The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2022-04 PB AGENDA PACKET NEW HANOVER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD AGENDA Assembly Room, New Hanover County Historic Courthouse 24 North Third Street, Room 301 Wilmington, NC 28401 Members of the Board Jeffrey P Petroff, Chair | Donna Girardot, Vice-Chair Paul Boney | Hansen Matthews | Jeffrey Stokley Jr. | H. Allen Pope | Colin J. Tarrant Rebekah Roth, Director| Ken Vafier, Planning Manager APRIL 7, 2022 6:00 PM Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Approval of Minutes REGULAR ITEMS OF BUSINESS The Planning Board may consider substantial changes in these petitions as a result of objections, debate, and discussion at the meeting, including rezoning to other classifications. 1 Public Hearing Rezoning Request (Z22-03) - Request by Douglas E. Reeves, applicant, on behalf of Reeves Holdings, LLC, property owner, to rezone approximately 1.84 acres of land located at 6205 Blossom Street from R-15, Residential District, to CB, Community Business, and R-10, Residential District. 2 Public Hearing Rezoning Request (Z22-07) - Request by Adam G. Sosne, applicant, on behalf of Grove Park Properties, property owner, to rezone approximately 15.38 acres of land located at 5550 Carolina Beach Road from R-15, Residential District, to RMF-MH, Residential Mul􀀾-Family Medium-High Density District. 3 Public Hearing Rezoning Request (Z22-09) - Request by James Fentress with Stroud Engineering, PA, applicant, on behalf of Dallas Harris Land Company, LLC, property owner, to rezone approximately 1.1 acres of land located at 7491 Market Street from R-15, Residential District, to (CZD) CB, Community Business District for a bank/financial institution 4 Public Hearing Rezoning Request (Z22-08) - Request by Cindee Wolf, applicant, on behalf of New Beginnings Christian Church, Inc., property owner, to rezone approximately 9.60 acres of land located within the 3100 Block of Blue Clay Road from R-20, Residential District, and (CZD) R-10, Conditional Residential District, to (CZD) R-5, Conditional Residential District 5 Public Hearing Rezoning Request (Z22-05) - Request by Cindee Wolf, applicant, on behalf of Har-Ste Investments, property owner, to rezone approximately 7.32 acres of land located at the 300 block of Edgewater Club Road from R-20, Residential District, to (CZD) R-7, Residential District. NEW HANOVER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION MEETING DATE: 4/7/2022 Regular DEPARTMENT: Planning PRESENTER(S): Amy Doss, Current Planner CONTACT(S): Amy Doss; Rebekah Roth, Planning & Land Use Director SUBJECT: Public Hearing Rezoning Request (Z22-03) - Request by Douglas E. Reeves, applicant, on behalf of Reeves Holdings, LLC, property owner, to rezone approximately 1.84 acres of land located at 6205 Blossom Street from R-15, ResidenBal District, to CB, Community Business, and R-10, ResidenBal District. BRIEF SUMMARY: The applicant is proposing to rezone approximately 1.84 acres from R-15, Residen)al to CB, Community Business and R-10, Residen)al. The por)on of the land fron)ng Castle Hayne Road is intended for commercial space. The acreage fron)ng Blossom Street would be rezoned for low density residen)al. Although a straight rezoning, the applicant has provided a proposed plan for the parcel, but condi)ons regarding uses cannot be placed on the approval. The subject site would be required to meet all the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) requirements for development within the proposed zoning districts. Types of uses allowed and commonly found in the CB district include civic, ins)tu)onal, and commercial uses like community centers, religious assemblies, restaurants, and general retail sales. Types of uses allowed and commonly found in the R-10 district include civic, ins)tu)onal, and residen)al uses like libraries, religious assemblies, and EMS facili)es. Some of these uses allowed in the CB and R-10 zoning districts are also permi8ed within the R-15 zoning district. Any proposed non-residen)al use would be subject to the applicable site design and approval provisions within the UDO. The R-15 district in this area was established within the “Castle Hayne” zoning area in 1985. At the )me, the purpose of the R-15 district was to provide lands that accommodate very low-density housing and recrea)onal uses in order to preserve the quiet residen)al nature of the areas included in the district. The purpose of the Residen)al-10 (R-10) District is to provide lands that accommodate new residen)al neighborhoods and encourage the conserva)on of exis)ng residen)al lots and neighborhoods. The purpose of the Community Business (CB) District is to provide lands that accommodate the development, growth, and con)nued opera)on of businesses that serve surrounding neighborhoods with goods and services. CB district lands can serve as a buffer between higher density/intensity development and moderate or low-density mul)-family and single-family neighborhoods. This district was added to the UDO in 2019 and was intended to be appropriate adjacent to exis)ng residen)al uses. It is es)mated that 1.27 acres of property zoned CB can generally support approximately 10,000 square feet of tradi)onal general retail uses based on a typical 18% building area for this type of zoning. The remaining por)on of the parcel that would be zoned R-10 and if developed at the maximum R-10 density of 3.3 units per acre, this could yield a poten)al maximum of 3 dwelling units. If developed at the maximum R-15 density of 2.5 units per acre, this could yield a poten)al maximum of 5 dwelling units. The net change from the poten)al trip genera)on if the site were to be developed under the exis)ng R-15 district to the proposed CB and R-10 districts shows an approximate increase of 36 AM peak hour trips and an approximate increase of 90 PM peak hour trips. General retail uses typically generate the bulk of their trips during the PM hours as Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 retail uses are oEen not the weekday rush hour des)na)on for motorists. The es)mated traffic generated from the site is under the 100 peak hour threshold that triggers the ordinance requirement for a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). Based on the current student genera)on rate, the maximum development within the proposed zoning district can be es)mated to generate approximately the same number of students than if developed under exis)ng zoning. The general student genera)on rate provides only an es)mate of an)cipated student yield as different forms of housing at different price points yield different numbers of students. Please refer to the Schools sec)on included in this report for addi)onal informa)on on school enrollment and capacity. The site would serve as a transi)onal area between the commercial ac)vity along the Castle Hayne corridor and the lower-intensity uses to the east. The proposed rezoning for CB and R-10 is generally CONSISTENT with the Comprehensive Plan because it will allow for the types of residen)al development and commercial uses encouraged in the Community Mixed Use place type. This case was originally scheduled for the February 3, 2022 Planning Board mee)ng. The applicant requested and was granted a con)nuance to the April 7, 2022 Planning Board mee)ng. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Because the proposed rezoning is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and would provide a transi)on between exis)ng commercial services and residen)al areas, Staff recommends approval of the proposal and suggests the following mo)on: I move to recommend APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning to CB and R-10. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it will allow for the types of residen)al and commercial uses that would be encouraged in the Community Mixed Use place type. I also find recommending APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the site is located on an arterial street near exis)ng commercial services and would serve as a transi)on between the Castle Hayne commercial node to the south and residen)al proper)es to the north and east. Alterna)ve Mo)on for Denial I move to recommend DENIAL of the proposed rezoning to CB and R-10. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it would allow for the types of commercial uses that would be encouraged in the Community Mixed Use place type, I find recommending DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is not consistent with the desired character of the surrounding community and the intensity will adversely impact the adjacent neighborhoods. ATTACHMENTS: Descrip)on Z22-03 Script Z22-03 PB Staff Report Z22-03 Zoning Map Z22-03 FLUM Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 Z22-03 Neighboring Properties Z22-03 Application Cover Sheet Z22-03 Application Package COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (only Manager) Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 PLANNING BOARD SCRIPT for Zoning Map Amendment Application (Z22-03) Request by Douglas E. Reeves, applicant, on behalf of Reeves Holdings, LLC, property owner, to rezone approximately 1.84 acres of land located at 6205 Blossom Street from R-15, Residential District, to CB, Community Business, and R-10, Residential District. 1. This is a public hearing. We will hear a presentation from staff. Then the applicant and any opponents will each be allowed 15 minutes for their presentation and an additional 5 minutes for rebuttal. 2. Conduct Hearing, as follows: a. Staff presentation b. Applicant’s presentation (up to 15 minutes) c. Opponent’s presentation (up to 15 minutes) d. Applicant’s rebuttal (up to 5 minutes) e. Opponent’s rebuttal (up to 5 minutes) f. Staff review of any additional conditions 3. Close the public hearing 4. Board discussion 5. Before we proceed with the vote, I would like to invite the applicant to the podium. Based on the Board discussion and items presented during the public hearing, would you like withdraw your petition, request a continuance, or proceed with a vote? 6. Vote on the application. The motion should include a statement saying how the change is, or is not, consistent with the land use plan and why approval or denial of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest. Example Motion for Approval I move to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning to CB and R-10 districts. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it will allow for the types of residential and commercial uses that would be encouraged in the Community Mixed Use place type. I also find RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the site is located on an arterial street near existing commercial services and would serve as a transition between the Castle Hayne commercial node to the south and residential properties to the north and east. Example Motion for Denial I move to RECOMMEND DENIAL of the proposed rezoning to CB and R-10 districts. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it will allow for the types of residential and commercial uses that would be encouraged in the Community Mixed Use place type. I also find RECOMMENDING DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is not consistent with the desired character of the surrounding community and the intensity will adversely impact the adjacent areas. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 1 - 1 Alternative Motion for Approval/Denial: I move to RECOMMEND [Approval/Denial] of the proposed rezoning to CB and R-10 districts. I find it to be [Consistent/Inconsistent] with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because [insert reasons] __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ I also find RECOMMENDING [Approval/Denial] of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because [insert reasons] __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 1 - 2 Z22-03 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 1 of 14 STAFF REPORT OF Z22-03 REZONING APPLICATION APPLICATION SUMMARY Case Number: Z22-03 Request: Rezone approximately 1.84 acres to CB, Community Business and R-10, Residential Applicant: Property Owner(s): Douglas E Reeves with Reeves Holdings LLC Reeves Holdings, LLC Location: Acreage: 6205 Blossom Street 1.84 PID(s): Comp Plan Place Type: R01109-003-001-000 Community Mixed Use Existing Land Use: Proposed Land Use: Undeveloped Commercial use fronting Castle Hayne, and residential use fronting Blossom Street Current Zoning: Proposed Zoning: R-15, Residential CB, Community Business, and R-10 Residential SURROUNDING AREA LAND USE ZONING North General Retail Sales, Undeveloped B-2, R-15 East Residential R-15 South Residential R-15 West Castle Hayne Road Right-of-Way, Residential N/A, RA Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 1 Z22-03 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 2 of 14 ZONING HISTORY July 1, 1985 Initially zoned R-15 (Castle Hayne Area) COMMUNITY SERVICES Water/Sewer CFPUA sewer is available; CFPUA water has capacity at this time. Capacity is also dependent on the analysis of the pipe collection system (gravity and force mains). Fire Protection New Hanover County Fire Services, New Hanover County Northern Fire District, New Hanover County Castle Hayne Station Schools Castle Hayne Elementary, Holly Shelter Middle, and Laney High Schools Recreation Riverside Park CONSERVATION, HISTORIC, & ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Conservation No known conservation resources. Historic No known historic resources. Archaeological No known archaeological resources. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 2 Z22-03 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 3 of 14 APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL • The applicant is proposing to rezone approximately 1.84 acres from R-15, Residential to CB, Community Business and R-10, Residential. The portion of the land fronting Castle Hayne Road is intended for commercial space. The acreage fronting Blossom Street would be rezoned for low density residential. • Access to the site is provided by Castle Hayne Road and Blossom Street. As shown on the proposed plan, the CB commercial zoning will front Castle Hayne Road and the R-10 residential zoning will front Blossom Street. • According to the applicant, the CB portion of the property is intended to be used for a restaurant. The acreage fronting Blossom Street will be subdivided into 3 lots for single family residential. However, because this is a straight rezoning request, conditions regarding uses cannot be placed on the approval. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 3 Z22-03 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 4 of 14 ZONING CONSIDERATIONS • The R-15 district in this area was established within the “Castle Hayne” zoning area in 1985. At the time, the purpose of the R-15 district was to provide lands that accommodate very low-density housing and recreational uses in order to preserve the quiet residential nature of the areas included in the district. However, recent rezonings of nearby property have allowed increased density and different levels of intensity in the surrounding Castle Hayne area. • The purpose of the Community Business (CB) District is to provide lands that accommodate the development, growth, and continued operation of businesses that serve surrounding neighborhoods with goods and services. CB district lands can serve as a buffer between higher density/intensity development and moderate or low-density multi-family and single- family neighborhoods. This district was added to the Unified Development Ordinance in 2019 and was intended to be appropriate adjacent to existing residential uses. • The purpose of the Residential-10 (R-10) District is to provide lands that accommodate new residential neighborhoods and encourage the conservation of existing residential lots and neighborhoods. Neighborhoods in the R-10 district are relatively low density in character and may be established in proximity to neighborhood or community commercial districts to encourage the establishment of walkable development patterns. • Although a straight rezoning, the applicant has provided a proposed plan for the parcel, but conditions regarding uses cannot be placed on the approval. The subject site would be required to meet all the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) requirements for development within the proposed zoning districts. Types of uses allowed and commonly found in the CB district include civic, institutional, and commercial uses like community centers, religious assemblies, restaurants, and general retail sales. Types of uses allowed and commonly found in the R-10 district include civic, institutional, and residential uses like libraries, religious assemblies, and EMS facilities. Some of these uses allowed in the CB and R-10 zoning districts are also permitted within the R-15 zoning district. Any proposed non- residential use would be subject to the applicable site design and approval provisions within the UDO. • The subject property is located within the commercial area of Castle Hayne. This area includes general office, retail, and restaurant uses. Adjacent property to the north of the site is zoned B-2, Regional Business, with a retail use established on site. Single-family housing and undeveloped land are located directly east and northeast of the property along Blossom Street, an unimproved public right-of-way. A small adjacent property to the south is zoned R-15 Residential. To the west exists RA-zoned parcels, accommodating single- family housing. To the northwest of the subject site, B-2 zoning exists and includes the Hudson Hardware and Luck’s Tavern businesses. • Current R-15 zoning would allow a maximum of 5 dwelling units on the 1.84-acre site at a density of 2.5 du/ac. • Future development of the site would be subject to technical review to ensure compliance with applicable County and State regulations, including applicable site design and approval provisions within the UDO. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 4 Z22-03 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 5 of 14 AREA SUBDIVISIONS UNDER DEVELOPMENT • The property is not within one mile of any subdivisions under development. TRANSPORTATION • Access will be provided to the subject property from Castle Hayne Road, an NCDOT- maintained minor arterial street, and by Blossom Street by way of Vine Street. • Traffic Impact Analyses are not required for a straight rezoning, as a specific development proposal is required to thoroughly analyze access, potential trip generation, and roadway improvements. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 5 Z22-03 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 6 of 14 • Before any development can occur on this site, the Technical Review Committee will review all plans for compliance with applicable land use regulations, including any recommended roadway improvements from traffic impact analyses to ensure adequate traffic safety and distribution. Recommended roadway improvements will be completed as required by a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) or through the NCDOT Driveway permitting process. • As currently zoned, it is estimated the site would generate about 4 AM peak hour trips and 5 PM peak hour trips if developed at the permitted density. • The trips generated from the requested CB portion of the property would vary based on the proposed uses within this district. It is estimated that 1.27 acres of property zoned CB can generally support approximately 10,000 square feet of traditional general retail uses based on a typical 18% building area for this type of zoning. Such a development is estimated to generate about 38 AM peak hour trips and 92 PM peak hour trips. • The net change from the potential trip generation if the site were to be developed under the existing R-15 district to the proposed CB and R-10 districts shows an approximate increase of 36 AM peak hour trips and an approximate increase of 90 PM peak hour trips. General retail uses typically generate the bulk of their trips during the PM hours as retail uses are often not the weekday rush hour destination for motorists. • As there is not a specific development proposal at this time to analyze traffic impacts for, staff has provided the volume to capacity ratio for roadways in the vicinity of the subject site. While volume to capacity ratio, based on average daily trips, can provide a general idea of the function of adjacent roadways, the delay vehicles take in seconds to pass through intersections is generally considered a more effective measure when determining the Level of Service of a roadway. NCDOT Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) - 2019 Road Location Volume Capacity V/C Castle Hayne Road 6100 block 19,494 17,375 1.12 (F) Intensity Approx. Peak Hour Trips Existing Development: Undeveloped 0 AM / 0 PM Typical Development under Current Zoning: 5 Single-Family Dwellings 4 AM / 5 PM Potential Trip Generation under Proposed Rezoning: Approximately 10,000 Square Feet of General Retail Sales & 3 Single- Family Dwellings Total: 40AM / 95 PM (38 AM / 92 PM for CB & 2 AM / 3PM for R-10) Potential Net Change under Proposed Zoning: - + 36AM / + 90 PM Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 6 Z22-03 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 7 of 14 Nearby Planned Transportation Improvements and Traffic Impact Analyses • The property is not within 1-mile of any planned Transportation Improvement Projects or Traffic Impact Analyses. ENVIRONMENTAL • The property is not within a Natural Heritage Area or Special Flood Hazard Area. • The property is within the Holly Shelter Creek watershed. • Per the Classification of Soils in New Hanover County for Septic Tank Suitability, soils on the property consist of Class I soils (suitable/slight limitation). OTHER CONSIDERATIONS SCHOOLS • Students generated from development of this parcel would be assigned to Castle Hayne Elementary, Holly Shelter Middle, and Laney High schools. Students may apply to attend public magnet, year-round elementary, or specialty high schools. • Under the current zoning, density would be limited to a maximum of 5 dwelling units. Under the proposed zoning, a maximum of 3 units could be developed. • Based on the current student generation rate*, the maximum development within the proposed zoning district can be estimated to generate approximately the same number of students than if developed under existing zoning. • The general student generation rate provides only an estimate of anticipated student yield as different forms of housing at different price points yield different numbers of students. Over the past four years, staff has also seen a decline in the number of students generated by new development. Student numbers remained relatively stable between 2015 and 2020 (excepting the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic), while 14,500 new residential units were permitted across the county. In addition, the student population is anticipated to only grow by approximately 1,300 students over the next 10 years based on the recent New Hanover County Schools Facility Needs Study. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 7 Z22-03 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 8 of 14 Development Type Intensity Estimated Student Yield (current general student generation rate)* Existing Development Undeveloped Approximate* Total: 0 Typical Development under Current R-15 Zoning 5 residential units Approximate* Total: 1 Potential Development under Proposed Zoning Districts 3 residential units Approximate* Total: 1 *The current general student generation rate was calculated by dividing the projected New Hanover County public school student enrollment for the 2021-2022 school year by the number of dwelling units in the county. Currently, there are an average of 0.22 public school students (0.09 for elementary, 0.05 for middle, and 0.08 for high) generated per dwelling unit across New Hanover County. These numbers are updated annually and include students attending out-of-district specialty schools, such as year-round elementary schools, Isaac Bear, and SeaTech. **Because the student generation rate often results in fractional numbers, all approximate student generation yields with a fraction of 0.5 or higher are rounded up to a whole number and yields with a fraction of less than 0.5 are rounded down. This may result in student numbers at the elementary, middle, and high school levels not equaling the approximate total. • Developments of the size and type associated with the proposed rezoning would likely not reach full build-out for over 5 years. As a result, existing school enrollment and capacity is not likely to be relevant. New Hanover County Schools staff would include this project if approved in future facility planning initiatives in order to accommodate any resulting student growth. • Staff has provided information on existing school capacity to provide a general idea of the potential impact on public schools, but these numbers do not reflect any future capacity upgrades. School Enrollment* and Capacity**—2021-2022 Estimates *Enrollment is based on the New Hanover County Schools enrollment projections for the 2021-2022 school year. **Capacity calculations were determined based on the projected capacities for the 2021-2022 school year, and funded or planned capacity upgrades were those included in the Facility Needs Study presented by New Hanover County Schools to the Board of Education in January 2021. This information does not take into account flexible scheduling that may be available in high school settings, which can reduce the portion of the student body on campus at any one time. Level Total NHC % Capacity School Enrollment of Assigned School Capacity of Assigned School w/ Portables % of Capacity of Assigned School Funded Capacity Upgrades Elementary 91% Castle Hayne 483 529 91% None Middle 98% Holly Shelter 917 934 98% None High 105% Laney 2063 1903 108% None Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 8 Z22-03 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 9 of 14 REPRESENTATIVE DEVELOPMENTS Representative Developments of R-15: Page’s Corner in Ogden Clay Crossing Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 9 Z22-03 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 10 of 14 Representative Developments of R-10: Rachel’s Place Planters Walk and West Bay Estates Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 10 Z22-03 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 11 of 14 Representative Developments of CB: Context and Compatibility • The property is located along Castle Hayne Road, which is identified as a Minor Arterial on the WMPO Functional Classification Map. • The site abuts the Castle Hayne commercial node and is adjacent to single family homes to the east on Blossom Street. • The site would serve as a transitional area between the commercial activity along the Castle Hayne corridor and the lower-intensity uses to the east. • The development is expected to have no impact on the school system. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 11 Z22-03 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 12 of 14 2016 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The New Hanover County Future Land Use Map provides a general representation of the vision for New Hanover County’s future land use, as designated by place types describing the character and function of the different types of development that make up the community. These place types are intended to identify general areas for particular development patterns and should not be interpreted as being parcel specific. ` Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 12 Z22-03 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 13 of 14 Future Land Use Map Place Type Community Mixed Use Place Type Description 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. Analysis The subject property is located in a transitional area near the Castle Hayne commercial services node and ideally would provide for the needs of adjacent residential neighborhoods. The Comprehensive Plan classifies properties along the Castle Hayne Road corridor as Community Mixed Use. It is the intent of the plan to allow for the continued growth of this node with commercial services and moderate density residential development while also providing a transition between the lower density housing to the east and the high intensity Castle Hayne Road Corridor. The subject site’s location makes it appropriate to serve as a transitional area between the existing and future businesses located within the Castle Hayne commercial node to the south and low-density residential and low-intensity commercial land uses to the north. The proposed CB portion of the parcel would allow for the types of commercial uses that would be appropriate in a Community Mixed Use place type and would provide services to the surrounding community. Uses permissible within the CB are meant for transitional areas between residential areas and commercial nodes. The applicant intends for lower- intensity commercial services such as a small restaurant, for nearby residents as well as commuters since Castle Hayne Road is an important commuter route to and from Pender County. The proposed R-10 portion of the parcel will be located between the CB and existing R-15 zoning districts. The proposed R-10 zoning district could accommodate approximately 3 residential units, which would provide an appropriate transition to the single-family homes existing on Blossom Street and toward the east. While the proposed housing density is lower than typical in a Community Mixed Use place type, it is consistent with existing housing patterns. Consistency Recommendation The proposed rezoning for CB and R-10 is generally CONSISTENT with the Comprehensive Plan because it will allow for the types of residential development and commercial uses encouraged in the Community Mixed Use place type. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 13 Z22-03 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 14 of 14 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Because the proposed rezoning is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and would provide a transition between existing commercial services and residential areas, Staff recommends approval of the proposal and suggests the following motion: I move to recommend APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning to CB and R-10. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it will allow for the types of residential and commercial uses that would be encouraged in the Community Mixed Use place type. I also find recommending APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the site is located on an arterial street near existing commercial services and would serve as a transition between the Castle Hayne commercial node to the south and residential properties to the north and east. Alternative Motion for Denial I move to recommend DENIAL of the proposed rezoning to CB and R-10. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it would allow for the types of commercial uses that would be encouraged in the Community Mixed Use place type, I find recommending DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is not consistent with the desired character of the surrounding community and the intensity will adversely impact the adjacent neighborhoods. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 2 - 14 R-15 B-2 RA New Hanover County, NCSHODIncorporated Areas Indicates Conditional Zoning District (CZD) See Section 5.7 of the UDOCOD B-1 AC R-5 EDZD CB I-1 R-7 PD B-2 I-2 R-10 RMF-X CS AR R-15 RMFU SC RA R-20 UMXZ O&I R-20S Zoning Districts CB, R-10R-156205 Blossom StZ22-03 Proposed Zoning/Use:Existing Zoning/Use:Site Address:Case: R-15 Subject Site Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 3 - 1 Conservation Rural Residential General Residential Community Mixed Use New Hanover County, NCCONSERVATION RURAL RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY MIXED USE URBAN MIXED USE GENERAL RESIDENTIAL EMPLOYMENT CENTER COMMERCE ZONE Place Types CB, R-10R-156205 Blossom StZ22-03 Proposed Zoning/Use:Existing Zoning/Use:Site Address:Case: Subject Site Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 4 - 1 6208 6303 60006000 6214 6215 4009 6304 6307 6201 6117 6205 61076111 6000 6312 6300 6201 6101 6117 6301 6333 6401 6000 6118 6200 6311 6000 3908 6120 6100 3920 6025 6315 6115 6101 6129 6206 6301 6016 6200 6313 6000 6305 6309 6217 6205 New Hanover County, NCNeighboring Parcels CB, R-10R-156205 Blossom StZ22-03 Proposed Zoning/Use:Existing Zoning/Use:Site Address:Case: Subject Site Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 5 - 1 Initial Application Documents & Materials Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 6 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 7 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 7 - 2 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 7 - 3 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 7 - 4 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 1 - 7 - 5 NEW HANOVER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION MEETING DATE: 4/7/2022 Regular DEPARTMENT: Planning PRESENTER(S): Julian Griffee, Current Planner CONTACT(S): Julian Griffee; Rebekah Roth, Planning & Land Use Director SUBJECT: Public Hearing Rezoning Request (Z22-07) - Request by Adam G. Sosne, applicant, on behalf of Grove Park Proper<es, property owner, to rezone approximately 15.38 acres of land located at 5550 Carolina Beach Road from R-15, Residen<al District, to RMF-MH, Residen<al Mul<-Family Medium-High Density District. BRIEF SUMMARY: The applicant is proposing to rezone approximately 15.38 acres from R-15, Residen+al to RMF-MH, Residen+al Mul+- family Medium-High Density. The subject site would be required to meet all the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) requirements for development within the proposed zoning district. The R-15 district in this area was established in 1971. At the +me, the purpose of the R-15 district was to ensure that housing served by private sep+c and wells would be developed at low densi+es. Since its original zoning designa+on in 1971, this por+on of the county and the Monkey Junc+on node have experienced a gradual shi; from the original R-15 zoning to more commercial districts and uses, as well as residen+al developments of higher density. The RMF-MH district was established to accommodate lands for medium to high density residen+al development of varying types and designs, with emphasis on midrise structures, near suburban shopping centers and employment centers. The district is intended to serve as a transi+on between intensive nonresiden+al development and lower density residen+al development. The current R-15 zoning allows for several non-residen+al uses that are not permi<ed within the proposed RMF-MH zoning district. Such uses include, but are not limited to, equestrian facili+es, stables, and wholesale nurseries that are permi<ed by-right, and uses such as kennels, campgrounds, convenience stores, and fuel sales that are permi<ed subject to a special use permit. The RMF-MH district allows for the development of mul+-family residen+al units with a maximum height of 4 stories. Structure setback is con+ngent on the number of stories of any proposed mul+-family development. Currently, the subject site contains approximately 70 mobile homes. If developed at the maximum permi<ed density allowed under the RMF-MH district, 385 residen+al units could be constructed. As currently developed, it is es+mated the site generates about 35 peak AM trips and 40 peak PM trips. The net change from the es+mated trips generated from the exis+ng development to the es+mated number of trips generated from the maximum density allowed under the RMF-MH district is 123 more trips during the AM peak hour and 110 more trips during the PM peak hour. Based on a generalized historic genera+on rate, staff would es+mate that the increase in homes would result in approximately 69 addi+onal students than the number of students who are es+mated to be already generated under the exis+ng development. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 The subject property is located on one of the county’s more densely developed corridors and within one of the three high growth nodes iden+fied in the Comprehensive Plan. Given the commercial development to the east, the site is less likely to be appropriate for low density, single-family development than when the R-15 zoning was originally applied. Required setbacks and transi+onal buffers provide addi+onal mi+ga+on for aesthe+c effects along the property boundaries and will be con+ngent on the type and scale of development located on this parcel. The Comprehensive Plan classifies the property as Urban Mixed Use, which promotes development of a mix of residen+al, office, and retail uses at higher densi+es. The proposed RMF-MH zoning is generally CONSISTENT with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because the district is more in line with the densi+es recommended for Urban Mixed Use areas, especially in growth nodes, than the exis+ng zoning. This case was originally heard at the March 3, 2022 Planning Board mee+ng. The applicant requested and was granted a con+nuance to the April 7, 2022 Planning Board mee+ng. Following a mee+ng with the applicant team, the acreage of the parcel has been updated and all informa+on within the staff report has been revised to reflect this figure. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: While staff would have preferred to see a condi+onal rezoning request for a higher density district on this site given poten+al traffic impacts and proximity to low density residen+al neighborhoods, the RMF-MH district was designed to be used in this specific type of situa+on, and standards are in place for buffers and traffic analysis at technical review required before redevelopment could occur. As a result, staff recommends approval of the proposal and suggests the following mo+on: I move to recommend APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the district is more in line with the densi+es and uses recommended for Urban Mixed Use areas than the exis+ng zoning. I also find recommending APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the RMF-MH district standards are designed so projects can serve as appropriate transi+ons from exis+ng commercial nodes to the exis+ng single-family residences. Alterna+ve Mo+on for Denial: I move to recommend DENIAL of the proposed rezoning. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the district is more in line with the densi+es and uses recommended for Urban Mixed Use areas than the exis+ng zoning, I find recommending DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because of the uncertainty of nega+ve impacts that a development allowed by-right within the RMF-MH zoning district could have on the adjacent land uses and infrastructure. ATTACHMENTS: Descrip+on Z22-07 PB Script Z22-07 PB Staff Report Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 Z22-07 Zoning Map Z22-07 FLUM Z22-07 Mailout Map Z22-07 Application Cover Sheet Z22-07 Application Materials COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (only Manager) Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 PLANNING BOARD SCRIPT for Zoning Map Amendment Application (Z22-07) Request by Adam G. Sosne, applicant, on behalf of Grove Park Properties, property owner, to rezone approximately 15.38 acres of land located at 5550 Carolina Beach Road from R-15, Residential District, to RMF-MH, Residential Multi-Family Medium-High Density District. 1. This is a public hearing. We will hear a presentation from staff. Then the applicant and any opponents will each be allowed 15 minutes for their presentation and an additional 5 minutes for rebuttal. 2. Conduct Hearing, as follows: a. Staff presentation b. Applicant’s presentation (up to 15 minutes) c. Opponent’s presentation (up to 15 minutes) d. Applicant’s rebuttal (up to 5 minutes) e. Opponent’s rebuttal (up to 5 minutes) f. Staff review of any additional conditions 3. Close the public hearing 4. Board discussion 5. Before we proceed with the vote, I would like to invite the applicant to the podium. Based on the Board discussion and items presented during the public hearing, would you like withdraw your petition, request a continuance, or proceed with a vote? 6. Vote on the application. The motion should include a statement saying how the change is, or is not, consistent with the land use plan and why approval or denial of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest. Example Motion for Approval I move to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning to an RMF-MH district. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because because the district is more in line with the densities and uses recommended for Urban Mixed Use areas than the existing zoning. I also find RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the RMF-MH district standards are designed so projects can serve as appropriate transitions from existing commercial nodes to the existing single-family residences. Example Motion for Denial I move to RECOMMEND DENIAL of the proposed rezoning to an RMF-MH district. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the district is more in line with the densities and uses recommended for Urban Mixed Use areas than the existing zoning, I find RECOMMENDING DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because of the uncertainty of negative impacts that a development allowed by-right within the RMF-MH zoning district could have on the adjacent land uses and infrastructure. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 1 - 1 Alternative Motion for Approval/Denial: I move to RECOMMEND [Approval/Denial] of the proposed rezoning to a conditional RMF-M district. I find it to be [Consistent/Inconsistent] with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because [insert reasons] __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ I also find RECOMMENDING [Approval/Denial] of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because [insert reasons] __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 1 - 2 Z22-07 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 1 of 17 STAFF REPORT FOR Z22-07 ZONING MAP AMENDMENT APPLICATION APPLICATION SUMMARY Case Number: Z22-07 Request: Rezoning to an RMF-MH district Applicant: Property Owner(s): Adam G. Sosne Grove Park Properties Location: Acreage: 5550 Carolina Beach Road 15.38 PID(s): Comp Plan Place Type: A portion of R07600-006-041-000 Urban Mixed Use Existing Land Use: Proposed Land Use: Mobile Home Park The property would be allowed to be developed in accordance with the RMF-MH district Current Zoning: Proposed Zoning: R-15, Residential district RMF-MH SURROUNDING AREA LAND USE ZONING North Commercial Services, Undeveloped Land B-2 East Commercial Services B-2 South Single-Family Residential, Multi-Family Residential R-10, R-15 West Undeveloped B-2, R-15 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 1 Z22-07 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 2 of 17 ZONING HISTORY April 7, 1971 Initially zoned R-15 COMMUNITY SERVICES Water/Sewer Property is currently connected to water and sewer. Water is provided via a master meter. Waster and sewer is private within the site. Fire Protection New Hanover County Fire Services, New Hanover County Southern Fire District, New Hanover County Myrtle Grove Station Schools Bellamy Elementary, Myrtle Grove Middle, Ashley High Schools Recreation Arrowhead Park, Myrtle Grove Athletic Complex CONSERVATION, HISTORIC, & ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Conservation No known conservation resources Historic No known historic resources Archaeological No known archaeological resources Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 2 Z22-07 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 3 of 17 APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL • The applicant is proposing to rezone approximately 15.38 acres from R-15, Residential to RMF-MH Residential Multi-family Medium-High Density. • According to the applicant, the proposed zoning will allow for the provision of housing for future development in a land use pattern that is generally more consistent with the 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan. ZONING CONSIDERATIONS • The R-15 district in this area was established in 1971. At the time, the purpose of the R-15 district was to ensure that housing served by private septic and wells would be developed at low densities. Since that time, water and sewer services have become available to the surrounding area • Since its original zoning designation in 1971, this portion of the county and the Monkey Junction node have experienced a gradual shift from the original R-15 zoning to more commercial districts and uses, as well as residential developments of higher density. This is a trend that is expected to continue. • Currently, the subject site contains approximately 70 mobile homes. • The RMF-MH district was established to accommodate lands for medium to high density residential development of varying types and designs, with emphasis on midrise structures, near suburban shopping centers and employment centers. The district is intended to serve as a transition between intensive nonresidential development and lower density residential development. • The current R-15 zoning allows for several non-residential uses that are not permitted within the proposed RMF-MH zoning district. Such uses include, but are not limited to, equestrian facilities, stables, and wholesale nurseries that are permitted by-right, and uses such as kennels, campgrounds, convenience stores, and fuel sales that are permitted subject to a special use permit. • The RMF-MH district allows for the development of multi-family residential units with a maximum height of 4 stories. Structure setback is contingent on the number of stories of any proposed multi-family development. The dimensional standards for the RMF-MH zoning district are outlined within Section 3.2.14. of the UDO. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 3 Z22-07 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 4 of 17 • The subject site is located adjacent to and abuts residential properties. As such, additional standards outlined with Table 3.1.3.C.2 may be applicable, depending on the height of the structures that may be developed on the parcel. • As the subject site is adjacent to existing single-family residential uses, a transitional buffer would be required in the event of a multi-family development. Multi-family residential uses that abut Single-Family Detached and undeveloped residentially zoned properties are subject to a Type A: Opaque Buffer. These buffers must be a minimum width of 12 feet if fencing 6-10 feet high and vegetation are used, or 20 feet if vegetation only. • If approved, development on the parcel would be subject to Technical Review Committee and Zoning Compliance review processes to ensure full compliance with all ordinance requirements and specific conditions included in the approval. Only minor deviations from the approved conceptual plan, as defined by the UDO, would be allowed. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 4 Z22-07 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 5 of 17 AREA SUBDIVISIONS UNDER DEVELOPMENT TRANSPORTATION • Currently, access is provided to the subject property from the service road adjacent to Carolina Beach Road. The applicant has indicated that another access may be provided to the service road by way of the B-2 zoned parcel to the north, as the applicant is under contract for that parcel. • The access road serves other businesses and residential developments and filters traffic onto southbound Carolina Beach Road. • As currently developed, it is estimated the site generates about 35 peak AM trips and 40 peak PM trips. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 5 Z22-07 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 6 of 17 • If developed at the maximum permitted density allowed under the RMF-MH district, 385 residential units could be constructed. This would be estimated to generate 158 trips during the AM peak hour and 150 trips during the PM peak hour. • If developed at the maximum permitted density allowed within the RMF-MH district, the development would be estimated to generate 123 more trips during the AM peak hour and 110 more trips during the PM peak hour than the current use of the subject site. • Traffic Impact Analyses are not required for a straight rezoning, as a specific development proposal is required to thoroughly analyze access, potential trip generation, and roadway improvements. • Because a TIA is not required to analyze transportation impacts at this time, Staff has provided the volume to capacity ratio for the adjacent roadway near the subject site. While volume to capacity ratio, based on average daily trips, can provide a general idea of the function of adjacent roadways, the delay vehicles take in seconds to pass through intersections is generally considered a more effective measure when determining the Level of Service of a roadway. However, the available volume to capacity data indicates capacity currently exists in this area. NCDOT Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) - 2020 Road Location Volume Capacity V/C Carolina Beach Road 5500 Block 39,000 41,368 0.94 • The LOS of this portion of Carolina Beach Road is rated as ‘E’. • The capacity for the service road is 10,978 according to NCDOT data. However, traffic counts are not available. • The LOS of the service road is rated as ‘E’. Intensity Approx. Peak Hour Trips Existing Development: Mobile Home Park w/ 70 Dwelling Units 35 AM / 40 PM Typical Development under Current Zoning: 38 Single-Family Dwellings 32 AM / 42 PM Maximum Development under Proposed RMF-MH Zoning: 385 Dwelling Units 158 AM / 150 PM Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 6 Z22-07 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 7 of 17 Nearby Planned Transportation Improvements and Traffic Impact Analyses Nearby NC STIP Projects: • STIP Project U-5702B o Project encompasses access management improvement on College Road from Carolina Beach Road to Shipyard Boulevard. o Project is scheduled after 2029. • STIP Project U-5790 o Project to convert the intersection of Carolina Beach Road and College Road to a continuous flow intersection and widen a portion of Carolina Beach Road south of that intersection.  Continuous flow intersections permit more efficient travel movements and help alleviate congestion by allowing more of the main street’s traffic to move through the intersection.  Bidding of the project is expected to occur after 2029. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 7 Z22-07 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 8 of 17 Nearby Traffic Impact Analyses: Traffic Impact Analyses (TIAs) are completed in accordance with the WMPO and NCDOT standards. Approved analyses must be re-examined by NCDOT if the proposed development is not completed by the build out date established within the TIA. Proposed Development Land Use/Intensity TIA Status 1. Beau Rivage Update • 4,500 square feet of drive- thru bank • 3,500 square feet of fast- food drive thru • 6,900 square feet of supermarket (addition to the existing Harris Teeter) • 7,500 square feet of shopping center • Approved December 28, 2016 • 2018 Build Out Date The TIA required improvements be completed at certain intersections in the area. The notable improvements consisted of: • Installation of an eastbound right-turn lane on Sanders Road at the site’s access and Carolina Beach Road. Nearby Proposed Developments included within the TIA: • Tarin Woods • River Lights Development Status: Development under construction. The right-turn lane on Sanders Road at the site’s access has been constructed. Proposed Development Land Use/Intensity TIA Status 2. Tarin Woods II Phase 2B(1): • 219 Single-Family Homes • 398 Townhomes • Addendum approved March 26, 2020 • 2020 Build Out Year The TIA required improvements be completed at certain intersections in the area. The notable improvements consisted of: • Installation of a northbound leftover/U-turn on Carolina Beach Road at the Harris Teeter driveway (required to be installed during the development of Phase 2A). • Installation of a second westbound right turn lane on Manassas Drive at Carolina Beach Road. • Includes additional point of egress to Carolina Beach Road. Nearby Proposed Developments included within the TIA: • Beau Rivage Update • Beau Rivage Townhomes Development Status: Development and improvements are currently under construction. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 8 Z22-07 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 9 of 17 Proposed Development Land Use/Intensity TIA Status 3. Kaylies Cove • 110 Single-Family Homes • Approved February 20, 2018 • 2019 Build Out Year (as studied in the TIA) The TIA required improvements be completed at certain intersections in the area. The notable improvements consisted of: • Installation of an eastbound right turn lane and westbound left turn lane on Piner Road at the site’s access. Nearby Proposed Developments included within the TIA: • None Development Status: Homes under construction. 110 lots have been platted at this time, and both turn lanes have been installed. Other: • W-5703C: o U.S. 421 (Carolina Beach Road) Pedestrian Safety project located from Willoughby Park Road to the Monkey Junction intersection. o Project consists of: ▪ A 10-foot multi-use path on the east side of U.S. 421 and a sidewalk on the west side of U.S. 421; ▪ A black aluminum fence in the existing median; and ▪ Pedestrian signals, high-visibility crosswalks, and lighting proposed at the intersections of U.S. 421 with Antoinette Drive and the northernmost Walmart driveway. ▪ The project is expected to begin construction in Fall 2022. ENVIRONMENTAL • The property is not within a Natural Heritage Area. The property is not located within a Special Flood Hazard Area. • The property is within the Mott Creek watershed. • Per the Classification of Soils in New Hanover County for Septic Tank Suitability, soils on the property consist of Class I (suitable/slight limitation) & III (severe limitation) soils; however, the property is currently connected to water and sewer provided by CFPUA Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 9 Z22-07 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 10 of 17 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS Schools • Students living in the proposed development would be assigned to Bellamy Elementary School, Myrtle Grove Middle School, and Ashley High School. Students may apply to attend public magnet, year-round elementary, or specialty high schools. • Approximately 70 dwelling units are currently located on the property and 385 units could potentially be developed under the proposed zoning for an increase of 315 dwelling units. • Based on a generalized historic generation rate*, staff would estimate that the increase in homes would result in approximately 69 additional students than the number of students who are estimated to be already generated under the existing development. • The general student generation rate provides only an estimate of anticipated student yield as different forms of housing at different price points yield different numbers of students. Over the past four years, staff has also seen a decline in the number of students generated by new development. Student numbers remained relatively stable between 2015 and 2020 (excepting the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic), while 14,500 new residential units were permitted across the county. In addition, the student population is anticipated to only grow by approximately 1,300 students over the next 10 years based on the recent New Hanover County Schools Facility Needs Study. Development Type Intensity Estimated Student Yield (current general student generation rate) * Existing Development 70 Residential Units Approximate** Total: 16 (6 elementary, 4 middle, 6 high) Proposed Zoning 385 Residential Units Approximate** Total: 85 (35 elementary, 19 middle, 31 high) *The current general student generation rate was calculated by dividing the projected New Hanover County public school student enrollment for the 2021-2022 school year by the number of dwelling units in the county. Currently, there are an average of 0.22 public school students (0.09 for elementary, 0.05 for middle, and 0.08 for high) generated per dwelling unit across New Hanover County. These numbers are updated annually and include students attending out-of-district specialty schools, such as year-round elementary schools, Isaac Bear, and SeaTech. **Because the student generation rate often results in fractional numbers, all approximate student generation yields with a fraction of 0.5 or higher are rounded up to a whole number and yields with a fraction of less than 0.5 are rounded down. This may result in student numbers at the elementary, middle, and high school levels not equaling the approximate total. • Staff has provided information on existing school capacity to provide a general idea of the potential impact on public schools, but these numbers do not reflect any future capacity upgrades. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 10 Z22-07 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 11 of 17 School Enrollment* and Capacity** (2021-2022 School Year) *Enrollment is based on the New Hanover County Schools enrollment projections for the 2021-2022 school year. **Capacity calculations were determined based on the projected capacities for the 2021-2022 school year, and funded or planned capacity upgrades were those included in the Facility Needs Study presented by New Hanover County Schools to the Board of Education in January 2021. This information does not take into account flexible scheduling that may be available in high school settings, which can reduce the portion of the student body on campus at any one time. • The 2021 facility needs survey prepared by Schools staff indicates that, based on NC Department of Public Instruction (DPI) student growth projections and school capacity data, planned facility upgrades, combined with changes to student enrollment patterns, will result in adequate capacity district wide over the next ten years if facility upgrades are funded. Level Total NHC Capacity School Projected Enrollment of Assignment School Capacity of Assigned School w/Portables Capacity of Assigned School Funded or Planned Capacity Upgrades Elementary 95% Bellamy 456 499 91% None Middle 108% Myrtle Grove 740 738 100% None High 100% Ashley 1990 1896 105% None Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 11 Z22-07 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 12 of 17 Existing Development Current Conditions: Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 12 Z22-07 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 13 of 17 Representative Developments Representative Developments of R-15: Clay Crossing Page’s Corner Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 13 Z22-07 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 14 of 17 Representative Developments of RMF-MH (Proposed Zoning/Land Use): Amberleigh Shores Cambridge Village Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 14 Z22-07 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 15 of 17 Context and Compatibility • The property is located to the southwest of the Monkey Junction Intersection and is accessed by a service road that connects the property to Carolina Beach Road. • While the area was zoned for lower density residential development in the early 1970s, the 2016 Comprehensive Plan recommends urban mixed use and higher density development patterns. • The subject property is located in one of the county’s more densely developed corridors and within one of the three high growth nodes identified in the Comprehensive Plan. • The property is located just west of the Monkey Junction commercial node serving residents in this area, and is a location anticipated to serve as a transition from single-family detached land uses to the south and west of the site and the commercial services and higher intensity uses along Carolina Beach Road to the east and north. • Given the commercial development to the east, the site is less likely to be appropriate for low density, single-family development than when the R-15 zoning was originally applied. • Required setbacks and transitional buffers provide additional mitigation for aesthetic effects along the property boundaries and will be contingent on the type and scale of development located on this parcel. Multi-family residential developments are subject to setbacks that range from 20’ to 100’, dependent on the number of stories of the structures. Transitional buffers are also a requirement of multi-family developments. Type A Opaque Buffers are required from the existing residential and undeveloped residential zoned parcels that abut the subject site, which consist of vegetation, berms, or fences with vegetation. 2016 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The New Hanover County Future Land Use Map provides a general representation of the vision for New Hanover County’s future land use, as designated by place types describing the character and function of the different types of development that make up the community. These place types are intended to identify general areas for particular development patterns and should not be interpreted as being parcel specific. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 15 Z22-07 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 16 of 17 Future Land Use Map Place Type Urban Mixed Use; Monkey Junction Node Place Type Description Promotes development of a mix of residential, office, and retail uses at higher densities. Types of uses encouraged include office, retail, mixed use, small recreation, commercial, institutional, single-family, and multi-family residential. Analysis The Comprehensive Plan classifies the property as Urban Mixed Use, which promotes development of a mix of residential, office, and retail uses at higher densities. The site is located within the Monkey Junction commercial node between existing commercial services and a single-family detached residential development. As there is an existing single-family development to the west of the subject site, the proposal would provide a transition to Carolina Beach Road, which contains commercial services along the road frontage that serve adjacent residential developments in the project vicinity. In addition, the project supports the Comprehensive Plan’s goal to provide for a range of housing types and opportunities for households of different sizes and income levels as well as a mix of uses located on adjacent or nearby parcels. The proposal is also in line with the preferred density range for the Urban Mixed Use place type, which envisions residential development in the range of 2-5 stories at a medium to high density. If approved, the parcel could be built out to a maximum of 385 residential units at 25 du/acre. Consistency Recommendation The proposed RMF-MH zoning is generally CONSISTENT with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because the district is more in line with the densities recommended for Urban Mixed Use areas, especially in growth nodes, than the existing zoning. Additionally, the densities and range of housing types allowed in the proposed zoning district could provide an appropriate transition from the existing commercial node to the west and the existing single-family residences to the south and undeveloped land to the west. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 16 Z22-07 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 17 of 17 STAFF RECOMMENDATION While staff would have preferred to see a conditional rezoning request for a higher density district on this site given potential traffic impacts and proximity to low density residential neighborhoods, the RMF-MH district was designed to be used in this specific type of situation, and standards are in place for buffers and traffic analysis at technical review required before redevelopment could occur. As a result, Staff recommends approval of the proposal and suggests the following motion: I move to recommend APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the district is more in line with the densities and uses recommended for Urban Mixed Use areas than the existing zoning. I also find recommending APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the RMF-MH district standards are designed so projects can serve as appropriate transitions from existing commercial nodes to the existing single-family residences. Alternative Motion for Denial I move to recommend DENIAL of the proposed rezoning. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the district is more in line with the densities and uses recommended for Urban Mixed Use areas than the existing zoning, I find DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because of the uncertainty of negative impacts that a development allowed by-right within the RMF-MH zoning district could have on the adjacent land uses and infrastructure. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 2 - 17 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 3 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 4 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 5 - 1 Initial Application Documents & Materials Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 6 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 7 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 7 - 2 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 7 - 3 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 7 - 4 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 7 - 5 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 7 - 6 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 7 - 7 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 2 - 7 - 8 NEW HANOVER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION MEETING DATE: 4/7/2022 Regular DEPARTMENT: Planning PRESENTER(S): Ken Vafier, Planning Supervisor CONTACT(S): Ken Vafier; Rebekah Roth, Planning & Land Use Director SUBJECT: Public Hearing Rezoning Request (Z22-09) - Request by James Fentress with Stroud Engineering, PA, applicant, on behalf of Dallas Harris Land Company, LLC, property owner, to rezone approximately 1.1 acres of land located at 7491 Market Street from R-15, Residen@al District, to (CZD) CB, Community Business District for a bank/financial ins@tu@on. BRIEF SUMMARY: The applicant is proposing to rezone just over one acre of land located at 7491 Market Street from R-15 to (CZD) CB in order to develop a bank/financial ins2tu2on. The proposed development consists of a 2,400 square foot structure with a covered drive-thru ATM area with 3 service lanes. In addi2on to the proposed bank/financial ins2tu2on use, the applicant is also proposing that Medical and Dental Office and Clinic a nd Offices for Private Business and Professional Acvies be included to allow for future flexibility in land uses. Access is proposed from Torchwood Boulevard and Market Street and will be limited to right-in/right-out movements and will be subject to NCDOT Driveway Permi@ng regula2ons. Internal circula2on throughout the site and through the drive-thru ATM area is provided via internal drive aisles. As currently zoned, it is es2mated the site would generate about 3 trips during the peak hours if developed at the permiAed density. The proposed use is an2cipated to generate approximately 29 AM peak hour and 58 PM peak hour trips. Trip genera2on for the three proposed uses varies, however, the net change from the poten2al trip genera2on if the site were to be developed under the exis2ng R-15 district shows an increase ranging from 2-26 AM peak hour trips and an approximate increase ranging from 3-25 PM peak hour trips . The es2mated traffic generated from the site is under the 100 peak hour threshold that triggers the ordinance requirement for a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). The property is located along the Market Street corridor, which, as a principal arterial, is one of the more intensely developed commercial corridors in the unincorporated county. It is located at the southern extent of the Special Highway Overlay district and lies in a transi2onal area between the Porters Neck high growth node to the north and the Ogden commercial node, both of which are classified as Urban Mixed Use, the highest intensity place type in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan. While many proper2es with frontage along Market Street retain their ini2al R-15 zoning, this corridor has func2oned as a main commercial corridor for a substan2al 2me and similar smaller, residen2ally zoned proper2es have been transi2oning to commercial property. Due to the loca2on and surrounding development paAerns, the property is less likely to be developed with low density housing as the corridor con2nues to be developed with commercial uses to serve residents in this por2on of the county. Due to the site’s proximity to adjacent single-family residen2al to the west and its historic use as a buffer property between these proper2es and Market Street, the design of ligh2ng associated with the business use may need addi2onal considera2on to ensure compa2bility. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan classifies the property under the Community Mixed Use place type, where appropriate land uses include office, commercial, and ins2tu2onal services. The proposed uses are generally CONSISTENT with Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 the Comprehensive Plan because they will provide lower impact, transi2onal uses that are in line with both the Community Mixed Use place type as well as the intent of the CB district. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Based on the recommended uses for the Community Mixed Use places, intent of the CB district, and the context and compa2bility with the immediate surrounding area, staff recommends approval of the proposal and suggests the following mo2on: I move to recommend APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it will allow for the types of uses that are appropriate in the Community Mixed Use place type. I also find APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is in line with the intent of the CB district and can provide transi2onal uses from single-family residen2al homes to the west and the Market Street corridor. Alterna@ve Mo@on for Denial I move to recommend DENIAL of the proposed rezoning. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it will allow for the types of uses that are appropriate in the Community Mixed Use place type, I find DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is not consistent with the desired character of the surrounding community and the land use will adversely impact the adjacent residen2al areas. ATTACHMENTS: Descrip2on Z22-09 Script PB Z22-09 Staff Report PB Z22-09 Zoning Z22-09 Future Land Use Z22-09 Neighboring Properties Initial Application Cover Sheet Z22-09 Application Concept Plan Cover Sheet Z22-09 Concept Plan Public Comments Cover Sheet Neutral Comment COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (only Manager) Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 PLANNING BOARD SCRIPT for Zoning Map Amendment Application (Z22-09) Request by James Fentress with Stroud Engineering, PA, applicant, on behalf of Dallas Harris Land Company, LLC, property owner, to rezone approximately 1.1 acres of land located at 7491 Market Street from R-15, Residential District, to (CZD) CB, Community Business District for a bank/financial institution. 1. This is a public hearing. We will hear a presentation from staff. Then the applicant and any opponents will each be allowed 15 minutes for their presentation and an additional 5 minutes for rebuttal. 2. Conduct Hearing, as follows: a. Staff presentation b. Applicant’s presentation (up to 15 minutes) c. Opponent’s presentation (up to 15 minutes) d. Applicant’s rebuttal (up to 5 minutes) e. Opponent’s rebuttal (up to 5 minutes) f. Staff review of any additional conditions 3. Close the public hearing 4. Board discussion 5. Before we proceed with the vote, I would like to invite the applicant to the podium. Based on the Board discussion and items presented during the public hearing, would you like withdraw your petition, request a continuance, or proceed with a vote? 6. Vote on the application. The motion should include a statement saying how the change is, or is not, consistent with the land use plan and why approval or denial of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest. Example Motion for Approval I move to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it will allow for the types of uses that are appropriate in the Community Mixed Use place type. I also find RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is in line with the intent of the CB district and can provide transitional uses from single-family residential homes to the west and the Market Street corridor. Example Motion for Denial I move to RECOMMEND DENIAL of the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) CB district. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it will allow for the types of uses that are appropriate in the Community Mixed Use place type, I find RECOMMENDING DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is not consistent with the desired character of the surrounding community and the land use will adversely impact the adjacent residential areas. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 1 - 1 Alternative Motion for Approval/Denial: I move to RECOMMEND [Approval/Denial] of the proposed rezoning to a conditional RMF-M district. I find it to be [Consistent/Inconsistent] with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because [insert reasons] __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ I also find RECOMMENDING [Approval/Denial] of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because [insert reasons] __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 1 - 2 Z22-09 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 1 of 16 STAFF REPORT FOR Z22-09 CONDITIONAL REZONING APPLICATION APPLICATION SUMMARY Case Number: Z22-09 Request: Rezoning to a Conditional CB, Community Business district Applicant: Property Owner(s): James Fentress with Stroud Engineering Dallas Harris Land Company Location: Acreage: 7491 Market Street 1.1 PID(s): Comp Plan Place Type: R03618-012-032-000 Community Mixed Use Existing Land Use: Proposed Land Uses: Undeveloped Bank/Financial Institution, Medical and Dental Office and Clinic, Offices for Private Business and Professional Activities Current Zoning: Proposed Zoning: R-15, Residential District (CZD) CB SURROUNDING AREA LAND USE ZONING North Single-Family Residential (English Moor at West Bay) R-15 East Market Street; Medical Offices O&I South West Bay Buffer, General Retail, Contractor Office R-15, B-2 West Single-Family Residential (Rockport at West Bay) R-15 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 1 Z22-09 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 2 of 16 ZONING HISTORY July 7, 1972 Initially zoned R-15 (Area 8B) COMMUNITY SERVICES Water/Sewer Water and sewer services are available through CFPUA, and the property is currently connected to both. Fire Protection New Hanover County Fire Services, New Hanover County Northern Fire District, New Hanover County Ogden Station Schools Porters Neck Elementary, Holly Shelter Middle, and Laney High Schools Recreation Ogden Park, Pages Creek Nature Preserve CONSERVATION, HISTORIC, & ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Conservation No known conservation resources Historic No known historic resources Archaeological No known archaeological resources Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 2 Z22-09 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 3 of 16 APPLICANT’S PROPOSED CONCEPTUAL PLAN Includes Staff Markups • The applicant is proposing to construct a 2,400 sf bank with a covered drive-thru ATM area consisting of three lanes. The building is proposed at one story and 25’ in height. • In addition to the proposed bank/financial institution use, the applicant is also proposing that Medical and Dental Office and Clinic and Offices for Private Business and Professional Activities be included to allow for future flexibility in land uses. Rockport at West Bay Estates Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 3 Z22-09 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 4 of 16 • The applicant’s proposed conceptual plan includes preliminary design for required setbacks, parking, landscaping and buffering, and stormwater detention. • Existing regulated trees in the buffer area on the western boundary of the lot will be retained, and this area will be supplemented as needed to achieve 100% opacity within 1 year of planting per ordinance requirements. ZONING CONSIDERATIONS • The R-15 district in this area was established in 1972. At the time, the purpose of the R-15 district was to ensure that housing served by private septic and well would be developed at low densities. • Since its original zoning designation in 1972, this portion of the county and the Market Street corridor have experienced a gradual shift from the original R-15 zoning to more commercial districts and uses, a trend that is expected to continue. • The CB district was established to provide lands that accommodate the development, growth, and continued operation of businesses that serve surrounding neighborhoods with goods and services needed for a variety of daily and long-term purposes. Development in this district is intended to be designed in a form and at a scale that is both walkable and accessible to vehicles and located at intersections and along streets that will allow multiple neighborhoods access to the district’s businesses. The district is also intended to serve as a buffer between higher density/intensity development and moderate or low-density multi- family and single-family neighborhoods. • In the CB district, a minimum 25-foot rear setback, 20-foot interior setback, and 20-foot opaque bufferyard are required where the development abuts existing single-family properties. • The site also lies within the Special Highway Overlay District, which subjects it to additional standards such as increased structure and parking setbacks from Market Street as well as requirements governing lot coverage and signage. • The site was initially recorded as a “buffer” lot for Rockport at West Bay Estates when the community was platted in 1994. Based on staff research into the recording of this lot as a buffer on the recorded plat, it appears that this dedication was voluntary, and there is not currently a known legal requirement to maintain this parcel as a buffer for Rockport at West Bay Estates. • The UDO contains controls on exterior lighting on the site, and the maximum illumination levels at the common property line with the residential properties to the west shall not exceed 0.5 foot candles. The UDO does not prescribe limitations on the height, wattage, bulb-type, or fixture type, and these can be further limited with a conditional zoning request if mutually agreed upon by the applicant. • If approved, the project would be subject to Technical Review Committee and Zoning Compliance review processes to ensure full compliance with all ordinance requirements and specific conditions included in the approval. Only minor deviations from the approved conceptual plan, as defined by the UDO, would be allowed. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 4 Z22-09 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 5 of 16 AREA SUBDIVISIONS UNDER DEVELOPMENT Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 5 Z22-09 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 6 of 16 TRANSPORTATION • Access points are proposed to be provided to the subject property from Market Street, an NCDOT maintained principal arterial, and Torchwood Boulevard, an NCDOT maintained minor collector street. • The proposed access points to both Market Street and Torchwood Boulevard will function as right-in/right-out movements. Internal circulation throughout the site and through the drive-thru ATM area is provided via internal drive aisles. • As currently zoned, it is estimated the site would generate about 3 trips during the peak hours if developed at the permitted density. The proposed (CZD) CB development would alter the estimated number of peak hour trips by the following: o Approximate increase of 26 AM and 55 PM peak hour trips if developed at the specific proposed use of a drive-thru bank; Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 6 Z22-09 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 7 of 16 o Approximate increase of 6 AM and 9 PM peak hour trips if developed with 3,000 sf of medical office/clinic; o Approximate increase of 2 AM and 3 PM peak hour trips if developed as a 3,000 sf general office building. • The estimated traffic generated from the site is under the 100 peak hour threshold that triggers the ordinance requirement for a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). • Because a TIA is not required to analyze transportation impacts at this time, Staff has provided the volume to capacity ratio for the adjacent roadway near the subject site. While volume to capacity ratio, based on average daily trips, can provide a general idea of the function of adjacent roadways, the delay vehicles take in seconds to pass through intersections is generally considered a more effective measure when determining the Level of Service of a roadway. The volume to capacity ratios at this location indicate Market Street is over its planning capacity, while Torchwood Boulevard is near its planning capacity. NCDOT Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) - 2019 Road Location Volume Capacity V/C Market Street Approximately 0.5 miles south of subject property 59,890 37,232 1.61 Torchwood Boulevard North of subject property 7,745 8,000 0.97 Intensity Approx. Peak Hour Trips Existing Development: Undeveloped 0 AM / 0 PM Typical Development under Current Zoning: 3 Single-Family Dwellings 3 AM / 3 PM Proposed Development: 2,400 Square Foot Bank/Financial Institution 29 AM / 58 PM 3,000 Square Foot Medical/Dental Office 9 AM / 12 PM 3,000 Square Foot Private/Professional Office 5 AM / 6 PM Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 7 Z22-09 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 8 of 16 Nearby Planned Transportation Improvements and Traffic Impact Analyses Nearby NC STIP Projects: • STIP Project U-4902D – Market Street median o Project to install a center median and pedestrian accessways along Market Street from Middle Sound Loop Road to Marsh Oaks Drive. The pedestrian accessways will consist of a 10-foot multi-use path on the eastern side of the street, and a 5-foot sidewalk on the western side of the street. o The project is currently under construction and is expected to be completed by early- 2023. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 8 Z22-09 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 9 of 16 • STIP Projects U-475, U-4751A – Military Cutoff Extension o Project to extend Military Cutoff from Market Street to I-140. o The project is currently under construction and is expected to be completed in early- 2023. o The extension of Military Cutoff will intersect Torchwood Boulevard just over ¾ miles west of the subject site. Lendire Road/Brittany Lakes Drive, Torchwood Boulevard, and Putnam Drive/Bradfield Court will connect to the Military Cutoff extension, allowing access to neighborhoods west Market Street. o The project will also install a sidewalk and multi-use path along the extension of Military Cutoff and the sections of Market Street included in the project. Nearby Traffic Impact Analyses: Traffic Impact Analyses (TIAs) are completed in accordance with the WMPO and NCDOT standards. Approved analyses must be re-examined by NCDOT if the proposed development is not completed by the build out date established within the TIA. Proposed Development Land Use/Intensity TIA Status 1. Ogden Starbucks • 2,200 square foot coffee shop with drive thru • Approved May 10, 2019 • 2021 Build Out Year The TIA required improvements be completed at certain intersections in the area. The notable improvements consisted of: • Installation of an additional exclusive eastbound right-turn lane on Lendire Road at Market Street (improvement installation to be coordinated with the Military Cutoff Extension project (U-4751). Modification of the signal timing at the same intersection to incorporate the new dual right-turn lanes. Nearby Proposed Developments included within the TIA: • None Development Status: Construction is complete. The installation of right-turn lane will be completed with the Military Cutoff extension project. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 9 Z22-09 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 10 of 16 Proposed Development Land Use/Intensity TIA Status 2. Middle Sound West • 288 multi-family units • Small office with 32 employees • Approved August 14, 2019 • 2021 Build Out Year The TIA required improvements be completed at certain intersections in the area. The notable improvements consisted of: • Installation of a westbound right-turn lane at the site’s access on Lendire Road. Nearby Proposed Developments included within the TIA: • Ogden Starbucks Development Status: Special Use Permit issued in November 2021; no construction has started at this time. Proposed Development Land Use/Intensity TIA Status 3. Bayshore Commercial Development • 20,000 square feet of Medical/Dental Office • 70,000 square feet of Shopping Center • 8,000 square feet of High Turnover Sit Down Restaurant • 4,000 square feet of Fast- Food Restaurant • TIA approved September 11, 2019 • 2022 Build Out Year The TIA requires improvements be completed at certain intersections in the area. The notable improvements consisted of: • Installation of an additional westbound left turn lane on Bayshore Drive to Market Street • Extension of existing northbound right turn lane on Market Street from Bayshore Drive to the site’s access points Nearby Proposed Developments included within the TIA: • None Development Status: The property is zoned B-2, which allows for this development by- right. Preliminary plans have been reviewed by the TRC. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 10 Z22-09 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 11 of 16 Proposed Development Land Use/Intensity TIA Status 4. Bailey Shoppes • 4,800 sf of Office • 6,600 sf of Shopping Center • 1,200 sf of Fast Food Restaurant with Drive-Thru • 2,400 sf of High-Turnover Restaurant • Approved February 20, 2018 • 2018 Build Out Year (No Update Needed Per NCDOT) The TIA required improvements be completed at certain intersections in the area. The notable improvements consisted of: • Installation of a southbound right-turn lane from Bump Along Road to Mendenhall Drive • Installation of a traffic signal at a future u-turn movement to be located approximately 800 feet south of Alexander Road Nearby Proposed Developments included within the TIA: • Aldi at Marsh Oaks • Amberleigh Shores Phase II Development Status: Initial site work has been completed; however, no structures have been constructed at this time. ENVIRONMENTAL • The property does not contain any Special Flood Hazard Areas or Natural Heritage Areas. • The property is within the Pages Creek watershed. • Per the Classification of Soils in New Hanover County for Septic Tank Suitability, soils on the property consist of Class I (suitable with slight limitations) soils; however, the project will connect to CFPUA sewer services. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 11 Z22-09 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 12 of 16 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS Representative Developments Representative Developments of R-15: Rockport at West Bay Estates English Moor at West Bay Estates Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 12 Z22-09 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 13 of 16 Representative Developments of Land Use: 7320 Market Street State Employees Credit Union on Market Street Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 13 Z22-09 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 14 of 16 Context and Compatibility • The property is located along the Market Street corridor, which, as a principal arterial, is one of the more intensely developed commercial corridors in the unincorporated county. • The site is located at the southern extent of the Special Highway Overlay district and lies in a transitional area between the Porters Neck high growth node to the north and the Ogden commercial node, both of which are classified as Urban Mixed Use, the highest intensity place type in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan. • While many properties with frontage along Market Street retain their initial R-15 zoning, this corridor has functioned as a main commercial corridor for a substantial time and similar smaller, residentially zoned properties have been transitioning to commercial property. • Due to the location and surrounding development patterns, the property is less likely to be developed with low density housing as the corridor continues to be developed with commercial uses to serve residents in this portion of the county. • Due to the site’s proximity to adjacent single-family residential to the west and its historic use as a buffer property between these properties and Market Street, the design of lighting associated with the business use may need additional consideration to ensure compatibility. 2016 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The New Hanover County Future Land Use Map provides a general representation of the vision for New Hanover County’s future land use, as designated by place types describing the character and function of the different types of development that make up the community. These place types are intended to identify general areas for particular development patterns and should not be interpreted as being parcel specific. Future Land Use Map Place Type Community Mixed Use Place Type Description 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. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 14 Z22-09 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 15 of 16 Analysis The subject site is located along a major arterial in a location that is likely to continue to develop with commercial uses to serve nearby residents. The Market Street corridor in this area of the county is one of the county’s most heavily traveled commercial corridors, and the site is between the Porters Neck growth node and the Odgen commercial node, both of which are classified under the county’s highest intensity place type. The proposed uses are consistent with those encouraged within the Community Mixed Use place type, and development of the site with these lower intensity commercial uses can serve as a transition between the Urban Mixed Use areas to the north and south. Though the site has historically been used as a buffer between Rockport at West Bay Estates and Market Street, development of the site with the proposed uses under the CB zoning district may be appropriate with the application of the UDO’s regulations on landscaping, buffering, and lighting. Development in the CB district is intended to be designed in a form and at a scale that is both walkable and accessible to vehicles and located at intersections and along streets that will allow multiple neighborhoods access to the district’s businesses. The district is also intended to serve as a buffer between higher density/intensity development and moderate or low- density multi-family and single-family neighborhoods. The proposed uses at the subject site are in line with the intent of the district. Consistency Recommendation The proposed uses are generally CONSISTENT with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because they will provide lower impact, transitional uses that are in line with both the Community Mixed Use place type as well as the intent of the CB district. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 15 Z22-09 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 16 of 16 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based on the recommended uses for the Community Mixed Use places, intent of the CB district, and the context and compatibility with the immediate surrounding area, staff recommends approval of the proposal and suggests the following motion: I move to recommend APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it will allow for the types of uses that are appropriate in the Community Mixed Use place type. I also find APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is in line with the intent of the CB district and can provide transitional uses from single-family residential homes to the west and the Market Street corridor. Alternative Motion for Denial I move to recommend DENIAL of the proposed rezoning. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it will allow for the types of uses that are appropriate in the Community Mixed Use place type, I find DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is not consistent with the desired character of the surrounding community and the land use will adversely impact the adjacent residential areas. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 2 - 16 CZD R-10 CZD O&I CZ D B-1 R-15 O&I B-2 R-10 R-1 0 New Hanover County, NCSHODIncorporated Areas Indicates Conditional Zoning District (CZD) See Section 5.7 of the UDOCOD B-1 AC R-5 EDZD CB I-1 R-7 PD B-2 I-2 R-10 RMF-X CS AR R-15 RMFU SC RA R-20 UMXZ O&I R-20S Zoning Districts CB/Bank/FinancialR-157491 Market StreetZ22-09 Proposed Zoning/Use:Existing Zoning/Use:Site Address:Case: R-15 B-2 B-2 0 830415Feet Case Site Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 3 - 1 Torchwood B l v d Windsong R d LostTree R d P e ters L n Mark e t S t Elkmont C t Lido D r Ern Way Fox w e r t h D r BriefRd Green v i e w Dr Palm G r o v e D r Bright L e a f Rd Bayshore D r Mar k e t S t Thais T r l Shore Point D r Oak R i d g e L n Urban Mixed Use General Residential Community Mixed Use New Hanover County, NCCONSERVATION RURAL RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY MIXED USE URBAN MIXED USE GENERAL RESIDENTIAL EMPLOYMENT CENTER COMMERCE ZONE Place Types CB/Bank/FinancialR-157491 Market StreetZ22-09 Proposed Zoning/Use:Existing Zoning/Use:Site Address:Case: 0 700350 Feet Case Site Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 4 - 1 Palm Grove D r Lido Dr Greenview Dr Lost T r e e R d Windsong R d Elkmont C t Shore P o i n t D r BriefRd Mar k e t S t Bayshore D r Oak R i d g e L n ThaisTrl New Hanover County, NCNeighboring Parcels CB/Bank/FinancialR-157491 Market StreetZ22-09 Proposed Zoning/Use:Existing Zoning/Use:Site Address:Case: 0 700350 Feet Case Site Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 5 - 1 Initial Application Documents & Materials Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 6 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 2 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 3 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 4 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 5 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 6 Revised: 3/7/2022 7491 MARKET STREET Conditional Rezoning Narrative Introduction The original developer of Rockport, Dallas Harris Land Company, LLC, retains ownership of the US Highway 17 frontage, 7491 Market Street, as shown on Map Book 34, Page 2 of the New Hanover County Registry. The 1.15‐acre tract is located at the corner of Market Street, US Highway 17 South and Torchwood Blvd. The Landowner proposes a Conditional Rezoning from its present R‐15 zoning to CB, Community Business, zone. The New Hanover County 2016 Comprehensive Plan promotes Community Mixed Use consistent with this proposal for this area. The adjacent properties to the rear and north east side are presently zoned R‐15. The property across Market Street is zoned O&I and B‐2. The property to the southwest side of the property is zoned B‐2. The developer proposes a twenty‐four hundred square feet bank building with driveway on Torchwood as well as Market Street, US Highway 17. The development will include parking, sufficient storm drainage and detention pond as shown by the attached Conditional Rezoning Plan. This property has traditionally served as a buffer to the highway for the residential subdivision. The subdivision was originally recorded with a twenty feet wide buffer on its periphery. The proposed commercial development will dedicate a buffer along the subdivision boundary. The buffer will be atleast twenty feet wide as originally required for the residential performance subdivision. The buffer will utilize fence and plantings to create an opaque screen to the new development as well as the highway. The new buffer will merge with the existing buffer on its southern end. The new development will buffer Torchwood Boulevard either side of the driveway to create an attractive street scape. All new buffers will be the maintenance responsibility of the new development. Torchwood Blvd. is considered the primary access serving the proposed bank’s drive through windows. The primary access will be from Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 7 Market Street US Highway 17. This development concept is consistent with the New Hanover County Comprehensive Land Use Plan with regards to a mix of small scale compact uses serving all modes of travel. Existing Use The property is currently undeveloped. The property has been known to have homeless encampments. Proposed Uses The proposed CB zoning is to intended to enable a commercial bank building with a 20 feet wide buffer to the rear for the Rockport at West Bay Estates residential community. The commercial use is intended to serve and compliment the neighborhood. The project will maintain and improve existing drainage patterns as well as manage the stormwater runoff in accordance with state and county requirements. There are no existing wetlands on the property. Grading will be limited to only that necessary for drainage to the existing stormwater along US Highway 17. In consideration of the concerns raised at the June 8th, 2021 community meeting the plan has been revised to now show traffic flow from Torchwood Blvd. and US Highway 17, Market Street, to Market Street. The proposed drainage now shows a pond to address the citizen’s concerns as well. The community meeting was a bit contentious however we feel beneficial to the process and the plan. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 8 7491 MARKET ST., WILMINGTON, NC DALLAS HARRIS LAND COMPANY, LLC CONDITIONAL REZONING FROM R-15 TO CB Community Meeting Report One required community meeting was held on Tuesday, June 8, 2021 from 5:30 pm to 7:30 pm at the Ogden Park Picnic Shelter #1 in New Hanover County, North Carolina. This meeting was organized by Stroud Engineering, PA to provide adjoining residents an opportunity to review the proposed plan, ask questions, and voice concerns regarding the proposed conditional use rezoning. The residents were notified by mail of the meeting concerning the proposed rezoning. There were at least eight adjoining residents that attended the meeting. Stroud Engineering, PA represented three on the applicant’s behalf to address any questions, log the minutes and assist the process. The owner, Dallas Harris and his wife as well as his realtor, two members of the Rockport Homeowners Association and Nicole Smith, the New Hanover County Planner were in attendance as well. A reporting of the attendees is attached. Primary concerns were traffic, drainage and pedestrian safety. The majority of the comments and concerns were from the adjoining Rockport Subdivision residents. General questions (and the answers provided) are included below: Traffic : Traffic was the main concern regarding the proposed commercial use on a rather busy access to Market Street. There are planned driveways on both Torchwood Blvd. and Market Street. There are North Carolina Department of Transportation planned and funded right of way improvements on Market Street that should improve the accessibility and reduce the wait times. There is also an approved development to the west that will provide a connection to Gordon Road which should reduce the amount of traffic desiring to access Market. Another concern noted was the site distance turning off Torchwood Blvd. south bound onto Market St. US Highway 17. The NCDOT project mentioned above will address and improve both of these concerns. There was noted concern that rush hour traffic may queue beyond the proposed driveway into the existing subdivision. Clients traveling South on Market can use the Market Street driveway as opposed to getting blocked by the potential queuing. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 9 There was concern of increased accidents and back-ups from a new driveway into the proposed commercial building as Market Street is always backed up. The projects mentioned above will address and improve both of these concerns. Drainage: Concerns were also expressed regarding the drainage in the area. The streets in Rockport have historically flooded as a result of Florence and other significant hurricanes. The NCDOT project on Market Street has significant planned drainage improvements at the Torchwood and Market intersection. The Realtor offered that he had the NCDOT plan for these improvements. Excerpt from the plan showing this intersection is hereby attached. There was suggestion that an issue exists with the culvert under Torchwood. The NCDOT project removes and replaces that existing 30 inch culvert. Safety: The Rockport community is also concerned with their safety due to increased amounts of traffic using Torchwood Blvd from Market St. to access numerous existing and proposed residential neighborhoods. This seems mostly a complaint of existing conditions however the proposed Commercial Site will likely be right in/right out of all driveways therefore not promoting traffic back into Rockport. Various questions: When will the construction start? Deed concern Buffer restrictions./ Trees (Existing and Proposed) Retention Pond Location Bypass Other ideas for alternate traffic outlets? Community Meeting Report by: Stroud Engineering, P.A. 102-D Cinema Dr. Wilmington, NC 28403 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 10 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 11 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 7 - 12 Concept Plan Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 8 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 9 - 1 Public Comments In Support X Neutral 1 In Opposition X Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 10 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 3 - 11 - 1 NEW HANOVER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION MEETING DATE: 4/7/2022 Regular DEPARTMENT: Planning PRESENTER(S): Julian Griffee, Current Planner CONTACT(S): Julian Griffee; Rebekah Roth, Planning & Land Use Director SUBJECT: Public Hearing Rezoning Request (Z22-08) - Request by Cindee Wolf, applicant, on behalf of New Beginnings Chris:an Church, Inc., property owner, to rezone approximately 9.60 acres of land located within the 3100 Block of Blue Clay Road from R-20, Residen:al District, and (CZD) R-10, Condi:onal Residen:al District, to (CZD) R-5, Condi:onal Residen:al District. BRIEF SUMMARY: The applicant is proposing to rezone 9.60 acres of a 10.94-acre parcel to (CZD) R-5 to construct a 68-unit a.ached housing development at a density of 7.08 units per acre. The proposed plan also includes associated parking, a clubhouse and common ameni3es. The subject site would be required to meet all the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) requirements for development within the proposed zoning district. The proposed development consists of 17 quadraplex buildings on the parcel, which is bounded to the east by Blue Clay Road, between the Ivywood neighborhood to the north and the Rachel’s Place neighborhood to the south. Building heights are proposed at a maximum of two stories. The applicant has submi.ed architectural designs of the proposed quadraplexes as part of the conceptual plan. The R-20 district in this area was established in 1974. At the 3me, the purpose of the R-20 district was to ensure that housing served by private sep3c and wells would be developed at low densi3es. Since that 3me, water and sewer services have become available to the surrounding area; however, the Blue Clay Road corridor remains primarily zoned for low density housing and industrial uses. The purpose of the R-5, Residen3al District is to provide lands that accommodate moderate to high density single-family detached and single-family a.ached development. Currently, the site is undeveloped land. The proposed 68-unit development equates to a density of 7.08 units per acre. The R-5 district allows up to 8 units per acre by-right. Currently, the site generates zero trips. As currently zoned, it is es3mated the site would generate about 26 AM and 34 PM trips during the peak hours if developed at the permi.ed density. The proposed R-5 development, if developed as affordable units as intended, would increase the es3mated number of peak hour trips by approximately 5 AM peak hour and 6 PM peak hour trips. If the proposed R-5 development is constructed as market value units, the increase in the es3mated number of peak hour trips is approximately 18 AM peak hour trips and approximately 16 PM peak hour trips. The es3mated traffic generated from the site is under the 100 peak hour threshold that triggers the ordinance requirement for a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). Based on the current general student genera3on rate, the increase in homes would result in approximately 7 addi3onal students than would be generated under current zoning. The Comprehensive Plan classifies the property as Community Mixed Use, which promotes development of a mix of residen3al, office, and retail uses at moderate densi3es. This classifica3on intends for moderate to high densi3es while Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 also providing a transi3on between the exis3ng lower density housing and higher intensity employment centers, such as the N. Kerr Industrial Park. The proposed rezoning is generally CONSISTENT with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because the project provides for the type of housing diversity that is recommended in the Community Mixed Use place type, the residen3al densi3es are in-line with those recommended within this place type, and the project will provide addi3onal housing in close proximity to exis3ng and future commercial development serving nearby residents. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: Intelligent Growth & Economic DevelopmentEncourage development of complete communi3es in the unincorporated countyEnsure NHC has appropriate housing to support business growth RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: The Wrightsboro area of the county is posi3oned for future growth given the approved development at the intersec3on of Castle Hayne Road and N. Kerr Avenue, approved projects within the nearby N. Kerr Industrial Park, and an3cipated development within the future Blue Clay Road Business Park. Because this proposal is in line with the Comprehensive Plan recommenda3ons for this area and is similar in form and density to other projects located between the N. Kerr Industrial Park and exis3ng neighborhoods, staff recommends approval of this applica3on and suggests the following mo3on with the applicant’s proposed condi3ons: I move to recommend APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) R-5 district. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the project provides for the types and mixture of uses recommended in the Community Mixed Use place type and the residen3al densi3es are in-line with those recommended for the property. I also find recommending APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal would benefit the community by providing diverse housing op3ons. The proposal also provides a transi3on between adjacent neighborhoods to the employment center to the east and will provide addi3onal housing in close proximity to exis3ng and future commercial development in the Wrightsboro area. Alterna:ve Mo:on for Denial I move to recommend DENIAL of the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) R-5 district. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the project provides for the types and mixture of uses recommended in the Community Mixed Use place type and the residen3al densi3es are in-line with those recommended for the property, I find recommending DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is not consistent with the desired character of the surrounding community and the density will adversely impact the adjacent neighborhoods. ATTACHMENTS: Descrip3on Z22-08 PB Script Z22-08 PB Staff Report Z22-08 Zoning Map Z22-08 FLUM Z22-08 Mailout Map Z22-08 Application Cover Sheet Z22-08 Application Documents Z22-08 Concept Plan Cover Sheet Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 Z22-08 Concept Plan Z22-08 Public Comments Cover Sheet Z22-08 Public Comment Opposition COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (only Manager) Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 PLANNING BOARD SCRIPT for Zoning Map Amendment Application (Z22-08) Request by Cindee Wolf, applicant, on behalf of the property owner, New Beginnings Christian Church, Inc., to rezone approximately 9.60 acres of land located within the 3100 Block of Blue Clay Road from R-20, Residential District, and CZD R-10, Conditional Residential District to CZD R-5, Conditional Residential District. 1. This is a public hearing. We will hear a presentation from staff. Then the applicant and any opponents will each be allowed 15 minutes for their presentation and an additional 5 minutes for rebuttal. 2. Conduct Hearing, as follows: a. Staff presentation b. Applicant’s presentation (up to 15 minutes) c. Opponent’s presentation (up to 15 minutes) d. Applicant’s rebuttal (up to 5 minutes) e. Opponent’s rebuttal (up to 5 minutes) f. Staff review of any additional conditions 3. Close the public hearing 4. Board discussion 5. Before we proceed with the vote, I would like to invite the applicant to the podium. Based on the Board discussion and items presented during the public hearing, would you like withdraw your petition, request a continuance, or proceed with a vote? 6. Vote on the application. The motion should include a statement saying how the change is, or is not, consistent with the land use plan and why approval or denial of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest. Example Motion for Approval I move to recommend APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) R-5 district. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the project provides for the types and mixture of uses recommended in the Community Mixed Use place type and the residential densities are in-line with those recommended for the property. I also find recommending APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal would benefit the community by providing diverse housing options. The proposal also provides a transition between adjacent neighborhoods to the employment center to the east and will provide additional housing in close proximity to existing and future commercial development in the Wrightsboro area. Example Motion for Denial I move to recommend DENIAL of the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) R-5 district. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the project provides for the types and mixture of uses recommended in the Community Mixed Use place type and the residential densities are in-line with those recommended for the property, I find recommending DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is not consistent with the desired character of the surrounding community and the density will adversely impact the adjacent neighborhoods. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 1 - 1 Alternative Motion for Approval/Denial: I move to RECOMMEND [Approval/Denial] of the proposed rezoning to a conditional RMF-M district. I find it to be [Consistent/Inconsistent] with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because [insert reasons] __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ I also find RECOMMENDING [Approval/Denial] of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because [insert reasons] __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 1 - 2 Z22-08 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 1 of 16 STAFF REPORT FOR Z22-08 CONDITIONAL REZONING APPLICATION APPLICATION SUMMARY Case Number: Z22-08 Request: Rezone 9.60 acres to (CZD) R-5, Conditional Residential District Applicant: Property Owner(s): Cindee Wolf New Beginnings Christian Church, Inc. Location: Acreage: 3100 Block of Blue Clay Road 9.60 PID(s): Comp Plan Place Type: R03300-003-002-000 Community Mixed Use Existing Land Use: Proposed Land Use: Undeveloped Residential Development Current Zoning: Proposed Zoning: R-20, Residential District and (CZD) R-10, Conditional Residential District (CZD) R-5, Conditional Residential District SURROUNDING AREA LAND USE ZONING North Single-Family Residential (Ivywood) R-10 East Undeveloped I-2 South Single-Family Residential (Rachel’s Place) (CZD) R-10 West New Beginnings Christian Church R-20 Blue Clay Road Z22-08 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 2 - 1 Z22-08 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 2 of 16 ZONING HISTORY July 1, 1974 Initially zoned R-20 (Area 10A) April 4, 2016 Portion of parcel rezoned to (CZD) R-10 as part of a larger rezoning to allow for the development of a performance residential subdivision. COMMUNITY SERVICES Water/Sewer Water and sewer services are available through CFPUA. Fire Protection New Hanover County Fire Services, New Hanover County Northern Fire District, New Hanover County Wrightsboro Station Schools Wrightsboro Elementary, Holly Shelter Middle, and New Hanover High Schools Recreation Cape Fear Optimist Park, Blue Clay Bike Park CONSERVATION, HISTORIC, & ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Conservation No known conservation resources Historic No known historic resources Archaeological No known archaeological resources Z22-08 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 2 - 2 Z22-08 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 3 of 16 APPLICANT’S PROPOSED CONCEPTUAL PLAN Proposed Site Plan with Staff Markups • The applicant is proposing to rezone 9.60 acres of a 10.94-acre parcel to (CZD) R-5 to construct a 68-unit attached housing development at a density of 7.08 units per acre. The proposed plan also includes associated parking, a clubhouse and common amenities. • The proposed development consists of 17 quadraplex buildings on the parcel, which is bounded to the east by Blue Clay Road, between the Ivywood neighborhood to the north and the Rachel’s Place neighborhood to the south. Building heights are proposed at a maximum of two stories. • The applicant has submitted architectural designs of the proposed quadraplexes as part of the conceptual plan. • The community clubhouse is located in the central portion of the parcel, close to the southern boundary of the parcel along the proposed private drive Covenant Lane. • The west and east areas of the site contain the development’s stormwater infiltration basins. • A 30’ wide drainage easement is indicated along the north boundary of the project adjacent to property zoned or developed as R-10, Residential Districts. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 2 - 3 Z22-08 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 4 of 16 ZONING CONSIDERATIONS • The R-20 district in this area was established in 1974. At the time, the purpose of the R-20 district was to ensure that housing served by private septic and wells would be developed at low densities. Since that time, water and sewer services have become available to the surrounding area; however, the Blue Clay Road corridor remains primarily zoned for low density housing and industrial uses. • Rezoning case Z-950 was approved in 2016 and resulted in the subject site being split zoned (CZD) R-10 and R-20. Case Z-950 was a rezoning request to construct a 46-unit performance residential district. The current subject site was intended at the time to contain 16 of these lots, as well as recreation space, and 30 lots were to be located on another portion of the parent tract. • Rezoning case Z-966 approved Covenant I, a 68-unit Senior Housing residential development. Covenant I is located on the site where the original 30 lots for Z-950 were to be constructed. The subject site for Covenant II still contains the (CZD) R-10 zoning tied to case Z-950. • The purpose of the R-5, Residential District is to provide lands that accommodate moderate to high density single-family detached and single-family attached development. • The proposed 68-unit development equates to a density of 7.08 units per acre. The R-5 district allows up to 8 units per acre by-right. • The subject 9.60-acre site is currently part of a parent parcel approximately 10.64 acres in area. The residual property is not included with this proposal and will remain zoned R- 20. It is the location of New Beginnings Christian Church. • In the description of the project and according to the applicant, the project is intended to provide affordable units at 30, 40, and 50% of Are Median Income (AMI). However, the method of achieving that affordability has not been determined at this point in time. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 2 - 4 Z22-08 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 5 of 16 AREA SUBDIVISIONS UNDER DEVELOPMENT Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 2 - 5 Z22-08 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 6 of 16 TRANSPORTATION • Access is proposed to be provided to the subject property from Blue Clay Road to the east, which is an NCDOT-maintained minor arterial roadway. Secondary access is provided by way of the New Beginnings Christian Church’s parking lot to the west, and via a private local road from Rachel’s Place. • Initially, a connection was not planned between this proposed development and the Rachel’s Place subdivision to the south. A connection is required and is intended to be gated. • The access from Blue Clay Road will be a full-movement access, with the site plan indicating a left and right turn lane from the property to turn onto Blue Clay Road. • The access from the west will be shared with New Beginnings Christian Church’s parking lot. This access connects the development to Alex Trask Drive. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 2 - 6 Z22-08 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 7 of 16 • As currently zoned, it is estimated the site would generate about 26 AM and 34 PM trips during the peak hours if developed at the permitted density. The proposed R-5 development, if developed as affordable units as intended, would increase the estimated number of peak hour trips by approximately 5 AM peak hour and 6 PM peak hour trips. If the proposed R-5 development is constructed as market value units, the increase in the estimated number of peak hour trips is approximately 18 AM peak hour trips and approximately 16 PM peak hour trips. • The estimated traffic generated from the site is under the 100 peak hour threshold that triggers the ordinance requirement for a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). • Because a TIA is not required to analyze transportation impacts at this time, Staff has provided the volume to capacity ratio for the adjacent roadway near the subject site. While volume to capacity ratio, based on average daily trips, can provide a general idea of the function of adjacent roadways, the delay vehicles take in seconds to pass through intersections is generally considered a more effective measure when determining the Level of Service of a roadway. NCDOT Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) - 2020 Road Location Volume Capacity V/C Blue Clay Road 2900 Block of Blue Clay Road 5,300 5,429 0.98 Intensity Approx. Peak Hour Trips Existing Development: Undeveloped 0 AM / 0 PM Typical Development under Current Zoning: 32 Single-Family Housing 26 AM / 34 PM Proposed Development: Affordable Housing (ITE Code 223): 68 Dwelling Units (Quadraplex Structures) 31 AM / 40 PM Proposed Development: Multifamily Housing, Low- Rise (ITE Code 220): 68 Dwelling Units (Quadraplex Structures) 44 AM / 50 PM Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 2 - 7 Z22-08 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 8 of 16 Nearby Planned Transportation Improvements and Traffic Impact Analyses Nearby NC STIP Projects: • STIP Project U-5863 o Project to widen Castle Hayne Road into multi-lanes from I-140 to Division Drive. Right-of-Way and Utilities taking place in FY 2025. Nearby Traffic Impact Analyses: • There are no TIAs located within the general vicinity of the proposal. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 2 - 8 Z22-08 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 9 of 16 ENVIRONMENTAL • The property does not contain any Special Flood Hazard Areas or Natural Heritage Areas. • The property is within the Ness Creek watershed. • Per the Classification of Soils in New Hanover County for Septic Tank Suitability, soils on the property consist of Class II (moderate limitations for septic suitability) and Class III (severe limitations for septic suitability). However, the site is expected to be served by CFPUA when developed. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS SCHOOLS • Students living in the proposed development would be assigned to Wrightsboro Elementary, Holly Shelter Middle, and New Hanover High Schools. Students may apply to attend public magnet, year-round elementary, or specialty high schools. • As the site is undeveloped, the parcel does not generate any students. • A typical by-right development of 32 residential units would be expected to generate an additional 7 students. 68 units are proposed under the rezoning request. • Based on the current general student generation rate*, the increase in homes would result in approximately 7 additional students than would be generated under current zoning. • The general student generation rate provides only an estimate of anticipated student yield as different forms of housing at different price points yield different numbers of students. Over the past four years, staff has also seen a decline in the number of students generated by new development. Student numbers remained relatively stable between 2015 and 2020 (excepting the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic), while 14,500 new residential units were permitted across the county. In addition, the student population is anticipated to only grow by approximately 1,300 students over the next 10 years based on the recent New Hanover County Schools Facility Needs Study. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 2 - 9 Z22-08 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 10 of 16 Development Type Intensity Estimated Student Yield (current general student generation rate) * Existing Development Undeveloped Approximate** Total: 0 (0 elementary, 0 middle, 0 high) Typical Development Under Current Zoning (R-10) 32 Residential Units Approximate** Total: 7 (3 elementary, 2 middle, 2 high) Proposed (CZD) R-5 Zoning 68 Residential Units Approximate** Total: 14 (6 elementary, 3 middle, 5 high) *The current general student generation rate was calculated by dividing the projected New Hanover County public school student enrollment for the 2021-2022 school year by the number of dwelling units in the county. Currently, there are an average of 0.22 public school students (0.09 for elementary, 0.05 for middle, and 0.08 for high) generated per dwelling unit across New Hanover County. These numbers are updated annually and include students attending out-of-district specialty schools, such as year-round elementary schools, Isaac Bear, and SeaTech. **Because the student generation rate often results in fractional numbers, all approximate student generation yields with a fraction of 0.5 or higher are rounded up to a whole number and yields with a fraction of less than 0.5 are rounded down. This may result in student numbers at the elementary, middle, and high school levels not equaling the approximate total. • Staff has provided information on existing school capacity to provide a general idea of the potential impact on public schools, but these numbers do not reflect any future capacity upgrades. School Enrollment* and Capacity** (2021-2022 School Year) *Enrollment is based on the New Hanover County Schools enrollment projections for the 2021-2022 school year. **Capacity calculations were determined based on the projected capacities for the 2021-2022 school year, and funded or planned capacity upgrades were those included in the Facility Needs Study presented by New Hanover County Schools to the Board of Education in January 2021. This information does not take into account flexible scheduling that may be available in high school settings, which can reduce the portion of the student body on campus at any one time. • The 2021 facility needs survey that has been prepared by Schools staff indicates that, based on NC Department of Public Instruction (DPI) student growth projections and school capacity data, planned facility upgrades, combined with changes to student enrollment patterns, will result in adequate capacity district wide over the next ten years if facility upgrades are funded. Level Total NHC Capacity School Projected Enrollment of Assignment School Capacity of Assigned School w/Portables Capacity of Assigned School Funded or Planned Capacity Upgrades Elementary 95% Wrightsboro 494 564 88% None Middle 108% Holly Shelter 965 934 103% None High 100% New Hanover 1,584 1,648 96% None Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 2 - 10 Z22-08 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 11 of 16 NEW HANOVER COUNTY STRATEGIC PLAN • One of the goals of the New Hanover County Strategic Plan for 2018-2023 is to encourage the development of complete communities in the unincorporated county by increasing housing diversity and access to basic goods and services. • The proposed R-5 zoning district would allow for an increase in housing diversity and allow for those new residents to utilize existing goods and services within one mile of the subject property. • The predominant housing type in the area is single family detached. Under the proposed R-5 district, single family detached would decrease (89% to 86%), and single family attached units would increase (1% to 4%). • The subject property is located in the Wrightsboro community area, where 62% of residents currently live within one-mile of a support service (urgent care, primary doctor’s office, child & adult care, etc.), and 50% live within one-mile of a community facility (public park, school, museum etc.). • With the proposed number of units, the number of residences within one-mile of a support service and community facility would increase (62% to 63%, 50% to 51%). Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 2 - 11 Z22-08 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 12 of 16 REPRESENTATIVE DEVELOPMENTS Representative Developments of R-20: Holland Drive Long Leaf Drive Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 2 - 12 Z22-08 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 13 of 16 Representative Developments of R-5: Wrightsville Place Leeward Village Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 2 - 13 Z22-08 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 14 of 16 Context and Compatibility • While the area was zoned for low density housing in the mid 1970’s, the 2016 Comprehensive Plan recommends higher density single family development patterns, and a mixture of uses can be provided via adjacent tracts or when separated by lower traffic local or collector roads. In addition, there have been residential developments approved recently within the general vicinity that are of higher densities than the original R-20 zoning allows. • The subject property is located on a minor arterial road and is in close proximity to the Wrightsboro commercial node. • The property abuts residentially zoned property to the north and south, the New Beginnings Christian Church to the west, and the N. Kerr Industrial Park is located across Blue Clay Road to the east. • The proposal is at a density slightly higher than that of the adjacent residential land uses. • The proposed height will be limited to 2 stories, which are typically lower in height than the permitted by-right 40’ maximum allowed within the R-5 district. The proposed architectural standards and pictures have similar appearances of nearby detached single- family houses. 2016 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The New Hanover County Future Land Use Map provides a general representation of the vision for New Hanover County’s future land use, as designated by place types describing the character and function of the different types of development that make up the community. These place types are intended to identify general areas for particular development patterns and should not be interpreted as being parcel specific. Z22-08 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 2 - 14 Z22-08 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 15 of 16 Future Land Use Map Place Type Community Mixed Use Place Type Description Promotes development of small-scale, compact, mixed use development patterns. Types of uses encouraged include office, retail, mixed use, recreation, single-family, and multi-family residential. Analysis The subject property is located in the northern portion of the county along a minor arterial road and is in the general vicinity of the Wrightsboro neighborhood commercial node and other commercial services. Residential developments that have been approved nearby include Rachel’s Place, the Covenant I, and Blue Clay Townes, which all have higher densities than allowed within the R-20 district. The Comprehensive Plan classifies the property as Community Mixed Use, which promotes development of a mix of residential, office, and retail uses at moderate densities. This classification intends for moderate to high densities while also providing a transition between the existing lower density housing and higher intensity employment centers, such as the N. Kerr Industrial Park. The site is located between two existing single-family developments on the north and south, abuts an existing religious institution to the west, and across Blue Clay Road from industrially-zoned properties to the east. These areas are classified as General Residential and Employment Center within the Future Land Use Map. As such, the proposal could serve as an appropriate infill and transitional development between those two land use classifications. In addition, the project is in line with the preferred density range of the Community Mixed Use place type, promotes the mixture of uses recommended within the Community Mixed Use place type, and supports the Comprehensive Plan’s goal to provide for a range of housing types and opportunities for households of different sizes and income. Consistency Recommendation The proposed rezoning is generally CONSISTENT with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because the project provides for the type of housing diversity that is recommended in the Community Mixed Use place type, the residential densities are in-line with those recommended within this place type, and the project will provide additional housing in close proximity to existing and future commercial development serving nearby residents. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 2 - 15 Z22-08 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 16 of 16 STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Wrightsboro area of the county is positioned for future growth given the approved development at the intersection of Castle Hayne Road and N. Kerr Avenue, approved projects within the nearby N. Kerr Industrial Park, and anticipated development within the future Blue Clay Road Business Park. Because this proposal is in line with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations for this area and is similar in form and density to other projects located between the N. Kerr Industrial Park and existing neighborhoods, staff recommends approval of this application and suggests the following motion with the applicant’s proposed conditions: I move to recommend APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) R-5 district. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the project provides for the types and mixture of uses recommended in the Community Mixed Use place type and the residential densities are in-line with those recommended for the property. I also find recommending APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal would benefit the community by providing diverse housing options. The proposal also provides a transition between adjacent neighborhoods to the employment center to the east and will provide additional housing in close proximity to existing and future commercial development in the Wrightsboro area. Alternative Motion for Denial I move to recommend DENIAL of the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) R-5 district. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the project provides for the types and mixture of uses recommended in the Community Mixed Use place type and the residential densities are in-line with those recommended for the property, I find recommending DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is not consistent with the desired character of the surrounding community and the density will adversely impact the adjacent neighborhoods. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 2 - 16 Ho l l a n d D r Ha l l W a t t e r s D r Cala d a n R d Orville Wright Way BlueClayRd New BeginningDr BlueBonnetCir KittyHawk Rd Sandy Ln Teresa Dr Arlene Dr Long Leaf Dr PenningtonDr B-1 R-15 CZ D R - 1 0 I-2 PD R -2 0 R-10 CZD R-5 New Hanover County, NCSHODIncorporated Areas Indicates Conditional Zoning District (CZD) See Section 5.7 of the UDOCOD B-1 AC R-5 EDZD CB I-1 R-7 PD B-2 I-2 R-10 RMF-X CS AR R-15 RMFU SC RA R-20 UMXZ O&I R-20S Zoning Districts CZD R-5R-20 & CZD R-103100 Block of Blue Clay Road Z22-08 Proposed Zoning/Use:Existing Zoning/Use:Site Address:Case: 0 1,000500 Feet Case Site Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 3 - 1 H o l l a n d D r Orville Wright Way Blu e C l a y R d New BeginningDr BlueBonnetCir Kitty Hawk Rd Teresa Dr Arlene Dr Long Leaf Dr Pe nni ngton Dr Community Mixed Use General Residential Employment Center New Hanover County, NCCONSERVATION RURAL RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY MIXED USE URBAN MIXED USE GENERAL RESIDENTIAL EMPLOYMENT CENTER COMMERCE ZONE Place Types CZD R-5R-20 & CZD R-103100 Block of Blue Clay Road Z22-08 Proposed Zoning/Use:Existing Zoning/Use:Site Address:Case: 0 1,000500 Feet Case Site Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 4 - 1 New Hanover County, NCNeighboring Parcels CZD R-5R-20 & CZD R-103100 Block of Blue Clay Road Z22-08 Proposed Zoning/Use:Existing Zoning/Use:Site Address:Case: 0 825412.5 Feet Case Site Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 5 - 1 Initial Application Documents & Materials Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 6 - 1 Page 1 of 6 Conditional Zoning District Application – Updated 05-2021 NEW HANOVER COUNTY_____________________ DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & LAND USE 230 Government Center Drive, Suite 110 Wilmington, North Carolina 28403 Telephone (910) 798-7165 FAX (910) 798-7053 planningdevelopment.nhcgov.com CONDITIONAL ZONING APPLICATION This application form must be completed as part of a conditional zoning application submitted through the county’s online COAST portal. The main procedural steps in the submittal and review of applications are outlined in the flowchart below. More specific submittal and review requirements, as well as the standards to be applied in reviewing the application, are set out in Section 10.3.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance. Public Hearing Procedures (Optional) Pre-Application Conference 1 Community Information Meeting 2 Application Submittal & Acceptance 3 Planning Director Review & Staff Report (TRC Optional) 4 Public Hearing Scheduling & Notification 5 Planning Board Hearing & Recom- mendation 6 Board of Commissioners Hearing & Decision 7 Post-Decision Limitations and Actions 1. Applicant and Property Owner Information Applicant/Agent Name Owner Name (if different from Applicant/Agent) Company Company/Owner Name 2 Address Address City, State, Zip City, State, Zip Phone Phone Email Email Cindee Wolf Design Solutions Wilmington, NC 28406 910-620-2374 cwolf@lobodemar.biz P.O. Box 7221 New Beginning Christian Church, Inc. 910-341-7984 (Pastor Rob Campbell) nbcc@new bcc.com 3120 Alex Trask Drive Castle Hayne, NC 28429 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 1 Page 2 of 6 Conditional Zoning District Application – Updated 05-2021 2. Subject Property Information Address/Location Parcel Identification Number(s) Total Parcel(s) Acreage Existing Zoning and Use(s) Future Land Use Classification 3. Proposed Zoning, Use(s), & Narrative Proposed Conditional Zoning District: Total Acreage of Proposed District: Please list the uses that will be allowed within the proposed Conditional Zoning District, the purpose of the district, and a project narrative (attach additional pages if necessary). Note: Only uses permitted in the corresponding General Use District are eligible for consideration within a Conditional Zoning District. 4. Proposed Condition(s) Note: Within a Conditional Zoning District, additional conditions and requirements which represent greater restrictions on the development and use of the property than the corresponding general use district regulations may be added. These conditions may assist in mitigating the impacts the proposed development may have on the surrounding community. Please list any conditions proposed to be placed on the Conditional Zoning District below. Staff, the Planning Board, and Board of Commissioners may propose additional conditions during the review process. 3100 Block of Blue Clay Road Community Mixed-UseR-20 & CZD R-10 CZD R-5 10.94 ac. 322020.91.7300 / R03300-003-002-000 The proposed project is a sixty-eight (68) units attached housing development. There are seventeen(17) quadraplex structures, along with associated parking areas, a clubhouse and common amenties. Reference attached plan for preliminary site layout and conditons. An exhibit of the proposedarchitectural style is also included. 9.60 ac. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 2 Page 3 of 6 Conditional Zoning District Application – Updated 05-2021 5. Traffic Impact Please provide the estimated number of trips generated for the proposed use(s) based off the most recent version of the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) must be completed for all proposed developments that generate more than 100 peak hour trips, and the TIA must be included with this application. ITE Land Use: Trip Generation Use and Variable (gross floor area, dwelling units, etc.) AM Peak Hour Trips: PM Peak Hour Trips: 6. Conditional Zoning District Considerations The Conditional Zoning District procedure is established to address situations where a particular land use would be consistent with the New Hanover County 2016 Comprehensive Plan and the objectives outlined in the Unified Development Ordinance and where only a specific use or uses is proposed. The procedure is intended primarily for use with transitions between zoning districts of dissimilar character where a particular use or uses, with restrictive conditions to safeguard adjacent land uses, can create a more orderly transition benefiting all affected parties and the community at-large. The applicant must explain, with reference to attached plans (where applicable), how the proposed Conditional Zoning district meets the following criteria. 1.How would the requested change be consistent with the County’s policies for growth and development, as described in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan, applicable small area plans, etc. Affordable Housing (223) / 68 total Units per dwelling unit 33 39 The policies for growth and development encourage safe and affordable housing to be availableto every citizen. Sustainability of the County depends on sensible in-fill and maximizing use of landsalready accessible to urban services. The proposed development will provide for an alternativehousing product in this area of the County. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 3 Page 4 of 6 Conditional Zoning District Application – Updated 05-2021 2.How would the requested Conditional Zoning district be consistent with the property’s classification on the 2016 Comprehensive Plan’s Future Land Use Map. 3.What significant neighborhood changes have occurred to make the original zoning inappropriate, or how is the land involved unsuitable for the uses permitted under the existing zoning? The tract is identified in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan as a "Community Mixed-Use" place-type.The plan suggests higher densities. The proposed project is an acceptable transition use along thebusy Blue Clay Road corridor, with the railroad / industrial uses to the East and single-family neighbor-hoods to the South & West. The typical large-lot homes of the past were necessary due to the need for adequate land to support wells and septic systems. Now public utilities are available. A denser housing product makes in-fill possible with better affordability. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 4 Page 5 of 6 Conditional Zoning District Application – Updated 05-2021 Staff will use the following checklist to determine the completeness of your application. Please verify all of the listed items are included and confirm by initialing under “Applicant Initial”. If an item is not applicable, mark as “N/A”. Applications determined to be incomplete must be corrected in order to be processed for further review; Staff will confirm if an application is complete within five business days of submittal. Application Checklist Applicant Initial This application form, completed and signed Application fee: x $600 for 5 acres or less x $700 for more than 5 acres x $300 in addition to base fee for applications requiring TRC review Community meeting written summary Traffic impact analysis (if applicable) Legal description (by metes and bounds) or recorded survey Map Book and Page Reference of the property requested for rezoning Conceptual Plan including the following minimum elements: Tract boundaries and total area, location of adjoining parcels and roads x Proposed use of land, building areas and other improvements o For residential uses, include the maximum number, height, and type of units; area to be occupied by the structures; and/or proposed subdivision boundaries. o For non-residential uses, include the maximum square footage and height of each structure, an outline of the area structures will occupy, and the specific purposes for which the structures will be used. x Proposed transportation and parking improvements; including proposed rights-of-way and roadways; proposed access to and from the subject site; arrangement and access provisions for parking areas. x All existing and proposed easements, required setbacks, rights-of-way, and buffers. x The location of Special Flood Hazard Areas. x A narrative of the existing vegetation on the subject site including the approximate location, species, and size (DBH) of regulated trees. For site less than 5 acres, the exact location, species, and sized (DBH) of specimen trees must be included. x Approximate location and type of stormwater management facilities intended to serve the site. x Approximate location of regulated wetlands. x Any additional conditions and requirements that represent greater restrictions on development and use of the tract than the corresponding general use district regulations or additional limitations on land that may be regulated by state law or local ordinance One (1) hard copy of ALL documents and site plan. Additional hard copies may be required by staff depending on the size of the document/site plan. One (1) digital PDF copy of ALL documents AND plans CAW CAW CAW CAW CAW N/A CAW CAW Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 5 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 6 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 7 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 8 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 9 Legal Description for CZD Rezoning The Covenant Family Residential Community Beginning at a point located along the western boundary of Blue Clay Road, a 60’ public right‐of‐way; said point being the southeast corner of Section One, Ivy Wood at Runnymeade, a subdivision recorded among the land records of the New Hanover County Registry in Map Book 29, at Page 64; and running thence from the point of beginning with the Blue Clay Road right‐of‐way, South 12021’59” West, 332.88 feet to a point; thence leaving the right‐of‐way, North 64044’03” West, 1263.45 feet to a point; thence, North 34039’10” East, 380.50 feet to a point; thence, South 62008’51” East, 1128.23 feet to the point and place of beginning, containing 9.60 acres, more or less. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 10 REPORT OF COMMUNITY MEETING REQUIRED BY NEW HANOVER COUNTY ZONING ORIDINANCE FOR CONDITIONAL DISTRICT REZONINGS Project Name: 3100 Block of Blue Clay Road Proposed Zoning: R-20 & CZD R-10 to CZD R-5 The undersigned hereby certifies that written notice of a community meeting on the above zoning application was given to the adjacent property owners set forth on the attached list by first class mail, and provided to the Planning Department for notice of the Sunshine List on February 9, 2022 . A copy of that written notice and site layout are also attached. The meeting was held at the following time and place: Monday, February 21st, 6:00 p.m.; at the New Beginnings Christian Church, 3120 Alex Trask Dr., Castle Hayne. The persons in attendance at the meeting were: Reference attached sign-in list The following issues were discussed at the meeting: Attendees from Rachels Place asked about the status of connection to the stub street from Blue Bonnet Circle. It was explained that both that roadway & the proposed drive for the subject project are privately maintained. Connection would be beneficial to inter-connectivity, but cannot be mandatory. Adjacent property owners asked that screening plantings be installed along the common boundary. As a result of the meeting, the following changes were made to the petition: None Date: February 28, 2022 Applicant: Design Solutions By: Cindee Wolf Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 11 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 12 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 13 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 14 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 15 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500' PERIMETER OF 2940 BLUE CLAY ROAD SUBJECT PROPERTY OWNER: NEW BEGINNING CHRISTIAN CHURCH INC 3120 ALEX TRASK DR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2940 BLUE CLAY RD CASTLE HAYNE OWNER ADDRESS CITY / STATE / ZIP PROPERTY ADDRESS 113 GREENVILLE AVENUE LLC PO BOX 1787 PITTSBORO, NC 27312 3212 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE ALLERS ELIZABETH ANN 3205 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3205 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE BARON COLIN ETAL 2166 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2166 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE BENTON ROSS H 3200 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3200 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE BISSON PATRICK D JR 919 TANGLEWOOD LN N LIBERTY LAKE, WA 99019 3217 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE BOSTIC BUILDING CORP 6622 GORDON RD WILMINGTON, NC 28411 1313 ROOSTER CT CASTLE HAYNE BOYETTE MOSLEY III CHARLYNE 2136 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2136 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE BRADLEY MICHAEL ANTHONY 3209 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3209 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE BRAY RAYMOND E JR 3213 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3213 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE BRINSON PROPERTY HOLDINGS LLC 3108 KITTY HAWK RD WILMINGTON, NC 28405 3108 KITTY HAWK RD WILMINGTON BUCHNER MARK R DIANE M 1264 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 1264 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE BURNS RONALD BRAFFORD 134 WINDEMERE RD WILMINGTON, NC 28405 3209 WHITEWOOD WAY CASTLE HAYNE BYRD CELESTE W 2128 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2128 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE CAPE FEAR PUBLIC UTILITY AUTH 235 GOVERNMENT CENTER DR WILMINGTON, NC 28403 CAPPS STEPHEN R VIRGINIA L 1438 SCOTT RD ROCKY POINT, NC 28457 3205 WOOLWITCH CT S CASTLE HAYNE CAPPS STEPHEN VIRGINIA 1439 SCOTT RD ROCKY POINT, NC 28457 3209 WOOLWITCH CT S CASTLE HAYNE CARVER COLLIN F ET UX 2048 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2048 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE CLOYD SHELBY HEWETT 3208 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3208 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE CLYMER ANDREW W JENNIFER A 2154 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2154 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE CUOMO DAVID P 3220 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3220 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE CYRUS MORGAN E 2108 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2108 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE DAVIDSON THOMAS P PATRICIA L 2158 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2158 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE DICKENSON STEPHEN J CAROLINE 2150 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2150 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE DILLON JAMES A PATRICIA L 609 LATTICE CT CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 609 LATTICE CT CASTLE HAYNE DJOSEY EDWARD KRISTIINA TRUSTEES 138 WHITMAN AVE WILMINGTON, NC 28429 3202 WOOLWITCH CT S CASTLE HAYNE DOWNS FRANCES I ETAL 2162 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2162 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE ELDERS ADAM G 1309 ROOSTER CT CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 1309 ROOSTER CT CASTLE HAYNE FAISON JAMES H III ANGELA W 907 POTOMAC DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 3204 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE FANN RONALD V JUDY L 2115 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2115 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE FINN DAMIEN PAULA 2119 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2119 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE FUSCO DENISE 1268 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 1268 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE GALLAGHER SCOTT D JAYNE 2132 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2132 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE GLOVER ADAM S ETAL 3202 SKY CT CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3202 SKY CT CASTLE HAYNE GRACE INVESTMENTS OF WILM LLC 340 WILD RICE WAY WILMINGTON, NC 28412 3201 SKY CT CASTLE HAYNE GRIFFIN FREDRICK M MARTHA A 1245 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 1245 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE HARRIS CHRISTOPHER N 3205 SKY CT CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3205 SKY CT CASTLE HAYNE HARTLEY CONNOR 2123 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2123 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE HARTS CODY W SARA G 1241 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 1241 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE JINOL SALVADOR KEELY 2052 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2052 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE KEIFER STACY J 3210 WOOLWITCH CT S CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3210 WOOLWITCH CT S CASTLE HAYNE KELLY RYAN ETAL 2139 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2139 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE KLUTZ DONNA M 2301 SHIRLEY RD WILMINGTON, NC 28405 3201 WOOLWITCH CT S CASTLE HAYNE LEE REBECCA J ETAL 1276 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 1276 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE LEGWIN DAVID PAMELA 3206 WOOLWITCH CT S CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3206 WOOLWITCH CT S CASTLE HAYNE LEWIS JAMES KENNETH CATHY HILL 3200 WOOLWITCH CT S CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3200 WOOLWITCH CT S CASTLE HAYNE LONG CHRISTIAN J ETAL 2044 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2044 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE LORENZEN MARCI 2120 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2120 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE MACPHERSON BRITTLYNN R 1265 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 1265 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE MARTIN CHRIS ALLEN 3216 ALEX TRASK DR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3216 ALEX TRASK DR CASTLE HAYNE MASCO NICOLE C 2109 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2109 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE MCCAULEY PATRICK J 2135 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2135 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE MCLEOD BERNARD F III ELAINE P 6513 WAKEFALLS DR WAKE FOREST, NC 27587 1272 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE MILLER CATHY LYNN 3217 WOOLWITCH CT S CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3217 WOOLWITCH CT S CASTLE HAYNE MILLER MADELYN E 606 LATTICE CT CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 606 LATTICE CT CASTLE HAYNE NEW BEGINNING CHRISTIAN CHURCH 401 7TH ST S WILMINGTON, NC 28401 3120 ALEX TRASK DR CASTLE HAYNE NEW BEGINNING CHRISTIAN CHURCH INC 3120 ALEX TRASK DR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 ROBERT CAMPBELL LOOP RD CASTLE HAYNE NEWKIRK DORELL MCKENZIE 2043 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2043 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE NICHOLS FRANCIS T 607 LATTICE CT CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 607 LATTICE CT CASTLE HAYNE NOBLES SHERWOOD MILDRED 3200 ALEX TRASK DR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3200 ALEX TRASK DR CASTLE HAYNE NORTON TABITHA 3201 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3201 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE OKEEFE KATHLEEN 611 LATTICE CT CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 611 LATTICE CT CASTLE HAYNE PERRY SUSAN E 2146 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2146 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE PHILLIPS DEBRA 3210 SKY CT CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3210 SKY CT CASTLE HAYNE Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 16 POPLIN JOHN L VICKY A 3207 WHITEWOOD WAY S CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3207 WHITEWOOD WAY CASTLE HAYNE PRIVETTE JACOB A 520 WHITE POINT LN TAYLORSVILLE, NC 28681 3201 WHITEWOOD WAY CASTLE HAYNE RACHELS PLACE LLC 6622 GORDON RD WILMINGTON, NC 28411 CASTLE HAYNE RACHELS PLACE LLC 6622 GORDON RD WILMINGTON, NC 28411 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE RIFFLE GREGORY ETAL 3206 SKY CT CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3206 SKY CT CASTLE HAYNE ROBINSON RYNEE D 2165 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2165 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE RUDOLPH LARRY M KRISTI 3210 WHITEWOOD WAY CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3210 WHITEWOOD WAY CASTLE HAYNE RUSSELL CHRISTINA W 2131 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2131 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE SCOTT GARY L 3216 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3216 GALWAY RD CASTLE HAYNE SHREVES CHARLES L II BRENNA 2149 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2149 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE SIMMONS TROY M ETAL 2116 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2116 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE SKOLASKI MARK R JENNIFER J 3216 WHITE WOOD WAY CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3216 WHITEWOOD WAY CASTLE HAYNE SMITH RICHARD K 3200 SKY CT CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3200 SKY CT CASTLE HAYNE SMITH TERRY L JR 3209 SKY CT CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3209 SKY CT CASTLE HAYNE SOPER ERICA A 2142 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2142 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE STEVENS HILLARY P D ERIC M 1257 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 1257 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE STRICKLAND GAIL W 3218 WOOLWITCH CT S CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3218 WOOLWITCH CT S CASTLE HAYNE SUITS DANIEL CRAIG SUSAN C 3213 WOOLWITCH CT S CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3213 WOOLWITCH CT S CASTLE HAYNE TARR WILLIAM W PATRICIA R 1249 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 1249 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE TAYLOR JANELLE A ET VIR 3218 WHITE WOOD WAY CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3218 WHITEWOOD WAY CASTLE HAYNE TENNANT LINDA R 3206 WHITEWOOD WAY CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3206 WHITEWOOD WAY CASTLE HAYNE THOMPSON ASHLEY E 3214 WOOLWITCH CT S CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3214 WOOLWITCH CT S CASTLE HAYNE THOMPSON CONNIE K ETAL 3202 WHITEWOOD WAY CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3202 WHITEWOOD WAY CASTLE HAYNE THOMPSON ERNEST LOTOYA BATTLE 2161 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2161 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE THOMPSON JEROD LEE JESSICA L 3220 ALEX TRASK DR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3220 ALEX TRASK DR CASTLE HAYNE THOMPSON PATRICIA S 1237 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 1237 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE THORNE KELLY A MICHAEL B 1261 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 1261 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE TRASCO INC 6336 OLEANDER DR STE 1 WILMINGTON, NC 28403 3001 KITTY HAWK RD CASTLE HAYNE VASCONEZ ALEXIS N 2127 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2127 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE WATSON BRIAN K ETAL 2124 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2124 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE WILLIAMS ANTHONY 3200 WHITEWOOD WAY CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3200 WHITEWOOD WAY CASTLE HAYNE WILSON BRANDON M ERICA C 2176 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 2176 BLUE BONNET CIR CASTLE HAYNE WOODCOCK JOSEPH FPO BOX 10335 DES MOINES, IA 50306 3205 WHITEWOOD WAY CASTLE HAYNE WORRELL KATRYN H 608 LATTICE CT CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 608 LATTICE CT CASTLE HAYNE ZACHRICH ANDREW ETAL 1253 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 1253 BIG FIELD DR CASTLE HAYNE ZELL WILLIAM G JENNIFER L 3212 ALEX TRASK DR CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 3212 ALEX TRASK DR CASTLE HAYNE ZINN BARON V 610 LATTICE CT CASTLE HAYNE, NC 28429 610 LATTICE CT CASTLE HAYNE Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 17 P.O. Box 7221, Wilmington, NC 28406 * Telephone: 910-620-2374 * Email: cwolf@lobodemar.biz Notice of an Information Meeting February 9, 2022 To: Adjacent Property Owners From: Cindee Wolf Re: The Covenant ‐ Family Community A Performance Residential Townhome Development The New Beginnings Church is working towards the final stage of their community development project. The Senior Community phase, along Holland Drive, is ready to start construction soon. The lands along Blue Clay Road are now also planned for townhomes. This proposal would require a Conditional Zoning District approval from New Hanover County. A Conditional Zoning District allows particular uses to be established only in accordance with specific standards and conditions pertaining to each individual development project. Essentially, this means that only that use, structures and layout of an approved proposal can be developed. An exhibit of the project layout is enclosed. The buildings each have four (4) units of attached / single‐family homes. There is a mix of 1‐ and 2‐story roof heights. The County requires that the developer notify the property owners within a 500’ adjacency to the project and hold a meeting for any and all interested parties. This is intended to provide neighbors with an opportunity for explanation of the proposal, and for questions to be answered concerning project improvements, benefits, and impacts. A meeting will be held on Monday, February 21st, 6:00 p.m., at the New Beginning Christian Church, 3120 Alex Trask Dr., Castle Hayne. If you cannot attend, you are also welcome to contact me at telephone # 910‐620‐2374, or email cwolf@lobodemar.biz with comments and/or questions. Another alternative will be to join the meeting via this ZOOM link: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/85142954108 A report of the meeting, and any other contact, is included along with the rezoning application. Prior to this project being reviewed by the Planning Board & Commissioners, you will receive subsequent notices of the agendas directly from the County. Those meetings provide public hearings for comment on any issues pertinent to approval of the proposal. We appreciate your interest and look forward to being a good neighbor and an asset to the community. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 18 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 7 - 19 Concept Plan Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 8 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 9 - 1 Public Comments In Support X Neutral X In Opposition 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 10 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 4 - 11 - 1 NEW HANOVER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION MEETING DATE: 4/7/2022 Regular DEPARTMENT: Planning PRESENTER(S): Amy Doss, Current Planner CONTACT(S): Amy Doss, Rebekah Roth: Planning and Land Use Department SUBJECT: Public Hearing Rezoning Request (Z22-05) - Request by Cindee Wolf, applicant, on behalf of Har-Ste Investments, property owner, to rezone approximately 7.32 acres of land located at the 300 block of Edgewater Club Road from R-20, Residen@al District, to (CZD) R-7, Residen@al District. BRIEF SUMMARY: The applicant is proposing to rezone approximately 7.32 acres from R-20 to (CZD) R-7 in order to develop 44 single- family 2-story a-ached townhomes under the County’s performance residen0al standards at a density of 6 dwelling units per acre. The R-20 district in this area was established in 1971. At the 0me, the purpose of the R-20 district was to provide for low density residen0al use. When the R-20 district was first applied to this area in the 1970s, many homes in the rural unincorporated areas of the County u0lized private well and sep0c. Water and sewer are now available in the area, and the applicant is proposing connec0ons to the CFPUA for water and sewer. The R-7, Residen0al district was established to provide lands that accommodate moderate density residen0al development with a range of housing types that are located in walkable distances to jobs and services and, where appropriate, serve as a transi0on between more intensive and lower density areas. The subject site is currently vacant. If developed under R-20, the site would permit up to 14 dwelling units. If developed at the maximum permi-ed density allowed under the R-7 district, 44 single-family 2-story a-ached townhomes could be constructed. A typical development under current zoning would generate approximately 13 peak hour trips. The net change from the es0mated trips generated at peak hour under exis0ng zoning to the es0mated number of trips generated from the maximum density allowed in the R-7 district at peak hour is 12 more trips. The es0mated traffic generated from the site is under the 100 peak hour threshold that triggers the ordinance requirement for a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). Based on a historic genera0on rate, staff would es0mate that the increase in dwelling units would result in approximately 7 addi0onal students more than if developed under the current zoning. The site is surrounded by undeveloped R-20 to the north, R-20 to the east and west, and to the south is Porters Neck Elementary School and is appropriate for low-density residen0al development. Required setbacks and fenced buffers will provide mi0ga0on for the surrounding adjacent property owners. The Comprehensive Plan classifies the subject parcel as General Residen0al and indicates low-density residen0al (including the type of a-ached townhomes that are proposed) as appropriate for this place type. The proposed R-7 zoning is generally CONSISTENT with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because it will provide low-density residen0al Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 housing as a transi0on between the elementary school and the adjacent residen0al areas. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: The proposed (CZD) R-7 rezoning is a low-density residen0al development that would provide an orderly transi0on between the elementary school and the adjacent residen0al areas. The concept plan as submi-ed reflects compa0bility with the adjacent residen0al developments and standards are in place for buffers and traffic analysis at technical review before development can occur. As a result, Staff recommends approval of the proposal and suggests the following mo0on: I move to recommend APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it will allow for the types of residen0al uses encouraged in the General Residen0al place type. I also find APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposed district will provide a transi0on between low density residen0al uses to the east and west and current lower intensity development that may transi0on in the future to the north. Alterna@ve Mo@on for Denial I move to recommend DENIAL of the proposed rezoning. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it will allow for the types of residen0al uses encouraged in the General Residen0al place type, I find DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the land use will adversely impact the adjacent residen0al areas. ATTACHMENTS: Descrip0on Z22-05 Script Z22-05 Staff Report PB Z22-05 Zoning Map Z22-05 FLUM Mail Out Map Z22-05 Application Cover Sheet Z22-05 Application Package Z22-05 Concept Plan Cover Sheet Z22-05 Concept Plan Z22-05 Public Comments Cover Sheet Public Comment, Neutral Public Comments, In Opposition COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (only Manager) Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 PLANNING BOARD SCRIPT for Zoning Map Amendment Application (Z22-05) Request by Cindee Wolf, applicant, on behalf of Har-Ste Investments, property owner, to rezone approximately 7.32 acres of land located at the 300 block of Edgewater Club Road from R-20, Residential District, to (CZD) R-7, Residential District. 1. This is a public hearing. We will hear a presentation from staff. Then the applicant and any opponents will each be allowed 15 minutes for their presentation and an additional 5 minutes for rebuttal. 2. Conduct Hearing, as follows: a. Staff presentation b. Applicant’s presentation (up to 15 minutes) c. Opponent’s presentation (up to 15 minutes) d. Applicant’s rebuttal (up to 5 minutes) e. Opponent’s rebuttal (up to 5 minutes) f. Staff review of any additional conditions 3. Close the public hearing 4. Board discussion 5. Before we proceed with the vote, I would like to invite the applicant to the podium. Based on the Board discussion and items presented during the public hearing, would you like withdraw your petition, request a continuance, or proceed with a vote? 6. Vote on the application. The motion should include a statement saying how the change is, or is not, consistent with the land use plan and why approval or denial of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest. Example Motion for Approval I move to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning to (CZD) R-7 district. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it will allow for the types of residential uses that would be encouraged in the General Residential place type. I also find RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the site is located on an local street near existing residential use and would serve as a transition between the lower density residential properties to the east and west and institutional property to the south. Example Motion for Denial I move to RECOMMEND DENIAL of the proposed rezoning to (CZD) R-7 district. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it will allow for the types of residential uses that would be encouraged in the General Residential place type. I also find RECOMMENDING DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal is not consistent with the desired character of the surrounding community and the intensity will adversely impact the adjacent areas. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 1 - 1 Alternative Motion for Approval/Denial: I move to RECOMMEND [Approval/Denial] of the proposed rezoning to (CZD) R-7 districts. I find it to be [Consistent/Inconsistent] with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because [insert reasons] __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ I also find RECOMMENDING [Approval/Denial] of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because [insert reasons] __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 1 - 2 Z22-05 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 1 of 16 STAFF REPORT FOR Z22-05 CONDITIONAL REZONING APPLICATION APPLICATION SUMMARY Case Number: Z22-05 Request: Rezoning to a (CZD) R-7, Residential to develop 44 townhomes Applicant: Property Owner(s): Cindee Wolf, Design Solutions Har-Ste Investments, L.L.C. Location: Acreage: 300 block of Edgewater Club Road 7.32 acres PID(s): Comp Plan Place Type: R03700-004-441-000 General Residential Existing Land Use: Proposed Land Use: Undeveloped 44 Single Family Attached Townhomes Current Zoning: Proposed Zoning: R-20, Residential (CZD) R-7, Residential Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 2 - 1 Z22-05 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 2 of 16 SURROUNDING AREA LAND USE ZONING North Undeveloped R-20 East Single-Family Residential R-20 South Single-Family Residential, Institutional R-20 West Single-Family Residential R-20 ZONING HISTORY July 6, 1971 Initially zoned R-20 COMMUNITY SERVICES Water/Sewer Water and sewer services are available through CFPUA. Specific design will be determined during site plan review. Fire Protection New Hanover County Fire Services, New Hanover County Northern Fire District Schools Porters Neck Elementary, Holly Shelter Middle, and Laney High Schools Recreation Pages Creek, Ogden Park, Smith Creek Park CONSERVATION, HISTORIC, & ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Conservation No known conservation resources. Historic No known historic resources. Archaeological No known archaeological resources. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 2 - 2 Z22-05 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 3 of 16 APPLICANT’S PROPOSED CONCEPTUAL PLAN Includes Staff Markups • The applicant is proposing to rezone approximately 7.32 acres from R-20 to (CZD) R-7 in order to develop 44 single-family 2-story attached townhomes under the County’s performance residential standards at a density of 6 dwelling units per acre. • The applicant has indicated that the subject property will be subdivided into 44 lots, and the area outside of the lots will be dedicated common area in which a Homeowners Association will assume responsibility for maintenance of the open space, pool amenity, and other common areas within the development. • The units will be located in rows of 4 with a maximum of 3 stories including a first level garage, ranging in size from approximately 2,400-2,800 square feet. Some changes to building configuration are possible. • Owners will have garage space for 1-2 vehicles plus a parking pad to allow for 2 additional vehicles. Guest parking illustrated at this time is conceptual, the specific number of guest parking spaces will be determined during the TRC approval process. All proposed parking will be required to meet Ordinance requirements. • The applicant’s proposed conceptual plan includes a fenced buffer yard on all sides, which meets the ordinance requirements. • The conceptual plan complies with the County’s standards for a Major Site Plan, including zoning dimensional standards. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 2 - 3 Z22-05 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 4 of 16 ZONING CONSIDERATIONS • The R-20 district in this area was established in 1971. At the time, the purpose of the R-20 district was to provide for low density residential use. There was no water and sewer available and no stormwater standards were in place at the time. • When the R-20 district was first applied to this area in the 1970s, many homes in the rural unincorporated areas of the County utilized private well and septic. Water and sewer are now available in the area, and the applicant is proposing connections to the CFPUA for water and sewer. • As currently zoned, the site would permit up to 14 dwelling units at a density of 1.9 du/ac. • The R-7, Residential district was established to provide lands that accommodate moderate density residential development with a range of housing types that are located in walkable distances to jobs and services and, where appropriate, serve as a transition between more intensive and lower density areas. • The site and surrounding land are zoned R-20, much of which has been developed for residential purposes. The adjacent property to the north zoned R-20 is currently undeveloped and to the south is an elementary school. • Although no lots will face an adjacent owner’s backyard, street lighting will be required near adjacent neighbors. Maximum Illumination Levels are required to be 0.05 foot-candles at lot lines adjacent to single family detached or vacant R-20 parcels. The County’s UDO requires a 10’ fenced vegetated buffer around the development. • The applicant has provided elevations depicting the intended design of the single-family townhomes as part of the application package. The sample renderings provided by the applicant are intended to be representative but are not conditioned. • If approved, the project would be subject to Technical Review Committee and Zoning Compliance review processes to ensure full compliance with all ordinance requirements and specific conditions included in the approval. Only minor deviations from the approved conceptual plan, as defined by the UDO, would be allowed. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 2 - 4 Z22-05 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 5 of 16 AREA SUBDIVISIONS UNDER DEVELOPMENT Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 2 - 5 Z22-05 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 6 of 16 TRANSPORTATION • The applicant has proposed two full access driveways to the subject property, one from Edgewater Club Road and one from Waterstone Drive, both classified as local by NCDOT. • As currently zoned, it is estimated the site would generate about 13 trips during the peak hours if developed at the permitted density. The proposed R-7 development would increase the estimated number of peak hour trips by approximately 12 trips. • The estimated traffic generated from the site is under the 100 peak hour threshold that triggers the ordinance requirement for a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 2 - 6 Z22-05 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 7 of 16 • Because a TIA is not required to analyze transportation impacts at this time, Staff has provided the volume to capacity ratio for the adjacent roadway near the subject site. While volume to capacity ratio, based on average daily trips, can provide a general idea of the function of adjacent roadways, the delay vehicles take in seconds to pass through intersections is generally considered a more effective measure when determining the Level of Service of a roadway. However, the available volume to capacity data indicates capacity currently exists in this area. NCDOT Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) - 2019 Road Location Volume Capacity V/C Edgewater Club Road 300 block 6,100 10,979 0.55 • Because a TIA is not required to analyze transportation impacts at this time, Staff has provided the Level of Service (LOS) in vehicle delay per second at two notable intersections in the area, the roundabout at Porters Neck Road/Edgewater Club Road/Shiraz Way and the intersection of Market Street and Porters Neck, as reported in TIA19-04 Porters Neck – The Oaks at Murray Farms. • The roundabout at Porters Neck Road/Edgewater Club Road/Shiraz Way was anticipated to function at LOS A with a typical 9/10 delay in seconds when the Oaks at Murray Farm project was built. • The intersection of Market Street and Porters Neck was anticipated to function at LOD D with a typical 45/49 delay in seconds when the Oaks at Murray Farm project was built. Intensity Approx. Peak Hour Trips Existing Development: Undeveloped 0 AM / 0 PM Typical Development under Current Zoning: 14 Single-Family Dwellings 10 AM / 13 PM Proposed Development: 44 Single-family attached townhomes 21 AM / 25 PM Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 2 - 7 Z22-05 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 8 of 16 Nearby Planned Transportation Improvements and Traffic Impact Analyses Nearby Traffic Impact Analyses: Traffic Impact Analyses (TIAs) are completed in accordance with the WMPO and NCDOT standards. Approved analyses must be re-examined by NCDOT if the proposed development is not completed by the build out date established within the TIA. Proposed Development Land Use/Intensity* TIA Status 1. The Oaks at Murray Farm • 204 Apartments • 34 Duplex Units • 62 Single-Family Dwellings • Approved December 6, 2019 • Full Build 2023 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 2 - 8 Z22-05 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 9 of 16 The TIA required improvements be completed at certain intersections in the area. The notable improvements consisted of: • Installation of a second westbound right-turn lane on “Old” Market Street at Hwy 17 • Revising signal plan to modify phase at the Hwy 17 and “Old” Market Street intersection. Nearby Proposed Developments included within the TIA: • Waterstone Development Status: No construction has occurred at this time. *The TIA analyzed 406 dwelling units on the subject site. Shown are the 300 units approved by the Board of Commissioners. ENVIRONMENTAL • The property is not within a Natural Heritage Area or Special Flood Hazard Area. • The property is within the Pages Creek watershed. • Per the Classification of Soils in New Hanover County for Septic Tank Suitability, soils on the property consist of Class l (suitable/slight limitation), and Class III (severe limitation) soils; however, the site is expected to be served by CFPUA when developed. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS Schools • Students living in the proposed development would be assigned to Porter’s Neck Elementary School, Holly Shelter Middle School, and Laney High School. Students may apply to attend public magnet, year-round elementary, or specialty high schools. • A maximum of 14 dwelling units would be permitted under the current R-20 zoning base density, and 44 units could potentially be developed under the proposed zoning for an increase of 30 dwelling units. • Based on a generalized historic generation rate*, staff would estimate that the increase in homes would result in approximately 7 additional students than would be generated under current zoning. • The general student generation rate provides only an estimate of anticipated student yield as different forms of housing at different price points yield different numbers of students. Over the past four years, staff has also seen a decline in the number of students generated by new development. Student numbers remained relatively stable between 2015 and 2020 (excepting the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic), while 14,500 new residential units were permitted across the county. In addition, the student population is anticipated to only grow by approximately 1,300 students over the next 10 years based on the recent New Hanover County Schools Facility Needs Study. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 2 - 9 Z22-05 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 10 of 16 Development Type Intensity Estimated Student Yield (current general student generation rate) * Existing Development Undeveloped Approximate** Total: 0 (0 elementary, 0 middle, 0 high) Typical Development Under Current Zoning 14 residential units Approximate** Total: 3 (1 elementary, 1 middle, 1 high) Proposed Zoning 44 residential units Approximate** Total: 10 (4 elementary, 2 middle, 4 high) *The current general student generation rate was calculated by dividing the projected New Hanover County public school student enrollment for the 2021-2022 school year by the number of dwelling units in the county. Currently, there are an average of 0.22 public school students (0.09 for elementary, 0.05 for middle, and 0.08 for high) generated per dwelling unit across New Hanover County. These numbers are updated annually and include students attending out-of-district specialty schools, such as year-round elementary schools, Isaac Bear, and SeaTech. **Because the student generation rate often results in fractional numbers, all approximate student generation yields with a fraction of 0.5 or higher are rounded up to a whole number and yields with a fraction of less than 0.5 are rounded down. This may result in student numbers at the elementary, middle, and high school levels not equaling the approximate total. • Staff has provided information on existing school capacity to provide a general idea of the potential impact on public schools, but these numbers do not reflect any future capacity upgrades. School Enrollment* and Capacity** (2021-2022 School Year) Level Total NHC Capacity School Projected Enrollment of Assignment School Capacity of Assigned School w/Portables Capacity of Assigned School Funded or Planned Capacity Upgrades Elementary 95% Porters Neck 473 552 86% None Middle 108% Holly Shelter 965 934 103% None High 100% Laney 2125 2013 106% None *Enrollment is based on the New Hanover County Schools enrollment projections for the 2021-2022 school year. **Capacity calculations were determined based on the projected capacities for the 2021-2022 school year, and funded or planned capacity upgrades were those included in the Facility Needs Study presented by New Hanover County Schools to the Board of Education in January 2021. This information does not take into account flexible scheduling that may be available in high school settings, which can reduce the portion of the student body on campus at any one time. • The 2021 facility needs survey prepared by Schools staff indicates that, based on NC Department of Public Instruction (DPI) student growth projections and school capacity data, planned facility upgrades, combined with changes to student enrollment patterns, will result in adequate capacity district wide over the next ten years if facility upgrades are funded. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 2 - 10 Z22-05 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 11 of 16 New Hanover County Strategic Plan • One of the goals of the New Hanover County Strategic Plan for 2018-2023 is to encourage the development of complete communities in the unincorporated county by increasing housing diversity and access to basic goods and services. • The proposed R-7 zoning district would allow for an increase in housing diversity and allow for those new residents to utilize existing goods and services within one mile of the subject property. • The predominant housing type in the area is single family detached. Under the proposed R-7 district, single family detached would decrease (80% to 79%), and single family attached units would increase (6% to 7%). • The subject property is located in the Porters Neck community area, where 68% of residents currently live within one-mile of a support service (urgent care, primary doctor’s office, child & adult care, etc.), and 60% live within one-mile of a community facility (public park, school, museum etc.). • With the proposed number of units, the number of residences within one-mile of a support service would increase (68% to 69%) whereas the percentage of residences within one-mile of a community facility would remain at 60%. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 2 - 11 Z22-05 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 12 of 16 REPRESENTATIVE DEVELOPMENTS Representative Developments of R-20: Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 2 - 12 Z22-05 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 13 of 16 Representative Developments of R-7: Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 2 - 13 Z22-05 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 14 of 16 Context and Compatibility • The property is located off of Edgewater Club Rd, a NCDOT classified local road that connects to Porters Neck and Market Street. Two driveway entrances provide access to Edgewater Club Road and Waterstone Drive. • The site is one of few undeveloped tracts located adjacent to a single-family residential neighborhood, single family homes, and across the street from an elementary school. The development is designed like a traditional attached single-family neighborhood with parking pads and one- or two-car garages. • The proposed attached homes will be two stories above a garage and are restricted to the maximum 40-foot height as required by the County’s UDO. • A 10’ fenced buffer yard is required by the UDO and shown on the plan; however, the applicant has not provided information on the timing of the fence installation prior to construction. • Maximum Illumination Levels are required to be 0.05 foot-candles at lot lines adjacent to single family detached or vacant R-20 parcels. The project is designed to where no lots face into an adjacent property owner’s backyard; however, street lighting will be in close proximity to adjoining property owners’ backyards. The UDO does not prescribe limitations on the height, wattage, bulb-type, or fixture type. These design features may need additional consideration to ensure compatibility. • The development would have minimal impact on the school system. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 2 - 14 Z22-05 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 15 of 16 2016 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The New Hanover County Future Land Use Map provides a general representation of the vision for New Hanover County’s future land use, as designated by place types describing the character and function of the different types of development that make up the community. These place types are intended to identify general areas for particular development patterns and should not be interpreted as being parcel specific. Future Land Use Map Place Type General Residential Place Type Description Focuses on lower-density housing and associated civic and commercial 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. Types of uses include single-family residential, low-density multi-family, residential, light commercial, civic, and recreational. Analysis The subject property is located east of Edgewater Road and north of Waterstone Drive, between the Waterstone neighborhood to the west, single family residential to the east, and an elementary school to the south. The Comprehensive Plan classifies the subject parcel as General Residential and indicates low-density residential (including the type of attached townhomes that are proposed) as appropriate for this place type. This project is designed to serve as an appropriate transition between the school and adjacent R-20 Residential district. The overall project density of 6 dwelling units per acre for the proposed R-7 development is within the preferred density range for the General Residential place type (0-6 units per acre). The proposed townhome product clusters dwelling units together, providing open space for the community and increased land efficiency. Moderate density residential development in this location will provide residents with walkability to adjacent neighborhoods and serve as a transition between the school and less dense residential development. The height limits for the proposed townhome structures are in-line with the single- family homes in the existing development. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 2 - 15 Z22-05 Staff Report PB 4.7.2022 Page 16 of 16 The application of the proposed zoning district supports the intent of the General Residential place type and is appropriate for this parcel given the surrounding land use and housing density. Consistency Recommendation The proposed rezoning from R-20 to (CZD) R-7 is generally CONSISTENT with the Comprehensive Plan because the project’s density is in line with the density recommendations for General Residential areas and with the county’s goals of providing for efficient land use. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The proposed (CZD) R-7 rezoning is a low-density residential development that would provide an orderly transition between the elementary school and the adjacent residential areas. The concept plan as submitted reflects compatibility with the adjacent residential developments and standards are in place for buffers and traffic analysis at technical review before development can occur. As a result, Staff recommends approval of the proposal and suggests the following motion: I move to recommend APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it will allow for the types of residential uses encouraged in the General Residential place type. I also find APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposed district will provide a transition between low density residential uses to the east and west and current lower intensity development that may transition in the future to the north. Alternative Motion for Denial I move to recommend DENIAL of the proposed rezoning. While I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it will allow for the types of residential uses encouraged in the General Residential place type, I find DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the land use will adversely impact the adjacent residential areas. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 2 - 16 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 3 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 4 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 5 - 1 Initial Application Documents & Materials Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 6 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 2 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 3 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 4 Page 1 of 6 Conditional Zoning District Application – Updated 05-2021 NEW HANOVER COUNTY_____________________ DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & LAND USE 230 Government Center Drive, Suite 110 Wilmington, North Carolina 28403 Telephone (910) 798-7165 FAX (910) 798-7053 planningdevelopment.nhcgov.com CONDITIONAL ZONING APPLICATION This application form must be completed as part of a conditional zoning application submitted through the county’s online COAST portal. The main procedural steps in the submittal and review of applications are outlined in the flowchart below. More specific submittal and review requirements, as well as the standards to be applied in reviewing the application, are set out in Section 10.3.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance. Public Hearing Procedures (Optional) Pre-Application Conference 1 Community Information Meeting 2 Application Submittal & Acceptance 3 Planning Director Review & Staff Report (TRC Optional) 4 Public Hearing Scheduling & Notification 5 Planning Board Hearing & Recom- mendation 6 Board of Commissioners Hearing & Decision 7 Post-Decision Limitations and Actions 1. Applicant and Property Owner Information Applicant/Agent Name Owner Name (if different from Applicant/Agent) Company Company/Owner Name 2 Address Address City, State, Zip City, State, Zip Phone Phone Email Email Cindee Wolf Design Solutions Wilmington, NC 28406 Wilmington, NC 28405 910-620-2374 cwolf@lobodemar.biz P.O. Box 7221 Har-Ste Investments, L.L.C. 2922 Orville Wright Way, Suite 110 910-794-8699 (Contact: Dean Hardison) dean@hardisonbuilding.com Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 5 Page 2 of 6 Conditional Zoning District Application – Updated 05-2021 2. Subject Property Information Address/Location Parcel Identification Number(s) Total Parcel(s) Acreage Existing Zoning and Use(s) Future Land Use Classification 3. Proposed Zoning, Use(s), & Narrative Proposed Conditional Zoning District: Total Acreage of Proposed District: Please list the uses that will be allowed within the proposed Conditional Zoning District, the purpose of the district, and a project narrative (attach additional pages if necessary). Note: Only uses permitted in the corresponding General Use District are eligible for consideration within a Conditional Zoning District. 4. Proposed Condition(s) Note: Within a Conditional Zoning District, additional conditions and requirements which represent greater restrictions on the development and use of the property than the corresponding general use district regulations may be added. These conditions may assist in mitigating the impacts the proposed development may have on the surrounding community. Please list any conditions proposed to be placed on the Conditional Zoning District below. Staff, the Planning Board, and Board of Commissioners may propose additional conditions during the review process. 300 Block of Edgewater Club Road 316908.98.7284 / R03700-004-441-000 7.32 Ac.+/- R-20 7.32 Ac.+/- General Residential (CZD) R-7 Reference attached site plan and exhibits for the proposed site layout & architectural style. The proposal is to develop forty-four (44) single-familly, attached, 2- story, townhomes with a pool amenity, along with associated roads, driveway parking pads, and stormwater management. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 6 Page 3 of 6 Conditional Zoning District Application – Updated 05-2021 5. Traffic Impact Please provide the estimated number of trips generated for the proposed use(s) based off the most recent version of the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) must be completed for all proposed developments that generate more than 100 peak hour trips, and the TIA must be included with this application. ITE Land Use: Trip Generation Use and Variable (gross floor area, dwelling units, etc.) AM Peak Hour Trips: PM Peak Hour Trips: 6. Conditional Zoning District Considerations The Conditional Zoning District procedure is established to address situations where a particular land use would be consistent with the New Hanover County 2016 Comprehensive Plan and the objectives outlined in the Unified Development Ordinance and where only a specific use or uses is proposed. The procedure is intended primarily for use with transitions between zoning districts of dissimilar character where a particular use or uses, with restrictive conditions to safeguard adjacent land uses, can create a more orderly transition benefiting all affected parties and the community at-large. The applicant must explain, with reference to attached plans (where applicable), how the proposed Conditional Zoning district meets the following criteria. 1.How would the requested change be consistent with the County’s policies for growth and development, as described in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan, applicable small area plans, etc. Residential Condo / Townhouse (230) 44 dwelling units 19 23 Policies for growth and development encourage safe and affordable housing to be availableto every citizen. Townhome communities such as this one are in demand due to lifestylepreferences, affordability factors and proximity to services. Rezoning to allow this housingproduct and density on the subjest tract would be consistent with the concept of sensiblein-fill where public services are already existing. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 7 Page 4 of 6 Conditional Zoning District Application – Updated 05-2021 2.How would the requested Conditional Zoning district be consistent with the property’s classification on the 2016 Comprehensive Plan’s Future Land Use Map. 3.What significant neighborhood changes have occurred to make the original zoning inappropriate, or how is the land involved unsuitable for the uses permitted under the existing zoning? The entire Porters Neck community has undergone extensive changes over the past several years, witha variety of housing developments, a new elementary school, and extensive commercial services at theMarket Street intersection. Although the R-20 zoning district may still be appropriate for the areas withinspecial flood hazard areas, the reduced allowable density is counterproductive to fostering a prosporousand thriving economy. The proposed change form R-20 to R-7 - but as a Conditonal District, maintainsthe residential character of the area, but simply with an alternative housing style. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the Porters Neck area as a "General Residential" place-type. It isintended for opportunities to provide additional housing to the community in the form of single-familyor lower-density, attached home styles. The "ideal" development intensity is shown as beingfrom 1-6 units per acre. The proposed plan does maximize the performance density in an R-7 district, but by clustering theunits in buildings of four (4) homes, it allows for a large common area centralized within the community. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 8 Page 5 of 6 Conditional Zoning District Application – Updated 05-2021 Staff will use the following checklist to determine the completeness of your application. Please verify all of the listed items are included and confirm by initialing under “Applicant Initial”. If an item is not applicable, mark as “N/A”. Applications determined to be incomplete must be corrected in order to be processed for further review; Staff will confirm if an application is complete within five business days of submittal. Application Checklist Applicant Initial  This application form, completed and signed  Application fee: • $600 for 5 acres or less • $700 for more than 5 acres • $300 in addition to base fee for applications requiring TRC review  Community meeting written summary  Traffic impact analysis (if applicable)  Legal description (by metes and bounds) or recorded survey Map Book and Page Reference of the property requested for rezoning  Conceptual Plan including the following minimum elements: Tract boundaries and total area, location of adjoining parcels and roads • Proposed use of land, building areas and other improvements o For residential uses, include the maximum number, height, and type of units; area to be occupied by the structures; and/or proposed subdivision boundaries. o For non-residential uses, include the maximum square footage and height of each structure, an outline of the area structures will occupy, and the specific purposes for which the structures will be used. • Proposed transportation and parking improvements; including proposed rights-of-way and roadways; proposed access to and from the subject site; arrangement and access provisions for parking areas. • All existing and proposed easements, required setbacks, rights-of-way, and buffers. • The location of Special Flood Hazard Areas. • A narrative of the existing vegetation on the subject site including the approximate location, species, and size (DBH) of regulated trees. For site less than 5 acres, the exact location, species, and sized (DBH) of specimen trees must be included. • Approximate location and type of stormwater management facilities intended to serve the site. • Approximate location of regulated wetlands. • Any additional conditions and requirements that represent greater restrictions on development and use of the tract than the corresponding general use district regulations or additional limitations on land that may be regulated by state law or local ordinance  One (1) hard copy of ALL documents and site plan. Additional hard copies may be required by staff depending on the size of the document/site plan.  One (1) digital PDF copy of ALL documents AND plans CAW CAW CAW CAW N/A CAW CAW CAW Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 9 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 10 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 11 Legal Description for Conditional Zoning at 300 Edgewater Club Road Beginning at a point in the southwestern boundary of Edgewater Club Road, a 60’ public right‐ of‐way; said point being located North 19036’25” West, 383.08 feet from its intersection with the northern boundary of the southern loop of Waterstone Drive, a 50’ public right‐of‐way; and running thence: South 70023’35” West, 205.00 feet to a point; thence South 19036’25” East, 318.55 feet to a point; thence South 46033’07” West, 318.89 feet to a point; thence South 67030’18” West, 265.07 feet to a point; thence North 67059’35” West, 269.41 feet to a point; thence North 07006’24” West, 251.49 feet to a point; thence North 62037’21” East, 713.25 feet to a point; thence North 70023’35” East, 202.10 feet to a point in the Edgewater Club Road right‐of‐way; thence with that right‐of‐way, South 19036’25” East, 60.00 feet to the point and place of beginning, containing 7.32 acres, more or less. The described boundary is shown on a plat recorded among the land records of the New Hanover County Registry, in Map Book 69, at Page 95. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 12 REPORT OF COMMUNITY MEETING REQUIRED BY NEW HANOVER COUNTY ZONING ORIDINANCE FOR CONDITIONAL DISTRICT REZONINGS Project Name: 300 Edgewater Club Road Proposed Zoning: R-20 to (CZD) R-5 The undersigned hereby certifies that written notice of a community meeting on the above zoning application was given to the adjacent property owners set forth on the attached list by first class mail, and provided to the Planning Department for notice of the Sunshine List on December 27, 2021 . A copy of that written notice and site layout exhibit that was included in the mailing are also attached. Subsequently, several interested parties requested remote access to the meeting. A ZOOM event was created & the link emailed to anyone that asked. The meeting was held at the following time and place: Wednesday, January 19th, 6:00 p.m.; at the Waterstone Clubhouse, 843 Waterstone Drive. The persons in attendance at the meeting were: Reference attached sign-in list The following issues were discussed at the meeting: A brief introduction of the project was given, along with explanation of conditional zoning districts. The proposed units are intended to be up-scale townhomes, primarily marketed toward 55+, but not actually age-restricted. The footprints allow the master being on the ground floor, along with a 2-car garage. They will be two-story with another two rooms, and possibly heated space over the garage on the second floor. The design will include an optional elevator. Primary issues discussed included the obvious - traffic & stormwater. The difference in traffic between single-family homes, as zoned, and the additional units - as townhomes, translate by traffic trip generation standards at roughly only 8 more trips in the A.M. peak & 9 more trips in the P.M. peak … what is fairly negligible to the current Edgewater & Porters Neck traffic volume, albeit cumulative when considering future development. Additionally, existing Waterstone residents were concerned that the current clubhouse & pool amenity was not large enough as it was, and didn’t want to add another group with rights to use the same facilities. As a result of the meeting, the following changes were made to the petition: The proposal has been revised to request an R-7 district with 44 units, for a maximum density of six (6) units per acre, and an amenity dedicated solely for the subject community . Date: January 3, 2022 Applicant: Design Solutions By: Cindee Wolf Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 13 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 14 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 15 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 16 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 17 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 18 1 cwolf@lobodemar.biz From:Jim Spicuzza <jimspicuzza@yahoo.com> Sent:Wednesday, January 19, 2022 11:53 AM To:Cindee Wolf Cc:dhayes@nhcgov.com; rzapple@nhcgov.com; joboseman@nhcgov.com; Jonathan Barfield; brivenbark@nhcgov.com Subject:Waterstone proposed townhome rezoning - Community meeting Hi Cindee, I hope this finds you doing well. I own the house at 102 Edgewater Club Road which directly adjoins the Waterstone community closest to the round-a-bout at Porters Neck Road and Edgewater Club Drive. I have no issue with the developers building out the community by right. I do, however, take issue with rezoning the property for higher density in order to accommodate proposed townhomes. There are flooding issues on Edgewater Club Road and run-off issues relating to Futch and Pages Creek that we are all aware of. Having lived at the headwaters of Futch Creek for more than a decade and having lived through the closing of the creek in order to contain the vast runoff of fecal microbial pollution, more than 20 years ago, nothing positive can happen by purposefully increasing density and water runoff for these already strained ground surfaces. The current R-20 zoning allows for larger yards, better drainage, and less hardscape for parking than the now proposed 50 or more townhomes would require. This proposed higher density would also result in far more vehicle traffic at the roundabout and a diminished sense of community for Waterstone's single family homeowners, some of whom paid over a million dollars to live in what the Waterstone developers had told them would be a single family home community. Not once have the developers asked to meet to discuss their development plans and how it would impact my property. In fact, we woke one morning to find tractors encroaching onto the property and removing trees well onto our land. Later, a fence was erected around our property to enclose it from the rest of the community. While we appreciate the buffering fence (especially if proposed townhomes may possibly be approved) we had no issue with the way it was before this development came along. The developer's history of desiring higher density rezoning for this parcel has remained evident for many years. First (in 2016) it was apartment complexes and now the camel is trying to get its head under the tent again...only for the opportunity for presumably even more townhomes. I am aware that numerous families that purchased single family homes at Waterstone (for as much as $1M+) specifically asked the onsite sales representative if rezoning for higher density was ever a possibility again...and they were told "NO". I expect these folks will present themselves at any preliminary or rezoning meeting to express their (real) grievances of being harmed by the developer's own sales representations, required disclosures and being financially damaged (by diminished value), should this project ever be approved. At a time when the market supports million-dollar homes in an old Porters Neck farm field, I am shocked that the developers thought the process of adding high density townhomes to an expensive single-family development would be an acceptable approach. No consideration was given to previous Waterstone home buyers and the rest of the Porters Neck Country Club, Edgewater Club Drive and Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 19 2 Figure 8 Island communities. By the way, where is the traffic study that supports these proposed townhome units? It's already a nightmare for anyone trying to get out of our driveway. In summation, I will always support a developer's right to build out a community by right. In this case, by right means R-20 single family homes. I will not support higher density apartments or townhomes for all the reasons I have listed above. Kind Regards, Jim Spicuzza 910.443.4283 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 20 1 cwolf@lobodemar.biz From:cwolf@lobodemar.biz Sent:Thursday, January 20, 2022 8:55 AM To:'Vince Wright' Subject:RE: Community Meeting Attachments:Waterstone Color Exhibit.pdf Mr. Wright, There was quite a crowd. Primary issues discussed included the obvious ‐ traffic & stormwater. The difference in traffic between single‐family homes – as zoned, & the additional units ‐ as townhomes, translate by traffic trip generation standards at roughly only 8 more trips in the A.M. peak & 9 more trips in the P.M. peak … what is fairly negligible to the current Edgewater & Porters Neck traffic volume, albeit cumulative when considering future development. The proposed units are intended to be up‐scale townhomes, primarily marketed toward 55+, but not actually age‐ restricted. The footprints allow the master being on the ground floor, along with a 2‐car garage. They will be two‐story with another two rooms, and possibly heated space over the garage on the second floor. The design will include an optional elevator. Also, the developers initially intended for this development to be a sub‐community of Waterstone – ie. party to the amenity. However, I believe if they move forward, the development will probably stand on its own & have a separate amenity within the community. The opposition was extensive. The developers will be meeting and decide how they want to proceed – or not. If the project gets submitted – with the next deadline being February 1st – the Planning Board would hold a public hearing on March 3rd & final hearing for approval or denial would be at the April 4th Board of Commissioners. The County advertises and sends out additional notices of those hearings. The process bumps month to month dependent on the submittal timing. Please do not hesitate to reach out again if you have questions. Thank you. Cindee Wolf Tel. 910‐620‐2374 From: Vince Wright <vincewright.cpi@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2022 7:40 PM To: CWolf <cwolf@lobodemar.biz> Subject: Re: Community Meeting Thank you for trying. VW Get Outlook for iOS From: CWolf <cwolf@lobodemar.biz> Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2022 6:42:18 PM To: Vince Wright <vincewright.cpi@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Community Meeting I’m sorry but after it started I was not able to access the invite option Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 21 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 22 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500' PERIMETER ANGE DAVID S 836 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 836 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON BENTON KAREN H MICHAEL T 827 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 827 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON BRADLEY LUZZETTA G 217 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON, NC 28405 217 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON BRICE JOHN R IV 1005 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 1005 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON CASLER CORRINE TRUSTEE 1017 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 1017 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON DALE ELEANOR B JEFFREY L 1013 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 1013 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON FOLLAND PATRICK J ERICA L 309 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON, NC 28411 305 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON FOLLAND PATRICK J ERICA L 309 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON, NC 28411 309 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON HARDISON BUILDING INC PO BOX 809 WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 760 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON HARDISON BUILDING INC PO BOX 809 WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 8217 MOSS BRIDGE CT WILMINGTON HARDISON BUILDING INC PO BOX 809 WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 8205 MOSS BRIDGE CT WILMINGTON HARDISON BUILDING INC PO BOX 809 WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 8221 MOSS BRIDGE CT WILMINGTON HARDISON BUILDING INC PO BOX 809 WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 8209 MOSS BRIDGE CT WILMINGTON HARRIS MIKE A III NIKI 8220 MOSS BRIDGE CT WILMINGTON, NC 28411 8220 MOSS BRIDGE CT WILMINGTON HAR‐STE INVESTMENTS LLC 7123 GRAY GABLES LN WILMINGTON, NC 28403 HAWKINS JEFFERY L MARY H 1021 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 1021 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON JOHNSON IVEY LEWIS SR 221 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON, NC 28405 221 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON KORTEMEYER JAY L ARLENE E MANY 316 GRAYHAWK CIR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 316 GRAYHAWK CIR WILMINGTON LEONG BRYAN M SARAH 1025 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 1025 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON LICURSI ROBERT KAREN TRUSTEES 304 GRAYHAWK CIR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 304 GRAYHAWK CIR WILMINGTON LLOYD ROBERT P ETAL 8201 SAGE VALLEY DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 8201 SAGE VALLEY DR WILMINGTON LYONS MARY JANE MARK D 8212 MOSS BRIDGE CT WILMINGTON, NC 28411 8212 MOSS BRIDGE CT WILMINGTON MARACON LLC PO BOX 1528 WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 823 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON MAUS WILLIAM C III SHANNON C 308 GRAYHAWK CIR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 308 GRAYHAWK CIR WILMINGTON MCCLAMMY FARMS LLC PO BOX 1047 WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 840 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON MCCLAMMY FARMS LLC 265 RACINE DR STE 104 WILMINGTON, NC 28403 WILMINGTON MCCLAMMY FARMS LLC 265 RACINE DR STE 104 WILMINGTON, NC 28403 843 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON MCCLAMMY FARMS LLC 265 RACINE DR STE 104 WILMINGTON, NC 28403 1039 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON MCCLAMMY FARMS LLC 265 RACINE DR STE 104 WILMINGTON, NC 28403 859 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON MCCLAMMY FARMS LLC PO BOX 1047 WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 808 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON MCCLAMMY FARMS LLC PO BOX 1047 WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 8136 GRAND HARBOUR CT WILMINGTON MCCLAMMY FARMS LLC PO BOX 1047 WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 804 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON MCCLAMMY FARMS LLC 265 RACINE DR STE 104 WILMINGTON, NC 28403 756 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON MCCLAMMY FARMS LLC PO BOX 1047 WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 8133 GRAND HARBOUR CT WILMINGTON MCCLAMMY FARMS LLC PO BOX 1047 WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 745 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON MCCLAMMY FARMS LLC 265 RACINE DR STE 104 WILMINGTON, NC 28403 202 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON MCCLAMMY FREDDIE JR 226 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON, NC 28405 226 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON MCCLAMMY FREDDIE JR MARY PUGH 226 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON, NC 28411 MICHAEL CHRISTIAN HOMES LLC 2922 ORVILLE WRIGHT WAY #110 WILMINGTON, NC 28405 1004 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON MICHAEL CHRISTIAN HOMES LLC 2922 ORVILLE WRIGHT WAY #110 WILMINGTON, NC 28405 749 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON MILLER WILLIAM B ANNE G 312 GRAYHAWK CIR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 312 GRAYHAWK CIR WILMINGTON NEAL EDWIN M ANDREA R 8208 MOSS BRIDGE CT WILMINGTON, NC 28411 8208 MOSS BRIDGE CT WILMINGTON NHCO BD OF EDUCATION 6410 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON, NC 28412 416 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON ONEIL GORDON L LIVING TRUST 8795 LOW POND DR WARRENTON, VA 20187 321 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON RAYNOR MARIE V 4918 SHELLEY DR WILMINGTON, NC 28405 310 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON RUFFIN MICHAEL D JOYCE M 405 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON, NC 28405 405 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON SCHLIPP MICHAEL B KATHERIN M 833 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 833 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON SCHROEDER / RIDER TRUSTEES 320 GRAYHAWK CIR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 320 GRAYHAWK CIR WILMINGTON SIDDLE TAKAYO L 1012 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 1012 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON SMITH JOSHUA L KATHERINE A 8216 MOSS BRIDGE CT WILMINGTON, NC 28411 8216 MOSS BRIDGE CT WILMINGTON STITH ALICE W 1009 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 1009 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON SUMMERS MATTHEW SARAH M 815 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 815 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON SWAN SONG PROPERTIES LLC 221 SIMMONS DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 314 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON SWAN SONG PROPERTIES LLC 221 SIMMONS DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 314 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON TISDALE TRESCOTT W II TRACY H 1016 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 1016 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON TISDALE TRESCOTT W II TRACY H 1016 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 1016 CRANFORD DR WILMINGTON VAUGHN JACQUELINE T ERIC M 832 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 832 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON WILLIAMS ELIJAH R 8204 MOSS BRIDGE CT WILMINGTON, NC 28411 8204 MOSS BRIDGE CT WILMINGTON WILLIAMS JOHN PAUL PHYLLIS E 317 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON, NC 28405 317 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON WILLIAMS VIRGINIA D 301 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON, NC 28405 301 EDGEWATER CLUB RD WILMINGTON YOUNG KERESA A DELTON E 753 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON, NC 28411 753 WATERSTONE DR WILMINGTON Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 23 P.O. Box 7221, Wilmington, NC 28406 * Telephone: 910-620-2374 * Email: cwolf@lobodemar.biz Notice of a Community Information Meeting December 27, 2021 To: Adjacent Property Owners From: Cindee Wolf Re: Waterstone Townhome Development The Waterstone developers are interested in developing a new residential community on lands within the proximity of your property. This proposal would require a Conditional Zoning District approval from New Hanover County. A Conditional Zoning District allows particular uses to be established only in accordance with specific standards and conditions pertaining to each individual development project. Essentially, this means that only that use, structures and layout of an approved proposal can be developed. A plan of the project layout is enclosed. The County requires that the developer hold a meeting for all property owners within 500 feet of the tract boundary, and any and all other interested parties. This provides neighbors with an opportunity for explanation of the proposal and for questions to be answered concerning project improvements, benefits and impacts. A meeting will be held on Wednesday, January 19th, at the Waterstone Clubhouse, 843 Waterstone Drive, 6:00 p.m. If you cannot attend, you are also welcome to contact me at telephone # 910‐620‐2374, or email cwolf@lobodemar.biz with comments and/or questions. We appreciate your interest in the project and look forward to being a good neighbor and an asset to the community. Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 24 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 25 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 7 - 26 Concept Plan Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 8 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 9 - 1 Public Comments In Support X Neutral 1 In Opposition 6 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 10 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 11 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 12 - 1 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 12 - 2 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 12 - 3 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 12 - 4 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 12 - 5 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 12 - 6 Planning Board - April 7, 2022 ITEM: 5 - 12 - 7