5-4-2023 Planning Board Packet NEW HANOVER COUNTY
PLANNING BOARD AGENDA
Assembly Room, New Hanover County Historic Courthouse
24 North Third Street, Room 301 Wilmington, NC 28401
Members of the Board
Jeffrey B. Petroff, Vice-Chair
Colin J. Tarrant | Hansen Matthews | Clark Hipp | Walter “Pete” Avery | Kevin Hine
Rebekah Roth, Director| Ken Vafier, Planning Manager
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
MAY 4, 2023 5:00 PM
Call to Order
Pledge of Allegiance
Approval of Minutes
REGULAR ITEMS OF BUSINESS
The Planning Board may consider substantial changes in these petitions as a result of objections, debate, and
discussion at the meeting, including rezoning to other classifications.
1 Public Hearing
Rezoning Request (Z23-09) - Request by Rob Tanner with Impeccable Development, applicant, on
behalf of Andrea Jones, Gwendolyn Horton, Christin Deener, Dwayne Barr, and Kimberlee Barr,
property owners, to rezone seven (7) parcels totaling approximately 11.77 acres of land located at
6800, 6808, 6814, 6818, 6820, 6824, and 6828 Carolina Beach Road from R-15, Residential to 2.37
acres of (CZD) B-1, Neighborhood Business and 8.6 acres acres of (CZD) RMF-M, Residential Multi-
Family - Moderate Density for a convenience store with fuel stations and a maximum 128 unit multi-
family development. This item was continued from the March 30 meeting.
2 Public Hearing
Text Amendment Request (TA23-04) – Request by Michael Faulkner with Castle Hayne Farm Park, LLC,
applicant, to amend the Unified Development Ordinance requirements pertaining to Campground /
Recreational Vehicle (RV) Parks.
3 Public Hearing
Text Amendment Request (TA23-02) - Request by New Hanover County Planning & Land Use to amend
Section 10.2.3 Community Information Meeting to clarify expectations and standards for Community
Information Meetings required for applications for conditional rezonings, planned developments, and
intensive industry special use permits.
4 Preliminary Forum
Special Use Permit Request (S23-02) - Request by Lynda Kachman with Rising Stars of North Carolina,
LLC, applicant, on behalf of Sandfiddler Properties, LLC, property owner, for the use of Child Care
Center at the approximately 0.82-acre parcel located at 320 Van Dyke Drive, zoned I-1, Light Industrial.
OTHER ITEMS
5 Discussion Regarding Planning Board Officers
6 Discussion Regarding Planning Board Meeting Times
N E W H A N OV E R C O U N T Y P L A N N I N G B OA R D
R EQ U E S T F O R B OA R D A C T I O N
M E E T I N G DAT E : 5/4/2023
Regular
D E PA R T M E N T: Planning P R E S E N T E R (S ): Robert Farrell, Senio r Planner
C O N TA C T (S ): Robert Farrell; Rebekah Ro th, Pla nning & L and U se D irector
S U B J EC T:
P ublic Hearing
Rezoning Request (Z 23-09) - Request by Rob Tanner with I m peccable Development, applic ant, on behalf of A ndrea
J ones, Gwendoly n Horton, C hris=n Deener, Dway ne B arr, and K imberlee B arr, property owners, to rezone seven
(7) parcels totaling approximately 11.77 ac res of land loc ated at 6800, 6808, 6814, 6818, 6820, 6824, and 6828
C arolina B each Road from R-15, Residen=al to 2.37 acres of (C Z D) B -1, N eighborhood Business and 8.6 ac res acres
of (C Z D) R M F-M , Residen=al M ul=-Family - M oderate Density for a c onvenience store with fuel sta=ons and a
maximum 128 unit mul=-family development. T h is item was conn u ed from the M arch 30 meeng.
B R I E F S U M M A RY:
T he applicant is pro posing to rezone seven parcels totaling approxima tely 11.77 acres from the R -15, Residen)al
zo ning district to approximately 2.37 acres to the (C Z D ) B -1, N eighborhood B usiness a nd approximately 8.66 acres to
the (C Z D ) R M F -M, Residen)al Modera te Family - Moderate Density districts f o r convenienc e sto re with f uel pumps
and a mul)-f amily develo pment.
T his item wa s con)nued at the March 30 regular mee)ng to allow staff to include an analysis of the Traffic I mpact
Analysis in the repo rt to the board. T he T I A wa s approved on March 29, an analysis o f which is included in the staff
report.
T he co ncept pla n can be bro ken into two interconnected por)ons: T he convenience store with f uel pumps to the east
bo rdering C arolina B each Road, and the mul)-family po r)o n to the west.
T he eastern por)on o f the projec t co nsists of a maximum 6,000 square foot convenience store and 16 pump fueling
sta)on with associated parking. T he concept pla n iden)fies an exis)ng L ive O ak specimen tree that will be preserved
alo ng C arolina B each Road. A condi)on has been included preserving the tree.
Sto rmwater is pro posed to be managed by a sha red sto rmwater management system on the mul)-f amily po r)o n o f
the project. A co ndi)o n has been included requiring a sto rmwa ter maintenance agreement between the co nvenience
sto re and the mul)-family development.
T he site is accessed at the intersec)o n of C arolina B each Road, a n N C D OT maintained U rban Principal Arterial
highway, and Myrtle Gro ve Road, an N C D OT maintained Minor Arterial ro ad. T he intersec)on is signalized and the
concept plan pro poses an access ro ad extended f ro m the intersec)on o f C aro lina B each Ro ad and Myrtle Grove Ro ad
west into the interior of the site for access to the convenience sto re and propo sed mul)-f amily develo pment. T he site
includes a second right-in / right-out driveway ac c ess onto C a ro lina B each Ro ad south of the intersec)on.
T he R -15 district in this area was established in 1971. At the )me, the purpo se o f the R -15 district was to ensure that
ho using served by private sep)c and wells wo uld be developed at low densi)es. Since that )me, public and private
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1
water and sewer services have beco me available to the surrounding a rea ; ho wever, the C arolina B each corrido r
remains primarily zo ned for low density housing.
W hile the site is zo ned R -15, the C aro lina B each Ro ad co rridor has seen increased interest in higher density residen)al
such as the B ayat Mixed U se convenience sto re and triplex development a nd the McQuillan Pines mixed use
apartment and sto rage facility project to the south of the site.
As c urrently zo ned, the site wo uld be permiEed up to 29 dwelling units at a density of 2.5 du/ac under the performance
develo pment standards. T he proposed 128 units equate to an o vera ll density o f 14 du/ac.
I t is es)mated the site would generate approximately 24 A M and 31 P M peak hour trips if develo ped at the permiEed
density for performance development in the R -15 district. T he pro posed R M F-M development is es)mated to
generate 63 Am and 76 P M peak hour trips. T he propo sed co nvenience store with f uel pumps is es)mated to generate
506 PM and 430 P M peak ho ur trips with a reduc)o n of 238 A M and 258 P M trips due to pa ss-by traffic. C o mbined,
the pro ject wo uld result in an addi)onal es)mated 331 A M a nd 248 P M peak hour trips.
Pass-by trips are made by the traffic already using the a dja cent ro adway, entering the commercial por)on of the site as
an intermediate stop on their way to ano ther des)na)on. I t should be noted tha t the expecta)o n is these trips wo uld
enter and exit the site within the same hour.
T he propo sed project is located along a major a rteria l highway tha t is currently nearing capacity. T he C arolina B each
Road – Myrtle Grove Ro ad intersec)on is an impo rtant signalized intersec)o n in the C aro lina B each Ro ad co rridor.
Propo sed impro vements listed in the T I A include improvements to the signalized intersec)on to a c c o mmo da te the
addi)o nal traffi c generated from the site and improvements to exis)ng U -turns o n C arolina B each Road.
T here is an exis)ng co nvenience sto re with f uel sta)ons across C arolina B each Ro ad, and another similarly sized
convenience sto re with f uel sta)o ns recently approved by the B oa rd o f C ommissioners in Ma rc h 2023 immediately
adjacent to the subject site to the south.
T he proposed aEached housing type increases ho using type diversity in the area and acts as a f urther transi)on
between the C arolina B each Ro ad corrido r to the east, an a rea dedicated for co nserva)o n to the west, and different
ho using types to the north and south.
Students living in the pro posed develo pment would be assigned to Anderso n E lementary School, Murray Middle
School and Ashley High Scho o l. B ased on a generalized student genera)on ra te, staff would es)mate the increase in
dwelling units would result in an increase of appro ximately 22 mo re students than es)mated under current zoning.
T he propo sed rezo ning request is generally C O N S I S T E N T with the 2016 C omprehensive Pla n because the pro posed
density, housing type, and increased interconnec)vity are in line with the recommenda)ons of both the General
Residen)al and U rban Mixed U se place types and the pro posed develo pment acts as an a ppro pria te transi)on
between exis)ng co mmercial and residen)al uses in the a rea .
S T R AT EGI C P L A N A L I G N M E N T:
R EC O M M E N D E D M OT I O N A N D R EQU E S T E D A C T I O N S :
W hile the pro posed project would be the third convenience store with fuel sta)ons a t an intersec)on tha t is
transi)o ning into a node, the density of commercia l land uses in an area is o utside the scope of staff review.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1
Staff ’s reco mmenda)o n is based on the policy guidance of the 2016 C o mprehensive Plan, zo ning co nsidera)ons, and
technical review. T he C arolina B each Road corridor has been designated as C o mmunity Mixed U se within the
C o mprehensive Plan. T he plan recommends a mix o f commercial uses and residen)al housing types tha t act as a
transi)o n between higher intensity and lower intensity development a nd iden)fies the scale of the recommended
develo pment as up to 3 stories and 15 du / ac.
T he scale and density o f the pro posed development c o nforms with the reco mmenda)o ns for the place type and
pro vides transi)ons f ro m the pro posed commercial por)on o f the project to exis)ng and pro posed residen)al uses.
Propo sed improvements required by the T I A accommodate the addi)onal tra ffic generated from the site and include
impro vements to the signalized intersec)o n and exis)ng U -turns on C aro lina B ea ch Road. Addi)o na l co ndi)o ns
related to tree reten)o n and pedestrian inf rastructure along C arolina B each Ro ad increase walka bility for the
immediate area with o ppo rtuni)es for future extensio ns.
As a result, Staff recommends approval of the request a nd suggests the following mo)on:
I mo ve to recommend A P P R OVA L of the pro posed rezo ning. I find it to be C O N S I S T E N T with the purpo ses and
intent o f the C o mprehensive Plan because the pro posed density and housing type is within the recommenda)ons o f
the C o mmunity Mixed U se place type and the commerc ial develo pment a c ts as an appropriate transi)on between the
highway c o rridor and residen)al development. I also fi nd reco mmending A P P R OVA L o f the rezo ning request is
reaso nable and in the public interest because the project provides interconnec)vity and housing diversity at an
appro priate density to act as a transi)on between exis)ng commercial and residen)al development.
P roposed C ondi=ons:
1. An opaque fence shall be pro vided a lo ng the pro perty line adjo ining any exis)ng residen)a l development. T he fence
loca)o n may be adjusted by Planning staff to acc o mmo da te a ny u)li)es, easements, or saved / protected trees.
2. T he two (2) specimen trees shown on the co ncept pla n alo ng C arolina B each Ro ad shall be reta ined and preserved
on site.
3. E xis)ng trees onsite will be preserved that do not impact required land grading or o ther impro vements and future
ameni)es as iden)fied in the required Tree Remo val Permit.
4. T he so uthernmo st mul)-family structure as sho wn o n the concept plan shall be limited to two-sto ries in height.
5. E xterior ligh)ng will be designed and installed to maintain adequate ligh)ng levels on the pro posed site while
assuring that excessive light spillage and glare are not directed a t adjacent pro perty, neighboring areas, o r mo to rists.
6. A sidewalk or mul)-use path shall be installed along C aro lina B each Ro ad extending from the no rthern pro perty line
to the southern pro perty line with stubs for connec)o n to exis)ng or future pedestrian facili)es on adjacent parcels.
Pedestrian crossing labeling mee)ng N C D OT minimum requirements for pedestrian safety sha ll be installed at both
driveway entrances. T he pedestrian fa c ility along C arolina B each Road shall be within a dedicated public access
easement.
7. A sto rmwa ter maintenance agreement shall be made between the c o nvenience store with fuel pumps and the mul)-
family development if they are on separate parcels o r under sepa rate o wnership.
A lterna=ve M o=on for D E N I A L (I f based on inf o rma)on presented at the public hea ring or o ther co nsidera)on
beyond the sco pe o f staff review, the board finds denial a ppro pria te.)
I move to reco mmend D E N I A L of the pro posed rezoning. I find it to be C O N S I S T E N T with the purpo ses a nd intent o f
the C omprehensive Plan because the propo sed density, housing type, a nd inc rea sed interco nnec)vity are in line with
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1
the recommenda)ons o f bo th the C ommunity Mixed U se place type and the propo sed development a c ts as an
appro priate transi)on between exis)ng co mmercial and residen)al uses in the area. H o wever, I find reco mmending
D E N I A L of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proximity of exis)ng and appro ved
similar uses wo uld not advance the vision for this a rea o f C a ro lina B each Ro ad.
AT TA C H M E N T S :
Descrip)on
Planning Board Script
Z23-09 Staff Report
Z23-09 Zoning Map
Z23-09 FLUM
Z23-09 Mailout Map
Application Cover Sheet
Z23-09 Application
Concept Plan Cover Sheet
Z23-09 Concept Plan
Public Comment
C O U N T Y M A N AG E R'S C O M M E N T S A N D R EC O M M E N DAT I O N S : (only M anag er)
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1
PLANNING BOARD SCRIPT
for Zoning Map Amendment Application (Z23-09)
Request by Rob Tanner with Impeccable Development, applicant, on behalf of Andrea Jones,
Gwendolyn Horton, Christin Deener, Dwayne Barr, and Kimberlee Barr, property owners, to rezone
seven (7) parcels totaling approximately 11.77 acres of land located at 6800, 6808, 6814, 6818, 6820,
6824, and 6828 Carolina Beach Road from R-15, Residential to 2.37 acres to (CZD) B-1, Neighborhood
Business and 8.66 acres to (CZD) RMF-M, Residential Multi-Family – Moderate Density for a
convenience store with fuel stations and a maximum 128 unit multi-family development.
1. This is a public hearing. We will hear a presentation from staff. Then the applicant and any
opponents will each be allowed 15 minutes for their presentation and an additional 5 minutes
for rebuttal.
2. Conduct Hearing, as follows:
a. Staff presentation
b. Applicant’s presentation (up to 15 minutes)
c. Opponent’s presentation (up to 15 minutes)
d. Applicant’s rebuttal (up to 5 minutes)
e. Opponent’s rebuttal (up to 5 minutes)
f. Staff review of any additional conditions
3. Close the public hearing
4. Board discussion
5. Before we proceed with the vote, I would like to invite the applicant to the podium. Based on
the Board discussion and items presented during the public hearing, would you like withdraw
your petition, request a continuance, or proceed with a vote?
6. Vote on the application. The motion should include a statement saying how the change is, or
is not, consistent with the land use plan and why approval or denial of the rezoning request is
reasonable and in the public interest.
Example Motion for Approval
I move to recommend APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning. I find it to be CONSISTENT with
the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the proposed density and housing
type is within the recommendations of the Community Mixed Use place type and the commercial
development acts as an appropriate transition between the highway corridor and residential
development. I also find recommending APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and
in the public interest because the project provides interconnectivity and housing diversity at an
appropriate density to act as a transition between existing commercial and residential
development.
Proposed Conditions:
1. An opaque fence shall be provided along the property line adjoining any existing
residential development. The fence location may be adjusted by Planning staff to
accommodate any utilities, easements, or saved / protected trees.
2. The two (2) specimen trees shown on the concept plan along Carolina Beach Road shall
be retained and preserved on site.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 1 - 1
3. Existing trees onsite will be preserved that do not impact required land grading or
other improvements and future amenities as identified in the required Tree Removal
Permit.
4. The southernmost multi-family structure as shown on the concept plan shall be limited to
two-stories in height.
5. Exterior lighting will be designed and installed to maintain adequate lighting levels on
the proposed site while assuring that excessive light spillage and glare are not directed
at adjacent property, neighboring areas, or motorists.
6. A sidewalk or multi-use path shall be installed along Carolina Beach Road extending
from the northern property line to the southern property line with stubs for connection
to existing or future pedestrian facilities on adjacent parcels. Pedestrian crossing
labeling meeting NCDOT minimum requirements for pedestrian safety shall be installed
at both driveway entrances. The pedestrian facility along Carolina Beach Road shall
be within a dedicated public access easement.
7. A stormwater maintenance agreement shall be made between the convenience store
with fuel pumps and the multi-family development if they are on separate parcels or
under separate ownership.
Alternative Motion for DENIAL
I move to recommend DENIAL of the proposed rezoning. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the
purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the proposed density, housing type,
and increased interconnectivity are in line with the recommendations of both the Community
Mixed Use place type and the proposed development acts as an appropriate transition
between existing commercial and residential uses in the area. However, I find recommending
DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the proximity
of existing and approved similar uses would not advance the vision for this area of Carolina
Beach Road.
Alternative Motion for Approval/Denial:
I move to RECOMMEND [Approval/Denial] of the proposed rezoning to a conditional RMF-L
district. I find it to be [Consistent/Inconsistent] with the purposes and intent of the
Comprehensive Plan because [insert reasons]
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
I also find RECOMMENDING [Approval/Denial] of the rezoning request is reasonable and in
the public interest because [insert reasons]
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 1 - 2
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 1 of 20
STAFF REPORT FOR Z23-09
CONDITIONAL REZONING APPLICATION
APPLICATION SUMMARY
Case Number: Z23-09
Request:
Rezoning to a Conditional B-1 and Conditional RMF-M district
Applicant: Property Owner(s):
Rob Tanner with Impeccable Development Andrea Jones, Gwendolyn Horton, Christin
Deener, Dwayne Barr, and Kimberlee Barr
Location: Acreage:
6800, 6808, 6814, 6818, 6820, 6824, and
6828 Carolina Beach Road 11.77
PID(s): Comp Plan Place Type:
R08200-001-015-000, R08200-001-016-000,
R08200-001-021-000, R08200-001-023-000,
R08200-001-024-000, R08200-001-025-000,
R08200-001-026-000
Community Mixed Use
Existing Land Use: Proposed Land Use:
Single-Family Residential Convenience Store with Fuel Station and
Multi-Family Dwelling Units
Current Zoning: Proposed Zoning:
R-15, Residential (CZD) B-1 and (CZD) RMF-M
SURROUNDING AREA
LAND USE ZONING
North Manufactured Home Park R-15
East Convenience Store and Single-Family Residential R-15
South
Single-Family Residential, Electrical Substation, and
an approved rezoning for a Convenience Store with
fuel pumps and 4 triplex dwellings
R-15, CZD B-1 and CZD
R-5
West Conservation Land
R-15
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 1
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 2 of 20
ZONING HISTORY
April 7, 1971 Initially zoned R-15 (Area 4)
COMMUNITY SERVICES
Water/Sewer
Water and sanitary sewer services are not available through CFPUA.
Private water and sewer utilities will be required through an agreement with
a private utility provider or permitting for well(s) and septic system(s)
through Environmental Health.
Fire Protection New Hanover County Fire Services, New Hanover County Southern Fire
District, New Hanover County Federal Point Station
Schools Anderson Elementary, Myrtle Grove Middle, and Ashley High Schools
Recreation Veterans Park
CONSERVATION, HISTORIC, & ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Conservation
Conservation resource maps indicate pocosin wetlands may exist on the
property. Projects containing 5 acres or more of pocosin conservation
resources are required to comply with additional buffer and conservation
standards in Section 5.7 of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO).
Historic No known historic resources
Archaeological No known archaeological resources
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 2
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 3 of 20
APPLICANT’S PROPOSED CONCEPTUAL PLAN
Includes Staff Markups
• The concept plan consists of an extension of a private access road west of the intersection
of Carolina Beach Road and Myrtle Grove Road with a maximum 6,000 square foot
convenience store with 16 fuel pumps on Carolina Beach Road and a maximum of 128 multi-
family units split among 6 multi-family structures. The plan also includes areas for parking
stormwater and future amenities.
• A fenced and vegetated buffer is proposed around the perimeter of the project area with
a vegetated buffer between the proposed commercial and residential areas.
• The concept plan can be broken into two interconnected portions: The convenience store with
fuel pumps to the east bordering Carolina Beach Road, and the multi-family portion to the
west.
Proposed Access Road
Convenience
Store Amenity
Area
Stormwater
Multi-
Family
Units
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 3
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 4 of 20
Convenience Store with Fuel Pumps
Includes Staff Markups
• The eastern portion of the project consists of a maximum 6,000 square foot convenience
store and 16 pump fueling station with associated parking.
• The concept plan identifies an existing Live Oak specimen tree that will be preserved along
Carolina Beach Road. A condition has been included preserving the tree.
• An access road extends from the intersection of Carolina Beach Road and Myrtle Grove
Road west into the interior of the site for access to the convenience store and proposed
multi-family development.
• The site includes a second right-in / right-out driveway access onto Carolina Beach Road
south of the intersection.
• Stormwater is proposed to be managed by a shared stormwater management system on
the multi-family portion of the project. A condition has been included requiring a stormwater
maintenance agreement between the convenience store and the multi-family development.
2nd Driveway
Convenience Store
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 4
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 5 of 20
Multi-Family Development
Includes Staff Markups
• The western portion of the project consists of six (6) multi-family apartment structures with a
maximum total of 128 units between them with an area for future amenities, open space,
stormwater management, and perimeter parking circling five (5) of the multi -family
structures.
• The multi-family structures are three (3) stories with the exception of a two (2) story structure
at the southern end of the project. The structure is proposed at two stories to reduce potential
visual impacts to neighboring single-family residential uses.
Amenity
Area
Stormwater
Open
Space
Perimeter
Parking
2-Story
Multi-
Family
3-Story
Multi-
Family
Fenced and Vegetated Buffer
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 5
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 6 of 20
• The 2-story limitation for the southernmost multi-family structure has been included as a
condition of approval.
• The open space area has been designated as a tree-save area, a condition has been
included that trees within the tree-save area shall be retained outside of those required
removed for essential site improvements identified on an approved Tree Removal Permit.
• The future amenity area acts as a transition and buffer between the convenience store and
multi-family structures.
• No plans have been proposed for the type or scale of the future amenity. Potential
amenities could include a clubhouse or recreation center, indoor and outdoor athletic fields
and facilities, a swimming pool, or other similar features. If approved, any future amenity
would be subject to Technical Review Committee (TRC) and zoning compliance review, as
applicable, to ensure compliance with state and local development requirements.
• A landscaped buffer is proposed around the outside perimeter of the project providing
additional visual buffers from adjoining residential uses.
ZONING CONSIDERATIONS
• The R-15 district in this area was established in 1971. At the time, the purpose of the R-15
district was to ensure that housing served by private septic and wells would be developed
at low densities. Since that time, public and private water and sewer services have become
available to the surrounding area; however, the Carolina Beach corridor remains primarily
zoned for low density housing.
• While the site is zoned R-15, the Carolina Beach Road corridor has seen increased interest
in higher density residential such as the Bayat Mixed Use convenience store and triplex
development and the McQuillan Pines mixed use apartment and storage facility project to
the south of the site.
• As currently zoned, the site would be permitted up to 29 dwelling units at a density of 2.5
du/ac under the performance development standards. The proposed 128 units equate to
an overall density of 14 du/ac.
• The RMF-M district was established to provide lands that accommodate moderate density
single and multi-family development. The intent of the district is to function as a transitional
district between intensive non-residential development and higher density residential areas.
The district is designed to provide a reasonable range of choice, type, and location of
housing units.
• The B-1 district was established to provide lands that accommodate a range of small-scale,
low-intensity, neighborhood-serving commercial development that provide goods and
services to residents of adjacent neighborhoods. Convenience stores with fuel stations are
permitted within the B-1 district.
• A Type-A opaque buffer meeting the standards of Table 5.4.3.B.2 is required for attached
housing along all property lines adjoining single-family development. A transitional buffer
is not required between the proposed commercial and multi-family development.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 6
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 7 of 20
• If approved, the project would be subject to Technical Review Committee and Zoning
Compliance review processes to ensure full compliance with all ordinance requirements and
specific conditions included in the approval. Only minor deviations from the approved
conceptual plan, as defined by the UDO, would be allowed.
AREA DEVELOPMENTS
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 7
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 8 of 20
TRANSPORTATION
CURRENT CONDITIONS
Intensity of Current Zoning Typical development under current zoning would allow a maximum
of 29 single-family dwelling units.
PROPOSED ACCESS
Primary Access Carolina Beach Road at the intersection of Carolina Beach Road
and Myrtle Grove Road.
Secondary Access Second driveway access onto Carolina Beach Road for the
convenience store south of the primary access.
EXISTING ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS
Affected Roadway Carolina Beach Road, Myrtle Grove Road
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 8
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 9 of 20
Type of Roadway NCDOT major arterial and minor arterial
Roadway Planning
Capacity (AADT) 41,369
Latest Traffic Volume
(AADT) 36,000
Latest WMPO Point-in-Time
Count (DT) 38,756
Current Level of Congestion Nearing Capacity
Sources
Source of Planning Capacity: WMPO
Source of Latest Traffic Volume: NCDOT (2021)
Source of WMPO Point-in-Time County: WMPO (2022)
NEARBY NCDOT STIP ROADAWAY PROJECTS
No Nearby STIP Projects
TRAFFIC GENERATION
Traffic Generated
by Present
Designation
Traffic Generated
by Proposed
Designation
Pass-
By
Trips
Potential
Impact of
Proposed
Designation
AM Peak Hour Trips 24 569 -238 +331
PM Peak Hour Trips 31 506 -258 +248
Assumptions
Typical Development with Existing Zoning – 29 single family detached
dwellings.
Proposed Development – 6,000 sq ft convenience store with fuel pumps
and 128 multi-family dwellings.
Sources Source of Trip Generation: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Ed.
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS (TIA)
New developments that are anticipated to generate more than 100 trips during any peak hour
period are required to submit a traffic impact analysis (TIA) as part of their rezoning application. A
team of NCDOT, WMPO, and County planning staff work with an applicant’s traffic engineers to
develop the scope for the TIA, including the study area, the traffic data which must be collected, trip
distribution, and the developments and background traffic growth that must be analyzed. This
document is used to identify off-site transportation improvements required to mitigate the impacts of
the development and must be approved by the WMPO and NCDOT.
Approval Date March 29, 2023
Development Proposal
Analyzed
6,000 sq ft convenience store with 16 fuel stations and 128 multi-
family dwellings.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 9
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 10 of 20
Study Intersections
- US 421 (Carolina Beach Road) and SR 1492 (Myrtle Grove
Road)
- US 421 (Carolina Beach Road) and Southern Charm Drive /
Hill Valley Walk
- US 421 (Carolina Beach Road) and Median Crossover (north
of Myrtle Grove Road)
Trip Generation
- Multi-Family: 63 AM / 76 PM peak hour trips
- Convenience Store with Gas Station: 506 AM / 430 PM
peak hour trips
- 569 AM / 506 PM total peak hour trips
- 6,428 average daily trips
Pass-By Trips - - 238 AM / -258 PM peak hour trips
Traffic Data Collection
- November 29, 2022 (Carolina Beach Road and Myrtle
Grove Road)
- November 29, 2022 (Carolina Beach Road and Southern
Charm Drive / Hill Valley Walk)
- November 29, 2022 (Carolina Beach Road and Median
Crossover)
Trip Distribution and
Assignment
- 60% to / from the north via Carolina Beach Road
- 30% to / from the south via Carolina Beach Road
- 10% to / from the east via Myrtle Grove Road
Approved Developments &
Background Growth
- Full Build – 2024
- Growth Rate – 1.5% per year
Required Improvements
Carolina Beach Road and Myrtle Grove Road – Site Access A
(signalized intersection)
- Extend the existing northbound U-turn / left turn lane on
Carolina Beach Road to provide 200 feet of storage,
appropriate full width deceleration, and appropriate taper.
- Construct a southbound right turn lane on Carolina Beach
Road with 100 feet of storage, appropriate full width
deceleration, and taper.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 10
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 11 of 20
- Restripe westbound “left turn only” lane on Carolina Beach
Road to a combined left / thru lane.
- Construct the site access (eastbound approach) with an
internal protected stem of 200 feet, measured from the
right-of-way line, that provides one ingress lane and two
egress lanes configured as an exclusive left turn lane and a
shared thru-right lane.
- Provide a four (4)-section flashing yellow arrow signal head
to the northbound U-turn / left turn lane.
- Modify the signal plan to accommodate above
improvements.
Carolina Beach Road and Crossover north of Myrtle Grove Road
(unsignalized crossover)
- No improvements required.
Carolina Beach Road and Southern Charm Drive / Hill Valley Walk
(unsignalized crossover)
- No improvements required.
Carolina Beach Road and Site Access B (proposed stop-controlled
right-in / right-out intersection).
- Construct a southbound right turn lane on Carolina Beach
Road with full storage extending back to the intersection of
Carolina Beach Road and Myrtle Grove Road.
- Construct site access (eastbound approach) with an internal
protected stem of 125 feet, measured from the right-of-way
line and one ingress and one egress lane configured as a
right-in / right-out.
- Provide stop controls for eastbound approach.
SUMMARY
The proposed project is located along a major arterial highway that is currently nearing capacity.
The Carolina Beach Road – Myrtle Grove Road intersection is an important signalized intersection in
the Carolina Beach Road corridor. Proposed improvements listed in the TIA include improvements to
the signalized intersection to accommodate the additional traffic generated from the site and
improvements to existing U-turns on Carolina Beach Road.
While the estimated AM and PM peak hour trips exceed 500, the estimated pass-by trips reduce
the overall AM and PM trips approximately in half. Pass-by trips are made by the traffic already
using the adjacent roadway, entering the commercial portion of the site as an intermediate stop on
their way to another destination. It should be noted that the expectation is these trips would enter
and exit the site within the same hour.
ENVIRONMENTAL
• The property is not within a Natural Heritage Area or the Special Flood Hazard Area.
• The property is within the Lord’s Creek watershed.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 11
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 12 of 20
• Per the Classification of Soils in New Hanover County for Septic Tank Suitability, soils on the
property consist of Class I (Suitable) and Class III (Severe Limitation) soils. Public water is
available and public sewer is available through a mainline extension.
• Conservation resource maps indicate pocosin wetlands may exist on the property. Projects
containing 5 acres or more of pocosin conservation resources are required to comply with
additional buffer and conservation standards in Section 5.7 of the Unified Development
Ordinance (UDO) however less than 5 acres of pocosin wetlands have been identified on
the parcels.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
Schools
• Students living in the proposed development would be assigned to Anderson Elementary
School, Murray Middle School and Ashley High School. Students may apply to attend public
magnet, year-round elementary, or specialty high schools.
• A maximum of 29 dwelling units would be permitted under the current R-15 zoning base
density, and 128 units could potentially be developed under the proposed zoning for an
increase of 99 dwelling units.
• Based on a generalized historic generation rate*, staff would estimate that the increase in
homes would result in approximately 22 additional students than would be generated under
current zoning.
• The general student generation rate provides only an estimate of anticipated student yield
as different forms of housing at different price points yield different numbers of students.
Over the past four years, staff has also seen a decline in the number of students generated
by new development. Student numbers remained relatively stable between 2015 and
2020 (excepting the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic), while 14,500 new residential
units were permitted across the county. In addition, the student population is anticipated to
only grow by approximately 1,300 students over the next 10 years based on the recent
New Hanover County Schools Facility Needs Study.
Development Type Intensity Estimated Student Yield
(current general student generation rate) *
Existing Development 6 single-family
dwellings
Approximate** Total: 1
(1 elementary, 0 middle, 0 high)
Typical Development Under
Current Zoning 29 residential units Approximate** Total: 6
(3 elementary, 1 middle, 2 high)
Proposed Zoning 128 residential units Approximate** Total: 27
(12 elementary, 6 middle, 9 high)
*The current general student generation rate was calculated by dividing the New Hanover County public school student
enrollment for the 2022-2023 school year by the number of dwelling units in the county. Currently, there are an
average of 0.22 public school students (0.09 for elementary, 0.05 for middle, and 0.0 7 for high) generated per
dwelling unit across New Hanover County. These numbers are updated annually and include students attending out -
of-district specialty schools, such as year-round elementary schools, Isaac Bear, and SeaTech.
**Because the student generation rate often results in fractional numbers, all approximate student generatio n yields
with a fraction of 0.5 or higher are rounded up to a whole number and yields with a fraction of less than 0.5 are
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 12
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 13 of 20
rounded down. This may result in student numbers at the elementary, middle, and high school levels not equaling the
approximate total.
• Since the residential components associated with the proposed rezoning are likely to have
a build-out date within 5 years per the Traffic Impact Analysis, staff has outlined existing
school capacity to provide a general idea of the potential impact on public schools.
• Staff has provided information on existing school capacity to provide a general idea of the
potential impact on public schools, but these numbers do not reflect any future capacity
upgrades.
School Enrollment* and Capacity** (2022-2023 School Year)
*Enrollment is based on the New Hanover County Schools student numbers for the 2022-2023 school year.
**Capacity calculations were determined based on the capacities for the 2022-2023 school year, and funded or
planned capacity upgrades were those included in the Facility Needs Study presented by New Hanover County Schools
to the Board of Education in January 2021. This information does not take into account flexible scheduling that m ay
be available in high school settings, which can reduce the portion of the student body on campus at any one time.
• The 2021 facility needs survey prepared by Schools staff indicates that, based on NC
Department of Public Instruction (DPI) student growth projections and school capacity data,
planned facility upgrades, combined with changes to student enrollment patterns, will result
in adequate capacity district wide over the next ten years if facility upgrades are funded.
New Hanover County Strategic Plan
• One of the goals of the New Hanover County Strategic Plan for 2018-2023 is to encourage
the development of complete communities in the unincorporated county by increasing
housing diversity and access to basic goods and services.
• The proposed RMF-M conditional zoning district (CZD) would allow for an increase in housing
diversity.
• The predominant housing type in the area is single family detached at 73%. Under the
proposed RMF-M district the site would allow for multi-family attached (apartments) and
increase housing type diversity by reducing the percentage of single-family detached (73%
to 71%) and increasing the percentage of multi-family units (10% to 12%).
• The subject property is located in the Veterans Park community area, where 64% of
residents currently live within one mile of a convenience need (grocery store, retail staples,
pharmacies, etc.), a support service (urgent care, primary doctor’s office, child & adult care,
etc.), there would be no change to the number of residences within one mile of goods and
services.
Level
Total
NHC
Capacity
School
Projected
Enrollment of
Assignment
School
Capacity of
Assigned
School
w/Portables
Capacity of
Assigned
School
Funded or
Planned
Capacity
Upgrades
Elementary 91% Anderson 291 314 93% None
Middle 92% Murray 882 889 99% None
High 93% Ashley 1983 1990 99.6% None
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 13
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 14 of 20
Representative Developments
Representative Developments of R-15:
Cypress Village Subdivision north of subject site
Old Cape Cod Subdivision south of subject site
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 14
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 15 of 20
Representative Development of Adjacent Convenience Stores with Fuel Stations
BP at Shipyard Blvd and Longstreet Drive in Wilmington
Exxon at Shipyard Blvd and Longstreet Drive in Wilmington
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 15
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 16 of 20
Representative Developments of Multi-Family Developments:
Amberleigh Shores in Ogden
Stephens Pointe in Porters Neck
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 16
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 17 of 20
Context and Compatibility
• The property is located at the intersection of Carolina Beach Road and Myrtle Grove, an
area experiencing a mix of commercial and higher density residential growth.
• The proposed concept plan includes commercial development at the intersection intended to
serve the surrounding community and vehicles traveling on Carolina Beach Road. The
commercial development acts as an appropriate transition to the proposed higher density
residential.
• There is an existing convenience store with fuel stations across Carolina Beach Road, and
another similarly sized convenience store with fuel stations recently approved by the Board
of Commissioners in March 2023 immediately adjacent to the subject site to the south.
• The proposed project would be the third convenience store with fuel stations at an
intersection that is transitioning into a node. While the commercial projects involve the same
land use, the density of commercial land uses in an area is outside the scope of staff review.
• The proposed attached housing type increases housing type diversity in the area and acts
as a further transition between the Carolina Beach Road corridor to the east, an area
dedicated for conservation to the west, and different housing types to the north and south.
• The proposed density of 14 du / ac is below the maximum allowed for the RMF-M zoning
district and slightly less than the maximum recommended for the Community Mixed Use
place type.
• Additional conditions related to tree retention and pedestrian infrastructure along Carolina
Beach Road increase walkability for the immediate area with opportunities for future
extensions.
2016 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The New Hanover County Future Land Use Map provides a general representation of the vision for
New Hanover County’s future land use, as designated by place types describing the character and
function of the different types of development that make up the community. These place types are
intended to identify general areas for particular development patterns and should not be
interpreted as being parcel specific.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 17
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 18 of 20
Future Land Use
Map Place Type Community Mixed Use
Place Type
Description
Focuses on small-scale, compact, mixed use development patterns that serve
all modes of travel and act as an attractor for county residents and visitors.
Types of appropriate uses include office, retail, mixed use, recreational,
commercial, institutional, and multi-family and single-family residential.
Analysis
The proposed development is at the Carolina Beach Road and Myrtle Grove
intersection, an area experiencing a mix of commercial and higher density
residential growth.
The proposed concept plan includes commercial development at the
intersection intended to serve the surrounding community and travelers on
Carolina Beach Road. The commercial development acts as an appropriate
transition to higher density residential.
The proposed project would be the third convenience store with fuel stations
at an intersection that is transitioning into a node. While the commercial
projects involve the same land use, the density of commercial land uses in
an area is outside the scope of staff review.
The proposed attached housing type increases housing diversity in the area
and acts as an appropriate transition between existing commercial and
residential development.
The proposed density of 14 du / ac is below the maximum allowed for the
RMF-M zoning district and slightly less than the maximum recommended for
the Community Mixed Use place type.
Additional conditions related to tree retention and pedestrian infrastructure
along Carolina Beach Road increase walkability for the immediate area
with opportunities for future extensions.
Consistency
Recommendation
The proposed rezoning request is generally CONSISTENT with the 2016
Comprehensive Plan because the proposed density, housing type, and
increased interconnectivity are in line with the recommendations of both the
General Residential and Urban Mixed Use place types and the proposed
development acts as an appropriate transition between existing commercial
and residential uses in the area.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
While the proposed project would be the third convenience store with fuel stations at an intersection
that is transitioning into a node, the density of commercial land uses in an area is outside the scope
of staff review.
Staff’s recommendation is based on the policy guidance of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan, zoning
considerations, and technical review. The Carolina Beach Road corridor has been designated as
Community Mixed Use within the Comprehensive Plan. The plan recommends a mix of commercial
uses and residential housing types that act as a transition between higher intensity and lower
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 18
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 19 of 20
intensity development and identifies the scale of the recommended development as up to 3 stories
and 15 du / ac.
The scale and density of the proposed development conforms with the recommendations for the
place type and provides transitions from the proposed commercial portion of the project to existing
and proposed residential uses. Proposed improvements required by the TIA accommodate the
additional traffic generated from the site and include improvements to the signalized intersection
and existing U-turns on Carolina beach Road. Additional conditions related to tree retention and
pedestrian infrastructure along Carolina Beach Road increase walkability for the immediate area
with opportunities for future extensions.
As a result, Staff recommends approval of the request and suggests the following motion:
I move to recommend APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning. I find it to be
CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the
proposed density and housing type is within the recommendations of the Community
Mixed Use place type and the commercial development acts as an appropriate
transition between the highway corridor and residential development. I also find
recommending APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public
interest because the project provides interconnectivity and housing diversity at an
appropriate density to act as a transition between existing commercial and residential
development.
Proposed Conditions:
1. An opaque fence shall be provided along the property line adjoining any
existing residential development. The fence location may be adjusted by
Planning staff to accommodate any utilities, easements, or saved / protected
trees.
2. The two (2) specimen trees shown on the concept plan along Carolina Beach
Road shall be retained and preserved on site.
3. Existing trees onsite will be preserved that do not impact required land grading
or other improvements and future amenities as identified in the required Tree
Removal Permit.
4. The southernmost multi-family structure as shown on the concept plan shall be
limited to two-stories in height.
5. Exterior lighting will be designed and installed to maintain adequate lighting
levels on the proposed site while assuring that excessive light spillage and glare
are not directed at adjacent property, neighboring areas, or motorists.
6. A sidewalk or multi-use path shall be installed along Carolina Beach Road
extending from the northern property line to the southern property line with
stubs for connection to existing or future pedestrian facilities on adjacent
parcels. Pedestrian crossing labeling meeting NCDOT minimum requirements for
pedestrian safety shall be installed at both driveway entrances. The pedestrian
facility along Carolina Beach Road shall be within a dedicated public access
easement.
7. A stormwater maintenance agreement shall be made between the convenience
store with fuel pumps and the multi-family development if they are on separate
parcels or under separate ownership.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 19
Z23-09 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 20 of 20
Alternative Motion for DENIAL (if based on information presented at the public hearing or other
consideration beyond the scope of staff review, the board finds denial appropriate.)
I move to recommend DENIAL of the proposed rezoning. I find it to be CONSISTENT
with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the proposed density,
housing type, and increased interconnectivity are in line with the recommendations of
both the Community Mixed Use place type and the proposed development acts as an
appropriate transition between existing commercial and residential uses in the area.
However, I find recommending DENIAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in
the public interest because the proximity of existing and approved similar uses would
not advance the vision for this area of Carolina Beach Road.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 2 - 20
C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
B
e
a
c
h
R
d
C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
B
e
a
c
h
R
d
C u p o l a D rMyrtl
e
G
r
o
v
e
R
d
Bo n f i r e D r
Seaview Rd
Cypress V i l l age P l
S u mmer TreeLn
Ti d al w a l k Dr
SouthernCharm Dr Hill Valley Walk
Chimney L n
New Hanover County, NC
Z23-09
CZD B-1R-156800 Carolina Beach RdZ23-09
Proposed Zoning/Use:Existing Zoning/Use:Site Address:Case:
0 250 500 US Feet
ZONING
B-1
B-2
I-2
R-5
R-10
R-15
RMF-L
CZD
Z23-09
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 3 - 1
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 4 - 1
Hu
r
o
n
D
r
E r i e C t
Sto
d
d
a
r
d
R
d
T
e
v
i
otRd
Bancroft D
r
F l i p F l o pLn
C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
B
e
a
c
h
R
d
C u p o l a Dr
C
l
a
r
k
H
i
l
l
R
d
Egret Point Rd
Glenarthur Dr
C
a
r
o
l
i
n
a
B
e
a
c
h
R
d
H ailshamDr
B o n f i r e D r
C
h
a
m
p
l
a
in
Dr
Cypress V i l lage P l
Seaview Rd
W
e
d
d
e
r
b
u
r
n
D
r
P
orchesDr
Myrtl
e
G
r
o
v
e
R
d
SummerTreeLn
Tid al w alk D r
D
o
r
r
i
n
g
t
o
n
D
r
Southern CharmDr Hill Valley W a l k
C h i m n e y L n
Z23-09
Neighboring Parcels (500 feet)
CZD B-1R-156800 Carolina Beach RdZ23-09
Proposed Zoning/Use:Existing Zoning/Use:Site Address:Case:
0 250 500 US FeetPlanning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 5 - 1
Initial Application
Documents & Materials
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 6 - 1
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 1
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 2
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 3
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 4
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 5
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 6
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 7
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 8
5.Traffic lmpad
Please provide the estimated number of trips generated for the proposed use(s) based off the most recent version of
the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE} Trip Generation Manual. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) must be completed for
all proposed developments that generate more than 100 peak hour trips, and the TIA must be included with this
application.
ITE Land Use: Multifamily/Conv. Store w/ Gas Station (6KSF)
Trip Generation Use and Variable (grou floor area, dwelling units, etc.) 300 Units/16 FP (*Dwelling Units now I�
AM Peak Hour Trips: 622 I PM Peak Hour Trips: 580
6.Conditional Zoning Distrid Considerations
The Conditional Zoning District procedure is established to address situations where a particular land use would be
consistent with the New Hanover County 201 6 Comprehensive Plan and the objectives outlined in the Unified
Development Ordinance and where only a specific use or uses is proposed. The procedure is intended primarily for
use with transitions between zoning districts of dissimilar character where a particular use or uses, with restrictive
conditions to safeguard adjacent land uses, can create a more orderly transition benefiting all affected parties and
the community at-large.
The applicant must explain, with reference to attached plans (where applicable), how the proposed Conditional
Zoning distrid meets the following criteria.
1. How would the requested change be consistent with the County's policies for growth and development, asdescribed in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan, applicable small area plans, etc.
See attached.
Page 3 of 6
Conditional Zoning District Application -Updated 02-2022
8)
(*now 572)(*now 505)
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 9
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 10
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 11
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 12
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 13
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 14
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 15
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 16
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 17
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 18
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 19
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 20
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 21
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 22
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 23
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 24
Property Owner’s Property Addresses and Parcel IDs:
6800 Carolina Beach Road: R08200-001-026-000
Andrea Jones 2018 Treecrest Pkwy
Decatur, GA 30035-3542
6808 Carolina Beach Road: R08200-001-023-000
Gwendolyn Geneise Horton 18 Syracuse Pl
Durham, NC 27704-5250
6814 Carolina Beach Road: R08200-001-024-000
Kimberlee & Dwayne Barr
105 Sturbridge Dr
Piscataway, NJ 08854-5138
6818 Carolina Beach Road: R08200-001-025-000
Christin Deener
7110 Holland Ln
Franktown, VA 23354-2401
6820 Carolina Beach Road: R08200-001-015-000
Christin Deener
7110 Holland Ln
Franktown, VA 23354-2401
6824 Carolina Beach Road: R08200-001-021-000
Christin Deener
7110 Holland Ln
Franktown, VA 23354-2401
6828 Carolina Beach Road: R08200-001-016-000
Christin Deener 7110 Holland Ln
Franktown, VA 23354-2401
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 25
Zoning Map Amendment Application for
6800, 6808, 6814, 6818, 6820, 6824, & 6828 Carolina Beach Road
(R08200-001-026-000, R08200-001-023-000, R08200-001-024-000, R08200-001-025-000,
R082000-001-015-000, R08200-001-021-000, & R08200-001-016-000)
3. Proposed Zoning, Use(s), & Narrative
Please list the uses that will be allowed within the proposed Conditional Zoning District, the
purpose of the district, and a project narrative (attach additional pages if necessary). Note:
Only uses permitted in the corresponding General Use District are eligible for consideration
within a Conditional Zoning District.
Impeccable Development is requesting the property, including parcels R08200-001-015-000,
R08200-001-016-000, R08200-001-021-000, R08200-001-023-000, R08200-001-024-000,
R08200-001-025-000, and R08200-001-026-000, be rezoned from Residential 15 District (R-15)
to Residential Multi-Family – Moderate Density (RMF-M) and Neighborhood Business (B-1) for a
one hundred and twenty eight (128) unit multi-family use project to provide a necessary missing
middle housing opportunity and a neighborhood-serving convenience store with fuel sales. The
RMF-M district accommodates moderate density single-family and multi-family development
with a density of 17 units/acre. The RMF-M district is intended to function as a transition between
intensive nonresidential development and higher density residential development, as well as
providing a reasonable range of choice, type, and location of housing units. The B-1 district allows
for a range of small-scale, low-intensity, neighborhood-serving commercial development that
provide goods and services to residents of adjacent neighborhoods. B -1 district regulations are
intended to ensure uses, development intensities, and a development form that is consistent
with a pedestrian-friendly, walkable, and neighborhood scale. Mixed use development is allowed
that is consistent with district character. The project is proposed on 11.77 acres consisting of
seven tracts directly off of Carolina Beach Road.
The Future Land Use Map identifies this site as Community Mixed Use. Community Mixed Use
focuses on promoting a mix of retail, office, and residential at medium densities up to 15 units
per acre which aligns with the properties’ classifications on the 2016 Comprehensive Plan’s
Future Land Use Map (“FLUM”). This proposed project is limiting the residential units to 15 units
per acre in accordance with the FLUM designation of Community Mixed Use while providing a
neighborhood convenience store with fuel sales to serve the local area.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 26
Zoning Map Amendment Application for
6800, 6808, 6814, 6818, 6820, 6824, & 6828 Carolina Beach Road
(R08200-001-026-000, R08200-001-023-000, R08200-001-024-000, R08200-001-025-000,
R082000-001-015-000, R08200-001-021-000, & R08200-001-016-000)
4. Proposed Condition(s) Note: Within a Conditional Zoning District, additional conditions and
requirements which represent greater restrictions on the development and use of the property
than the corresponding general use district regulations may be added. These conditions may
assist in mitigating the impacts the proposed development may have on the surrounding
community. Please list any conditions proposed to be placed on the Conditional Zoning District
below. Staff, the Planning Board, and Board of Commissioners may propose additional conditions
during the review process.
To mitigate the impact on the surrounding community the proposed project will provide a fenced
buffer between the established residences and the proposed new residences, and a two-story
building will be placed along the adjoining property line as shown on the submitted site plan. The
exterior lighting will be designed and installed to maintain adequate lighting levels on the
proposed site while assuring that excessive light spillage and glare are not directed at ad jacent
property, neighboring areas, or motorists.
1. How would the requested change be consistent with the County’s policies for growth and
development, as described in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan, applicable small area plans, etc.?
This proposed zoning change from R-15 to Residential Multi-Family – Moderate Density (RMF-M)
and Neighborhood Business (B-1) would be consistent with multiple goals and policies on the
2016 Comprehensive Plan including but not limited to Goal III by helping to revitalize commercial
corridors and blighted areas through infill development that is compatible with surrounding
neighborhoods and creating density that can support future growth, Goal IX by promoting
environmentally friendly growth by clustering development and providing housing opportunities
close to employment and services that accommodates population growth while minimizing
impacts on natural resources, and Goal XV of providing a range of housing types, opportunities,
and choices while assisting with the County’s Strategic Plan Objective of enhancing the self-
sufficiency of individuals and families. The property is accessed directly off Carolina Beach Road,
a state maintained Urban Principal Highway . This project will provide a safe and conveniently
located community and provides another housing type .
Neighborhood Business (B-1) would be consistent with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan’s Goal III
by encouraging mixed-use development that is compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods,
Goal IX by promoting a mixture of uses minimizing impacts on natural resources, and Goal XV by
providing choices to the community and motorists with a neighborhood-serving commercial
development.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 27
Zoning Map Amendment Application for
6800, 6808, 6814, 6818, 6820, 6824, & 6828 Carolina Beach Road
(R08200-001-026-000, R08200-001-023-000, R08200-001-024-000, R08200-001-025-000,
R082000-001-015-000, R08200-001-021-000, & R08200-001-016-000)
This zoning change would provide for a mix of housing types and mix of uses within the
Community Mixed Use Center as contemplated by the 2016 Comprehensive Plan. The proposed
change would also allow for a more modern development pattern of the area as any future
development would have to comply with all of New Hanover County’s land use and planning
regulations.
The proposed project would also provide another convenience store with fuel sales along the
only evacuation route off Pleasure Island. The CDC and other hurricane preparedness experts
urge people to fill up their gas thanks before a hurricane. Even if not needed for evacuation, filling
up a car’s fuel tank is important in case of supply issues. Having another available convenience
store with fuel sales on the evacuation route, and in close proximity to residents, could also help
prevent lines and price gouging.
The proposed project will create a mixed-use hub at an existing signalized intersection and
provided needed housing options within New Hanover County to help close the housing gap as
shown by the Housing Needs Assessment.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 28
Zoning Map Amendment Application for
6800, 6808, 6814, 6818, 6820, 6824, & 6828 Carolina Beach Road
(R08200-001-026-000, R08200-001-023-000, R08200-001-024-000, R08200-001-025-000,
R082000-001-015-000, R08200-001-021-000, & R08200-001-016-000)
2. How would the requested Conditional Zoning district be consistent with the property’s
classification on the 2016 Comprehensive Plan’s Future Land Use Map?
The property is classified as Community Mixed Use on the Future Land Use Map and is
surrounded by Conservation and General Residential. The Community Mixed Use place type is
intended to promote a mix of retail, office, and residential at medium densities up to 15 units per
acre. While mixed uses are encouraged on the same parcel, they can be adjacent or separated
by lower traffic roads. The rezoning request for RMF-M and B-1 would allow desired moderate
density residential at 15 units/acre to be placed adjacent or in close proximity to retail and office
uses, creating a mixed-use area within the growth node. The project also includes a convenience
store with fuel sales.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 29
Zoning Map Amendment Application for
6800, 6808, 6814, 6818, 6820, 6824, & 6828 Carolina Beach Road
(R08200-001-026-000, R08200-001-023-000, R08200-001-024-000, R08200-001-025-000,
R082000-001-015-000, R08200-001-021-000, & R08200-001-016-000)
3. What significant neighborhood changes have occurred to make the original zoning
inappropriate, or how is the land involved unsuitable for the uses permitted under the existing
zoning?
While the property is zoned R-15, with a maximum of 2.5 units/acre, Carolina Beach Road has
seen increased residential density which is needed to help close the housing gap. Adjacent
properties are currently zoned residential; however, much of the adjacent property is vacant
property owned by Cape Fear Community College and a convenience store with fuel sales is
located directly across Carolina Beach Road. B-1 on the front of the project and RMF-M to the
rear of this property would serve as an appropriate transition between the zoning districts as well
as comply with the Future Land Use Map classification of Community Mixed Use.
The purpose of the R-15 district at the time it was established was to ensure that housing served
by private septic and wells would be developed at low densities. Since that time, public and
private water and sewer services have become available to the surrounding area; however, the
Carolina Beach corridor remains primarily zoned for low density housing .
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 30
Community Meeting Summary
for Conditional Rezoning Request by Impeccable Development
Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, November 29, 2022
Meeting Location: Best Western Plus, 5600 Carolina Beach Road
Representatives from Impeccable Development, G3 Engineering, and Lee Kaess, PLLC
(collectively, “Development Team”) hosted a meeting to introduce the proposed development
including parcels R08200-001-015-000, R08200-001-016-000, R08200-001-021-000, R08200-
001-023-000, R08200-001-024-000, R08200-001-025-000, R08200-001-026-000, which is
proposed to be rezoned to from R-15 to B-1 for a Convenience Store and Fuel Station and RFM-
M for approximately 300 multi-family units. Property owners within 500 ft. of the property, as
required by New Hanover County, were notified of the community meeting by mail on November
15, 2022.
The meeting allowed people to view a context aerial for general site location purposes and
a concept of the overall proposed conditional rezoning. The Development Team also provided a
brief overview of the public hearing process and technical review process for development projects
in New Hanover County.
The community asked the Development Team questions about the plans, and many of the same
questions were discussed repeatedly during the meeting. The following is a synopsis of the
comments heard at the meeting.
• Attendees were most concerned about the gas station and traffic improvements which
would be required on Carolina Beach Road. The Development Team explained a Traffic
Impact Analysis (“TIA”) is in process and would be reviewed by NCDOT and the WMPO.
The project must comply with any required traffic mitigation improvements.
• Concerns were raised over the potential for the project to lower the property value of the
adjacent neighborhoods. The Development Team explained this was not an consideration
of zoning but we could ask an appraiser to review that concern.
• Neighbors asked if the project would seek government assistance or subsidies. The
Development Team said no but there would be an offer of workforce housing units at HUD
High Home rents.
• Neighbors expressed concern over the visibility of the structures from their properties and
the ability of residents to see in their backyards. The Development Team is going to work
on potential elevations of the proposed project as well as an exhibit showing sightlines.
The Development Team also discussed the required buffers and landscaping.
• A question was asked if the project would be fenced. The Development Team agreed to use
a fenced buffer option.
• A question was asked regarding the on-site trees. The Development team said the tree
survey is not complete at this time but is in process.
• Neighbors expressed concerns over the lighting for the project. The Development Team
explained that the county has specific lighting requirements but that the designers would
look into enhanced light protection for the neighboring homes.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 31
Community Meeting Summary
for Conditional Rezoning Request by Impeccable Development
Meeting Date & Time: Tuesday, November 29, 2022
Meeting Location: Best Western Plus, 5600 Carolina Beach Road
In response to the community meeting as well as other feedback on the project, the Applicant
proposes to fence the multifamily project adjacent to the Old Cape Cod neighborhood; decreased
the proposed number of residential units; and placed a two-story building adjacent to Old Cape
Cod as shown on the site plan submitted with the application.
The Development Team established a separate email account for this proposed project,
impeccable.cbroad@gmail.com, and offered to meet with property owners on site if requested.
Attached, please find the sign-up sheet.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 32
1200 N Federal Hwy ste 200 • Boca Raton, FL 33432 • Tel: (717) 891-5168 •
November 15, 2022
RE: Community Meeting for Conditional Rezoning Request by Impeccable
Development for property at 6800, 6808, 6814, 6818, 6820, 6824, & 6828 Carolina
Beach Road
We invite you to join us for a community meeting for the proposed conditional rezoning
of property located at 6800, 6808, 6814, 6818, 6820, 6824, & 6828 Carolina Beach Road,
Wilmington, North Carolina and identified as New Hanover County Parcels: R08200-001-015-000, R08200-001-016-000, R08200-001-021-000, R08200-001-023-000,
R08200-001-024-000, R08200-001-025-000, R08200-001-026-000. You are receiving this
invitation because New Hanover County GIS records indicate you own property near or adjacent
to the proposed conditional rezoning property.
We welcome the opportunity to discuss the proposed project with you at the community
meeting where we will give a brief presentation and answer any questions. The community
meeting will be held on November 29, 2022 from 5:30-6:30 pm at the Best Western Plus located
at 5600 Carolina Beach Road, Wilmington, North Carolina, 28412. Please reference the attached
illustration of the site plan for the property proposed for rezoning.
We look forward to seeing you at 5:30 p.m. on November 29, 2022 at:
Best Western Plus
5600 Carolina Beach Road
Wilmington, NC 28412
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 33
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 34
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 35
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 36
FORTY ELEVEN 02 LLC 221 WILLIAMS RD WILMINGTON, NC 28409 6801 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-005-003-000
STRICKLAND EDNA COLEMAN RE TRUST5001 ILEX DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 7900 MYRTLE GROVE RD WILMINGTON R08200-002-041-000
WARD JOHN A ETAL 7906 MYRTLE GROVE RD WILMINGTON, NC 28409 7906 MYRTLE GROVE RD WILMINGTON R08200-002-042-001
CIRCLE K STORES INC PO BOX 52085 DC17 PHOENIX, AZ 85072 6759 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-002-042-000
LAND LEASE CAROLINA LLC 2004 BALMORAL PL WILMINGTON, NC 28405 6752 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-001-029-000
LAND LEASE CAROLINA LLC 2004 BALMORAL PL WILMINGTON, NC 28405 6748 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-001-055-000
HATCHER BRANDY MAE ETAL 6760 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6760 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-001-027-000
JONES ANDREA 2018 TREECREST PKWY DECATUR, GA 30035 6800 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-001-026-000
MCNEEL TERESA K 6841 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6841 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-005-008-000
HARRIS HOWARD E JR 49 GREAT EAGLE TER BOLIVIA, NC 28422 6840 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-001-017-000
DEENER CHRISTIN 7110 HOLLAND LN FRANKTOWN, VA 23354 6828 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-001-016-000
6844 BAYAT LAND LLC 2 WISTERIA LN LAKE GROVE, NY 11755 6830 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-001-018-000
6844 BAYAT LAND LLC 2 WISTERIA LN LAKE GROVE, NY 11755 6844 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-001-014-000
HARRIS HOWARD E ETAL 5311 DANDELION DR WILMINGTON, NC 28405 6838 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-001-020-000
JACOBS ALEXANDER E JR 6834 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6834 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-001-019-000
HORTON GWENDOLYN GENEISE 18 SYRACUSE PL DURHAM, NC 27704 6808 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-001-023-000
DEENER CHRISTIN 7110 HOLLAND LN FRANKTOWN, VA 23354 6820 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-001-015-000
BARR KIMBERLEE W DWAYNE ETAL105 STURBRIDGE DR PISCATAWAY, NJ 08854 6814 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-001-024-000
DEENER CHRISTIN 7110 HOLLAND LN FRANKTOWN, VA 23354 6824 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-001-021-000
DEENER CHRISTIN 7110 HOLLAND LN FRANKTOWN, VA 23354 6818 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-001-025-000
6901 SOUTHERN EXPOSURE LTD 2840 COLLEGE RD S UNDEV AC 319 WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6901 SOUTHERN EXPOSURE WILMINGTON R08214-005-001-000
DEWITT LOIS P 6905 SOUTHERN EXPOSURE WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6905 SOUTHERN EXPOSURE WILMINGTON R08214-005-003-000
RADLEY CASEY DAVIS 6903 SOUTHERN EXPOSURE WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6903 SOUTHERN EXPOSURE WILMINGTON R08214-005-002-000
WILLIAMS WESTON B ETAL 6900 SOUTHERN EXPOSURE WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6900 SOUTHERN EXPOSURE WILMINGTON R08214-006-001-000
FERGUSON CHARLES ERNEST 6902 SOUTHERN EXPOSURE WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6902 SOUTHERN EXPOSURE WILMINGTON R08214-006-002-000
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 37
1
CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO PO BOX 1551 RALEIGH, NC 27602 6854 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-001-013-001
LAND LEASE CAROLINA LLC 2004 BALMORAL PL WILMINGTON, NC 28405 6752 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON R08200-001-029-000
RAFFERTY CREIGHTON MARY 3909 SINGLETREE RD MINT HILL, NC 28227 710 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-060-000
RAILEY KAREN W 4913 CORONADO DR WILMINGTON, NC 28409 821 SUMMER TREE LN WILMINGTON R08214-007-012-000
GANN GINA J 819 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 819 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-011-000
GINTER KARA 807 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 807 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-052-000
RUSSELL JOSHUA APRIL 821 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 821 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-012-000
BARKER MICHAEL R ETAL 813 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 813 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-008-000
HERMAN RANDOLPH CHARLES WENDY LEE 1729 OWLS NEST RD SANFORD, NC 27330 702 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-064-000
STRICKLAND LAURIE BRIGMAN 816 SUMMERTREE LN WILMINGTON, NC 28412 816 SUMMER TREE LN WILMINGTON R08214-007-041-000
ANDERSON JOHN A PATRICIA E 822 SUMMERTREE LN WILMINGTON, NC 28412 822 SUMMER TREE LN WILMINGTON R08214-007-038-000
OLD CAPE COD OWNERS ASSN INC 6846 CAROLINA BEACH RD WILMINGTON, NC 28412
FLEMING KIMBERLY A 2652 TRALEE DR GASTONIA, NC 28056 804 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-058-000
DEE REBECCA D 809 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 809 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-053-000
MONTGOMERY AARON LUMA ETAL 812 SUMMERTREE LN WILMINGTON, NC 28412 812 SUMMER TREE LN WILMINGTON R08214-007-043-000
MEYER MITCHELL D PATRICIA R 1014 CAROLINA BEACH AVE N APT B-1014 CAROLINA BEACH, NC 28428 806 SUMMER TREE LN WILMINGTON R08214-007-046-000
ELLER KRISTA M 818 SUMMERTREE LN WILMINGTON, NC 28412 818 SUMMER TREE LN WILMINGTON R08214-007-040-000
YON MARIA M ROBERTO C 1012 ELSMORE DR MATTHEWS, NC 28104 820 SUMMER TREE LN WILMINGTON R08214-007-039-000
JESSIE LOGAN M ETAL 802 SUMMERTREE LN WILMINGTON, NC 28412 802 SUMMER TREE LN WILMINGTON R08214-007-048-000
SMITH JUDSON C 703 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 703 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-067-000
RECCHIA TARA CARL S 4564 GRAYSTONE DR NAZARETH, PA 18064 709 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-070-000
BAKER VIRGINIA A 704 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 704 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-063-000
GRETES TASO 823 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 823 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-013-000
SOGGIE DANIEL S 706 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 706 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-062-000
ALTOMARE ANTHONY P 19 BIRCHWOOD CT BLAUVELT, NY 10913 804 SUMMER TREE LN WILMINGTON R08214-007-047-000
OLD CAPE COD OWNERS ASSOC INC 822 SUMMERTREE LN WILMINGTON, NC 28412 821 SUMMER TREE LN WILMINGTON R08214-007-012-000
NORTHWAY JASON ERIC 700 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 700 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-065-000
MEYER MITCHELL D PATRICIA R 1014 CAROLINA BEACH AVE N APT B CAROLINA BEACH, NC 28428 814 SUMMER TREE LN WILMINGTON R08214-007-042-000
PIKE ROBERT JR AMANDA 6904 SOUTHERN EXPOSURE BLV WILMINGTON, NC 28412 6904 SOUTHERN EXPOSURE WILMINGTON R08214-006-003-000
LESLEY JEFFREY N 1121 MILITARY CUTOFF RD SUITE C201 WILMINGTON, NC 28405 808 SUMMER TREE LN WILMINGTON R08214-007-045-000
WILEY DANIELLE 705 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 705 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-068-000
FOUST JACQUELINE 817 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 817 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-010-000
FCHARLIE LLC 712 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 712 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-059-000
GREEN THOMAS 707 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 707 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-069-000
TERHUNE DUSTIN ETAL 701 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 701 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-066-000
JUSKIN MELISSA LEE 805 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 805 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-051-000
FISHER TYLOR J 708 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 708 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-061-000
ZAZZALI JOANNA M 815 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 815 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-009-000
STEELE MICHELLE M 810 SUMMERTREE LN WILMINGTON, NC 28412 810 SUMMER TREE LN WILMINGTON R08214-007-044-000
NANCE GARY K 801 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON, NC 28412 801 SOUTHERN CHARM DR WILMINGTON R08214-007-050-000
Property Owner Data-2
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 38
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 39
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 40
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 41
NEW PARCEL 1
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH WESTERN CORNER OF THE SUBJECT PARCEL AND POINT BEING
MARKED BY HAVING ¾” IRON PIPE FOUND AND HAVING NC STATE PLANE COORDINATES OF N
125,361.87 E 2,333,004.66 THENCE A LINE BOUNDED TO THE NORTH BY LANDS NOW OR FORMERLY
OWNED BY LAND LEASE CAROLINA, LLC AND BOUNDED TO THE SOUTH THE FOLLOWING BEARING AND
DISTANCE:
S 87° 47’ 38” E 503.27’ TO ¾” IRON PIPE FOUND
THENCE A LINE BOUNDED TO THE EAST BY LANDS NOW OR FORMERLY OWNED BY BRANDY MAE
HATCHER AND BOUNDED TO THE WEST BY THE SUBJECT PARCEL THE FOLLOWING BEARING AND
DISTANCE:
S 09° 06’ 51” E 74.98’ TO ¾” IRON PIPE FOUND
THENCE A LINE BOUNDED TO THE NORTH BY LANDS NOW OR FORMERLY OWNED BY BRANDY MAE
HATCHER AND BOUNDED TO THE SOUTH BY THE SUBJECT PARCEL THE FOLLOWING BEARINGS AND
DISTANCES:
S 89° 21’ 16” E 207.01’ TO ANGLE IRON FOUND
S 89° 00’ 47” E 26.71’ TO 5/8” IRON REBAR SET
S 89° 56’ 09” E 4.31’ TO 1” IRON PIPE FOUND (L6)
S 89° 56’ 09” E 309.02’ TO ¾” IRON PIPE FOUND
THENCE A LINE BOUNDED TO THE EAST BY CAROLINA BEACH ROAD U.S. HWY NO. 421 AND BOUNDED
TO THE WEST BY THE SUBJECT TRACT THE FOLLOWING BEARINGS AND DISTANCES:
S 11° 05’ 40” E 78.65’ TO 5/8” IRON REBAR SET
THENCE A LINE BOUNDED TO THE SOUTH BY LANDS NOW OR FORMERLY OWNED BY ______ AND
BOUNDED TO THE NORTH BY THE SUBJECT TRACT THE FOLLOWING BEARINGS AND DISTANCES:
N 79° 46’ 20” W 26.84’ TO 5/8” IRON REBAR SET
N 75° 22’ 08” W 139.28’ TO 5/8” IRON REBAR SET
N 89° 32’ 00” W 96.12’ TO 5/8” IRON REBAR SET
N 86° 31’ 48” 44.91’ TO 5/8” IRON REBAR SET
N 88° 15’ 47” W 44.93’ TO 5/8” IRON REBAR SET
THENCE A LINE BOUNDED TO THE EAST BY LANDS NOW OR FORMERLY OWNED BY _____ AND
BOUNDED TO THE WEST BY THE SUBJECT TRACT THE FOLLOWING BEARING AND DISTANCE:
S 02° 28’ 20” W 227.27’ TO 5/8” IRON REBAR SET
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 42
THENCE A LINE BOUNDED TO THE SOUTH BY LANDS NOW OR FORMERLY OWNED BY 6844 BAYAT LAND,
LLC AND ALEXANDER E JACOBS AND BOUNDED TO THE NORTH BY THE SUBJECT TRACT THE FOLLOWING
BEARINGS AND DISTANCES:
N 87° 30’ 39” W 21.24’ TO ANGLE IRON FOUND
N 87° 31’ 38” W 218.07 TO 1” IRON PIPE FOUND
THENCE A LINE BOUNDED TO THE EAST BY LANDS NOW OR FORMERLY OWNED BY ALEXANDER E
JACOBS, AND HOWARD HARRIS AND BOUNDED TO THE WEST BY THE SUBJECT TRACT THE FOLLOWING
BEARINGS AND DISTANCES:
S 01° 55’ 41” E 109.51’ TO 5/8” IRON REBAR SET
S 01° 55’ 41” E 124.18’ TO 1” IRON PIPE FOUND
S 00° 20’ 20” W 36.34’ TO ¾” IRON PIPE FOUND
S 00° 16’ 47” E 108.80’ TO ½” IRON PIPE FOUND
THENCE A LINE BOUNDED OT THE SOUTH BY AN APPARENT PROPERTY GAP AND LANDS NOW OR
FORMERLY OWNED BY CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT CO, DUSTIN TERHUNE, AND JASON NORTHWAY
AND BOUNDED TO THE NORTH BY THE SUBJECT PARCEL THE FOLLOWING BEARING AND DISTANCE:
N 88° 50’ 09” W 418.60’ TO 1” IRON PIPE FOUND
THENCE A LINE BOUNDED TO THE WEST BY CAPE FEAR COMMUNITY COLLEGE AND BOUNDED TO THE
EAST BY THE SUBJECT TRACT THE FOLLOWING BEARINGS AND DISTANCES:
N 05° 52’ 57” W 146.40’ TO ¾” IRON PIPE FOUND
N 05° 32’ 13” W 124.93’ TO 1” IRON PIPE FOUND
N 05ׄ 39’ 46” W 122.82’ TO ¾” IRON PIPE FOUND
N 05° 28’ 57” W 89.65’ TO 1” IRON PIPE FOUND
N 05° 47’ 27” W 104.71’ TO ½” IRON PIPE FOUND
N 05° 25’ 58” W 130.82’ TO ¾” IRON PIPE FOUND
THENCE BACK TO SAID POINT OF BEGINNING. TRACT CONTAINS 398,856 SQ. FT. / 9.16 ACRES
NEW PARCEL 2
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE SOUTH EASTERN CORNER OF THE SUBJECT PARCEL AND POINT BEING
MARKED BY HAVING ¾” IRON PIPE FOUND AND HAVING NC STATE PLANE COORDINATES OF N
124,989.08 E 2,334,119.15 THENCE A LINE BOUNDED TO THE SOUTH BY LANDS NOW OR FORMERLY
OWNED BY 6844 BAYAT LAND, LLC AND BOUNDED TO THE NORTH °BY THE SUBJECT TRACT THE
FOLLOWING BEARINGS AND DISTANCES:
N 87° 36’ 49” W 183.63’ TO 5/8” IRON REBAR FOUND
N 87° 30’ 39” 232.34’ TO 5/8” IRON REBAR SET
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 43
THENCE A LINE BOUNDED TO THE WEST BY LANDS NOW OR FORMERLY OWNED BY _____ AND
BOUNDED TO THE EAST BY THE SUBJECT TRACT THE FOLLOWING BEARING AND DISTANCE:
N 02° 28’ 20” E 227.27’ TO 5/8” IRON REBAR SET
THENCE A LINE BOUNDED TO THE NORTH BY LANDS NOW OR FORMERLY OWNED BY _____ AND
BOUNDED TO THE SOUTH BY THE SUBJECT TRACT THE FOLLOWING BEARINGS AND DISTANCES:
S 88° 15’ 47” E 44.93’ TO 5/8” IRON REBAR SET
S 86° 31’ 48” E 44.91’ TO 5/8” IRON REBAR SET
S 89° 32’ 00” E 96.12’ TO 5/8” IRON REBAR SET
S 75° 22’ 08” E 139.28’ TO 5/8” IRON REBAR SET
S 79° 46’ 20” E 26.84’ TO 5/8” IRON REBAR SET
THENCE A LINE BOUNDED TO THE EAST BY THE SOUTH BOUND LANE OF CAROLINA BEACH ROAD AND
BOUNDED TO THE WEST BY THE SUBJECT TRACT THE FOLLOWING BEARINGS AND DISTANCES:
S 11° 05’ 40” E 65.76’ TO ½” IRON PIPE FOUND
S 10° 18’ 19” E 121.78’ TO ¾” IRON PIPE FOUND
S 11° 53” 42” E 15.04’ TO ¾” IRON PIPE FOUND
THENCE BACK TO SAID POINT OF BEGINNING TRACT CONTAINS 81,655 SQ. FT. / 1.87 ACRES
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 44
5.0'
MIN.
5.0'
MIN.
5.0'
MIN.
BUILDING A
BUILDING B
BUILDING C
BUILDING D
BUILDING F
BUILDING E
BUILDING G
MYR
T
L
E
G
R
O
V
E
R
D
C
A
R
O
L
I
N
A
B
E
A
C
H
R
D
MULTIFAMILY
AMENITY AREA
SCM POND
25.0' SIDE SETBACK
25.0' SIDE SETBACK
25.0' FRONT SETBACK
30.0' REAR SETBACK
30.0' SIDE SETBACK
30.0' SIDE SETBACK
30.0' SIDE SETBACK
35.0' FRONT SETBACK
18.0'
TYP.
22.0'
TYP.
18.0'
TYP.
2
2
.
0
'
30
.
0
'
10.0'
20
.
0
'
20
.
0
'
SITE DATA TABLE
11.04 ACRESTOTAL SITE AREA
DEVELOPMENT DATA:
TAX PARCEL IDS
ZONING DATA:
R-15EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT:
15 UNITS/ACREMAXIMUM DENSITY
128 (MULTIFAMILY)MAXIMUM # PROPOSED UNITS
45'MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT
PROPOSED USE:COMMERCIAL
MULTIFAMILY
PROPOSED MULTIFAMILY SITE DATA:
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL SITE DATA:
188 SPACESPROPOSED PARKING
25'MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT
50 SPACESPROPOSED PARKING
9.16 ACRESAREA
1.87 ACRESAREA
UNSHADED ZONE XFEMA FLOOD ZONE CLASSIFICATION
SITE LEGEND
PROPOSED PROPERTY BOUNDARY LINE
6' TALL WOODEN FENCE
26'MAXIMUM FUEL CANOPY HEIGHT
EXISTING VEGETATION - REFER TO SURVEY FOR TREE INFO
SITE NOTES
R08200-001-015-000, R08200-001-016-000,
R08200-001-021-000, R08200-001-023-000,
R08200-001-024-000, R08200-001-025-000,
R08200-001-026-000
THE FOLLOWING ARE CONCEPT APPROXIMATIONS AND
MAY ADJUST THROUGH SITE DESIGN:
-BUILDING AREAS
-BUILDING CONFIGUATION/LAYOUT
-PROPOSED PARKING SPACES PROVIDED
-PARKIND AND DRIVE AISLE CONFIGURATION
-STORMWATER DETENTION POND SIZE AND
LOCATION
-SIDEWALK CONFIGURATION/LAYOUT
THIS DOCUMENT, TOGETHER WITH THE CONCEPTS AND DESIGNS PRESENTED HEREIN, AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE, IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND CLIENT FOR WHICH IT WAS PREPARED. REUSE OF AND IMPROPER RELIANCE ON THIS DOCUMENT WITHOUT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION AND ADAPTATION BY KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. SHALL BE WITHOUT LIABILITY TO KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
NC LICENSE #F-0102
200 SOUTH TRYON STREET, SUITE 200
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 28202
PHONE 704-333-5131
C 2023
SHEET 1 of 1
THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND HAS BEEN PRODUCED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A SURVEY, CODE RESEARCH, OR CONTACT WITH THE CITY, COUNTY, ETC.
01/23/2023
NORTH
REZONING OVERALL SITE CONCEPT
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 45
BUILDING A
BUILDING B
BUILDING C
BUILDING D
BUILDING F
BUILDING E
BUILDING G
MULTIFAMILY
AMENITY AREA
TREE REMOVAL LEGEND AND CALULATIONS
EXISTING REGULATED HARDWOOD TREES TO BE REMOVED FOR
ESSENTIAL SITE IMPROVEMENTS (±2)
EXISTING REGULATED PINE TREES TO BE REMOVED FOR
ESSENTIAL SITE IMPROVEMENTS (±9)
EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREES TO BE REMOVED FOR ESSENTIAL
SITE IMPROVEMENTS (±45)
EXISTING REGULATED PINE TREES TO BE RETAINED (±8)
EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREES TO BE RETAINED (±16)
EXISTING REGULATED HARDWOOD TREES TO BE RETAINED (±0)
±44 EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREES TO BE REMOVED WITH ±947" TOTAL
CALIPER X 2 = 1,894" TOTAL MITIGATION REQUIRED
**NOTE: THESE ARE PRELIMINARY PRESERVATION ESTIMATES AND
ONLY INCLUDED TREES EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN REGULATED
BY CODE. TREE NUMBERS AND INFORMATION CORRESPONDS WITH
THE TREE REPORT PREPARED BY JOSHUA TREE ON 1/18/2023.
TREE PRESERVATION NOTES
1.TREE PRESERVATION / REMOVAL PERMIT IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO
CLEARING AND LAND DISTURBANCE.
2.PRIOR TO ANY CLEARING, GRADING, OR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY,
TREE PROTECTION FENCING WLL BE INSTALLED AROUND
PROTECTED TREES, OR GROVES OF TREES AND NO
CONSTRUCTION WORKERS, TOOLS, MATERIALS, OR VEHICLES ARE
PERMITTED WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION FENCE.
3.PROTECTIVE FENCING IS TO BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE
DURATION OF THE PROJECT. LAND CLEARING AND CONSTRUCTION
CONTRACTORS SHALL RECEIVE ADEQUATE INSTRUCTION ON TREE
PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS AND METHODS.
4.LABEL PROTECTIVE FENCING WITH SIGNS TO BE PLACED EVERY 50
LF, OR AT LEAST TWO (2) PER AREA, IN ENGLISH AND SPANISH
"TREE PROTECTION AREA: DO NOT ENTER".
THIS DOCUMENT, TOGETHER WITH THE CONCEPTS AND DESIGNS PRESENTED HEREIN, AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE, IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND CLIENT FOR WHICH IT WAS PREPARED. REUSE OF AND IMPROPER RELIANCE ON THIS DOCUMENT WITHOUT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION AND ADAPTATION BY KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. SHALL BE WITHOUT LIABILITY TO KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
NC LICENSE #F-0102
200 SOUTH TRYON STREET, SUITE 200
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 28202
PHONE 704-333-5131
C 2023
SHEET 1 of 1
THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND HAS BEEN PRODUCED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A SURVEY, CODE RESEARCH, OR CONTACT WITH THE CITY, COUNTY, ETC.
01/23/2023
NORTH
REZONING OVERALL TREE CONCEPT
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 46
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 47
235 Government Center Drive, Wilmington, NC 28403
t: 910-332-6560 f: 910-332-6353 www.cfpua.org
March 17, 2023
Kimley-Horn
Attn: Alex Kimbrell
Fort Mill, SC
Re: Water & Sewer Availability
Address: 6800 Carolina Beach Road, Wilmington, NC
Parcel ID Number(s): R08200-001-026-000
To Whom It May Concern:
This letter is to verify that Cape Fear Public Utility Authority (CFPUA) water and sewer
would require a mainline extension to serve the above referenced property. At this time,
capacity is available.
Sewer capacity is allocated on a first come, first serve basis when capacity is available,
the plans meet CFPUA’s requirements, and the NCDWQ FTA/FTSE forms are signed
by the Authority.
If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Bernice S. Johnson, Senior Project Manager
Cape Fear Public Utility Authority
Engineering Department
Development Services Division
910-332-6620
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 7 - 48
Concept Plan
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 8 - 1
BUILDING A
BUILDING B
BUILDING C
BUILDING D
BUILDING F
BUILDING E
BUILDING G
MULTIFAMILY
AMENITY AREA
APPROXIMATE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE
(CRZ) FOR SPECIMEN TREE # 86/87
APPROXIMATE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE
(CRZ) FOR SPECIMEN TREE # 149
SCM POND
TREE REMOVAL LEGEND AND CALULATIONS
EXISTING REGULATED HARDWOOD TREES TO BE REMOVED FOR
ESSENTIAL SITE IMPROVEMENTS (±2)
EXISTING REGULATED PINE TREES TO BE REMOVED FOR
ESSENTIAL SITE IMPROVEMENTS (±10)
EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREES TO BE REMOVED FOR ESSENTIAL
SITE IMPROVEMENTS (±44)
EXISTING REGULATED PINE TREES TO BE RETAINED (±7)
EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREES TO BE RETAINED (±17)
EXISTING REGULATED HARDWOOD TREES TO BE RETAINED (±0)
±44 EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREES TO BE REMOVED WITH ±905" TOTAL
CALIPER X 2 = 1,810" TOTAL MITIGATION REQUIRED
**NOTE: THESE ARE PRELIMINARY PRESERVATION ESTIMATES AND
ONLY INCLUDED TREES EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN REGULATED
BY CODE. TREE NUMBERS AND INFORMATION CORRESPONDS WITH
THE TREE REPORT PREPARED BY JOSHUA TREE ON 1/18/2023.
TREE PRESERVATION NOTES
1.TREE PRESERVATION / REMOVAL PERMIT IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO
CLEARING AND LAND DISTURBANCE.
2.PRIOR TO ANY CLEARING, GRADING, OR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY,
TREE PROTECTION FENCING WLL BE INSTALLED AROUND
PROTECTED TREES, OR GROVES OF TREES AND NO
CONSTRUCTION WORKERS, TOOLS, MATERIALS, OR VEHICLES ARE
PERMITTED WITHIN THE TREE PROTECTION FENCE.
3.PROTECTIVE FENCING IS TO BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE
DURATION OF THE PROJECT. LAND CLEARING AND CONSTRUCTION
CONTRACTORS SHALL RECEIVE ADEQUATE INSTRUCTION ON TREE
PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS AND METHODS.
4.LABEL PROTECTIVE FENCING WITH SIGNS TO BE PLACED EVERY 50
LF, OR AT LEAST TWO (2) PER AREA, IN ENGLISH AND SPANISH
"TREE PROTECTION AREA: DO NOT ENTER".
THIS DOCUMENT, TOGETHER WITH THE CONCEPTS AND DESIGNS PRESENTED HEREIN, AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE, IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND CLIENT FOR WHICH IT WAS PREPARED. REUSE OF AND IMPROPER RELIANCE ON THIS DOCUMENT WITHOUT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION AND ADAPTATION BY KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. SHALL BE WITHOUT LIABILITY TO KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
NC LICENSE #F-0102
200 SOUTH TRYON STREET, SUITE 200
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 28202
PHONE 704-333-5131
C 2023
SHEET 1 of 1
THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND HAS BEEN PRODUCED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A SURVEY, CODE RESEARCH, OR CONTACT WITH THE CITY, COUNTY, ETC.
02/17/2023
NORTH
REZONING OVERALL TREE CONCEPT
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 9 - 1
Public Comments
In Support 0
Neutral 0
In Opposition 2
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 10 - 1
Farrell, Robert
From:Frank Stanton <fstanton77@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, March 18, 2023 5:20 AM
To:Farrell, Robert
Subject:6800 Carolina Beach Rd - Business and Multi-family residential
** External Email: Do not click links, open attachments, or reply until you know it is safe **
Dear Mr. Farrell,
South of Monkey Junction along Carolina Beach Road my opinion is to keep the R15 zoning (8 families per acre) in place
and not change the zoning to accommodate multi family rental facilities.
I would also like to speak briefly at the March 30th 5 pm meeting at 3rd Street and Princess.
Thank you for your time.
Regards,
Frank Stanton
7637 Vancouver Ct.
Wilmington, NC 28412
910-465-1646 mobile
fstanton77@gmail.com
fstanton@icloud.com
PLEASE NOTE: This communication, including any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it,
may include information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended
recipient, please note that any dissemination, distribution, copying or use of this communication, or any of the
information contained in or attached to it, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended
recipient, please notify the sender by immediately replying to this message or notifying the sender by telephone and
then delete this communication and its attachments from your system without reading or saving in any manner.
Thank you.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 10 - 2
Farrell, Robert
From:noreply@civicplus.com
Sent:Sunday, April 23, 2023 8:31 AM
To:May, Katherine; Roth, Rebekah; Vafier, Ken; Farrell, Robert; rmeredith@nhcgov.com;
Doss, Amy; Griffee, Julian; Dickerson, Zachary
Subject:Online Form Submission #2919 for Public Comment Form
** External Email: Do not click links, open attachments, or reply until you know it is safe **
Public Comment Form
Public Comment Form
The agenda items listed are available for public comment at an upcoming Planning
Board or Board of Commissioners meeting. Comments received by 8 AM the day of
the applicable meeting will be made available to the Board prior to that meeting and
will be included as part of the permanent, public record for that meeting.
First Name Heather
Last Name Listebarger
Address 6934 Ontario Rd
City Wilmington
State NC
Zip Code 28412
Email Field not completed.
Projects available for
comment.
PB Meeting - Z23-09 - Multi Family Development (6800
Carolina Beach Road)
What is the nature of your
comment?
Oppose project
Public Comment We do not have the infrastructure to support this additional
housing. Our roads are already well over crowded, as well as
our schools. The green space in our county is becoming almost
nonexistent. A prime example is the Riverlights development.
The land was completely clear cut to house thousands.
Upload supporting files
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 1 - 10 - 3
N E W H A N OV E R C O U N T Y P L A N N I N G B OA R D
R EQ U E S T F O R B OA R D A C T I O N
M E E T I N G DAT E : 5/4/2023
Regular
D E PA R T M E N T: Planning P R E S E N T E R(S ): Zach D ickerson, C urrent Planner
C O N TA C T (S ): Zach Dickerson; Robert Fa rrell, S enio r Planner; Rebekah Ro th, Planning & L and U se D irector
S U B J EC T:
P ublic Hearing
Text A mendment Request (TA 23-04) – Request by M ichael Faulkner with C astle Hay ne Farm Park, L LC , applicant,
to amend the U nified Dev elopment O rdinance requirements pertaining to C ampground / Recrea=onal Vehicle
(RV ) Parks.
B R I E F S U M M A RY:
Applicant Michael Fa ulkner has submi"ed a request for a text amendment to the U nified D evelo pment O rdinance
(U D O ) to change the use-specifi c standards for C ampground/Recrea-ona l Vehicle Parks. T he applicant stated a desire
to amend the ordina nce to fi t with developing trends in technology, culture, employment a nd the market. Specifi c
needs o utlined in the applica-o n include community needs for traveling nurses and smaller RV types such as Mercedes
Sprinters.
T he applica nt is pro posing that the minimum number of spaces is reduced to 8, with a minimum area per space o f
1,200 square f eet. T his would allow RV Park operato rs mo re fl exibility in site design, and would allow smaller sites to
be used for RV Park developments.
T he N ew Hanover C ounty U nified D evelopment O rdina nce defines C ampgrounds/RV Parks as, “any parcel o r tract o f
land upon which campsites are o ccupied or intended to be occupied by tent for o vernight camping or upo n which
recrea-o nal vehicles are occupied for sleeping purpo ses, regardless o f whether or not a charge is made f o r such
purpo ses.” T he U D O currently requires minimum development sta ndards of RV parks, including a minimum o f 25
spaces a nd that each space will consist o f a minimum a rea o f 2,000 square feet. I n addi-on, the U D O requires certain
other minimum standards such as open space requirements, ba throom facili-es, access and parking.
T he current ordinance standards are geared towards larger scale ca mpgrounds for i-nerant use, where users bring
their own RV, park it during their stay, and leave with the RV a>er. RV Parks are o nly permi"ed by-right in the B -2 and
P D districts, in all other districts they are permi"ed with a Special U se Permit (S U P). I n a ll districts, they are subjec t to
addi-o nal development standards.
Staff have researched other jurisdic-ons’ regula-ons for RV Parks, fi nding some regulate the ma ximum number of lots
per acre rather than a minimum number o f required lots. W hile most jurisdic-ons researched by sta ff have minimum
lot size requirements, the sizes vary within a ra nge o f 1,250 to 2,250 square f eet. O ther jurisdic-ons prescribe setbacks
between the RVs/travel trailers and minimum requirements f o r open spa ce. T he o pen space requirements of o ther
jurisdic-o ns are based on acreage of the to tal site o r the number of RV spaces. Research indicates that while RV parks
and campgro unds are co mmonly regulated across jurisdic-ons, tho se regula-ons vary widely.
RV Parks and c ampgro unds are not specifically addressed in the 2016 C o mprehensive Pla n. H o wever, these uses are
common in many co mmuni-es along the N orth C arolina coast, inc luding N ew Hanover C ounty, and can suppo rt
tourism and public access to water and natural reso urces. T he 2016 C o mprehensive Plan recommends suppor-ng
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 2
business success and pro mo-ng place-based econo mic develo pment. I ncreasing flexibility in site design allows f o r
diversity and variety in areas where RV parks and c ampgro unds co uld be developed.
W hile the current regula-o ns are simila r to o ther jurisdic-ons, N ew Hano ver C ounty ’s minimum lot size for RVs in RV
parks is larger than others. T he applicant ’s request is mo re in line with o ther communi-es, which have smaller
minimum space requirements. T he N ew Hanover C o unty U D O s-ll has contro ls o ver o ther aspects o f RV parks,
including parking, setbacks from rights-of-way, and access. T he applicant ’s request to update and clarify the language
in to a llo w for flexibility in restroom facility design is in line with the minimum requirements for develo pment standards
for RV Parks.
W hile the minimum number o f spaces required do es no t a ppea r commonly as a regula-on in o ther jurisdic-o ns,
reducing the number fro m 25 to 8 wo uld allow for smaller-scale RV parks. T he reduc-o n in minimum space size wo uld
allo w RV park o perators more fl exibility in site design. Tourism is a la rge part of the econo my in N ew H ano ver C ounty;
during the summer, the demand fo r tempo rary lo dging increases and the supply decreases. T he request to allo w a
lower number of minimum spaces and smaller space requirements wo uld allo w f o r smaller-scale RV parks to o perate
within the C ounty, increasing the opportunity for to urist-oriented businesses to o perate o n smaller sites.
T he C o unty s-ll requires that RV Parks go through the Specia l U se Permit in residen-al districts, which will ensure
addi-o nal review of site design a nd c o mplia nce with public hea lth and safety requirements. I n all districts, an RV Park
wo uld be required to go through the Technica l Review C ommi"ee pro cess, ensuring minimum standards are met.
However, these changes to the o rdinance may aff ect develo pment in ways that a re no t yet fully clear. T he suggested
amendments to space size and minimum number of required spa c es are ra-o nal but wo uld a llo w for smaller lots, more
common in residen-al areas, to be used f o r campgrounds and RV parks. T here is s-ll the co ntrol mechanism of the
Special U se Permit fo r all campgrounds and RV pa rks in residen-a l areas.
Staff has determined that addi-onal research is needed on how po ten-al increases in this use will impact residen-al
areas. Further insight is needed to determine what lo c a-ons and zo ning districts are appropriate for so me o f the
smaller sca le vs. larger sca le parks. T hese smaller-scale campgro unds and RV parks may require addi-onal standa rds in
order to mi-gate their impacts on adjacent residen-al a rea s.
S T R AT EGI C P L A N A L I G N M E N T:
R EC O M M E N D E D M OT I O N A N D R EQU E S T E D A C T I O N S :
W hile what the applicant is pro posing is no t out of line with other jurisdic-ons and the N ew Hanover C ounty U nifi ed
Development O rdinanc e, staff would need mo re -me to research the full propo sa l and the implica -o ns o f these
changes to the ordinance. Staff suggests co n-nuing this a pplica-on to allow for more -me f o r research and
reco mmends the f o llo wing mo-on:
I move to C O N T I N U E the proposed amendment o f the N ew Hano ver C ounty U nified D evelo pment O rdina nce to
modif y the la nguage in Sec-on 4.3.4.E .2 to the J une 1 Planning B o ard mee-ng in order to allow f o r mo re -me for staff
research and review.
I f the B o ard finds that suffi cient inf o rma-on is presented a t the hearing to allo w f o r them to make a recommenda-on,
they may elect to proceed with one of the following mo-ons:
A lterna=ve M o=on for A pproval:
I move to R EC O M M E N D A P P R OVA L of the pro posed amendment to the N ew Hanover C ounty U nified Development
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 2
O rdinance to modif y the language in Sec-on 4.3.4.E .2, I find it to be C O N S I S T E N T with the go als of the 2016
C o mprehensive Plan to support business suc c ess and pro mo te pla c e-based economic develo pment. I also fi nd
R EC O M M E N D I N G A P P R OVA L o f the propo sed amendment reaso nable and in the public interest because it allo ws
for flexibility in site design and accommoda-ons for a c ha nging market and demand.
A lternate M o=on for Denial:
I mo ve to recommend D E N I A L of the proposed amendment to the N ew Hanover C o unty U nified Development
O rdinance to modif y the language in Sec-o n 4.3.4.E .2. I find it to be I N C O N S I S T E N T with the goals o f the 2016
C o mprehensive Pla n to suppo rt business success and pro mo te place-based economic development. I fi nd
rec ommending D E N I A L o f the a mendment request is reasonable and in the public interest because the amendment
allo ws f o r to o much o f an o pen window for development o f RV parks o n smaller parcels in residen-al areas.
AT TA C H M E N T S :
Descrip-on
TA23-04 Script Planning Board
TA23-04 Staff Report Planning Board
Initial Application Cover Sheet
TA23-04 Initial Application
Public Comments Cover Sheet
C O U N T Y M A N AG E R'S C O M M E N T S A N D R EC O M M E N DAT I O N S : (only M anag er)
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 2
SCRIPT for Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment (TA23-04)
Request by Michael Faulkner with Castle Hayne Farm Park, LLC, applicant, to amend the Unified
Development Ordinance requirements pertaining to Campground / Recreational Vehicle (RV) Parks.
1. This is a public hearing. We will hear a presentation from staff. Then the applicant and any
opponents will each be allowed 15 minutes for their presentation and an additional 5 minutes for
rebuttal.
2. Conduct Hearing, as follows:
a. Staff presentation
b. Applicant’s presentation (up to 15 minutes)
c. Opponent’s presentation (up to 15 minutes)
d. Applicant’s rebuttal (up to 5 minutes)
e. Opponent’s rebuttal (up to 5 minutes)
3. Close the public hearing.
4. Board discussion
5. Before we proceed with the vote, I would like to invite the applicant to the podium. Based on the
Board discussion and items presented during the public hearing, would you like withdraw your
petition, request a continuance, or proceed with a vote?
6. Vote on amendment. The motion should include a statement saying how the change is, or is not,
consistent with the land use plan and why approval or denial of the rezoning request is reasonable
and in the public interest.
I move to CONTINUE the proposed amendment of the New Hanover County Unified Development
Ordinance to modify the language in Section 4.3.4.E.2 to the June 1 Planning Board meeting in
order to allow for more time for staff research and review.
Alternative Motion for Approval:
I move to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the proposed amendment to the New Hanover County
Unified Development Ordinance to modify the language in Section 4.3.4.E.2, I find it to be
CONSISTENT with the goals of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan to support business success and
promote place-based economic development. I also find RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the
proposed amendment reasonable and in the public interest because it allows for flexibility in site
design and accommodations for a changing market and demand.
Alternate Motion for Denial:
I move to RECOMMEND DENIAL of the proposed amendment to the New Hanover County Unified
Development Ordinance to modify the language in Section 4.3.4.E.2. I find it to be INCONSISTENT
with the goals of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan to support business success and promote place-
based economic development. I find RECOMMENDING DENIAL of the amendment request is
reasonable and in the public interest because the amendment allows for too much of an open
window for development of RV parks on smaller parcels in residential areas.
Alternative Motion for Approval/Denial:
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 2 - 1 - 1
I move to [Approve/Deny] the proposed amendment to the New Hanover County Unified Development
Ordinance to modify the language in Section 4.3.4.E.2. I find it to be [Consistent/Inconsistent] with the
purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because [insert reasons]
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
I also find [Approval/Denial] of the proposed amendment is reasonable and in the public interest because
[insert reasons]
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 2 - 1 - 2
TA23-04 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 1 of 5
STAFF REPORT OF TA23-04
TEXT AMENDMENT APPLICATION
APPLICATION SUMMARY
Case Number: TA23-04
Request:
To amend Article 4 of the Unified Development Ordinance to change the use-specific standards
for Campground/Recreational Vehicle (RV) Parks to reduce the minimum number of spaces
required and the minimum space size in the campground. The applicant has also proposed to
clarify the language regarding the amenity area in the campground.
Applicant: Subject Ordinance:
Michael Faulkner Unified Development Ordinance
(UDO)
Subject Article(s) and Section(s):
• Article 4: Uses and Use-Specific Standards
o Section 4.3.4.E.2.A
o Section 4.3.4.E.2.C
o Section 4.3.4.E.2.L
BACKGROUND
Applicant Michael Faulkner has submitted a request for a text amendment to the Unified
Development Ordinance (UDO) to change the use-specific standards for Campground/Recreational
Vehicle Parks. The applicant stated a desire to amend the ordinance to fit with developing trends
in technology, culture, employment and the market. Specific needs outlined in the application include
community needs for traveling nurses and smaller RV types such as Mercedes Sprinters.
The applicant is proposing that the minimum number of spaces is reduced to 8 (E.2.A), with a
minimum area per space of 1,200 square feet (E.2.C). This would allow RV Park operators more
flexibility in site design, and would allow smaller sites to be used for RV Park developments.
The applicant’s goal is a more tailored, boutique RV park experience in contrast to the larger, more
common campground-style RV parks. The applicant has also proposed language to update and
clarify the minimum requirements for bathroom facilities and the central structure for laundry,
vending machines and the retail sales counter.
Staff have received calls expressing interest in permanent or temporary RV use on individual
parcels; however the County only permits RVs to be used in an approved campground/RV park.
There are several campgrounds in the County mostly concentrated in and around Carolina Beach
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 2 - 2 - 1
TA23-04 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 2 of 5
and Ogden. While mobile home parks are common in the northern part of the County, there are no
campgrounds or RV parks in the Wrightsboro, Hightsville or Castle Hayne area.
The New Hanover County Unified Development Ordinance defines Campgrounds/RV Parks as, “any
parcel or tract of land upon which campsites are occupied or intended to be occupied by tent for
overnight camping or upon which recreational vehicles are occupied for sleeping purposes,
regardless of whether or not a charge is made for such purposes.” The UDO currently requires
minimum development standards of RV parks, including a minimum of 25 spaces and that each
space will consist of a minimum area of 2,000 square feet. In addition, the UDO requires certain
other minimum standards such as open space requirements, bathroom facilities, access and parking.
The current ordinance standards are geared towards larger scale campgrounds for itinerant use,
where users bring their own RV, park it during their stay, and leave with the RV after. RV Parks are
only permitted by-right in the B-2 and PD districts, in all other districts they are permitted with a
Special Use Permit (SUP). In all districts, they are subject to additional development standards.
Staff have researched other jurisdictions’ regulations for RV Parks, finding some regulate the
maximum number of lots per acre rather than a minimum number of required lots. While most
jurisdictions researched by staff have minimum lot size requirements, the sizes vary within a range
of 1,250 to 2,250 square feet.
Jurisdiction Minimum Lot Size Lot Density Per Acre Minimum Lot Number
Leland, NC 1,250 sq ft 7 -
Dare County, NC 1,500 sq ft - -
Myrtle Beach, SC 2,250 sq ft - -
Surf City, NC 1,800 sq ft 20 -
Holly Ridge, NC 1,500 sq ft - 15
Other jurisdictions prescribe setbacks between the RVs/travel trailers and minimum requirements
for open space. The open space requirements of other jurisdictions are based on acreage of the
total site or the number of RV spaces.
Research indicates that while RV parks and campgrounds are commonly regulated across
jurisdictions, those regulations vary widely.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 2 - 2 - 2
TA23-04 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 3 of 5
STAFF ANALYSIS
RV Parks and campgrounds are not specifically addressed in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan.
However, these uses are common in many communities along the North Carolina coast, including
New Hanover County, and can support tourism and public access to water and natural resources.
The 2016 Comprehensive Plan recommends supporting business success and promoting place-based
economic development. Increasing flexibility in site design allows for diversity and variety in areas
where RV parks and campgrounds could be developed.
While the current regulations are similar to other jurisdictions, New Hanover County’s minimum lot
size for RVs in RV parks is larger than others. The applicant’s request is more in line with other
communities, which have smaller minimum space requirements. The New Hanover County UDO still
has controls over other aspects of RV parks, including parking, setbacks from rights-of-way, and
access. The applicant’s request to update and clarify the language in to allow for flexibility in
restroom facility design is in line with the minimum requirements for development standards for RV
Parks.
While the minimum number of spaces required does not appear commonly as a regulation in other
jurisdictions, reducing the number from 25 to 8 would allow for smaller-scale RV parks. The reduction
in minimum space size would allow RV park operators more flexibility in site design. Tourism is a
large part of the economy in New Hanover County; during the summer, the demand for temporary
lodging increases and the supply decreases. The request to allow a lower number of minimum
spaces and smaller space requirements would allow for smaller-scale RV parks to operate within
the County, increasing the opportunity for tourist-oriented businesses to operate on smaller sites.
The County still requires that RV Parks go through the Special Use Permit in residential districts,
which will ensure additional review of site design and compliance with public health and safety
requirements. In all districts, an RV Park would be required to go through the Technical Review
Committee process, ensuring minimum standards are met. However, these changes to the ordinance
may affect development in ways that are not yet fully clear. The suggested amendments to space
size and minimum number of required spaces are rational but would allow for smaller lots, more
common in residential areas, to be used for campgrounds and RV parks. There is still the control
mechanism of the Special Use Permit for all campgrounds and RV parks in residential areas.
Staff has determined that additional research is needed on how potential increases in this use will
impact residential areas. Further insight is needed to determine what locations and zoning districts
are appropriate for some of the smaller scale vs. larger scale parks. These smaller-scale
campgrounds and RV parks may require additional standards in order to mitigate their impacts on
adjacent residential areas.
When the current standards were originally adopted, SUPs were intended to function as a “maybe,”
depending on the specific site and project proposed. The safeguards of that review process have
changed over time. Subsequent court decisions have rendered this SUP process as a de facto “yes”
unless evidence is provided that a proposed project will not meet a required finding based on its
impacts on adjacent properties. As a result, staff is concerned that by reducing the bar for potential
applicants and projects set by the project and property size minimums, there may be implications
beyond those evident based on an initial review of the request.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 2 - 2 - 3
TA23-04 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 4 of 5
PROPOSED AMENDMENT
The application and proposed text amendment is below, with red italics indicating new language
and strikethrough indicating provisions that are removed.
Subsection 4.3.4.E.2.A:
a. Every recreational vehicle park shall contain at least 25 8 spaces.
Subsection 4.3.4.E.2.C:
c. Every space shall consist of a minimum area of 2,000 1,200 square feet. Each space shall
be designated on the ground by permanent markers or monuments.
Subsection 4.3.4.E.2.L
l. Each park shall have a central structure or structures area that will provide separate toilet
facilities for both sexes, and/or a minimum of 2 private unisex toilet rooms. This structure The
location of this area may also contain a retail sales counter and/or coin operated machine
for the park residents’ use only, vending and laundry machines for the park visitors’ use only,
provided there is no exterior advertising. Vending machines also may be permitted in a
sheltered area.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 2 - 2 - 4
TA23-04 Staff Report PB 5.4.2023 Page 5 of 5
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
While what the applicant is proposing is not out of line with other jurisdictions and the New Hanover
County Unified Development Ordinance, staff would need more time to research the full proposal
and the implications of these changes to the ordinance. Staff suggests continuing this application to
allow for more time for research and recommends the following motion:
I move to CONTINUE the proposed amendment of the New Hanover County Unified
Development Ordinance to modify the language in Section 4.3.4.E.2 to the June 1 Planning
Board meeting in order to allow for more time for staff research and review.
If the Board finds that sufficient information is presented at the hearing to allow for them to make
a recommendation, they may elect to proceed with one of the following motions:
Alternative Motion for Approval:
I move to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the proposed amendment to the New Hanover
County Unified Development Ordinance to modify the language in Section 4.3.4.E.2, I find
it to be CONSISTENT with the goals of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan to support business
success and promote place-based economic development. I also find RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL of the proposed amendment reasonable and in the public interest because it
allows for flexibility in site design and accommodations for a changing market and demand.
Alternate Motion for Denial:
I move to RECOMMEND DENIAL of the proposed amendment to the New Hanover County
Unified Development Ordinance to modify the language in Section 4.3.4.E.2. I find it to be
INCONSISTENT with the goals of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan to support business success
and promote place-based economic development. I find RECOMMENDING DENIAL of the
amendment request is reasonable and in the public interest because the amendment allows
for too much of an open window for development of RV parks on smaller parcels in
residential areas.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 2 - 2 - 5
Initial Application
Documents & Materials
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 2 - 3 - 1
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 2 - 4 - 1
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 2 - 4 - 2
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 2 - 4 - 3
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 2 - 4 - 4
Public Comments
In Support 0
Neutral 0
In Opposition 0
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 2 - 5 - 1
N E W H A N OV E R C O U N T Y P L A N N I N G B OA R D
R EQ U E S T F O R B OA R D A C T I O N
M E E T I N G DAT E : 5/4/2023
Regular
D E PA R T M E N T: Planning P R E S E N T E R(S ): Rebeka h Roth, Planning & L and U se Directo r
C O N TA C T (S ): Rebekah Roth
S U B J EC T:
P ublic Hearing
Text A mendment Request (TA 23-02) - Request b y N ew Hanover C ounty P lanning & L and U se to am end S ec8on
10.2.3 C ommunity I nform a8 on M ee8 ng to clarify expec ta8 ons and standards for C ommunity I nforma8on
M ee8ngs required for applica8ons for c ondi8onal rezonings, planned developments, and intensive industry
special use permits.
B R I E F S U M M A RY:
N ew Hanover C ounty Planning & L and U se staff are proposing a n amendment to clarify the expecta$ons and
standards for required co mmunity inf o rma$on mee$ngs. T he key intent o f the amendment is to ensure that applicant
teams, adjacent residents/property owners, and board members have a common understanding of the purpo se o f
these mee$ngs, that standards ensure that owners and residents o f adjacent land are inf o rmed of pro posed
develo pment applica$o ns, and that these mee$ngs serve as an effec$ve forum for co ncerns to be resolved thro ugh
discussio n and mo difica$o ns to the proposal when po ssible.
C o mmunity inf o rma$on mee$ngs, which are required by the ordinance to take place prior to applica$ons f o r
condi$onal rezonings, planned develo pments, and intensive industry spec ial use permits, were first required by the
county in 2007. At that $me, the intent was to make sure nea rby residents and property o wners were informed o f
po ten$al develo pment pro posals earlier in the pro cess to suppo rt their ability to par$cipate. S ince then, these
mee$ngs have also beco me forums to resolve po ten$al confl ic ts before an applica$o n is submi2ed.
T he pro posed text amendment and a sso ciated administra$ve do cuments are intended to re-set expecta$o ns f o r
applicant teams, adjacent residents/property owners, and boa rd members so this f o rum can be2er serve the purpo se
currently intended f o r it in the planning process.
Staff released dra4s of these documents on March 31, 2023 f o r a public comment period that ended at 8 am o n April
24, 2023. All co mments a nd staff responses are a 2a c hed. T he pro posed amendment has been revised to provide f o r
so me flexibility f o r scheduled mee$ngs that were unable to o ccur due to reasons beyond the applicant's contro l, and
the administra$ve documents have been revised to more clearly diff eren$ate between administra$ve requirements
that must be met in order for an applica$o n to be deemed co mplete and provisions that are recommenda$ons and
best prac$ces.
I f appro ved by the B o ard o f C ommissioners, the text amendment could o nly be changed through an offi cial text
amendment pro cess, but administra$ve documents could be modified and updated upon the approval o f the co unty
manager.
S T R AT EGI C P L A N A L I G N M E N T:
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3
R EC O M M E N D E D M OT I O N A N D R EQU E S T E D A C T I O N S :
Staff recommends appro val of the requested amendment a nd suggests the following mo$on:
I move to R EC O M M E N D A P P R OVA L of the pro posed amendment to the N ew Hanover C ounty U nified Development
O rdinance to cla rif y expec ta$ons for required co mmunity inf o rma$on mee$ngs and the propo sed administra$ve
do cuments. I find them to be C O N S I S T E N T with the purpo se and intent of the 2016 C omprehensive Plan because
they clarify an importa nt part of the planning process necessary to support the go als of the C omprehensive Plan f o r a
vibrant community suppor$ve of private investment that also conserves and enha nces our sense o f place. I also
fi n d R EC O M M E N D I N G A P P R OVA L of the pro posed amendment reasonable and in the public interest because it
clarifi es expecta$o ns fo r applicants, ci$zens, and boa rd members related to community mee$ngs.
AT TA C H M E N T S :
Descrip$on
TA23-02 - Script (Planning Board)
TA23-02 - Staff Report - PB
TA23-02 Text Amendment Draft
TA23-02 - Community Meeting Guidelines - PB Draft
TA23-02 Notice Template - PB Draft
TA23-02 Community Information Meeting Report - PB Draft
TA23-02 Public Comments and Staff Responses
C O U N T Y M A N AG E R'S C O M M E N T S A N D R EC O M M E N DAT I O N S : (only M anag er)
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3
SCRIPT for Unified Development Ordinance Text Amendment (TA23-02)
Request by New Hanover County Planning & Land Use to amend Section 10.2.3 Community
Information Meeting to clarify expectations and standards for Community Information Meetings
required for conditional rezonings, planned developments, and intensive industry special use permits.
1. This is a public hearing. We will hear a presentation from staff. Then any supporters and
opponents will each be allowed 15 minutes for their presentation and an additional 5 minutes
for rebuttal.
2. Conduct Hearing, as follows:
a. Staff presentation
b. Supporters’ presentation (up to 15 minutes)
c. Opponents’ presentation (up to 15 minutes)
d. Supporters’ rebuttal (up to 5 minutes)
e. Opponents’ rebuttal (up to 5 minutes)
3. Close the public hearing
4. Board discussion
5. Vote on amendment. The motion should include a statement saying how the change is, or is not,
consistent with the land use plan and why approval or denial of the rezoning request is reasonable
and in the public interest.
Example Motion of Approval
I move to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the proposed amendment to the New Hanover County Unified
Development Ordinance to clarify expectations for required community information meetings and the
proposed administrative documents. I find it to be CONSISTENT with the purpose and intent of the 2016
Comprehensive Plan because they clarify an important part of the planning process necessary to support
the goals of the Comprehensive Plan for a vibrant community supportive of private investment that also
conserves and enhances our sense of place. I also find RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the proposed
amendment reasonable and in the public interest because it clarifies expectations for applicants, citizens,
and board members related to community meetings.
Alternative Motion for Approval/Denial:
I move to [Approve/Deny] the proposed amendment to the New Hanover County Unified Development
Ordinance to establish the Riverfront Urban Mixed-Use Zoning (RUMXZ) district. I find it to be
[Consistent/Inconsistent] with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because [insert reasons]
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
I also find [Approval/Denial] of the proposed amendment is reasonable and in the public interest because
[insert reasons]
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3 - 1 - 1
STAFF REPORT FOR TA23-02
TEXT AMENDMENT REQUEST
REQUEST SUMMARY
Case Number: TA23-02
Request:
To amend Section 10.2.3 Community Information Meeting to clarify expectations and standards
for Community Information Meetings required for conditional rezonings, planned developments,
and intensive industry special use permits.
Applicant: Subject Ordinances:
New Hanover County Unified Development Ordinance (UDO)
Purpose & Intent
The key intent of this amendment is ensure that applicant teams, adjacent residents/property
owners, and board members have a common understanding of the purpose of the community
information meetings required for certain development applications, that standards ensure that
owners and residents of adjacent land are informed of proposed development applications, and
that the meeting serves as an effective forum for concerns to be resolved through discussion and
modifications to the proposal when possible.
BACKGROUND
The New Hanover County Unified Development Ordinance requires applicants hold community
information meetings before submitting an application for conditional rezonings, planned
developments, and intensive industry special use permits. This type of meeting was first required
by the county in 2007 in response to public concerns voiced regarding the River Lights development
(which was reviewed by the county prior to its annexation by the City of Wilmington). At that time,
it was intended to ensure that nearby residents and property owners were informed of potential
development proposals earlier in the process to support their ability to participate. Since then,
board members and community residents have indicated during public hearings an expectation that
these meetings should also serve as forums to resolve potential conflicts before an application is
submitted, either through discussion or modifications to the proposed plan. This expectation, while
included in the meeting purpose statement in 2019 as part of the UDO Project amendments, may
not be recognized by all code users, and the implications of this expanded purpose on meeting
format and application requirements has not been previously addressed.
This conflict in expectations of the purpose and requirements for community information meetings
was recently highlighted at a Planning Board meeting when an applicant took advantage of a
section of the ordinance that allowed applicants proceed with an application if they submitted a
report stating the reasons why the meeting was not held. The applicant felt that due to recent
public hearings, adjacent community members were aware of the project and the new application
reflected their input, so an additional meeting was not necessary. The ordinance allows the Planning
Board and Board of Commissioners to determine the adequacy of that report, and the Planning
Board voted 4-3 to not accept the report in lieu of the community meeting. Consideration of the
applicant’s proposal was delayed until a community meeting was held.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3 - 2 - 1
While this instance expedited staff’s efforts to address requirements for community information
meetings, questions and complaints regarding these meetings had been ongoing for several years.
Staff had received questions from community members regarding why some notice included certain
information and others did not and complaints that either notice had not been received or was
received so late that adjacent property owners were unable to attend the meeting. Applicants had
also indicated that the required meetings were becoming a barrier in the process and a forum for
complaints and citizen anger rather than the source of up-front information originally intended.
The proposed text amendment and associated administrative documents are intended to re-set
expectations for applicant teams, adjacent residents/property owners, and board members so this
forum can better serve the purpose currently intended for it in the planning process. The text
amendment would articulate current expectations that input provided during community information
meetings should be considered by an applicant and impact the project submitted as a formal
application. The associated administrative documents are meant to better support meetings
designed to be accessible for attendees, reducing potential conflict.
Staff released drafts of the proposed amendment to the UDO and associated administrative
documents on March 31, 2023 for a public comment period that ended at 8 am on April 24, 2003.
During this period, comments were received from staff members at Paramounte Engineering. Those
comments and staff responses are attached.
The proposed amendment has been revised to provide for some flexibility for scheduled meetings
that were unable to occur due to reasons beyond the applicant’s control, and the administrative
documents have been revised to more clearly differentiate between administrative requirements
that must be met in order for an application to be deemed complete versus recommendations and
best practices.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT & ADMINISTRATIVE DOCUMENTS
The proposed draft amendment is attached, with red italics indicating new language proposed as
part of the public comment draft and strikethrough indicated text that is to be removed. New
language provided in response to public comments or additional staff consideration are indicated
by blue underlined text.
All administrative documents are new, and changes made in response to public comments or
additional staff consideration are indicated by strikethrough or blue underlined text.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the requested amendment and suggests the following motion:
I move to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the proposed amendment to the New Hanover
County Unified Development Ordinance to clarify expectations for required community
information meetings and the proposed administrative documents. I find them to be
CONSISTENT with the purpose and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because they
clarify an important part of the planning process necessary to support the goals of the
Comprehensive Plan for a vibrant community supportive of private investment that also
conserves and enhances our sense of place. I also find RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of
the proposed amendment reasonable and in the public interest because it clarifies
expectations for applicants, citizens, and board members related to community meetings.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3 - 2 - 2
2023-03 Public Comment Draft
10.2.3. COMMUNITY INFORMATION MEETING
A. Purpose
The purpose of a community information meeting is to provide an in-person or digital forum so
the applicant can inform owners and residents of nearby lands and other stakeholders about a
proposed development application, to allow the applicant to explain the review process and site
plan if applicable; solicit comments and to provide the applicant an opportunity to hear and
address questions, comments and concerns about the development proposal as a means of
resolving so they are able to resolve conflicts and outstanding issues through discussion and
modifications to the proposal, where possible.
B. Applicability
1. Unless a report is submitted in accordance with subsection 2 below, a At least one
community information meeting that complies with the requirements in this section is
required to be held prior to submittal of any of the following applications:
a. Conditional rezonings;
b. Planned developments; and
c. Special use permits for uses classified as intensive industry.
2. An applicant may submit an application identified in subsection 1 above without first
holding a community information meeting if the applicant submits with the application
a report documenting efforts that were made to arrange such a meeting and stating the
reasons such a meeting was not held. Scheduled meetings that are unable to be held
due to technical issues beyond the control of the applicant or isolated storm events may
take place after the application submittal deadline as long as the required community
information meeting report is submitted within three business days of the application
deadline.
3. The adequacy of a meeting held or report submitted shall be considered by the Planning
Board and Board of Commissioners, as appropriate, in their decisions, but shall not be
subject to judicial review.
4. For applications other than those identified in subsection 1 above, a community
information meeting may be held in accordance with this section at the option of the
applicant.
C. Procedure
If a community information meeting is conducted, the applicant shall comply with the
requirements in subsections 1 and 2 below.
1. Notification
a. The applicant shall provide send written notice by first class mail and/or
personal delivery or other agreed upon measure at least ten days prior to the
date of the community information meeting. Notice shall be provided to the
Planning Department and to each owner of record of land within 500 feet of
and on the property tax parcel or leased site, if applicable, subject to the
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3 - 3 - 1
2023-03 Public Comment Draft
application. Notice shall be provided to the Planning Department as outlined
by administrative procedures.
b. The County shall provide notice of the community information meeting by e-
mail to the Sunshine List upon receipt of the applicant’s notification.
2. Conduct of Meeting and Written Summary
a. The community information meeting shall be open to the public. At the
meeting, the applicant shall explain the development proposal and
application, inform attendees about the application review process, respond
to questions or concerns neighbors raise about the proposed application, and
discuss ways to resolve any conflicts or concerns.
b. The applicant shall prepare a written summary of the meeting. The summary
shall be included with the application materials and contain the following
information:
1. Date, time, and location of the meeting;
2. List of invitees and copies of any returned mailings received as of the
date of application;
3. List of meeting attendees;
4. Summary of issues discussed;
5. Description of any changes or adjustments made to the proposal as a
result of the comments and concerns received by the applicant; and
6. Any other information the applicant deems appropriate.
c. The Planning Director may develop administrative requirements for
communicating and holding community meetings that fulfill the meeting
requirements of this section, as approved by the New Hanover County Board
of Commissioners, with subsequent amendments approved by the County
Manager.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3 - 3 - 2
2023-05 Planning Board Public Hearing Draft
Changes made in response to public comment indicated by strikethrough and underlined blue text.
1
Community Meeting Guidelines
New Hanover County Planning & Land Use
Purpose
The purpose of this document is to outline the administrative requirements and recommended best
practices for communicating and holding community meetings that fulfill the Community Information
Meeting requirement pursuant to UDO Section 10.2.3.
Meeting Scheduling
Requirements
A. Applicants must hold an in-person and/or virtual community information meeting prior to
submitting their application, but not earlier than six months prior to application submittal.
B. The meeting must begin no earlier than 5:00 PM and no later than 8:00 PM on a weekday or no
earlier than 10:00 AM and no later than 7:00 PM on a weekend.
C. The meeting must not be held on a Sunday morning, holiday, a holiday weekend, or the day
before a holiday or holiday weekend. A holiday is defined as legal holidays recognized by New
Hanover County.
D. The meeting must be scheduled and noticed for at least an hour.
Recommendations
A. Applicants are expected to consider the demographics and schedule of meeting attendees when
determining a date and time for scheduling a meeting. For instance, community meetings in
neighborhoods with large numbers of retirees may be appropriate during daytime hours, but in
other instances it would be more appropriate to begin meeting no earlier than 5:00 PM and no
later than 8:00 PM on a weekday or no earlier than 10:00 AM and no later than 7:00 PM on a
weekend.
B. Applicants are encouraged to consider religious or cultural holidays that may not be legal
holidays recognized by New Hanover County staff if appropriate given the demographics of a
community.
C. Applicants are encouraged to schedule community information meetings early enough in
advance of anticipated application deadlines to allow for a properly noticed additional meeting
in case the initial meeting must be cancelled or further discussions with community members is
desired.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3 - 4 - 1
2023-05 Planning Board Public Hearing Draft
Changes made in response to public comment indicated by strikethrough and underlined blue text.
2
Meeting Content
Requirements
A. Applicants must present the following information during their meeting:
a. A clear explanation of the proposal, including the proposed zoning district(s), potential
uses, and number of residential units and/or density, as applicable;
b. An explanation of the type of review process involved (i.e., public hearings or
preliminary forums required for conditional rezoning, planned development rezoning, or
special use permit as applicable);
c. When the application is anticipated to be submitted;
d. How interested parties can stay informed and engaged in the process; and
e. The applicant’s contact information.
B. The Planning Director may designate staff to attend the meeting to observe or answer
procedural questions.
Recommendations
A. While county staff do not generally attend these meetings to avoid potential unofficial feedback
on a proposed project, the Planning Director may designate staff to attend the meeting to
observe or answer procedural questions if determined to be appropriate.
B. The applicant is encouraged to obtain information from the Planning Department regarding the
review process that can be used to inform residents of the next steps.
Meeting Format
Requirements
Applicants may choose the format for a community meeting—virtual, in-person, or hybrid—following
the requirements below.
A. Virtual Meetings
a. Virtual community meetings must be held using an interactive online video conferencing
software such as Microsoft Teams, Zoom, WebEx, or other similar platforms as
approved by the Planning Director.
b. As some members of the public do not have internet access or are otherwise unable to
access digital platforms, the meeting platform must have the ability for attendees to call
into the conference using a telephone. If a platform can only be accessed via the
internet, it cannot be used to hold the virtual meeting.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3 - 4 - 2
2023-05 Planning Board Public Hearing Draft
Changes made in response to public comment indicated by strikethrough and underlined blue text.
3
c. Those who access the meeting via telephone must be given the same information,
graphics, maps, and any other pertinent information as those accessing the meeting via
the internet. If the applicant intends to screen share presentation slides or graphics
during the video conference, that material must be included in hardcopy format in the
virtual meeting notification packet should be made available to those who access the
meeting via telephone before the meeting if requested.
d. Meeting attendees, whether online or on the phone, must have an opportunity to ask
questions and voice concerns about the proposal.
e. The meeting must be held open for a minimum of one hour regardless of the number of
participants that attend.
B. In-Person Meetings
a. In-person venues must be held at one of the following locations:
i. On the subject property; or
ii. At a nearby public meeting place such as a school, library, community center,
place of worship, or other meeting facility that is easily identified by the public;
or
iii. At a publicly accessible approved by the Planning Director or designee.
b. During times of public health concern, meetings must follow current health and safety
recommendations issued by the Center of Disease Control and/or local health officials.
If in-person meetings are permitted during times of public health concern, they must be
held in venues large enough to allow participants to gather safely, and all proper safety
and cleaning measures must be taken, including providing masks or other protective
supplies to participants.
c. Meeting venues must provide ADA compliant accessibility for meeting attendees.
d. Meeting venues should provide sufficient safe and accessible parking for attendees.
e. Meetings should provide an opportunity for questions and comments of attendees
either during the meeting itself or in writing so they can be addressed later. If questions
are addressed outside of the meeting, responses should be provided in the community
meeting report submitted with the development application.
C. Hybrid Meetings
a. Hybrid meetings must meet the requirements of both virtual and in-person meetings,
excepting that the call-in feature does not have to be provided for the virtual meeting
and presentation slides and graphics do not have to be included in hardcopy format in
the virtual meeting notification packet.
Recommendations
A. Applicants are expected to consider the accessibility of in-person meeting sites for attendees.
For instance, while in some instances meetings at the subject site help inform the discussion,
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3 - 4 - 3
2023-05 Planning Board Public Hearing Draft
Changes made in response to public comment indicated by strikethrough and underlined blue text.
4
they are likely inappropriate if the site is difficult to get to or has limited space for attendee
parking. Meeting spaces that do not allow for access for disabled attendees would also be
inappropriate.
B. The selection of virtual meetings should consider the attendees’ access to the necessary
internet infrastructure and the likelihood of their having personal devices that make access
possible.
Meeting Notice
Requirements
Applicants must provide notice of a neighborhood meeting as follows:
A. The applicant must utilize the meeting notice template developed by the Planning Department
and include a description of the proposal, including all potential uses being requested and the
number and/or maximum density of residential units, and a map showing the location of the
subject property and highlighting the parcels of the property owners who were required to be
notified of the proposal.
B. The mailing shall also include a conceptual site plan of the proposal clearly labeling structures
and site features such as parking areas and proposed vegetative buffers.
C. The notice must include paper copies (in color) of any graphics or slides that will be presented
by the applicant if the meeting is being held only on a virtual platform.
D. The applicant must provide the Planning & Land Use Department the information to access the
meeting and a copy of the notification letter and materials at least 10 days prior to the
scheduled meeting in a digital format so it can be shared with the email Sunshine List. If the
Planning Director or designee must approve the location of an in-person meeting, the
information should be provided a minimum of 15 days in advance to allow for staff review and
approval before mailing.
E. Notice must be sent by first class mail to all property owners within 500 feet of the subject tax
parcel or leased site at least ten days prior to the date of the community meeting.
Recommendations
A. Applicants are encouraged to provide Planning & Land Use Department staff a list of residents
and property owners notified of the Community Information Meeting to allow staff to answer
citizen questions related to who should have received notice.
B. Staff can assist in preparing a list of property owners required to be notified, but applicants are
encouraged to request this information at least five business days in advance of when the list is
needed.
C. Applicants are encouraged to send first class mailed notice further in advance than the ten day
minimum to ensure recipients receive far enough in advance of the meeting to allow for them to
reschedule as needed so they are able to attend if desired.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3 - 4 - 4
2023-05 Planning Board Public Hearing Draft
Changes made in response to public comment indicated by strikethrough and underlined blue text.
5
Post Meeting Procedures
A. The applicant must submit the following materials to Planning staff as part of their initial
application submittal:
a. The designated Community Information Meeting Report form posted on the Planning &
Land Use website;
b. A list of names and addresses of attendees. For virtual meetings with over 50
attendees, applicants are allowed to provide a full recording in order to fulfill this
requirement. For virtual participants, the applicant should create an attendance list by
having each attendee verbally introduce themselves when they join the meeting or by
having each attendee type their name in the meeting chat;
c. A list of the names and addresses of invitees and copies of any returned mailings
received as of the date of application;
d. A copy of the meeting notification, including all attachments; and
e. A copy of all materials distributed or presented at the meeting.
B. The Planning Director may require a second meeting for projects that generate a high level of
community interest or concern, when an application changes significantly, or if there is a defect
in community meeting notice.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3 - 4 - 5
[INSERT LOGO OF ENTITY HOSTING MEETING] [INSERT FIRM CONTACT INFORMATION]
To: Resident(s) and property owner(s)
From: [INSERT NAME]
Date: [INSERT DATE]
Re: Notice of meeting to discuss a potential [INSERT REZONING/PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT/SPECIAL USE PERMIT] located at [INSERT SPECIFIC ADDRESS OR
GENERAL LOCATION IF NOT ADDRESSED] and having New Hanover County
Parcel Identification Numbers [INSERT PARCEL NUMBERS] .
[INSERT WHO THE APPLICANT/FIRM IS AND WHAT PURPOSE OF MEETING THIS IS]. The property
is highlighted in red on the context map included with this mailing. The other parcels highlighted
on the context map indicate the property owners we are required to notify about this proposal.
The property is currently zoned [INSERT CURRENT ZONING INCLUDING OVERLAYS]. The
developer is considering [INSERT PROPOSED REZONING INCLUDING OVERLAY]. The [INSERT
REZONING/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT/SPECIAL USE PERMIT] would facilitate the development of
[INSERT PROJECT PROPOSAL INCLUDING ALL POTENTIAL USES BEING REQUESTED AND NUMBER
AND/OR MAXIMUM DENSITY OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS]. A concept plan depicting the proposal is
included with this mailing.
We will hold a [INSERT IN-PERSON/VIRTUAL/HYBRID] community meeting on [INSERT DAY],
[INSERT DATE], from [INSERT TIME RANGE] [INSERT AT LOCATION/VIA VIRTUAL PLATFORM]. The
purpose of this community meeting is to ensure that nearby property owners are made aware of
the proposed project. We also want a better understanding of how this project could impact
you, and look forward to hearing your questions, comments, and concerns.
Instructions for registering for and joining the meeting are enclosed.
Please do not hesitate to contact [INSERT APPLICANT/FIRM CONTACT]. Also, for more
information about the requirements for this type of proposal and how you can receive future
information, you may want to visit nhcgov.com/528/Planning-Land-Use, email
rfarrell@nhcgov.com, or contact the New Hanover County Planning & Land Use Department via
phone at (910) 798-7165.
If the proposal should move forward and be submitted to the New Hanover County
Planning & Land Use Department formally, you will be able to stay engaged in the project from
the time of application submittal to the time it is heard by our elected officials via the
Development Review webpage (https://plannhc.com).
[INSERT NOTIFICATION AREA/CONTEXT MAP]
[INSERT CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN]
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3 - 5 - 1
[INSERT LOGO OF ENTITY HOSTING MEETING] [INSERT FIRM CONTACT INFORMATION]
[INSERT DATE]
RE: Virtual Neighborhood Meeting – Instructions
Dear Neighboring Property Owner,
We will be hosting a virtual neighborhood meeting via [INSERT PLATFORM]. The meeting will be
held on [INSERT DAY & DATE] and run from [INSERT TIME RANGE].
To attend the meeting via computer, mobile device, or iPad, type in the following link in
your internet browser:
[INSERT PLATFORM MEETING LINK]
*If a meeting ID or passcode is required, insert here as well.
To attend the meeting via phone, you may dial in b y:
[INSERT PHONE NUMBER]
*If a meeting ID or passcode is required, insert here as well.
[If there is technical support before, during or after the meeting, insert contact info
here]
Sincerely,
[INSERT NAME]
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3 - 5 - 2
Page 1 of 2
Community Information Meeting Report – Updated 04-2022
NEW HANOVER COUNTY_____________________
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & LAND USE
230 Government Center Drive, Suite 110
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
Telephone (910) 798-7165
Nhcgov.com/528/Planning-Land-Use
COMMUNITY INFORMATION MEETING REPORT
Address/Location Parcel Identification Number(s)
Meeting Date and Time
Format (Virtual, In-Person, Hybrid) Location if In-Person or Hybrid
Selection Criteria for Location
Meeting Summary
Issues and Concerns Discussed at Meeting
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3 - 6 - 1
Page 2 of 2
Community Information Meeting Report – Updated 04-2022
List of Changes and Modifications Made to the Proposal in Response to Issues and Concerns (if no modifications
were made, please explain why)
Report Attachments
All of the following items must be submitted as part of the required community information meeting report in addition
to this form.
Checklist Applicant Initial
A list of names and addresses of attendees
A list of the names and addresses of invitees and copies of any returned mailings received to date
A copy of the mailed notice with all attachments
A copy of all materials distributed or presented at the meeting
Acknowledgement and Signatures
By my signature below, I hereby certify that written notice of the community information meeting as described
above was mailed and/or personal delivery to property owners withing 500 feet of the subject site as set forth
on the attached list, by first class mail on [DATE] _____________________________. A copy of the written notice
is also attached. I also herby certify that the meeting summary and list of attendees is accurate and representative
of the proceedings at the community information meeting..
Signature of Applicant Print Name
Date
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3 - 6 - 2
1
Public Comments & Responses
Includes comments received during official public comment period of March 31, 2023 to April 24, 2023
Comment Provider Document & Section Comment(s) Staff Response
Paramounte Engineering,
Allison Engebretson and Brad
Schuler
-Most comments were received
during a virtual meeting and are
not verbatim; Mr. Schuler did send
some written clarifications-those
are indicated by quotation marks
UDO Text Amendment –
Section 10.2.3.B (Applicability)
Can flexibility be allowed in situations where a community information meeting
is scheduled but due to an act of God is unable to occur? Sometimes applicants
need to be on a particular agenda due to contractual obligations, and if the
meeting could occur within a certain timeframe prior to the meeting that would
be helpful.
“As it relates to flexibility on the timing and notice of the meeting, the examples
we provided at the [virtual] meeting were ones we just thought of at that time.
It is hard to predict every situation that would warrant some flexibility (who
would have thought of Covid?), so would prefer the current text allowing
flexibility to remain.”
While staff understands the desire for flexibility, the intent of the text amendment is
to ensure that community information meetings are held, and resident concerns are
considered, before a proposal is finalized. This may require community meetings be
held further in advance of an application deadline than is sometimes happening, and
this is recommended in the updated Administrative Guidelines. In order to address
the noted concerns, the language has been revised to allow a new community
meeting be held within the application completeness review timeline in cases where
technical issues beyond the control of the applicant or isolated storm events cause a
previously scheduled meeting to be cancelled. Additional guidance related to meeting
dates generally occurs for larger disasters or disruptive events, and it less appropriate
that applications move forward without community meetings when adjacent
residents are adapting to situations such as hurricane recovery.
UDO Text Amendment –
Section 10.2.3.C (Procedure)
Could notification also be provided by personal delivery? Sometimes applicants
would prefer to deliver notice personally to allow for discussions with adjacent
residents and property owners.
Hand delivered notice would meet the intent of the ordinance as long as the property
owner received the notice, and not just a tenant. The text amendment language has
been modified to allow for first class mailing and/or hand delivery to all property
owners within the prescribed notification area.
Request to clarify that the 500 ft. notification ring is related to the tax parcel or
leased site subject to the development application. Leased sites at the airport
were specifically mentioned as examples where large numbers of property
owners not impacted by a project might have to be notified if notification is
based just on the parcel of land.
Notification requirements for community meetings are not addressed in the General
Statutes but are currently intended to reflect the statutory notification requirements
for public hearings so that the same parties notified about the public hearings have
already been made aware of the project. The ordinance standards for public hearing
notice require all property owners within 500 ft. of the parcel of land be notified, so
the requested change would not include everyone who would receive notice of the
public hearing. As past department interpretation of the community information
meeting notice have allowed for the reduced scope of mailings for leased sites, the
number of impacted properties is likely small, and the requested clarification would
still allow statutory requirements be met and impacted property owners be notified,
the requirement has been clarified to allow the notification to be for properties within
500 ft. of the tax parcel or leased site, if applicable.
Is it necessary to require copies of returned mailings be provided with an
application? Many times, undelivered letters are not returned by the post office
prior to the application, and provision of undelivered letters would not impact
the notification requirements of the county. Request to at least modify the
provision to read ‘any returned mailings received as of the date of application.’
“While the notes reference modifying the requirement to at least provide return
mailings received as of the date of application, I still take some issue with this as
the County does not provide this information in the PB/BOC packets. Would
prefer if this requirement was removed from the proposal.
The intent of including the returned mailings is to allow staff and board members to
address questions of residents who did not receive notification of the community
information meeting. It would be helpful to have this information, so the requirement
has been retained but amended to only require provision of copies of any returned
mailings received as of the date of application.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3 - 7 - 1
2
Comment Provider Document & Section Comment(s) Staff Response
Paramounte Engineering,
Allison Engebretson and Brad
Schuler
-Most comments were received
during a virtual meeting and are
not verbatim; Mr. Schuler did send
some written clarifications-those
are indicated by quotation marks
UDO Text Amendment –
Section 10.2.3.C (Procedure)
Questions were asked regarding the role of the guidelines and whether they are
binding.
The guidelines operate in the same way as other administrative processes, such as
application deadlines and application requirements. They are intended to be rules,
but ones that are more flexible than ordinances. This will be clarified in the Purpose
statement of the Administrative Guidelines, and any language that is guiding rather
than a requirement will be noted as such in the guidelines.
Administrative Guidelines –
Meeting Scheduling
The time and day guidelines may be overly rigorous for certain demographics
(assumes that adjacent residents work a regular business
This language may be more appropriate as a recommendation, rather than an
administrative rule. To ensure that applicants consider the demographics and most
appropriate meeting day and time for adjacent property owners when scheduling
community information meetings, the application form has been modified to require a
narrative describing this rationale.
Administrative Guidelines –
Meeting Content
Is it appropriate to have the applicant provide information on the review process
or could this be provided via a link to the county website included in the
notification letter? Preference is to have a staff member attend the community
information meeting.
The intent of this provision is to provide the meeting attendees with information
regarding the next steps in the process. This has been clarified in the meeting
guidelines, but staff intends to provide additional information that can be available to
the public regarding the process on the website and available for applicants to provide
to attendees.
Administrative Guidelines –
Meeting Format
Since meeting materials are not always finalized at the time the notification is
sent out, could the guidelines be modified to require that the notification include
the process for requesting meeting materials for anyone who is accessing the
meeting via telephone?
As staff has received no information to date indicating that this is a problem with
community meetings, the suggested change has been included in the administrative
guidelines and notification template. This may be revisited if future problems arise.
Given the difficulty of identifying in-person meeting venues that are convenient
and large enough for adjacent residents, requiring Planning & Land Use
Department approval of a venue may add an additional barrier to the applicant,
especially without clear guidelines for department staff to use in determining
whether to approve.
This language has been revised and the requirement for staff pre-approval has been
removed, though this may be revisited if future problems arise. To ensure that
applicants consider the most appropriate meeting venue for adjacent property
owners when scheduling community information meetings, the application form has
been modified to require a narrative describing this rationale.
Is requiring the applicant to provide masks at public meetings reasonable or
necessary? This section may not be necessary as local health requirements
would determine what is necessary based on the nature of the public health
concern and may not be necessary in outdoor venues.
This language has been revised to require compliance with local health directives and
does not specify health accommodations.
The ADA compliance requirement may be difficult to monitor and could rule out
meetings on-site or in building such as religious assembly structures that
otherwise could be appropriate venues. Could this be phrased as a
recommendation?
This language has been revised to not refer to a specific set of accessibility
requirements. To ensure that applicants consider the needs of adjacent property
owners when scheduling community information meetings, the application form has
been modified to require a narrative describing this rationale. This may be revisited if
future problems arise.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3 - 7 - 2
3
Comment Provider Document & Section Comment(s) Staff Response
Paramounte Engineering,
Allison Engebretson and Brad
Schuler
-Most comments were received
during a virtual meeting and are
not verbatim; Mr. Schuler did send
some written clarifications-those
are indicated by quotation marks
Administrative Guidelines –
Meeting Format
“The ‘safe and accessible parking’ standard seems also tied to the ADA guideline.
Who is responsible for deciding what is ‘safe and accessible?’ Wouldn’t any
building that is allowed to be occupied today be already providing this?”
The intent of this requirement is to ensure that meeting attendees can conveniently
access the site, which may be on the subject site or park as well as a building. As with
the draft ADA compliance requirement, this language has been revised, but to ensure
that applicants consider the needs of adjacent property owners when scheduling
community information meetings, the application form has been modified to require a
narrative describing this rationale. This may be revised if future problems arise.
Request to clarify what in the guidelines is mandatory and what is
recommended.
The guidelines operate in the same way as other administrative processes, such as
application deadlines and application requirements. They are intended to be rules,
but ones that are more flexible than ordinances. This will be clarified in the Purpose
statement of the Administrative Guidelines and Community Information Meeting
Report, and any language that is guiding rather than a requirement will be noted as
such in the guidelines.
Administrative Guidelines –
Meeting Notice
Request that if maps showing the subject property and highlighting the parcels of
the property owners who are required to be notified is mandatory that it be
provided by the Planning & Land Use Department (at least upon request)
The purpose of this provision is to allow recipients of the letter to know who of their
neighbors may also have received the information. To alleviate the burden for
applicants who are not professional land designers, attorneys, or engineers, the
guidelines have been updated to remove this provision but to require the applicant
provide the list of persons notified to the Planning & Land Use office as part of the
notification for the community meeting. This will allow staff to answer questions that
adjacent property owners may have regarding who should have received notification.
If it is determined that the staff pre-approval of a location is unreasonable and is
removed from the guidelines, (B) should be modified to reflect.
(B) has been removed.
Administrative Guidelines –
Post Meeting Procedures
Given the difficulty of getting a sign-in sheet for a virtual meeting, especially large
ones, could a recording of the full community information meeting be provided
instead? The provision in (A)(b) may not work for larger meetings either.
While it may be difficult for applicants to get a full list of virtual attendees for large
meetings, a recording of the full community information meeting is not as accessible
for this type of information as a provided list. The requirement that a list of names
and addresses of attendees be provided has been retained but for virtual meetings
with over 50 attendees, applicants are allowed to provide a full recording as an
alternative.
Administrative Guidelines –
Overall Document
“Overall, would prefer…[that the] guidelines [be] more of a ‘best community
meeting practices’ document that could be provided to potential applicants and
not regulatory in nature.”
The intent of this document is to outline administrative requirements, so there will be
some regulatory language, though administrative rules by nature allow for more
flexibility than ordinance provisions. Language that is more appropriate as a guideline
or best practice has been identified as such, and the document has been revised.
Notification Letter Template Could the information on how to contact the Planning & Land Use Department
be more concise (perhaps handled by a link) in order to allow for one page
notification letters? Longer letters are less likely to be read in their professional
experience.
The template has been revised to provide more concise staff contact information.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 3 - 7 - 3
N E W H A N OV E R C O U N T Y P L A N N I N G B OA R D
R EQ U E S T F O R B OA R D A C T I O N
M E E T I N G DAT E : 5/4/2023
Regular
D E PA R T M E N T: Planning P R E S E N T E R (S ): Amy Doss, C urrent Planner
C O N TA C T (S ): Amy Doss; Robert Farrell, S enio r Planner; Rebekah Ro th, Planning & L and U se D irector
S U B J EC T:
P reliminary Forum
S pec ial U se Perm it Request (S 23-02) - Request by Ly nda Kac hman with Rising S tars of N orth C arolina, L LC ,
applic ant, on behalf of S andfiddler P roper;es, L LC , property owner, for the use of C hild C are C enter at the
approximately 0.82-acre parcel located at 320 Van Dy ke Drive, zoned I -1, L ight I ndustrial.
B R I E F S U M M A RY:
T he applicant is reques#ng a special use permit for a licensed c hild care center in an exis#ng building on an
appro ximately 0.82-acre pa rcel located at the intersec#o n of Van D yke D rive and Amsterdam Way. T he property is
currently zoned I -1 with an exis#ng commercial structure that will be co nverted f o r the propo sed use.
T he propo sed child care center will accommodate up to 60 children ages 0-12 years. T he only modifica#on to the site
wo uld be an exterior fence for child safety. T his facility wo uld serve as an expansio n of the child care fa c ility at 6743
Amsterdam Way. T he N C State D C D E E C onsulta nt has viewed the exis#ng building and recommended it to be suitable
for child care needs.
W ithin the exis#ng I -1 district, the U nified Development O rdinance requires a spec ial use permit approved by the
B o ard o f C ommissioners to allow a C hild C are C enter.
Full a c c ess to the site is currently and will remain from Van D yke D rive, a N C D OT ma intained minor arterial ro ad. As
currently zo ned, it is es#mated the site would generate about 8 A M a nd 10 P M trips during the peak hours. T he
pro posed use wo uld result in an es#mated 47 A M and 47 P M trips, increasing the es#mated number o f peak hour trips
by approximately 39 A M and 37 P M peak hour trips. T he es#mated traffi c generated f ro m the site is under the 100
peak hour thresho ld that triggers the ordinance requirement for a Tra ffic I mpact Analysis (T I A).
T he 2016 C omprehensive L a nd U se Plan classifi es the subject pro perty as E mplo yment C enter. T he intent o f this place
type focuses on emplo yment and pro duc#o n, with predo minantly offi ce a nd light industria l uses. I t can also include
residen#al, civic, and recrea#onal uses, but should be clearly delineated from rural and co nserva#o n areas. Types o f
uses encouraged include commercial uses designed to serve the needs o f the emplo yment center are appro priate.
S T R AT EGI C P L A N A L I G N M E N T:
R EC O M M E N D E D M OT I O N A N D R EQU E S T E D A C T I O N S :
As a preliminary f o rum the Planning B oard does not ma ke a decisio n or reco mmenda#o n on special use permits. T he
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4
bo ard is requested to hear the presenta#ons of sta ff, the applica nt, a nd the public to facilitate an o pen and transparent
discussio n of the special use permit applica#on.
AT TA C H M E N T S :
Descrip#on
S23-02 Planning Board Script
S23-02 Zoning Map
S23-02 Future Land Use Map
S23-02 Mailout Map
Application Materials Cover Sheet
S23-02 Application Materials
S23-02 Concept Site Plan
C O U N T Y M A N AG E R'S C O M M E N T S A N D R EC O M M E N DAT I O N S : (only M anag er)
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4
SCRIPT for SPECIAL USE PERMIT Application PRELIMINARY FORUM (S23-02)
Request by Lynda Kachman with Rising Stars of North Carolina, LLC, applicant, on behalf of
Sandfiddler Properties, LLC, property owner, for the use of Child Care Center at the approximately
0.82-acre parcel located at 320 Van Dyke Drive, zoned I-1, Light Industrial.
1. This is a Preliminary Forum. The purpose of this forum is to facilitate an open and transparent discussion of
the special use permit application and to provide an opportunity for public comments and questions. Please
note per state law, the Planning Board will not be making a decision or recommendation this evening. Instead,
the decision on the application will be made during the Board of Commissioners’ quasi-judicial hearing,
where public participation will be limited to parties with standing and witnesses providing evidence through
sworn testimony. Anyone interested in speaking in support or opposition of the project should sign in and
speak tonight at this meeting, regardless of standing in the matter.
2. Staff will introduce the application. Then the applicant will be allowed 15 minutes for their presentation.
Following the applicant’s presentation, we will have 20 minutes for public questions and comments, and then
allow the applicant time to address them. The Board members will then provide their comments and ask
questions of the applicant. At the end, Staff will give an overview of next steps in the special use permit
process. We will then close the forum.
3. Conduct forum as follows:
a. Staff introduction
b. Applicant’ s presentation (up to 15 minutes)
c. Public comments and questions (up to 20 minutes – total supporters and opponents)
d. Applicant response to public comments and questions.
e. Planning Board questions and comments.
f. Staff overview of next steps.
4. Close the Preliminary Forum.
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4 - 1 - 1
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4 - 2 - 1
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4 - 3 - 1
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4 - 4 - 1
APPLICANT
MATERIALS
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4 - 5 - 1
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4 - 6 - 1
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4 - 6 - 2
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4 - 6 - 3
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4 - 6 - 4
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4 - 6 - 5
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4 - 6 - 6
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4 - 6 - 7
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4 - 6 - 8
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4 - 6 - 9
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4 - 6 - 10
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4 - 7 - 1
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 4 - 7 - 2
N E W H A N OV E R C O U N T Y P L A N N I N G B OA R D
R EQ U E S T F O R B OA R D A C T I O N
M E E T I N G DAT E : 5/4/2023
O ther B usiness
D E PA R T M E N T: Planning P R E S E N T E R(S ): Rebeka h Roth, Planning & L and U se Directo r
C O N TA C T (S ): Rebekah Roth
S U B J EC T:
Disc ussion Regarding P lanning B oard M ee.ng T im es
B R I E F S U M M A RY:
W hen the Planning B o ard adopted the 2023 mee!ng calenda r, they elected to move the regular mee!ng !me f ro m 6
P M to 5 P M due to the growing number of agenda items and late mee!ngs they had been experiencing. At the !me,
Planning staff research did no t indicate this change of !me wo uld cause confl icts for any stakeholders. H o wever, since
then, the new mee!ng !me has begun to confl ic t with expecta!ons for staff presenc e at B o ard of C o mmissio ner
agenda reviews, which o0en occur at 4 pm immedia tely preceding the Planning B oard mee!ng.
S T R AT EGI C P L A N A L I G N M E N T:
R EC O M M E N D E D M OT I O N A N D R EQU E S T E D A C T I O N S :
Staff requests that the Planning B oard amend the ado pted 2023 mee!ng calendar to reinstate a 6 P M mee!ng !me. I t
is staff's pref erence that the mee!ng !me be amended star!ng in J une in o rder to avoid a confl ict with the J une 1
B o ard o f C ommissioners agenda review and so expec ta!ons a re clear for anyone who may submit applica!ons for
vacant seats.
C O U N T Y M A N AG E R'S C O M M E N T S A N D R EC O M M E N DAT I O N S : (only M anag er)
Planning Board - May 4, 2023
ITEM: 6