2017-05 May 4 2017 PBM
Page 1 of 15
Minutes of the
New Hanover County Planning Board
May 4, 2017
The New Hanover County Planning Board met Thursday, May 4, 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
Allen Pope Ben Andrea, Current Planning & Zoning Supervisor
Edward “Ted” Shipley, III Rebekah Roth, Senior Planner
David Weaver Brad Schuler, Current Planner
Dylan McDonnell, Long Range Planner
Absent: Julia Moeller, Community Development Planner
Ernest Olds, Vice Chairman John Townsend, Planning Technician
Paul Boney Sharon Huffman, Deputy County Attorney
Jordy Rawl
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.
Approval of Minutes
Motion: Ted Shipley MOVED, SECONDED by Allen Pope, to approve the April 6,
2017 Planning Board minutes as written. Upon vote, the MOTION PASSED 4-0.
Chairman Girardot stated she would like to move Item #2 Rezoning Request Z17-04
forward to consider the rezoning case prior to hearing the staff presentation on the Monkey
Junction small area plan. She reported that she had also asked staff to provide an overview on the
status of the UDO process at the end of the meeting. Hearing no objections, Chairman Girardot
announced the public hearing on Rezoning Request Z17-04.
Item 2: Rezoning Request (Z17-04) – Request by Design Solutions on behalf of the property
owner, Carolina Partner Group, LLC, in order to rezone 0.71 acres located at 6311 Carolina
Beach Road from (CUD) B-1, Conditional Use Business District, to (CZD) B-1, Conditional
Business District, in order to develop an automobile service station.
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 staff report:
Page 2 of 15
This is an application to establish a conditional zoning district in order to develop an
automobile service station. The subject property is currently zoned as a Conditional Use
B-1 district, which includes the property directly south. That property currently contains
a gift shop and a single family dwelling. There is a mixture of commercial and
residential zoning in the area, with mostly non-residential uses being located along
Carolina Beach Road. Located directly north is a religious institution, to the east is the
Winds Ridge townhomes development, and to the west are general commercial uses,
including a child care facility.
The subject property is currently an undeveloped, wooded tract of land. There are no
wetlands or flood zones located on the subject property.
The current approved site plan that is attached to the Conditional Use zoning district
was approved in 1994 and allows for a gift shop, single-family dwelling, retail nursery
as shown on the plan. In 2002, the parent parcel was subdivided into three lots, which
created the subject 0.71 acres property being considered under this rezoning application.
All of the uses allowed within the current conditional use district are all located on the
adjacent lot to the south and will continue to operate under that approved district.
The site plan submitted with the application proposes to develop a 5,800 square foot
automobile service station consisting of 7 service bays. The proposed development will
connect directly to Carolina Beach Road and will provide one parking lot cross-access
stub, which will be installed up to the southern property line. Stormwater runoff will
be handled by an underground system, so there are no ponds proposed for the
development. The development has also obtained a variance from the Board of
Adjustment for certain setback standards. These standards require increased setbacks
from residential uses, but with the variance, the proposed building is allowed to be
developed ten feet (10’) from the property line as shown on the site plan.
In regard to traffic, the proposed use will generate 17 trips in the AM peak hour, and 20
trips in the PM peak hour. Because these trips do not exceed 100 in either of the peak
hours, a TIA was not required to be completed. Carolina Beach Road currently operates
at a Level of Service (LOS) of “F”, when using the volume to capacity ratio.
Staff has reviewed this rezoning application for consistency with the 2016
Comprehensive Plan. The Plan classifies the subject property as Community Mixed
Use. The Community Mixed use 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 because it will provide for a community level service to the
surrounding area and because it will provide for the opportunity for future
interconnectivity with the property to the south. For those reasons, staff is
recommending approval of the application without any additional conditions.
Mr. Schuler offered to answer questions from the board.
In response to inquiries from Chairman Girardot to clarify the location of the house and
the variance that was granted by the Zoning Board of Adjustment, Mr. Schuler confirmed that the
house is not on the subject property, but is located on the adjacent property where the gift shop is
located and that the setback variance of ten feet from the property line applies to the side property
line adjacent to the residential use only. Mr. Schuler explained that when a commercial use locates
Page 3 of 15
next to a residential use, the setback is the height of the structure multiplied by 2.75 for the side
set back. The Board of Adjustment has issued a variance for that particular standard.
Chairman Girardot opened the public hearing and recognized the applicant.
Cindee Wolf of Design Solutions stated she represented the owner and developer and
provided the following information relative to the proposed application.
Ms. Wolf explained that Oleary's is a local establishment with a few locations around the
region and is not one of the larger places like Valvoline and other larger ones around. Her client is
very interested in locating another store toward the southern part of the county. Ms. Wolf presented
a color rendering of the proposal, noting there are some minor changes to the rendering from the
actual site plan in front of the board, including that this would be stubbed to the property line. She
noted they have located an existing tree there that she believes they can avoid. She noted it will be
very nice to have the stub there if the gift store shop ever redevelops or rehabs to provide that
interconnectivity.
Ms. Wolf stated the orientation of the building is nice. The counter and waiting area is
located in the front section that Carolina Beach Road and is more of a storefront type of situation.
With the way the building and the lot are cocked to the roadway corridor and not perpendicular to
it, passersby from the south will not see anything as far as the building itself. There is a blank wall
along the back adjacent to the residential use. She showed an exhibit reflecting the buffer yard
along the back adjacent to the residential use. She noted that traveling south on Carolina Beach
Road being across the median and the buffer that will be required between this use and the church,
since the church is zoned residential, the bays of the actual use will be fairly well screened from
passersby.
Ms. Wolf then presented an exhibit reflecting what transpired during the variance process.
She explained that the owner of the adjacent property had signed off on the variance. It is the
owner and operator of the gift store that lives in that home. It was agreed upon that there would be
a fence to screen the parking. The applicant will incorporate a fence along the back, not only for
the residential use, but also for Winds Ridge, in addition to a large buffer based on the setbacks
and buffer yards. The applicant has also agreed to put landscaping along the blank wall to soften
the look of it.
Ms. Wolf stated in regard to the questions about automotive type uses, a use like this
O’Leary’s facility has no underground tanks so that will not be an issue on this site. The used oil,
used oil filters, etc. that are removed and replaced during servicing of vehicles are placed in smaller
drums for coolant and oil filters and in a larger tank for used oil. These drums are pumped monthly
by a contractor who takes it away from the site, which is a regular service type of situation. The
hours of operation for this establishment will be 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday,
with drop-off and pick-up available until 5:30 p.m. No work will be done in the bays between 5:00
p.m. and 5:30 p.m. The business will also be open from 8:00 a.m. until 2:00 p.m. on Saturdays and
will be closed on Sundays. She stated that any noise or adverse effects on neighbors in the vicinity
or on the church will be protected by those hours. Ms. Wolf offered to answer any questions the
board may have.
Page 4 of 15
In response to an inquiry from Chairman Girardot regarding whether the proposed use
included body work, Ms. Wolf explained there is a very distinct category between automobile
service stations and automobile repair and the proposed use would not include body work. The
definition of the proposed use was cleared with the zoning officer prior to beginning the application
process, and includes services such as oil changes, lube jobs, etc. There will be no painting, heavy
body work, or things of that nature. There is a very specific definition in our code and the proposed
use meets the definition of the use that is permitted in the B-1 district.
In response to David Weaver’s inquiry regarding the skimmer system of the underground
storage component for the stormwater treatment system, Ms. Wolf stated the soils in this area are
phenomenal, 12 to 15 inches per hour type of soil, so they are confident in using the infiltration
technique for stormwater management. As far as runoff of oil or other things, that will be done
within the building. They use carts with funnels that take them into the tanks, but also, to the best
of my knowledge, the floor of the building itself, the concrete slab, is flat and there's no reason
that the oil should come out through the doors. The infiltration system will be out here and in here
with just a central inlet. They are not using porous concrete so the sheet flow would go to a drop
inlet in the center so they would be creating a low spot in the parking lot, but the building slab
would not be sloped to go toward that same. She noted, however, the roof drainage certainly would
so she doesn’t see any issue of the oil used inside the building ever getting out into the parking lot.
Board Member Allen Pope noted Mr. Weaver was likely referring to an oil-water separator,
which is typically installed when there is a wash down system to wash down vehicles. He thought
this facility probably would not have a wash down system. In response to Mr. Pope’s inquiry
regarding the structures that appear to be buildings on the site plan, Ms. Wolf explained that those
structures are just canopies and are not buildings at all, and are similar to fruit and vegetable
canopies, consisting of metal rods with canvas across the top. In response to Mr. Pope’s question
about the owners of the two tracts, Ms. Wolf confirmed that the owner of the subject property does
not own the gift shop property. The owner of the gift store sold her client the subject property
several years ago. That is why he was basically quoted during the variance situation that as long
as the two fences are incorporated, plus some softening of the building facade by the plants was
fine with his ex-wife, who is the person who lives in the house, they would be agreeable to it.
Board Member Pope stated concern about why the applicant could not go ahead and make
that connection between these two parcels rather than just have a stub-out. Ms. Wolf stated the
applicant would build to the property line. She explained that on the neighbor’s side of the property
line is just gravel and sand so certainly, if they wanted to move those temporary structures and
connect, that would be up to them. Board Member Pope asked if a conversation had been held
with that property owner regarding connectivity to their property. Ms. Wolf responded that there
had not been a conversation with the adjacent property owner regarding connectivity.
Board member Ted Shipley inquired about the type of residential community located east
of the proposed site, noting it appeared that Michael’s Bay Lane dead ends and there are some
smaller homes or duplexes there. Ms. Wolf replied that she thinks it is a combination of duplexes
and single family residences down that steet. She noted that Winds Ridge is a townhome style
community and was done as a high density project in the early 2000s. The applicant has buffered
from them. She pointed out that that there is nothing further down that road; however, there is a
turnaround there. Chairman Girardot confirmed they are townhomes, noting she had driven into
Page 5 of 15
the community. Chairman Girardot commented that there is a great difference in elevation off the
back of the proposal property and it appeared that the developer would have to bring in a
tremendous amount of fill onto the proposal site. Ms. Wolf confirmed Chairman Girardot was
correct in regard to the difference in elevation, noting there is a hole there, but it would not require
a ton of fill. The applicant has had an engineer look at it, soils tests have been done, and the
engineer has done some preliminary fill calculations. They are guessing that they will probably set
the slab at around 52, which is from the lowest point just three or four feet.
Chairman Girardot stated she had asked staff to show some typical pictures of the
applicant’s other locations. Ms. Wolf apologized, noting she would need to take some photos as
there was no street view of the other locations on Google Earth. Chairman Girardot noted that
staff has provided some photos of the other locations so the board would have them to review.
Ms. Wolf pointed out that one of the photos provided by staff reflected the old view and
that the new building does not have the doors on the front of the building. They looked at photos
of the Castle Hayne location and the Leland location.
Chairman Girardot commented that the County Commissioners had just recently had the
discussion about a mini storage site on North College Road across from Laney High School. One
of the commissioners mentioned they were not excited about having a metal building fronting on
North College Road. This is on Carolina Beach Road leading down to one of our biggest tourist
centers, Pleasure Island, and directly on the road. She inquired what the outside of the building
will look like and whether it would be a metal building.
Ms. Wolf stated one of the applicant’s other locations has a brick façade. That is one of the
older facilities. There is also some decorative block. She noted that the facility recently rebuilt
after the widening project took a good amount of the right-of-way on Market Street also has a brick
and decorative block façade, which faces the street.
In response to Chairman Girardot’s inquiry regarding the façade materials, Ms. Wolf stated
she could verify the exterior façade materials prior to the County Commissioners meeting, but it
appears that the area in front of the building is clad with something and she imagined the rear
section would probably be metal and where the bay doors are located would also be metal. She
felt that the view the board is seeking to enhance will be taken care of by the building’s
architecture. Chairman Girardot stated she feels it is important to enhance the street view.
Chairman Girardot inquired if the board had any additional questions for Ms. Wolf.
No one from the public spoke in support or in opposition to the rezoning application.
Chairman Girardot closed the public hearing.
Chairman Girardot stated at this time the applicant may ask to either continue the
application to a future meeting or to proceed with this board deciding whether to recommend
approval or denial of the application. She asked Ms. Wolf what the applicant wished to do.
Page 6 of 15
Cindee Wolf confirmed the applicant would like to move forward with a decision by the
Planning Board.
Chairman Girardot entertained additional discussion or a motion by the Planning Board.
Board Member Allen Pope stated his only concern with this property is that there is not
any real connectivity other than Carolina Beach Road. He noted that connecting to the gift shop
would definitely be an advantage, but the gift shop doesn’t connect to anything either so at this
point he would be in favor of the rezoning.
Chairman Girardot stated she thinks the applicant would have to have the gift shop owners’
permission, as they would have to be a willing participant to make that connection. Board Member
Pope stated he wished the applicant had held a conversation about connectivity with the adjacent
property owner prior to submitting the application.
Board Member David Weaver inquired if it would be permissible to include a condition in
a motion for approval to require cladding of the office area with either brick or stone.
Chairman Girardot confirmed she had spoken with staff and it would be permissible to
include a condition to require cladding of the office area with either brick or stone.
Cindee Wolf, the applicant, stated she had no doubt the architecture is going to meet that
criteria for the front section, but she certainly couldn’t agree to a condition that the entire building
not have metal panels at all. Ms. Wolf also stated concern about connecting to the adjacent
property now based on the way the property currently is. She noted she could very possibly see
someone flying through the parking lot that is sand and has no format at this point in time. She
noted that when the gift shop re-develops, it will have to come back for approval by the Planning
Board and County Commissioners because it is a B-1 CUD district and will have to be reviewed
by the staff. Ms. Wolf said she thinks that is the point where it will be very important to provide
that interconnectivity, and that it would be a little dangerous to open that connection up now. She
noted the applicant will certainly pave to the property line.
Hearing no other questions or comments, Chairman Girardot entertained a motion from the
Planning Board.
Motion: David Weaver MOTIONED, SECONDED BY Ted Shipley, to recommend
approval as the Planning Board finds this request for a zoning map amendment of 0.71 acres from
(CUD) B-1, Conditional Use Business District, to (CZD) B-1, Conditional Business District, as
described is:
1. Consistent with the purposes and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because
commercial uses that provide community level services are encouraged within the
Community Mixed Use place type.
2. Reasonable and in the public interest because the proposed development provides for
community level service to the surrounding residents, and because it will provide the
opportunity for future interconnectivity along a major thoroughfare.
Page 7 of 15
Condition:
1. The office area be clad in brick or decorative block.
Upon vote, the MOTION PASSED 4-0.
Item 2: Monkey Junction Plan Scoping Report – Presentation by Planning Staff of a scoping
report for a Monkey Junction small area plan.
Senior Long Range Planner Rebekah introduced the planning initiative for the Monkey
Junction area. She provided a brief explanation of what small area plans are and how they fit with
the comprehensive plan and the county’s other planning initiatives. She also outlined why the
Monkey Junction area was chosen for this project and described the plan’s study area and process.
Ms. Roth then presented some findings from staff’s preliminary research, what to expect next in
the process, and how it will coordinate with the other initiatives.
Comprehensive Plan Background
The Comprehensive Plan, adopted in August 2016, incorporated extensive community input
to develop a variety of strategies to help achieve the county’s vision. The plan’s Future Land
Use Map shows what type of development would be best for different areas of the county
outside of the city limits. These place types provide general information on appropriate
development, but the same place type might look different depending on a community’s
existing character and needs.
For instance, urban mixed use areas, where development would look more like a city pattern
and be easily walkable, will look different in Monkey Junction, Middle Sound, Ogden,
Porters Neck, Kirkland, and around Cape Fear’s north campus but all are designated urban
mixed use. In many cases, place types are similar to the type of development already on the
ground - for instance in the many general residential areas of the county. There are some
differences, though—such as the urban mixed use areas, recommending smaller scale
community mixed use in the undeveloped northeastern section of the county, and
establishing growth nodes where increased density is recommended, such as the Cape Fear
north campus, the Porters Neck-Kirkland area, and in Monkey Junction. These nodes were
included so growth could be accommodated in places that already have more density as a
way to protect the rest of the county from increased sprawl.
Small Area Plan Background
With the comprehensive plan in place, one of the next steps outlined in the PlanNHC 2016
Action Plan is developing detailed, targeted plans for the areas of the county outside of the
city limits. Small area plans supplement the broad vision of the comprehensive plan by
providing a finer level of detail to address a specif ic area’s unique needs and opportunities.
Each small area planning process includes a study of the specific land use, transportation,
and other existing conditions of the particular community. County staff will work with local
stakeholders to identify the issues the plan should address, the features it should protect, and
the opportunities and constraints for action. These small area plans will give the community
the opportunity to refine PlanNHC’s vision for their community, exploring different
development scenarios and their possible outcomes. Based on PlanNHC’s vision and the
Page 8 of 15
community’s goal, the county will work with stakeholders to develop actionable strategies
and identify indicators of success.
Factors Considered for Small Area Plan Initiatives
Areas of high current development—Monkey Junction, Porters Neck/Kirkland,
Wrightsboro
Areas of potential high development—those three areas, plus Hwy 421 & northeast
Changing development patterns—growth nodes, northeast
Existing small area plans
Monkey Junction was the only area that met all of these criteria.
Monkey Junction Plan Study Area
The study area for the Monkey Junction plan includes the primary Monkey Junction
intersection of Carolina Beach & College Rd. and uses the Wilmington city limits and roads
(Masonboro Loop, Myrtle Grove, Sanders, Lt. Congleton) as boundaries. The majority of
the plan’s recommendations will likely be targeted to the area within ½ mile of the primary
intersection. This main commercial hub provides essential services and products to the
adjacent neighborhoods, so recommendations will be developed to ensure it can efficiently
serve surrounding communities. Just outside of the study area are residential neighborhoods
and commercial enterprises that could be greatly affected by any changes to the Monkey
Junction area. As a result, these peripheral areas will be specifically included in public
engagement initiatives.
Planning Process
The Monkey Junction planning process is designed to allow for wide—yet accessible—
public input and deliberation. The scoping portion of this process, which has resulted in the
scoping report included in the board’s packet and posted on the county’s website, has
allowed staff to review preliminary data and get an idea of some of the potential is sues this
plan can address. The public engagement process for this plan will occur in three main
phases. The first will explore the area’s existing conditions in more detail. Staff will work
with key stakeholders holding specialized knowledge about opportunities and constraints for
the area’s future development. This will allow us to get input from the individuals and
organizations, such as large landowners, developers, and government organizations, whose
decisions and actions can change this area. The information learned from these stakeholders
will be compiled into a report that can guide the public conversation and will kick-off the
wider public engagement portion of the process. Staff will be working with area residents
and other citizens to get an understanding of their needs and values. Staff is planning a large
kick-off and up to four larger public workshops, and will also get out into the community
where people already are, rather than expecting them to make time in their schedule to come
to us. She encouraged board members to share their ideas and suggestions for particular
events and locations that would help in those efforts. Because area stakeholders may have
some common concerns but vary widely in the amount of value they place on each issue, the
final phase of the public engagement process will provide an opportunity for deliberation on
areas where there is not consensus. The community will have the opportunity to discuss
potential required tradeoffs and begin designing strategies that can address them. Staff
estimates that during this time they will have to ability to have 2-4 larger events and some
Page 9 of 15
smaller public workshops if needed. Using that information, staff will work to draft a plan
that reflects the community’s priorities, and additional forums will be provided so the
community can evaluate plan alternatives and potential recommendations before the formal
review process starts.
Scoping Report Purpose
The scoping report included in the Planning Board packet and posted on the county’s website
is meant to provide a starting point for this process and to guide future discussions and
research. It includes information on the area’s history, development patterns, transportation
conditions, and environmental features. She encouraged anyone who is interested in this
project to go to the county’s website, take a look at it, and provide feedback, noting that any
feedback provided to the team at this stage in the process will help guide their next steps. I
will briefly describe some themes of our preliminary findings.
Community Character
First, staff’s findings suggest that the Monkey Junction area does not have distinct
community identity. Staff has been able to find little historical information beyond how the
area got its name with the monkeys at the gas station. There are few historic structures still
standing, and the area has limited civic and cultural facilities.
Land Use & Development
The most visible feature of this area is the Carolina Beach Road and College Road
intersection. Along with Piner Road, these major thoroughfares have divided the area into
four quadrants, each of which has developed a unique land use character over time. For
instance, the north quadrant -which is closest to the City of Wilmington—contains the
majority of the area’s apartments and is most similar to the city’s development patterns.
Staff has also found that the existing commercial areas - with their large parking lots and
limited landscaping - do not align with the comprehensive plan’s vision for the area. Staff
also has some preliminary information that suggests that redevelopment of many of these
properties is unlikely any time soon because of the great value of these commercial
structures, which could have a major impact on the type of recommendations the final plan
would make.
Transportation
Transportation issues - especially the high levels of traffic - are one of the most prominent
problem areas in Monkey Junction. The major thoroughfares are wide and serve as barriers
that keep residents from accessing services - especially for pedestrians and bicyclists.
Proposed transportation projects in this area could further limit this access and will need to
be taken into account in the final plan.
Environment
Because of the way this area has been developed over time, little greenspace remains; and
development continues to affect the quality of natural resources, notably Mott Creek, which
has shown high levels of bacteria that can be attributed to animal waste. Stormwater runoff
and poor drainage have also negatively affected resident quality of life, endanger existing
development during major storms, and could greatly affect future development.
Page 10 of 15
Next Steps
Over the next few months, staff will be contacting key stakeholders to gather inform ation
needed for an Existing Conditions & Development Potential Report. This report will be
presented to the Planning Board during a public meeting, and along with a kick-off event,
will trigger our wider public engagement. Information, including dates and reports, will be
located on the project website and everyone is encouraged to visit it and sign up for updates.
If board members have information that they think staff needs to consider or key
stakeholders who should be contacted, please let staff know. Staff may not be able to
incorporate all information in this first report, but the information may help inform the final
plan. The Existing Conditions report and public kick-off are anticipated to occur in early
fall, but staff will be coordinating this project with two other Planning & Land Use
initiatives.
Other Planning Projects—NE NHC Future Street Plan
Last Tuesday, we held our first public workshop for the NE NHC Future Street Plan. Until
the adoption of PlanNHC, the majority of the northeastern section of the county was outside
of the urban services boundary. This meant that public utilities weren’t available. Now that
water and sewer can be extended, there will be more opportunities for future development.
If areas are developed before a comprehensive transportation network plan is in place, it can
result in traffic congestion and reduce the quality of life. For that reason, the County and
Wilmington Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (WMPO) are working with a
consultant to study how well the existing transportation network performs and to design
ways to integrate future land use and transportation development.
Another public workshop will be held on May 16 so that the public can provide some
feedback on potential recommendations on how the future street network can best serve
residents.
Other Planning Projects—Unified Development Ordinance
Last Thursday, another public workshop was held for the release of the Unified Development
Ordinance Blueprint report. Ms. Roth introduced Director Chris O’Keefe to provide more
information on the Unified Development Ordinance project.
Planning & Land Use Director Chris O’Keefe introduced long range planning staff
members – Long Range Planner Dylan McDonnell, Planning Specialist John Townsend, and
Community Development Planner Julia Moeller. Mr. O’Keefe noted there are part of a team that
has been working incredibly hard with some of the initiatives being outlined by Senior Planner
Roth.
Chairman Girardot welcomed the long range planning staff and thanked them for their
work on the long range planning initiatives.
Director O’Keefe stated that most of the board members were able to attend the official
presentation of the Blueprint Report and Policy Audit at the joint meeting of the Board of County
Commissioners and Planning Board held last Thursday. This report is the first product provided
for the creation of the new Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). The UDO will provide a
complete overhaul of our circa 1969 zoning ordinance and will also fold in the subdivision
Page 11 of 15
regulations, floodplain requirements, stormwater requirements, and sedimentation and erosion
control requirements into one cohesive document that will have better formatting, have graphics,
and will use illustrations to help convey some of the material conveyed in the ordinance. The
blueprint and audit outline several major themes which will work to align our development
ordinances with the policies and place types included in the comprehensive plan, Plan NHC. The
detailed audit section highlights shortcomings of our existing ordinance, which contains
approximately sixty pages of things the consultant feels could be improved in the ordinance to help
in the future. On Thursday evening after the joint County Commissioners/Planning Board
meeting, the public unveiling of the document took place. Approximately fifty people attended
the meeting and provided their thoughts and suggestions on what they felt could be improved in
the ordinance, as well as their thoughts and concerns about some of the existing zoning districts.
The group was particularly interested in how they could be involved in the process moving forward
so there was a lot of discussion that involved getting more word out to the public about when our
meetings were going to occur and what could be done so that they had more opportunities to
provide feedback.
Director O’Keefe stated now that the blueprint and audit have been completed, the drafting
process begins. The bulk of the work for the drafting is going to be completed by the consultants,
which were hired by the County. Their job is to draft the ordinance so that we can review it and
provide feedback to them.
Director O’Keefe stated the consultants have broken down their task into sections. The
first section they will address involves the definitions, the zoning districts, and use standards. They
anticipate it will take about 3 months to come back with information for the technical committee,
for all of us, and for the citizens to review. The consultants are going to present this information
at public meetings where feedback will be taken. Each draft section will be highlighted online in
a prominent location on the County’s website. NHCTV will be utilized to further publicize that
the information is available, what the information is about, and how feedback can be collected.
The process itself will take between nine and twelve months for the final draft to be completed.
Once the final draft has been completed, there will be further opportunities for feedback, it will
come before the planning board, and then the Board of Count y Commissioners for ultimate
approval.
Director O’Keefe pointed out that between each drafted section there will be coordinated
meetings with the City of Wilmington. As many people are aware, the City of Wilmington is
undergoing the creation of a unified development ordinance for their own use. It is very important
that our ordinances speak the same language. We want to make sure the definitions in the County’s
ordinance mean the same thing as the definitions and the words the City of Wilmington uses in
their ordinance. The County thinks that this will serve our citizens well and the development
community well, and will also serve our staff and elected officials well.
Director O’Keefe concluded his remarks, noting there are no dates yet for when the next
draft versions will be available because it depends on how quickly the consultants can get the
sections done. As soon as those dates are available, they will be widely publicized so that
everyone will know when and where to come to provide feedback.
Page 12 of 15
Senior Long Range Planner Rebekah Roth resumed the Monkey Junction Plan Scoping
Report presentation and how all of the planning initiatives will be coordinated.
Relationship with Other Planning Projects
All of these efforts were identified as implementation measures in the Comprehensive Plan
approved last summer. They each will help implement the Comprehensive Plan’s vision,
but each also has a different purpose and scope. The Unified Development Ordinance
project most directly implements the plan because it translates its vision into ordinances that
regulate the county’s development.
The Monkey Junction Plan and NE NHC Future Street Plan both supplement PlanNHC’s
recommendations, providing greater detail to its guidance for decision makers. Both will
target specific areas, but the Future Street Plan has a much narrower focus than the Monkey
Junction plan.
Anticipated Timeline for Draft Documents
While each of these projects has had a major milestone within the past two weeks, staff will
be working to stagger future public workshops and meetings to avoid overwhelming the
public with too much information at once. Of these three projects, the Future Street Plan
has the shortest timeline, and a presentation of potential recommendations is anticipated for
next month’s Planning Board meeting. The draft document should be finalized in early
summer and its recommendations can be considered in the Unified Development Ordinance
project. The Monkey Junction Plan’s public engagement should end in early 2018. Wh ile
staff anticipates the draft plan being complete early in the year, they will be coordinating
with the Unified Development Ordinance project timeline to avoid confusion. Because staff
will be working on the projects simultaneously, we will be able to ensure they do not
contradict each other even if they are adopted at different times.
Senior Planner Roth offered to answer questions from planning board members.
Chairman Girardot inquired if staff would be preparing the scoping report for the Monkey
Junction area before it goes out to the public and the stakeholders. Senior Planner Roth responded
that the scoping report has been posted to the county’s website to give the public the ability to see
what we anticipate for our process, what the study area looks like, and some of the things we're
going to look at initially. Staff wanted to make sure that if there were things missing or things we
needed to study that they were identified as early as possible in the process. The existing
conditions report will be put together by staff over the summer and will be presented to the public
in early fall.
Chairman Girardot stated in regard to the Northeast New Hanover County Future Street
Plan that Planning Board Member Allen Pope was kind enough to agree to serve as the board’s
representative on that board. She expressed her appreciation for him agreeing to serve in that
capacity. She noted that she found it interesting about the UDO presentation by the consultants
was their change of focus from uses to structures. She stated that will be new way of thinking for
the county and asked Director O’Keefe to provide comment on the change in focus.
Director O’Keefe responded that a couple of major items that the new unified development
ordinance should bring to us are the change in focus from use to structure, which will require us
Page 13 of 15
to look at buildings and how they interact or the interplay between different buildings and that
affects communities. He agreed that it will be a big change. Director O’Keefe said that staff is
excited about moving forward. He noted that the other major point that those who have been
immersed in our new comprehensive plan know is that we're going to rely on mixed use districts
and mixed use areas moving forward to help us accommodate the tremendous growth that we are
expecting and hoping will continue in the county. Mixed use developments are what we are
looking to as the solution and the unified development ordinance is going to help us see how that
development can take place and help us create the regulations to make it happen effectively.
Chairman Girardot commented that one of the other things she took away from the
consultant was his hope to eliminate the conditional use districts. She noted if we do this right,
we hopefully won’t have a need for them. The consultant also said he hopes to increase the low
impact development and to do less text amendments to meet the needs of specific projects, which
is near and dear to her heart. She noted it should be a very rewarding process moving forward.
Director O’Keefe commented that our current ordinance is almost fifty years old. The
frequency of text amendments has been increasing so that will absolutely be one of the bonuses of
the new ordinance. It will require some tweaking at first, but it will more accurately reflect the
vision of the comprehensive plan and will certainly not require people to ask for piecemeal text
amendments as often.
Board member David Weaver apologized for not being able to attend the joint Board of
Commissioners and Planning Board meeting, noting he was at the Coastal Resource Commission
meeting. He stated in looking through the LSL Planning audit, they appeared to be spending
substantive time with things like LID and stormwater runoff. He inquired if they were also
including groundwater.
Director O’Keefe explained that the ordinance development is going to be tied to the
comprehensive plan and all the vision contained in the plan, which includes assuring that there is
a safe and reliable water supply for the county. There are other things going on in relation to
groundwater. The County is doing a study on groundwater now, which is going to give us a better
idea of what the current situation is. Mr. O’Keefe stated he didn’t know whether or not the results
of that study are going to be woven into the unified development ordinance or whether there is
will be consideration of a separate groundwater ordinance at some future time once that study is
complete. However, the relationship between the use of the land and groundwater is certainly
something the consultant is going to be thinking about when drafting the ordinance language.
Board member Weaver stated he is very much looking forward to them addressing
groundwater impacts for land use. He noted that at the recent County Commissioners meeting
when they heard the special use permit for the convenience food store, the commissioners seemed
to be very concerned about the impacts of things like underground storage tanks on groundwater
resources. Mr. Weaver offered a word of caution in regard to his understanding of the USGS
study, noting he didn’t know if that study would give the county the information it needs to move
forward anytime soon to protect the groundwater. He hates to wait for something definitive to
come out of that.
Page 14 of 15
Chairman Girardot commented that Mr. Weaver had made some good points and noted
that the Planning Board was also very concerned about those underground tanks when the proposal
came before them.
Board member David Weaver then complimented Ms. Roth’s scoping report. He noted that
the northeastern part of the county, Mayfaire, Landfall, etc. have high end employment centers
with regard to Office and Institutional and things like that. In the northern part of the county off
College Road, there are a lot of valuable small industrial employment centers. He noted he
couldn’t think of anything in the Monkey Junction area or in the southern part of the county and
wondered if it would be worthwhile to consider that missing component as part of this small area
development plan. He noted all the people that live down in that area and that a lot of them have
to drive to other places in the county to work so it would be nice to incorporate that into the small
area plan.
Senior Planner Roth agreed that is definitely one of the ideals of the urban mixed use place
type and something that's needed in this area. The only current real entrepreneurial or office type
of use she is aware of is the MARBIONC property that is in the study periphery so if there are any
opportunities to coordinate with them staff would definitely be looking forward to that, but staff
does want to take a look at the uses in this area, what is potentially appropriate in terms of things
that can provide a larger employment base for the southern part of the county so they don't have
to travel thirty minutes to get to their jobs.
Technical Review Committee Report (March 2017)
Current Planner Brad Schuler reported the New Hanover County Technical Review
Committee met twice during the month of April and reviewed four preliminary plats.
Kaylee’s Cove
This performance plan was originally approved by the TRC in January, 2017 for 16 lots.
The request was for an expansion of 8 additional lots. The project will be served by
CFPUA. The TRC voted 5-0 to approve the expansion of 8 lots with some conditions
as noted in the Planning Board package.
Homestead Estates at River Oaks
This conventional plan is located along the 8300 block of River Road and has 35 lots,
which includes utilities from Aqua. Public roads are proposed, which will be taken over
for maintenance by NC Department of Transportation in the future. The TRC approved
the plan in a vote of 5-0 with four conditions, which as listed in the Planning Board
package.
Taryn Woods: 2
This project was originally approved in January 2017 and was seeking approval from
the TRC for 188 lots. They have connection to CFPUA for all lots and now have the
approval of the plat for 95 lots. The improvements required by the traffic impact analysis
must be in before they plat any remaining lots after those initial 95 lots.
Page 15 of 15
Catherine’s Cove
This is both a performance and regular subdivision that will be within the Bayshore
Estates subdivision, which proposes 35 lots, 30 lots under the performance standards
and 5 lots under the conventional standards. They have connections to CFPUA. This
subdivision plan was approved by the TRC in a vote of 5-0.
Chairman Girardot commented that three of the four subdivisions are located in the
southern portion of New Hanover County. Chairman Girardot stated that the UDO process has a
technical committee, which is made up of planning staff, the Planning Board Chair, and any other
departments and agencies that will interface with the Unified Development Ordinance so she will
keep the board very well posted on the process as it moves forward. She stated she would welcome
the input of other board members along the way.
Other Business
Planning & Land Use Director Chris O’Keefe stated that a new version of the zoning
ordinance is located in the desks, which reflects the special use permit text amendment and the
buffer setbacks and building height text amendment. Hard copies of the revised ordinance will
also be delivered to planning board members. The new version of the zoning ordinance is also
available online on the New Hanover County website.
Director O’Keefe also announced that in two weeks, the Wilmington Metropolitan Urban
Area Planning Organization will be leading a competition between employers for Ride Your Bike
to Work Week, which will be a good opportunity for people to ride their bikes to their offices.
Advice on the best and safest routes is available at the County Planning & Land Use Department
and the WMPO office.
With no other items of business, Chairman Girardot adjourned the meeting at 7:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
______________________________________
Chris O’Keefe, Planning & Land Use Director
Please note that the above minutes are not a verbatim record of the New Hanover County Planning
Board meeting. The entire proceedings are available for review online at www.nhcgov.com.