2018-02-05 Regular Meeting
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34
REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 5, 2018 PAGE 17
ASSEMBLY
The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met in Regular Session on Monday, February 5, 2018,
at 4:00 p.m. in the Assembly Room of the New Hanover County Courthouse, 24 North Third Street, Wilmington,
North Carolina.
Members present: Chairman Woody White; Vice-Chairman Skip Watkins; Commissioner Jonathan Barfield,
Jr.; Commissioner Patricia Kusek; and Commissioner Rob Zapple.
Staff present: County Manager Chris Coudriet; County Attorney Wanda M. Copley; and Clerk to the Board
Kymberleigh G. Crowell.
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Pastor Shawn Blackwelder, St. Paul’s United Methodist Church, provided the invocation and Commissioner
Kusek led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA
Chairman White requested a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as presented.
Motion
: Vice-Chairman Watkins MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Kusek, to approve the items on the
Consent Agenda as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
CONSENT AGENDA
Approval of Minutes – Governing Body
The Commissioners approved the minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 22, 2018.
Reappointment of Bill Vassar to the Wilmington Regional Film Commission – Governing Body
The Commissioners reappointed Bill Vassar to the Wilmington Regional Film Commission as Ms. Sherri
Robinson declined the appointment. Mr. Vassar’s term is for three years and will expire on January 31, 2021.
Approval of Three Donations for Accession into the Museum’s Permanent Collection – Museum
The Commissioners approved a list of three objects to be accessioned into the Cape Fear Museum’s
permanent collection. The objects were approved by the Museum Advisory Board at its meeting on January 17, 2018
and a list of the items is available for review at the Cape Fear Museum.
Approval of One Item to be Deaccessioned from the Museum Collection – Museum
The Commissioners approved a list of one item to be deaccessioned from the Cape Fear Museum’s permanent
collection. The object was approved by the Museum Advisory Board at its meeting on January 17, 2018 and the list
of the item is available for review at the Cape Fear Museum.
Approval of Order for Advertisement of 2017 Unpaid Tax Liens on Real Property – Tax Department
The Commissioners approved the Order for Advertisement of 2017 Unpaid Tax Liens on Real Property for
New Hanover County, City of Wilmington, Town of Kure Beach, Town of Wrightsville Beach, Town of Carolina
Beach, and the New Hanover County Fire District.
A copy of the order is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLI, Page
3.1.
Approval of New Hanover County Monthly Collection Reports for December 2017 – Tax Department
The Commissioners approved the Tax Collection Reports of New Hanover County, New Hanover County
Fire District, and New Hanover County Debt Service as of December 2017. NCGS 105-350 requires the Tax Collector
to submit a report showing the amount of taxes collected.
Copies of the tax collection reports are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and are contained in Exhibit
Book XLI, Page 3.2.
REGULAR ITEMS OF BUSINESS
ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION TO CONGRATULATE THE NEW HANOVER HIGH SCHOOL
WILDCATS FOR WINNING THE SCHOOL’S FIFTH NORTH CAROLINA HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETIC
ASSOCIATION STATE FOOTBALL CHAMPIONSHIP
Commissioner Barfield welcomed the New Hanover High School (NHHS) Wildcats football team and stated
that he was a 1984 graduate and there were some great athletes then as there are now. He congratulated the team on
winning the North Carolina High School Athletic Association (NCHSAA) State Football Championship and read the
resolution into the record.
Motion
: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple, to adopt a resolution
congratulating the New Hanover High School Wildcats for winning the school’s fifth NCHSAA State Football
Championship. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Chairman White commended the team for how well it represented New Hanover County across the state. As
the team members embark on other life pursuits and goals that they are going to achieve, he asked them to remember
what they did at the end of the season, which was setting a goal of winning the title, winning games, and representing
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34
REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 5, 2018 PAGE 18
this school on and off the field. It's an incredible achievement and it translates immediately to any goals each team
member has set in life and the methods each uses to do it.
Chairman White invited NHHS Principal Pat Morgan and Coach Earl Smith to step forward to receive the
resolution and invited them to make remarks.
Coach Smith stated that on behalf of the football team, coaching staff, NHHS, and the entire community, he
would like to thank the Board for this great honor. This cumulates a great several weeks since reaching this
achievement. The team has 16 seniors that were great leaders throughout and the team had days just like all family
members do, but it was a great effort that night. He knows this community will be forever proud. He thanked the
Board for the inviting the team to attend today’s meeting.
Principal Morgan concurred with Coach Smith’s comments stating that he could not be more proud. He
enjoys going to the games every chance he gets and also taking his children to the games. Most of the team members
walk by and speak with his children and are a great representation of the school and our community. He thanked them
for attending and thanked the Board for inviting the group to the meeting.
Chairman White thanked Principal Morgan, Coach Smith, and the football team for attending the meeting.
A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLI,
Page 3.3.
CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF REQUEST TO APPLY FOR THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 2018 COMMUNITY WASTE REDUCTION AND
RECYCLING GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $30,000
Environmental Management Director Joe Suleyman stated that the North Carolina Department of
Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) has a division that's charged with providing information to units of local government
and also support for new programs. This grant cycle has typically focused on “away from home recycling” in venues
where there's a lot of traffic. It encourages people away from home to recycle when entering and leaving a facility.
The Environmental Management Department has had a great deal of success with the program. For the last four years
that the department has applied for the grant, it has consecutively been awarded the grant.
This grant request very closely mirrors a grant request the department did two years ago in partnership with
the Town of Carolina Beach for the boardwalk expansion. The program was viewed as an opportunity to provide
recycling opportunities for people not only at the boardwalk, but also in the nearby central business district. The Town
was so pleased with how those receptacles looked and held up, that they bought additional ones and expanded it further
throughout the central business district.
Director Suleyman stated that he has met with the Cape Fear Community College (CFCC) Sustainability
Committee and the committee is very much behind this program. They want to see CFCC take recycling efforts to the
next level. The goal of this program is to make "away from home" recycling convenient to students, faculty and
visitors who utilize Cape Fear Community College's (CFCC) common areas. Expenses over and above those provided
by grant funding, including a $15,000 match, will be paid from the Environmental Management Enterprise Fund in
the FY18-19 budget if approved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners. The total project cost, including
state grant funding and the required County match, totals $45,000. The funds will be used for a one-time purchase of
the recycling receptacles and educational materials during FY18-19. There will be no ongoing costs associated with
this program and no expenditures beyond the initial grant period.
Director Suleyman concluded his presentation stating that he would appreciate the Board approving the
department’s request to apply for the Community Waste Reduction and Recycling (CWRAR) grant to fund a program
called "Campus Connections: Recycling Away from Home."
Chairman White thanked Director Suleyman for his presentation and asked for direction from the Board.
Motion
: Vice-Chairman Watkins MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Kusek, to approve the submission of a
2018 Community Waste Reduction and Recycling grant application for $30,000 to the NCDEQ Division of
Environmental Assistance and Customer Service for the “Campus Connections: Recycling Away from Home”
recycling program.
Chairman White opened the floor for Board discussion.
In response to Board questions, Mr. Suleyman stated that it will be CFCC’s responsibility to maintain the
new receptacles. The receptacles are quite rugged and little maintenance is needed other than physically dumping the
units.
Hearing no further discussion, Chairman White called for a vote on the motion on the floor.
Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY DESIGN SOLUTIONS ON
BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, ACI PINE RIDGE, LLC, TO REZONE 2.3 ACRES LOCATED
AT 168 AND 178 PORTERS NECK ROAD FROM B-1, BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND B-2, HIGHWAY
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34
REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 5, 2018 PAGE 19
BUSINESS DISTRICT, TO (CZD) B-2, CONDITIONAL HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT, IN ORDER TO
DEVELOP A HOTEL (Z17-12)
Chairman White opened the public hearing and requested staff to make the presentation.
Current Planner Brad Schuler presented the request submitted by Cindee Wolf of Design Solutions on behalf
of the property owner, ACI Pine Ridge, LLC, to rezone 2.3 acres located at 168 and 178 Porters Neck Road from B-
1, Business District, and B-2, Highway Business District, to (CZD) B-2, Conditional Highway Business District, in
order to develop a hotel. The application was initially scheduled for consideration by the Board of Commissioners on
January 8, 2018. At the meeting, the applicant requested that the item be continued to a future meeting so that
modifications could be made to the site plan. The Board granted a continuance to the February 5, 2018 meeting.
The vast majority of the subject property is zoned B-1 with a very small portion being zoned B-2 at the
southern corner. The property is located in an area of Porters Neck that is mostly zoned and used for commercial
services. There is a Lowe's Home Improvement store to the northeast and a Food Lion grocery store to the south. To
the west of the property, a parcel has been recently developed for general commercial uses including an interior design
store and the adjoining parcel is also planned for development of a commercial shopping center including a Slice of
Life Pizzeria. To the north there is approximately 30 acres of undeveloped land zoned B-1. However, over half of
that property contains wetlands and it is currently owned by Duke Energy Progress.
The subject property is undeveloped and consists of 2.3 acres of land, which is located within two parcels.
The site plan has been modified multiple times during the review process. Each modification to the plan resulted in a
reduction in the overall size of the hotel. The site plan considered by the Planning Board proposed a 138,000 square
foot hotel consisting of six stories and 150 rooms. Since the January 8, 2018 Board of Commissioners meeting when
the continuance was granted, the site plan has been updated in order to comply with the restrictive covenants of the
Porters Neck Crossing development. This has resulted in the scale of the proposal being reduced. Specifically:
1. The area of the rezoning reduced from 3.5 acres to 2.3 acres;
2. The number of stories of the hotel reduced from 5 to 4;
3. The square footage of the hotel reduced from 86,500 to 64,000;
4. The number of hotel rooms reduced from 140 to 116; and
5. The outdoor pool was removed.
There is also a driveway that runs along the boundary of the proposed area which provides interconnectivity to the
adjoining property.
The proposal is not projected to generate more than 100 peak hour trips and therefore, a Traffic Impact
Analysis (TIA) was not required to be completed. However, the subject property was included in a 2007 TIA. The
2007 TIA accounted for the Lowe’s Home Improvement store, a 120,000 square foot discount store, and a 181,000
square foot shopping center, which all together was estimated to include 2,000 trips in the PM peak. The roadways
required as part of that proposal have already been installed. Per the NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT), the
proposed hotel will not warrant any update to that TIA, nor will it require a driveway permit as the trips expected from
the hotel will not exceed the overall trips included in the approved 2007 TIA.
The 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan classifies the subject property as Urban Mixed Use and is also
located within the Kirkland/Porters Neck Growth Node, so it recommends a mixture of residential, office, and retail
uses at higher densities. The types of uses encouraged include office, retail, mixed use, small recreation, commercial,
institutional, and single-family and multi-family residential.
The proposed hotel is generally consistent with the Urban Mixed Use place type. It provides a commercial
service in a proposed mixed use growth node at a scale aligned with Comprehensive Plan guidelines of two to seven
stories in height. The site design includes multi-modal components, namely a sidewalk that will provide pedestrian
access to adjacent properties that will benefit future visitors staying at the hotel and patrons of existing and planned
businesses.
The Planning Board considered this application at their December 7, 2017 meeting. At the meeting, no one
from the public spoke in favor of or in opposition to the application. The Board recommended approval (7-0) of the
application, finding that it is:
1. Consistent with the purposes and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because the proposed
development provides a commercial service in a proposed mixed use growth node at a scale aligned with
comprehensive plan guidelines of two to seven stories in height.
2. Reasonable and in the public interest because the proposed development will provide pedestrian access
to adjacent properties that will benefit future visitors staying at the hotel and patrons of existing and
planned businesses.
The Planning Board recommended the following four conditions be added to the development:
1. The building cannot exceed 80 feet in height. The height shall be measured from the average grade to
the highest point of the building, including parapet walls.
2. A connection for future parking lot cross-access shall be provided to the adjoining land northeast of the
proposed development. The connection shall be constructed to the property line.
3. A five-foot-wide sidewalk shall be installed along both frontages of Porters Neck Road. The sidewalk
shall be open for public use and connect to the interior parking area of the hotel.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34
REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 5, 2018 PAGE 20
4. Access to the individual hotel rooms shall be provided by an interior building corridor.
Mr. Schuler concluded the presentation stating that staff is recommending approval of this application as
stated in the Planning Board’s action. Staff concurs with the Planning Board’s statements that the application is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and is reasonable and in the public interest.
Staff also suggests modifying the recommended conditions so that they are consistent with the updated site
plan. Based on the revisions, staff suggests removing the condition regarding the future parking lot cross-access and
updating the maximum height condition to reflect the reduced number of stories for the hotel. Staff recommends the
following conditions:
1. The building cannot exceed 60 feet in height. The height shall be measured from the average grade to
the highest point of the building, including parapet walls.
2. A five-foot-wide sidewalk shall be installed along both frontages of Porters Neck Road. The sidewalk
shall be open for public use and connect to the interior parking area of the hotel.
3. Access to the individual hotel rooms shall be provided by an interior building corridor.
Chairman White invited the petitioner to make comments.
Cindee Wolf, representing the property owner, ACI Pine Ridge, LLC, stated that her clients identified this
tract as a perfect place for this kind of development. It's located in a commercial node with a wealth of other services
attractive to transient travelers. The request to rezone the property to B-2 is because of the hotel. The use of a
conditional zoning district allows the ability to zero in on that use and how it works with the B-1 as it was originally
zoned. On interconnectivity, by virtue of sharing the common drive, whatever is to be developed on lot 4R and what
is being developed on 3R are very simply interconnected by virtue of the common drive. Again, the brand for this
hotel has not been identified at this point.
There were some restrictive covenants within the commercial subdivision that did limit the project to what
is being presented tonight. This plan, compared to the previous plan, has an indoor pool so it still has a pool. It will
have some type of small meeting facility but it's really just for groups and perhaps training sessions. It will not be a
convention center style. It does have breakfast service which is typical of that size but it does not have restaurants,
bars, etc.
Stormwater management is being handled by an existing pond, which is a regional facility. There is an
existing pipe that drains the commercial center that is out in front of the lots back to the pond. For this project, inlets
will be dropped right on top of the pipe and that directs the water, so they have no necessary offsite improvements.
The site, when it was permitted for this pond along with all the other sites, was earmarked for up to 80% of surface
coverage. The surface coverage on lot 3 would be proportional to lots 3R and 4R, whatever their acreage is now or
will be. Currently, the coverage with this site plan is down around 71% percent, so there is room to spare.
Ms. Wolf concluded her presentation stating that she and her clients agree with the conditions that staff has
outlined. They do not find them to be onerous in any way and there is consistency with the Comprehensive Plan.
Chairman White announced that no one had signed up to speak in opposition and closed the Public Hearing.
He then opened the floor for Board discussion.
In response to Board questions, Ms. Wolf stated that there were no negative responses during the community
information meeting. Most of the attendees were commercial owners and very interested in it becoming a commercial
community. They are excited about the sidewalks and having more potential customers in the area. The building is
limited to four stories due to the subdivision declarations for the entire subdivision.
In response to additional Board questions, Ms. Wolf stated that the shared access driveway would come
through between lots 3 and 4 and provide a circulation pattern for traffic. She feels there will be no confusion for
where the entrance is located and directional signage at the back of the property will help. The intent is for people to
come through on Porters Neck Road or through the shopping center. In regards to the condition for access to the
individual hotel rooms being provided by an interior building corridor, Ms. Wolf stated that Planning Board member
Ted Shipley wanted to ensure that this would not be a motel and have exterior room doors.
Hearing no further discussion, Chairman White asked the petitioner whether to continue the application to a
future meeting or to proceed with the Board deciding whether to approve or deny the application. Ms. Wolf requested
the Board to proceed with the decision. Chairman White requested direction from the Board.
Motion
: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield, to approve the request by Cindee
Wolf of Design Solutions on behalf of the property owner, ACI Pine Ridge, LLC, to rezone 2.3 acres located at 168
and 178 Porters Neck Road from B-1, Business District, and B-2, Highway Business District, to (CZD) B-2,
Conditional Highway Business District, in order to develop a hotel, as the Board finds that the application as described
is: 1) Consistent with the purposes and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because the proposed development
provides a commercial service in a proposed mixed use growth node at a scale aligned with comprehensive plan
guidelines of two to seven stories in height. 2) Reasonable and in the public interest because the proposed development
will provide pedestrian access to adjacent properties that will benefit future visitors staying at the hotel and patrons of
existing planned businesses; with the following conditions as recommended by staff:
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34
REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 5, 2018 PAGE 21
1. The building cannot exceed 60 feet in height. The height shall be measured from the average grade to
the highest point of the building, including parapet walls.
2. A five-foot-wide sidewalk shall be installed along both frontages of Porters Neck Road. The sidewalk
shall be open for public use and connect to the interior parking area of the hotel.
3. Access to the individual hotel rooms shall be provided by an interior building corridor.
Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP
OF AREA 5 OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED JULY 6, 1972, is hereby
incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book I, Section 5, Page 75.
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY THE LEE LAW FIRM, ON
BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, LLOYD C. BRINKLEY, JR. ET AL, TO REZONE 2.5 ACRES OF
LAND LOCATED AT 106 OAK RIDGE LANE FROM (CUD) B-1, CONDITIONAL USE BUSINESS
DISTRICT, TO (CZD) B-1, CONDITIONAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, IN ORDER TO DEVELOP AN
AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATION (Z17-11)
Chairman White opened the public hearing and requested staff to make the presentation.
Current Planner Brad Schuler presented the request submitted by Lee Law Firm, on behalf of the property
owner, Lloyd C. Brinkley, Jr. et al, to rezone 2.5 acres of land located at 106 Oak Ridge Lane from (CUD) B-1,
Conditional Use Business District, to (CZD) B-1, Conditional Business District, in order to develop an automobile
service station. The property is located in an area of Market Street that has a mixture of residential and commercial
uses. Single family dwellings are located next to the property along Greenview Drive, along Oak Ridge Lane, and a
church is located next door. The property is currently accessed by both Greenview Drive, which is a state maintained
road, and Oak Ridge Lane, which is a private dead end road that provides access to 13 residential lots to the west.
The subject property is 2 1/2 acres which was rezoned to its current district, (CUD) B-1, in 1990 in order to
allow for the development of a retail nursery, which is still in operation on the site. The applicant proposes to develop
an automobile service station (AAA Car Care Center). The service station would consist of an eight-bay shop,
office/retail center, and an automated car wash area containing an exterior cleaning/vacuuming area. There are no
fueling stations proposed.
Per the County's requirements, automobile service stations are allowed to provide for general maintenance
of vehicles such as oil changes, state inspections and tire rotation. Major changes such as body work, would not be
permitted at this facility. The development will have a total of three driveways to adjacent roads. NCDOT has reviewed
this plan and has provided preliminary comments to the applicant regarding improvements that will be required as
part of the driveway permit. The applicant has illustrated the improvements on a site plan which included the
installation of a center concrete median on Greenview Drive.
The landscaping plan submitted by the applicant illustrates all vegetation that will be removed and planted
on the property. The applicant has agreed that all vegetation within the rear buffer will be preserved and also a six-
foot-tall fence will be installed along the buffer. The applicant has also agreed to conditions regarding signage,
specifically no digital, animated or flashing signs will be allowed. The applicant must place signage along Oak Ridge
Lane indicating it is a private road. There are a couple significant trees located along Oak Ridge Lane, which will
remain. Furthermore, the Zoning Ordinance does require fencing to be placed around them during construction and
in the event the trees are damaged within three years after the construction, they must be mitigated in accordance with
the County’s standards.
The proposal is not projected to generate more than 100 peak hour trips and therefore, a Traffic Impact
Analysis (TIA) was not required to be completed. NCDOT has two major transportation improvements planned for
the area. One project will extend Military Cutoff Road to I-140. Construction is expected to begin on that project
early this year. The U-4029D project will consist of installation of a center median on Market Street from Middle
Sound Road to Marsh Oaks Drive. The project also includes installation of a sidewalk on the western side of Market
Street and a multi-use path on the eastern side. Construction is expected to begin in early 2019.
The 2016 Comprehensive Land Use 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. Types of appropriate uses include office, retail,
mixed use, recreational, commercial, institutional, and multi-family and single-family residential.
The Planning Board considered this application at their January 11, 2018 meeting. At the meeting, one
adjacent property owner expressed concerns with the use and maintenance of Oak Ridge Lane, and lighting of the site.
These concerns were addressed by the applicant, including agreeing to a condition that private road signage be
installed along Oak Ridge Lane. The Board recommended approval (4-0) of the application, finding that it is:
1. Consistent with the purposes and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because the low-density
commercial use is appropriate due to its location off a major arterial in a transitional area between major
intersections and two Urban Mixed Use areas where higher density mixed uses are desirable.
2. Reasonable and in the public interest because the proposed development will support business success
and provide commercial services to the surrounding residents, while limiting impacts to the surrounding
residential area by preserving existing vegetation and installing a fully opaque buffer along the rear
property line.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34
REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 5, 2018 PAGE 22
The Planning Board recommended the following three conditions be added to the development:
1. All existing trees located within required buffer yards must be preserved and supplemented as necessary
in order to provide a fully opaque screen. In addition, a six-foot-tall solid fence must be installed along
the rear buffer yard.
2. Flashing, animated, and digital signs shall be prohibited on the property.
3. A sign indicating that Oak Ridge Lane is a private road shall be installed along the right-of-way of Oak
Ridge Lane, west of the proposed driveway access to the subject site.
Mr. Schuler concluded the presentation stating that staff is recommending approval of this application as
stated in the Planning Board’s action. Staff concurs with the Planning Board’s statements that the application is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and is reasonable and in the public interest, and the recommended conditions.
Chairman White invited the petitioner to make comments.
Michael Lee of Lee Law Firm, PLLC, representing the property owner, Lloyd C. Brinkley, Jr. et al, presented
the following information regarding the application:
Approval:
Modification of Existing B-1 Conditional Use:
How is change consistent with County’s Policies for Growth and Development
How would the zone change be consistent with the property’s classification on the Land
Classification Map
What neighborhood changes have occurred to make the original zoning inappropriate or is the
land unsuitable for uses permitted under existing zoning
Summary:
History:
Zoned B-1 approximately 27 years ago
Current use – Retail: Landscape/nursery/garden center
Community Meeting: November 2, 2017
Application Filed: November 6, 2017
Planning Board: December 7, 2017 and January 11, 2018
Mr. Lee explained that due to the November 6, 2017 application deadline there was not a chance to
incorporate all of the community meeting input at that time. Concerns were expressed by the residents about the car
wash location, that they did not want people driving down Oak Ridge Lane, and about saving the trees. During the
December 7, 2017 Planning Board meeting, he requested a continuance so that the residents’ concerns could be
addressed. The buildings were moved around on the site and they saved the trees.
Project:
AAA Car Care Center:
Automotive service station; automated car wash; and retail/travel office serving patrons of AAA
With the revisions, the site plan has essentially been flipped so that the car wash will be on the other side of
the property. The site plan was also modified to ensure that some of the trees were saved. There will also be a six-foot
fence and landscaping that is 20 – 25 feet at the back of the property.
Ordinance – Condition Use Permit (CUP) Modification:
How is the change consistent with the County’s policies for growth and development: Policies for
growth and development encourage projects which revitalize commercial corridors and provide a
mix of uses.
How would rezoning be consistent with the property’s classification on the Land Classification Map:
Site designated as “community mixed use” under Future Land Use Plan (FLUP). Small scale office
and retail developments preferred.
What neighborhood changes have occurred to make original zoning inappropriate or is the land
unsuitable for uses permitted under existing zoning: Various significant infrastructure
improvements; commercial growth in corridor; change in current B-1 use; and FLUP – mixed use.
Mr. Lee concluded his presentation stating that this modification is for a B-1 use. This is a 2 1/2-acre site and
there was ability to dovetail in the insurance office along with travel and car services and the car wash. It's within the
Community Mixed Use under the Future Land Use Plan and is a mix of uses. There have been a number of changes
in New Hanover County and along this corridor in the last 27 years, in addition to the fact of all the forthcoming
significant NCDOT improvements in the area. The project fits neatly within the mixed-use, small scale development
pattern.
In response to Board questions, Mr. Schuler stated that signage for this project is within the Special Highway
District, so the maximum height signage allowed is six feet.
Regarding questions about the NCDOT projects that will have a direct effect on the project, Mr. Lee stated
that specifically there's going to be a widening that occurs in front of the site. The applicant, although not required, is
working with NCDOT on the potential of a possible left over, which the applicant would pay for to the extent NCDOT
allows for that. The widening of the right of way would also allow the applicant to install a right turn lane that will
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34
REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 5, 2018 PAGE 23
be coming southbound. This will provide a turn lane onto Greenview, which is a public road, that will benefit not just
this project but all the projects developing in and around the site.
In response to Board questions, Mr. Lee stated that the County code requires the lighting not bleed out into
the residential areas. With respect to the hours of operation for both a car wash and the car care/insurance/retail
facility, they will only be open at times when staff is present. The car wash is not an automated style and there has to
be actual staff on site. It is currently anticipated that the car wash will be open no later than 9:00 p.m. or 10:00 p.m.
and the car care facility and insurance until probably 7:00 p.m. or 8:00 p.m., which will vary with the different days.
Regarding questions on recycling water from the car wash, Project Engineer Todd Simmons with Freeland
and Kauffman, Inc., stated that approximately 66% of the water will be recycled.
Regarding questions on the TIA and the trips being generated by the project, Mr. Lee confirmed that the
nursery is not being expanded and will go completely away. They are looking for the increase and in this case, the
increase is seen on Saturday with 47 trips. The measurement is the number of trips in and out, or rather the number of
customers arriving and then leaving. In this case, the increase is 23.5 trips. In the PM peak, they are looking at the
difference between the existing use, which is at 62 or 31 customers arriving and then leaving. The lower number of
increase in trips for purposes of this particular project didn’t warrant a TIA.
A brief discussion was held about the TIA and the rules of what triggers a TIA being done. Mr. Schuler
stated that in redevelopment situations where an existing use is going away and a new use is being developed, the
numbers of trips generated by the previous use are subtracted out. The thought is the improvements from the previous
use to accommodate those trips that have already been installed on the subject road way. Also those trips are taken
into account when future NCDOT projects are planned and there is also a median being installed as part of the Military
Cutoff extension project. He further stated that NCDOT, through the driveway permit process, is going to look at the
proposed use of all the trips generated by it. There is still a transportation review as previously noted. In this case,
there will be a right turn lane installed as well as a median along Greenview Drive, so there is still a transportation
review requiring some improvements to the road way system. Lastly, a TIA is not necessarily going to improve the
level of service, it's going to make sure the project does not make it worse. The number of trips being added to the
road way system for this project is a small number and won't have a substantial impact on Market Street.
In response to Board questions, Mr. Schuler stated that he has not seen any information about the potential
impacts of the improvements from the NCDOT projects. He imagines the capacity would increase. As the property is
currently zoned, the only use allowed on the property is a retail nursery.
Further discussion was held about the TIA process. Current Planning and Zoning Supervisor Ben Andrea
stated that any increase in traffic on Market Street could have a negative effect. In regards to why the credit is
occurring, a previous Board of Commissioners adopted guidelines as to when a TIA is required in the County and
established parameters for looking at a TIA. The document was adopted in 2006 and provides the guidance to subtract
the existing trips from trips that are going to be generated by a new proposal. When looking at what triggers a TIA,
the County’s requirement is 100 peak hours. The trigger is not necessarily if the new development creates 100 peak
hours, but when the difference between the new development and the existing development trips exceed 100 trips.
Chairman White stated that no one signed up to speak in favor of the request and asked that those who signed
up to speak in opposition to the request to give their comments.
Carole Merkerson, resident of Oak Ridge Lane and representing the Oak Ridge Homeowners Association,
spoke in opposition to the request stating that shortly after a meeting held in February, a letter was received from More
and Van Allen PLLC regarding an access easement and driveway maintenance agreement. The legal description for
the property is incorrect and is for a property off Highway 132. The original subdivision plan had Oak Ridge Lane as
a complete private street and the residents want it to remain a private street. The homeowners do not want to allow
access to AAA especially on the car wash side and because there are children, pets, and it is a dead end street. Many
people currently use it as a turn around, so there is already a lot of traffic. When the median comes in, that's going to
be stopped. Ms. Merkerson further expressed concerns about the car wash exit being right on the subdivision line.
When the project was originally presented to the residents, it was down towards the street side, where the nursery’s
entrance is currently located. It has since been changed further up next to one of the homeowner’s houses and the
HOA does not want to give permission to access the private road.
Lenin Romero, resident of Oak Ridge Lane, spoke in opposition to the request stating that there is already a
lot of traffic on Oak Ridge Lane due to it being used as a turn around. Based on his experience in sales and working
with repair shops, after the service has been completed the mechanics test drive a customer’s car to check it. Those
test drives will bring oil, brake fluid, and other chemicals down the road. He has no doubt Oak Ridge Lane will be
used for the same purposes.
Denise Ebbinkhuysen, resident of Oak Ridge Lane, spoke in opposition to the request stating that she lives
directly behind the proposed business. She purchased her home because it was located on a private road and because
the parcel in front of her was specifically for a nursery. She also has an adult child with special needs who lives in
the home. The business noises during the day, the sounds, and the lights will impact his quality of life. She expressed
further concerns about the signage that will be at the back of the property and the value depreciation of her home as
well as the other homes on the street due to the project. With this project, the road will become more unsafe for a
special needs child or any of the children who have to wait at the corner of Market Street and Oak Ridge Lane for the
school bus as school buses are not allowed to go down a private road. While she supports growth and development to
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34
REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 5, 2018 PAGE 24
help stimulate our economy, there are four car washes within a two-mile radius of this property and numerous empty
buildings and dwellings in this area of Market Street.
In rebuttal for the petitioner, Mr. Lee stated that there is a private street and it is owned by Mr. Brinkley, not
the Oak Ridge Lane Homeowners Association (HOA), and the HOA has the ability to use the street. However, it has
been stated to the HOA and also the Planning Board that the petitioner is willing to enter into a maintenance agreement
to maintain from Market Street to the back property line. Also, a sign would be posted stating that the road is only for
residents. The HOA has not agreed to the proposed agreement but again, efforts are being made to work with them on
that front. Their concerns are understood as AAA would also like that access to be well maintained. If people were to
take test drives down the road, the County could issue a notice of violation. Even though the road is not owned by the
HOA, the petitioner is willing to have a condition that states they cannot use the private road for test drives.
In response to Board questions, Mr. Lee restated that the petitioner would agree to maintain the road from
Market Street to the back property line. Again, NCDOT requires the entrance be pushed back as far as possible from
Market Street. He reconfirmed that the petitioner is agreeable to a condition stating that test drives cannot be performed
on the private road. The road is owned by Mr. Brinkley and he has agreed for them to maintain the road. There would
be an actual physical sign posted that states it is a private road. No major repairs will occur at the site, such as body
work. The County code only allows for general car maintenance.
Chairman White closed the Public Hearing and requested direction from the Board.
In response to Board questions regarding no right turns being allowed, Planning Board member Paul Boney
stated that Mr. Brinkley owns the street. He would assume as a private road the signage would say “Private Road”
instead of “No Right Turn” so that residents utilizing the AAA services could return to their homes. However, the
petitioner is agreeable to a condition that their employees cannot use the private road. In his opinion, this would be
received favorably by the Planning Board. He further stated that had Ms. Ebbinkhuysen shared her concerns and
personal situation with the Planning Board, they would have looked favorably on that as well.
Chairman White stated that it appears to him that staff believes this application would be consistent with the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan and reasonable and in the public interest. He then requested a motion from the Board
to approve or deny the request.
Chairman White recognized Commissioner Zapple for comment.
Commissioner Zapple stated that he is deeply troubled by the traffic issues that are represented here. He
understands that the way the laws are currently written, or the way the regulations are written, there appears to be a
loophole. He would like to continue the discussion, especially on the triggering of a TIA, because he believes the
public has, as he does, great faith in what a TIA should be doing to help get a handle on growth and specifically traffic
issues throughout the County. He thinks the public in general feels that these regulations are in place to help control
some of this growth so when moving forward we are not looking at uncontrolled traffic situations. However, we are
consistently faced with issues like this where there are exceptions after exceptions. The exceptions should fall down
on the side of the people who use these heavily traveled corridors and the ever-increasing capacity on the major
thoroughfares. He will continue this conversation with staff to see if the regulations can be relooked at and what
triggers the TIA.
Chairman White stated that he assumes when the prior Board set the 100 trip mark in 2006, discussion was
held about de minimis additions to roadway grade systems. He asked staff to explain the process followed to arrive
at the decision to use 100 trips as the trigger for a TIA and to further explain how the offset is applied. He understands
Commissioner Zapple’s concerns and they make sense. However, he would like to know the history of how the prior
Board arrived at 100 trips being reasonable and the offset being reasonable.
Mr. Andrea stated that he was not very familiar with the methodology the prior Board used to arrive at 100.
Staff will research it and report back to the Board. However, the idea is if there are trips already occurring, the new
development should only be responsible for the improvements to accommodate the new trips.
Hearing no further discussion, Chairman White asked the petitioner whether to continue the application to a
future meeting or to proceed with the Board deciding whether to approve or deny the application. Mr. Lee requested
the Board to proceed with the decision. Chairman White requested direction from the Board.
Motion
: Vice-Chairman Watkins MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield, approve the request by Lee
Law Firm, on behalf of the property owner, Lloyd C. Brinkley, Jr. et al, to rezone 2.5 acres of land located at 106 Oak
Ridge Lane from (CUD) B-1, Conditional Use Business District, to (CZD) B-1, Conditional Business District, in order
to develop an automobile service station, as the Board finds that the application as described is: 1) Consistent with the
purposes and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because the low-density commercial use is appropriate due to its
location off a major arterial in a transitional area between major intersections and two Urban Mixed Use areas where
higher density mixed uses are desirable. 2) Reasonable and in the public interest because the proposed development
will support business success and provide commercial services to the surrounding residents, while limiting impacts to
the surrounding residential area by preserving existing vegetation and installing a fully opaque buffer along the rear
property line; with the following conditions:
1. All existing trees located within required buffer yards must be preserved and supplemented as necessary
in order to provide a fully opaque screen. In addition, a six-foot-tall solid fence must be installed along
the rear buffer yard.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34
REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 5, 2018 PAGE 25
2. Flashing, animated, and digital signs shall be prohibited on the property.
3. A sign indicating that Oak Ridge Lane is a private road shall be installed along the right-of-way of Oak
Ridge Lane, west of the proposed driveway access to the subject site.
4. The portion of Oak Ridge Lane west of the proposed driveway access to the subject site shall not be
utilized by employees for activities associated with the business or businesses in operation on the site.
This includes, but is not limited to, the test driving of vehicles.
Commissioner Barfield stated that while he understands the needs and concerns of those living in that area,
his larger concern is for the greater area. One of our goals in planning is to try to establish nodes to where there is a
clump of commercial development where people might be on the roads and only have to drive so far to get to a variety
of commercial services. In his opinion, it helps control the traffic that will be on Market Street. He sees a true need
for the citizens in that area so they are not driving all the way up Market Street, downtown, College Road, or other
places to get their vehicles worked on and maintained. This is his reason for providing a second to the motion.
Vice-Chairman Watkins stated he also understands how the citizens in this area feel. However, it seems the
applicant is interested in developing the project in some manner. If this project were not approved, the Board would
receive a request for another type of business for the same parcel in the near future.
Chairman White called for a vote on the motion on the floor.
Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP
OF AREA 5 OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED JULY 6, 1972, is hereby
incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book I, Section 5, Page 76.
PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST BY DESIGN SOLUTIONS,
ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, CWEST, LLC, FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT IN ORDER
TO DEVELOP A CAMPING AND TRAVEL TRAILER PARK ON 3.6 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT
9533 AND 9617 RIVER ROAD (S17-04)
Chairman White opened the public hearing and announced that the special use process requires a quasi-
judicial hearing; therefore, the Clerk to the Board must swear in any person wishing to testify. He requested all persons
who signed in to speak or who want to present testimony to step forward to be sworn in.
The following persons were sworn in:
Brad Schuler
Ben Andrea
Ken Vafier
Wayne Clark
Paul Boney
Amy Kinds
Cindee Wolf
Curtis Westbrook
Alan Toll
Hansen Matthews
Troy Slaughter
Boyd Knapp
Chairman White further stated that a presentation will be heard from staff and then the applicant group and
the opponents group will each be allowed fifteen minutes for presentations and an additional five minutes, if necessary,
for rebuttal. He then asked Current Planner Brad Schuler to start the presentation.
Current Planner Brad Schuler presented the request by Design Solutions, on behalf of the property owner,
CWEST, LLC, for a Special Use Permit (SUP) in order to develop a camping and travel trailer park on 3.6 acres of
land located at 9533 and 9617 River Road. Adjoining the subject property to the north is the Carolina Beach Family
Campground and to the south is Snows Cut. Directly next door to the property is a single family dwelling.
The proposed development will consist of 44 camping sites and a management office/restroom facility.
Access to the property will be provided by two driveways off River Road. The applicant is proposing to develop the
site in two phases. The first phase will consist of the northern undeveloped portion of the property which will contain
26 camping sites and a bathhouse. The second phase will be the southern portion of the property which will contain
the remaining camping sites and will convert the existing single family dwelling into a management office and
bathhouse for the campground.
The recreational vehicle (RV) park is expected to connect to Aqua Utilities water service. Wastewater
services for the bathhouses will be provided by a private septic system which will have to be installed in accordance
with the County's Health Department standards. Also, a sewage dumping station is required for the RV and travel
trailers and it will have to be installed in accordance with the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
(NCDEQ) standards.
The proposal is anticipated to generate 14 trips in the AM peak and 21 in the PM peak. Therefore, a Traffic
Impact Analysis (TIA) was not required to be completed for the application. There has been no recent TIA nor are
there any projects included in the State Transportation Plan. The Wilmington/New Hanover County Comprehensive
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34
REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 5, 2018 PAGE 26
Greenway Plan does recommend a greenway be installed along the portion of River Road adjacent to the subject
property. A driveway permit is required by NCDOT for the proposed development.
The 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan classifies the subject property as General Residential. The General
Residential place type focuses on lower-density housing and associated civic, commercial, and recreational services.
Typically, housing is single-family or duplexes. Commercial uses should be limited to strategically located office and
retail spaces, while recreation and school facilities are encouraged throughout. The proposed development is consistent
with the place type as it will provide for recreational opportunities in the area, is not estimated to generate a large
amount of traffic on the roadway network, and is located next to an existing travel trailer park in an area containing a
few single-family homes.
Four conclusions are required to be reached supported by findings of facts based on competent, material, and
substantial evidence and testimony in order to approve a SUP:
1. The use will not materially endanger the public health or safety if located where proposed and developed
according to the plan as submitted and approved.
2. The use meets all required conditions and specifications of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property or that the use is a public
necessity.
4. The location and character of the use if developed according to the plan as submitted and approved will
be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in general conformity with the plan of
development for New Hanover County.
The Planning Board considered this application at their January 11, 2018 meeting. At the meeting, two
adjacent residents asked for modifications to be made to the site plan related to access and fencing, however the
Planning Board did not include these requests in their recommendation. The Planning Board recommended approval
(3-1) of the application as well as recommending the following conditions be added to the development:
1. No camping activity of any kind can occur in any required bufferyard or in the 15-foot access easement
that runs along the northern property line of the subject site.
2. A 20-foot-wide easement shall be dedicated to the County along River Road for the purposes of installing
a future pedestrian facility in accordance with the Wilmington/New Hanover County Comprehensive
Greenway Plan.
Staff has conducted an analysis of the proposed use and the information provided as part of the application
package, in addition to supplemental information provided by the applicant, and has created preliminary findings of
fact to support each of the conclusions required to be reached to approve the SUP request. These preliminary findings
of fact and conclusions are based solely on the information provided to date, prior to any information or testimony in
support or opposition to the request that may be presented at the upcoming public hearing. Staff concludes that based
on the information presented with the application and supplemental correspondence, the four required conclusions
could be met to approve the SUP request.
Chairman White invited the petitioner to present comments.
Paul Westbrook, applicant, stated that he has owned the park for a number of years and manages it himself.
He also owns multiple properties at Wrightsville Beach and has a residence there he has owned since 1983. He then
asked Cindee Wolf of Design Solutions to continue the presentation.
Ms. Wolf, representing the property owner, CWEST, LLC, stated that Mr. Westbrook’s aspirations for having
an RV park made sense. The general vicinity of this part of the County has been used for both permanent mobile home
residences and transient camping facilities in the last 20 years. They were included as part of the 1988 Seabreeze
Small Area Plan which defined the historic and unique nature of this section of the County. The plan was intended as
a policy guide for the future development and revitalization of the Seabreeze community.
There are some modular homes on the site, as well as a concrete block structure on one of the tracts. The
parcels are adjacent to the Snows Cut Park, across the waterway from the Carolina Beach State Park and near the
oceanfront beaches. Their location makes perfect sense for a recreational use. The County's Comprehensive Plan for
the future promotes a focus on increasing public access to the water and natural resources. Enhancement of this unique
environment with significant trees around it was paid attention to. The character and history of the County is strongly
encouraged.
Phase 1 would be just the top part of the subject property, which is currently vacant. The purpose of that is
because Phase 2 does cover the area occupied by the current mobile homes. Mr. Westbrook’s intent was never to
displace those current residents, but rather to transition as those homes become obsolete. Improvement will include
stabilized drives throughout the park for safe circulation and easy access for emergency vehicles. Electric and water
hookups services will be available, along with a septic waste pump out facility as required by the code.
Similar to what is currently happening there, the trash will be handled by contractor pick-up of individual
carts. A dumpster was tried and that's can always problematic because outside people use it and don't pay attention to
some of the regulations. Mr. Westbrook has contracted the trash service to come on a regular basis.
It was felt that this particular area was not large enough to justify a pool and there is no attempt to create a
commercial use here. The current demographic of RV and travel trailers seem to be more oriented toward retirees than
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34
REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 5, 2018 PAGE 27
family camping activities. It is believed that the nearby location of the park, beaches, and other cultural and
recreational activities will meet the needs of the facility users. As to public safety, the subject property is on River
Road. It is a major thoroughfare and there are two driveways which provide good circulation throughout the site. A
stub to the adjacent vacant property has been created for future interconnectivity and provides for the potential for
interconnectivity to the north, if that should ever happen. The site is right beside the Federal Point Fire Station.
Detailed design and permitting would be required prior to the onset of any new improvement construction.
There is no stormwater facility in the current mobile home park. The upgraded facility would be using gravel
pathways which are considered porous. The few surfaces that would be added for the benefit of the new RV spaces
would be of low density. It would probably be no more than 25%. This allows the opportunity of meeting the
stormwater criteria with the use of swales and other natural practices rather than ponds. This is why a pond is not part
of this project.
It is Ms. Wolf’s responsibility to put a site plan together that meets all required conditions and specifications
of the Zoning Ordinance and the staff has done preliminary review. RV and trailer parks, although their prescribed
conditions are included in the mobile home ordinance, have a different set of conditions and requirements. All
conditions and requirements specifically for RV and travel trailers have been met. Again, they are not the same as the
mobile homes. Half of this project area has historically been occupied by a mobile home park and there has been no
evidence of adverse effect on land values surrounding properties to date. There is also a campground next to the
subject property, which has historically been a nonconforming use but happily used in this particular part of the
County.
In the past, Ms. Wolf believes it is generally the case that new projects with compliance current regulations,
visual screening, and enhancements of the overall aesthetics are usually assets that tend to benefit the surrounding
area rather than deteriorate from it. Location, character, and use as far as the plans being discussed are intended to
support lower density housing and recreational opportunities. Being close to the public park and across from the
waterway is a perfect way to meet those goals of the Comprehensive Plan.
Ms. Wolf concluded her presentation stating that the proposed enhancements will bring the existing
conditions into compliance with current regulations and technical standards. The aesthetics will be greatly improved
and she and her client believe that this proposal meets the findings necessary to approve the SUP. It provides an
excellent opportunity to expand housing and recreational uses for the County’s tourism industry, and will be an asset
to the County overall as well as the immediate surrounding community.
Chairman White opened the floor for Board questions.
Regarding questions on the allowed length of time an RV or travel trailer can stay, Ms. Wolf stated that she
believes it would be a possibility that an RV or travel trailer can park on the site for an indefinite period of time. As
to whether an RV or travel trailer would be taxable due to staying parked in the County for a particular period of time,
Mr. Coudriet stated that if there is any permanency he would assume it is taxable, but would have to defer to the Tax
Department to know the specific rules. Ms. Wolf stated that her understanding is that if an RV or travel trailer is on
st
the site on January 1, it is the responsibility of the campgrounds, RV parks, or mobile home parks to report it and
they are taxed based on upon that information. Mr. Westbrook stated that currently for the mobile home park, he
submits to the Tax Department a list of who owns each unit and is taxed. His assumption would be he would do the
same for the RV park if a unit were in place that long.
Regarding questions about sewage drop and if it would be septic tank related, Ms. Wolf stated that she was
not familiar with the particulars of the pump out station, but it is controlled by the Health Department. There is
adequate space on the site to accommodate it and the location has not been identified yet. With a pump out, there is a
specific tank used by RVs or travel trailers that need to pump out. It is contracted for a truck to come and pump out
the tank and there would not be sewer drops at each RV site.
Regarding the design of the RV pad, Mr. Westbrook stated that it would be normal to have a patio for each
site, whether it be brick material or something similar.
Commissioner Barfield stated that he would assume the County Parks Department would recognize that there
will probably be increased traffic at the Snows Cut Park. What he would like to see at the bend of River Road in that
area is some sort of sign NCDOT could put up that states “pedestrian traffic”. Knowing how fast people are coming
around that curve and that people have to walk across the road at that particular location, it would give the driving
public knowledge that there could be pedestrians in that area. Ms. Wolf stated that would be something they certainly
could work out with the NCDOT when updating the driveway permit to have some type of crossing signage.
In response to Board questions about the existing house owned by the Wade family, Mr. Westbrook stated
that this is the same family he purchased the adjoining tract from and he has spoken with the homeowner(s) about
purchasing that tract as well. The owner wants to sell and will sell, but is not quite ready. Ms. Wolf stated that buffering
is in place as required so there can be no camping activities or anything occurring in that entire buffer area. In regards
to the mobile home park residents, Mr. Westbrook believes he has spoken with each resident. During each discussion,
he has stated that he absolutely has no plans to kick out anyone from the mobile home park. The transition will begin
as the residents move out. He fully understands this could delay the Phase 2 plans for some years and is prepared for
it.
Regarding access to the properties to the west of the subject property, Ms. Wolf stated that the 15-foot access
that is existing today has been preserved. Approximately 150 feet of it will be improved as part of this plan. There is
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34
REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 5, 2018 PAGE 28
also a condition on the access that nothing can happen so that it always remains accessible. It is an unimproved
easement and if it ever were to be improved, the 15-feet gives adequate room for a single access drive. How it would
be improved would be up to whoever wanted to improve it.
Chairman White stated that no one signed up to speak in favor of the request and requested that those who
signed up to speak in opposition to the request to give their comments.
Boyd Knapp, resident of River Road, stated that he has been in the camping business for almost 40 years and
has no objection to a well-developed, well-managed RV park. He has concerns that the current plan violates some iron
clad rules of operating a campground for safety and control. For a well-run campground there is one entrance, one
access for vehicular and foot traffic and it goes by the office. His understanding from the Planning Department is that
this plan does not violate any ordinances. However, for Phase 1 there is supposed to be a management office and none
is listed on the plan. He expressed concerns about the safety of children in that area. Although it may not be known,
there are some standard dangers to children in the area. When the weather is not too severe, people live in the woods
who use whatever facilities they can use in the middle of the night, and unfortunately pick up whatever things are
laying out that they might want to use. Nationally, it's estimated that at any given time there are approximately 40
generally pick-up type camping vehicles that have serial killers in there, rapists, child molesters, etc. Essentially these
are people that have no known home, maybe several identities, and those people don't plan on paying attention to any
rules anywhere, ever.
Mr. Knapp concluded his comments stating that Carolina Beach has a standard operating procedure for
people deemed troublesome of bringing them over the bridge and dumping them out. The area under the bridge is a
known camping spot or known informal place for people to sleep during severe weather. In order to protect the
children in the area of the subject property and provide management with control, he suggests that Phase 1 be fenced
throughout with a six-foot wooden fence. Mr. Knapp concluded his comments stating that the planning of Phase 1 and
Phase 2 does not exhibit a knowledge of what campgrounds are and how they are operated.
Troy Slaughter, resident of Princess Street, representing his family's company, Winner Enterprises of
Carolina Beach, LLC, stated that the family has concerns about access to its property which consists of three, one-
acre parcels. When his grandfather, Martin Winner, bought the property from the Freemans in the last century, the 15-
foot easement coming across the northern boundary may have been sufficient. His concern today is that if his family
has any intention or plans to develop the three acres, the 15-foot easement is not going to be enough. Whether that
gets expanded or not at some point of time is another issue. For today's purposes as far as planning goes, if in the
future they do something with the property and need more than 15-feet, he would like this Board to make sure that
any plan that is approved today will not impede that possibility. Obviously if there's dirt that changes ownership down
the road there's going to be some sort of compensation and he understands that. However, today for this Board’s
purposes the 15-foot easement needs to be taken into consideration for any planning purposes.
Chairman White stated that he is not sure it’s the Board’s role to negotiate private agreements like that or to
rearrange existing real estate law related to easements and fee simple land underneath it. He asked what Mr. Slaughter
would propose the Board entertain.
Mr. Slaughter stated that his proposal is that along the northern section of the intended use of the property, if
somehow the layout and the design could take into consideration that the 15-foot wide easement is not going to be
enough at some point in time in the future.
Chairman White stated that he understands that if that didn’t happen it would be in violation of the easement
that Mr. Slaughter has and his remedy would be to take action to prevent that from occurring. He further understands
that Mr. Slaughter’s question is if the Board can do something proactively or pre-emptively to ensure that or inoculate
him from having to make use of the court system.
Mr. Slaughter stated that as this is a conditional use permit as he understands it, the Board has certain leeway
to grant or deny such a request. His position is that because this is a conditional use permit, that a condition be attached
to the SUP so it allows for consideration that this easement be protected and if necessary in the future, to get emergency
service vehicles to the three acres. The 15-foot easement is not going to be sufficient for that kind of traffic.
Chairman White stated that he wants to figure out a way to try to accommodate Mr. Slaughter within the
bounds that the Board has as a governing board, but does not know what the Board’s legal options would be. It seems
to him that 15 feet was reasonable 50 or 75 years ago, and he’s sure things have changed. He is not sure this governing
board is the proper arbiter of those changes. He thinks that's an agreement between two private parties that might need
to be arrived at. He also would think that the petitioner would be very mindful of his problem if he did anything to
encroach on what easement rights Mr. Slaughter has, whatever his deed says. If the petitioner did anything that
encroached or limited it in any way, he would imagine the petitioner would be held liable.
Commissioner Barfield asked Mr. Slaughter if the easement is currently in his deed and stated that typically
there is some type of compensation for an easement. Mr. Slaughter confirmed it is in the deed and he does not know
what happened as far as compensation as it was Seabreeze in the 1950s or 60s.
Commissioner Barfield stated that his point is that he would assume that would be a conversation between
Mr. Slaughter and the current landowner in terms of wanting to increase that easement. Just as with the NCDOT, they
buy easements, they just don’t get them granted to them.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34
REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 5, 2018 PAGE 29
Chairman White stated that he thinks it’s reasonable for Mr. Slaughter to come to the Board to discuss this
matter and try to see what the Board could do. However, the Board needs to be very mindful of doing anything that
would benefit or harm two private parties in a real estate situation. He does not think the Board has the lawful
jurisdiction to do anything other than consider this on its face, assuming that the petitioner is going to abide by
whatever rights Mr. Slaughter does have in the original easement.
Mr. Slaughter confirmed for Vice-Chairman Watkins that the part of the easement on the property in between
his property and the subject property is owned by someone else. The easement runs directly along the northern
boundary of the properties.
Deputy County Attorney Sharon Huffman stated that the issue that Mr. Slaughter brings up is not relevant to
what's before the Board. There's a 15-foot access easement that's there, it's legal, it's recorded. It would provide Mr.
Slaughter’s family with the ability to put three structures on the three lots. That could be done using the 15-foot access
easement. Anything they want to do in addition to that, which requires greater than 15-feet, is something they would
have to obtain from the petitioner later. As she understands it, Mr. Slaughter is asking this Board to place a condition
on the SUP that essentially says at some future time if Winner Enterprises wishes to develop their property in such a
manner that they need more than 15-feet, that the petitioner asking for the SUP is going to have to provide that. That
is not an appropriate type of condition for the Board to place on this SUP.
Regarding if this would basically be a taking of the property or denying the property owner the right to use
his own property, Ms. Huffman stated that she is not exactly sure what Mr. Slaughter is wanting the Board to do. If
what he is wanting is the Board to place a condition that would require the SUP holder to provide Winner Enterprises
with additional property to develop their property, she can't imagine such a condition as that. She does not know what
else he would be asking for. Ms. Huffman reiterated that all that is before the Board is a request for an SUP. The
burden is on the applicant to provide evidence that they have met the four requirements. The fact that this access
easement which is there, it’s legal, it's recorded, and provides Winner Enterprises the ability to develop their three
lots, Mr. Slaughter’s request really has no relevance to the SUP request that's before the Board.
Chairman White thanked Ms. Huffman for her input.
Commissioner Zapple confirmed with Mr. Slaughter that the Estate of Ms. Nancy Lewis, who owns the
property in between Mr. Slaughter’s property and the subject property, has the same identical 15-foot easement. Mr.
Slaughter further confirmed that it runs the entire length of that property.
Regarding what size road is required for the development of Mr. Slaughter’s three lots, Mr. Schuler stated
that if it was developed for three structures there would be no roadway requirement. It is the fourth structure that
requires additional right-of-way and improvements to the road. In those cases, it would fall under the County’s
subdivision ordinance. The private right-of-way standard is 45 feet. For a local street, it’s a 22-foot travel way with
curb and gutter. Regarding review of this project by Emergency Management or Fire Services, Mr. Schuler stated that
neither department’s standards would apply until the fourth structure is accessed off the same access way. Their
standards do not apply to a driveway that goes to three structures.
In response to Board questions, Mr. Slaughter stated there is no other access to the three lots and they are
landlocked. The owners of the property next to River Road are not connected with his family and are not willing to
sell the property to his family. Winner Enterprises does have a 22-space RV park in Carolina Beach which has a good
demand. Ideally, he would like to be able to use the three acres as overflow for the current RV park in Carolina Beach.
However, with the 15-foot easement that is not an option. He does not have an application with the County to develop
the lots.
Hearing no further discussion, Chairman White closed the Public Hearing and stated that a Special Use Permit
which is denied may only be resubmitted if there has been a substantial change in the facts, evidence, or conditions of
the application as determined by the Planning Director. He asked the petitioner if they would like to continue the
application to a future meeting or to proceed with this Board deciding whether to recommended approval or denial of
the application. Mr. Westbrook requested the Board to proceed with the decision.
Chairman White asked for direction from the Board.
Commissioner Zapple stated that he is having difficulty with the third finding of fact of the SUP that says,
“Will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property.” He realizes no one can see clearly into the
future. However, there are three pieces of property, while currently there is no application for developing, but there
seems to be a desire of the owner to develop in the future. He does not believe a 15-foot easement will allow for that.
He would like to continue the discussion to see if the applicant might be open to expanding the easement to at least to
22-feet. This way, the Board doesn’t end up with this issue coming back in the future where the Board has basically
set up a situation knowing that there is a landlocked area and the property owner is not able to get the full use of his
land.
Chairman White stated that this is a quasi-judicial proceeding and he has not heard any evidence of any value
diminishment that's been presented from Mr. Slaughter. While he thinks everyone sympathizes with Mr. Slaughter’s
plight, if the Board were to entertain anything outside the boundaries of the evidence it just heard, the Board is not
permitted to do that as a quasi-judicial body. He further stated that would be his comment about what duty the Board
has to listen to the evidence and make the decision on the evidence that's been presented.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34
REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 5, 2018 PAGE 30
Commissioner Barfield stated that as a realtor he also could not go along with that logic. An easement is
something that a person buys and sells. It has to be negotiated because it concerns infringing upon someone else's
private property rights. He can't see the Board infringing on anyone's private property rights and hates it when NCDOT
does. Although NCDOT has the authority, he doesn’t think that the Board should impose that authority upon itself to
negotiate with someone for access to a bigger piece of land. To him, there needs to be financial gain for one party or
the other to make that work but not the Board saying someone can have more land. Those things are in deeds and are
in the deeds for a reason because someone negotiated them way back when. Easements are negotiated and included
in deeds to give people access to their property but that's pretty much what it is, to give access, not to give a whole
road or those kind of things. He just can't see limiting someone's private property rights for something that may or
may not happen in the future.
Vice-Chairman Watkins stated that he agrees with Commissioner Barfield. There's a parallel issue being
dealt with at the Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Organization (WMPO) where intended roads will have a map
placed on the property by NCDOT. This basically will freeze a property and once the map is placed, significantly
reduces the use of that property. The property owners and NCDOT are in the middle of several lawsuits on this issue.
The NCDOT has to compensate those property owners to fair market value. Again, it is considered a taking of property.
He restated that he agrees with Commissioner Barfield and if Mr. Westbrook and Mr. Slaughter want to negotiate
something, that's between them but he does not think it's in this Board's purview.
Commissioner Zapple stated that he understands and absolutely respects the points of view expressed by
Vice-Chairman Watkins and Commissioner Barfield. He simplysees it as a problem that the Board has the opportunity
to try and avoid in the future. He does not see it as an undue burden to certainly encourage what is clearly not an
adequate size easement to service any of the properties up there including the Estate of Ms. Lewis as well as Mr.
Slaughter's property. He would fall down on the side of being more proactive on this so the Board is not revisiting
this in the near future with lawsuits or bitter complaints.
Vice-Chairman Watkins asked Mr. Schuler, if it was assumed an RV park was the ultimate goal of the
Winners, to confirm that there would be a 22-foot road but a 45-foot easement. Mr. Schuler stated that would be for a
major subdivision assuming the development would be single family homes. An RV park only requires that a 20-foot
road runs through it, similar to this proposal.
Commissioner Barfield stated that his big concern is not only what is being discussed tonight, but for the
woman who passed away. Now the Board would be looking at putting an unfair burden on her family and her estate
as it would have to go through that property as well. This is something the Board does not need to touch. Mr. Slaughter
needs to have a conversation with these property owners and ask what would it cost to have an adequate, bigger
easement to his property. He does not think it's the Board’s position and should not be its position to impose basically
a taking of someone's property. Also, the other property owners of the estate property aren't present to speak.
Chairman White stated he agrees and the Board just has no authority to do anything other than listen to what
it has heard and make judgments on whether or not it meets the four criteria for an SUP. He thinks Mr. Slaughter is in
a great position to negotiate with Mr. Westbrook and has made his case. It's not the Board’s job to interfere with that
nor is it within the Board’s jurisdiction to do so.
Chairman White stated that he would entertain a motion on application request.
Motion
: Commissioner Kusek MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Watkins, to approve the request by Design
Solutions, on behalf of the property owner, CWEST, LLC, for a Special Use Permit (SUP) in order to develop a
camping and travel trailer park on 3.6 acres of land located at 9533 and 9617 River Road based on the evidence
presented and the findings of facts concluding that: 1) the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety
if located and developed according to the plan as submitted and approved; 2) the use meets all required conditions and
specifications of the Zoning Ordinance; 3) the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting
property or that the use is a public necessity; and (4) the location and character of the use if developed according to
the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in general
conformity with the plan of development for New Hanover County as presented; with the following conditions be
added to the development:
1. No camping activity of any kind can occur in any required bufferyard or in the 15-foot access easement
that runs along the northern property line of the subject site.
2. A 20-foot-wide easement shall be dedicated to the County along River Road for the purposes of installing
a future pedestrian facility in accordance with the Wilmington/New Hanover County Comprehensive
Greenway Plan.
Upon vote, the MOTION PASSED 4 -1. Commissioner Zapple voted in opposition.
A copy of an order granting a Special Use Permit and listing the findings of facts is contained in SUP Book
IV, Page 70.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
Chairman White announced that no one signed up to speak under public comment.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chairman White adjourned the meeting at 6:10 p.m.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34
REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 5, 2018 PAGE 31
Respectfully submitted,
Kymberleigh G. Crowell
Clerk to the Board
Please note that the above minutes are not a verbatim record of the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners
meeting. The entire proceedings are available for review and checkout at all New Hanover County Libraries and
online at www.nhcgov.com.