2023-08-29 Special Meeting
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35
AUGUST 29, 2023 SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 868
ASSEMBLY
The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met for a Joint Special Meeting with the New Hanover
County Planning Board on Tuesday, August 29, 2023, at 8:37 a.m. at the New Hanover County Government Center,
230 Government Center Drive, Wilmington, North Carolina.
Members present: Chair Bill Rivenbark; Vice-Chair LeAnn Pierce; Commissioner Jonathan Barfield, Jr.;
Commissioner Dane Scalise; and Commissioner Rob Zapple.
Staff present: County Manager Chris Coudriet; County Attorney K. Jordan Smith; and Clerk to the Board
Kymberleigh G. Crowell.
New Hanover County Planning Board Members present: Chair Jeffrey B. Petroff; Vice-Chair Colin J. Tarrant;
and members Kevin Hine, Clark Hipp, Hansen Matthews, and Cameron Moore. Pete Avery was absent.
Planning staff present: Planning and Land Use Director Rebekah Roth; Senior Long Range Planner Rachel
LaCoe, and Development Review Supervisor Robert Farrell.
Chair Rivenbark and Chair Petroff called their respective Boards to order for the Joint Special Meeting,
reporting that the purpose of the meeting is to discuss technical information considered as part of rezoning requests
and upcoming planning initiatives.
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC DATA AND REVIEW PROCESSES
Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Organization (WMPO) Transportation Planner Scott James provided an
overview of the WMPO’s role in land use review and traffic impact analyses (TIAs) as follows:
WMPO service area:
Technical Services section duties:
TIAs: Coordinate TIA review for member jurisdictions that require traffic studies for new
development, redevelopment, and expansion projects
Technical Review Committees (TRC): New Hanover County, Pender County, City of Wilmington,
and Town of Leland
WMPO primary audiences: traffic consultants and their clients, planning boards and commissions,
appointed and elected officials, and the public
WMPO staff is multi-disciplinary: engineers, planners, administrators, and government authorities
The WMPO’s job is to provide facts and data, design standards and guidelines, analyses, and
recommendations
Reviews involve many elements:
Traffic data collection: weekdays during the public school year, can include seasonal factors,
and historic trends and future forecasts
Land use regulations: permitted and compatible uses, height and density restrictions, and
master plan compliance
Variances and waivers (administrative or not)
Traffic control devices: new/modified traffic signals or stop controls
Geometric roadway design: additional turn lanes (into site or offsite)
Traffic modeling and forecasting: current and future simulation models, roadway
improvements (STIP projects), and minimum acceptable delays (congestion)
Traffic safety requirements (access restrictions)
TIA Committee members have “many bites at the apple:”
Prior to the initial plan proposal, during traffic analysis review, during TRC, during public
hearings, when applying for site access permit(s), during construction, and when complete
and released to public agency
Highway capacity manual intersection vehicular levels of service:
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35
AUGUST 29, 2023 SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 869
Highway capacity manual roadway capacity levels of service:
Mr. James stated in response to questions that obtaining an approved TIA takes about three to four months.
Part of the analysis is the consideration of any adjacent developments that are not yet built in the future condition
of the current proposal. The review committee identifies the neighboring development that has received approval
but has not yet been built and adds the current proposal as its future neighbor for analysis. For Carolina Beach Road,
projects are considered in the order they apply. The responsibility of traffic data collection lies with the applicant
and the applicant’s traffic consultant. Data collection occurs during non-holiday weekday peak hour periods and
when schools are in session once the initial start of school has settled down to have the most recent data for
comparison with historical trends. The recommended data collection includes morning and evening peak hour
periods from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on a Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday at a minimum.
Industry standards aim for a level of service rating of D or higher. Ms. Roth added that the North Carolina Department
of Transportation (NCDOT) does not provide specific roadway capacity recommendations, and their requirements
remain regardless of Board actions.
Mr. James explained in response to further questions that the traffic model considers what other
developments will contribute and adds the current proposal’s impacts. As to if there are rejected TIAs, the
committee’s goal is to work with the applicant’s interpretation of the impact and it either agrees with the applicant
or counterposes with additional or different mitigation measures. The goal is to get to yes. County Commissioners
only see approves TIAs. A great amount of discussion is held before data collected during the peak pandemic is
applied to an analysis and agreed upon before use in future predictions. Current data for this specific region and for
most major facilities in town shows a return to pre-pandemic travel levels, and the review committee is comfortable
with current data collection efforts. Background projects, which are ones that are large enough to have a traffic
study, are included in the analysis of a proposal. The background growth rate is to reflect all the other projects that
are too small to be analyzed by a formal study. When adjusting the background growth rate, it assumes traffic will
increase regardless of the development, ensuring it does not overly impact a specific project. If the Board of
Commissioners or Planning Board receive an application without an approved TIA conditions letter from the review
committee, they are limited solely to the applicant’s analysis. Conversely, if an approval or approval with conditions
letter is included, the boards have both the applicant’s and staff’s interpretations to consider. Ms. Roth added that
the current staff policy allows applicants to apply for a rezoning or special use permit request before the approval is
in place. The Planning Board can choose to continue the item until the approval is granted or consider the application
based on what the applicant has prepared in their TIA. However, the matter will not be scheduled for the Board of
Commissioners' consideration until the approval letter is in place.
NCDOT District Engineer Ben Hughes provided the following information regarding driveway access
permitting:
When is an NCDOT driveway access permit required?
When connecting a commercial driveway access to an NCDOT maintained roadway
TIA necessary for moderate to large developments:
Assists in determining how best to accommodate the proposed access connections safely and
efficiently
When is a TIA Required?
NCDOT threshold – 3,000 vehicles per day:
Typically, the following developments meet or exceed the 3,000 vehicles per day threshold:
55,000 square feet retail
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35
AUGUST 29, 2023 SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 870
300 single family homes
250,000 square feet office
400,000 square feet industrial
350-room hotel
Municipality or county ordinance – typically specifies 100 peak hour trips or approximately 1,000
vehicles per day
Typically, the following developments meet or exceed the 1,000 vehicles per day threshold:
20,000 square feet retail
100 single family homes
85,000 square feet office
135,000 square feet industrial
115-room hotel
Will a development be required to make improvements to the public roadway?
Total average delay at an intersection or individual approach increases by 25% or greater while
maintaining the same level of service
The level of service degrades by at least one level
Level of service is “F”
Turning lanes – when vehicle queue exceeds available storage
Conclusions/recommendations:
Identify potential intersections that will be at an unacceptable level of service
Identify improvements proposed to mitigate these potential impacts to the roadway network
Consider constraints to constructing such improvements:
Right of way constraints, utility conflicts, and environmental impacts
NC General Statute 136-18 – Powers of the Department of Transportation
Common roadway improvements for an unsignalized intersection:
Construction of left or right turn lanes; or added storage to existing turn lanes
Roundabout conversations
Reduced conflict intersections (such as on US 17 in the Scott’s Hill area)
Installation of new traffic signals
Common roadway improvements for signalized intersections:
Modifications to an existing traffic signal:
Dedicated left or right turn arrows (green and flashing yellow arrows)
Lane additions or extensions
Timing adjustments
Traffic signal coordination with nearby traffic signals
Example improvements at driveway access(s):
Left and right turn and deceleration lanes
Signalization
Roundabout
Reduced conflict intersections (US 17 Scott’s Hill area)
Can NCDOT deny access?
NCDOT is responsible for regulating the location, design, construction, and maintenance of street
and driveway connections on the state highway system
Is a TIA always necessary?
NCDOT’s driveway access permit review process looks at warrants for turn lanes at driveways
A TIA is not necessary for a turn lane warrant analysis
Can counties participate in transportation projects?
NC General Statute 136-18(38) - Powers of Department of Transportation states: “To enter into
agreements with municipalities, counties, governmental entities, or nonprofit corporations to
receive funds for the purposes of advancing right-of-way acquisition or the construction schedule
of a project identified in the Transportation Improvement Program.”
Mr. Hughes responded to questions stating that NCDOT regulates the location of access to a property and
the preference is for access to be lined up with existing driveways or intersections that are along the same corridor.
NCDOT guidelines are statewide and are applied the same across all 14 divisions. TIAs are very conservative and
analyze the worst time of day to ensure that the worst case scenario is mitigated. For beach communities, a seasonal
adjustment factor on occasion is applied to the peak traffic counts. Also, if a typical peak time for a proposed
development is a Saturday, those counts can be considered for a TIA as a worst case scenario. As it is a planning level
item, NCDOT does not look at the capacity component for the level of service for individual intersections.
Mr. James confirmed that the TIA will only look at the delay calculations. The capacity component would
be done by the transportation planning review process, not the TIA, and is where the region is evaluated, and trends
observed. The facilities are looked at in a broader condition than the spot intersections for a traffic study. The state
will then decide whether improvements are required which is the STIP conversation. For the Board’s review of land
use, there should not be a capacity element in the presentation because the committee does not do the analysis. In
this state, directions are taken and the data collection guidelines for congestion management are set by the NCDOT
Congestion Management division. The Institute for Transportation Engineers (ITE) is responsible for recommended
practices in cooperation with other organizations.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35
AUGUST 29, 2023 SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 871
NCDOT Division 3 Planning Engineer Adrienne Cox and Corridor Development Engineer Michelle Howes
provided the following information regarding NCDOT STIP for 2026-2035:
A quick glance:
Project planning:
NCDOT Division 3 coordinates long range plans in partnership with the Transportation Planning
Division (TPD), Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), Rural Planning Organizations (RPOs),
and the locally elected official boards within these local organizations
In Division 3 there are three MPOs and three RPOs
The overall process is a bottom-up approach, with local MPO and RPO boards identifying project
needs, in cooperation with NCDOT Division 3
This is a transparent process:
Opportunities for local input throughout
Resources available on the NCDOT webpage for projects across North Carolina
NCDOT’s transportation planning partner in New Hanover County is the WMPO:
Board members: Jonathan Barfield, Jr. (representing New Hanover County) and Dane Scalise
(representing Cape Fear Transportation Authority)
Projects often begin locally with an idea that goes into a long-range plan such as a county-wide
Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP):
Plans are for 30 years into the future and are not fiscally constrained
MPOs are federally required to develop what is called a Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP):
Plans are for 20-25 years into the future and are fiscally constrained
Projects from within these plans are then selected and submitted to the prioritization process
(SPOT) which is then how projects get funded in the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP):
This program identifies the funding for projects within the next 10 years
How state transportation projects are prioritized:
The State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) is the NCDOT 10-year capital plan for
projects:
Updated about every two years using a data-driven process called prioritization
Process is established in the Strategic Transportation Investments (STI) law, which also
mandates ongoing evaluation and improvement:
STI law encourages thinking from a statewide and regional perspective, while also
providing flexibility to address local needs
It allocates available revenues based on data-driven scoring and local input
Projects are submitted into prioritization
The NCDOT Strategic Prioritization Office of Transportation (SPOT) reviews and calculates
scores
Projects are ranked at the statewide, regional, and division needs levels, based on criteria such
as safety, congestion, benefit cost, and local priorities
Collaboration with MPOs and RPOs and public input are key components:
Statewide mobility = 40% Funds, 100% based on data
30% Funds, 70% based on data/30%
Regional impact =
local input
30% Funds, 50% based on data/50%
Division needs =
local input
Prioritization process:
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35
AUGUST 29, 2023 SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 872
Scoring process:
Current transportation planning:
This summer the WMPO has kicked off the start of their new MTP and has a public input survey
available and has hosted public open houses
Survey:
https://live.metroquestsurvey.com/?u=cs6j6r#!/?p=web&pm=dynamic&s=1&popup=WTD
MTP project timeline: Phase 1 of public outreach for the 2050 MTP begins in August 2023 and
concludes in November 2023. Phase 2 of public outreach begins in June 2025, when the draft
plan will be released for public comment, with plan adoption expected in November 2025.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35
AUGUST 29, 2023 SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 873
A brief discussion ensued about the various processes. Ms. Howes stated that many criteria go into scoring
projects, with congestion being a highly weighted criteria point in a highway project that will greatly affect the score.
The higher the project scores, the higher it is on the list to compete for funding. It is also accurate that some large
roadway projects that are three to five years out from completion will make a substantial difference in the County’s
traffic patterns. Ms. Cox stated that the NCDOT Board just approved the STIP for 2024-2033, and it starts again in
two years. The ten year plan is renewed every two years. Ms. Howes stated that the STIP is very much a reactionary
process. The issue is that the scoring is heavily based on current problems. The funding for those projects that score
high with poor congestion money usually runs out before the department can be proactive on a project. There are
other ways to get projects funded, such as using a TIA, but the STIP is not typically that avenue.
Ms. Cox responded to questions stating that the CTP and MTP processes are where projections are looked
at for where proactive actions can be taken when factoring in permits and land use, which are taken into
consideration because the goal is to have the plan that best reflects the needs. The opportunity for that is within the
constrained plan (MTP), where the impact can be emphasized and state what is needed. There are other
opportunities to fund projects such as spot safety funds for places where the real time data can be seen, and some
money can be used to make minimal improvements to mitigate the issue but not necessarily have big projects like
is done through a STIP. Grant funding is also looked for to offset issues. All the needs come from the local board,
which identifies projects and project needs as reflected in the MTP, potentially if it is just the WMPO, and contains
much public input.
Discussion ensued about the prioritization of the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge. Ms. Howes stated that when
it comes to prioritization, NCDOT also looks at a project’s cost. There could be 100 projects, and only 10 of them fall
into the budget as only so much money can be allocated towards projects. It is not a lack of acknowledgement; it
does not have enough funding for all the projects and the Cape Fear Memorial Bridge replacement. It is an example
of a project that would use the entire NCDOT capital improvement budget. Ms. Cox stated that the bridge is in the
statewide bucket of funds, which is 100% data driven, and work is being done with the WMPO to look at different
options for how to submit to help improve the scoring and get the project funded. She will provide the detailed
scoring process intricacies for the highway projects utilized by the NCDOT Raleigh office. Ms. Howes explained that
within the WMPO, all the projects come from the MTP, which is developed with the local board and local input and
is renewed every five years to ensure it accounts for changes in the area and growth. She and Ms. Cox work with the
WMPO to submit projects through their supplemental slots to get the best scores possible to try to get a project
funded. They also work with Ms. Roth on the County’s bicycle and pedestrian projects that are not within the
WMPO’s MTP but are within the County plan and submitted at a division level. NCDOT’s primary funding is from the
gas tax, but it is not the only source of funding and work is ongoing to change how the department is funded.
Ms. Howes responded to questions explaining that for intersection improvements a lot depends on the
right of way at an intersection. Roundabouts do provide increased mobility, especially where a signal might not be
warranted with the number of vehicles traveling through that intersection. A variety of alternatives are also
considered such as the traditional intersection improvement. All are studied and public input is sought before a
decision is finalized. Some projects that get submitted through the STIP might be funded in other ways like through
spot safety improvement projects with a quicker timeline than a bigger STIP project typically.
Ms. Roth and Senior Current Planner Robert Farrell presented the following information regarding
transportation and traffic in the New Hanover County planning process:
Planning process:
New Hanover County Planning Department involvement in transportation project planning:
Other New Hanover County Planning Department transportation roles:
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35
AUGUST 29, 2023 SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 874
Consider transportation network and planned projects in the 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan
(Comprehensive Plan)
TIA review process input
Coordination with NCDOT and WMPO staff for technical review of development project submittals
Administration of subdivision ordinance
Administration of any development standards or zoning conditions related to bicycle and
pedestrian features
Street assessment process
Road closing and renaming requests
Transportation information – New Hanover County staff reports:
Estimated trip generation – presentation:
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35
AUGUST 29, 2023 SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 875
Staff decision-making considerations:
Legislative considerations (rezonings): current zoning, requested zoning, Comprehensive Plan
guidance, and other considerations:
Quasi-judicial considerations (special use permits): evidence presented with an application,
technical standards, and requirements, Comprehensive Plan guidance:
Overview of considerations throughout the process:
Discussion ensued regarding staff recommendations. County Manager Coudriet stated that the staff must
evaluate projects as they relate to County policy, not on personal judgment. Projects are recommended only if they
are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Roth responded to questions stating that when a property is
rezoned, the zoning stays with the land, even if it is sold. What is allowed under the rezoning or SUP is based on
regulations applied to the property. If the property is sold, the new owner would still have to follow the same rules
or start the process over again. Some provisions time related depending on the decision. Projects approved under
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35
AUGUST 29, 2023 SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 876
an SUP need to be started within two years. Conditional rezonings do not generally have a timeframe, but there is
an option available for staff to rezone a property if a project is not started within a specific period.
A brief discussion ensued about the need for TIA approvals before moving forward with a public hearing on
a proposed project. Ms. Roth explained that the requirement has been put in place based on Board direction and
can be changed right away. It was put in place because the Board felt it was important to the decision making process
to know what requirements will be approved by NCDOT. The Planning Board also desires to have the approval letter
to confirm that what the applicant's transportation engineering team is providing has been thoroughly vetted. The
approved TIA being in place helps the community understand the daily impacts of a particular project. Commissioner
Scalise expressed concerns that waiting for an approved TIA holds up the process of projects, which may increase
consumer costs, especially regarding affordable housing. Commissioner Barfield agreed with the Planning Board
members that he would like to have all the information before deciding on a project, as traffic is a primary concern
for citizens.
BREAK: Chair Rivenbark and Chair Petroff called for a break from 11:06 a.m. until 11:24 a.m.
Chief Strategy Officer Jennifer Rigby opened the floor for discussion regarding the staff reports.
Commissioner Scalise stated that he believes that staff does a fantastic job educating the Board on the steps. A brief
discussion ensued regarding projects where the Planning Board has recommended denial, but staff recommends
approval. Ms. Roth reviewed the differences between the information available to staff when making
recommendations, the information considered by the Planning Board, and the information provided to the
Commissioners when making decisions. This differentiation plays a role in understanding and addressing differences
that may arise between the Planning Board's recommendations and those of the staff.
Commissioner Barfield expressed his appreciation to the Planning staff for what they bring to the table by
facilitating the thought processes. The staff reports are very thorough and assist him in making an informed decision.
He appreciates the Planning Board for advising the Board of Commissioners on projects as well as all the perspectives
that are brought forward through the process.
Vice-Chair Pierce also expressed appreciation to the Planning Board members for volunteering their time
and their work.
Commissioner Zapple thanked the Planning staff for their work and stated that he is going to push them
and expects them to push back and likes the improvements made to the staff reports. He would like more
communication between the County Commissioners and the Planning Board. He desires more discussion on the SUP
process and would like to see less SUPs coming before the Board because he wants the Board to have more input
on projects.
In further discussion about the staff reports, Commissioner Scalise stated that he would like more
information to see more about the Planning Board discussions during its meetings including individual members’
concerns. He is appreciative of understanding the procedure. He wants to ensure people are following the proper
procedure, reward them for that and disincentivize people who do not follow proper procedure. Commissioner
Barfield stated that transportation information plays the least role in his decision-making process. As Wilmington
has grown, it may take more time to get to a destination. He believes that people have the right to develop their
property within the bounds of what is legal and does not believe it is the Board’s job to decide otherwise solely
based on growth. He also expressed the need for more housing types in the community for different income levels.
When it comes to economic development, businesses need to know that there will be housing for their employees
when they locate here. Commissioner Zapple stated that he does not want it to get to the point where there is a
traffic problem as in other cities and wants the transportation information in the staff report. Commissioner Scalise
agreed with Commissioner Zapple that including data points about some of the solutions that are already in process
related to traffic would be helpful in the staff report. The Board can point to some of the infrastructure projects that
are already in process to show how things will improve related to traffic even with a project. He reiterated that he
is not in favor of slowing processes down because of some perception of traffic whenever solutions are just around
the horizon. The reality is that North Carolina is a highly desired state and New Hanover County is a highly desired
county, which is a good thing. People are bringing in tax revenue, and the County is having growth and development
in a way that keeps people alive and vibrant. Other places in the country have people running away, and he hopes
that does not happen here. He believes the Board needs to be deliberate about its policy decisions to encourage
responsible growth. Vice-Chair Pierce stated that the main complaint she hears from the public is about traffic. She
knows that NCDOT is working to alleviate those issues, but she believes the Board needs to be aware of the concerns.
She believes that connectivity, such as trails and multiuse paths, will help alleviate some traffic.
Tony Mathis with NCDOT Traffic Services stated that the Military Cutoff Road extension will help to alleviate
some of the traffic congestion on Market Street, especially in the Middle Sound Loop Road area. As to the orange
barrels on Market Street, he cannot speak as to when they will be removed, but hopefully citizens will see a good
bit of them removed in the next couple of months.
A brief discussion ensued regarding data not reflecting the traffic experience with commuters. Ms. Roth
stated that WMPO Staff and Mr. Mathis would be here throughout the end of the meeting if something came up.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35
AUGUST 29, 2023 SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 877
FRAMEWORK FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
Ms. Roth and Long Range Planner Rachel LaCoe provided the following information regarding the
Comprehensive Plan Update Framework:
Comprehensive Plan update framework:
Housing need:
Current and past activities:
Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan
Stormwater services program stormwater watershed planning updated stormwater ordinance
new flood maps adopted
Floodplain management program, including Community Rating System (CRS) program
activities
Coastal Storm Damage Reduction (CSDR) and Masons’ Inlet relocation projects
Development standards that reduce structural risk in flood prone areas, protect trees and
incentivize canopy retention
Flood studies of areas with less detailed flood risk data
What is a Comprehensive Plan?
Broad, long-term vision for future land uses and the built environment
Policy guidance for development approvals and changes to regulatory standards
Blueprint for community investments and programming
Incorporates the County’s other plans, including the newly adopted Strategic Plan
Why is it being updated?
Comprehensive Plans are required to be updated
The Comprehensive Plan should align with the new Strategic Plan
Many changes since the current Comprehensive Plan’s adoption in 2016
What are the key planning rules of thumb?
The community will continue to attract new residents, and those residents may be different
from those who live here now
Private property will be used or developed in some way to benefit the owner
Natural features will impact how land is developed and the community’s quality of life
The form and function of development impacts the quality of life and the health of residents
Land use planning should be coordinated with infrastructure planning
Land use policy choices impact economic sustainability
Decisions do not affect all stakeholders equally
What are the goals for the update?
Move quickly:
Provide guidance for decisions around ongoing development requests
Refine past policies and recommendations that may be getting out of date
Inform upcoming planning efforts
Move deliberately:
Coordinate with infrastructure planning
Carefully consider implications of policy options
Involve the community
Vet concepts with key stakeholders
How is this done?
Framework for track 1 – immediate impact updates:
Fall 2023 – Step 1: Western Bank
Winter 2023-2024 – Step 2: Bike/Pedestrian trail plan
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35
AUGUST 29, 2023 SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 878
Framework for track 2 – comprehensive updates:
How is this done?
Role of update in continuous planning process:
Public engagement approach:
Different stakeholders = different input needed and at different stages in the process
Engagement methods are as easy and convenient as possible
Elicit the best information to help the Commissioners make policy decisions
Eye on confidence in the credibility of the process
Draft public engagement framework:
Immediate impact:
Review and incorporate public comment over the past several years
Focus groups and interviews for key stakeholders and partners
Public hearing process
Comprehensive update:
One general survey with targeted outreach
Informational and educational opportunities
Focus groups and interviews for key stakeholders and partners
Public comment period
Public Hearing process
Public engagement process overview:
Communications plan with boards:
Monthly planning project update
Presentations at meetings for key project milestones
Joint work sessions (annually at a minimum)
Next Steps – Summer and Fall 2023:
Track 1 – Immediate impact updates:
Present Western Bank study report
Public Hearings on Western Bank Plan update and Unified Development Ordinance (UDO)
amendment
Prepare for Bike/Ped trail plan
Track 2 – Comprehensive updates:
Identify contracted analysis needs for the FY25 budget process
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 35
AUGUST 29, 2023 SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 879
Develop a public survey
Ms. Roth stated that she understands the urgency to update the Comprehensive Plan as fast as possible,
but staff is offering a solution they know they can meet with staff and Board member transitions. Staff has developed
this plan in coordination with the other projects that have also been assigned around housing affordability, the work
with CFPUA, and the work with the WMPO on their planning processes.
A brief discussion ensued regarding the changes that have been and are being made which have shaped
the development the County is seeing, such as NCDOT projects and water and sewer infrastructure. County Manager
Coudriet stated that one of the appropriate things needed to move forward with this plan is the need to give the
Board the space and the opportunity to look at what is not right about the Comprehensive Plan, which from a staff
perspective is unclear. Commissioner Scalise stated that he likes the plan the way it is, and it can be tweaked as the
Board moves forward. Just because the plan has been in existence for eight years does not mean it is a bad plan.
Commissioner Zapple stated that the rate of growth in the northern part of the County has been influenced by
changes in the availability of water and sewer infrastructure. Those changes were not accounted for in the
Comprehensive Plan due to not knowing at the time of its development. He also thinks that track one is more
appropriate and that much of the rework of the Comprehensive Plan should be focused on the northern part of the
County. Vice-Chair Pierce believes the greatest focus should be on the unincorporated areas of the County that are
not built out. She does not think the Board can wait two years for an updated plan and feels the fast track is more
ideal. Commissioner Barfield stated that the time consuming part of updating the Comprehensive Plan will be the
community input. There is no need for major overhaul and he feels people were very clear in 2016. He also believes
that the County should take a regional approach when looking at the update to the Comprehensive Plan because so
many live outside of New Hanover County and commute in for work. Commissioner Scalise agreed that the County
should reach out and include regional partners because they are beneficiaries of what is happening in the County.
Ms. Roth stated that the Comprehensive Plan not only guides what developers do with their property, but
also guides the County's work and the investments it makes. It also identifies what the County needs to do to
implement its goals so there are no conversations about piecemeal rezonings for years on end. Staff can do some
things to ensure that the direction set moves ahead and be implemented in a timely fashion.
A brief discussion ensued regarding open space, parks, and the need for a large-scale park in New Hanover
County. County Manager Coudriet stated that he confirmed with Chief Facilities Officer Sara Warmuth that there are
three parks in the unincorporated County that are over 200 acres each. He does not believe the County is
underperforming as it relates to parks.
Ms. Roth thanked both Boards for their attendance. Based on the discussion, she will work with staff to
finalize plans for the project. She added that staff will plan to move forward with both track one and track two
projects over the coming months and keep both Boards updated as the project moves forward.
ADJOURNMENT
Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark and Chair Petroff adjourned the meeting at 12:48 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kymberleigh G. Crowell
Clerk to the Board
Please note that the above minutes are not a verbatim record of the Special Meeting of the New Hanover County Board of
Commissioners. The entire proceedings are available online at www.nhcgov.com.