Loading...
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.