to the Zoning Ordinance to create a by right R-7: Medium Density District. This item was continued from
the Planning Board’s October 4, 2012 meeting.
Page 1 AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPLICANT: STAFF This item came before the planning board at your March work session and was presented for further discussion at your September
work session. The proposal creates a new zoning district that would permit, by rezoning, medium density development in areas adjacent to similar district characteristics, densities,
and commercial nodes. This additional district would allow for a broader range and variety of options for those developments that cannot attain the EDZD or high density development requirements.
These recommendations are a product of staffs analysis coupled with input from developers in regards to a lack of variety of housing options. Medium density projects will be required
to go through the rezoning process, which requires at least two public hearings, as well as TRC review when subdivision takes place. Section 53.1: R-7 Medium Density Development Purpose:
The purpose of this section is to encourage medium density development in Urban and Transition areas where adequate services are available. The district will allow greater variety of
housing types provided that environmental impacts are minimized and adequate open space is provided. The intent of the medium density district is to: A. Provide for greater population
densities to facilitate high quality affordable housing, a greater range of lifestyles and income levels in close proximate to commercial and employment centers. B. Provide for the efficient
delivery of public services and accessibility to employment, transportation and shopping. C. Serve as a buffer and transition area between
more intensively developed areas and lower density residential areas 52.1-1: Conventional Residential Regulations Dimensional Requirements: (1) Minimum lot area: 7,000 square feet (2/16/87)
(2) Minimum lot width 50 feet (3) Minimum front yard 25 feet
Page 2 (4) Minimum side yard 8 feet (5) Minimum rear yard 20 feet (6) Maximum height 35 feet 53.1-2: Parking -Parking and loading shall be provided in accordance with the provisions
of Article VIII. 53.1-3: Signs -Signs shall be in accordance with Article IX. 53.1-4: Performance Residential -The maximum density of Performance Residential Development shall be 6 units
per net tract acre (with net tract area determined pursuant to Section 51.5-2 (11)). (1/4/82) 53.1-5: All Medium Density Developments shall comply with the following requirements: (1)
Roadway access R-7 zoning districts shall have direct access to at least one roadway classified as an arterial or collector on the most recent FHWA-approved functional classification
map for the Wilmington urban area. R-7 zoning districts may also be located on streets which are designed and built to County or NCDOT collector street standards, which are not identified
on the functional classification map. (2) Buffer Strip -Buffer strips shall be required in accordance with Section 67. (3) District Improvement Requirements -All medium density residential
developments shall provide improvements as specified in the following table. Improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the standards set by the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority,
County or appropriate local or State agency. CFPUA Water CFPUA Sewer Max. Imperv. Surface Ratio for Gross Site Area Sidewalks on all roads within district R-7 Yes Yes .50 Yes (4) Setbacks
and Uses (A) The required minimum setback for Medium Density development utilizing attached single family shall not be less than twentythirty-five feet from any existing detached residential
development (not including Mobile Home Parks, High Density, Planned Development
Page 3 or other R-7 development), the setback shall be calculated from the following formula: 1. Required setback = (Building Height) x (2.75) 2.1. Reductions in setbacks (i) The required
setbacks may be reduced as specified in Section 67. In no case, however, shall the minimum setback be less than 25 feet. 3.2. Uses in the yards (i) The part of the yard adjacent to the
residential uses shall be used only for buffer strips and as specified in Section 67. (B) In no case shall any part of a detached single-family dwelling unit be located closer than ten
(10) feet to any part of any other detached single-family dwelling, and in no case shall any part of a multiple dwelling unit be located closer than twenty (20) feet to any part of another
dwelling unit. (5) When a development proposal is submitted under this Section, it shall be reviewed in accordance with the same standards as established in the Subdivision Ordinance
even if the project does not involve the subdivision of land. (6) Maximum allowable height for structures shall be 35 feet. However, the maximum allowable height for piling supported
primary structures which are located in "Coastal High Hazard Areas, V-Zones" and/or Ocean Hazard Areas as defined by the Coastal Resources Commission shall be 44 feet.
Page 4 Permitted Uses PD R 20S R 20 R 15 R 10 R 7 B1 B2 I1 I2 O &I AR AI SC RA * RF MU Commercial Marina (2/14/84) P S S S S S S P P P S Electric /Gas & Sanitary Services P P P P P P
P P P P P P P P P Electric Substations P S S S S P P P P P S P P S Telephone & Telegraph Facilities P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Other Communication Facilities Including Towers S S
S S S S S S P P S S S S S (2/5/96) Cellular & PCS Antennas (See Section 69.17 (H)) P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Convenience Food Store (7/5/85) P S S S P P P P S S P S Camping, Travel
Trailer Parks (2/14/83) P S S S S S P S Golf Courses P P P P P P P P Indoor & Outdoor Recreation Establishments P S S S S S P P P P S S S P S (2/14/82, 8/16/04) Parks & Recreation Area
(4/2/07) P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Adult Day Care P S S S S S P S Children's Day Care (12/13/82) P S S S S S P P S S P S Community Center P S S S S S P S Hospitals P S S S S S P
S Nursing & Personal Care Facilities P S S S S S P S Residential Care (9/8/81) P P P P P S P P P Educational Services Colleges, Universities, Professional Schools & P S S S S S P S Technical
Institutions Elementary & Secondary Schools P P P P P S P P Libraries P P P P P S P P P P P P Museums (5/2/83) P P P P P Membership Organizations Churches P P P P P S P P P P P P P P
P Lodges, Fraternal & Social Organizations (5/2/83) P S S S S S P P P S S Other Accessory Buildings or Uses, clearly incidental to P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P the Permitted Use or
Building (see Section 62) Cemeteries S S S S S S S S Community Boating Facility (8/6/92) S S S S S S S S Private Residential Boating Facility (9/19/92) P P P P P P P P Duplexes P S P
S P Evangelistic and Religious Assemblies not P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P conducted at a Church (7/6/92) Government Offices & Buildings P S S S S S P P P P P P P P S High Density Development
(3/22/82) Permitted only P S S S S within Urban Transition Area (2/16/87, 10/11/95) Home Occupation P P P P P P P P
Page 5 Permitted Uses PD R 20S R 20 R 15 R 10 R 7 B1 B2 I1 I2 O &I AR AI SC RA * RF MU Other Mobile Home S P P P S S P S Mobile Home, Doublewide (6/7/82) P P P P P S S P P Mobile Home
Park (Density shall not exceed 2.5 P S S S S Units beyond Urban Transition area) (2/16/87, 10/11/95). Mobile Home Subdivision (6/1/92) S S S S S S Outdoor Bazaars excluding Yard Sales
(7/6/92) P P P P P P
P P P P P P P P P Residential Private Pier P P P P P P P Single Family Dwelling P P P P P P S S P P P P Single Family Dwelling-Attached (1/4/82) P P P P P S S P Special Fund Raising
for Non-Profit Organizations P P P P P P P P P P P P P P (7/6/92) Temporary Sign P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Recycling Facilities: (1/3/89) Small Collection P S S S S P P P P S P P
Item 4: Text Amendment (A-409, 11/12) -Request by Staff to amend “Section 23: Definitions” of the Zoning Ordinance to clarify the term Building and/or Structure.
A-409, 11/12 Page 1 A-409, 11/12 AMENDMENT TO THE NEW HANOVER COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE APPLICANT: STAFF Staff proposes to amend Section 23: Definitions to provide clarity to the term
Structure and/or Building. Proposed changes are in red. Section 23: Definitions Structure and/or Building: Anything constructed or erected within a fixed location on the ground, or attached
to something having a fixed location on the ground. Among other things, structures include building, mobile homes, walls, fences, and poster panels. The terms building and/or structure
shall be construed to include porches, decks, carports, garages, sheds, roof extensions, overhangs extending more than 2�
� structure and/or building.
Item 5: Text Amendment (A-411, 11/12) -Request by Staff to amend “Section 69.11: Building Setbacks” of the Zoning Ordinance to clarify when roof overhangs are used as the reference point
to measure building setbacks.
A-411, 11/12 Page 1 A-411, 11/12 AMENDMENT TO THE NEW HANOVER COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE APPLICANT: STAFF Staff proposes to amend Section 69.11: Setback Table, to clarify when roof overhangs
are not calculated for purposes of setbacks. Proposed changes are in red. Section 69.11: Setbacks For the purposes of this Ordinance, setbacks shall not be required for nonresidential
structures located within Commercial, Office and Institutional and Industrial Districts that abut nonresidential uses in Commercial, Office and Institutional and Industrial Districts.
Setbacks shall be measured from the structure. If a roof overhang extends more than two (2) feet from the structure, the setback shall be measured from the drip line of the roof. Setbacks
within commercial, office and institutional and industrial districts abutting residential districts shall be calculated The required minimum setbacks for structures located within Commercial,
Office and Institutional and Industrial Districts abutting residential uses and/or platted lots on residentially zoned property shall be calculated from Table 69.11 utilizing the following
formulas. Where the adjacent residential district is occupied by non-residential uses, the minimum setback shall be twenty (20) feet. (5/4/98) (1) Side yard Required setback (2) (Building
Height) x (Factor from Column B, Table 69.11) (3) Rear yard Required setback (4) (Building Height) x (Factor from Column D, Table 69.11) (5) Reductions in setbacks (6) The required setbacks
may be reduced as specified in Section 67. In no case, however, shall any side or rear yard setback be less than specified in Table 69.11 (3/9/88) DISTRICT SIDE YARD SETBACK FACTOR MINIMUM
SIDE YARD SETBACK, IN ALL CASES REAR YARD SETBACK FACTOR MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACK, IN ALL CASES B-1 2.75 3.73 B-2 2.75 3.73 O&I 2.75 3.73 I-1
3.08 4.33 I-2 3.49 5.14 A-I 3.08 4.33
Technical Review Committee Report – October (No meetings were held in October).