8.27.19 Agenda
August 27, 2019, 5:30 PM
I. Call Meeting to Order (Vice-Chairman Hank Adams)
II. Official Approval of July Minutes (currently in draft status)
July Member Attendees: Hank Adams, Kristin Freeman, Joe Miller, Brett Keeler, Richard Kern
III. Regular Items of Business
1. Case ZBA-940 - Stroud Engineering, P.A., applicant, on behalf of Maritime West
Development, LLC, property owner, is requesting variances from the street yard
plantings required per Section 62.1-10(2)(A) and the parking lot perimeters plantings
per Section 62.1-5(2)(A) of the New Hanover County Zoning Ordinance. The property is
located at 4320 US HWY 421 N, Wilmington, NC.
1
MINUTES
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
The New Hanover County Zoning Board of Adjustment held a regular and duly advertised meeting at 5:30 P.M. at the New
Hanover County Government Center Complex, 230 Government Center Drive, in the Lucie Harrell Conference Room,
Wilmington, NC, on Tuesday, July 23, 2019.
Members Present Members Absent
Hank Adams, Vice- Chairman Ray Bray, Chairman
Joe Miller Cameron Moore
Brett Keeler Mark Nabell
Kristin Freeman
Richard Kern
Ex Officio Members Present
Ken Vafier, Executive Secretary
Sharon Huffman, County Attorney
Ron Meredith, Current Planner
Denise Brown, Clerk
Vice-Chairman Hank Adams explained that the Zoning Board is a quasi-judicial board appointed by the Board of
Commissioners to consider zoning ordinance variances from residents in New Hanover County where special conditions
would create unnecessary hardships. The Zoning Board also hears appeals of the County’s interpretation in enforcement
of the Zoning Ordinance. The appellants have thirty days in which to appeal any decision made by the Board to Superior
Court.
Vice-Chairman Adams inquired on corrections to the June 25, 2019 minutes.
Mr. Keeler made a motion to approve the June 25, 2019 minutes. Mr. Miller second the motion. The motion passed
unanimously.
Vice-Chairman Adams made a statement prior to the case to inform the public that today’s hearing is to listen to testimony
regarding whether the request for the special exception for reasonable accommodation is “reasonable” and “necessary.”
Vice-Chairman Adams stated the applicant and the opposition will each have a time limit of 15 minutes for testimony and
an additional 5 minutes for rebuttal or additional time may be allotted as deemed necessary.
CASE ZBA-939
Vice-Chairman Adams swore in County staff, Mr. Ken Vafier and Mr. Ron Meredith.
Mr. Meredith presented an overview of the case to the board stating the petitioner, Mr. Heafner, on behalf of the
property owners, Zachary and Ashley Paulovits, is requesting a special exception for reasonable accommodation under
the Federal Fair Housing Act to deviate from the maximum number of 6 residents that may be allowed in a group home
to allow up to 8 residents in a group home at 602 Everbreeze Lane. Mr. Meredith stated the proposal is specifically for an
Oxford House Group Home for Disabled Persons.
Mr. Meredith stated the property is located in the northeastern section of New Hanover County in the Summer Glen
subdivision. The group home is in the residential area located north of Gordon Road, west of Eaton Elementary, and east
2
of I-40. The site is zoned R-15, Residential District, consistent with the general zoning designation in the area. A group
home with six (6) residents is allowed by-right in this district per the zoning ordinance.
Mr. Meredith reviewed the New Hanover County Zoning Ordinance definitions for Group Homes and Disabled Persons in
the New Hanover County Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Meredith presented an aerial photo of the subject site and the adjacent area which consists of single family residential
homes.
Mr. Meredith provided history that in 2015 the definition of Group Homes and Disabled Persons were adopted in the
New Hanover County Zoning ordinance via text amendment in order to add provisions allowing reasonable
accommodations for this respective protected class under the Federal Fair Housing Act.
Mr. Meredith stated the amendment defined these two terms as well as parameters for group homes, in allowing the
number of occupants, parking, distance from others group homes and the special exceptions provisions and procedures.
Mr. Meredith stated the Board of Adjustment has the ability to decide on special exceptions under the Fair Housing Act.
The approval process set forth in Section 121-3 of the New Hanover County ordinance for variances and appeals shall to
special exception requests. Mr. Meredith stated the approval criteria for a special exception request, that if the Board of
Adjustment finds greater weight in reasonable accommodation will be determined that will not undermine the legitimate
purpose and effects of the existence regulations such as financial or administrative burden on the county.
Mr. Meredith stated an accommodation shall be determined necessary if it will provide direct and meaningful therapeutic
of the effects of the particular disability or handicap. This act will afford handicap or disabled person equal opportunity
to enjoy housing.
Mr. Vafier stated typically the board decides on variance hearings however, with special exception requests the board is
tasked with deciding if factors presented by the applicant meet the criteria to be determined reasonable and necessary.
Mr. Meredith stated the county tax records indicate the residence is 3 bedrooms and 3 bathrooms to accommodate the
residents. The applicant can provide specific information on the accommodations and function within the residence as it
relates to the Oxford House model.
Mr. Kern inquired of other group homes in the vicinity.
Mr. Meredith stated the nearest group home is 3,800 sf distance from 602 Everbreeze Lane.
Mr. Vafier added the minimum required distance from group homes is 2,000 sf. In this case hearing the applicant is
meeting the group home distance requirement.
Mr. Miller stated to clarify todays proceeding that by right upon the 2015 text amendment implemented by the County
Commissioners group homes are allowed to house 6 individuals in a home.
Mr. Keeler inquired of the bedrooms in the home.
Mr. Meredith stated the tax records stated the home has 3 bedrooms, however there may have been a modification to
the residence. Mr. Meredith stated the applicant can clarify bedroom totals.
Ms. Freeman inquired of any Home Owners Association rules in place to the residence.
3
Mr. Vafier stated the county enforces zoning regulations only. All HOA enforcement is administered by the neighborhood
association. Mr. Vafier also stated the county does not inspect bedrooms in these homes, however for this case the
packet submitted to board members the application stated the home has four bedrooms. County tax records includes
the home contains 3 bedrooms.
Mr. Meredith stated homes can be converted adding bedrooms however the number of bedrooms should not affect the
decision on case hearing.
The Vice- Chairman then swore in Mr. Greg Heafner, Ms. Jacklyn Feliciano, Ms. Donna Griffith, Ms. Shanda Bordeaux,
and Ms. Karen Conzema.
Mr. Greg Heafner, PLLC- Mr. Heafner stated he is representing Oxford House in today's proceedings; the owner of the
home is leasing the house to the residents who participate in the Oxford House model. Mr. Heafner explained that Oxford
House is a recovery program for people suffering from alcoholism or drug addiction. The home is located at 602
Everbreeze Lane with four bedrooms. Mr. Heafner stated there has been some modification to the residence, the house
currently has five bedrooms.
Mr. Heafner stated he is requesting a special exception for reasonable accommodation under the Federal Fair Housing
Act to increase residents at the Oxford House from 6 people to 8 people as the New Hanover Zoning Ordinance allows
per Section 63.11(1).
Mr. Heafner stated the two extra people is necessary for the house to succeed. The residents support themselves; with
an increase of residents to eight (8) the residents will benefit successfully in participating and meeting financial burden.
There is a therapeutic benefit in having more people in the house; all the residents support each other’s goals. There is
no financial burden to the county anticipated.
Mr. Heafner gave history that the first Oxford Home was established in the county in 1975 and there are over 200 Oxford
Houses in NC. A home must be chartered by Oxford House and follow the manual and model standards that Oxford
House operates under. Since 1990, the state has contracted with the Oxford House to provide residency for individuals
requesting transitional housing.
Mr. Heafner stated the residents will elect home officials to ensure all chores, home guidelines, rules and utilities are
properly attended. The residents all work together cohesively for the success of the Oxford House model. Mr. Heafner
stated all Oxford House homes are leased with no profit to the Oxford House agency. The residents of Oxford Homes can
reside for as long as they want; there is no time limit of residency for the participants. Mr. Heafner stated historically in
NC, residents of Oxford House typically live in the homes for a year and a half. The homes are not coed.
Primarily the homes serve as a transition residence for individuals who have completed rehabilitation programs or who
have elected to stay at Oxford House due to lack of individual family environment. The men will abide by standards
established by the Oxford House model; there has been no incident to demonstrate that the home has a negative impact
on the community. Mr. Heafner stated there is no evidence presented that stated this home will increase a financial
burden on New Hanover County.
There are three rules for all residents to comply with: they will be self-supporting, self-governing, and there shall be no
use of alcohol or drugs.
Mr. Heafner stated Oxford Houses are not half way houses or substance abuse centers and there is no treatment
provided at the residence by any sort of staffing. The houses are used for residential living. Mr. Heafner implore the
board to consider the request of the special exception for reasonable accommodation under the Federal Fair Housing
Act to increase residents at the Oxford House from 6 people to 8 people as the New Hanover Zoning Ordinance allows.
4
Mr. Heafner stated residents who have been in residency for a long time at the home are typically awarded a bedroom
without a roommate. However, usually all bedrooms are occupied by two residents. Mr. Heafner stated the home is for
male residency only. The location of the home is good for the residents to access the bus route for transportation.
Mr. Heafner stated DePaul University surveyed the Oxford House model and determined eight (8) people or greater is
an ideal number in a group setting for therapeutic value among recovery persons in sobriety.
Mr. Heafner concluded that the board is tasked with deciding if the request is reasonable and necessary. There is no
administrative burden to the county and fundamentally the request does not change the zoning character of the
neighborhood.
Currently, there are three existing Oxford Houses in the county’s jurisdiction and there is no record of incident at the
homes.
Mr. Miller inquired is he home currently operating with six residents.
Mr. Heafner stated the house opened in mid-July with less than six residents.
Vice-Chairman Adams inquired of other individuals with vary disabilities be allowed to live at the homes.
Mr. Heafner stated he’s not aware of other residents with varied disabilities being allowed to live at the homes other
than those specified with drug and or alcohol abuse. Mr. Heafner stated he has no knowledge of these individuals being
excluded.
Mr. Keeler inquired of incident reports to homes being a burden to the county.
Mr. Vafier stated he’s not aware of any zoning formal complaints at the Oxford Homes with additional residency.
Ms. Huffman stated she contacted the 911 Director regarding calls from the other three (3) existing Oxford Houses in
the unincorporated area responding to incidents and there were none on record.
Ms. Freeman inquired of the Oxford House on Lullwater Drive in the city limits and its status with six (6) residents.
Ms. Jacklyn Feliciano - Oxford House Representative – Ms. Feliciano stated she’s been working with the Oxford House
organization for four (4) years and potential residents are always inquiring of a vacancy. Ms. Feliciano stated the homes
provide a need for these individuals due to the population has increased with opioid substance.
Ms. Feliciano stated it’s not usual for an Oxford House to have one to two vacancies. One of the homes in the city’s
jurisdiction is being purchased by NC DOT due to road expansion and currently Ms. Feliciano is searching for another
residence to house the displaced tenants. Ms. Feliciano stated the City and the County have different zoning regulations
for homes to adhere and some of the homes in the city have not requested additional residents as allowed.
Currently the home on Lullwater Drive has less than eight residents and functions however it has a high turnover.
However, the Oxford House Chapter was able to assist to maintain sufficient occupancy for the home to function
successfully.
Ms. Feliciano stated there are a total of eleven (11) Oxford Houses in New Hanover County seven (7) Oxford Homes are
located in the City of Wilmington and four (4) Oxford Houses are located in the unincorporated areas of the county.
Mr. Miller inquired of how does the Oxford House communicate with the community in regards to house incidents that
may impact the neighborhood.
5
Ms. Feliciano stated she is in communication with the neighbors that adjacent the Oxford House to address concerns.
OPPOSITION:
Ms. Donna Griffith-602 Blackburn Court (neighbor)- Ms. Griffith shared her concerns of the oversight how the home is
managed. Ms. Griffith stated there should be limits on rental agreements with the owners of the homes and residents in
assisting in the individuals to be self-sustained. Ms. Griffith stated the application was submitted for residents to follow
the Federal Fair Housing Act, however she believes the individuals should monitor in staying at the house, if residents do
not participate appropriately the disabled class should be revoked per the agency requirements in meeting the
requirements.
Ms. Shanda Bordeaux-605 Everbreeze Lane (neighbor)- Ms. Bordeaux stated she supports and in favor of the Oxford
House model and individuals rebuilding life choices to become productive citizens in the county. However, Ms. Bordeaux
stated the Oxford House submitted an application on June 18th to the county misrepresenting themselves to house an
eight (8) resident group home for women. Ms. Bordeaux stated the house should not be operational if zoning approval
was not obtained to operate with eight (8) residents prior to the hearing. Ms. Bordeaux stated she took photos of the
residents at the home and it is primarily men coming in and out of the resident.
Ms. Bordeaux stated the four (4) bedroom house was sold on June 11th, however in the Oxford House application it states
the house is five bedrooms. Ms. Bordeaux stated on July 16 she contacted the Inspections Department regarding permit
status being on file for the additional bedroom being added to the residence and no record was on file. Ms. Bordeaux
stated the Oxford House website stated they are a not for profit however with the proposed rent of the home is on the
higher level for residents to adhere to appears to be steep. Ms. Bordeaux stated this group home in the community will
lower the property value.
Ms. Bordeaux stated she’s concerned with the deceitfulness of the applicant in the inconsistency of the application
submitted to the county on behalf of the Oxford House. She’s concerned of lack of oversight of the Oxford House.
Ms. Greg Heafner - (Rebuttal) Mr. Heafner stated there was an error in that he indicated the incorrect gender of the
residents that will reside at 602 Everbreeze Lane. Mr. Heafner stated in regards to the opposition testimony, none of the
neighbor concerns relate to the reasonable and necessary.
Vice-Chairman Adams inquired on how is the house monitored for other inappropriate behaviors.
Mr. Heafner stated the house will only have men residing at the group home. The Oxford House manual specifically states
if a resident uses they are asked to leave the home. Mr. Heafner stated if the house falls on hard times or behavioral
issues they will meet with other residents in the Oxford Chapter and discuss a resolution to bring the house to a successful
manner. Mr. Heafner stated the behaviors are monitored by the residents and persons can be voted out of the home
residency. Mr. Heafner stated the Oxford Homes have resources to address issues that may arise in this area.
Ms. Feliciano –(Rebuttal) Ms. Feliciano stated if residences are found to encroach any of the basic principles of the Oxford
module they may be asked to leave the home. Ms. Feliciano stated Oxford manual and principles are followed; they have
been successful in providing housing to substance abuse residents who enroll in the program for the past 44 years. Ms.
Feliciano stated the residents are fairly new to recovery and some issues do arise but they are addressed early on for
positive outcome. There is typically a core member who is familiar with the group home process as a guide.
Ms. Feliciano stated there are three basic principles to the Oxford House success the residents must comply. There is zero
tolerance for drug or alcoholic use. Ms. Feliciano stated if a resident is found or suspected of using any substance they
will be immediately asked to leave the home. All residences must pay and maintain their own share of expenses. The
resident cannot be found to be disruptive in behavior. It is not a requirement to have multiple residents in the bedrooms,
6
however, there is a therapeutic value to the residents in sharing a bedroom. There are three double bedrooms and 2
single bedrooms. The garage was converted into a bedroom.
Ms. Griffith-(Rebuttal)- Ms. Griffith stated that due the home being subject to the Federal Fair Housing Act, the home
must follow more laws than testimony presented. Ms. Griffith stated there is a high level of mental issues in homes with
individuals with drug or substance recovery in literature. Ms. Griffith stated to live in the home there should be some
exclusions, due diligence, and government oversight to these homes. Ms. Griffith stated that according to Section 63.11
of the zoning ordinance, the group home should not be operational today without permit approval.
Ms. Vafier stated there is a review of a commercial facility packet requesting an 8-member group home. Mr. Vafier stated
currently the home has three (3) residents living in the home and not active as a group home.
Ms. Karen Conzema-813 Worthington Way - (Rebuttal) Ms. Conzema presented literature regarding the residents who
live near various Oxford Houses and these residents stated they witnessed ongoing issues at the residences. Ms. Conzema
stated some parents of these group homes have given testimony that similar group homes like the Oxford House struggle
with day to day situations and some have committed suicide.
Ms. Conzema stated the home is located in a cul-de-sac and a bus stop is close but she is concerned for safety of the
multiple children that reside and the Oxford House residents will require walking through the neighborhood to travel to
the bus stop location. Ms. Conzema stated the home in her opinion is not a good location for a group home.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED.
BOARD DISCUSSION:
Ms. Huffman presented a draft order for the board in their task to consider the special exception.
Mr. Keeler inquired if the board has authority to place conditions on the request.
Ms. Freeman stated that she is unsure of the necessity for the additional members in the home.
Ms. Huffman stated the board is tasked with approving or denying the request. Due to the special exception request,
conditions do not apply to the group home request.
Vice-Chairman stated that the task is to decide if the request is reasonable and necessary as to amelioration of the effects
of the disability and resident’s equal opportunity to enjoy housing.
Ms. Huffman gave a history of the Commissioners approval of a text amendment in 2015 that allows group homes of six
(6) members to reside in the unincorporated area of the county however, applicants could apply for an eight (8) member
group home through the special exception approval process.
Ms. Huffman stated in the City of Wilmington’s residential zoning districts eight (8) members are allowed to reside in a
group home by-right without additional board approval.
Ms. Huffman stated the home must comply with neighborhood Home Owners Association if applicable.
Mr. Miller inquired of a motion to include all findings of facts.
Ms. Huffman stated the findings showing reasonable and necessity could be directed to items listed in notation and the
application received for the special exemption by the applicant collaborating in draft with staff for the language.
7
Mr. Keeler stated in his research of case studies, there is a therapeutic value with 8 residents living together. Mr. Keeler
stated with evidence presented the special exception request is reasonable and necessary.
Ms. Freeman agreed with Mr. Keeler’s statement.
Mr. Kern made a motion to approve the special exception based on evidence presented by the applicant stating there is
no burden to the county administration; no changing in zoning and there is a therapeutic benefit to eight (8) residents
living together. The residents should enjoy greater equal opportunity in housing with an eight (8) member household.
Mr. Keeler second the motion.
The motion was unanimously approved.
All ayes to the motion presented.
BOARD DECISION:
On a motion by Mr. Richard Kern and seconded by Mr. Brett Keeler, the board voted 5-0 to grant the special exception
request to allow up to 8 residents to reside in the group home at 602 Everbreeze Lane, Wilmington NC.
The Board's decision was based on the following conclusions and findings of fact:
1. It is the Board's conclusion that, the request to deviate to eight from the limit of six disabled persons living together
in a group home at 602 Everbreeze Lane is reasonable. This conclusion is based on the following FINDINGS OF FACT:
The request does not place any additional financial or administrative burden on the county.
Allowing two additional persons to the proposed group home in which 6 persons are permitted by-right does
not fundamentally alter the zoning scheme at this location.
The proposal meets all Zoning Ordinance requirements.
2. It is the Board's conclusion that the request to deviate to eight from the limit of six disabled persons living together
in a group home at 602 Everbreeze Lane is necessary. This conclusion is based on the following FINDINGS OF FACT:
Residents in a group home operated by The Oxford House, Inc., support each other in defined household roles
and living accommodations, limiting the need for paid staff on-site, which provides direct and meaningful
therapeutic amelioration of the effects of the effects of the disability for the residents.
The allowance of 8 persons in a typical Oxford House is a model that has an increased rate of success for its’
residents, and provides direct and meaningful therapeutic amelioration of the effects of the disability for the
residents.
8
There being no further business before the board, it was properly moved by Vice-Chairman Adams and seconded by Mr.
Keeler to adjourn the meeting. All ayes.
MEETING ADJOURNED.
Please note the minutes are not a verbatim record of the proceedings.
_______________________________________ ______________________________
Executive Secretary Chairman
DATE: _______________
ZBA-940 Page 1 of 4
VARIANCE REQUEST
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
August 27, 2019
CASE: ZBA-940, 8/19
PETITIONER: Stroud Engineering, P.A., applicant, on behalf of Maritime West Development, LLC, property
owner.
REQUEST: Variances from the parking lot perimeter planting requirements per Section 62.1-5(2)(A) and the
street yard planting requirements per Section 62.1-10(2)(A) of the New Hanover County Zoning
Ordinance.
LOCATION: 4320 Highway 421 N
PID: R02400-001-048-000
ZONING: I-2, Heavy Industrial District
ACREAGE: 11.45 Acres
PETITIONER’S REQUEST:
Stroud Engineering, P.A., applicant, on behalf of Maritime West Development, LLC, property owner, is requesting
two variances related to landscaping requirements on the site. The Zoning Ordinance requires the provision of
parking lot perimeter landscaping with 5 or more parking spaces or 2,500 square feet or more devoted to vehicular
use. Street yard landscaping is required for new construction of principal structures or expansions to existing
structures, or whenever additional off-street parking is required. In general, the Zoning Ordinance states that the
purpose of providing landscaping is to address visual character, aesthetics, glare, dust, noise, runoff, and other
potential impacts associated with development. The applicant is proposing variances from two separate sections
of the Zoning Ordinance:
(A) A variance from the parking lot perimeter requirement to plant 32 deciduous or evergreen trees
required per Section 62.1-5(2)(A) of the ordinance. The applicant has proposed planting ornamental
grasses on a raised berm in lieu of the parking lot perimeter requirements.
(B) A variance from the required 104 understory trees and 208 shrubs that would be required to satisfy
the street yard landscaping requirements per Section 62.1-10(2)(A) of the ordinance. The applicant
is proposing 52 understory trees and 104 shrubs in order to provide half of the required street yard
plantings.
The applicant contends that multiple utility easements adjacent to US Highway 421, stormwater features, and the
need for adequate access within the proposed development do not allow for the site to be designed to
accommodate the required plantings. The surveyed locations of each easement on the property with the
accompanying restrictions have been provided by the applicant and are included as attachments to this summary.
BACKGROUND AND ORDINANCE CONSIDERATIONS:
The subject property consists of 11.45 acres located on the eastern side of US Highway 421 N and is zoned I-2,
Heavy Industrial. Currently, there is an existing 6,240 sq. ft. building located in the northwestern corner of the
property. The applicant intends to construct 7 separate warehouse buildings, totaling 34 units and 132,100 square
ZBA-940 Page 2 of 4
feet, on the remainder of the site for general warehousing. As the proposal will require additional off-street
parking exceeding 5 parking spaces, the provision of parking lot perimeter and street yard landscaping is required.
The applicable language in the Zoning Ordinance in Section 62.1-5 addresses landscaping in parking lot areas:
62.1-5: Additional Landscaping Requirements for Parking Lots
(2) Design Criteria - Landscaping shall be required for parking lot perimeters and for parking lot interiors.
(A) Parking Lot Perimeters - A landscaped strip ten (10) feet in width shall be required along any
side of a parking lot abutting a street right-of-way, separate parking lot or residentially zoned
property. This landscaping shall consist of, at a minimum, one 3" caliper evergreen or
deciduous tree every eighteen (18) to twenty-seven (27) feet. If a buffer strip is required in
accordance with Section 62.1-4, then the ten-foot width may be included as part of the buffer
strip. (4/2/90) The landscaped strip may be interrupted by driveway connections between
parking lots. If adjacent parking lots are developed concurrently then both properties can
install a minimum of 5 ft. strip or any multiple agreed upon in writing by the two property
owners that would equal 10 ft. of planted area between the parking lots. Adjacent lots that
choose to share a double parking row split along the middle of a drive isle are exempt from
this requirement.
The parking lot perimeter landscaping requirements consist of one 3” caliper evergreen or deciduous tree every
18 to 27 feet along a parking lot abutting a street right-of-way. With the proposed development of this site, 32
trees would be required to meet the parking lot perimeter standards. The applicant is asking for a variance from
the parking lot perimeter planting requirements in lieu of the street yard plantings as well as the provision of
ornamental grasses on a raised berm to provide vegetative screening.
Additionally, applicable language from Section 62.1-10 of the Zoning Ordinance requires all new construction or
expansions to install street yard landscaping consisting of planted trees and shrubs:
62.1-10: Street Yard Landscaping
(1) A street yard, as defined herein, must be provided for new construction of principal structures or for
expansions to existing structures or used whenever additional off-street parking is required. However, no
street yard improvements shall be required for those portions of lot frontage used for driveways
constructed in accordance with County or State driveway regulations.
(2) It is intended that street yards be landscaped by meeting the following requirements:
(A) For every 600 sq. ft. of street yard area, the street yard shall contain:
One Canopy/Shade tree, (3"caliper) minimum or 3 understory story trees, six ft. in height,
only when overhead power lines exist above the street yard; and six shrubs, 12" in height at
planting.
(5) The Street yard area is calculated by:
Step One: Multiplying the designated street yard factor in accordance with the zoning designation of the
property by the linear street frontage of the property less the road fronting width of any access drives
within the street yard to determine the base street yard area;
ZBA-940 Page 3 of 4
Step Two: Subtracting the area of any walkways, sidewalks or other bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and
transit amenities from the base street yard area to get the total required street yard area.
The applicant may install the street yard in any configuration that provides the required amount of street
yard square footage between the property line and any site improvements. The maximum and minimum
widths as listed in the following table may not be exceeded in any portion of the street yard. (10/7/13)
When applying the formula specified above, using the designated street yard factor of 25 for the I-2 Zoning
District, the base street yard area totals 20,825 square feet:
863 Linear Feet of Street Frontage – 30 Linear Feet of Driveway = 833 Linear Feet of Street Frontage
833 Linear Feet of Frontage x 25 = 20,825 sq. ft.
When applying the number of canopy trees and shrubs specified in Section 62.1-10(2)(A), the required number
of plantings for this site are 35 canopy trees or 104 understory trees and 208 shrubs, all of which must be
planted in a width ranging from 12.5’ to 37.5’ along the street frontage.
Figure 1: Recorded easements on property adjacent to US Highway 421 N in area of required landscaping.
ZBA-940 Page 4 of 4
The applicant contends that difficulties arise with providing the required number of plantings due to restrictions
on vegetation within the multiple utility easements, which generally address interference with overhead lines and
underground transmissions. The Zoning Ordinance allows for three understory trees to be planted for every
canopy tree that would be required where the street yard is below overhead power lines. With the characteristics
of the site, 104 understory trees would be required to be planted within the street yard area. Due to the presence
of the easements along the street frontage, the available space for the planting of the required vegetation is
limited.
The applicant has submitted a landscaping plan that proposes 52 understory trees and 104 shrubs, which is
approximately half of the required plantings at this site.
In summary, the applicant is requesting a variance from the parking lot perimeter planting requirements detailed
in Section 62.5-(2)(A) of the Zoning Ordinance. In addition, the petitioner is also requesting a variance from the
street yard planting requirements in order to plant half of the required understory trees and shrubs as required
in Section 62.1-10(2)(A).
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT POWER AND DUTY:
The Board of Adjustment has the authority to authorize variances from the terms of the Zoning Ordinance where,
due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the regulations would result in unnecessary hardship. In
granting any variance, the Board may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with the
Zoning Ordinance. A concurring vote of four-fifths (4/5) of the voting members of the Board shall be necessary to
grant a variance. A variance shall not be granted by the Board unless and until the following findings are made:
1. Unnecessary hardship would result from the strict application of the ordinance. It shall not be necessary
to demonstrate that, in the absence of the variance, no reasonable use can be made of the property.
2. The hardship results from conditions that are peculiar to the property, such as location, size, or
topography. Hardships resulting from personal circumstances, as well as hardships resulting from
conditions that are common to the neighborhood or the general public, may not be the basis for granting
a variance.
3. The hardship did not result from actions taken by the applicant or the property owner. The act of
purchasing property with knowledge that circumstances exist that may justify the granting of a variance
shall not be regarded as a self-created hardship.
4. The requested variance is consistent with the spirit, purpose, and intent of the ordinance, such that public
safety is secured, and substantial justice is achieved.
ACTION NEEDED (Choose one):
1. Motion to approve the variance request based on the findings of fact (with or without conditions)
2. Motion to table the item in order to receive additional information or documentation (Specify).
3. Motion to deny the variance request based on specific negative findings in any of the 4 categories
above.
New Hanover County Zoning Board of Adjustment
Vicinity MapE2,000 FeetCase: ZBA-940Address: 4320 Highway 421 NVariance request: Variances from the parking lot perimeter planting requirements and the street yard planting requirements Applicant: Stroud Engineering, P.A. Owner: Maritime West Development, LLC August 27, 2019
INVISTA
SUBJECT PROPERTY
FORTRON INDUSTRIES
ARTEVA SPECIALTIES
WILBARA LLC
I-2
New Hanover County Zoning Board of Adjustment
Easement MapCase: ZBA-940Address: 4320 Highway 421 NVariance request: Variances from the parking lot perimeter planting requirements and the street yard planting requirements Applicant: Stroud Engineering, P.A. Owner: Maritime West Development, LLC August 27, 2019
1,000 FeetE
INVISTA
SUBJECT PROPERTY
ARTEVA SPECIALTIES
U
S H
W
Y 42
1
Case: ZBA-940
New Hanover County Zoning Board of Adjustment
Aerial MapE1,000 Feet
Address: 4320 Highway 421 NVariance request: Variances from the parking lot perimeter planting requirements and the street yard planting requirements Applicant: Stroud Engineering, P.A. Owner: Maritime West Development, LLC August 27, 2019
INVISTA
SUBJECT PROPERTY
ARTEVA SPECIALTIES
ORDER TO GRANT/DENY A VARIANCE – Case ZBA-940
The Zoning Board of Adjustment for New Hanover County, having held a public hearing on August 27,
2019 to consider application number ZBA-940, submitted by Stroud Engineering, P.A., on behalf of
Maritime West Development, LLC, a request for a variance to use the property located at 4320 US
Highway 421 N in a manner not permissible under the literal terms of the ordinance and having heard all
the evidence and arguments presented at the hearing, makes the following FINDINGS OF FACT and
draws the following CONCLUSIONS:
1. It is the Board’s conclusion that, if the applicant complies with the literal terms of the
ordinance, specifically the parking lot perimeter planting requirements in Section 62.1-5(2)(A)
and the street yard planting requirements in Section 62.1-10(2)(A) of the New Hanover County
Zoning Ordinance, that an unnecessary hardship would result/would not result. (It shall not
be necessary to demonstrate that, in the absence of the variance, no reasonable use can be
made of the property.) This conclusion is based on the following FINDINGS OF FACT:
_______________________________________________________________________.
_______________________________________________________________________.
_______________________________________________________________________.
_______________________________________________________________________.
2. It is the Board’s conclusion that the hardship of which the applicant complains results/does
not result from unique circumstances related to the subject property, such as location, size, or
topography. (Hardships resulting from personal circumstances, as well as hardships resulting
from conditions that are common to the neighborhood or the general public, may not be the
basis for granting a variance.) This conclusion is based on the following FINDINGS OF FACT:
_______________________________________________________________________.
_______________________________________________________________________.
_______________________________________________________________________.
_______________________________________________________________________.
3. It is the Board’s conclusion that the hardship did/did not result from actions taken by the
applicant or the property owner. (The act of purchasing property with knowledge that
circumstances exist that may justify the granting of a variance shall not be regarded as a self-
created hardship.) This conclusion is based on the following FINDINGS OF FACT:
_______________________________________________________________________.
_______________________________________________________________________.
_______________________________________________________________________.
_______________________________________________________________________.
4. It is the Board’s conclusion that, if granted, the variance will/will not be consistent with the
spirit, purpose, and intent of the ordinance, such that public safety is secured, and substantial
justice is achieved. This conclusion is based on the following FINDINGS OF FACT:
_______________________________________________________________________.
_______________________________________________________________________.
_______________________________________________________________________.
_______________________________________________________________________.
THEREFORE, on the basis of all the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that the application for a VARIANCE from
New Hanover County Zoning Ordinance to allow variances from the parking lot perimeter requirements
in Section 62.1-5(2)(A) and the street yard planting requirements in Section 62.1-10(2)(A) of the New
Hanover County Zoning Ordinance be GRANTED/DENIED, subject to the following conditions, if any:
ORDERED this 27th day of August, 2019.
____________________________________
Henry Adams, Vice-Chairman
Attest:
____________________________________
Kenneth Vafier, Executive Secretary to the Board
PPo
PPo oPP
NOTE: PARKING, SHRUBS, AND SMALL TREES ARE OKAY.
OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR, AND REPLACEMENT OF THE OVERHEAD ELECTRIC
EXPLICITLY ALLOWED: ANYTHING WHICH DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH THE
EXPLICITLY PROHIBITED : NONE
DESCRIPTION: OVERHEAD ELECTRIC
MB 65 P 3
B 5447 P 1139
30' PRIVATE ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT
WILBARA, LLC
(TYP)
38'
(TYP)
25'
(TYP)
36'
110'X190'
2
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X180'
5
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X180'
6
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X180'
7
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X190'
3
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X190'
4
BLDG.
PROP.
VAVA VA VA
VA VA VA VA
VA VA
100'X100'
1
BLDG.
PROP.
EX ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALT
EX BLDG
EX ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALTPROP ASPHALT
POND
OPAQUE SCREENING
PAD W/ 8' TALL
12'x24' DUMPSTER
VAVA
VAVA
PROP ASPHALT
6
5
'
R
OA
D
ACCE
S
S
AN
D
U
TILITIE
S
E
A
S
EME
N
T
US HIGHWAY 421
BO
O
K
5
4
4
7
P
A
G
E
1
1
3
9
GRAPHIC SCALE:
0 SCALE:STROUD ENGINEERING, P.A.
102-D CINEMA DRIVE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403
(910) 815-0775
LICENSE NO.C-0647
SHEET:
MARITIME NORTH
WILMINGTON, NC 28401
4320 US HWY 421 NORTH
PHONE:
ADDRESS:
DEVELOPER:
910-821-1735
CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429
PO BOX 789
MARITIME WEST DEVELOPMENT, LLC
EASEMENT EXHIBIT
100 100 200
1" = 100'1 OF 6
1" = 100'
EX 16" PVC WATER (CFPUA)
EX 8" PVC FORCE MAIN (CFPUA)
NOTE: PARKING AND GROUNDCOVER ARE OKAY.
AND SHALLOW ROOTED GROUND COVER
EXPLICITLY ALLOWED: PAVED R/W, DRIVE AISLES, PARKING AREAS,
EXPLICITLY PROHIBITED : TREES, BERMS, FENCES
DESCRIPTION: WATER MAIN, SEWER FORCE MAIN, AND APPURTENANCES
MB 65 P 3
B 6101 P 509
PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT
CFPUA
(TYP)
38'
(TYP)
25'
(TYP)
36'
110'X190'
2
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X180'
5
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X180'
6
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X180'
7
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X190'
3
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X190'
4
BLDG.
PROP.
VAVA VA VA
VA VA VA VA
VA VA
100'X100'
1
BLDG.
PROP.
EX ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALT
EX BLDG
EX ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALTPROP ASPHALT
POND
OPAQUE SCREENING
PAD W/ 8' TALL
12'x24' DUMPSTER
VAVA
VAVA
PROP ASPHALT
6
5
'
R
OA
D
ACCE
S
S
AN
D
U
TILITIE
S
E
A
S
EME
N
T
US HIGHWAY 421
BO
O
K
5
4
4
7
P
A
G
E
1
1
3
9
GRAPHIC SCALE:
0 SCALE:STROUD ENGINEERING, P.A.
102-D CINEMA DRIVE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403
(910) 815-0775
LICENSE NO.C-0647
SHEET:
MARITIME NORTH
WILMINGTON, NC 28401
4320 US HWY 421 NORTH
PHONE:
ADDRESS:
DEVELOPER:
910-821-1735
CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429
PO BOX 789
MARITIME WEST DEVELOPMENT, LLC
EASEMENT EXHIBIT
100 100 200
1" = 100'2 OF 6
1" = 100'
VAULTCONC
PANEL
EX 48" RCP RAW WATER (LCFWSA)
ANTo
NOTE: PARKING AND GROUNDCOVER ARE OKAY.
EXPLICITLY ALLOWED: LAWFUL CULTIVIATION WHICH DOES INTERFERE WITH THE USE (GRASS)
EXPLICITLY PROHIBITED : TREES, SHRUBS, IMPROVEMENTS
DESCRIPTION: RAW WATER MAIN AND APPURTENANCES
MB 65 P 3
B 1699 P 1272
AND RIGHT OF WAY
PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT
C.O.W.
(TYP)
38'
(TYP)
25'
(TYP)
36'
110'X190'
2
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X180'
5
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X180'
6
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X180'
7
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X190'
3
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X190'
4
BLDG.
PROP.
VAVA VA VA
VA VA VA VA
VA VA
100'X100'
1
BLDG.
PROP.
EX ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALT
EX BLDG
EX ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALTPROP ASPHALT
POND
OPAQUE SCREENING
PAD W/ 8' TALL
12'x24' DUMPSTER
VAVA
VAVA
PROP ASPHALT
6
5
'
R
OA
D
ACCE
S
S
AN
D
U
TILITIE
S
E
A
S
EME
N
T
US HIGHWAY 421
BO
O
K
5
4
4
7
P
A
G
E
1
1
3
9
GRAPHIC SCALE:
0 SCALE:STROUD ENGINEERING, P.A.
102-D CINEMA DRIVE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403
(910) 815-0775
LICENSE NO.C-0647
SHEET:
MARITIME NORTH
WILMINGTON, NC 28401
4320 US HWY 421 NORTH
PHONE:
ADDRESS:
DEVELOPER:
910-821-1735
CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429
PO BOX 789
MARITIME WEST DEVELOPMENT, LLC
EASEMENT EXHIBIT
100 100 200
1" = 100'3 OF 6
1" = 100'
OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR, AND REPLACEMENT OF THE UTILITY
ALLOWED: ANYTHING WHICH DOES/WOULD NOT INTERFERE WITH THE
PROHIBITED : NONE
DESCRIPTION: FUTURE PRIVATE UTILITY & ACCESS
MB 65 P 3
DB 6157 P 2247
15' PRIVATE UTILITY & ACCESS EASEMENT
NOTE: PARKING AND SHRUBS ARE OKAY
OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR, AND REPLACEMENT OF THE UTILITY
ALLOWED: ANYTHING WHICH DOES/WOULD NOT INTERFERE WITH THE
PROHIBITED : NONE
DESCRIPTION: FUTURE PRIVATE UTILITY
MB 65 P 3
DB 6157 P 2247
30' PRIVATE UTILITY EASEMENT
INVISTA
(TYP)
38'
(TYP)
25'
(TYP)
36'
110'X190'
2
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X180'
5
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X180'
6
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X180'
7
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X190'
3
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X190'
4
BLDG.
PROP.
VAVA VA VA
VA VA VA VA
VA VA
100'X100'
1
BLDG.
PROP.
EX ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALT
EX BLDG
EX ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALTPROP ASPHALT
POND
OPAQUE SCREENING
PAD W/ 8' TALL
12'x24' DUMPSTER
VAVA
VAVA
PROP ASPHALT
6
5
'
R
OA
D
ACCE
S
S
AN
D
U
TILITIE
S
E
A
S
EME
N
T
US HIGHWAY 421
BO
O
K
5
4
4
7
P
A
G
E
1
1
3
9
GRAPHIC SCALE:
0 SCALE:STROUD ENGINEERING, P.A.
102-D CINEMA DRIVE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403
(910) 815-0775
LICENSE NO.C-0647
SHEET:
MARITIME NORTH
WILMINGTON, NC 28401
4320 US HWY 421 NORTH
PHONE:
ADDRESS:
DEVELOPER:
910-821-1735
CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429
PO BOX 789
MARITIME WEST DEVELOPMENT, LLC
EASEMENT EXHIBIT
100 100 200
1" = 100'4 OF 6
1" = 100'
oANTANTo
PANEL
VAULTCONC
oPP
oLP
NOTE: PARKING AND SHRUBS ARE OKAY
OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR, AND REPLACEMENT OF THE UTILITY
EXPLICITLY ALLOWED: ANYTHING WHICH DOES/WOULD NOT INTERFERE WITH THE
EXPLICITLY PROHIBITED : STRUCTURES
DESCRIPTION: WATER PIPELINE AND APPURTENANCES
B 1147 P 243
WATER PIPELINE EASEMENT
LOWER CAPE FEAR WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY
(TYP)
38'
(TYP)
25'
(TYP)
36'
110'X190'
2
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X180'
5
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X180'
6
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X180'
7
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X190'
3
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X190'
4
BLDG.
PROP.
VAVA VA VA
VA VA VA VA
VA VA
100'X100'
1
BLDG.
PROP.
EX ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALT
EX BLDG
EX ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALTPROP ASPHALT
POND
OPAQUE SCREENING
PAD W/ 8' TALL
12'x24' DUMPSTER
VAVA
VAVA
PROP ASPHALT
6
5
'
R
OA
D
ACCE
S
S
AN
D
U
TILITIE
S
E
A
S
EME
N
T
US HIGHWAY 421
BO
O
K
5
4
4
7
P
A
G
E
1
1
3
9
GRAPHIC SCALE:
0 SCALE:STROUD ENGINEERING, P.A.
102-D CINEMA DRIVE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403
(910) 815-0775
LICENSE NO.C-0647
SHEET:
MARITIME NORTH
WILMINGTON, NC 28401
4320 US HWY 421 NORTH
PHONE:
ADDRESS:
DEVELOPER:
910-821-1735
CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429
PO BOX 789
MARITIME WEST DEVELOPMENT, LLC
EASEMENT EXHIBIT
100 100 200
1" = 100'5 OF 6
1" = 100'
oANTANTo
PANEL
VAULTCONC
GUARDRAILFOOTING
BOARD
MESSAGE
OVERHEAD MESSAGE BOARD
6" STEEL GAS
oPP PPooFO 6" STEEL GAS oPP
FO6" STEEL GAS
COMM COMMCOMM
6" STEEL GAS
oGAS
PP
PPoFOoo
oPP
oLP
COMM
APPEAR TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH THE LCFWSA EASEMENT
NOTE THAT VAULT, OVERHEAD ELECTRIC, AND TELEMETRY
BUT WHICH ARE OUTSIDE RECORDED EASEMENTS
UTILITIES ON/ADJACENT TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
(TYP)
38'
(TYP)
25'
(TYP)
36'
110'X190'
2
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X180'
5
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X180'
6
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X180'
7
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X190'
3
BLDG.
PROP.
110'X190'
4
BLDG.
PROP.
VAVA VA VA
VA VA VA VA
VA VA
100'X100'
1
BLDG.
PROP.
EX ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALT
EX BLDG
EX ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALT
PROP ASPHALTPROP ASPHALT
POND
OPAQUE SCREENING
PAD W/ 8' TALL
12'x24' DUMPSTER
VAVA
VAVA
PROP ASPHALT
6
5
'
R
OA
D
ACCE
S
S
AN
D
U
TILITIE
S
E
A
S
EME
N
T
US HIGHWAY 421
BO
O
K
5
4
4
7
P
A
G
E
1
1
3
9
GRAPHIC SCALE:
0 SCALE:STROUD ENGINEERING, P.A.
102-D CINEMA DRIVE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403
(910) 815-0775
LICENSE NO.C-0647
SHEET:
MARITIME NORTH
WILMINGTON, NC 28401
4320 US HWY 421 NORTH
PHONE:
ADDRESS:
DEVELOPER:
910-821-1735
CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429
PO BOX 789
MARITIME WEST DEVELOPMENT, LLC
EASEMENT EXHIBIT
100 100 200
1" = 100'6 OF 6
1" = 100'