2017-02 February 2 2017 PBM
Page 1 of 35
Minutes of the
New Hanover County Planning Board
February 2, 2017
The New Hanover County Planning Board met Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. in the
Assembly Room of the New Hanover County Historic Courthouse, Wilmington, NC to hold a
public meeting.
Planning Board Present: Staff Present:
Donna Girardot, Chairman Chris O’Keefe, Planning & Land Use Director
Ernest Olds, Vice Chairman Ken Vafier, Planning Manager
Paul Boney Ben Andrea, Current Planning & Zoning Supervisor
Allen Pope Brad Schuler, Current Planner
Jordy Rawl Sharon Huffman, Deputy County Attorney
Edward “Ted” Shipley, III
David Weaver
Chairman Donna Girardot opened the meeting and welcomed the audience to the public hearing.
Chris O’Keefe led the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance.
Chairman Donna Girardot reviewed the procedures for the meeting.
Chairman Girardot volunteered to represent the Planning Board at the March 6, 2017 County
Commissioners meeting instead of Mr. Rawl. Mr. Rawl agreed to serve as the Planning Board
representative on the next date assigned to Chairman Girardot.
Approval of Minutes for January 2017
Ernest Olds made a motion to approve the January 5, 2017 Planning Board meeting minutes. David
Weaver seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted 7-0 to approve the January 5, 2017
Planning Board meeting minutes.
Item 1: Presentation – Wilmington Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Staff
will present the Cape Fear Transportation 2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan.
Suraiya Motsinger, Senior Transportation Planner with the Wilmington Urban Area Metropolitan
Planning Organization, provided a presentation of the Cape Fear Transportation 2040 plan.
MPO History and Responsibilities
Metropolitan Planning Organizations were created in 1962 when Congress enacted Federal
law to require transportation planning for urbanized areas. The Federal Highway Act was
amended in the 1970s.
Page 2 of 35
Board members of the Wilmington Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization include
elected officials from Wilmington, Wrightsville Beach, Carolina Beach, Kure Beach, Leland,
Navassa, Belville, New Hanover County, Brunswick County, Pender County, Cape Fear Public
Transportation Authority, and an appointed NC Department of Transportation representative.
All transportation decisions go through this board.
A metropolitan transportation plan is required to be developed every five years and must have
a minimum of a twenty-year range. The plan guides how investments in all transportation
modes are made in our region and includes roads, bicycle lanes, sidewalks, ferries, rail,
aviation, and every mode that requires federal transportation investment. Infrastructure affects
quality of life, the environment, and the way people engage in their environment. Most
important, this plan has a fiscal constraint requirement that every project in the plan must have
an identified anticipated funding source. We can only insert projects in this plan that can be
paid for through those anticipated funds.
In our region, six modes of transportation are analyzed including aviation, bicycle and
pedestrian, ferry, freight/rail, mass transportation, and roadways, as well as transportation
demand management and transportation systems management solutions, which encourage
efficiency.
In order to meet the fiscal constraint requirement when developing the project list, we develop
our needs list and inventory what the needs are over the twenty-year time period. Then, based
on the anticipated funding coming to the region, the projects are ranked to determine which
projects can be funded in the plan. Alternative funding mechanisms are also considered and
projects can be identified in the list if alternative funding can be identified.
Cape Fear Transportation 2040 – Project List and Funding Proposal
Aviation Projects - Terminal Improvements, Runway Expansions, and Safety
Improvements
Bike/Pedestrian Projects – Bicycle Lanes and Sidewalks, Multi-Use Paths, and
Crosswalks
Ferry Projects – Additional Vessel, and Additional Mooring Facilities
Freight/Rail Projects – Roadway, Railway, and Rail Crossing
Mass Transit Projects – Amenities (Shelters), Access (Crosswalks), Express Service,
Additional Service, and Park & Rides
Roadway Projects – Congestion/Access Management, Economic Management, and
Safety
Alternative Funding Mechanisms (Potential Local Initiatives) include:
Local Option Sales Tax
Page 3 of 35
Transportation Improvement Bonds
Municipal License Tax
Vehicle Registration Fees
Vehicle Rental Tax
Statewide Auto Parts Tax
Project Specific Mechanisms include:
Tolling
The Planning Board’s role in the plan is to consider it when going through your development
review process, provide feedback to the Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Organization on what
they can do better, and to participate in and encourage all New Hanover County residents to
participate in the development of our next Cape Fear Transportation 2045 Plan.
Item 2: Zoning Ordinance Amendment Request (A-425, 9/16) – Request by Planning Staff
to amend Zoning Ordinance Article II, Article V, Article VII, and Article XI regarding
Special Use Permit Requirements and the Table of Permitted Uses.
Chairman Girardot commented in regard to this issue and the process the board has employed over
the last six months she would like to add some perspective to the SUP discussion. Although many
of us are focused on intense manufacturing SUPs, there have been approximately 633 special use
permits applied for in New Hanover County since 1969 when the County’s first zoning ordinance
was adopted. Those special use permits range from cell towers to convenience stores to in-home
day cares, mobile homes, and churches. She noted there is another SUP rezoning request for a
church-owned retirement home/assisted care facility on tonight’s agenda. Out of 633 SUP requests
only 14 fell into the category of industry or manufacturing, and since 2011, in the last six years,
there have been just two intensive manufacturing SUPs. Therefore, we must be careful to not
frighten off or discourage the future Corning or GE or unfairly impact the 633 in order to more
highly regulate the 14. She explained that when the board began this process, which has been an
issue of discussion and debate for the last three years, the Planning Board was tasked by the County
Commissioners to provide processes and procedures that are fair and predictable and a timely
review of applications while continuing to protect the environment and our quality of life in New
Hanover County. The Planning Board also tried to keep in mind comments like those expressed in
a Star-News editorial on Sunday when they said, “The Wilmington area has an increasingly diverse
economy. Landing more well-paying manufacturing businesses is vital to keeping that mix.” The
board knew it was vital to seek public and professional input. That is why as we did with the
comprehensive plan process last year, the board asked practitioners, folks that actually work on
the ground level day-to-day with these issues, the Wilmington Chamber of Commerce, the North
Carolina Coastal Federation, to join us in these discussions and deliberations.
Chairman Girardot stated she had heard it said during the six-month period that there wasn’t an
opportunity for people to express their opinions and she would like to address that issue. She
explained that the Planning Board had held five public work sessions and a public hearing to
discuss this topic since August 2016. Each of those public work sessions was publicly noticed to
local media and individuals requesting notification and promoted on the County’s website. At two
Page 4 of 35
of those five sessions, a public comment period was offered so the Planning Board could receive
public comment. Staff reviewed the text amendment in detail and there was a lengthy public
hearing. In addition to posting the schedule for that meeting and this meeting on the Planning and
Land Use website and sending email to nearly 1,000 individuals who signed up for public notices,
the County has purchased advertisements in the Legal Notice section of the Star News to publicize
the meetings.
Chairman Girardot stated the Planning Board has heard from people asking them to adopt the
Model SUP and the 2014 SUP. The Model SUP was drafted by the Coastal Federation and the
2014 SUP tends to be viewed as pro-business; however, the Planning Board at their first meeting
in August 2016 decided to use as their working draft the version proposed by the County’s
consultants, LSL Planning, and reviewed it with suggested additions and changes by the county
staff. She explained the board worked from and consulted the other two documents during their
deliberations and she believed all parties understood the final product would be a compromise.
She felt confident the draft before the board was a good document. She commented that she
doubted each person or organization got everything they wanted and perhaps it could be better. As
the County test drives it during the next year, they are prepared to make changes and improve on
it as circumstances warrant. She said everyone needed to remember that the draft being considered
this evening is a temporary amendment which will once again be under review with all of the
county’s ordinances as they work their way through the upcoming unified development ordinance
(UDO) process.
Chairman Girardot stated in closing she would like to thank her fellow Planning Board members
for the time and talent they dedicated to the process and she would also like to thank the staff for
guiding their work and offering recommendations and suggestions throughout the last six months.
She also thanked the Chamber of Commerce, the Coastal Federation, and BASE for the time and
staff resources they contributed and their willingness to participate in a debate and compromise
process. Chairman Girardot said first of all she would like to thank the many citizens who attended
the work sessions, communicated with them by way of email and phone, and came out and spoke
at the public hearings. She noted it is important that we encourage businesses to relocate, expand,
and start up in New Hanover County when we expand our tax base. As former UNCW Chancellor
DePaolo would say, this region has the best educated waiters. We have a responsibility to provide
our children with other choices without having to leave New Hanover County to pursue their
dreams. Chairman Girardot stated we need to ensure New Hanover County can compete locally
and on the world stage by providing an atmosphere for business that is transparent, timely, and not
unnecessarily burdensome, while at the same time, we must protect our quality of life and that is
what this ordinance attempts to do. She thanked everyone and stated she looked forward to hearing
the public comments and input.
Planning & Land Use Director Chris O’Keefe provided the staff presentation.
Mr. O’Keefe reviewed the proposed changes to the special use permit process.
At the direction of the Board of County Commissioners, staff was asked to amend the language in
the ordinance to add clarity and predictability to the process. Staff was also directed to contract
the services of LSL Planning consulting firm, the same firm working on the County’s Unified
Development Ordinance, to review the draft amendment to the Special Use Permit requirements
Page 5 of 35
and Table of Permitted Uses and to provide recommendations for improvement to the text and to
reformat the Table of Permitted Uses using the North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes. The draft amendment and the LSL report was presented to the Planning Board at
a public work session on August 30th. Four additional public work sessions were held at which
comments from the public were considered. There was also a planning board meeting in September
where extensive public comments were received. At the final work session, with the consensus of
the board, the Chair directed staff to circulate the consensus draft for final comments. The draft,
incorporating final comments (highlighted in yellow in the presentation), is included in the
planning board agenda package.
The results of this effort included a complete reorganization of the Special Use Permit section of
the zoning ordinance so that the language flows in a logical sequence and contains all the required
information in one place. The draft incorporates the NAICS codes into the Table of Permitted Uses
and the draft includes a stronger review process for the most intensive manufacturing industries.
Mr. O’Keefe provided more details about the significant changes between the existing special use
permit process and the draft ordinance proposed as part of the agenda package.
In Article II, the definitions for “limited manufacturing” and “general manufacturing” are
removed. In these definitions, the uses from the Table of Permitted Uses are described in
paragraphs in the definition section. These definitions require staff, citizens, or prospective
business owners to interpret a definition to determine what category their business is in. With the
NAICS codes, each manufacturing use is listed individually so these definitions will no longer be
necessary.
There is a new definition added to the text for “intensive manufacturing”. The proposed language
includes stronger requirements for intensive manufacturing uses to get a special use permit. It is
necessary to have a definition for intensive manufacturing in order to clearly identify which uses
are subject to the new requirements. The new definition directs readers to the Table of Permitted
Uses where the uses are listed together under the intensive manufacturing heading.
During the work sessions, there was a great deal of discussion about the review of external effects.
In Article V, this language has been removed from the I-2 Heavy Industry zoning district
description. Much of the information requested in the section has been included in Section 70-2,
which describes the application requirements. As part of the application requirements, a written
description of the proposal depicting the nature and scope of the proposal is required for all special
use permits, plus Intensive Manufacturing proposals will be required to disclose all federal, state
and local permits that will be required in order to operate.
The bulk of the text amendment refers to Section 70, which combines all the information pertaining
to the process for obtaining a special use permit into one section, which is organized in a logical
order following the progression through the application and permit process. This reorganization
helps clarify the process for applicants, citizens, and staff. The application process is described in
Section 70-2. Note that the deadline for receiving an application remains at twenty business days
prior to the Planning Board meeting for most special use permits, but for Intensive Manufacturing
industries, the application deadline is increased to 35 business days prior to the Planning Board
Page 6 of 35
meeting to allow for more time for the public and staff to review more complex intensive
manufacturing projects.
Section 70-2(1) provides a timeline for when items must be submitted in order to be included in
the Planning Board meeting agenda package. Items must be submitted no later than ten business
days prior to the Planning Board meeting date. This section also explains that all information can
be presented at the public hearings.
Section 70-2(2) includes the application requirements necessary for an application to be deemed
complete. The entire list is included in the draft text amendment and will be included in a checklist
on the special use permit application. Items have been added as part of the text amendment process,
meaning there is a complete list of other items. Item D contains a list of all site plan requirements.
In Item D, under #8, the draft language requires site plans to show the approximate locations of
wetlands under jurisdiction of the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality. (Items
were added as a result of comments received from the last Planning Board work session). Item E
changes the word “narrative” to “written description.” Additionally, the language highlighted in
BLUE has been brought forward today and is supported by the N.C. Coastal Federati on and the
Wilmington-New Hanover County business community. This language requires applicants to
describe how their proposal satisfies the four required findings of fact that are necessary for
granting a special use permit. Item F indicates that it is at the discretion of the petitioner to provide
supplemental information, plans, and/or documents that the petitioner intends to use to
demonstrate at the public hearing that the required conclusions are met. Item I specifies a report
on the required community information meeting must be included in the application for all
intensive manufacturing uses. Item J requires special use permit applications for intensive
manufacturing to identify all federal, state, or local permits necessary for operation of the proposed
use.
Section 70-2(3) specifies that application requirements may be waived if it is determined that the
required information is not applicable to the subject request.
Section 70-3 describes how an application is reviewed and offers an optional pre-application
conference for the purpose of helping applicants navigate through the process. Section 70-3
discusses how an application is determined complete or incomplete. Staff receives an application
and is allowed up to five days to notify an applicant about whether the application is complete or
incomplete. All applications that are complete will be placed on the agenda for the next scheduled
Planning Board meeting, satisfying the application requirements. The Section also describes staff
responsibility for posting complete applications on the County’s website within 10 days of the
application deadline. This is so that interested parties can read about the proposal to determine if
they want to provide evidence regarding a project. If the petitioner submits additional information
after the application deadline, staff will also post that information on the website so it is available
for the public to review.
The next two sections, 70-4 and 70-5, describe how the public hearings are held and notification
requirements. The sections emphasize the quasi-judicial nature of special use permit hearings and
the reliance on competent, substantial, and material evidence is the basis for determining if the
findings of fact are indeed met. The section also describes the Planning Board’s and County
Page 7 of 35
Commissioners’ ability to accommodate the presentation of additional information or evidence
that is necessary.
Section 70-6 discusses the review and decision making processes of both the Planning Board and
the Board of County Commissioners. These sections explain that the burden of proof is on the
applicant to present evidence to support positive findings about each required element. If that
burden is met, the Board must grant the special use permit. The section also explains that the board
may add conditions which, if implemented, will lead to an application satisfying the required
findings of fact.
Section 70-7 presents the four required findings that must be met to merit the issuance of the
special use permit. This section explains that the board shall approve the application for the special
use permit if it reaches all of the four findings. These findings are the same findings that are in the
current ordinance.
Finally, Section 71 reorganizes information about extending the validity of a special use permit
and making changes to approved special use permits. The section also discusses resubmittals of
denied applications. All of this information will be in the same section of the ordinance whereas it
is now scattered throughout the special use permit section of the existing ordinance.
Next, Mr. O’Keefe presented the proposed amendment to the Table of Permitted Uses. He
explained that amending the Table of Permitted Uses to utilize North American Industry
Classification System or NAICS codes was part of the Board of Commissioners request to provide
clarity and predictability in the special use permit process.
The existing Table of Permitted Uses classifies uses and staff and applicants must refer to the
definition section to determine which manufacturing category their application falls under, then
the category is classified. Zoning districts are listed at the top of the table. Inside the table, P stands
for permitted use, S requires a special use permit, and if there is nothing in the table, the use is not
allowed in the zoning district. For intensive manufacturing, all uses require a special use permit in
the I-2 District and they are not permitted in any other districts.
The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) is used by business and government
to classify business establishments according to the type of economic activity and process of
production. The NAICS codes will allow interested parties to find their specific use in the Table
of Permitted Uses (TOPU) easily.
In 2014, staff created a Table of Permitted Uses that described the uses in the limited
manufacturing, general manufacturing, and intensive manufacturing categories. The intent of the
staff table was to be policy neutral and to assure that the uses permitted by right, special use permit,
or not permitted remained consistent with the TOPU in the ordinance. That table was not adopted
in 2014, but it was used as a baseline during the Planning Board discussion in the work sessions.
At the work sessions the Planning Board and stakeholders discussed a variety of factors, including
the location and amount of land in each zoning district, the intensity and size of the use, whether
the use was or could be contained indoors, possible environmental impacts of uses, and
compatibility with surrounding uses to determine if the use would be permitted by right, with a
Page 8 of 35
special use permit, or not at all. The table illustrates how each use is classified (Permitted, Special
Use Permit, or Not Permitted) in a district. It also illustrates the individual NAICS use code for
each classification. This table also contains the rest of the final changes that occurred after the final
work session and are included in the draft Table of Permitted Uses, which is in the agenda package.
Mr. O’Keefe reviewed the proposed changes, noting highlighted uses were changed from P
(Permitted by Right) in that category to S (Special Use Permit required). Three uses in the I-1
District proposed as P (Permitted by Right) were changed to an S (Special Use Permit required).
In the Airport Industrial District, one use, Plastics Product Manufacturing, was not permitted at
all, but is proposed to be allowed with a Special Use Permit.
Sixteen uses are proposed to be considered Intensive Manufacturing would only be allowed by
Special Use Permit in the I-2 Heavy Industrial District and would not permitted in any other
district. Intensive manufacturing uses will be required to go through a heightened special use
permit review process which includes a longer review process so staff and the public have time to
research the proposed use. The applicant must hold a public meeting prior to applying so the public
can learn about the proposed use. Applicants must disclose all federal, state, and local permits that
will be required for the operation applied for in their special use permit application. This disclosure
will allow staff and the public to evaluate the potential impacts of their proposed project.
Mr. O’Keefe stated in conclusion, the text amendment as currently proposed improves the process
by providing a predictable process. Utilizing NAICS codes to identify manufacturing uses in the
Table of Permitted Uses will greatly improve staff’s ability to make accurate and consistent use
determinations. This text amendment as proposed achieves the goal of adding clarity and
predictability to the process.
In response to Chairman Girardot’s inquiry, Mr. O’Keefe confirmed that the application and any
submitted materials from the applicant will be posted on the website so that they will be accessible
for viewing by the public.
Chairman Girardot opened the public hearing.
Tyler Newman of Business Alliance for a Sound Economy (BASE) stated they have advocacy
partnerships with the Wilmington Chamber of Commerce and appreciate the opportunity to have
participated in this important collaborative process. The process was lengthy as they sat at the table
through at least fifteen hours of work sessions as the Planning Board and staff went through the
proposed document line by line and word by word to think about how the special use process
works, how it could be streamlined, and how it could meet the needs of the business community
while protecting our quality of life. Mr. Newman stated he was happy to say they had truly reached
a consensus as earlier that afternoon the business community and the Coastal Federation came to
an agreement on the blue agreement shown by staff; therefore, they would join the Coastal
Federation in supporting staff’s proposed text amendment and look forward to continuing to
support this document when it moves forward to the county commissioners. Mr. Newman
encouraged the planning board’s support of the proposed text amendment.
Mike Giles of the Coastal Federation stated they had been involved in the special use permit
discussion since 2011 and had worked on addressing the community and business concerns since
Page 9 of 35
2014. This is an important milestone for our community and it is critical for sustainable prosperity
and opportunity for all who live in this coastal area. He thanked the planning board members, the
county planning staff, the county administration, and especially Chairman Girardot for her
leadership and hard work on this sometimes contentious issue, as well as the N.C. Coastal
Federation staff, specifically Karen Dunn, their resident planning expert and Jennifer Salter, their
communications specialist, and the hundreds, if not thousands of citizens who have worked to
provide input, comment, and more importantly, their valuable time. Mr. Giles stated as a temporary
bridge document the N.C. Coastal Federation supports the A-425 text amendment with the
additional proposed language submitted by the Federation stakeholders. That said, the Federation
recommends that the County staff work with the consultant, SLS Planning, to revisit the Table of
Permitted Uses as a priority in the upcoming UDO update. He also thanked Hal Kitchin with
McGuire Woods for his tireless and unselfish efforts to listen to other viewpoints and stay engaged
throughout the process. He also thanked Matthew Davis with Forrest Law Firm, who provided the
Coastal Federation with the local connection and relationships to the business community to help
them find common ground for improvements to the SUP text language. He said they look forward
to working with everyone to make New Hanover County a better place to live.
Matthew Davis stated he is an attorney with the Forrest Law Firm and was there on behalf of the
Coastal Federation to speak in favor of the proposed text amendment, including the modification
presented in the staff report and highlighted in blue. Mr. David spoke specifically to the proposed
modification and the manner in which it strengths the SUP process by making plain from the start
what the ordinance already requires, which is that an applicant must provide competent material
and substantial evidence sufficient to allow the county, which serves in a quasi-judicial capacity,
to make the four required conclusions set forth in Section 70-7. For that reason, he would
encourage the board to recommend and support staff’s proposed text amendment, including the
modification. Mr. Davis also acknowledged and thanked each of them for volunteering their time
during the long, involved process and noted the time given to the community is for everyone’s
good. He also thanked the business community, especially as represented by Hal Kitchin and Tyler
Newman and their willingness to give him an audience and work to find common ground. He also
recognized the N.C. Coastal Federation, including Tracy Skrabal, Mike Giles, Jennifer Salter, and
Karen Dunn, who are a group that works tirelessly on behalf of our community and seeks to
preserve our unique coastal resources and way of life, and do it because they care.
Cameron Moore, Executive Officer with the Wilmington-Cape Fear Homebuilders Association,
stated that Tyler Newman spoke on their behalf in regard to this issue, lending their support, as
well as his support, and the business community’s support. He said that Chairman Girardot had
summed it up best in her preamble earlier. This is a consensus document that has been reached
over many meetings and many hours. What you have before you is something that will work for
everybody in the room. We are all citizens of New Hanover County. For that, we lend our support
to the document.
Edmund McCaffray stated he lives at 7512 Dunbar Road in the Ogden area thanked the board for
their long hours of work on this amendment and noted he had attended three of the work sessions,
which were lengthy. He stated he does have some concerns as he understands some industries have
been reclassified as eligible to be sited in I-1, one of which is chemical manufacturing. These may
go in areas in I-1 which are surrounded by residential communities. Porters Neck Middle
Elementary School is opening soon and there is a new residential development behind it. My
Page 10 of 35
overall concern is that we are able to move away from the days of being targeted internationally
for very intensive industry from Greek companies to Australian companies, for cement
manufacturing, for hazardous waste facilities. We had oil refining at one time, coal transfer
stations. I just hope that this action will prevent any of those bad outcomes from happening again.
Tom Wolfe stated he represents the ILM, New Hanover County Regional Airport as Chairman of
the Board. He stated that the Airport was asking that seven uses not have a special use permit, the
reason being that the Airport is looking at the land they have and trying to do their utmost to build
industry along the lines of what the Garner Report has given us. He inquired why they would ask
for these variations. He said they feel that they are not heavy industry and that they have a fiduciary
responsibility as a public unit to do what is best for the citizens here. They have an unusual
situation in that they will not be selling land, but will be leasing it and certai nly don’t want to lease
land and have it come back to them in a polluted state either water wise, air wise or any way.
Another factor is that the Airport’s attorney is the County’s attorney. He noted in the eight years
he had been associated with the Ms. Copley, she had kept many of them out of trouble and he has
reason to believe if anything came before the Airport Board that she would do likewise. Mr. Wolfe
said the Airport Board reports to the County Commissioners. They are a small staff and would
have to lean heavily upon the County staff, as they have in other areas so he was sure whatever
came in, Mr. O’Keefe would be heavily involved in. He said they would not want to do anything
that would harm this community, but they don’t want to say no to someone that might come here
with the idea of we don’t want to go through a special use permit. In response to Chairman Girardot
inquiry, Mr. Wolf confirmed he was satisfied with the designations as they are now and was not
asking for seven additional changes.
Hal Kitchin of 2902 Hydrangea Lane stated this issue arose in 2013 when members of the business
community became concerned that the existing special use permit process that had gone into effect
a couple of years earlier was unintentionally stifling economic growth and prosperity. Since then,
a lot of hard work and effort has gone into trying to solve what the business community perceives
to be a problem. A lot of work on behalf of members of the business community, public servants,
elected representatives, and appointed representatives, and on behalf of citizens and citizen groups,
many of whom are represented here has been done. Back in 2013 and 2014, there were multiple
work sessions and planning board and county commissioner hearings. In 2015, many of us were a
part of the community task force run by the Coastal Federation that tried to find a consensus on
this problem. Last year, this planning board and in particular, Chairman Girardot, ran what can
only be described as an extraordinary effort to come up with a solution that could be deemed a
consensus and would include the voices of everybody in our community. There were five public
work sessions of at least sixteen hours where everyone sat around the table and went through the
special use permit line by line. Participants included the Coastal Federation, BASE, the Chamber
of Commerce, and many members of the community in addition to the planning board. Mr. Kitchin
said that with all that work, it was very gratifying to stand before the board and say that there is a
consensus on how to move forward. He noted it isn’t perfect. Nobody’s completely happy with
what the board will review and possibly vote on tonight, but it is a solution we can all live with. It
has involved a lot of hard work by many of our partners in the business community, many of which
are here, and the planning board. A lot of extracurricular work was done on behalf of this board.
It wasn’t necessary, but it was a wonderful thing for the community. Mr. Kitchin thanked Mike
Giles and Karen Dunn who put in countless hours and very effectively represented the membership
of the N.C. Coastal Federation, as well as Matthew Davis, who came in at the end to help us get
Page 11 of 35
to yes. Mr. Kitchin also thanked all the citizens, including those who came out to this meeting and
previous meetings. Mr. Kitchin said this is a good solution; nobody’s completely happy, but we
appreciate the planning board’s support of the proposal before you tonight.
Shane Johnson stated he is with the Cape Fear Realtors Association, which recently changed their
name from the Wilmington Regional Association of Realtors, as is the largest professional
organization in the region. He stated they rise in support of the zoning ordinance amendment
request, along with the recommended staff changes. He noted they first got involved with this
process in 2014 when they recognized the need for some streamlining of the special use permit
process. He specifically thanked Chairman Girardot and the folks that were involved with this
process for giving them the opportunity to voice their concerns because this is a very important
issue that impacts members, homeowners, and neighborhoods. There are countless hours that
people have talked about spent on this process. He said many years ago Detopeville wrote that
America’s greatness came from her ability to compromise. He said this exhibits that ability, taking
lots of different voices in the community that don’t necessarily agree and finding that agreement
point where we can move forward. Mr. Johnson thanked the board for their time and noted they
look forward to working with them as they build out the comprehensive plan.
Julie Wilsey stated she is the Airport Director at ILM and she would like to address the Table of
Permitted Uses. The Airport wants to be a good neighbor and to be an economic engine for this
community and they believe the Table of Permitted Uses for the Airport Industrial designation is
adequate, particularly with respect to noise. As the board members know, noise impacts and the
perception of noise varies from one person to the next. For that reason, the FAA has developed an
Integrated Noise Model that is the industry standard for computing aircraft noise exposure in and
around the airports. It also calculates the noise based on a 24-hour average exposure. ILM has
calculated both the current noise model and also a projected 2020 noise model, and has determined
that at the 65 day/night level, which is the level of day/night noise that the FAA is concerned about
and wants us to regulate, the Airport owns all of the property at that level. She stated they may not
be able to predict the types of industry that come to ILM or that they will grow on the ILM campus;
however, they believe that the Table of Permitted Uses takes those into account. They want to be
good neighbors. Ms. Wilsey thanked the planning board members for their efforts and for making
the designations that they have for Airport Industrial, noting the Airport looks forward to working
with the County.
Harper Peterson stated he agreed with everybody that supported this text amendment whether it is
consensus compromise. It is open and will continue to grow. He has been a resident of Wilmington
for forty-five years. He and his wife have five children. He loved it then and loves it now. He noted
his father will be 100 years old in three weeks and his daughter will have his first grandchild in a
week so they are excited. He noted he had heard a couple of times that we don’t want to scare
industry away. There haven’t been that many intensive applications in the last few months or years.
He remembers the open coal storage proposal in 1981, as well as Flemington and the pollution of
our drinking water there, and Thermal-Chem, Hugo-Neu, hog waste, coal ash, and on and on. He
said it only takes one industry to impact our paradise. He likes to think of this area, this region,
with a preamble. Anything we do, we know there are catchphrases and expressions like , “Cash is
king” and “Think globally, act locally,” but the one that has the most meaning for him and he
would offer it to everyone with anything we do as a community and that is , “Water is sacred.”
Without water, we wither. We can unify around that and not compromise, not reach consensus,
Page 12 of 35
but have one voice. There is no shortage of businesses and industry that want to come here for the
right reasons and want to participate in our mantra that water is sacred. If we lose that, it’s a finite
resource. We know our aquifers are bleeding with salt. We know the river we share with 32
counties. It’s a finite resource so we have to protect it. Mr. Peterson asked everyone adopt that
mantra because he thinks it could help us as we move forward as a community. He stated it is a
great process and he looks forward to participating. He thanked Chairman Girardot for her
leadership, noting he has known her for many years and she has inflicted many wounds, deep scars
on him, but he respects everything she does and knows she loves this community.
Speakers in Opposition
Pris Endo stated she is a resident of Middle Sound, but once lived in Winter Park, which at that
time was a viable County suburb of Wilmington connected by trolley and bus service between the
City and Wrightsville Beach and a much loved community by all of its resi dents. Having witnessed
the demise of parts of Winter Park, her family moved to Middle Sound to escape traffic noise and
habitat loss. She is particularly sensitive to the destruction of communities and neighborhoods as
we see the buildup of New Hanover County. That is why she is testifying for the third time in less
than five months about the Industrial Special Use Permit. Ms. Endo stated her comments were put
together yesterday and based on what she has seen tonight, there have been some changes, but she
still thinks her comments are germane to the topic. It has come to her attention that at a planning
board meeting late last year, there were changes made in the I-1 text amendments that could have
major consequences for residential communities just north of Middle Sound at Porters Neck. There
is land remaining in Porters Neck that is zoned Light Industrial, which is also the case in Kings
Grant and Castle Hayne. However, the revised text amendments have changed the classifications
of rubber, plastics, basic chemical, resin, artificial synthetic and fibers, coating, adhesives, glass,
clay products, and refractory manufacturing from Heavy Industrial to Light Industrial status, but
production of these products can still be very hazardous to human health.
Ms. Endo stated the general public deserves meetings with the developers of these so-called light
industries if they decide to apply to come to town and also needs a chance to negotiate face to face,
but the revised text amendments do away with community meetings and have reduced the time the
community has to respond to future potentially hazardous industrial development. Ms. Endo stated
that to protect our neighborhoods and communities as we know them today, she strongly supports
an industrial special use permit, but urges the planning board to eliminate the recent amendments
changing Heavy Industry classified industries to Light Industry and to hold on to the community
meetings. It is incumbent upon elected officials and professional County leadership to protect
homeowners who want to continue the vibrant lifestyle their neighborhoods offer and provide
assurance to county residents that through astute land use planning and application of the Industrial
Special Use Permit, citizens can be fully engaged in helping to sustain the quality of life in New
Hanover County that attracts so many to this area.
Peter Gilman-Bryan stated he is a volunteer water quality coordinator for the Surfrider Foundation,
Cape Fear Chapter. He said he finds himself a little bit of an orphan as he signed up to speak in
opposition, but he is here to support the Coastal Federation and it appears they are in support of
the proposed amendment. He said their concerns echo those expressed by Mr. Harper Peterson.
Our primary concerns are water quality, air quality, and a healthy environment; and whatever we
can do to maintain those. He noted a compromise has been reached and he realizes this is a bridge
Page 13 of 35
document so that we will be moving on, but we are a little concerned about this reclassification of
certain industries that might have the character of Intensive Industries. Not only would this
reclassify them, but then they might only be obliged to have a 20-day review as opposed to the 35-
day review, which they strongly support. He said they feel most of these should still remain within
the I-2 District. He didn’t think the County should be anxious because certain businesses might
threaten to locate somewhere else that it won’t meet these demands. We weren’t diminished when
Titan departed and the county is clearly a popular location in itself. Mr. Gilman-Bryan said we
would do ourselves a disservice to accept anything less than the most robust special use permit
protecting the assets that are the quality of life that belongs to everybody here in New Hanover
County.
Dr. Robert Parr stated he has practiced medicine in New Hanover County for 33 years and is a
resident of Middle Sound, as well as a business owner in Porters Neck. He said the work session
meeting where the text amendments and Table of Permitted Uses were altered did not offer a public
comment period at the critical end of the meeting. Those who were there know exactly what
happened at that meeting. The results of those alterations are that toxic air emissions presently
reserved for remote I-2 areas may not be permitted by special use or by right in Light Industrial
areas immediately adjacent to communities, businesses where they were never intended, and the
community information meeting, critical to our system of open governance, is now n ot available
to residents in these matters. Chemical, paint, refractory, rubber, glass, and pharmaceutical
manufacturing release large amounts of hazardous air pollutants into surrounding neighborhoods,
even with the best emission controls. These uses are not compatible in any way adjacent to
developed communities, retail and professional businesses, parks, or the newly developed Porters
Neck Elementary School. After reading over the list of hazardous air pollutants associated with
these industries and traveling to adjacent neighborhoods in Porters Neck, Kings Grant, and Castle
Hayne, he would ask the board if these changes are reasonable, if they protect existing property
values, and if they safeguard the quality of life and the public health in these areas. Dr. Parr said it
is his considered opinion that they do not. The Planning Department, the Planning Board and
County Commissioners have also been provided with a letter from Clean Air Carolina and Medical
Advocates for Healthy Air strongly supporting the position that heavy industrial industries and
uses with heavy toxic emissions should never be located adjacent to residential development for
matters of public health and safety. He said he knows there is a lot of compromising going on here,
but in all the months and years that this process has gone forward, this is the first time we’ve talked
about the real effects to the people, the public health. We’ve talked about numbers and projections,
but we haven’t talked about public health and that’s one of the main things we should be here for
tonight.
Jim Nesbitt stated he resides at 716 Mason Hill Drive, which is on Whiskey Creek and he is also
concerned about water quality, air quality, and the quality of life in New Hanover County. He
noted the board has an awesome task in front of them as they all live here and love it here and the
citizens do to. He asked the board to protect the residents and protect New Hanover County in all
of their decisions. It is devastating to drive around the Art Museum and see the devastation of the
woods that are there. He said he doesn’t know how many people take into consideration what trees
do for our air and how trees clean our air. He would hope that we would give more consideration
to protecting our green space so that our air quality, no matter what comes into it, will be preserved.
Page 14 of 35
Roger Shew stated he is a resident of New Hanover County and Wilmington and resides on Park
Avenue. He applauded the staff and planning board for doing extreme vetting before vetting was
popular, noting he gave them a lot of credit for putting all of this together and incorporating not
only the Coastal Federation and the Chamber of Commerce and the real estate interests, but also
allowing the citizens to be involved as well. He said it is very important to be able to make
comments. He thanked them for recommending and hopefully, requiring that there be community
meetings early in the process and that there is a timeframe of at least 35 days that will allow for
input into the decision process. He noted although he does feel that full disclosure would be the
best for these applications, the compromises worked out requiring applicants to list all pertinent
issues and permits that may be associated with the industry are worth applauding. Mr. Shew noted
one think that still gives him pause if the Table of Permitted Uses. Several of those industries really
give him true pause when you look at concrete production, plastic production as those things truly
require a bit more thought than some of the precision manufacturing that the Garner Report
mentioned as a goal of New Hanover County. For that reason, he would ask the board to reconsider
the reclassification of those permitted use industries and restore them to a more intense permit
requirement. He also commented that he really believes that an SUP is a good thing. He really
doesn’t believe that an SUP is a deterrent in spite of all of the discussion. Mr. Shew said he believes
the SUP has been a favorable thing for our area and the Garner Report itself, which he believes to
be in part error, may come about the best industries for this area. They wouldn’t even require a
special use permit so we really don’t need those. He also commented that Wilmington job growth
was 37th in the country in 2014 and 2015. New Hanover County has an unemployment rate lower
than the state average. Forbes listed us as the best place to start a business only behind Raleigh.
The Chamber of Commerce’s own data showed improvement in the scorecard and Nerd Wallet
Tech polled Wilmington as number two in the country. On December 15, Wilmington was best
performing in the country. Only Raleigh and Charlotte were above us. Don’t say we’re keeping
industry from coming to this area and growth from coming to the area. Mr. Shew thanked the board
for their hard work and asked everyone to be diligent. As a long-time resident that grew up in
Wilmington, this place means a whole lot to him. He thanked the board for the opportunity to work
on this issue.
Paul Summers of 246 Inlet Point Drive said he had chosen to speak against the proposed text
amendment because he thinks that the Special Use Permit proposed application is still imperfect,
in particular in regard to the need for the proposing company to disclose the negative external
effects that would be associated with it. He thinks that is kind of like a seller’s disclosure statement.
Instead of a laundry list of yes or no questions, they would only have to say what they know are to
be the possible negative effects or adverse effects to the community and they can do this in their
own format. They know their business and it is not a burden on them to say what things may come
up. Mr. Summers mentioned that it would be obviously valuable to the community to avoid
permitting industries that pollute or otherwise degrade our quality of life. It is also an advantage
to the company to get this information out up front before development and construction. If there
are adverse effects that come to light later, there will be negative publicity in the media. There
might even be boycotts or picketing. Having that statement on the record could be an important
factor if the community in fact engaged in some sort of litigation against the company. Mr.
Summers commented in summary, he didn’t see an ar gument not to ask companies to state the
negative external impacts and he didn’t think it would be a burden on them to do so. It would also
be beneficial for the community and beneficial to the company.
Page 15 of 35
Clarice Weaver stated she represented the League of Women Voters of the Lower Cape Fear and
lives on Blue Heron Drive in Porters Neck. She thanked the board for their public service and hard
work on this issue. The League of Women Voters goes through the process of consensus before
they take positions and the consensus portion that they are speaking to tonight is first, the League
holds that government should be open, accountable, and responsive to its citizens and that good
government gives citizens the right to know what government is doing up front and facilitates
citizen participation in government decision-making. Certainly, we’ve made steps forward in this
process; however, the changes in the Table of Permitted Uses allowing what are currently called
Intensive Industries as lighter industries will, for some people, be viewed as de facto rezoning.
People near those general zoned areas bought and developed businesses and homes expecting
heavy industries or intensive industries to be denied access without the care of the special use
permit and eliminating those protections without due process means current businesses and
residents will not be informed of these changes when what we currently call a heavy industry
moves near their places of residence or business. There will be no public hearing and we would
maintain this is not open government. She noted the board has been very open in this process so
let’s continue to be open when we think of what we should do with the Table of Permitted Uses.
Karen Gottovi stated she served New Hanover County as a county comm issioner from 1976 to
1984 and is probably the only one in the room who was sued by the EPA, which as far as she
knows has never been resolved. That lawsuit was over the landfill in Flemington, which the
County placed there with a special use permit. She made the point that this is a special use permit,
not a normal use for a particular parcel of the community. She noted she probably signed 100 to
150 of them during her eight years on the county commission and some came back to bite the
County badly. She stated she hopes and prays that your reclassification of these industries is in the
best interest of the County and the people who are going to have to live with them and that the
board will inform the public who will be affected by these changing uses . Ms. Gottovi noted an
instance years ago where a special use permit was issued for a trailer along Oleander Drive, which
he said would only be there for a few months. She stated that trailer was still there on that property
ten years later because he had a special use permit and there was no way to remove it. Ms. Gottovi
stated she is now with the League of Women Voters and supports their positions. She said she is
very happy the Coastal Federation was included in all the discussion of these issues. She urged t he
board to be very careful.
John Selerus stated he is a retired psychologist who resides at 6318 Mallard Drive and is a
concerned voter. He came prepared to speak against any weakening of the special use permit
process, but it sounds like the various constituents have come to some consensus and he thinks
that is a success for the community. He thanked everyone for their participation in that process.
Mr. Selerus noted he had attended one of the planning work sessions and it was contentious so he
was impressed that the parties have arrived at a consensus. Mr. Selerus stated his comments are
general rather than pro or con. He said that new businesses bring jobs. New employers bring jobs
and jobs are important, but these jobs must be consistent with a healthy community or we all lose.
No one wants a job only to live in an unhealthy environment with poor water quality, aquifers at
risk, or polluted air and no one will want to come and visit that community. He hoped that as the
process moves along, the decision makers in the community will involve the public before
decisions are made and consider the environmental consequences, not just the financial
consequences of a new industry before decisions are made. We must rely on the planners and staff
Page 16 of 35
and elected officials to do the best for our community. Mr. Selerus stated in conclusion that a
strong special use permitting process is essential.
Kayne Darrell stated she lives in Castle Hayne and would echo the concerns of everyone who has
already spoken in opposition to about some of the things in this special use permit. She said she
realized how fortunate all of us are to live in a community that is so educated, so engaged, and so
involved in the future of New Hanover County and she hopes that the board shares their belief that
their voices matter and will be heard. She thanked the board for the hard work they have done on
this issue. Ms. Darrell addressed the list of industries that are being moved to Light Industry
mentioned earlier by Dr. Parr. She wondered what research has been done to look at the potential
negative impacts to communities that those particular industries have and what criteria were used
to decide that it was safe to put those in residential areas where we live, work, and send our children
to school. She stated they deserved an answer to that question. Ms. Darrel noted as one of the
smallest and most densely populated counties in North Carolina, she thought everyone understood
that puts all of us dangerously close to all the negative impacts that are associated with Heavy I-1
and I-2 industries and understand we need smart growth. Ms. Darrell asked the board to make a
decision based on the needs of those educated citizens, those that have a vested interest in what is
right for this county and not for what’s right for the special interests. She noted all of them deserve
a place at the table when those decisions are made that will affect the places where they live, work,
and play and raise their families, particularly those decisions that will affect their future for
generations to come.
Cliff Bennett stated he lives in the Porters Point community in Porters Neck and none of the people
in his community of 58 homes were aware of this proposal until earlier that day. He noted they
have a unique concern in that they border one of the properties that is now zoned Light Industrial.
The current owner has been very good working with the residents in that they have one road in,
one road out. He explained that Braves Drive comes off Porters Neck into that area. Mr. Bennett
stated that although they have a private community and are responsible for maintaining the roads,
that owner has a legal right of way to use the community’s main drive for access to his property
for big trucks, dump trucks, etc. and that use is also passed on to future owners. Mr. Bennett stated
their concern is what happens in that area as far as having to transport goods into the area as that
will come right through their community’s main drive. He noted they have a lot of children in their
neighborhood. Mr. Bennett stated there is nothing they can do about that access if the people who
are working in those areas choose not to cooperate with them. He said that access if their main
concern other than pollution of noise, water, air, and things like that.
Diana Hill stated she has lived on Klein Road for 23 years and is retired from Dow Chemical
Company and she understands a lot about how companies can hide behind their processes, which
they can’t always describe to people. She noted we are the second smallest county, but watching
the local planning boards and governing boards, it seems there is a developer ready to put as many
houses as possible on any green space located in the county. Ms. Hill said we had clean industry,
the film industry, which we no longer have and it brought a lot of tourists to the area, along with
our river, our historic district, and our beaches. She noted if we continue to make our area look
like Charlotte and Raleigh and other big cities, there will be no reason for anybody to come here
so she thinks our quality of life is important. She asked the board to do what’s right for the people
and not right for the developers and the special interests, noting we’ve seen what that does for us.
Page 17 of 35
Ms. Hill begged the board to think about all of them who love this community and came here for
the quality of life. She said most of the residents didn’t come here to get jobs.
Chairman Girardot closed the public hearing and once again apologized if citizens had not been
notified of this issue earlier, but there were multiple public hearings. There was a televised public
hearing on September 8, 2016 with a presentation by staff, which was quite lengthy. There have
been schedules, as well as other information listed on the County’s website and approximately one
thousand people were notified by email. She apologized if anyone was left out and urged all who
would like to participate in issues going forward like the upcoming Unified Development
Ordinance process to sign up for the County’s Sunshine List to be among the 1,000 people that
receive advance notifications of Planning-related meetings.
Chairman Girardot opened the Planning Board discussion period.
David Weaver stated he has been an outlier on the board on this issue and everyone knows how
he feels about it to a great extent already. He stated a lot of people have already talked about it and
he shared the same sentiments with them. Mr. Weaver stated the first issue is about full disclosure
of external effects. He noted he doesn’t like to make a decision unless it’s fully informed. He stated
he felt the board should be privy to the impact information of anything that comes in for a special
use permit. He said, for example, we are requiring a list of permits that the applicant may feel
might be needed, which is a start, but a list of permits, especially an incomplete list of permits,
will not detail the types of external effects that could harm this county as far as attractiveness to
future business and impact the high quality of life that we already have here. Mr. Weaver stated
he didn’t really see that as being much of a substitute for full disclosure of impacts. He commented
that the sentence added today is a nice start, but the sentence reads, “A written description of the
proposal depicting the nature and scope of the proposed development, as well as information which
provides support for each of the required conclusions.” If he was an applicant and wanted to get
his application approved, he would be very happy to submit information that provides support for
each of the favorable recommendations or conclusions that the county commissioners have to
come up with but as a decision maker with the planning board, he would like to he would like to
know the information that isn’t necessarily going to provide support, that is an external effect or
impact of some kind that needs to be considered. He noted the way it reads it is really meaningless
in terms of requiring full disclosure because it doesn’t.
Mr. Weaver stated in regard to the Table of Permitted Uses, he can’t even argue about it because
he isn’t qualified enough to know all the different ins and outs of all the different uses that have
been discussed and the districts that they could go into. He said he doesn’t think any of the board
members have that expertise to compare the externalities of a plywood veneer plant to an
automobile manufacturing company so adjusting the Table of Permitted Uses from what it has
been and what has successfully worked for us for many years is arbitrary. It really has very little
foundation in fact with what the board has done and suggested. The bigger issue is why we are
doing this. He asked if our economy is weakening and do we need to go out and weaken our
regulations and our requirements for special use permits to attract industries that may be on the
margin or on the cusp or may have undesirable impacts in order to bring in those jobs. He would
say no. Dr. Shew just cited some of those statistics. Mr. Weaver said he wasn’t aware of any
metrics where the county was deficient compared to other local governments or local areas in our
region. We are actually one of the leaders in the state and as one of the reports stated, we are now
Page 18 of 35
one of the national leaders and we have moved up 16 spaces to #54 in the last year for jobs and
technology. He said he doesn’t see an economic reason for this amendment and yet at the same
time, we have an incredibly high quality of life. He noted a recent article in the newspaper, which
talked about how this area is number one in terms of favorability, whatever that is, as defined
somehow by a polling firm in Raleigh. We have a very high quality of l ife. We have many
resources, including Cape Fear Community College, UNCW, the beaches, the parks, etc. He noted
we have a great high quality of life that serves not only to provide a high quality of life for residents
and existing businesses, but also serves as a major attractant for future industries and future
businesses that may want to come here like technology companies. They look very closely at the
quality of life before they make a decision to move because their employees are so much in tune
with wanting that high quality of life. Mr. Weaver stated for those reasons, he had to ask the
question why. Has the case really been strongly made for need to weaken our regulations to bring
in more industries that may be on the cusp? Mr. Weaver said he knows it is always good to
streamline the regulations, but in this case, he questioned the need for the changes that are being
discussed where we don’t require full disclosure of impacts and are making it easier for certain
industries to go into different zoning districts, which is weakening our ordinance. Mr. Weaver
stated he has incredibly high respect for everybody on the board and the expertise, intelligence,
and dedication they have brought to this process, especially Chairman Donna Girardot, who has
led the board through a very complicated process with fairness and transparency to all.
Ted Shipley commented in regard to Mr. Weaver’s first point concerning the premise that we
should have applicants testify against themselves in a quasi-judicial format. He stated it would
violate all sorts of premises we have throughout the State of North Carolina in these types of
hearings if someone were forced to provide all information without a subpoena, although this isn’t
that type of hearing. He said the applicant has a right to prove their case, prove the four factors,
and if someone from the community wishes to step forward, be it the Coastal Federation or an
individual, and provide evidence to the contrary, so be it. That’s the whole point of these quasi-
judicial proceedings.
Jordy Rawl said he had listened to a lot of compelling cases by very educated people who are very
concerned about their community and noted he is in agreement with many of Mr. Weaver’s
statements, but he thinks that the intent of the business community is not necessarily to incentivize
industry, but not dis-incentivize it either. Developers and builders sometimes get a bad rap and he
is one of those people. He finds himself fulfilling a need of people, which is providing shelter and
it is a complicated process just to erect a structure around town. It is burdensome and there is a lot
of overregulation that makes the efforts challenging. As this community grows and people are
incentivized to come here for the natural resources and the community itself because it is such a
unique place, there will continue to be a need for gainful employment. He noted the chairman had
made the comment earlier that Wilmington is notorious for having some of the highest educated
wait staff, and he finds that disheartening because from a practical perspective, people come here
to UNCW, love the area, and want to stay. They graduate and there’s really no form of employment
for them to make ends meet to be able to provide the things that everybody who works hard aspires
to obtain so they find themselves caught in a bit of a rut. As mentioned earlier, it was unfortunate
the film industry left Wilmington. The film industry was highly subsidized by the state so you find
efforts to incentivize an industry be that whatever it may be. He didn’t think this board is
necessarily trying to promote anything to incentivize industry that would come to town and have
an unintended consequence on the community, but rather not to dis-incentivize a potential
Page 19 of 35
company that would like to come to this community, would like to work with the citizens, and
would like to work with the staff to promote and create a clean and gainful place of employment.
We come into a bit of a slippery slope in trying to find out how to walk that line. He feels that is a
relevant part of this discussion.
Paul Boney stated the board had heard from many really educated, well-intentioned folks. He
wished Harper Peterson’s father a happy 100th birthday. Everyone in the room wants to live to be
one hundred years old and wants clean air and clean water. All of us are happy and really appreciate
what Julie Wilsey does at the airport because we’re able to travel to all points on this earth because
she gets up at 5:00 a.m. every morning to come to work. We are so lucky to have this community.
He noted he was born here and Dr. Shew said earlier that he was born here. He has watched a lot
of things happen to this community over his lifetime – good things and probably some things we’d
want to do over as Ms. Gottovi said earlier. Everyone here is well-intentioned, but this state, this
world we live in is so polarized in everything that happens. There are people that you can’t get in
the same room, let alone come to a consensus on something like this. He was appointed last
summer and came in during the middle of this process. Representatives from all sides came
together eventually as a community and as a board to reach a consensus through the leadership of
Chairman Girardot, but we didn’t start out there. Everyone wants transparency, but it requires hard
work by individuals who are dedicated to making this a better community. Everyone has his/her
viewpoint, but at the end of the day, they came together and have given us a document. This board
is one group that comes together and votes our conscience, but we are looking at a way to get to
some sort of compromise because that’s what governing is. We come together with lots of
compromises for the good of everybody. Mr. Boney commended Chairman Girardot and his fellow
board members, the Coastal Federation, and the business community for coming together on
something that the board can all vote on. Mr. Boney acknowledged that no one thinks it’s perfect,
but this is somewhere to start and we can work on those things that need it. He stated he was in
favor of the proposed amendment. Mr. Boney noted that everybody who said they weren’t
informed have the entire Unified Development Ordinance process to go through and he would
welcome and encourage everybody in the room and on television to view that process and be
involved in it. He thanked everyone for attending the meeting.
Ernest Olds stated there wasn’t much to add, but he appreciated the eloquence of the speakers who
came before the board. This is not the end of the process, but is really just the beginning as there
is much more to do on the Unified Development Ordinance. He noted a lot of good comments
have been brought out and there is a lot of work that needs to be done on the Table of Permitted
Uses. We won’t stop working on it even if the amendment is passed this evening. Mr. Olds stated
he is in favor of moving forward and continuing the work.
Allen Pope stated he has worked in government his entire career and compromise is the bedrock
of good government. Without it, we can’t move forward. As Mr. Boney said, we all have that same
desire of a great place to live with clean water and clean air. Mr. Pope also encouraged everyone
to get involved.
Chairman Girardot stated the Planning Board serves at the pleasure of the County Commissioners
and in August they tasked us with the job of providing procedures and processes to this document
that are fair and predictable and would include a timely review of applications, and at the same
time, protect the environment and our quality of life. This isn’t a perfect document and everybody
Page 20 of 35
probably isn’t pleased with the outcome, but this is a bridge document that will probably serve us
for about a year while we go through the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) process. During
that time, if we find something that warrants change or modification, it is very easy to adopt a text
amendment. If this text amendment proves when we test drive it that it is outstanding and everyone
loves it, we can adopt it as it is, but if there are pieces of it that need to be changed, we will have
to come back to the table as with all of our ordinances during the UDO process and make those
changes at that time. She urged people to get involved in the UDO process.
Chairman Girardot entertained a motion.
Ted Shipley made a motion to recommend approval as the Planning Board finds this request for a
zoning ordinance text amendment is:
1) Consistent with the purposes and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan
because it implements Goal #1 of supporting business success by streamlining the
permitting process for targeted industries and encouraging target industries in
employment centers, commerce zones, and growth nodes; and
2) Is reasonable and in the public interest because the amendment adds clarity to the
County’s special use permit process and Table of Permitted Uses providing for orderly
growth in the county.
In response to Chairman Girardot’s inquiry, Deputy County Attorney Sharon Huffman confirmed
that a two-step adoption process for the narrative and the Table of Permitted Uses was not
necessary and a single motion was acceptable if it is clarified that Mr. Shipley’s motion applies to
both the text amendment and the amendment to the Table of Permitted Uses (TOPU).
Chairman Girardot stated she would also like to make it absolutely certain the planning board is
moving for approval of Text Amendment A-425 as presented in the packet and by staff, and also
as modified by the proposed language shown that includes the compromise statement from the
Coastal Federation and the business community. Ms. Huffman confirmed that as long as that is
clear to everyone that the amendment is for the A-425 Text, the amendment to the Table of
Permitted Uses, and the one change that has been brought forward during this meeting.
Ted Shipley made a motion, seconded by Allen Pope, to recommend approval of A-425 as
presented in the packet by the staff and as modified by the proposed language shown on the one-
page document, and inclusive of the Table of Permitted Uses, based on the fact that the Planning
Board finds the text amendment in sum is:
1) Consistent with the purposes and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because it
implements Goal #1: Support business success by streamlining the permitting process for
targeted industries and encouraging target industries in employment centers, commerce
zones, and growth nodes; and
2) 2) Is reasonable and in the public interest because the amendment adds clarity to the
County’s Special Use Permit process and Table of Permitted Uses providing for orderly
growth in the county.
Page 21 of 35
Mr. Weaver said like Mr. Pope he lived his life in compromise professionally and recognized the
value of compromise as these different groups came together. Mr. Weaver stated he will vote
against the motion so that if nothing else it jogs someone’s memory about the reasons he voted
against it as the amendment moves forward.
Allen Pope commented he had failed to mention earlier that the board had not talked a lot about
streamlining the process, but anyone who has ever dealt with a regulatory organization knows that
sometimes the process gets very complicated. He stated one of the great things this special use
permit does is streamline the process for those who actually do come with a proposal.
Hearing no other discussion, Chairman Girardot called for a vote on the motion. The Panning
Board voted 6-1 to recommend approval of Text Amendment A-425. (Ayes: Boney, Girardot,
Olds, Pope, Rawl, Shipley; No: Weaver)
Chairman Girardot thanked the audience for sharing their input with the Planning Board and
looked forward to seeing them during the Unified Development Ordinance process.
Chairman Girardot announced the board would take a five-minute recess to allow citizens to leave.
RECESS
Chairman Girardot called the meeting back to order.
Item 3: Rezoning Request (Z-962, 11/16) – Request by Frank Braxton and Bryan Hamby on
behalf of the property owner, Holdings of TCM, Inc., to rezone 13.98 acres located at the 120
block of Battleship Road, from B-2, Highway Business District, to R-10, Residential District.
Current Planner Brad Schuler provided information pertaining to location, land classification,
access, level of service and zoning; and showed maps, aerials, and photographs of the property
and the surrounding area. Mr. Schuler presented the following:
As stated this is an application proposing to rezone approximately 14 acres of land, which
is located along the Cape Fear river, directly across from downtown Wilmington and
adjacent to the Battleship North Carolina. This is a general use or straight rezoning
application, meaning this application does not include a proposed use of land or a
conceptual site plan; and conditions above and beyond the county’s development
regulations cannot be added to the property. If this application is approved, then the
property would be allowed to be developed in accordance with the proposed zoning district,
which in this case is the R-10 district.
A zoning map of the property proposed to be rezoned shows that the Battleship North
Carolina is located directly north of the property and is also zoned B-2. Across the river is
downtown Wilmington, which is zoned Central Business District and is also under the
Historic District Overlay. To the south and west of the property is undeveloped land in
Brunswick County which is zoned General Industrial. The property itself is undeveloped
Page 22 of 35
and is split by the Battleship Road right-of-way. Portions of the property are located within
an AE Special Flood Hazard Area. The proposed preliminary flood maps expand this flood
zone to cover the entire property. Portions of the property may be classified as regulation
wetlands, and If the property is developed in the future, additional verification of those
potential wetlands must be conducted by the US Army Corps of Engineers.
Approximately 0.7 acres of the western portion of the property is classified as the
Brunswick River/Cape Fear River Marshes Significant Natural Heritage Area in the New
Hanover County Natural Area Inventory. The North Carolina Natural Heritage gives this
area a collective rating of 2-Very High, meaning there are at minimum seven natural
elements located within the area.
The 2016 Comprehensive Plan classifies the property as Urban Mixed Use and
Conservation; however, only a small portion of the property, approximately 1 acre in area
is classified as Conservation. Therefore, staff focused on the application’s consistency
with the Urban Mixed Use place type. This place type promotes development that has a
mixture of compatible residential, office, and retail uses at higher densities.
It is staff’s opinion that this application is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
this Place type. By rezoning to the R-10 district, there will be fewer opportunities for a
mixture of compatible uses on this property. Currently the B-2 zoning district does permit
mixed use developments with a SUP. Also, the property is eligible to be rezoned to the
River Front Mixed Use district, which was created specificall y with this property in mind.
Just across the river, which would be a good vision for this property, and would meet the
Urban Mixed Use place type. It’s a mixture of uses that support one another and offer
different modes of transportation.
Staff also has concerns with this type of rezoning application. As a general use rezoning,
there can be no way that the county can condition, or the applicant can guarantee, a certain
type of development. I know the applicant is probably going to discuss a low density
residential development for the property, however that is not what is being considered
tonight. If this application is approved, then the property can be developed in acco rdance
with the R-10 district. The development plans can change, and the ownership of the
property can change. The general use rezoning also will not allow the county to gauge the
potential impacts the development may have on the surrounding area. An area with rich
economic, natural, cultural, and historic resources.
Staff is recommending denial of this application as detailed in the staff summary. Also, as
the subject property is adjacent to downtown Wilmington, the application was sent to the
City’s planning department for review. They too are not supportive of this application and
would prefer to see a mixture of uses that would bring services closer to residents and
promote multiple forms of transportation.
Mr. Schuler offered to answer any questions the board may have.
Page 23 of 35
Chairman Girardot opened the public hearing and recognized the applicant.
Joe Taylor, stated he is an attorney with Murchison, Taylor, and Gibson and represents the property
owners. This is a downzoning, which you don’t see very often. It is an unusual situation and is
based on very sound principles. The applicants have spent two years studying the available uses
of this property, which is a very sensitive piece of property and needs the kind of attention and low
density development they are hoping to do under R-10. Since the purchase, the owner has spent a
great deal of time evaluating the property, getting it cleared by Brownfields, delineating the
wetlands, delineating the required setbacks, permitting for water and sewer, historical and archive
study ad evaluation of all possible uses. He announced that Rick Catlin, Frank Braxton, and Brian
Hamby were consultants for the project and were present to address questions if needed. The
property is zoned B-2, and Urban Mixed Use. After two years of review, the applicants have
determined that zoning will not work because the property is too sensitive. They have held
meetings with staff, with whom they have a great relationship, and have talked to all of the
neighbors, City Council, the Wilmington Historic Foundation, etc. about their plans for R-10 as a
better and more compatible use for the property. It is important to note that the property is made
up of two tracts, a three-acres tract, which will remain B-2 and a larger tract which is simply not
fit for B-2 or Urban Mixed Use because it can’t sustain that type of use. There is no question that
the property is challenging. In the current B-2 zoning, the purpose is to provide for proper grouping
and development of roadside business uses. The property sits on a very small two-lane road that
hardly have any traffic. There are only two other uses on the road beside them. There are 90 uses
current uses permitted by right and 9 uses permitted by Special Use Permit and the applicants have
studied every one of those uses. In the classification for Urban Mixed Use, higher density uses are
encouraged, with a mix of commercial and residential uses in the zone, not necessarily on each
parcel, which is an important point, buildings to seven stories, and pedestrian access. As shown by
the overall pictures of the site, there is no pedestrian access so they would argue that Urban Mixed
Use is simply not possible on the southern piece or the eastern piece of property they are requesting
be rezoned.
Mr. Taylor stated they looked at every possible use available under Urban Mixed Use, B-2, and
R-15 and found only two uses that would work for the property. One use was an RV and camper
park, which is permitted by right under B-2, and from an economic standpoint, that one makes the
most sense for the property. It yields a good return and is basically a temporary use that can be
moved in and out, but the applicants don’t think it would be best for Wilmington or New Hanover
County. One of their arguments against putting an Urban Mixed Use development on this site is
that the property requested to be rezoned is 13+ acres, but by the time you take out the coastal
wetlands, the 404 wetlands, the 30-foot setback, a 50-foot setback and the 75-foot setback, there
are only four acres left to develop. If the board were to impose Urban Mixed Use on it, you would
have to subtract another acre out of that for stormwater so you would be left with three acres. He
stated that you can’t build an Urban Mixed Use project with three acres because you might be able
to get the buildings on the site, but you can’t meet the parking requirements. Mr. Taylor said the
applicants would love do something like that, but the property won’t handle it environmentally or
physically.
Mr. Taylor stated that the applicants really believe that the low density offered under R-10 is
absolutely the best option for this piece of property. He noted there are only three usable acres so
low density residential is absolutely the best in their opinion. Mr. Taylor said they have designed
Page 24 of 35
to do and they have, as part of their application, they are willing to and will provide water and
sewer to this property by piping it and drilling underneath the Cape Fear River to provide water
and sewer to their property and their development and to the Battleship, which is in need and will
need water and sewer for any expansion. Their pipeline just lays on top of the river. Mr. Taylor
said they will be boring forty feet underneath the river and are going to pay for that at their own
cost and provide that to the Battleship as part of their development of the property.
Mr. Taylor said he would suggest that the applicants have their own special formula of mixed use
and that’s what they’ve presented to the board. He noted mixed use must have a residential
component to it so for their total tract, the heart and soul of their tract is the B-2 tract which adjoins
the Battleship property. He stated that is the tract they are going to leave in place and leave it zoned
B-2.
Mr. Taylor stated as the Planning Board may remember, the County’s Urban Mixed Use doesn’t
require Residential to be on the same tract as the rest of the uses. You can have your components
on different tracts so he would argue very strongly that the three-acre tract they are leaving B-2
and the R-10 component is their mixture of Mixed Use; it’s just not as dense as the County
envisions. Mr. Taylor said they cannot physically or environmentally meet the density required by
Urban Mixed Use as it simply cannot be done on the property. He said they understand that when
they ask the County to rezone to Residential, R-10, the board can’t consider concept plan that
might be presented by the applicant, but has to consider every possible use under R-10. He said
the plan shown is provided strictly as a matter of illustration but they think that what works best
for this area is a B-2 component, an Urban Mixed Use component, which will stay there and then
a low density Residential section of the mixed use, which will respect the environmental sensitivity
of that particular tract. Mr. Taylor reminded that board that while it’s 14 acres, only three acres is
usable so you simply can’t put Urban Mixed Use on that property and that is the basis for their
request for rezoning.
Mr. Taylor said this is a requested downzoning of the property. The developers and owners are
very successful, highly qualified, and have a real social conscience. As a matter of right, they could
put a development on the property that economically will be very good for them, but they don’t
believe that’s the best thing to do for the county or for the citizens of Wilmington. You may ask
why do they want to build thirteen units on the property instead of 100 units. The answer is clear.
Urban mixed use on three acres simply will not work economically, environmentally, or
aesthetically. Failing to recognize the sensitivity of that portion of the property they’ve asked to
rezone is the reason every project that has come forward for the property has failed, whether it was
a twenty story skyscraper or whatever. The environmental sensitivity of the property is a huge
point. This proposal is a great compromise that pleases all the folks the applicant has talked to that
don’t want any development to take place as well the folks that want massive development to take
place. Mr. Taylor said he would argue that no comprehensive plan is perfect. There’s no way when
you adopted your comprehensive plan you could know or understand the sensitivities of this
particular piece of property. It doesn’t meet the comprehensive plan for the Urban Mixed Use
place type due to the environmental sensitivities. It simply won’t work.
Mr. Taylor said it’s really unusual when a developer client asks for a downzoning, but it’s the right
thing to do for this property and it makes a wonderful project. He showed the board what the view
of the low density component would basically be from the Cape Fear River Bridge. He asked the
Page 25 of 35
board for their support of their application and asked Mr. Catlin to address the board regarding the
things he has done in this endeavor.
Mr. Rick Catlin stated he is working 12 to 15 hours a day on his environmental engineering
business now that he isn’t in the General Assembly anymore and this is one of the neat projects he
has worked on. He updated the board on the assessment of the project which was done as he thinks
it is important that the board know that information. Mr. Catlin stated while it wasn’t required, the
they first did was a historical protection evaluation to ensure there were no buried historical ships
or any other objects that had any historical significance there. Their team found nothing there so
no other action will be needed. The development plans for this beautiful piece of property also will
have no impact on the historic abandoned ships along the coast of the Cape Fear River. There are
no plans to remove or change or impact those ships.
Mr. Catlin stated in regard to infrastructure growth, the project team has designed and is working
on permits and the applicant will pay the cost of building a water and sewer line under the river.
He has talked to the utility authority a lot about this as he was formerly on the utility authority. He
noted if the funds are ever given to dredge the river deeper, the Battleship pipeline is going to be
a problem so this would actually help the Battleship, and will also help the opportunity for the
whole region to be able to grow because they will have water and sewer over there. He said that
could help Eagle Island to be able to grow some economic capabilities. Mr. Catlin noted in his
discussions with the utility authority, they had discussed the possibility of linking the applicant’s
proposed water line once it is under the river to the other one the CFPUA has to make it strong
because it’s just got one way. It could actually help on Highway 421. Mr. Catlin noted that is not
part of this project, but he wanted to let the board know it was something he had discussed with
the utility authority.
Mr. Catlin stated in regard to environmental safety, they are looking at residential homes so they
did a lot of environmental evaluation and collected 120 soil samples, which is much more than
required. They also collected 18 groundwater samples which is far more in that small area than
anyone’s ever done. He explained they wanted to make sure they knew exactly all the
environmental issues so everyone would be safe. The answer is that it is a very safe place. He
noted they do have a Brownfield agreement and he thinks all of the homes there will be in a very,
very good situation.
Mr. Catlin stated he thinks the project will be an asset. For years and years, he has been looking at
that piece of property and saw that as a place to grow something on the river. He said now that
they’re looking at it, it does have a limitation as you really can’t build anything big there so it is a
place to do some very nice residential homes, which will have a great view across the river. The
residents will be near the Battleship and be able to boat over to the restaurants. The applicants are
also going to leave the trees as much as they can in place so the view will be very nice. Mr. Catlin
said he thinks it will be a real benefit and will grow the people that are paying taxes to New
Hanover County. He offered to answer any environmental questions the planning board members
had.
Chairman Girardot inquired if Mr. Allen Rusher was a part of the applicant’s organization as he
had signed the speakers list. Mr. Taylor explained that Mr. Rusher is a nearby property owner,
Page 26 of 35
who owns the marina and tug boat operation. He noted Mr. Rusher had attended to speak in favor
of the project, but he had an emergency and had to leave.
Jordy Rawl stated he could definitely see the positive attributes of being able to bring water and
sewer under the river there, but asked about parcel number 6, which is denoted on the map as being
in Brunswick County and whether the applicant had spoken with Brunswick County to determine
if there was any reciprocity and if Cape Fear Utility Authority would allow reciprocity of that
water and sewer.
Frank Braxton explained the applicant has been in contact with Cape Fear Utility Authority, which
currently doesn’t have a cross line, cross access agreement; however, there has been some
discussion about it. He said he thinks it will be a benefit to both counties if it could be joined
together. The applicant is open to it and he thinks they are running the line with the capacity to
serve another area so there is a good possibility.
David Weaver noted the board is technically not supposed to be considering the layout that the
applicant has done for this subdivision. He said he personally feels like it’s a great looking
development, great looking subdivision over there, but given the fact that a lot of other things
could happen in R-10, he would ask if the applicant had considered some kind of conditional
zoning district request as opposed to a straight R-10.
Mr. Taylor noted Mr. Schuler could correct him if he was speaking out of line, but explained when
they spoke to folks, in the first fifteen minutes they got fifteen conditions they wanted on the
project, for example provide a public boat ramp, a public gazebo, public bathrooms a boardwalk,
etc. He said it was his understanding from staff that even if the applicant provided those things,
that is not something they would support.
Mr. Schuler stated that staff had encouraged the applicants throughout the process to apply for a
conditional rezoning. Staff can’t give an opinion on this until they see the plan and have a chance
to review it. Staff didn’t say they couldn’t support a conditional rezoning. They just need time to
review it and would like to see components of the mixed use type of development incorporated
into it. Staff isn’t saying it has to be a high-rise building with a lot of parking, but they do want to
see it move more toward a mixed-use type of development that offers supporting uses that are
close together and different forms of transportation. He noted that is something staff would
encourage and try to push for in the conditional rezoning process and if that was included, then
staff could be potentially supportive of the conditional rezoning.
Mr. Taylor responded that it’s only three acres and the property is so sensitive that the only thing
that can be done with it is low density development. He noted they can’t say whether the houses
are going to sit in a row or are going to fall on the water line or what the lots are going to look like.
The applicant knows what their plan is, but it got so cumbersome for them as they have to deal
with brownfields, three sets of setbacks, etc. that they couldn’t do it as a conditional use. He noted
when you are doing all they are doing environmentally, they have to have some discretion with
how they draw this low density project out and that was the reason it was su bmitted this way.
Paul Boney noting understanding of Mr. Taylor’s comments, but said it would make a difference
to him for the applicant to go back and do that and come back with a plan showing what the
Page 27 of 35
applicant is actually going to do on the property. Now, the applicant is telling the board this might
be what they are going to do. No matter what conditions they make, this board finalizes those
conditions and looks at it to see if it’s reasonable. He noted he can see that property across the
river from his office and indicated he wasn’t comfortable yet because he doesn’t know what kind
of project the applicants are going to do. He commented that Mr. Taylor had said they could put a
mobile home park or something there, but that’s probably not going to be the highest and best use
of that property for the developer. He asked him to think about it from the planning board’s
perspective. He said he appreciated Mr. Taylor’s candor about what he ran into, but he wasn’t
convinced that a straight R-10 rezoning is what they ought to do. Mr. Boney noted that a
conditional use rezoning would be something to think about.
Mr. Olds stated a concern about the Battleship and its future and what its plans may be and how
the B zone may have an impact or not have an impact. He said it appears right now that the R-10
is not compatible at all with how the Battleship operates. Mr. Taylor replied that the R-10 doesn’t
adjoin the Battleship. The 3-acres piece of B-2 that adjoins the battleship will remain B-2 zoning
and is not a part of the request. Their development is divided into two pieces. One is the three acres
off developable land and the other is the three acres that adjoins the Battleship, which is B-2 and
will remain B-2. Whatever is done with that piece of property will be an adjunct to the Battleship,
which is zoned B-2 also. The applicants’ proposed residential rezoning is located on the other end
of their property.
In response to Mr. Boney’s concern, Mr. Taylor stated he didn’t want anyone to think he was
threatening anything. He explained that they actually evaluated every one of the 90 uses and ran
economic models on them and those were the only two models that would work for this piece of
property. When you see that and come to understand that, you will understand that no project has
ever succeeded on that property because they didn’t take into account the sensitivity of the land.
You just simply can’t put a B-2 development on that acreage.
Opposition
During the opposition portion of the hearing, Roger Shew stated that he had previously sent in his
comments regarding this rezoning. He said he agreed with the staff that the rezoning should not be
allowed, but he would also say that consideration of this parcel for mixed use is also an error. The
bottom line is that sometimes proposed zoning make absolutely no sense and this is a prime
example of that. He said he wished he had known of this property’s availability for purchase
because he would certainly have given money to acquire this property for the county and the
benefit of the residents. The best use for this property is to leave it in a natural state or alternatively
to construct an educational center that provides historical, cultural and environmental education
for our area and also helping to protect critical habitat and the health of the watersheds. That type
of center would draw children and adults and be a perfect complement to the educational
opportunities with the Battleship. In addition to the obvious benefits to the community, there are
fundamental properties of this site that led him to this conclusion. As stated earlier, less than three
acres of the site are above the AE zone, the base flood elevation. FEMA has said the best thing to
do in a floodway is that you allow the waters to be carried away as quickly as possible and the best
approach in that area is to avoid development at all. The whole area is surrounded by river or
wetland soils. As Mr. Catlin knows, the wetland soil is a Dorvan soil that is an organic fibrous soil
that has a tendency to degrade rapidly and will compact readily and if you have any saltwater
Page 28 of 35
change in the pore waters of that organic material, it will degrade even more rapidly. We’ve already
had floods in the area. You will have to raise the road and provide opportunity for access when
you put something like that in there. But, if you had a raised area for educational exhibits and
buildings, then you wouldn’t have to worry about that because you’re not impeding floodwaters
in those areas. Mr. Shew said he was encouraged that the Star-News Op-Ed section yesterday
basically said the same thing that he had said in his letter. Staff is right; this is not in the public
interest and we must ensure any development does not negatively impact the county’s economic,
cultural, historic and natural resources. Neither housing nor small mixed use meets those very
reasonable requirements. Sometimes, it’s time to say no, but if we can’t say no to a development
in this kind of location, then he thinks that the golden X of the river, the beach, and this whole area
that was discussed in previous discussions, then we are in jeopardy of preservation of our area. It’s
time to think above the mortgage life and small tax base increase that can be accrued. As Mr.
Spock of Star Trek would say, logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs
of the few. Mr. Shew said we are the many.
During rebuttal, Mr. Taylor said they have discussed the project and shown the board the nature
of the problem here. He explained the property is going to be developed. Millions of dollars have
been spent. The applicants believe that their proposal is by far the best compromise for those that
want intensive use and those that want no use. He noted the board is expert at compromise so he
would ask them to forward a favorable recommendation to the county commissioners.
During rebuttal, Mr. Roger Shew stated he understands that the property is going to be developed.
He would just ask that sometimes we take a look back and take a stance where we do something a
little bit different and this is one of those opportunities. He said he regrets to say it probably will
be developed, but he would like to go on record along with the Star-News and some others in
saying that it is a bad idea for this area.
Chairman Girardot closed the public hearing and opened the planning board discussion period.
Ernest Olds echoed Mr. Boney’s concerns about the uncertainty of the plan, noting that is one of
his main concerns. He said he is most concerned that we seem to have run out of options of things
we can do with the land so why does the board have to make a decision now. Maybe there is
something like an environmental center or another option. In this case, he doesn’t think because
this is the only option available that this is something worth pursuing with the amount of
uncertainty that has been presented.
Mr. Boney apologized to Mr. Taylor in regard to concerns about his presentation, noting he has a
problem with a blanket R-10 rezoning. He suggested that Mr. Taylor get together with his talented
consultants and the staff and seek a compromise and provide one of those beautiful renderings
with a real plan that provides certainty for the planning board to consider rather than them having
to take the applicant’s word for it.
David Weaver echoed Mr. Boney’s comments. The applicants are great, but it would be nice to
have a definite plan in place if something happened to them. He inquired if there was a zoning
category that requires a one-acre lot. Mr. Schuler replied the Airport Residential District requires
an acre lot, but outside of that, there is the R-20S zoning district and R-20 zoning district. Mr.
Weaver asked if there is a way to request a zoning district that would not specify the lot lines, the
Page 29 of 35
setbacks, structure, etc. are located, but instead only specify a thirteen lot subdivision. Mr. Schuler
replied if it was a zoning district, it would have to be a conditional district. The ordinance really
wants you to have a very definite plan, but staff can work with the applicant. He noted staff would
want to ensure what is presented complies with the subdivision ordinance so there are no issues
further down the line, but as far as building placement and setbacks, those can be modified and
you don’t have to show the exact location of the structures. Mr. Schuler said staff can work with
the applicant on that issue, but some level of detail will need to be shown on that plan.
Mr. Weaver noted staff had said it wasn’t consistent, but he would contend that as a mixed use
because it is so close to the downtown that it in essence functions as the residential aspect of a
mixed use development so that is not a concern for him in this particular case. Second, it doesn’t
sound like there are necessarily any historic or cultural resources on the site that would be impacted
by development so he wondered if that is not really an issue either. Brad Schuler commented that
the Battleship is a very important resource and Downtown Wilmington is a very important
resource. There are the shipwrecks along there, as well as the Gullah Geechi culture of Eagle Island
so he would disagree. Mr. Schuler thinks there are a lot of resources very nearby this property and
we need to make sure that this development doesn’t negatively impact them.
Jordy Rawl commented that a R-10 Conditional Plan would definitely help bring out the true intent
of this project and hammer out the details. They are obviously in an uphill battle trying to design
this project so if it is their intent to develop it the way the renderings depicted it, it would be his
recommendation to have that plan brought forward to the board so we can understand exactly what
the project will look like. He pointed out that it will be the first development project that the City
of Wilmington will see on that side of the river that is actually visible from the downtown area.
He has a lot of positive feelings about the way downtown Wilmington has been able to reinvigorate
itself and thinks this is a rare opportunity to help set the bar for how the area across the river will
take shape. He noted to the developer’s credit, he has seen a project they have done before and
they did a very nice job with it so he certainly thinks they have the capabilities. They have
obviously hired a marquis staff to help push the project forward. That being sad, he thought it
would best behoove their intent and the board’s considerations if they could bring forward that
conditional plan to help give the board the confidence that it is indeed what is going to happen.
Chairman Girardot asked the applicant if he would like to continue the application to a future
meeting or to proceed with the board deciding whether to recommend approval or denial of the
application. Mr. Taylor stated appreciation for the discussions, noting they take them as being
very well intended. He stated they would like to ask for a continuance to the next Planning Board
meeting in order to meet with staff to look at a conditional application and try to work out what
the conditions would be to determine if those conditions can be met environmentally and from a
development standpoint.
Ken Vafier suggested that the applicant consider withdrawing the request because a continuance
would result in the application still being under the consideration of a general use rezoning. There
are different submission requirements that will come with the conditional use, namely a
community meeting will have to be held and the application must be re-advertised as a conditional
use.
Page 30 of 35
Mr. Taylor confirmed the applicant would like to request a continuance of the current plan in order
to meet with their experts and consider whether to withdraw that application and bring back
another for the board’s consideration.
Paul Boney made a motion, seconded by David Weaver to continue Rezoning Request Z-962 to
the March 2017 Planning Board meeting. The Planning Board voted 7-0 continue Rezoning
Request Z-962 to the March 2017 New Hanover County Planning Board meeting.
Item 4: Rezoning Request (Z-966, 1/17) – Request by Design Solutions on behalf of the
property owner, New Beginning Christian Church, to rezone 8.57 acres located at the 3100
block of Blue Clay Road, from (CZD) R-10, Conditional Residential District, to (CUD) R-10,
Conditional Use Residential District, and for a Special Use Permit for a high density
development consisting of 68 dwelling units.
Chairman Girardot stated the request is for a conditional use district with a special use permit,
therefore, anyone wishing to speak must sign the public speakers form and be sworn in by the
county attorney.
Current Planner Brad Schuler provided information pertaining to location, land classification,
access, level of service and zoning; and showed maps, aerials, and photographs of the property
and the surrounding area. Mr. Schuler presented the following:
This is an application to establish a Conditional Use Zoning District. This type of zoning
district is not the same as the Conditional Zoning Districts we mostly now see in the
county. Technically, a Conditional Use Zoning District is a district that requires every land
use within it obtain a Special Use Permit, and therefore, there are potentially two actions
this board must take with making a decision on this type of application.
o The first action is on the rezoning itself, to the Conditional Use district. This is
a legislative decision, meaning it is a policy decision on whether or not the board
thinks the proposed district is appropriate for the area. This rezoning is
considered to be a straight or general rezoning; and therefore, no conditions can
be added to this action.
o If the rezoning is approved, then the board can consider the SUP of the proposed
land use. This is a quasi-judicial decision, meaning the decision must be made
on substantial and competent evidence presented here at the meeting. Conditions
above and beyond the requirements of the county's development ordinances can
be added on the proposed development with this action. Unlike conditional
zoning districts, the applicant does not have to agree to those conditions for them
to be added.
A zoning map of the area shows the subject property is located in an area that zoned for
residential purposes. New Beginning Christian Church, which owns the property, is located
next door here. To the north is a R-10 district that contains the Runny Meade and Ivy Wood
subdivisions. To the south is a Conditional R-10 district which was recently approved by
the Board of Commissioners in order to allow for the development of a performance
Page 31 of 35
residential subdivision called Rachel's Place. It is currently under construction. To the west
is R-20 zoning containing single family homes, as well as some R-15 residential zoning
next to Sandy and Modog Lanes. To the east across Blue Clay Road is the North Kerr
Industrial Park and the Blue Clay Farms Planned Development.
The subject property is currently undeveloped. In April 2016, it was rezoned to a
conditional R-10 zoning district in order to allow for the development of a 46 lot
performance residential subdivision. The property owner is now seeking to develop a
portion of this parcel as a high density development, specifically for an active adult
retirement community or independent living facility. The site plan for the new proposal
consists of 68 dwelling units. The main access to the development will be from Blue Clay
Road. No driveways are proposed to be installed along Holland Drive or Alex Trask Drive;
however, there will be an access way connection to the church’s parking lot from this
development. There will also be a connection to the road stub from the Rachel’s Place
subdivision to the south. The ordinance requires that connection be continued further north
with the goal of one day a connection being made to Galway Road as shown in the previous
plan. Also required by the ordinance, the development will be providing sidewalks
throughout, including one which connects to Blue Clay Road. The Wilmington-New
Hanover County Comprehensive Greenway Plan calls for a greenway to be installed along
the western side of Blue Clay road, which this sidewalk would then provide access to. In
regard to traffic, this use will generate nine trips in the AM peak and twelve trips in the PM
peak. As these trips do not exceed 100 in either of the peak hours, a TIA was not required
to be completed. This site plan was reviewed by the TRC and does comply with the
technical standards of the county's zoning ordinance.
Staff has reviewed this rezoning and special use permit application to determine if it is
consistent with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan. The Plan classifies the subject property as
Community Mixed Use. This place type focuses on small-scale, compact, mixed use
development patterns that serve all modes of travel and act as an attractor for county
residents and visitors. Overall, the proposed development is consistent with the
comprehensive plan. Multi-family residential is encouraged within the Community Mixed
Use place type. The ideal density for multi-family residential uses in this place type is
moderate (ranging up to 15 units per acre). The 7+ dwelling units per acre o f this
development is consistent with this recommendation and is the average density needed to
support the small-scale, compact, mixed use development patterns that this place type
promotes.
The project is also consistent with several other land use plan goals. Its proximity to water
and sewer utilities and use of existing transportation networks supports the efficient
provision of public services. The project’s pedestrian amenities also serve to meet the land
use plan’s goals of safe, walkable communities, and the location of the project close to
services and employment centers may minimize vehicle trips for residents.
Staff recommends approval of the rezoning to the Conditional Use Zoning district and finds
that the rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and is reasonable and in the
public interest. If the board approves the rezoning, then you can consider the Special Use
Permit portion of this application. Staff has conducted an analysis of the proposed use and
Page 32 of 35
the information provided as part of the application package and has created preliminary
findings of fact for each of the conclusions required to reach approval of the special use
permit request. Those preliminary findings are detailed in the staff summary.
Staff recommends three conditions be placed on the special use permit. First, the
development be used only as an Active Adult Retirement Community or Independent
Living Facility. Second, as recommended by the Fire Services Department, that no gates
or traffic calming devices be installed unless reviewed and approved by the Technical
Review Committee. Gates and speed bumps may hinder emergency services from getting
there. Third, a twenty-foot (20’) wide easement shall be dedicated along Blue Clay Road
for the purpose of installing a multi-use path. (This condition is already placed on the
conditional zoning district).
Mr. Shuler offered to answer questions from board members
Chairman Girardot stated when the Planning Board recommended approval in April there was
access from Alex Trask Drive and Holland Drive and asked about the length of that access road.
Mr. Schuler and Ms. Wolf stated the access road is 1,280 feet long. In response to Chairman
Girardot’s inquiry, Mr. Schuler reported that the proposal can be accessed from Alex Trask Drive
through the church’s parking lot and Fire Services has reviewed the plan and determined it does
meet their standards.
Chairman Girardot opened the public hearing and recognized the applicant.
Cindee Wolf stated she represents the applicant, New Beginnings Christian Church. She stated the
applicant came in several months ago after the approval of Rachel’s Place with a conditional
zoning district for R-10 because of the sewer and water and changes in the Castle Hayne area and
along Blue Clay Road resulting in more residential development occurring. At the time, this was
a R-10 performance residential development, which was what was available to the applicant, but
then the Comprehensive Land Use Plan identified this area as residential mixed use, which gave it
the opportunity being on Blue Clay Road to or fit into that criteria for high density development.
Ms. Wolf said the church’s motivation and hopes all along had been to do a senior housing
community, but at that time, the land classification overlaid on the site didn’t permit that. The
applicant went through this process for a reasonable, 46 lot subdivision, very similar to Rachel’s
Place, but the Comprehensive Land Use Plan change gives the applicant the opportunity for the
church’s vision to come to fruition.
Ms. Wolf said one of the changes in the old plan is that one area on the left side of the plan will
become part of the Christian Church and will give them the opportunity for future development.
That is not part of the proposal under consideration, but it does give them a solid piece of land so
that they can provide some recreation opportunities for the church, and perhaps in the future, a
fellowship hall, etc. rather than the property being cut into two parcels which is what the other
subdivision plan did. The Covenant senior housing project would include the driveway, which will
connect into Rachel’s Place, and will also connect into the church, and will have circulation around
The Covenant. She noted that one of the reasons Fire Services is okay with this proposal is because
all of these units have sprinklers.
Page 33 of 35
Ms. Wolf explained that the plan being presented tonight is slightly different. There are seventeen
buildings, a community center and a picnic area. Since the original submittal was delayed last
month because of a mailing error, the applicant revisited the footprint to reduce the number of
sidewalks and impervious surface and to keep people circulating around the site. The site plan that
is in the planning board packet, albeit still 17 buildings with 68 units, is just slightly different than
the site plan being presented. The floor plan reflects nine quads, each with four one-bedroom units,
and the two bedroom units. Buildings are all one story with sprinklers and are in a rotary design
so that all doors provide private entrances around the sides of the buildings. They have some nice
architectural features. The proposal also incorporates a clubhouse as a community meeting area.
The footprints are slightly different, but generally speaking this is the same layout.
Ms. Wolf stated this particular project is being defined as senior housing because the demographic
studies are suggesting that aging households will certainly dominate our future and the senior
housing is eligible for the Qualified Allocation Plan by the North Carolina Housing Finance
Agency. It’s not a sure thing, but the applicant is vying for that tax credit funding. Regardless, this
would continue to be a senior housing proposal, whether it was tax credit funded or not, but the
applicant thinks that’s an excellent opportunity if it’s allocated to have affordable housing for these
seniors in addition to just the fact that it would be for senior housing.
Ms. Wolf said senior housing generates a lot less traffic than other types and Blue Clay Road
certainly has the capacity for the added trip generation. Utilities would be connected to the public
system. One of the things that early on the communities off Holland Drive were concerned about
was more dense development. Even though this is a high density development, the density is 8
units per acre. This will be a small community, very specific to its users, and at a density of about
8 units per acre.
Ms. Wolf stated the County’s policies for growth and development encourage safe and affordable
housing to be available to all citizens. Infill of vacant properties is an excellent opportunity for
economic development and increased tax base. The applicant believes this project meets those
criteria and presents a sensible density. The applicant agrees with staff’s determination that the
proposal is consistent with the County’s Comprehensive Plan, and with the goals and policies for
development in this area. Ms. Wolf said the applicant also agrees with the conditions offered and
she is available to answer any questions the board members may have.
In response to an inquiry from Ernest Olds to compare the population and traffic prior to and after
the proposed development, Ms. Wolf stated for a 46-unit subdivision, a round number is generally
ten trips per day assuming a family with two parents and kids. Senior housing is probably a quarter
of that and not during the peak hours generally. If this comes to fruition and the applicant is able
to work through the qualified allocation plan for affordable housing, the probability is that a lot of
the seniors that would be living there wouldn’t have vehicles. The church will be working in
cooperation with the East Carolina Community Development Organization, which would be the
managers of the community, but the church would hold ownership. There would be a cooperative
venture with the congregation, making available buses, day trips, etc.
In response to an inquiry from Paul Boney, Ms. Wolf explained that the minimum age for the
senior community would be 55 years old and the church will own the facility under an LLC or
Page 34 of 35
something similar. The pastor can address the specifics. This project is a vision that the church has
had and they will be deeply involved.
Noting many of the residents will probably not have vehicles, Chairman Girardot inquired if
WAVE Transit served the area of the proposed development. Ms. Wolf stated that WAVE Transit
has a route on Castle Hayne Road, but to the best of her knowledge they wouldn’t venture into the
area of the proposed development. She will take a look at that.
No one from the public spoke in regard to the rezoning item.
Chairman Girardot asked if the applicant agreed with the staff’s findings and any condition
proposed to be added to the special use permit. Cindee Wolf confirmed the applicant agreed with
staff’s findings and any conditions proposed to be added to the special use permit. Chairman
Girardot entertained a motion on the rezoning.
David Weaver made a motion, seconded by Allen Pope, to recommend approval as the Planning
Board finds this request for a zoning map amendment of 8.75 acres in (CZD) R-10, Conditional
Residential District, to (CUD) R-10, Conditional Use Residential District, as described is:
1) Consistent with the purposes and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because
multifamily residential is encouraged within the Community Mixed Use Place Type.
The proposed density is consistent with the plan and is the average density needed to
support the small scale, compact, mixed use development patterns that this place type
promotes.
2) Reasonable and in the public interest because the development is located in close
proximity to water and sewer utilities, and will provide pedestrian amenities to help
promote a safe, walkable community. The development is also located close to services
and employment centers which may minimize vehicle trips for the residents.
The Planning Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval of Rezoning Request Z-966.
Chairman Girardot entertained a motion for the accompanying special use permit.
Allen Pope made a motion, seconded by David Weaver, to recommend approval as the Planning
Board finds this application for a special permit to develop a high density development:
1) Will not materially endanger the public health or safety;
2) Meets all requirements, conditions, and specifications of the zoning ordinance;
3) Will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting properties; and
4) Will be in harmony with the surrounding area and is in general conformity of the plan
for development of New Hanover County.
Including staff’s suggested conditions:
1) Development shall be used as an Active Adult Retirement Community or Independent
Living Facility.
2) No gates or traffic calming devices shall be installed unless reviewed and approved by
the Technical Review Committee.
Page 35 of 35
3) A twenty foot (20’) easement shall be dedicated to the County along Blue Clay Road
for the purpose of installing a future multi-use path in accordance with the Wilmington-
New Hanover County Comprehensive Greenway Plan.
The Planning voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the companion special use permit for Z-966.
Technical Review Committee Report (January 2016)
No TRC report was given.
Other Business
Approval of Work Session Minutes
Chairman Girardot entertained a motion to approve the minutes for the five work sessions held
between August 2016 and December 2016.
Paul Boney made a motion to approve the minutes for the five work sessions held between August
2016 and December 2016 as presented. Jordy Rawl seconded the motion. The Planning Board
voted unanimously to approve the minutes for the work sessions held on August 30, 2016,
September 22, 2016, September 29, 2016, November 15, 2016, and December 8, 2016.
With no other items of business, Chairman Girardot adjourned the meeting at 9:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
______________________________________
Chris O’Keefe, Planning & Land Use Director