Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResponse to Public Comments - Final - 2024-07-05Western Bank Amendment – Response to Public Comments What We Heard Response and Impact to the Planning Board Public Hearing Draft A number of the unique public comments and Action Alert comments that included additional statements indicated that there are questions regarding the purpose behind the amendment and why it is being considered. Some commenters seemed to misunderstand that the amendment was intended to allow for more intensive development and for the development of marsh lands and portions of Eagles Island not in New Hanover County. The entire Western Bank area is highly visible to travelers along the Cape Fear Memorial, Isabel Holmes, and Thomas Rhodes Bridges, as well as to residents and visitors of downtown Wilmington. Not all of this area is actually in New Hanover County, though—the majority of what people see of Eagles Island is actually in Brunswick County—and is not the focus of this amendment. While some marsh areas are included in the Western Bank area in New Hanover County, they are generally publicly owned. The focus of this amendment is the small number of land parcels in private ownership that are currently zoned for Regional Business, Industrial, or Mixed Use development (approximately 90 acres). This amendment is proposed because over the past several years, the Board of Commissioners and staff have been conducting a series of studies in response to new information and research indicating that the Western Bank area of New Hanover County is more susceptible to flooding than was known at the time the 2016 Comprehensive Plan was adopted. The plan currently classifies this area as Urban Mixed Use, our highest intensity place type or land development pattern, and the Commissioners have directed staff to change this classification to reduce potential risks and public costs related to future development. This amendment would be the first step in also modifying the regulations that currently apply to these properties, which currently allow for a wide variety of intensive uses, to reduce potential risk to hazards and long-term public impacts. The substance of those regulations has not been fully determined, but the provisions in the Comprehensive Plan would be used to inform that work. The updated amendment draft includes additional language to clarify the intent of the amendment, the reasons behind it, and the properties to which new recommendations apply. See the amendment’s Summary Sheet for more information. The Action Alert comments and two-thirds of the unique public comments directly request that the Western Bank properties not be allowed to develop. The Action Alert comments request that the properties be classified as Conservation rather than creating a new place type. While the goal of the plan amendment is to encourage low impact uses and public purposes, the majority of properties in the Western Bank area are privately owned so County development regulations cannot prohibit their reasonable use. The Conservation place type is intended to protect the natural environment, water quality, and wildlife habitats, but it also places limits on development that may be in conflict with local governments’ constitutional constraints on prohibiting the use of private property by their owners. Staff would not recommend that this place type be applied to properties under private ownership, but Conservation has been extended to publicly owned parcels and along the riverfront where Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Areas of Environmental Concern are likely to be located. Because the recommended place type is new and has not been applied to properties previously, staff was able to modify it to address many of the concerns expressed by commentors, which are further outlined below. In addition, the place type is suggested to be re-named Low-Intensity Riverfront, as it strongly emphasizes public purposes and uses, with recreation and civic uses making up the majority of the recommended use mix. This designation would allow for the types of park and educational purposes supported by many public commenters. The majority of public comments highlighted concerns regarding increasing compound flooding risk, how that might be impacted by future development, the long term public costs, and consistency with the stated goals of the floodplain management program. These concerns are one of the primary reasons why the County Commissioners have directed staff to modify the policies for the Western Bank. Over the past several years, Commissioners and staff have received large amounts of information from community stakeholders related to increasing nuisance flooding in this area and how those trends are projected to impact properties in the coming years. The County has a long-standing floodplain management program, with standards beyond the minimum required for participation in the FEMA flood insurance program to address ongoing resiliency. These standards are based on FEMA guidance, which though it aims to prevent flood damage as referenced in purpose statements included in Article 9 of the Unified Development Ordinance, are bound by the same constitutional limits described above, which constrain government from prohibiting use of private property. The initial draft of the amendment included recommendations that any buildings in this area meet requirements above and beyond what is currently required in the County ordinances. Language has been added to clarify the intent of these provisions and an additional No Adverse Impact certification is referenced in response to a public comment that provided information on its use in Brevard, NC. On Friday, June 7, 2024 an initial draft of an amendment to the 2016 Comprehensive Plan regarding future land use on the Western Bank properties in New Hanover County across from downtown Wilmington was released for public comments. All comments provided by noon on June 28 were considered by staff as the amendment was revised in preparation for Planning Board consideration at their July 11, 2024 meeting. During the three-week public comment period, staff was sent 2,543 public comment emails. The majority of the emails were sent via an Action Alert portal used by a number of local organizations and advocacy groups. Staff also received 165 unique email comments. Themes and concerns from comments are summarized below, along with staff responses to how they were considered in preparation of the Planning Board Public Hearing Draft of the amendment. What We Heard Response and Impact to the Planning Board Public Hearing Draft The majority of public comments also expressed concern regarding the impact of potential development on the area’s ecology and environmental resources, cultural and historic resources, and downtown Wilmington viewshed. Many commenters also expressed a desire for the entire Western Bank, including the properties located in Brunswick County, to be conserved as natural space to protect those resources, allow for educational opportunities, and provide economic value to downtown Wilmington as green space. It is important to note that some of the private properties in the Western Bank area impacted by this amendment are currently used for industrial or commercial purposes, and other privately-owned parcels were previously used for intensive uses. What people see on these properties is not pristine environment—it is the result of properties becoming overgrown by vegetation, which is covering likely brownfields. While the state indicates that two of the properties are participating in the brownfields program, most of the land parcels have not been cleaned up and known plans are not in place to do so. The desires voiced by commenters were the basis for many of the guidelines for this area in the initial public comment draft. As described above, there are limits on local governments’ ability to prohibit the use of private property, so provisions are in place to serve as guardrails for what is expected if private development or uses occur. These include recommendations for building height and architecture. As a result of the public comments, these recommendations have been modified to more closely align with height recommendations for riverfront uses in the City of Wilmington. Less height is recommended for parcels within the National Register Historic District so the U.S.S. Battleship remains the focal point for the viewshed. A number of public comments referenced concerns related to the traffic and fiscal impacts of potential development in this area as well as a desire for recreational uses and bicycle and pedestrian connectivity. Additional clarifying language has been added to reference concerns related to fiscal impacts. Staff does not anticipate a large traffic impact due to the types of lower intensity uses encouraged in the new place type and considered the limitations on transportation infrastructure in this area during the development of the Western Bank Report, which has influenced the recommendations in the proposed amendment. An emphasis on recreational uses is one of the primary recommendations for the Low- Intensity Riverfront place type. Language referencing requested connections to greenway, trail, and blueway networks in Wilmington and Brunswick County has been added. A handful of comments indicated a desire for development on the Western Bank, and a couple expressed concern that the recommended guidelines, especially regarding height and use, would limit the developability of private properties. Concerns were also voiced that properties with contamination due to past industrial uses may not be able to be cleaned up if private development were stymied, as that is the usual mechanism for environmental restoration. It is not the intent of this amendment to prohibit the reasonable use of private property, and any riverfront-specific zoning districts recommended by the amendment would have to consider those impacts. However, this amendment is intended to set guardrails for what any new uses or buildings would have to consider due to flood risks, public investments and cost, and desired community character. The current Urban Mixed Use place type outlined for this area indicates to property owners that the County desires more intensive development, resulting in a large amount of private investment in proposals that may encounter hurdles late in the development process. This amendment seeks to clarify expectations for land owners and potential developers and to identify County programs that could mitigate existing contamination concerns generally addressed by private developers. No changes to the initial amendment were made in response to these comments beyond the addition of some clarifying language.