Loading...
2022-05-02 Regular Meeting NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 2, 2022 PAGE 419 ASSEMBLY The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met in Regular Session on May 2, 2022, at 4:00 p.m. in the Assembly Room of the New Hanover County Courthouse, 24 North Third Street, Wilmington, North Carolina. Members present: Chair Julia Olson-Boseman; Vice-Chair Deb Hays; Commissioner Jonathan Barfield, Jr.; Commissioner Bill Rivenbark; and Commissioner Rob Zapple. Staff present: County Manager Chris Coudriet; County Attorney Wanda M. Copley; and Clerk to the Board Kymberleigh G. Crowell. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Reverend Wes Hunter of Masonboro Baptist Church provided the invocation and Vice-Chair Deb Hays led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA Chair Olson-Boseman requested a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Hays to approve the items on the Consent Agenda as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Minutes – Governing Body The Commissioners approved the minutes of the Budget Work Session and Agenda Review Meetings held on April 14, 2022 and Regular Meeting held April 18, 2022. Acknowledgement of New Hanover County Amended Restated Declaration of State of Emergency and Termination of the New Hanover County Amended Restated Declaration of State of Emergency Proclamations – County Manager The Commissioners acknowledged the New Hanover County Amended Restated Declaration of State of Emergency Proclamation dated April 27, 2020 and the Termination of the New Hanover County Amended Restated Declaration of State of Emergency Proclamation dated May 2, 2022. Copies of the proclamations are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLIII, Page 26.1. First Reading: Approval of Solid Waste Franchise for Coastal Lugging of NC LLC – County Attorney The Commissioners approved the first reading to authorize the issuance of a solid waste franchise agreement to Coastal Lugging of NC LLC. A second reading is required. Adoption of a Resolution Appointing Map Review Officers – Planning The Commissioners adopted the resolution appointing Map Review Officers for New Hanover County. A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLIII, Page 26.2. Approval of March 2022 Tax Collection Reports - Tax The Commissioners accepted the tax collection reports of New Hanover County, New Hanover County Fire District, and New Hanover County Debt Service as of March 2022. Copies of the tax collection reports are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLIII, Page 26.3. REGULAR ITEMS OF BUSINESS STATE OF THE COUNTY ADDRESS Chair Julia Olson-Boseman presented the annual State of the County Address. A copy of the State of the County Address is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLIII, Page 26.4. BREAK: Chair Olson-Boseman called for a break from 4:33 p.m. to 4:50 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF QUARTER CENT SALES TAX AND CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A SPECIAL ADVISORY REFERENDUM CONCERNING THE LEVY OF A ONE-QUARTER PERCENT (1/4%) COUNTY SALES AND USE TAX FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PURPOSES. Chair Olson-Boseman stated pursuant to NC General Statute 105-511.2(a), the Board of Commissioners shall hold a public hearing on the ballot question of a quarter cent sales tax for public transportation at least 30 days before the November 8, 2022, general election. This public hearing on the ballot question meets these requirements. Permissible uses of funding for this quarter cent sales tax include Wave operational and expansion support, bike and pedestrian trail construction, rail realignment and bus-rapid transportation planning, among others. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 2, 2022 PAGE 420 Chair Olson-Boseman asked for a motion to open the public hearing. Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Hays, to open the public hearing. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Chair Olson-Boseman asked Chief Financial Officer Lisa Wurtzbacher to make the staff presentation. Ms. Wurtzbacher presented the quarter cent transportation sales tax information as follows:  Process for sales tax referendum:  Ballot language stipulated in NCGS 105-511.2(b): \[ \] For \[ \] Against One-quarter percent (1/4%) local sales and use taxes, in addition to the current local sales and use taxes, to be used only for public transportation systems Chair Olson-Boseman stated that five people signed up to speak in favor and three people signed up to speak in opposition to the request. She invited the speakers to provide their remarks. In favor:  Theresa Densmore, resident of Chapra Drive, cited the need to provide more public transportation access and crosswalks in the County for the 28,500 visually impaired residents. She feels that the disabled community is not being heard and needs are not fully being met. She appreciates what the County has done with WAVE and the senior center, but more can be done, and she is happy to help in anyway.  Christine Conry, resident of Bardmoor Circle, stated she would like to see public transportation more fully expanded in the County to help reduce the number of private vehicles on the roadways.  Fred Gainey, resident of Trap Way, stated he fully believes the community needs not only WAVE transportation, but more sidewalks, bike paths, and the rail realignment. He hopes the business community and other organizations will support it.  Brianna D’Itri, resident of Barclay Pointe, stated that she is the mobility manager for WAVE Transit. The funds that would be generated from the sales tax, if passed, would help provide a designated funding source for expanded public transportation. It would also help provide a reliable public system, provide ability to have bike and pedestrian pathways, greenways, and empower people to engage in the economy and community without having to have private transportation to do so.  Laura Padgett, resident of Leader Circle, spoke on the importance to allow the voters to decide. Citizens will be investing in improvements to three transportation facilities to leverage a grander quality of life and future economic development with access and mobility. While residents will gain the benefits from the tax increase, visitors’ dollars will help as they do use the transportation and surface infrastructure. In opposition:  Skip Watkins, resident of Park Avenue, urged the Board not to place the matter on the November ballot citing concerns over the inefficiencies with WAVE Transit, the need for a bridge instead of more trollies, the tax does would be in perpetuity, and as he understands it, future boards can reallocate the funds to other purposes.  Neal Shulman, resident of Nash Drive, cited concerns about the lack of riders on WAVE Transit buses and the inefficiencies with WAVE Transit.  Wilmington Chamber of Commerce (Chamber) President and CEO Natalie English stated that the vision of the Chamber is to promote prosperity by cultivating business growth and building in infrastructure is one of the important ways to live here. The overriding concern of the Chamber and its members is timing. The effort of the City and County staff have made to help members understand the vision is much appreciated, but the presentations to the Chamber’s executive committee showed how little detail is available for how the expenditures would be made from a quarter cent sales tax. With rising interest rates, high gas prices and inflation, the Chamber’s executive committee feel the timing is not right for the sales tax referendum. The Chamber’s executive committee proposes that the Chamber work with the County and City to develop and implement public input sessions, detailed plans, and a longer education plan leading to the potential of a more successful outcome in 2024. Hearing no further comments, Chair Olson-Boseman asked for a motion to close the public hearing. Motion: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Hays, to close the public hearing. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Chair Olson-Boseman opened the floor to Board discussion. Commissioner Zapple stated the County needs a strong Wave Transit, sustainable funding for trails, bike paths, and an investment into the rail realignment. The quarter cent sales tax could help and there needs to be a NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 2, 2022 PAGE 421 strong promotional program from the City and the County. He understands the Chamber’s concern of the abbreviated period to run such a campaign leading up to the November election and preference to target the 2024 primary. As the County and Board are limited by state law on their level of involvement, the community business partners are needed to help. He further stated he would make a motion to postpone the resolution to place the sales tax referendum on the November ballot to a date beyond the end of the calendar year. Motion: Commissioner Zapple MOVED postpone the resolution to place the sales tax referendum on the November ballot to a date beyond the end of the calendar year. Commissioner Barfield stated that in the past the County did not look to the Chamber for these initiatives, it looked to itself. He provided a brief history of when he and former Commissioner Jason Thompson led the County's effort to pass the quarter-cent sales tax in 2010 and noted that there was no outside help as the work was done in- house. The County also hired a pollster who reported back that the quarter cent sales tax would not pass and the county manager at the time believed the pollsters. However, he believed in the citizens and at the time discussions were being had about the County’s quality of life initiatives, the parks and gardens, museum, and libraries. Due to the Board at the time not wanting to raise the right revenue to fund county government, library hours were reduced and the same was being considered for the parks. Meetings were held with the municipalities, Cape Fear Realtors, the Chamber, Cape Fear Homebuilders, and other groups and all adopted resolutions in support of the quarter cent sales tax. The projection for that quarter cent sales tax was $7 million but has brought in over $14 million a year to the County. Today’s question is not just about WAVE Transit but about other forms of transportation for the community as well. A person must be willing to have the courage to look past whether they are going to get elected or reelected to look at what is best long term for the citizens. He believes in the citizens of this community, that citizens want a more robust walking/biking trail system, a rail realignment that will allow traffic to flow smoothly, and a better public transit system. He wants to let the citizens decide because if they want it, it will pass and if not, it will not pass. In response to Board questions, County Manager Coudriet stated that for the 2010 effort the County did not appropriate resources to put on an advocacy campaign, but it did use resources to put on an education campaign and Commissioner Barfield and Mr. Thompson led the effort. The advocacy part was left up to individual Commissioners based on their political support or not. There is nothing prohibiting a Commissioner from advocating for it nor for putting on an education campaign for it. What cannot happen is County staff on County time with resources cross the line of saying vote for or against. It would also be problematic for the Commissioners convened as a body to sit at the dais and advocate, but not in their individual roles. Vice-Chair Hays asked if she was correct in understanding that with the 2010 referendum there was the potential of a negative result with a reduction in parks operating hours or fully closed as there was not enough funds to continue normal operations. Commissioner Barfield responded that was not quite correct; the Board at the time had the ability to raise resources so that the negatives would not appear but chose not to. There is always the option to raise the right resources to cover the obligation and that Board was not committed to that, so the referendum was the other option available. Vice-Chair Hays stated it is a difficult decision, but she would feel better having the business community’s support. As a board member of WAVE Transit, she has watched CEO Marie Parker do incredible things to establish award-winning service options and vision. Ms. Parker is working hard to change WAVE Transit into the public transit system that is needed to be a viable part of the community. Ms. Parker and her team need more time to get that done and prove to the community that the quarter cent sales tax is worth it. Commissioner Rivenbark stated that he used to go to his stepfather's grocery store to work when he would get home from school. If it were not for the bus, he could not have done that. He no longer has kids in the school system, but he pays taxes to support the schools. After various discussions and what he has heard tonight, he supports the request. Commissioner Zapple stated that the difference between the 2010 campaign and today’s question, is that the parks could be pointed to as a specific benefit to the entire community from the quarter-cent sales tax. That type of detail is not available yet for today’s request in terms of the transportation issues. It will take time and education on the part of the Chamber and business community to help citizens understand the need and rationale behind it and the modes of transportation that can be provided if the referendum were to pass. More in-depth detail is needed on how the resources will be used and again, the Chamber and the business community are asking for more time to educate themselves to help it pass. Commissioner Barfield stated that he is the only person on the dais that can speak to what happened in 2010. When the hospital was sold, $1.25 billion was placed into an account with only a theoretical plan of how those resources would be used and have still not really been invested to see a yield. There have been discussions about a plan on what those dollars could do and every organization in the community has put dibs on the resources but there is still no concrete plan. What is being discussed today is only $144 million over 10 years, so he does not understand how a plan did not have to be in place for the $1.25 billion but all the sudden a detailed plan is needed for the potential $14 million per year that could be coming in with the referendum. A brief discussion was held about Commissioner Zapple’s motion. County Attorney Copley asked for clarification if it was to set the consideration date beyond the calendar year to a date certain, to postpone it, or take the quarter-cent sales tax off for consideration at this time. Commissioner Zapple stated he wanted to make sure it NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 2, 2022 PAGE 422 does not come back before the November election and postpone the consideration of the resolution to a date beyond the calendar year and not place the sales tax referendum on the November 2022 ballot. Vice-Chair Hays stated that she would second the motion. Motion: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Hays, to postpone the consideration of the resolution to a date beyond the end of the calendar year and not place the sales tax referendum on the November 2022 ballot. Commissioner Barfield stated he would make a substitute motion to move forward with the sales tax referendum being placed on the November 2022 ballot and instruct staff to put together the education materials needed and work with partner agencies, the municipalities in the County, and others that may want to be part of the effort to pass the referendum. Commissioner Rivenbark stated he would second the motion. Substitute Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Rivenbark to adopt the resolution to move forward with the sales tax referendum being placed on the November 2022 ballot and instruct staff to put together the education materials needed and work with partner agencies, the municipalities in the County, and others that may want to be part of the effort to pass the referendum. Upon vote the MOTION PASSED 3 TO 2. Vice- Chair Hays and Commissioner Zapple dissented. A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLIII, Page 26.5. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REQUEST BY DAVID LUCHT, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF WALU, 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 DISTRICT AND R-10, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (Z22-03) Current Planner Amy Doss presented the request by David Lucht, applicant, on behalf of Walu, 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 District and R-10, Residential District (Z22-03). The site is located along the Castle Hayne commercial corridor, adjacent to similar business and residential uses. The site is one of a few on Castle Hayne Road that is still zoned residential from the mid-80s. To the north and west commercial zoning is in place and the land use is generally commercial and R-15 single family residential homes to the east across Blossom Street. Ms. Doss provided an overview of aerial photos noting that the applicant has stated if the site is developed the billboard will be removed. Site plans and requirements can also be worked through at the Technical Review Committee (TRC) level. The site is near existing community businesses and residential neighborhoods and has been zoned R-15 since 1985. The intent of the R-15 district is to provide lands that accommodate exceptionally low to low density residential development that can serve as a transition between very low-density residential development patterns and smaller, more dense residential areas of the County. She then provided an overview of a typical community business commercial development and explained that businesses in a Community Business District are generally smaller in scale than in a B-2 district. Development in an R-10 is like R-15 except the lots can be smaller. Ms. Doss provided an overview of the applicant’s site map noting that the applicant is proposing a commercial business along Castle Hayne Road and residential zoning appropriate for three single family homes along Blossom Street. While a conceptual plan is not required, the plan shows that the size of the R-10 zoning as requested, can be divided into three lots. The proposed straight rezoning would allow for an appropriate transition between the commercial development pattern along Castle Hayne Road and the R-15 residential to the east of the property along Blossom Street. Primary access to the site is provided by Castle Hayne Road and Vine Street. Because proposed site plans are not required for straight rezonings, staff has provided the trip generation for the greatest intensity of allowed use of 10,000 square feet of retail and three single family dwellings. The development pattern is estimated to generate approximately 40 trips in the morning peak hours and 95 trips in the evening peak hours. If the site were developed under current by-right zoning it would generate four AM and five PM trips. The site is not in range of any Traffic Impact Analyses (TIAs) and there are no subdivisions in the vicinity. Ms. Doss concluded the staff presentation stating that the 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan (Comprehensive Plan) classifies properties along the Castle Hayne Road corridor as Community Mixed Use to allow for the continued growth of the Castle Hayne commercial services node while providing a transition between the roadway corridor and lower density housing to the east. The proposal is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as the proposal allows for the types of uses in line with the designated place type. In addition, the proposed R- 10 residential lots along Blossom Street provide a transition between the commercial and existing residential areas. The Planning Board considered the request during its April 7, 2022 meeting and recommended approval (6-0). Staff received one email comment with concerns, which has been included in the agenda packet. Should the rezoning request be approved, project would be subject to TRC and Zoning Compliance review processes to ensure full compliance with all ordinance requirements. In response to Board questions, Ms. Doss stated that sewer service is available to the subject site and water service has capacity at this time. She noted that the applicant may be able to provide more details. Chair Olson-Boseman thanked Ms. Doss for the presentation and announced that no one signed up to speak in favor or opposition to the request and invited the applicant to make their presentation. Mr. Lucht, applicant, on behalf of Walu, LLC, property owner, stated that in the interest of time he will answer any questions the Board has and thought the staff presentation was excellent. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 2, 2022 PAGE 423 Hearing no further discussion, Chair Olson-Boseman closed the public hearing and asked if based on Board discussion and items presented during the public hearing whether the applicant like to withdraw or proceed with the petition and Board vote. Mr. Lucht stated that he would like to proceed. In response to Board questions, Planning and Land Use Director Rebekah Roth stated that the rezoning request is to allow 30,000 square feet for the R-10 district and whatever the remaining portion is would be rezoned to Community Business. Staff made sure that when the lines on the site were drawn, it allowed for the three residential lots as intended. In response to further Board questions, Ms. Doss stated she would have to investigate if there was an update on the level of service for Castle Hayne Road since 2019 that would be affected by the request as the Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Organization (WMPO) representative was unable to attend the meeting. Ms. Roth stated that due to this being a straight rezoning request the site would be subject to the ordinance lighting standards. The residential portion is being proposed to be developed in conjunction with the commercial portion. Ms. Roth reiterated that for straight rezoning requests nothing can be required that is not already in the ordinance. Mr. Lucht confirmed that the intention is to provide separation between the residential and commercial sections. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Olson-Boseman asked for the Board’s direction on the request. Motion: Chair Olson-Boseman MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield, to recommend approval of the proposed rezoning to CB and R-10. The Board finds 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. The Board also finds 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. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA CASTLE HAYNE OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED JULY 1, 1985 is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book II, Section Castle Hayne, Page 33. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONTINUANCE OF A 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, MEDICAL AND DENTAL OFFICE AND CLINIC, AND OFFICES FOR PRIVATE BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES (Z22-09) Planning and Land Use Director Rebekah Roth stated that the applicant has requested a continuance of the rezoning request and is present to make the request. James Fentress with Stroud Engineering, PA, applicant, on behalf of Dallas Harris Land Company, LLC, property owner, stated that he was requesting a continuance of the rezoning request to the June 6, 2022 meeting to allow additional time to work through details concerning the conditions placed on the request. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Olson-Boseman asked for direction from the Board. Motion: Vice-Chair Hays MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple, to continue the 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, medical and dental office and clinic, and offices for private business and professional activities to the June 6, 2022 meeting. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REQUEST BY CINDEE WOLF, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF NEW BEGINNING 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 FOR A 68-UNIT ATTACHED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT (Z22-08) Current Planner Julian Griffee presented the request by Cindee Wolf, applicant, on behalf of New Beginning Christian Church, Inc., property owner, to rezone approximately 9.60 acres of land located within the 3100 block of Blue Clay Road, between the Blue Clay Road/North Kerr Avenue intersection and I-140, from R-20, Residential District, and (CZD) R-10, Conditional Residential District, to (CZD) R-5, Conditional Residential District for a 68-unit attached housing development (Z22-08). The subject site is currently undeveloped, is located on a minor arterial road near the Wrightsboro Commercial Node and abuts existing single-family neighborhoods to the north and south, New Beginning Christian Church (NBCC) to the west, and woods and the North Kerr Industrial Park to the east. The surrounding area along the western side of Blue Clay Road is primarily zoned R-10 and R-20 residential districts and I-1 and I-2 industrial zoning exists on the eastern side. The applicant intends for the units to be affordable but that is not currently a condition as the financing mechanism for the development has not been determined. The proposed conceptual site plan outlines the 68- residential units with stormwater ponds at the extreme east and west portions of the development and includes associated parking, a clubhouse, and common amenities. The units are split between 17 quadraplex structures. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 2, 2022 PAGE 424 Access to the property will be provided by a connection to Blue Clay Road. Secondary accesses include a connection to the parking lot of NBCC to the west and a connection to Rachel’s Place via an existing stub from Blue Bonnet Circle to the south. The initial proposal did not display an access from Blue Bonnet Circle, but requirements within the code necessitate it and the applicant has indicated that access will be gated to allow for emergency services access. The proposed residential development would generate approximately 31 AM peak hour trips and 40 PM peak hour trips, if developed as affordable housing. It is a five AM / six PM peak trip increase from potential R-10 development with the same acreage. If the proposal is developed as a market rate residential development, it would generate only slightly higher peak hour trips compared to the estimated trip generation for an affordable development. There are no approved TIAs within the vicinity of the project. There is one State Transportation Improvement Project (STIP) currently programmed for funding, the details of which have been provided in the staff report in the agenda packet. In review of the nearby area subdivisions currently under development, Mr. Griffee stated that approximately one-third of the units within the subdivisions are built. If the development is constructed as proposed, it is estimated that the 68-units would generate an additional 14 students. The Comprehensive Plan classifies the area as Community Mixed Use. The project is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, which recommends higher density single family development patterns within the place type. The proposal is in similar form and density to that of recently approved residential developments within the general vicinity, namely Rachel’s Place, Blue Clay Townes, and the Covenant I which are all zoned for higher densities than that allowed within the R-20 district. The proposed structures have similar appearances of nearby detached single-family houses and will be limited to two stories, which are typically lower in height than the permitted by-right 40-foot maximum allowed within the R-5 district. The nearby Wrightsboro Node is positioned for growth, given the approved developments at Castle Hayne Road and North Kerr Avenue, the developments within the adjacent North Kerr Industrial Park, and the anticipated Blue Clay Road Business Park. The subject site is located between the General Residential place type to the west and the Employment Center place type to the east and could serve as an appropriate transition between these areas. The Planning Board considered this application at its April 7, 2022 meeting and recommended approval of the petition (6-0) with four conditions which have been agreed to by the applicant: 1. Street trees shall be provided along the boundary with the Rachel's Place Subdivision. 2. The connection to Rachel's Place shall be gated and limited to emergency vehicle access. 3. A fenced buffer shall be provided along the northern property line and fencing shall be incorporated along the southern property line. 4. Existing trees along the drainage ditch to the north shall be retained outside of clearing necessary for storm water conveyance and maintenance. Mr. Griffee concluded the staff presentation stating that staff received comments on the request, which have been included in the agenda packet. Should the rezoning request be approved, project would be subject to TRC and Zoning Compliance review processes to ensure full compliance with all ordinance requirements. In response to Board questions, Mr. Griffee stated that the applicant has previously received approval for a portion of its parcel to be rezoned to (CZD) R-10 as part of a larger rezoning to allow for the development of a performance residential subdivision for a 68-unit senior housing complex. He confirmed that the main entrance to the project is via Blue Clay Road. There are two stormwater ponds that currently exist on the site and the applicant is present to address the actual plan. Chair Olson-Boseman thanked Mr. Griffee for the presentation and announced that no one signed up to speak in favor and one person signed up to speak in opposition to the request and invited the applicant to make their presentation. Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, on behalf of the property owner, NBCC, Inc., stated that NBCC has teamed up with East Carolina Community Development, Inc. (ECCDI) to provide quality housing for diverse community, not restricted by economic background and partner with a broad provider to stimulate vibrant community growth. The first step was to purchase 22 acres between Blue Clay Road and Alex Trask Drive to build an attractive and well-maintained church facility. The vision for this portion of the property has always been to address the well documented deficit of housing for the common man in this community. However, subsidized housing is not what is being discussed. The project may or may not be tax credit funded but regardless, residents will have to be employed. The point of the proposal is to be able to charge reduced rents based on income levels by increasing density and reducing development costs per unit. The portion of land previously approved to R-10 specifically for a tax credit funded, senior age restricted housing community did not have the R-5 option available to it. What is being discussed today is the rest of the vacant land which is intended for a family-oriented townhome development. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the land as being appropriate for a higher density of development to address optimum efficiency, land utilization, and public service delivery. The surrounding area is overlaid by a variety of zoning districts and the introduction of public water and sewer has changed the need for larger lots to support private wells and/or septic systems. Another townhome style development, Blue Clay Towns, was recently approved as a (CZD) R-5 with what is considered attached single family which are buildings of four units and no more. As to the zoning compliance issue, Pastor Campbell allowed a homeless individual to park their vehicle, also being their home for the time, in the rear parking area on a temporary basis. That kindness was unfortunately abused, and the situation was immediately resolved upon receiving a complaint. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 2, 2022 PAGE 425 Primary access to the proposed project would be from Blue Clay Road and driveway permitting will be managed by the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT). The intersection would provide an attractive entryway and safe turning movements for all directions and include additional turning lanes if required by NCDOT. The drive will extend all the way through the church drives to Alex Trask Drive for convenient circulation towards all points of the community. A sidewalk will be included between the development and the senior development to provide for pedestrian interconnectivity and access. The layout was done specifically to mitigate the adverse effects on the adjacent single-family development. The parking lot is shielded by surrounding it with the homes and amenity center, and communal areas for recreation are included in the layout. Because the roadway stub at Rachel's Place was required by that subdivision’s regulations, the drive is privately maintained, and the County cannot mandate the connection. However, for the good of emergency services, the pavement connection must be made, and a gate will be installed only for emergency vehicle use. In looking at the overall circulation system of the area, there would be no reason for Rachel's Place residents to use the drive to get out to Blue Clay Road or vice versa. Based on a request by the Rachel’s Place residents whose homes back up to the entry drive, street trees will be installed on both sides of the drive which were not initially shown during the community meeting. Ms. Wolf reviewed the recommended condition for a fence along both the northern and southern buffers stating that bufferyards are intended to provide visual capacity between different uses. Since the project proposes an attached housing style, a transitional buffer will be required, but that screening can be accomplished by existing vegetation supplemented by evergreen hedges, earthen berms with landscaping, a fence, or a combination of methods. There is already a very well-defined ditch along the common property boundary with established mature trees and this project is responsible for ensuring that the screening is established before the first resident can move in. She and her client believe that a vegetative buffer works every bit as well as a fence and meets the criteria of the purpose in the code to provide buffering. As to the fence along the southern boundary, there is no buffer requirements along there because it is a drive, but street trees have been put in and the Rachel's Place community was designed with a 20-foot perimeter. The fence would be an unnecessary cost. She provided an overview of other ECCDI communities explaining that this project will have the same type of architectural style. It is believed that alternative housing products can coexist side by side everywhere without adverse effect to property values, with today's higher level of building standards and quality of development. The County's policies for growth and development encourage safe and affordable housing to be available to every citizen. An infill of vacant properties is an excellent opportunity for good economics and increased tax base. She and her client believe this project meets those criteria and presents a sensible density at only 7.1 units per acre with an attractive design. She and her client ask for Board approval of the request except for condition number three as they would like every opportunity to keep costs at a minimum by advantaging all the different buffering alternatives. Ms. Roth stated that a recent change in North Carolina General Statute 160-D is the indication that for any conditions to be able to be included with a conditional zoning or to be enforced they need to be mutually agreed upon by both the applicant and the governing board. At the Planning Board meeting the applicant did indicate they could live with the fence requirement. She noted that Planning Board member Hansen Matthews is present to answer any questions. Commissioner Barfield stated that affordable housing and public housing are not the same even though people equate one with the other. There is a true affordable housing crisis in this community. A fence was not imposed when the Rachel’s Place project was approved, so he is not understanding the requirement for this project. In response to Board questions, Mr. Matthews stated the fence condition was included to accommodate concerns about density of the multi-family units and being immediately beside existing single-family residences. He understands the cost concerns and effect it can have on being able to build affordable housing and that was noted by a Planning Board member. He feels the developer will provide a strong buffer, but he cannot speak to what other Planning Board members thought on requiring the fence. In response to Board questions, Ms. Wolf stated that it was not until today that she realized the details of the fence condition. She and her client would request that the third condition which includes fences along the north and south buffers be eliminated as another condition requires that all the existing vegetation along the ditch be preserved. The illustrative information provided is an accurate representation of what is desired to be approved, which would be a buffer meeting all New Hanover County code requirements along the back, whatever that may be of alternatives and a drive with street trees along both sides of the drive along the southern boundary. As to stormwater, the existing pond for the church will be expanded into the cleared area for the senior project and potentially for this project. There is a valid outlet for overflow design with the existing ditch that flows to the river and the 25-year storm criteria is the permitting that would be met. Chair Olson-Boseman requested that speakers in opposition to the request provide their remarks. Ronald Sparks, resident of Holland Drive, spoke in opposition to the request stating his concerns are with higher density projects around neighborhoods of large lots and single-family homes. There are flooding issues with just heavy rains and the outflow to the river is not functioning for the neighborhood. Chair Olson-Boseman stated that the applicant and opponent each have five minutes in total to provide rebuttal remarks. In applicant rebuttal, Ms. Wolf stated that older projects do not have drainage facilities. The County stormwater program is going to provide that aid and newer projects have the responsibility to incorporate those NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 2, 2022 PAGE 426 provisions which are effective and can sometimes assist with problems of the past. As to density, it has been acknowledged more homes are needed. A density of under eight units an acre is widely accepted under the General Residential place type of the Comprehensive Plan. Density is a perception of what is being proposed. With small family development there is not that big of a jump at five to eight units per acre, unlike apartments which are higher density at 10 units and greater per acre. In opposition rebuttal, Mr. Sparks stated that the term affordable housing does have an impact in his opinion. He is a concerned about a rental community in the area due to the constant turnover. If the homes were being purchased it would be a different discussion. He is concerned about the long-term effects on the health of the neighborhood if the project is approved and developed. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Olson-Boseman closed the public hearing and opened the floor to Board discussion. In response to Board questions, NBCC Pastor Robert Campbell stated that the financing has not been fully determined. The prior project was a tax credit project that was submitted repeatedly for six years before getting funding approval. Then the pandemic hit and there was a million-dollar shortfall due to the increase in construction materials. The goal is to provide workforce housing and it is needed, but it is not cheap housing. The hope is to find the financing to keep it affordable for 30 years and that is the path being followed. There is the vision and money has been put forth for engineering and other things. However, four different programs cannot be put in place without the zoning. ECCDI has been in the business for 25 years and what was shown as housing examples are 10 to 15 years old. If financing is not obtainable the church will have to decide what to with the land. The goal is to solve a need and effort is being made to obtain either a bond or tax credit deal, either of which can be a public-private partnership. The process is not quick, and they are prepared that it will take time to obtain the financing. In response to Board questions, County Engineer Jim Iannucci stated that the ditch has been identified as part of the stormwater utility program and there is currently an ongoing maintenance project out there. There would be coordination with the applicant to ensure there is enough space to maintain the drainage easement. Chair Olson-Boseman closed the public hearing and asked if based on Board discussion and items presented during the public hearing whether the applicant would like to withdraw or proceed with the petition and Board vote. Ms. Wolf stated that her client would like to proceed agreeing to conditions one, two, and four. A brief discussion was held about the third condition. Ms. Roth stated that for the northern property line, the County code requirement would clearly require a vegetative buffer. The Board may want to specify that the street trees as depicted on the concept plan shall be required along the southern property line with Rachel’s Place. Ms. Wolf indicated that change in the conditions would be agreeable with her client. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Olson-Boseman asked for the Board’s direction on the request. Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Hays, to recommend approval of the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) R-5 district. The Board finds 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. The Board also finds 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. The following three conditions are also approved: 1. Street trees shall be provided as depicted within the concept rendering along the boundary with the Rachel's Place Subdivision. 2. The connection to Rachel's Place shall be gated and limited to emergency vehicle access. 3. Existing trees along the drainage ditch to the north shall be retained outside of clearing necessary for stormwater conveyance and maintenance. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA 10A OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED JULY 1, 1974 is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book II, Section 10A, Page 48. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REQUEST BY CINDEE WOLF WITH DESIGN SOLUTIONS, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF HAR-STE INVESTMENTS, LLC, PROPERTY OWNER, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 7.32 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED NEAR THE 300 BLOCK OF EDGEWATER CLUB ROAD FROM R-20, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, TO (CZD) R-7, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT FOR A 44-UNIT ATTACHED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT (Z22-05) Current Planner Amy Doss presented the request by Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, applicant, on behalf of Har-Ste Investments, LLC, property owner, to rezone approximately 7.32 acres of land located near the 300 block of Edgewater Club Road from R-20, Residential District, to (CZD) R-7, Residential District for a 44-unit attached housing development (Z22-05). The site is currently vacant and located along Edgewater Club Road and Waterstone Drive. The property was initially zoned R-20 residential in 1971 and remains R-20 residential. As currently zoned, the NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 2, 2022 PAGE 427 site would permit up to 14 single-family dwelling units at a density of 1.9 dwelling units per acre. The proposed zoning would allow 44 single family attached townhomes at a density of six dwelling units per acre. The entire vicinity is zoned R-20 residential with an institutional use to the south. This is one of the few undeveloped tracts remaining in the Porters Neck area. Most tracts left are platted for single family development at under one acre. Ms. Doss provided an overview of developments representative in the immediate vicinity of the subject site and representative R-7 district development including a picture of the proposed development. She reiterated that the applicant is proposing residential zoning appropriate for 44 single-family attached townhomes under the County’s performance residential standards. The proposed conditional rezoning would allow for an appropriate transition between the school across from Waterstone Drive, the R-20 Residential to the west, and east of the property along Edgewater Club Road. Units would be grouped in rows of four with a maximum height of 2.5 stories, ranging in size from 2,400-2,800 square feet. The applicant’s conceptual plan includes a fenced buffer on all sides and complies with the County’s standards for a major site plan. Access to the site is provided from an entrance on Edgewater Club Road and another entrance on Waterstone Drive. Ms. Doss provided an overview of the estimated trip generation for the site if developed at the maximum density under the current R-20 Residential zoning, as well as estimated trip generation numbers for a development at the maximum density allowed under the proposed (CZD) R-7 district. There is one approved TIA within the general vicinity of the subject property and the details regarding the Oaks at Murray Farm TIA have been provided in the staff report in the agenda packet. Based on a historic generation rate, staff would estimate that the increase in dwelling units would result in approximately 10 additional students more than if developed under the current zoning. As to compatibility, Ms. Doss stated that following the intent of the R-7 district, the proposal would provide a low-density residential development with diverse housing types in proximity to jobs and services. It serves as a transition between higher and lower density areas and the school to the south. It is near the intersection of Market Street and Porters Neck, close to the roundabout, and if additional density is appropriate in the area, this would be the place to add it. The site plan also includes design features that reduce the impacts on adjacent neighbors. The site is in an area that the Comprehensive Plan envisions as General Residential place type with a focus on lower density housing and associated civic and commercial services. The proposed density of this project is within low density range in the Comprehensive Plan and therefore the proposal is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan place type. The Planning Board considered this application at its April 7, 2022 meeting and recommended approval of the petition (5-1) with three conditions: 1. The project will be age-restricted based on state and federal Fair Housing requirements for projects for individuals aged 55 and above. 2. An additional sidewalk will be provided between the project and Porter's Neck Elementary School. 3. The stormwater management system will be designed for a 100-year storm event. Ms. Doss concluded the staff presentation stating that staff understands the Board has received many comments in opposition to the request, what has been received by staff has been included in the agenda packet, and no additional comments were received after the closing of the public portal. Should the rezoning request be approved, development of the site will be subject to full technical review to ensure all land use regulations met. In response to Board questions, Ms. Roth stated that the homes in the Waterstone development were developed under the R-20 performance residential standards. There is quite a bit of space along the creek to offset that zoning and the lot sizes are not the typical large lots. The overall density is no more than 1.9 unit per acre, but the lot sizes are smaller than 20,000 square feet. Chair Olson-Boseman thanked Ms. Doss for the presentation, invited the applicant to make their presentation, and announced that no one signed up to speak in favor and four people signed up to speak in opposition to the request. Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, representing the property owner Har-Ste Investments, LLC stated the 148-unit Waterstone community started in 2015. The Comprehensive Plan assigns all the Porters Neck area beyond the Market Street corridor as General Residential place type, based on its proximity to shopping opportunities, restaurants, and other commercial services within the Kirkland/Porter's Neck growth node. Home development with densities up to six units per acre is promoted as a land use. Single family homes on individual lots are not an exclusive product in the area. Communities like Figure Eight Harbor, Plantation Village, and the Davis Nursing Home are all alternative living styles that co-exist in the area. The research in the Comprehensive Plan and a more recent housing needs assessment published last year, offered some statistics on demographics and home demand projections. She asked Katrina Redmon with KHR Associates, LLC to provide further insight on the housing trends and the projected demands in this community in the senior age range. Ms. Redmon stated that the Comprehensive Plan noted that the senior population is expected to grow by more than 55% by 2040. According to the analysis in that plan in 2010, 26% of the population growth were baby boomers and on an upward trend. The Bowen Report comprehensive housing study completed for New Hanover County in March 2021 was a broad comprehensive study that determined housing gaps and housing needs across New Hanover County. It also noted the same population growth patterns as the Comprehensive Plan indicating the greatest gains in population would be older millennials and baby boomers and that the trend would drive a demand for this type of housing to meet their needs. This development is to be for those age 55 and older. The over 55 demographics is already in the northeastern area of the County. This project will provide an opportunity for existing NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 2, 2022 PAGE 428 single family detached home residents to transition to a home that requires less maintenance, yard work, etc. that a planned community such as this provides. There is a shortage of approximately 4,600 units in the County for this demographic and there is a need to address it. Ms. Wolf stated that the site layout includes 44 attached single-family homes usually referred to as townhomes. Most of them will encircle a large courtyard area. She asked Mark Loudermilk with Mark Loudermilk Architects to provide an overview of the design. Mr. Loudermilk provided an overview of the design plan noting that the style is referred to as a new urbanism plan and that examples of this type of plan are RiverLights and Autumn Hall where the community space is on the inside. The cars are parked on the outside and the garages are located on the outside, but the front doors, living rooms, etc. all face inside into a community area like a shared green space. Ms. Wolf stated that townhome communities are in high demand and the subject site’s location is superior for both a lifestyle preference and its proximity to daily services. This R-7 zoning district request has a density of six units an acre. The townhomes not facing the front will be able to, through combining backyards with evergreen plantings along the common boundary of the Waterstone clubhouse and Moss Bridget homes, provide the required buffering but also, other nice landscaping could be planted in those areas, probably fenced courtyards of their very own. This provides a versatility to the residents for those who prefer more privacy with a private courtyard in the back and for those who want to be part of a broader center courtyard. The homeowners’ association will be responsible for maintenance of all the communal areas, building exteriors, and facilities which guarantees quality of aesthetics and sustainability of their environment. Stormwater management is proposed in the central area of the project and is a requirement for assuring water quality preservation and pre/post development attenuation control. Design must be complete, and all permits must be authorized before construction begins. The absence of a well- defined outlet for overflow design has been acknowledged and an agreed upon condition is to meet the 100-year storm criteria. Opposition to the petition referred to flooding along Edgewater Club Road, which is further beyond the subject site’s location, and occurred a few years ago during one of the area's largest storms. NCDOT has since made improvements to the undersized culvert and since then the school pond and various stormwater facilities in Waterstone were installed. The project promotes pedestrian accessibility with a loop around the courtyard and there is agreement to add sidewalks from the pathway out to the school sidewalk. There is not the ability to connect over to Waterstone because that is a private roadway. However, the team is more than willing to work within the public right of way to provide pedestrian accessibility. She stated that Don Bennett with Davenport Engineering reviewed the plan and provided a traffic analysis for the site and asked that he provide an overview of the traffic analysis. Mr. Bennett stated the site did not require a TIA just because of the gross trips being about a quarter of the requirement for the WMPO to perform a TIA. At the most intense time of the day there are a combination of 25 vehicles coming in and out of the subject site, which equates to a vehicle about every two and a half minutes. Under the by-right use it is going to be approximately 16 which is about a vehicle every four minutes. The proposal does not make that much of an impact. NCDOT will undertake review of the site and determine the needed improvements to either of the facilities during the driveway permitting process. In response to Board questions, Mr. Bennett confirmed that the only access to Figure Eight Island was through the roundabout further down the road, but he did not have the roundabout traffic figures. The traffic numbers being provided to the Board are directly from the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s (ITE) trip generation software that is the engineering standard for developing volumes. The same software package would be used to estimate the site trips for a TIA. Only during the TIA process are traffic counts collected on the adjacent roadway and/or any adjacent intersections that are part of the scope. While the numbers are theoretical, they are based upon a regression analysis of comparable sites nationwide that had been vetted and published by the ITE which again, is the reference standard for generating trips. Student population was not factored into the numbers, but if there were students living in the houses, there would be the opportunity for what is called internal capture or walkability to the school. Since the pandemic, NCDOT has not been collecting data for average daily trips (ADTs), hence the age of the numbers in the report in the agenda packet. NCDOT also issued a memorandum to engineering firms that prepare TIAs to take the NCDOT 2020 numbers with a grain of salt due to COVID impacts on the data. Ms. Wolf concluded the presentation stating that conditional zoning districts are intended for firm development proposals. The processes are established to address situations where a particular land use would be consistent with the County's land use plan and the objectives to safeguard adjacent land uses, while also providing an orderly transition but fitting the community at large. The development team has done all the due diligence to prepare for detailed design and permitting of an excellent project. Staff’s intensive review and determination of consistency with the guidance of the County's vision for the future is appreciated. The team also accepts the conditions that have been included as part of the project. In response to Board questions, Ms. Wolf stated the project is an age-restricted community proposal. Early on the project had 48 units and would have been the R-5 proposal with the limitations of threes and fours as far as attached single family. At the time, it was intended to be basically another phase of Waterstone. Residents were very vocal in opposition to that plan due to feeling the current clubhouse and amenities were not large enough and did not want more of a project. The project was reworked to the current proposal and will have its own amenities, be self-sufficient, and have its own homeowner’s association. The project does not go through Waterstone or any other community and has access to public streets. The developer is the same but technically the property owner is different. When approved in 2015, the Waterstone community did not include the subject site and the developers NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 2, 2022 PAGE 429 did not own the subject site until March 2021. The developer wants to avail themselves to whatever opportunities are available to provide a different housing product thought necessary in the area. Chair Olson-Boseman requested that speakers in opposition to the request provide their remarks. Mark Greenburg, resident of Sawmill Creek Lane, spoke in opposition stating there is no need to change the current zoning and the request should not be approved. He cited issues with limited area access to transportation, existing traffic congestion on Porter’s Neck Road, impacts to the stormwater systems and water quality, and that the rezoning will decrease the desirability of the area. Kate Phelps Connelly, resident of Beach Road North, spoke in opposition citing concerns with Edgewater Club Road being the only access point for all communities off Porter’s Neck Road, the additional burden the project will place on said road, the increased traffic due to the elementary school from parents driving children to and from the school instead of using the buses, and the lack of traffic management. Philip Jones, resident of Ramblewood Lane, spoke in opposition citing the existing projects being developed are adding more traffic and how the project would add to the existing traffic issues on Porter’s Neck Road and Edgewater Club Road. Chair Olson-Boseman stated that the applicant and opponents each have five minutes in total to provide rebuttal remarks. In applicant rebuttal, Ms. Wolf stated that the County is not a stagnant community and is diverse. The compelling reason for any zoning change is consistency with the plans and policies developed by the County for the County as a whole. If this were a performance development there would be a restriction of 1.9 units an acre, but there would be no restriction on the type of community developed on the site. She asked Mr. Bennett to again review the trip generation numbers for the conditional district rezoning for an age restricted community. Mr. Bennett reiterated that the ITE’s trip generation software is the engineering standard for developing volumes. The estimated number of trips to be generated by the proposed plan would be 20 to 25 vehicles per hour. It is a nominal increase to traffic when compared to the roadways around it and the capacity thereof. Ms. Wolf reiterated that based on the information provided by Mr. Bennett the trips are not a substantial increase. In response to Board questions, she confirmed that there is currently nothing on the subject site. She does not think it is fair to say that any vehicle from the site is additional traffic on Edgewater Club Road. If it has a development potential, it must be looked at what can be done today versus what is being asked for and it is not just brand-new trips. In opposition rebuttal:  Steve Hamburger, resident of Emerald Dunes Road, stated that it would be a precedent to change the zoning to R-7. He cited concerns about the environment, traffic, and how the infrastructure cannot keep up with the increased growth. The site should be approved as an R-20, single family home site as he feels that is more needed than what is being proposed.  Mr. Jones stated that the proposed rezoning request is not consistent with the desired character of the surrounding community and intensity and will adversely affect the adjacent areas.  Mr. Greenburg stated the people who are opposing the project are not saying it is a bad project, but it is being proposed in a uniquely wrong location due to the impacts it will have on the infrastructure. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Olson-Boseman closed the public hearing and opened the floor to Board discussion. In response to Board questions, Count Manager Coudriet stated he is not aware of any plans for a bike or trail system along Bald Eagle Lane or Edgewater Club Road. In response to Board questions, Ms. Roth stated there are a couple of different parameters with the Pages Creek water quality issues that over the years have proven problematic. The biggest one is the enterococci bacterial levels, and those have had elevation issues continually over the past several years. What has been learned over the past few years is that in looking at the longitudinal data, there has not been an increase in contamination from enterococci, nor in turbidity levels, and there has not been an increase in dissolved oxygen levels even as the area has developed. They have been consistently high in some cases, but it does not appear that these issues are tied to impervious levels or to levels of development. That is why there was an authorization last year for the thermal imaging study at the Page's Creek watershed. Work is ongoing to determine the source of those contaminants, but again, based on current longitudinal data, there does not seem to be a correlation between development in the watershed and the water quality issues that are being seen. In response to further Board questions, Ms. Roth stated that concerns were expressed during the Planning Board meeting that there was not a comprehensive review of traffic impacts. As those studies are not in place, staff did look at how much undeveloped or underdeveloped land there is in the subject area. It was determined that there is approximately 180 acres that under current zoning would equate to about 300 additional units that could be possible when developed at 1.9 units per acre. With R-7 zoning, it would be closer to about 1,000 units if each parcel were zoned to that designation. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 2, 2022 PAGE 430 Hearing no further discussion, Chair Olson-Boseman asked if based on Board discussion and items presented during the public hearing whether the applicant would like to withdraw or proceed with the petition and Board vote. Ms. Wolf stated that her client would like to proceed and agrees with the conditions. Chair Olson- Boseman asked for the Board’s direction on the request. Motion: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Rivenbark, to recommend denial of the proposed rezoning. While the Board finds 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, it finds denial of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the land use will adversely impact the adjacent residential areas. Upon vote, the MOTION FAILED 2 TO 3. Chair Olson-Boseman, Vice-Chair Hays, and Commissioner Barfield dissented. Chair Olson-Boseman asked if there was a motion to approve the request. Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Hays, to recommend approval of the proposed rezoning. The Board finds 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. The Board also finds 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. The following three conditions are also approved: 1. The project will be age-restricted based on state and federal Fair Housing requirements for projects for individuals aged 55 and above. 2. An additional sidewalk will be provided between the project and Porter's Neck Elementary School. 3. The stormwater management system will be designed for a 100-year storm event. Upon vote, the MOTION PASSED 3 TO 2. Commissioner Rivenbark and Zapple dissented. A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA 5 OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED JULY 6, 1971 is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book I, Section 5, Page 89. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Chair Olson-Boseman stated that three people signed up to speak on non-agenda items and invited them to make their remarks. Amy Jeffery, Interim Director DREAMS of Wilmington, introduced herself to the Board, provided a brief overview of the purpose and function of DREAMS of Wilmington, and expressed her concerns about the need for a transportation system to help the youth get to afterschool programs in a safe manner. Neal Shulman, resident of Nash Drive, shared his concerns about recent Board actions. ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS OF BUSINESS Vice-Chair Hays expressed her appreciation for being invited to attend the Honor Flight of the Cape Fear Area Welcome Home Celebration. She also commended Honor Flight of the Cape Fear Area Founder and Trip Leader for organizing the first Honor Flight in a dozen years. Commissioner Zapple thanked Assistant County Manager Sheryl Kelly for her service to the County and wished her well in her next endeavor. Chair Olson-Boseman expressed her appreciation for being invited to participate in the Honor Flight of the Cape Fear Area Departure Ceremony and Welcome Home Celebration for 75 area veterans and their guardians who got the chance to take part in the Honor Flight to Washington, D.C. She thanked everyone who were at ILM to honor the veterans and those who made the trip possible. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Olson-Boseman adjourned the meeting at 7:42 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kymberleigh G. Crowell Clerk to the Board Please note that the above minutes are not a verbatim record of the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners meeting. The entire proceedings are available online at www.nhcgov.com.