The URL can be used to link to this page

2023-01-09 Regular Meeting NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, JANUARY 9, 2023 PAGE 602 ASSEMBLY The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met January 9, 2023, at 4:00 p.m. in Regular Session in the Assembly Room of the New Hanover County Courthouse, 24 North Third Street, Wilmington, North Carolina. Members present: Chair Bill Rivenbark; Vice-Chair LeAnn Pierce; Commissioner Jonathan Barfield, Jr.; Commissioner Deb Hays; and Commissioner Rob Zapple. Staff present: County Manager Chris Coudriet; County Attorney Wanda M. Copley; and Clerk to the Board Kymberleigh G. Crowell. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Pastor Eddie Eaton, Wrightsboro Baptist Church provided the invocation and Commissioner Deb Hays led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF WITHDRAWAL REQUEST FOR REZONING REQUEST (Z22-18) BY CINDEE WOLF WITH DESIGN SOLUTIONS, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF GIOVANNI IPPOLITO AND TANYA VLACANCICH, PROPERTY OWNERS, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 4.65 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 6634 CAROLINA BEACH ROAD FROM R- 15, RESIDENTIAL TO (CZD) RMF-M, RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY - MODERATE DENSITY FOR A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT Chair Rivenbark stated that the Board received a request from the applicant to withdraw Regular Agenda Item 15: Public Hearing for Rezoning Request (Z22-18) - Request by Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, applicant, on behalf of Giovanni Ippolito and Tanya Vlacancich, property owners, to rezone approximately 4.65 acres of land located at 6634 Carolina Beach Road from R-15, Residential to (CZD) RMF-M, Residential Multi-Family - Moderate Density for a multi-family development. He asked for direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple to approve the request from the applicant to withdraw Regular Agenda Item 15: Public Hearing for Rezoning Request (Z22-18) - Request by Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, applicant, on behalf of Giovanni Ippolito and Tanya Vlacancich, property owners, to rezone approximately 4.65 acres of land located at 6634 Carolina Beach Road from R-15, Residential to (CZD) RMF- M, Residential Multi-Family - Moderate Density for a multi-family development. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA Chair Rivenbark requested a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Motion: Commissioner Hays MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple 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 Special and Regular Meetings held on December 5, 2022. Appointment of Director to the New Hanover County Financing Corporation – County Attorney The Commissioners appointed Chief Financial Officer Eric Credle to fulfil the remainder of Assistant County Manager Lisa Wurtzbacher’s term as a New Hanover County Financing Corporation Director. Adoption of Resolution and Associated Budget Amendment to Accept the Donation of Two Activity Buses from New Hanover County Schools – Sheriff The Commissioners adopted a resolution and associated budget amendment #23-041 to accept the two buses donated to the Sheriff's Office by New Hanover County Schools. Copies of the resolution and budget amendment are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLIX, Page 1.1. Approval of Lease Agreement with The Healing Place of New Hanover County, Inc. – Finance The Commissioners approved and authorized the County to enter into a lease agreement with The Healing Place of New Hanover County, Inc. Approval of Reallocation of Capital Fund Expenditures by New Hanover County Schools - Finance The Commissioners approved the reallocation request of capital fund expenditures by New Hanover County Schools to use the $44,500 in savings from the completed Forest Hills portico project for the Holly Shelter paved play area project, which had been put on hold due to contractor bids exceeding the project budget. The reallocation is expected to be sufficient to complete said project. Approval of October 2022 Tax Collection Reports - Tax The Commissioners approved the October 2022 tax collection reports for New Hanover County, New Hanover County Debt Service, and New Hanover County Fire District. Copies of the tax collection reports are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLIX, Page 1.2. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, JANUARY 9, 2023 PAGE 603 Approval of November 2022 Tax Collection Reports – Tax The Commissioners approved the November 2022 tax collection reports for New Hanover County, New Hanover County Debt Service, and New Hanover County Fire District. Copies of the tax collection reports are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLIX, Page 1.3. REGULAR ITEMS OF BUSINESS CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF A CODE OF ETHICS FOR THE CURRENT BOARD MEMBERS AND ADOPTION OF AMENDED RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR MEETINGS OF THE NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MANUAL Chair Rivenbark opened the floor for Board discussion. There being no discussion, he asked for Board direction. Motion: Commissioner Hays MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield to adopt the Code of Ethics for the current Board members and the Amended Rules of Procedure for Meetings of the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners Manual as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Copies of the Code of Ethics and Amended Rules of Procedure for Meetings of the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners Manual are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLIX, Page 1.4. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF APPOINTMENTS OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO VARIOUS BOARDS AND COMMITTEES FOR 2023 Chair Rivenbark opened the floor for Board discussion. There being no discussion, he asked for Board direction. Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple to approve the appointments of the County Commissioners to various boards and committees for 2023 as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the approved appointments list is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLIX, Page 1.5. PRESENTATION OF WILMINGTON HOUSING AUTHORITY REMEDIATION UPDATE Wilmington Housing Authority (WHA) CEO Tyrone Garrett presented the following update on the WHA remediation:  WHA Remediation Update:  Remediated Units:  Displaced Families: NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, JANUARY 9, 2023 PAGE 604  WHA Rebrand Rollout – Palm Card Sample:  Work Order Overview:  76.34% Completion Rate (Average) The Commissioners expressed appreciation to Mr. Garrett and his team as well as the WHA Board for the work that has been and continues to be done to return families to their homes. In response to Board questions, Mr. Garrett stated there are still 67 families displaced. WHA did not apply to the New Hanover Community Endowment (NHCE) for a grant. It received funds through Catholic Charities, which received a grant from NHCE, to assist with helping families get reestablished in their homes. He will be speaking with the NHCE director about future endeavors. There are four contracting companies plus his own team to work on units. The units are addressed as they come forward rather than working easiest to hardest. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Garrett for the update. PRESENTATION AND APPROVAL OF THE AUDIT REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2022 April Adams, partner with Cherry Bekaert, LLP, presented the following information of the New Hanover County Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022:  New Hanover County Audit Executive Summary:  Client Service Team:  Results of the Audit:  We have audited the financial statements of New Hanover County, North Carolina (the “County”) for the year ended June 30, 2022, and we have issued our report thereon dated December 1, 2022.  We have issued an unmodified opinion on the financial statements.  We have also issued a report on internal controls over financial reporting and compliance and other matters.  Single Audit:  Internal Controls:  In planning and performing our audit, we considered internal control over financial reporting (“internal control”) as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements, but not NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, JANUARY 9, 2023 PAGE 605 for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the County’s internal control. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the County’s internal control.  Our consideration of internal control was for the limited purpose described in the preceding paragraph and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies and, therefore, material weaknesses or significant deficiencies may exist that were not identified. In addition, because of inherent limitations in internal control, including the possibility of management override of controls, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected by such controls.  A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, misstatements on a timely basis.  Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements: None noted.  Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices:  Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. The significant accounting policies used by the County are described in Note I to the financial statements.  The County adopted GASB 87, Leases, effective July 1, 2021. Most prominent among the changes in the standard is the recognition of the right to use assets and lease liabilities for those leases previously classified as operating leases. This standard also included the recording of a lease receivable and deferred inflow of resources for lessor agreements.  We noted no inappropriate accounting policies or practices.  Related Party Relationships and Transactions:  As part of our audit, we evaluated the County’s identification of, accounting for, and disclosure of the County’s relationships and transactions with related parties as required by professional standards. We noted none of the following:  Related parties or related party relationships or transactions that were previously undisclosed to us;  Significant related party transactions that have not been approved in accordance with the County’s policies or procedures or for which exceptions to the County’s policies or procedures were granted;  Significant related party transactions that appeared to lack a business purpose;  Noncompliance with applicable laws or regulations prohibiting or restricting specific types of related party transactions;  Difficulties in identifying the party that ultimately controls the entity.  Significant Unusual Transactions:  We noted no transactions entered by the Company during the year for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. All significant transactions have been recognized in the financial statements in the proper period.  For purposes of this letter, professional standards define significant unusual transactions as transactions that are outside the normal course of business for the County or that otherwise appear to be unusual due to their timing, size, or nature.  We noted no significant unusual transactions during the year.  Significant Estimates:  Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based on management’s knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from those expected. The most sensitive estimates affecting the financial statements were:  Allowance for doubtful accounts  Depreciation and amortization expense  Fair value of investments  Pension liabilities  Other Post-Employment Benefits liability  Accrued compensated absences  Self‑insurance claim liabilities that have been incurred but not reported.  Liability for closure and post closure (Landfill)  Imputed interest rate on leases  Financial Statement Disclosures:  The estimates are based on an analysis of historical collection trends, current and anticipated economic conditions, the category of individual capital assets and their useful lives, actuarial calculations, and estimated future costs. We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used to develop the estimates in determining that they were reasonable in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole.  The financial statement disclosures are neutral, consistent, and clear.  Independence Considerations:  Non-attest Services:  Our firm prepares the Data Collection Form. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, JANUARY 9, 2023 PAGE 606  For all non-attest services we perform, you are responsible for designating a competent employee to oversee the services, make any management decisions, perform any management functions related to the services, evaluate the adequacy of the services, and accept overall responsibility for the results of the services.  Independence Conclusion:  We are not aware of any other circumstances or relationships that create threats to auditor independence.  We are independent of New Hanover County and have met our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with the relevant ethical requirements relating to our audits.  Other Required Communications:  Difficulties Encountered: We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our audit.  Disagreements with Management: Includes disagreements on a financial accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether resolved to our satisfaction, which could be significant to the financial statements or the auditor’s report. We are pleased to report that no such disagreements arose during our audit.  Auditor Consultations: We noted no matters that are difficult or contentious for which the auditor consulted outside the engagement team.  Management Representations: We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management representation letter dated December 1, 2022.  Management Consultations: In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting matters, like obtaining a “second opinion” on certain situations. To our knowledge, there were no such consultations with other accountants.  Other Findings or Issues: We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, with management each year. These discussions occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our retention.  Fraud and Illegal Acts: As of the date of this presentation no fraud, illegal acts, or violations of laws and regulations noted.  Going Concern: No events or conditions noted that indicate substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern.  Other Matters:  Supplementary Information: With respect to the supplementary information accompanying the financial statements, we made certain inquiries of management and evaluated the form, content, and methods of preparing the information to determine that the information complies with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, the method of preparing it has not changed from the prior period, and the information is appropriate and complete in relation to our audit of the financial statements. We compared and reconciled the supplementary information to the underlying accounting records used to prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements themselves.  Required Supplementary Information: With respect to the required supplementary information accompanying the financial statements, we have applied certain limited procedures to the information, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements.  Upcoming Financial Reporting Changes:  These standards will be effective for the County in the upcoming years and may have a significant impact on the County’s financial reporting.  We would be happy to discuss with management the potential impacts on the County’s financial statements and how we may be able to assist in the implementation efforts. Hearing no further comments, Chair Rivenbark thanked Ms. Adams for the report and requested direction from the Board. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, JANUARY 9, 2023 PAGE 607 Motion: Commissioner Hays MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple to approve the New Hanover County Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING WHEN THE DESIGN-BUILD DELIVERY METHOD IS APPROPRIATE FOR COUNTY CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS Chief Financial Officer Eric Credle stated the County currently uses the Design-Bid-Build and Construction Manager at Risk (CM@R) methods for construction projects. The Board is being asked to consider adding a third method known as Design-Build (DB). For projects that are more specialized/unique, there may be circumstances where it makes sense to go to a one-stop shop, where the firm has the design expertise and construction expertise to deliver the project from start to finish. The method will be most applicable in very specialized situations where the construction is tied into the unique design of the project. North Carolina General Statute (NCGS) 143-128.1A outlines several requirements for using the DB delivery method and requires the governmental entities to establish written criteria for determining when the method is appropriate for a given project. The resolution in the agenda packet reflects the six criteria for evaluating those areas. Additionally, the resolution authorizes the county manager or designee to decide if the DB method is the appropriate method for a given project. In response to Board questions, Mr. Credle confirmed it was correct that the DB method will not be the only process the County uses, rather it is just one of the tools that can be used. Chief Facilities Officer Sara Warmuth stated that there are quite a few local developers and contractors that can do DB projects. In response to further Board questions, Ms. Warmuth stated that CM@R allows the County to have the most input and hold the most control through the process. The DB method could be utilized for smaller projects and could rise to the level of a large project like the Ogden Skate Park. It is utilized more in the parks and gardens industry but could also be used in the facilities management industry. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield to adopt the resolution establishing written criteria for determining when the Design-Build method is appropriate for a project and to allow the county manager/designee to apply the criteria to future projects on a case-by-case basis. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLIX, Page 1.6. CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF BUDGET AMENDMENT 23-043 AND APPROVAL OF AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE LEACHATE MEMBRANE BIOREACTOR REPLACEMENT CAPITAL PROJECT TO TURNER MURPHY Environmental Management Director Joe Suleyman stated that the landfill generates daily about 50,000 gallons of wastewater. As the wastewater is toxic, the leachate treatment portion of the wastewater treatment system is one of the most important infrastructure pieces onsite to protect the environment. The department has ways to protect the environment from air emissions with the landfill gas collection system, ways to protect groundwater with liner systems, and ways to protect surface water with the leachate management system. A key component of the leachate management system is a membrane bioreactor which uses bacteria to consume the organic part of the wastewater and remove it from the waste stream. The system currently in place was purchased in 1992 and has been expanded over the years but has reached the end of its useful life. The department planned for this eventuality and set funds aside in the capital project fund to complete the project. The lowest bid received was $857,248 over budget, even after value engineering, from Turner Murphy. The request is for the Board to adopt the budget amendment reallocating $1,300,000 from the Lagoon Relining capital project to the Biological Treatment capital project and to approve the contract award to Turner Murphy. The Lagoon Relining capital project will be re- established and funded in the next five-year capital improvement plan (CIP) without adversely affecting operations. In response to Board questions, Mr. Suleyman stated the work will start once the contract is signed and the notice to proceed is issued. He confirmed the current capacity of the landfill is 28 years and there will not be another landfill approved to be built east of I-95 unless there is a radical change in regulations. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Hays to adopt budget amendment 23-043, transferring funds into the Biological Treatment Capital Project and approve the award of contract to Turner Murphy in the amount of $4,638,706 for the Leachate MBR Replacement project. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the budget amendment is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLIX, Page 1.7. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST (Z22-21) BY PARAMOUNTE ENGINEERING, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF THE CORNELIUS E NIXON REVOCABLE TRUST, CORNELIUS NIXON TRUST, AND NIXON ASSOCIATES, LLC, PROPERTY OWNERS, TO REZONE FOUR PARCELS TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 9.75 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 7011 RUTH AVENUE FROM B-2, REGIONAL BUSINESS AND R-15, RESIDENTIAL TO (CZD) RMF- M, RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY – MODERATE DENSITY FOR A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, JANUARY 9, 2023 PAGE 608 Current Planner Julian Griffee presented the rezoning request stating that the applicant is proposing to rezone approximately 9.75 acres at 7011 and 7032 Ruth Avenue and 7001 and 7035 Market Street from B-2, Regional Business and R-15, Residential to (CZD) RMF-M, Conditional Residential Multi-Family - Moderate Density. The subject parcels are located along the Market Street corridor, just north of the Military Cutoff extension – Market Street interchange in an area where the existing R-15 and B-2 zoning designations were applied in 1972. Since the original zonings were applied, water and sewer services have been introduced and the area has become more urbanized, with a variety of business uses and varying intensities of residential developments. Most of the parcels’ acreage is undeveloped. One of the parcels, which faces Market Street, hosts one single-family dwelling. The subject site is surrounded by a utility use, single-family dwellings along Ruth Avenue, and commercial development that fronts Market Street. The Military Cutoff extension also abuts the site and will be elevated at Ogden Park Drive as to not disrupt that roadway’s traffic flow. The extension is expected to be operational by the public this year. Mr. Griffee provided an overview of the applicant’s conceptual plan. The proposal consists of 144 dwellings units, spread between two four-story structures. A stormwater management device is proposed to be located between the multi-family structures, and space reserved for an amenity leasing office along Ruth Avenue. Setbacks and buffering from the adjacent residential uses has been proposed by the applicant, as depicted within the conceptual plan. The primary entry point is proposed from Ruth Avenue, a private right-of-way, which the applicant has indicated will be maintained by the development. A secondary access point has been proposed, connecting the development with direct access to Market Street. Preserved space has been delineated in the area that abuts the Military Cutoff extension. It is anticipated that the secondary access will be a right in, right out only, per the applicant. The existing site accommodating the single-family dwelling is estimated to generate approximately one AM peak hour and one PM peak hour trip. The trips generated from the requested B-2 portion of the property would vary based on the proposed uses within the district. It is estimated that 9.09 acres of property zoned B-2 can generally support approximately 71,300 square feet of traditional general retail uses based on an 18% building area typical for this type of zoning. For example, a 71,300 square foot supermarket development, a permissible use within the B-2 zoning district, is estimated to generate about 252 AM and 644 PM peak hour trips. The proposed RMF-M district is estimated to generate approximately 52 AM peak hour and 57 PM pear hour trips, which is a decrease by approximately 200 in the AM peak hour and 587 in the 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). Based on a generalized historic generation rate, staff would estimate that the increase in homes would result in approximately 32 additional students than would be generated under current zoning. There are no subdivisions under development within the general vicinity of the project. The 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan (Comprehensive Plan) classifies the property as Urban Mixed Use, which promotes development of a mix of residential, office, and retail uses at higher densities. It is intended for moderate to high densities while also providing a transition between the existing lower density housing and higher intensity commercial uses along heavily traveled roadway corridors, such as the Market Street corridor. The proposed RMF-M zoning is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan because the district is more in line with the densities recommended for Urban Mixed Use areas than the existing zoning, especially near growth nodes. Additionally, the shape and form of the development proposed could serve as an appropriate transition from the existing single-family dwellings along Ruth Avenue from the Military Cutoff extension, the commercial and institutional uses, and the power station. The Planning Board considered this application at its December 1, 2022 meeting and recommended approval of the application (5-0) with an additional condition specifying that the leasing amenity office be no taller than one-story. It found the application consistent with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the project provides for the types and mixture of uses recommended in the Urban Mixed Use place type and the residential densities are in line with those recommended for the property. It also found recommending approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal would benefit the community by providing a transition between the existing land uses along Ruth Avenue, the roadway to the west, and the commercial uses to the south, and will provide additional housing in close proximity to existing and future commercial development in between the City of Wilmington and the Kirkland – Porters Neck commercial node. Mr. Griffee concluded the staff presentation stating that no comments were received in opposition pertaining to the project. If approved, the project would be subject to Technical Review Committee (TRC) and zoning compliance review processes to ensure full compliance with all ordinance requirements. Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Griffee for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks. Allison Engebretson with Paramounte Engineering, applicant, on behalf of the Cornelius E. Nixon Revocable Trust, Cornelius Nixon Trust, and Nixon Associates, LLC, property owners, stated that Paramounte Engineering is working for the developer, Stout Operating Firm, LLC, on the requested conditional rezoning of the subject +10.9 acres of property located at the end of Ruth Avenue and adjacent to the new Military Cutoff extension. The subject site does touch Ruth Avenue all the way out to Ogden Park Drive, which is land that will be purchased by the client and maintained under a private ownership with access and utility easements to the existing properties along Ruth Avenue. The development is proposed to be at the end of Ruth Avenue which will also be the main access. The entire site is almost 11 acres, but only about 9.5 acres is being looked at for the development project. The Military Cutoff extension has bisected what was previously a larger parcel. The Nixon family has owned the property for about 100 years and had previously planned the entirety of Ruth Avenue for single-family homes, primarily for their family. The Military Cutoff extension has changed that plan a bit and it is no longer suitable for single-family in the rear portion where it touches the elevated highway. The family has looked at selling that area off for other development. It is an NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, JANUARY 9, 2023 PAGE 609 Urban Mixed Use area, which is one of the most intense land designations in the Comprehensive Plan. The subject site is surrounded by about 260 acres of Urban Mixed Use and the regional commercial shopping area along Market Street and Military Cutoff. It is also adjacent to Community Mixed Use, primarily Ogden Park, which encompasses some other areas as well. The Comprehensive Plan does support a project like what is being proposed. The Urban Mixed Use area does allow for multi-family residential, which is two to five stories tall and medium to high density. The proposed project falls in the medium density area in terms of the Comprehensive Plan. There will be two buildings, each with 72 units, for a total of 144 units with associated parking. The stormwater feature is located between the buildings partially as an amenity, and because it is the most appropriate place to locate it. There is also a secondary connection to Market Street on the site which will help to provide emergency vehicle access as well as meet people’s ingress and egress needs. Work has been done with the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) to work through the requirements that would be associated with the project due to the Military Cutoff extension project. There is a fair amount of open space on the plan, with the buildings concentrated on the interior of the site to keep them as far away as possible from the new extension on the left hand side, the power substation, and the existing single-family homes. Appropriate buffering will also be put in place. The leasing office will be kept at one-story and will blend into the neighborhood as much as possible. Ms. Engebretson provided a brief overview of the site conditions, noting that one gravesite was found on the site. To ensure it would not be disturbed by the project, gain knowledge about it, and check for any other potentially unmarked gravesites an archaeologist was hired to assess the area and provide a report on it. Essentially there is no evidence of any other graves and there was a recommendation made to install a buffer around the gravesite, which is currently being created. Ms. Engebretson concluded the applicant presentation stating that development will be built in accordance with the conditional rezoning plan, the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), and any approved modifications to the plan. Overall, the proposal is consistent with the use, density, and height recommendations of the Urban Mixed Use place type and supports the County’s policy to increase density in Urban Mixed Use areas within proximity to the City of Wilmington. Chair Rivenbark announced that no signed up to speak in favor or in opposition to the request, closed the public hearing and opened the floor to Board discussion. In response to Board questions, Ms. Engebretson confirmed that the gravesite will not be moved, and access will be provided to it. As to stormwater retention, Rob Balland with Paramounte Engineering confirmed that it would be built to a minimum of a 25-year storm, but efforts will be made to look at what could be done above the minimum. There are two options for outfalls because of the bypass and there are easements available to convey the stormwater. Also, a downstream analysis will be done of each outfall ditch to ensure they are appropriately sized. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Hays MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield, to approve the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) RMF-M district as 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 Urban Mixed Use place type and the residential densities are in-line with those recommended for the property. The Board also finds approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal would benefit the community by providing a transition between the existing land uses along Ruth Avenue, the roadway to the west, and the commercial uses to the south, and will provide additional housing in close proximity to existing and future commercial development in between the City of Wilmington and the Kirkland – Porters Neck commercial node. The condition of the amenity leasing office shall be limited to one story in height will also apply to the site. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA 8B OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED July 7, 1972 is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book II, Section 8B, Page 89. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST (Z22-22) BY SAMUEL FRANCK WITH WARD AND SMITH, P.A., APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF WILMINGTON DEVELOPMENT GROUP, INC, PROPERTY OWNER, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 7.63 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 147 BRENTWOOD DRIVE FROM R-15, RESIDENTIAL TO (CZD) R-5, RESIDENTIAL FOR A QUADRAPLEX AND TRIPLEX RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Current Planner Julian Griffee presented the rezoning request stating that the applicant is proposing to rezone approximately 7.63 acres at 147 Brentwood Drive from R-15, Residential, to (CZD) R-5, Conditional Residential District. The proposed development consists of three triplex and 10 quadraplex buildings on the parcel, which is located between existing single-family dwellings along Glendale Drive to the north and Brentwood Drive to the west and south. Businesses fronting Castle Hayne Road border the property to the east. Currently, the subject site is undeveloped. Single-family residential of varying types exists to the north, west, and south, and commercial uses exist to the east on parcels fronting Castle Hayne Road. Mr. Griffee provided an overview of the applicant’s conceptual plan. The concept plan depicts 49 single- family, attached residential units to be constructed in the format of three triplex structures and 10 quadraplex structures. The applicant has depicted on the plan Type A buffers between the development and single-family dwellings that border the parcel to the north and south. The plan also depicts two stormwater basins. Access is proposed in the southeast corner of the parcel from Brentwood Drive. A gated access for EMS Vehicles is proposed in the southwestern corner of the parcel, which would also connect to Brentwood Drive. The number of stories for the structures has not been provided. However, the maximum building heights for the current R-15 zoning district NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, JANUARY 9, 2023 PAGE 610 and the requested R-5 zoning district are both 40-feet. Brentwood Drive is the access to the parcel, which is a NCDOT local road and connects to Castle Hayne Road, a NCDOT minor arterial road. When compared with the type of development typical under current R-15 zoning, the requested district could generate an additional four trips in each peak hour. The estimated trip generation for the project is under the 100 peak hour trip threshold that triggers the ordinance requirement for a TIA, but any development would still be subject to NCDOT review through the driveway permitting process. There is one State Transportation Improvement Project (STIP) within the general vicinity of the proposal. That project seeks to widen Castle Hayne Road from Division Drive to I-140, with right-of-way acquisition scheduled for fiscal year 2025 and construction to begin after 2029. There is also one approved TIA nearby for Preservation Point, with those details included in the agenda packet. The Preservation Point project is the only subdivision under development within the general vicinity with most of the units unbuilt. Based on a generalized historic generation rate, staff would estimate that the increase in homes would result in approximately seven additional students than would be generated under current zoning. Again, the subject property is located on a NCDOT local road that connects only to Castle Hayne Road, a NCDOT minor arterial. The area is located between the Wrightsboro commercial node and downtown Wilmington and is positioned for future growth. The proposal could serve as an appropriate transition between the residentially zoned property to the north, south, and west, and B-2 zoned parcels that currently accommodate commercial uses that front Castle Hayne Road. The proposal has an overall higher density than that of adjacent land uses, however, performance residential developments exist nearby that contain single-family dwelling units on lots smaller than 5,500 square feet. The subject site is in close proximity to employment centers, including the Airport Commerce Park and industrial uses towards downtown Wilmington, and could provide different housing options to these concentrated employment centers. The Comprehensive Plan classifies the subject parcel as Employment Center. Employment Center place types are generally applied in areas like this that are intended to serve as employment and production hubs where office and light industrial uses are easily available. However, low to moderate density residential uses are encouraged within this place type to support the employment and production hubs. The proposed rezoning is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan because the project provides for the type of housing diversity that is recommended in the Employment Center place type, the residential densities are in line with those recommended within this place type, and the project will provide additional housing near existing and future commercial development serving nearby residents. The Planning Board considered this application at its December 1, 2022 meeting and recommended approval of the petition (5-0) with an additional condition specifying that improvements will be made to the existing drainage system within NCDOT right-of-way for completion of infrastructure improvements for the development. It found the application consistent with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the project provides for the types and mixture of uses recommended in the Employment Center place type and the residential densities are in line with those recommended for the property. It was further found that approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal would benefit the community by providing diverse housing options near existing employment centers. The proposal also provides a transition between adjacent neighborhoods to west and the commercial and industrial uses to the east and will provide additional housing near existing and future commercial development in the Hightsville area. The area is positioned for future growth given the area’s location along Castle Hayne Road, a minor arterial that connects the Wrightsboro commercial node to downtown Wilmington. Because the proposal in line with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations for this area, is similar in form and density to other residential projects approved nearby and may serve as a transitional buffer between the existing neighborhoods, existing commercial uses, and future commercial activity, staff concurs with the Planning Board’s recommendation of approval of this application. In addition to the condition recommended by the Planning Board, staff also recommends two conditions offered by the applicant to address additional questions brought up at the Planning Board hearing and suggests the proposed conditions: 1. Improvements will be made to existing drainage system within NCDOT right-of-way for completion of infrastructure improvements for the development in accordance with the standards and requirements of NCDOT and New Hanover County Engineering. 2. If the right-of-way for public dedication on the site plan is not accepted as a public right-of-way by the NCDOT, then the owner shall establish a perpetual arrangement for maintenance of the same by the owner of said right-of-way, via deed restriction or the like. 3. Access to the mail kiosk shall meet all ADA and accessibility requirements, and one visiting parking space located in front of or in close proximity to the mail kiosk may be removed to accommodate this. Mr. Griffee concluded the staff presentation stating that opposition comments were received and have been provided as part of the agenda packet. If approved, the 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 that the applicant would be able to provide insight as to why there is one point of public ingress and egress and one entrance restricted with a gate for only emergency vehicles. As understood by staff, the applicant altered the original design after the community meeting due to concerns expressed by the neighbors. In the original design, the road looped around to Brentwood Drive farther to the west. Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Griffee for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, JANUARY 9, 2023 PAGE 611 Samuel Franck with Ward and Smith, P.A., applicant, on behalf of Wilmington Development Group, Inc., property owner, stated that the proposed rezoning of approximately 7.6 acres from R-15 to (CZD) R-5 is in the best interest of the County and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In cooperation with Planning staff, and after considering various comments that were received from the neighbors, what has been developed is a plan that delivers a desirable diversity of housing options in this area of the County with a relatively low impact on an infill site in a way that is consistent with the Employment Center place type. Although the R-5 district allows up to eight units per acre, what is being proposed is about 6.4 units per acre. This will bring an organically more affordable housing option than the single-family homes that would be supported by the current R-15 zoning. The traffic impact is nominal and does not activate the need for the TIA to be redone as at the very peak hour there is an increase of three to four trips per hour, equating to one additional car every 15 minutes. The current R-15 zoning designation was created in 1972 and used throughout the County in several places where there were no other needs for different zoning. At that time, residences in the area could not rely on public water or sewer and had to incorporate a septic system and therefore, the request to rezone the subject site to R-15 made more sense. Parcels immediately to the east and southeast of the region are zoned Regional Business District B-2 which could include by-right big box stores or automobile dealers. Those areas are currently utilized for a towing service and a gas station, as well as the industrial uses that are located along Castle Hayne Road. The Comprehensive Plan contemplates interwoven equity, and this proposal will create a unique housing option that will increase the range of housing types, opportunities, and choices within the County, particularly on the northern side of the County. It fosters inclusivity for residents who are not interested in or cannot afford traditional detached single-family homes. As to the policy of creating a resilient economy, the proposed development will help revitalize an underutilized parcel of land. The proposed development will create a unique space that attracts individuals and companies to the area. The site is perfectly poised to offer housing options to employees working in the already established commercial and industrial parcels nearby. The conceptual plan is to establish a walkable community. The development would also increase resident access to basic goods and services and would increase the number of residences within one mile of support services. Where there are established commercial industrial uses, there is a need for a diversity of housing options to be available to people who work in those commercial and industrial services, and the less time spent driving home to work results in fewer cars generating fewer miles on the roads. The site also creates a good opportunity for a natural transition between the existing larger lots in the R-15 areas, located to the north and to the west, and the much more intense use located immediately to the east. The original design incorporated an entry at both ends which reach out to Brentwood Drive and are part of the parcel which is owned in fee-simple the applicant. The staggering of the homes was oriented to create more space between each building. There was active discussion at the community meeting where several concerns were presented by the neighbors with traffic being top amongst them in relation to the impact on Brentwood Drive. The neighbors were explicit that having two points of access to Brentwood Drive would lead to two points of intersection and therefore a greater impact on the ability to cleanly traverse Brentwood Drive. There were also numerous concerns about stormwater management and drainage due to standing water not only on the subject site, but also in the publicly maintained drainage facilities that are located along Brentwood Drive. Questions were raised about the integration of the development with the existing community as what is proposed is a private road and some residents expressed an interest in being able to also utilize the road. Other concerns heard were about the height of the development and how existing public infrastructure is located some distance from the site. In response to those comments, the plan was significantly revised in terms of site orientation by eliminating one of the primary points of access and establishing the secondary access for emergency use only. In doing so, the remaining point of access was located as close to Castle Hayne Road as possible. Also, 10 to 11 additional parallel parking spaces were created throughout the community due to neighbors’ concerns about overflow parking along Brentwood Drive. The development will incorporate significant vegetative and stormwater buffers that do not currently exist. Stormwater ponds were relocated with the southern pond now serving as a significant buffer between the proposed development and the existing homes along Brentwood Drive. The plan incorporates explicit depictions of where the stormwater ponds would go with the knowledge that stormwater has to be designed to manage all the onsite stormwater, as well as to treat and remove it in an appropriate fashion. It is a significant improvement over the natural lay of the land today. The sidewalk was always planned but again, there was a desire to make that explicit on the site plan. The infrastructure contemplated to be constructed in connection with this development includes both drainage improvements and water and sewer improvements. This needs to be done for the sake of delivering water and sewer to the subject site. Mr. Franck provided an overview of the drainage improvements that his clients will be responsible for that will be necessary for the project noting that water and sewer lines will be installed in front of 12 to 14 homes on Brentwood Drive that currently do not have access to public water and sewer. Mr. Franck concluded the applicant presentation stating that the site will be serving as a transition between the intense uses along Castle Hayne Road and the existing single-family residential area. The site plan is the result of significant dialogue and cooperation with staff and with significant consideration given to the neighbors. He noted that there were several neighbors who stated that they would prefer that nothing be built on the subject site. While those opinions are certainly respected, there is also a respect that the landowner has a right to build on their land, just as anyone else would. As indicated by the Planning Board's recommendation of approval, the requested rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and with the future land use map. It will increase the diversity of housing within the County and will allow for the development of an attractive low impact infill development that acts as a transition between nearby commercial and residential uses. In response to Board questions, Mr. Franck stated he could not speak to the project price point for the units as they have not been architecturally designed nor can it be reasonably projected what the market will hold in 18 to NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, JANUARY 9, 2023 PAGE 612 24 months. Also, the decision has not been made if the units will be rentals or offered for sale. The landowner is fine with not having two points of entry. It was a voluntary decision on their part in consultation with their professional land planner and to be responsive to the community’s concerns. The result is a nice, secluded cul-de-sac neighborhood with the opportunity to utilize the sidewalk. Although the road will be a dedicated public road there is not an expectation of a lot of thru traffic. While not the first choice, it is a reasonable accommodation to make. A brief discussion was held about the changes made after the community meeting, with focus on the change in points of ingress and egress. Mr. Franck explained that it is felt that the level of community interest in the development is indicative of the value that the neighbors place on the neighborhood. As such, the landowner feels that much better about their investment in the site, and the opportunity to build homes on their land that will be part of the community. It is also recognized that not everyone can be made happy. There is no real benefit to the landowner in making the road available to the public. However, it was something that could be afforded to be responsive to the community. The comments about traffic focused on the number of intersections being created on Brentwood Drive. It was felt that the creation of a single point of access was the best option to manage when placed closer to Castle Hayne Road. While the emergency access could be turned into a regular access, the Board is being asked to approve a conditional zoning that is based on the presented site plan. It is understood that if in the future it was determined that the emergency access needed to be turned into regular access the applicant would need to submit a request to revise the conditional zoning to allow it. In response to Board questions, Planning and Land Use Director Rebekah Roth confirmed that unless there is a condition provided that allows the applicant to make the gated access a public access or a secondary access as a condition of any approval, then the applicant would have to come back to the Board in the future to request the modification. Deputy County Attorney Sharon Huffman confirmed that Ms. Roth’s response was correct, that the option does not need to be given now and she does not think it is appropriate to provide the condition to allow the option to change the emergency access to a regular access. If the change is desired in the future the applicant would need to make the request of the Board. Further discussion was held about interconnectivity. Ms. Roth stated that from a staff perspective, interconnectivity is always the preference but, in this case, it is not a deal breaker. Staff did have discussions with the applicant prior to the formal application submission about the community meeting feedback. From a staff perspective, based on those discussions it was determined that if the applicant elected to go with only one ingress and egress, staff would still be supportive of the overall application. In response to Board questions, Planning Board member Jeff Petroff stated the project was discussed at great length during the Planning Board meeting and it was understood what the applicant showed were the differences between the original design and what was brought forward for consideration. Based on the number of units, the Planning Board was comfortable enough to approve the revised layout. Technically, having the emergency access which would meet the fire and emergency service codes while the utilities and upgrades that would be brought to the area warranted the approval. He thinks the Planning Board would have recommended approval for either the original design or the modified design that was presented. Discussion was held about the road being built to NCDOT standards. The applicant’s land planner Joshua Mihaley of Mihaley Land Design provided a brief history of the road design from the time of initial conception to what is being presented to the Board. Mr. Franck stated that what is being presented is the best solution after discussion with staff, the community, and with the professionals on the design team. He confirmed the road will be built to NCDOT standards. Ms. Roth confirmed that staff consulted NCDOT and there are features of the current design which would make it unlikely to ever be accepted into the NCDOT system which is the reason for the additional condition recommended by staff about the public access. Some of the features, including on-street parking are things that while the roadway itself is designed to meet the required NCDOT standards, are features that NCDOT will not necessarily take over. It is designated currently to be a private road that is maintained by a homeowners’ association (HOA), which is common within the County's jurisdiction because of NCDOT standards as far as what will be taken over for maintenance. Mr. Franck stated that he and his team cannot control whether NCDOT takes over the road, but it can be built to NCDOT standards. It is also understood that NCDOT is reluctant to take roads, whether connected at both ends or a cul-de-sac road. One of the new proposed conditions is a commitment from the landowner to establish by deed restriction for the perpetual road maintenance to be managed by the owner of the road. If it is a rental home situation, the owner of the road will be the landlord and if it is an HOA, where the homes are sold, the HOA will be the entity that owns the road. In either case, the landowner will be obligated by that condition to establish a deed restriction to ensure its perpetual maintenance if NCDOT does not take it. County Manager Coudriet stated that any time the Board has approved a rezoning such as this or a project is approved at staff level, unless the project is currently on an NCDOT highway, none of the approved projects are immediately accepted by NCDOT. There is always the condition of either an HOA or a future property owner maintaining it until NCDOT accepts it. Most of the projects the Board has ever approved, while being built to NCDOT standards, are not necessarily part of the state road maintenance system. Also, a development must be built out at 50% or more before even being considered by NCDOT. Chair Rivenbark announced that no one signed up to speak in favor and one person signed up to speak in opposition to the request and asked for the opposition speaker to provide their remarks. Chris Bengivengo, resident of Glendale Drive, spoke in opposition stating while he appreciates the developer listening to the community, it is not necessarily the right development for the area as the existing neighborhoods are single-family residences on large lots. He provided an overview of the neighbors’ concerns with NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, JANUARY 9, 2023 PAGE 613 traffic and explained how many of the properties cannot meet public water and sewer standards nor afford to tap into the service. He expressed concerns about the potential impacts to the homes that cannot connect into the service versus the ones that can connect. He asked the Board to deny the rezoning request and only allow the landowners to build single-family residences on the subject site. Chair Rivenbark stated that the applicant and opponent would each have five minutes for rebuttal and invited both to provide their rebuttal remarks. In applicant rebuttal, Mr. Franck stated that the applicant team has been very transparent about its intentions regarding installing water and sewer infrastructure. The lines will be sold to Cape Fear Public Utility Authority (CFPUA) once installed and what CFPUA does to allow people to connect to them from that point forward is beyond the landowner’s control. The lines being installed have been confirmed by the project engineer to be sufficient to carry service for the additional 12 to 14 homes that would have access to the lines. Finally, the current zoning R-15 has a height maximum height parameter of 40-feet. The proposed zoning (CZD) R-5 has a maximum height parameter of 40-feet, and there is no request for any height over what is currently permitted. In opposition rebuttal, Mr. Bengivengo stated the proposed project will affect homes on Glendale, Brentwood, and Victoria Drives and using Preservation Point for comparison is not appropriate. Chair Rivenbark closed the public hearing and opened the floor to Board discussion. Vice-Chair Pierce stated that she is okay with the project as presented as it would provide some more workforce housing in the area and the developers have done their best to address the community’s concerns. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked Mr. Franck if based on the Board discussion and items presented during the public hearing, would he like to withdraw the petition or proceed with the vote. Mr. Franck responded that he wanted to proceed with the vote. Chair Rivenbark asked for direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple, to approve the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) R-5 district as 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 Employment Center place type and the residential densities are in line with those recommended for the property. The Board finds approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal would benefit the community by providing diverse housing options in close proximity to existing employment centers. The proposal also provides a transition between adjacent neighborhoods to the west and the commercial and industrial uses to the east and will provide additional housing in close proximity to existing and future commercial development in the Hightsville area. The following conditions will also apply: 1. Improvements will be made to existing drainage system within NCDOT right-of-way for completion of infrastructure improvements for the development in accordance with the standards and requirements of NCDOT and New Hanover County Engineering. 2. If the right-of-way for public dedication on the site plan is not accepted as a public right-of-way by the NCDOT, then the owner shall establish a perpetual arrangement for maintenance of the same by the owner of said right-of-way, via deed restriction or the like. 3. Access to the mail kiosk shall meet all ADA and accessibility requirements, and one visiting parking space located in front of or in close proximity to the mail kiosk may be removed to accommodate this. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA 9A OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED July 1, 1972 is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book II, Section 9A, Page 63. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST (Z18-02M) BY CINDEE WOLF WITH DESIGN SOLUTIONS, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF BAILEY & FULLER PROPERTIES, LLC, PROPERTY OWNER, TO MODIFY THE CZD ZONING OF TWO PARCELS TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 3.44 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 7887 MARKET STREET FROM (CZD) B-2, REGIONAL BUSINESS AND O&I, OFFICE AND INSTITUTIONAL TO (CZD) B-2, REGIONAL BUSINESS Current Planner Zach Dickerson presented the rezoning request stating the applicant is proposing to modify the zoning of two parcels, located at 7887 and 7957 Market Street to a (CZD) B-2, Regional Business District to develop a mixed-use three-story building. The subject site is located on the northern side of Market Street and the surrounding area to the north and west is primarily residential with a few commercial developments to the east. Across Market Street to the south are three-story apartment buildings and commercial development. The subject site is currently undeveloped and bounded to the south by Market Street, to the east by Bump Along Road and to the west by Raintree Road. The parcel of the subject site that fronts Market Street was rezoned in 2018 to (CZD) B-2 for a two-story commercial development, while the rear parcel remained zoned as O&I. No development of the parcels has moved forward at this time. The O&I district is intended to provide lands that accommodate institutional, professional offices, and other compatible uses. The (CZD) B-2 zoning applying to the portion of the site fronting Market Street would allow a project with limited commercial uses, office space and a high-turnover restaurant. The concept plan NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, JANUARY 9, 2023 PAGE 614 has changed to provide for a different site layout, which is the reason for the rezoning request to (CZD) B-2 as well as allowing for building heights up to 50-feet. The B-2 district was established to provide for the proper site layout and development of larger format or larger structure size business uses, including big box stores and automobile dealers. It is also designed to provide for the appropriate location and design of auto-oriented uses that meet the needs of the motoring public or that rely on pass-by traffic. Access is proposed to be provided to the subject property from Bump Along Road, a private local road, and from Raintree Road, an NCDOT maintained road. Access on both Bump Along Road and Raintree Road will be full access in and out. Traffic calming devices are proposed on the Raintree Road entrance, as noted on the conceptual plan. A TIA was completed for the original Z18-02 rezoning case. It is estimated that the site will generate approximately 52 AM peak hour trips and 85 PM peak hour trips. This is a reduction from the previously approved project, which would have generated 134 AM and 264 PM peak hour trips, and a new TIA is not required. The applicant has proposed a condition that the improvements required as part of the approved 2018 TIA must be completed in accordance with NCDOT's standards prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Mr. Dickerson provided an overview of the required improvements which include the build-out of a right turn lane at Bump Along Road extending to Marsh Oaks Drive, and the signalization of the future U-turn at Marshall Court which will be installed as part of STIP U-4902D. This STIP also includes the build-out of a multi-use path along Market Street, extending from Middle Sound Loop Road to Marsh Oaks Drive. The Comprehensive Plan classifies the site as Community Mixed Use, and it is located near the Porters Neck growth node. The Community Mixed Use place type promotes a mix of retail, office, and residential development at moderate densities. It also recommends higher-intensity mixed use with first floor retail and office with housing above at a building height range of one to three stories. The Planning Board considered this application at its December 1, 2022 meeting and recommended approval (5-0) with the following conditions offered by the applicant: 1. The improvements required as part of the approved 2018 Traffic Impact Analysis must be completed in accordance with NCDOT’s standards prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 2. The two-way vehicular connection to Raintree Road, extending to Bump Along Road, must be included within a 30-foot wide access easement that is dedicated for public use. 3. The portion of Bump Along Road adjoining the subject property must be improved as a minimum 20’ paved, two-way drive and dedicated for public use, either by dedicating an access easement or private right-of-way. 4. Subject property owners will participate with all other property owners along Bump Along Road in a road maintenance agreement for their pro-rata road frontage. 5. Exterior lighting, including luminaries and security lights, shall be arranged, or shielded so as not to cast illumination in an upward direction above an imaginary line extended from the light sources parallel to the ground. Fixtures shall be numbered such that adequate levels of lighting are maintained, but that light spillage and glare are not directed at adjacent property, neighboring areas, or motorists. Light posts shall be no taller than 20-feet. The Planning Board found the application to be consistent with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it is in an area designated as Community Mixed Use, located near a growth node, and provides for the uses that are appropriate for the area. It further found recommending approval of the rezoning request was reasonable and in the public interest because the proposed provides neighborhood-serving commercial development. Mr. Dickerson concluded the staff presentation stating that based on the recommended uses and intensity for Community Mixed Use places, the context and compatibility with the immediate surrounding area, and reduced traffic impact in this transitional area, staff concurs with the Planning Board's recommendation of the application and proposed conditions. If approved, the project would be subject to TRC and zoning compliance review processes to ensure full compliance with all ordinance requirements. Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Dickerson for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks. Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, applicant, on behalf of behalf of Bailey & Fuller Properties, LLC, property owner, stated she has been working on the subject site for many years. The proposed project is a modification of the existing commercial center that is already approved for the front parcel with what is believed will be a superior design and improvement. The existing zoning with the project boundary includes the conditional district that was approved back in 2018. The rear parcel is zoned straight O&I, which is available for development of any of the uses within the O&I district and can be developed by-right. The application proposes to bring both parcels under a comprehensive conditional district, thereby providing surety of the development over both parcels and guarantees of specific improvements to mitigate any impacts to surrounding properties. She provided an overview of the former site plan noting the attached conditional district overlaying the front parcel and that the use to allow a drive-thru business has been removed from the prior approved uses for the site. The proposed modification of master plan for the properties is for a three-story building oriented towards the highway frontage with no building proposed in the rear. The uses would include those that are customary in a commercial center and are further limited to the updated condition list. As was part of the original condition, there will be a two-way vehicular connection to Raintree Road, extending to Bump Along Road, within a 30-foot wide access easement that is dedicated for public use. The portion of Bump Along Road adjoining the subject property must be improved as a minimum 20-foot paved, two-way drive and dedicated for public use, either by dedicating an access easement or private right-of-way. The existing wetlands on the rear track will be preserved and a conservation area buffer will be applied. The rear parking area is set back from it and there is also a double the required buffer yard distance between the rear of the parking area and the NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, JANUARY 9, 2023 PAGE 615 neighborhood. Sidewalks are provided throughout and will not only avail circulation to the tenants of the center but will provide pedestrian access from the neighborhood and to the front sidewalk being installed by NCDOT as part of the Market Street project. Street yard, interior parking, shading, and foundation plantings all add to the overall aesthetics of any project center such as this. Public water and sanitary sewer mains are available for utility services. The stormwater management system is proposed to be an efficient and versatile under pavement retention and infiltration system. Ms. Wolf explained that development of the land has been pending the imminent completion of Market Street median project, and recently NCDOT suggested that by the end of this year it may be complete. Bump Along Road is a private access easement, not a right of way, nor is it a road that was subdivided from the original tract of the Alberta Beale property in 1975. Several lots were created without benefit of recording plats, presumably because the subdivision regulations were not adopted until 1978. All the deeds connected to the properties reference them together with rights of way or easements for ingress and egress over and across the road that leads from the described tracts to US-17. It is technically fee-simple owned land known as Bump Along Road and the easement is still the fee simple property of the end lot owners. Those owners are the heirs of the developers of Mendenhall subdivision. Approval of the project with the conditions will include improvement of approximately 300-feet of Bump Along Road to a standard two way paved roadway, for which the developer will be responsible for both the construction and the perpetual maintenance. A TIA was completed during the 2018 rezoning process, and it has been determined that a new TIA is not necessary, but that the original recommendations will be continued. A consistent topic during past hearings related to issues endured by one of the residents of Brickstone Estates, Mr. Cromartie. Currently there is no culvert under the dirt path that extends from the end of Raintree Road over to Bump Along Road and hence there is an extensive depression area, much of which is delineated as actual wetlands. His home is right on the edge of it and has historically been severely impacted by heavy rainfall and flooding events. All runoff from the new surfaces of the proposed project will be required to be collected and managed in accordance with all state and county requirements. It will include a culvert under the Raintree Road extension, along with the upsizing of what was a 30-inch pipe underneath Market Street for 254 feet in the downstream drainage pattern to Paige's Creek and provide some remedy not existent today. She concluded the applicant presentation expressing appreciation for staff support and the positive recommendation of the Planning Board and stated that the request is consistent and reasonable and in the public interest. Chair Rivenbark announced that no one signed up to speak in favor and four people signed up to speak in opposition to the request and asked for the opposition speakers to provide their remarks. Chevalier Cromartie, resident of Raintree Road, spoke in opposition expressing his concerns regarding the increased traffic and safety issues that the project would cause, particularly on Raintree Road. He expressed concerns about the stormwater management plan not being achievable with the proposed underground system. He believes the project violates state statutes relating to the disposition of diffused surface water as he is certain the project will create a backwater situation on neighboring properties. He provided a brief history of what has occurred on his property due to hurricanes and significant rainfall events and what NCDOT contractors have done to mitigate the flooding issues. He does not feel the developers have been honest and transparent with their ability to help fix the issues that exist for his and his neighbors’ properties. Andy Fazzari, resident of Sansberry Court, spoke in opposition stating that his property is adjacent to the proposed project. He has no issue with the project itself but does have issues with the stormwater retention in the area as well as interconnectivity. The pipe improvements being installed by NCDOT to address the stormwater issue stop at Raintree Road and connect into an existing 24-inch pipe, which is currently blocked. As to the interconnectivity, when the project was originally approved the developer was fine with not having access to Raintree Road but now the County has stepped in and said there must be connectivity. He asked why the connectivity would be set for Raintree Road when no one can get out from the neighborhood to use it because it does not go up to the Mendenhall subdivision where there is a light. Chair Rivenbark stated that the applicant and opponents would each have five minutes for rebuttal and invited both to provide their rebuttal remarks. In applicant rebuttal, Ms. Wolf stated that the proposed project is to have a commercial center of 36,000 square feet with offices, retail, and things that the neighborhoods off Alexander Road and Brickstone Estates may desire to access without having to utilize Market Street, which is the point of interconnectivity along with emergency service delivery. There is the feasibility of a left-over at Alexander Road for people coming in the north direction to turn onto Alexander Road and then turn on Raintree Road to come in the back of the subject site. However, the left- over will not have a traffic signal. Bump Along Road is only 300-feet from the Mendenhall subdivision which has a traffic signal and a U-turn with a right turn lane. To the best of her knowledge, the majority of anyone coming from the south other than from those neighborhoods has no valid reason to use a left-over onto Alexander Road, where there is no stop to allow it. It could be an access point, but she does not believe it will be the primary access point. She and her client have never argued that Brickstone Estates on the northside of Raintree Road has backed up water because of an existing lack of a culvert under Raintree Road and Alexander Road. The improvements for the project will provide that much needed outlet. Part of the project is providing the remedy the residents are looking for stormwater management wise. Under pavement stormwater systems are valid and have go through all the same permitting, design regulations, and review by both the state and county that an open retention pond must go through. When open retention ponds are near a neighborhood, the arguments presented are about mosquitoes or concerns about the safety of children with fences. While the underground stormwater methods are more expensive, the developer can use all the land while meeting all the stormwater management criteria. As far as existing impacts NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, JANUARY 9, 2023 PAGE 616 of the subject site on properties, no surfaces have been laid down as no development has been done due as no detailed design and permitting has been done for the site. Ms. Wolf reiterated that the concerns expressed about stormwater management have been addressed and as to the proposed circulation, it is what circulation in this County is intended to provide to keep users for commercial uses off the main highways if possible. In response to Board questions, Ms. Wolf stated that the required traffic signal will be at the U-turn, located at the former Balkcum car dealership site, for people coming from the north U-turn to go back north again. North of the Alexander Drive loop and Market Street will be the left-over intersection. It will not be signalized. A person will have to wait for traffic to make a left-over into Brickstone Estates, whereas if a person goes up to the Mendenhall light, they will get the signal for a U-turn. She reconfirmed that she and her clients believe that some of the infrastructure that the project will provide will ease stormwater issues there is currently no outlet from Brickstone Estates to the NCDOT 54-inch culvert. That is where all the drainage goes, and the wetlands area cannot be drained. Not only will there be a new culvert pipe installed by the developer underneath the Raintree Road extension, but a catch basin will be set at the lowest point above the wetlands level to provide storm event overflow. In opposition rebuttal, Travis Shallow, resident of Bump Along Road, expressed concerns about the third floor potentially being made into residential units, the size of the parking lot, traffic and asked if there was the ability to add a gate where Bump Along Road narrows down to a one-lane private road. He also asked than an eight-foot wood privacy fence be required to provide more of a buffer for his and his neighbor’s properties. In opposition rebuttal, Jim Herren, resident of Sansberry Court, stated the subject site is uphill from his subdivision. While the proposal appears to be nice, until something is done about the stormwater runoff, he does not think what is being proposed will manage the situation. Also, if there is not going to be a stoplight at the intersection of Alexander Road and Market Street, he would like to know why NCDOT installed a stoplight arm at said intersection. Chair Rivenbark closed the public hearing and opened the floor to Board discussion. In response to Board questions, Ms. Roth stated that the rezoning request has some features that are benefits when compared to the current zoning of the subject site. One key benefit is the reduction in traffic with the removal of the drive-thru opportunity. Three-story buildings are appropriate for the area based on the Comprehensive Plan. Regarding the underground stormwater system, she deferred to County Engineer Jim Iannucci but noted that one of the things seen with surface stormwater is use of quite a bit of land which decreases the efficiency of land resources. Further discussion was held regarding stormwater and the use of underground management systems. Mr. Iannucci stated underground storage has been utilized in the City of Wilmington and the County. He confirmed that Ms. Roth was correct in that it is basically trading land for storage. The system utilizes infiltration, it does have an overflow, and would meet the 25 year pre- and post- storm requirements for the project. While the applicant will have to manage their stormwater, but there are also existing problems in the area that have been identified and must be addressed. The NCDOT culvert put under Raintree Road was never completed and he will be contacting NCDOT to learn more. That would be a project that Stormwater Services would entertain with NCDOT to make those improvements. The engineer of the proposed project would be required to include in the design plan what downstream improvements need to be done. However, they cannot be required to construct the improvements and as such, those would go on the prioritized list for Stormwater Services to do the work. In response to Board questions, Mr. Iannucci stated the needed improvements are something that Stormwater Services can fix. He stated that the residents explained the situation well with water flow issues. There are outstanding questions of where the water is and why the system was not completed by NCDOT. The flow of the water is what needs to be demonstrated to determine how it will reach the 54-inch culvert. A functioning system must be installed, which would be the responsibility of Stormwater Services, but the developer is responsible for the analysis and providing the information on the design plans. He reiterated that the developer cannot be required to make the downstream improvements but is required to create the preliminary design and identify the improvements so Stormwater Services can put them in place to benefit the surrounding area. In response to Board questions, Ms. Wolf reiterated that she and her client must go through the full permitting process before they can put down the first square foot of any type of surface and to do that, they must evaluate the downstream conditions. She reconfirmed that the fixes also must be done before construction can start. As to the stoplight at Alexander Road, the left-over method is better for anyone turning into the Alexander and Brickstone neighborhoods. It does not mean that more traffic will go that way to get to the subject location versus the Mendenhall U-turn, but it is all part of the interconnectivity and its purpose. Discussion was held regarding the enforceability of the condition “Subject property owners will participate with all other property owners along Bump Along Road in a road maintenance agreement for their pro-rata road frontage”. Ms. Wolf explained the condition relates to a 2018 request by Ms. LeGwin who was alive at the time and owned the fee simple property known as Bump Along Road. Her clients have the rights to use Bump Along Road and part of the TIA requirements was that Bump Along Road would be improved so there could be two-way traffic on a paved drive to access not only the front parking lot, but the connection to Raintree Road. Also, her clients must perpetually maintain that amount of frontage as part of when they prepared a road improvement and maintenance declaration that they were working on with Ms. LeGwin. The only thing Ms. LeGwin asked for was that they move her mailbox because it was up towards the front of Market Street, and that signage be installed at the end of the NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35 REGULAR MEETING, JANUARY 9, 2023 PAGE 617 improved portion that said, “No outlet - For residents and guests only.” Only one resident of Bump Along Road has contacted Ms. Wolf since the community information meeting. She and her client also offered for their attorney to prepare a road improvement maintenance agreement and asked for the residents to tell them if they wanted it pro- rata by their frontage, divided by six, or would they even want an agreement. Ms. Wolf stated she has not heard anything further but what she was trying to offer as part of the condition was to assist those residents. While they cannot require everyone on Bump Along Road to sign it, they can provide the paperwork to work out together and can commit to the maintenance of her client’s portion of Bump Along Road. In response to Board questions, Ms. Wolf confirmed that “Subject property owners” is referring to her clients and her clients are willing to have the document prepared and be a participant. If her clients are the only ones that sign for their pro-rata share, at least there is a guarantee that portion of Bump Along Road will be maintained. After further debate by the Board about the wording of the condition, there was consensus to modify it to state, “Subject property owners will offer to participate with all other property owners along Bump Along Road and assist in preparing a road maintenance agreement for their pro-rata road frontage”. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked Ms. Wolf if based on the Board discussion and items presented during the public hearing, would she like to withdraw the petition or proceed with the vote. Ms. Wolf responded that she wanted to proceed with the vote. Chair Rivenbark asked for direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Hays, to approve of the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) B-2 as the Board finds it to be consistent with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it is located in an area designated as Community Mixed Use, is located near a growth node, and provides for the uses that are appropriate for this area. The Board also finds recommending approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal provides neighborhood-serving commercial development. The following conditions will apply: 1. The improvements required as part of the approved 2018 Traffic Impact Analysis must be completed in accordance with NCDOT’s standards prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 2. The two-way vehicular connection to Raintree Road, extending to Bump Along Road, must be included within a 30-foot wide access easement that is dedicated for public use. 3. The portion of Bump Along Road adjoining the subject property must be improved as a minimum 20’ paved, two-way drive and dedicated for public use, either by dedicating an access easement or private right-of-way. 4. Subject property owners will offer to participate with all other property owners along Bump Along Road and assist in preparing a road maintenance agreement for their pro-rata road frontage. 5. Exterior lighting, including luminaries and security lights, shall be arranged, or shielded so as not to cast illumination in an upward direction above an imaginary line extended from the light sources parallel to the ground. Fixtures shall be numbered such that adequate levels of lighting are maintained, but that light spillage and glare are not directed at adjacent property, neighboring areas, or motorists. Light posts shall be no taller than 20-feet. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA 5 OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED July 6, 1971 is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book I, Section 5, Page 91. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Chair Rivenbark stated that no one signed up to speak on non-agenda items. ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS OF BUSINESS The Commissioners wished Commissioner Barfield well leading into his birthday. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Rivenbark adjourned the meeting at 7:33 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.