Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-04-27 Special Meeting NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 33 SPECIAL MEETING, APRIL 27, 2017 PAGE 754 ASSEMBLY The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met for a Joint Special Meeting with the New Hanover County Planning Board on Thursday, April 27, 2017, at 2:31 p.m. in the Harrell Conference Room at the New Hanover County Government Center, 230 Government Center Drive, Wilmington, North Carolina. Members present: Chairman Woody White; Vice-Chairman Skip Watkins; Commissioner Jonathan Barfield, Jr.; Commissioner Patricia Kusek; and Commissioner Rob Zapple. Staff present: County Manager Chris Coudriet; County Attorney Wanda M. Copley; and Clerk to the Board Kymberleigh G. Crowell. Planning Board members present: Chairman Donna Girardot; Board Members Paul D. Boney; Thomas “Jordy” Rawl; and Edward T. (Ted) Shipley, III. Board members Ernest W. Olds; H. Allen Pope; and David F. Weaver were absent. Planning staff present: Planning and Land Use Director Chris O’Keefe and Planning Manager Ken Vafier. Others present: LSL Planning representatives Paul LeBlanc; Elizabeth Garvin; and Thomas and Hutton representative Kevin Smith. Chairman White and Chairman Girardot called their respective Boards to order for the Joint Special Meeting reporting that the purpose of the meeting is to discuss the Unified Development Ordinance Audit and Blueprint Report. Planning and Land Use Director Chris O’Keefe thanked the County Commissioners and Planning Board members for attending the meeting. The County has been working with a zoning ordinance that was first adopted in 1969. This presentation of the Unified Development Ordinance Audit and Blueprint Report is the start of a process that everyone recognizes as necessary to correct the current ordinance. He then introduced Paul LeBlanc and Elizabeth Garvin with LSL Planning and Kevin Smith with Thomas and Hutton as the main consultants of the development team that staff has been working with on this project and asked that they begin the presentation. Mr. LeBlanc explained that this project is not just an update or a redo of the zoning regulations. The project will take all of the land development regulations for the County (zoning, subdivision, stormwater, soil erosion, etc.) and consolidate them into a single ordinance. This will allow the decision makers as well as the applicants to have a more consistent, uniform, and easy to use document than what currently exists. Presentation of New Hanover County Unified Development Ordinance Audit and Blueprint Report Mr. LeBlanc, Ms. Garvin, and Mr. Smith presented an overview of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Audit and Blueprint Report:  UDO Audit and Blueprint Report Overview:  Analyze current regulations  Identify changes necessary to update regulations and implement County plans  Annotated outline of proposed revisions  PlanNHC Overview:  PlanNHC Goals:  Promote:  Environmentally responsible growth; fiscally responsible growth; place-based economic development in the region that is tied to natural resources  Increase:  Recycling and reduction of solid waste; public safety by reducing crime through the built environment; physical activity and promote healthy, active lifestyles; and access to affordable and convenient healthy foods  Conserve open space for long term agricultural and rural uses  Conserve environmentally critical areas  Integrate multi-modal transportation into mixed land uses that encourage safe, walkable communities  Actively promote high quality educational and diverse cultural opportunities for residents and visitors  Preserve and protect water quality and supply  Ensure New Hanover County remains in attainment for air quality, in support of clean air and improved public health outcomes to support continued growth  Provide for a range of housing types, opportunities and choices  Revitalize commercial corridors and blighted areas through infill and redevelopment  Link major natural habitats  Conserve and enhance unique sense of place to attract individuals, companies, and organizations  Use public infrastructure improvements to leverage private investments  Support business success  Support health promotion and disease prevention while minimizing debilitating effects of mental and physical disabilities NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 33 SPECIAL MEETING, APRIL 27, 2017 PAGE 755  Support workforce development and economic prosperity for all  Plans and Policies Link:  Link Regulatory Process to existing New Hanover County Plans and Policies:  Wilmington-New Hanover County Comprehensive Greenways Master Plan: Establish vision and strategy for creating a regional network of active transportation corridors throughout City of Wilmington, New Hanover County, and the local beach communities.  Pathways to Prosperity – The Garner Study: Road map for New Hanover County to see realistic economic vision to strengthen area’s business climate, increase economic competitiveness, strengthen existing industries, and identify emerging industries to increase private investment, job creation and retention.  Cape Fear Transportation Plan 2040: Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) to guide regional transportation priorities and actions. Evaluates projects and strategies to promote mobility and access for people and goods within the plan boundaries.  Parks and Gardens Master Plan: Recently updated plan to address parks and recreation facilities future growth and provision of services.  Hazard Mitigation Plan: Guide to hazard mitigation activities. Protect life and property from future damages and economic losses that result from natural hazards.  Small Area Plans: Identify near-term strategies to address safety, mobility, and access.  Zoning Code Audit:  Key Issues:  Code is not well-linked to County plans and policies and may inadvertently prohibit good development  Code can be very challenging to navigate for regular citizens  Many specific standards are nested deeply within zone district regulations  Code includes subjective standards and ambiguous submission requirements  Negotiated review and approval process hinders predictable outcomes  Resolutions:  Update:  Definitions to remove regulations; non-conforming lot and use regulations (expansion, discontinuation, etc.); Table of Permitted Uses; landscaping standards to modernize tree standards, buffering, fencing and screening, as well as applicability; parking lot landscaping; accessory/building use standards; utilities and wireless communication facilities use standards; special use standards as well as provisions and review procedures; off-street parking and loading requirements; design standards for signage (permanent and temporary); procedures for building and zoning permit review; vesting rights and development agreements; procedures for ordinance and text amendments; and appeal procedures.  Clarify:  Development plan process and submittal requirements; street yard landscaping and foundation plantings; temporary use standards; zoning administrator, board of adjustments, courts, and county commissioners’ duties regarding zoning appeals; and legal provisions includes enforcement of ordinance/regulations.  Update and add to existing permitted use standards  Eliminate conditional use districts  Address performance residential standards  Update and create appropriate dimensional requirements (e.g. lot size, setbacks, height, FAR, etc.)  Update and clarify district regulations  Re-examine overlay districts functionality, uses, and standards  Address waste facilities and demolition landscape landfills use standards  Create/update design standards for architecture and lighting  Amend application submittal procedures  Subdivision Ordinance Audit:  Update:  Definitions; Preliminary Plan procedures; Final Plat procedures; and provisions for sidewalks, trails, and bikeways.  Address:  Landscape preservation and provisions for open area/open space, parks and recreation; and blocks and alleys and conditions when they are warranted.  Combine:  Into single UDO article; and enforcement of ordinance into UDO, include with zoning.  Create update administrative procedures/consolidate sections  Clarify Sketch Plan process  Create flexible general provisions  Identify/clarify easement requirements  Analyze and update lot standards  Reference Master Street Plan  Implement traffic calming  Correlate street tree requirement with zoning landscaping requirements  Stormwater and Erosion Audit:  Stormwater: NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 33 SPECIAL MEETING, APRIL 27, 2017 PAGE 756  Reformat section and consider how it relates to other sections of code  Update:  Definitions; purpose of regulations and County’s role; and regulations for new development and redevelopment.  Erosion:  Review for conformance with State of North Carolina requirements  Major Themes:  Focus on creating appropriate place types across the County:  Reinforce a sense of place in the county and help focus on multimodal development and walkability  Overhaul mixed-use zoning  Switch from emphasis on use to emphasis on structure  Address design transitions between place types through development standards  Create a Unified Development Ordinance and improve the document formatting, graphics, and illustrations:  Group like-with-like for uses, development standards, dimensions  Use matrices and tables to make information easier to find  Balance cross-referencing and useful redundancy  Move some administrative material to administrative manual  Modernize the current zone district line-up and use allocations: District % Acres District % Acres Airport Industrial (AI) 2.50 Planned Development (PD) 2.00 Airport Residential (AR) 1.18 Residential (R-7) 0.0 Business (B-1) .36 Residential (R-10) 3.69 Highway Business (B-2) 1.89 Residential (R-15) 37.43 Conditional Zoning District (CZD) .01 Residential (R-20) 13.75 Exceptional Design Zoning Dist. (EDZD) .01 Residential (R-20S) 4.45 Light Industry (I-1) 1.27 Residential Agriculture (RA) 8.52 Heavy Industry (I-2) 22.49 Riverfront Mixed Use (RFMU) .03 Office and Institutional (O&I) .41 Shopping Center (SC) .01  Review all current districts for County plan implementation, ease of use, long-term applicability; establish new line-up  Establish County-appropriate approach for regulating structures  Collect uses, analyze, and update:  Allocation across districts  Level of review and discretionary approval  Use-specific regulations/NC law  Special, temporary, and accessory uses  Coordinate as possible with the City of Wilmington  Create a standards-based regulatory process:  Include regulations that balance predictability and flexibility  Articulate clear review and approval criteria  Avoid “customized” code amendments for individual projects:  Unintended consequences  Clarity/confusion  Consistent treatment of all code users  Raise the bar for basic site design:  Establish or update requirements for:  Landscaping, buffering, and screening  Parking  Site layout  Natural resources and environmentally sensitive areas  Stormwater  Mobility/connectivity  Incorporate basic illustrations and graphics  Clarify subdivision standards and infrastructure criteria:  Update the subdivision approval process  Incorporate all applicable design standards  Fill-in gaps for any missing standards, update any outdated standards  Coordinate with City of Wilmington’s processes and standards (as possible):  Transitional zone districts at interface  Matching/compatible:  Development standards  Use standards  Regulatory terminology  Some similar review criteria NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 33 SPECIAL MEETING, APRIL 27, 2017 PAGE 757  Keys to a Successful UDO:  Predictability; flexibility; community expectations; consistent and fair treatment; decision standards and criteria; clear, concise language; and timely decisions.  Proposed Organization:  Consolidation of content; simplification of style; and consistent organization.  General Provisions:  Section 14 Relationship to County Plans:  Include provisions connecting the land use regulations to the goals and policies of relevant County and regional planning documents.  Section 16 Relationship to Other Regulations:  State that land development regulations are intended to compliment other regulations (including state and federal law); more restrictive shall apply.  Section 18 Transitional Regulations:  Establish the method to resolve the status of properties with pending applications, recent approvals, and properties with outstanding violations at the time the UDO is adopted; also, note that violations prior to UDO adoption will remain violations.  Zone Districts Proposed Revisions:  Revise Zone District Line-Up:  Identify districts and standards necessary to encourage preferred growth patterns.  Purpose Statements:  Include in each zone district to provide policy instructions about the use and interpretation of each zone district.  Purpose statements provide a window for incorporating planning policy and description and provide guidance to staff and the code user to reasonably predict interpretation.  Section 22 Dimensions:  Consolidate dimensional standards (height, setback, etc.) for the various zone districts and supplemental regulations in one or more tables that are more compact and user-friendly.  Use and Structure Proposed Revisions:  Section 30 Permitted Use Table:  Include an updated use table, organized from broad categories to narrow uses, to make information easy to find  Use organization includes:  Overall categories of use  General use types  Specific use types (singled out for additional regulation)  Section 31 Structures:  Identify and define types of structures permitted in districts to influence long-term placemaking, such as areas where the County wants to encourage compact, walkable, mixed-use development  Section 33 Special Uses:  Analyze and comment on SUP process; incorporate into UDO  Section 35 Temporary Use Standards:  Update to collect all current temporary use regulations – such as temporary farmer’s market – and add a more robust list of temporary uses  Comply with Reed v. Town of Gilbert  Development Standards Proposed Revisions:  Section 42 Connectivity and Mobility:  Address connectivity and access management between lots and streets, streets and streets, and overall neighborhood development  Section 44 Landscaping, Screening, and Buffering:  Update and expand options in all three categories to address the different types of landscaping, screening, and buffering required by different development types  Section 45 Building and Streetscapes:  Include standards addressing building and site design related to form, massing, and site placement – not architectural design  Section 48 Signs:  Update as necessary to conform to the requirements of Reed v. Town of Gilbert  Design and Improvement Proposed Revisions:  Section 53 Stormwater:  Clarify, modernize, and build requirements to ensure regulations are capable of addressing continued growth and future weather and storm events in the region  Section 58 Construction and Acceptance of Improvements  Section 59 Improvement Guarantees:  Ensure current subdivision design and improvement standards are applicable and up-to-date for both sections  Clarify the “paperwork” aspects of the subdivision process to ensure applicants and County staff are clear about requirements in both sections  Procedures Proposed Revisions:  Section 61 Common Procedures: NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 33 SPECIAL MEETING, APRIL 27, 2017 PAGE 758  Build on the information provided in Article 9 to create complete and consistent descriptions of the many processes applicable across multiple application types:  E.g., pre-application meetings, submittal requirements, fees, staff review, public notices, lapsing and extension of approvals, appeals, etc.  Section 62 Specific Procedures:  Provide a detailed list of steps required for each type of application or permit request along with a process flow chart to help applicants understand process and decisions:  E.g., rezoning, amendments, planned development, subdivision applications, special use permits, floodplain development application, sign permit, tree removal permit, and others.  Recommending and Decision-making Bodies:  Consolidate and clarify roles of the review and decision-making bodies in review and approval procedures; establish clear lines of authority  Violations and Enforcement:  Combine enforcement and penalty provisions from both zoning and subdivision ordinances and update as necessary  Measurements and Definitions:  Clear definitions of important words, phrases, and uses for easier interpretation and administration of regulations  Appendices:  Include information that is not necessary in the main body of the document  Next Steps:  Start drafting updated zone districts, use standards, and definitions  Coordinating meeting with City of Wilmington  County/public review draft of zone districts, use standards, and definitions General Discussion Discussion was held about when the public will able to provide input during this process. Ms. Garvin stated that she is aware of how the collaboration process worked with PlanNHC. For this type document, experience has proven that it is challenging to conceptualize zoning but much easier to respond to a draft. When the full draft is released first, there is usually more detailed responses received and in depth discussions held with the public. Efforts are also made to remind people that the drafted language is based on recommendations that have been made rather than decisions. The draft will be created in related parts with drafting meetings held approximately every three months over a period of nine to twelve months and eventually put into one draft document. Once the group feels the draft is heading in the right direction the public will be invited to provide input. It will be posted on the County’s website in advance of public input sessions. People will be able to send in suggestions/comments in writing if they are unable to attend the sessions and the development team and/or staff can contact people to discuss their suggestions. Regarding how the document will be presented to the Planning Board for approval consideration, Ms. Garvin explained she prefers that the draft go to the Planning Board as a whole for consideration because all the sections work as a whole. The goal of the development team is to have a document that in the end is the County’s document. There will be internal timelines and discussions held about the sections where there are disagreements in an effort to find consensus and a good approach for the County to use. The timeline to work through the full working draft is anticipated to be three to six months. A brief discussion was held about the County and the Wilmington Metropolitan Organization currently seeking input on road connections and the information being included in the UDO. Planning and Land Use Director O’Keefe explained that a meeting was held earlier in the week about the transportation network plan for the northeastern part of the County. The transportation network plan will be completed in about three months and anything that comes out of that can be recommended for the UDO. He noted that the network plan looks at land and how the layout should be while an ordinance is an ordinance. Ms. Garvin stated that the draft will continually have items worked in that are regulatory until the very end and when it is adopted. Regarding stakeholder involvement and the process to be involved, Ms. Garvin stated that there is room for everyone who wants to be involved in the process. Planning Manager Ken Vafier explained that the development team and staff are perceiving a stakeholder simply as someone who wants to have input in the process. There’s no minimum qualifications to be called a stakeholder; there’s no requirement; and no training needed. If someone is interested in being involved, reviews the document and provides input, the person is considered a stakeholder with their input being reviewed and considered. Everyone will have the opportunity to be involved in the public workshops during the drafting phase. There will be a need to reach out to targeted stakeholder groups, such as the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority (CFPUA) when the utilities section is being drafted to get specific input. All input is valuable. Staff has been working closely with various groups on their involvement and encouraging everyone to subscribe to the sunshine list. The list will be used to send out updates and input session notifications during the process. Planning and Land Use Director Chris O’Keefe reported that prior to drafting the blueprint, there was a meeting with specific stakeholders, such as the CFPUA, because they are daily users of the ordinance. Regarding Section F: Create a Standards-Based Regulatory Process, Ms. Garvin explained that standards- based decision making will feel like a big change to the County but it is a fairly common zoning practice. It will allow the County to reach the goal of being able to assign items for what the development should be. Some of this information has been articulated through PlanNHC and some is through good basic design. A standard-based process will allow property owners and developers to understand what layout and submission information will be required of their NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 33 SPECIAL MEETING, APRIL 27, 2017 PAGE 759 development. The County has articulated through PlanNHC some of the baselines to be used and that is what belongs in the code. With no baselines to work from, everyone is negotiating each proposed project. Planning and Land Use Director O’Keefe then announced that the information presented during this meeting will be presented at a 6:00 p.m. public session in the Andre’ Mallette Training Center. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further discussion, Chairman White and Chairman Girardot thanked the staff and consultants for the presentation and adjourned at 3:47 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kymberleigh G. Crowell Clerk to the Board Please note that the above minutes are not a verbatim record of the Special Meeting of the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners.