Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-07-22 Regular Meeting NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 261 ASSEMBLY The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met July 22, 2024, at 4:00 p.m. in Regular Session in the Assembly Room of the New Hanover County Courthouse, 24 North Third Street, Wilmington, North Carolina. Members present: Chair Bill Rivenbark; Vice-Chair LeAnn Pierce; Commissioner Jonathan Barfield, Jr.; Commissioner Dane Scalise; and Commissioner Rob Zapple. Staff present: County Manager Chris Coudriet; Clerk to the Board Kymberleigh G. Crowell; and County Attorney K. Jordan Smith. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chief Diversity and Equity Officer Linda Thompson provided the invocation, and Commissioner Scalise led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA Chair Rivenbark requested a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. MOTION: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple to approve the items on the Consent Agenda as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of the Charge of 2024 Levy – Tax The Commissioners approved the 2024 Charge of Levy and directed the Tax Collector to collect the taxes charged in the tax records and receipts for 2024. A copy of the 2024 Charge of Levy is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLV, Page 13.1. Approval of New Hanover County Collection Report for May 2024 – Tax The Commissioners approved the May 2024 tax collection reports for New Hanover County, New Hanover County Debt Service, and New Hanover County Fire District. Copies of the tax collection reports are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLV, Page 13.2. Approval of Contract Award for Nutrition Services for the Senior Resource Center to Gibbs Management Services, Inc. – Senior Resource Center The Board approved the contract award to Gibbs Management Services, Inc., for nutrition services at the Senior Resource Center. Adoption of Resolution Authorizing Execution of Opioid Settlements and Approving the Second Supplemental Agreement for Additional Funds – County Attorney The Board adopted the resolution authorizing the execution of Opioid Settlements and approved the second supplemental agreement for additional funds. A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLV, Page 13.3. Adoption of Resolution to Direct the Expenditure of Opioid Settlement Funds for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 – Strategy The Board adopted the resolution to direct the expenditure of Opioid Settlement Funds for Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-2025. Commissioner Zapple highlighted the County’s efforts to address the opioid crisis, including $15.9 million in immediate funding for various projects. He also praised the programs and strategies that will enhance services for those in need. A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLV, Page 13.4. Approval of an Offer for the County to Sell Property Located Adjacent to 3101 Castle Hayne Road and Associated Upset Bid Process – Finance The Board accepted Littlebird Properties, LLC's offer to purchase the County’s parcel of land adjacent to 3101 Castle Hayne Road (Parcel ID R02519-001-018-000) for $132,000, subject to the upset bid process. The Board also authorized staff to initiate and complete the upset bid process in accordance with NC General Statutes (NCGS) and authorized the county manager and county attorney to prepare and execute all necessary documents to sell and transfer the parcel to the highest bidder. Adoption of Purple Heart Day Proclamation – Sheriff The Board adopted the proclamation recognizing August 7, 2024, as Purple Heart Day in the County. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 262 A copy of the proclamation is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLV, Page 13.5. Adoption of Resolution Expressing Support for Consideration of Wilmington as a Future Site of the North Carolina Submarine Museum – County Manager The Board adopted the resolution expressing support for consideration of New Hanover County as a future site of the North Carolina Submarine Museum and its STEM and workforce development center. A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLV, Page 13.6. Approval of Minutes – Governing Body The Board approved the minutes of the Agenda Review held on June 13, 2024 and Regular Meeting held on June 17, 2024. REGULAR ITEMS OF BUSINESS PRESENTATION BY BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF SOUTHEASTERN NORTH CAROLINA MEMBER AND NORTH CAROLINA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (NCACC) YOUTHVOICE 2024 DELEGATE ZAYAHNIE BARRETO Zayahnie Barreto, Youth of the Year candidate for the Boys and Girls Club of Southeastern NC (BGCSENC), thanked the Board for the opportunity to speak and reported on how BGCSENC has been instrumental in helping her grow, interact with people, and learn to become a social and outgoing leader. She looks forward to attending the NCACC YouthVoice in a few weeks. The Commissioners commended Ms. Barreto on her presentation and discussed what opportunities she will have during the conference that will continue to help her grow while learning about county government. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE 2023 ANNUAL TAX SETTLEMENT Tax Administrator Allison Snell presented the statutorily required annual tax settlement report highlighting the following:  New Hanover County Tax Administration 2023 Annual Tax Settlement:  Per NCGS 105-373 the Tax Collector must make a report of settlement for the FY 2023-2024 and prior years  New Hanover County 2023 Levy:  Five-year comparison:  Fire District 2023 levy:  Fire District five-year comparison: NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 263 The Board commended Ms. Snell and her staff for their work and efforts to help the citizens pay their taxes and make them feel respected in their interactions with the Tax Department. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for Board direction. MOTION: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple to approve the 2023 annual tax settlement. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the report is available for review in the Tax Department. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF TWO CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AWARDS RELATED TO THE LAST FRONTIER INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT Chief Financial Officer Eric Credle and Cape Fear Public Utility Authority (CFPUA) Chief Engineer Gary McSmith presented the following information:  Last Frontier – Consideration of approval of two construction contracts:  Infrastructure project:  Water and wastewater mains:  All northern area mains – including CFPUA funded mains:  Interlocal Agreement key provisions:  Primary responsibilities:  CFPUA manages the project:  Manages design, bidding, and construction process  Ongoing responsibility for operation, maintenance, and repair  Eventually owns the assets of the project after any debt is repaid NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 264  New Hanover County funds the project:  State budget grant awarded in 2023 expected to fund most of the costs: $29.55 million  Regular cooperation and consultation between the parties  Total project cost:  September 2022 estimate: $26.5 million  November 2023 estimate: $42.6 million  Project Segments:  Construction awards for the first two segments:  Greenview West area wastewater force main:  Four bids received (one non-responsive):  Low Responsive Bid – S&L Contracting, LLC: $3,381,006  Sidbury Road and Greenview East area wastewater force mains:  Four bids received low:  Responsive Bid – T.A. Loving Company: $3,775,500 * Includes construction bids noted on prior page + construction administration fees A brief discussion ensued about the bidding environment and the appearance of a reduction in the projects’ costs. Mr. McSmith stated that due to the County’s projects now being funded through the North Carolina reserve funds via special appropriations, the requirements to use the funds are less costly to execute. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for Board direction on the request. MOTION: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield to approve, and award the construction contract for the Greenview West Area sewer force main to S&L Contracting, LLC in the amount of $3,381,005.68 and to approve and award the construction contract for the Sidbury and Greenview Area East sewer mains to T.A. Loving Company in the amount of $3,775,500. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF CASTLE HAYNE AND GORDON ROAD FIRE STATIONS GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE AWARD CONTRACT AMENDMENTS AND ADOPTION OF ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENTS Facilities Project Manager Kevin Caison stated that the request is for the Board to award the Castle Hayne and Gordon Road Fire Stations guaranteed maximum price (GMP) contract amendment to SAMET Corporation and adopt the associated budget amendments. SAMET Corporation is also the County’s construction manager at risk (CM@R) for both fire stations. He reported on the bidding process and explained how value engineering helped reduce the final GMP. Mr. Caison confirmed that these are the first projects SAMET Corporation has done for the County. Fire Rescue Chief Donnie Hall stated he has no concerns with installing rollup doors at the stations instead of the bi-fold doors used at the Ogden Fire Station. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for Board direction on the request. MOTION: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple to award the guaranteed maximum price contract amendment to Samet Corporation for the Castle Hayne Fire Station in the amount of $7,723,887 and adopt the associated budget amendment 25-002 to increase the overall project budget by $1,979,360. The Board further awards the guaranteed maximum price contract amendment to Samet Corporation for the Gordon Road Fire Station in the amount of $10,101,508 and adopts the associated budget amendment 25-001 to increase the overall project budget by $1,895,967. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Copies of the budget amendments are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLV, Page 13.7. PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT INFRASTRUCTURE CDBG-I APPLICATION ON THE PROPOSED SCOTTS HILL WATER MAIN EXTENSION AND APPROVAL TO SCHEDULE THE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING FOR AUGUST 19, 2024 Chair Rivenbark stated there is a need to hold a public hearing of the New Hanover County FY 2024-2025 North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Community Development Block - Infrastructure Grant (CDBG-I). The purpose of the public hearing is to obtain citizen's views and to allow response from the public to funding proposals and answer any questions posed by citizens. Staff will present a detailed overview of the New Hanover County CDBG-I funding application and proposed project. He asked for a motion to open the public hearing. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 265 MOTION: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield to open the public hearing for the New Hanover County Fiscal Year 25 North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Community Development Block - Infrastructure Grant (CDBG-I). Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Chair Rivenbark stated that staff will present the required information and receive public comments. Housing Program Manager Theo McClammy presented the following information:  CDBG-I Application FY25 Scotts Hill Water Main Extension – Public Hearing 1:  Project background:  Residents of the Scotts Hill community reported poor well water quality that impacts their drinking supply plus concerns about high levels of iron that are detrimental to appliances, clothing, and plumbing fixtures. Residents have repaired or replaced wells at substantial cost. Connection to public water would require an extension of main water lines, which is not something members of the community, many of whom are on fixed incomes, would be able to afford.  At the direction of management, staff is working with Insight Planning & Development to pursue a Community Development Block Grant-Infrastructure (CDBG-I) of $3 million to provide partial funding to bring public water to the Scotts Hill area by extending the main water lines  CFPUA has provided a preliminary engineering estimate of total project costs which is reflected in the agenda packet. The grant application is due September 30, 2024 with a decision expected in February.  Community engagement:  Informal citizen engagement meetings were held in the Scotts Hill Community on January 30, 2024, April 9, 2024, and July 16, 2024, to inform citizens of the potential project and to receive their feedback. Each meeting was well-attended, with about 50 residents, with staff from the manager’s office, Planning, Housing, Health Department, and CFPUA. Residents voted to request a water station and connection to CFPUA.  Partnering with the residents and CFPUA, a water station was installed at the Scotts Hill Community Center, which officially opened on July 16, 2024.  Study and project areas:  Consultant conducted a study of homeowners’ income levels and water connection needs of 81 parcels  The study has resulted in a defined project area of 57 homes consisting of low to moderate income households:  Project area includes parts of Stephens Church Road, McIntyre Trail, Foys Trail, and the western section of Creekwood Road  Project area meets CDBG-I grant requirements of providing benefits to a defined area where at least 51% of individuals are low to moderate income  Study area:  Project area:  Information required by the funding agency:  Purpose of the CDBG-I water program:  To improve the quality of life for low to moderate income people by providing a safe, clean environment, and clean drinking water through water and sewer infrastructure improvements and extensions of service. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 266  The CDBG program is able to fund a wide variety of community development activities: water and sewer infrastructure, neighborhood revitalization, COVID-19 related projects, and economic development projects that lead to job creation or retention.  The Department of Environmental Quality requires that 51% of the project area benefit low to moderate income persons and meet standards of affordability for the consumer and utility provider. The proposed project area has been determined to have a low and moderate income of at least 90%.  For fiscal year 2024-25, CDBG-I funding available is up to $3 million per applicant every three years. It is available to non-entitlement municipalities and counties. Applications for the next round of funding are due September 30, 2024.  CDBG-I program can fund a range of water infrastructure projects, including those that:  Resolve water loss in distribution systems  Extend public water to areas with contaminated wells  Extend water lines to areas with dry wells  Assist with low water pressure in public water systems  Regionalize two or more water systems  Rehabilitate or replace a water treatment plant  Activities Covered by CDBG-I Funds:  The range of activities covered by the CDBG-I funds for this project include: construction, environmental review, engineering design, construction administration and observation, legal activities, surveying, and grant administration  CDBG past experience:  The County’s previous CDBG experience includes the 2010 CDBG Scattered Site Housing (SSH) Program Reconstruction Project #13-0400  CDBG-I compliance:  Grant recipients are required to adhere to federal procurement requirements and other federal regulations  No displacement and relocation will occur as a result of the proposed activity:  If displacement and relocation would occur, grant recipients must comply with the requirements of the general displacement and relocation policy for CDBG grant funding, which includes assisting low to moderate income individuals with costs associated with relocation or displacement  CDBG-I application timeline:  The advertisement for this hearing states that complaints, grievances, or requests for information regarding the grant application should be addressed to the county manager’s office. A written response to complaints or requests for information will be sent within fifteen (15) business days, where practicable.  A second public hearing is requested for August 19, 2024 to present the application for board approval. The application will be available for review during normal business hours at the New Hanover County Government Center. Mr. McClammy concluded the presentation by stating that the Scotts Hill Water Main Extension application will be competitive because of documented community needs and citizens’ input. Water connections will take place in a well-defined geographic area that meets and surpass a key requirement to benefit a low-to-moderate income community, the project will result in long-term quality of life improvements for Scotts Hill residents, and it will provide a strong return on investment. Also attending this hearing is Chris Hilbert, representing Insight Planning and Development, and CFPUA Chief Engineer Gary McSmith. County Manager Coudriet responded to questions stating that if awarded the grant, staff will come back to the Board to ask for match approval. He thinks the timing will allow the request to be part of the FY 2025-2026 budget. If the grant is not awarded to the County, the Board will have to consider whether it wants to extend the total project costs through the general fund or partner with CFPUA in a cost share arrangement. Chair Rivenbark stated that two people signed up to speak under the public comments portion of the public hearing and asked for the speakers to provide remarks. Cynthia McIntyre, resident of Stephens Church Road, Wilmington, NC, thanked the Board for the water pump installation to have clean water for drinking and cooking. She recognized fellow community members in attendance. She also reported on the community’s interest and desire to be connected to the CFPUA water system. Bonnie Murray, resident of the Scotts Hill community, Wilmington, NC, thanked the Board for supporting the community water station, which provides clean drinking water to everyone in the community. She highlighted NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 267 the diverse needs of the Scotts Hill/Kirkland area, which includes low-income individuals, elderly residents, and disabled citizens. She reported on the importance of having community support to ensure the ability to obtain access to clean water from the water station. There being no further public comments, Chair Rivenbark asked for a motion to close the public hearing. MOTION: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield to close the public hearing. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for a motion to approve the second public hearing to be scheduled for the August 19, 2024 Board of Commissioners meeting. MOTION: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield to approve the second public hearing to be scheduled for the August 19, 2024 Board of Commissioners meeting. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARING AND DENIAL OF A REQUEST BY NEW HANOVER COUNTY PLANNING AND LAND USE TO AMEND THE NEW HANOVER COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO INCORPORATE GUIDELINES FOR RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES AND INFILL DEVELOPMENT Development Review Planner Amy Doss presented the residential density amendment, explaining that the goal is to clarify existing policy recommendations around residential density. This amendment is needed to ensure that new developments align with the 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan (Comprehensive Plan). It will assist in addressing various considerations discussed by the Board and staff when determining project consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Since adopting the Comprehensive Plan, numerous rezoning requests have highlighted the need for an updated plan. This amendment helps balance housing needs with concerns about infrastructure, environmental impact, and community character. It serves as an interim tool to provide clear guidance for public hearings while the Comprehensive Plan undergoes updates over the next year and a half. The amendment was released for public comment in May 2024. Comments included concerns about overdevelopment, higher density, multi-family development adjacent to single-family homes, building height, and lack of regulatory action. Ms. Doss stated that staff incorporated the comments and provided more explanation about the project's focus and a detailed chart of existing density recommendations for each place type. She also provided examples and context for transitional features for infill development. Components of the amendment include a summary of density recommendations for place types, a graphic explaining factors to consider when evaluating project density, a narrative detailing the factors and how they may affect density decisions, and a chart of sample transitional elements with graphics and explanations. It also includes information on when elements are required by the County’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) versus when they are recommended. The amendment supports the Strategic Plan by promoting workforce and economic development, sustainable land use, and environmental stewardship. It ensures projects align with the current Comprehensive Plan density recommendations and provides guidance on appropriate density within place types. The evaluation factors for rezoning include project density, place type recommendations, and relation to surrounding density. Factors influencing density appropriateness include water and sewer access, environmental features, nearby open space, commercial centers, and affordability. The amendment establishes a scale to evaluate when higher or lower density is more appropriate based on proximity to major corridors, public transit, open space, environmental features, or affordability. It also provides recommendations for appropriate transitions between land uses and densities. Considerations include land uses and building height, connectivity, stormwater, green infrastructure, roadways and private drives, landscaping, accessory elements, and hard barriers. It encourages locating higher intensity uses near similar areas and lower intensity uses near existing low-density developments, with additional multi-modal connectivity and pedestrian-oriented features recommended. Ms. Doss provided an overview of how place types are utilized on the Future Land Use map based on the current Comprehensive Plan versus the proposed amendment. Extensive Board discussion ensued about the amendment's actual purpose and effectiveness. Ms. Doss explained that no new regulations are introduced with this amendment. It summarizes existing policies and guidelines, consolidating and reiterating current practices and recommendations from different sources to provide clear guidance for applicants. It highlights common issues and community concerns that have arisen during public hearings and shows how these are typically addressed. It also reflects the feedback and priorities expressed by the Board and the Planning Board. Essentially, the amendment summarizes existing regulations from the ordinance, the UDO, and the Comprehensive Plan. Planning and Land Use Director Rebekah Roth added that the amendment was requested based on feedback received during rezoning discussions for infill projects. Currently, staff recommendations are based on the Comprehensive Plan, which lacks specific language discussed over the past eight years. Generally, any project within the broad density range is considered consistent with the plan, so staff will recommend approval, even if it includes taller structures next to existing developments. Incorporating specific language into the Comprehensive Plan will provide clearer guidance to applicants before they submit applications, ensuring projects align with County expectations. It will also help the community evaluate new projects, ensuring they maintain neighborhood character. This amendment clarifies existing discussions and recommendations into a guiding policy document, improving rezoning conversations and enhancing staff's ability to provide guidance. Commissioner Zapple commented on the public's frustration with terms like "encouraged," which they perceive as weak, especially when high-density projects move into established neighborhoods. He agreed with NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 268 Commissioner Scalise’s concerns about the need for clearer language to help people understand why high-density projects are permitted next to their homes. He noted that the Comprehensive Plan’s broad guidelines are constraining and called for a firmer stance. County Manager Coudriet explained that the current plan permits anything from zero to eight units per acre in general residential areas, but it is up to the Board to decide the appropriate density for specific areas. The amendment facilitates discussions between staff and applicants, allowing for negotiation and context-based recommendations. Although the Comprehensive Plan may state a maximum of eight units per acre, staff might recommend lower densities based on external factors. The amendment provides a framework for negotiation and helps ensure appropriate densities near existing subdivisions until the Comprehensive Plan is updated with clearer guidelines. Commissioner Barfield commented that he believes the staff is seeking predictability from the Board. Ms. Roth responded that being on the same page will guide early project conversations, preventing unwanted developments. The amendment clarifies what the Board expects in projects, addressing past issues with high densities and poor transitions to adjacent properties. The goal is to reduce frustration by ensuring projects align with the Board’s expectations and to provide a tool for clearly articulating those expectations. Commissioner Barfield noted that development stability remains unpredictable, with significant changes every few years. Increasing density in infill areas requires flexibility to consider all housing types due to limited land. Over-regulation could halt development, especially given the current housing shortage and rising costs. He emphasized the need to facilitate business development without harming communities and to evaluate each project on a case-by-case basis for balanced growth. Vice-Chair Pierce expressed understanding of the staff's aim but voiced concern that the document might mislead applicants into thinking their projects will likely be approved if they follow it. She agreed with Commissioner Barfield that each project should be evaluated individually, as the Board’s decisions vary based on community needs and board composition, which changes over time. While she appreciated the intent, she was unsure whether this approach was the right one. Commissioner Zapple agreed, noting the County is in a transitional phase with frequent changes. The public is upset because they assumed surrounding areas would remain zoned as they are. He acknowledged the need for more housing due to the increasing population, which raises density issues, but stressed the importance of the Board’s ability to set limits. Clearer guidelines and expectations are needed to address public and developer concerns effectively. Chair Rivenbark announced that one person signed up to speak in support of the request and asked the speaker to make his remarks. Logan Secord, resident of New Town Drive, Wilmington, NC, spoke in support of the proposed amendment. He stressed the need for clarity and specificity in planning documents, noting that current ambiguity has led to issues. He highlighted the importance of evaluating developments based on factors like proximity to public transport, affordability, and infrastructure. There is a necessity to have intelligent growth to avoid problems seen in cities like Charlotte and Atlanta and he advocated for mixed-use infill development to reduce traffic and provide local services. He also asked for stronger measures on affordable housing options to ensure essential workers can live in the area and advanced stormwater designs to manage increasing severe weather events. He stated his commitment to advocating for better development guidelines and supporting modifications for sustainable growth. He believes these guidelines are a step in the right direction, but the work needs to continue to address the issues. There being no further public comments, Chair Rivenbark closed the public hearing, and opened the floor to Board discussion. In Board discussion, Commissioner Scalise expressed concern that the amendment is premature given the ongoing process to revise the Comprehensive Plan. He felt this approach was patchwork and lacked a clear formula, which is unrealistic due to the emotional and varied nature of these issues. He emphasized that there is no one-size- fits-all solution and cautioned against giving that impression, noting that some projects should not be approved. While he supports staff and appreciates their work, he is concerned that the amendment might set unrealistic expectations and questioned if this is the right time for it. Commissioner Zapple, while agreeing somewhat with Commissioner Scalise, stated he would support the amendment. Chair Rivenbark highlighted the need to consider factors like traffic and other impacts, stating that each project requires thorough review and discussion with the applicant. He noted that while guidance can be provided, predicting the outcome for every project is impossible. Commissioner Barfield pointed out that the Board's unpredictability frustrates staff and developers. Developers find it challenging when they meet qualifications but still face rejections. The joint meeting with the Planning Board aimed to align perspectives, but each case remains unique and must be evaluated individually. While he understands the concerns, he does not believe this amendment would resolve the issue. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for direction from the Board. Commissioner Zapple stated he would make a motion to approve the request. MOTION: Commissioner Zapple MOVED to approve the proposed amendment to the New Hanover County 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan to provide guidelines for the evaluation of residential densities and clearly articulated recommended infill development elements. The Board finds it to be consistent with the purpose and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan because it provides a tool intended to enhance the ability to evaluate appropriate residential densities and suitability. The Board also finds approval of the proposed amendment reasonable and in the public interest because it provides recommendations to be used as guidance for infill development and can assist in the public review and process for rezoning and special use permit applications. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 269 Chair Rivenbark asked if there was a second to the motion on the floor. Vice-Chair Pierce stated she would make a substitute motion to deny the request. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Vice-Chair Pierce MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Scalise to deny the proposed amendment to the New Hanover County 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Upon vote, the MOTION PASSED 4 TO 1; Commissioner Zapple dissenting. PUBLIC HEARING AND WITHDRAWAL OF A REQUEST BY CINDEE WOLF WITH DESIGN SOLUTIONS, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF GIOVANNI IPPOLITO AND TANYA VLACANCICH, PROPERTY OWNERS, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 4.65 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 6634 CAROLINA BEACH ROAD FROM R-15, RESIDENTIAL TO (CZD) RMF-M, RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY – MODERATE DENSITY FOR A MAXIMUM 64-UNIT MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT (Z24-08) Development Review Supervisor Robert Farrell presented the request to rezone approximately 4.65 acres from R-15 Residential to RMF-M Residential Multi-family - Moderate Density. This project, located at 6634 Carolina Beach Road, was previously presented in May 2023. Initially zoned R-15 in the 1970s to ensure lower housing densities due to private wells and septic systems, the area now has access to public water and sewer services. It is bordered by single-family residential areas on three sides and a religious institution to the north. The proposed development includes 64 multi-family units, with four three-story buildings housing 12 units each and two two-story buildings housing eight units each on the western side of the site. Additional features include an amenity center, recreation area, open space, stormwater management, a right turn lane off Carolina Beach Road, and a privacy fence along the northern, eastern, and southern boundaries. The site has direct access to Carolina Beach Road, a principal arterial highway maintained by the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT). Access will be right-in/right-out, with a U-turn for northbound traffic approximately 1,800 feet to the south. The developer proposes adding a right-turn lane extending south to the entrance to Glenarthur Drive, subject to NCDOT requirements and permitting. The proposed development would generate fewer than 50 AM and PM peak hour trips, below the threshold requiring a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). While the area is nearing capacity and no immediate State Transportation Improvement Projects (STIP) are planned, other projects in the area have been reviewed to address general traffic growth. Based on current student generation rates, the development is expected to result in approximately ten additional students. The vicinity includes one subdivision and three TIAs within a mile of the site. The project supports the County Strategic Plan's goals of increasing housing options and preserving nature areas. With 14 dwelling units per acre, the proposed density is within the recommended range for the place type. Site features such as landscaping, parking, and stormwater management provide buffers between different residential uses. The applicant has voluntarily included a condition ensuring that 10% or six units, whichever is greater, will be dedicated to workforce housing for a minimum of 15 years. The property is designated as Community Mixed Use in the Comprehensive Plan, promoting a mix of retail, office, and residential development at moderate densities of up to 15 units per acre, with building heights ranging from one to three stories. The RMF-M district serves as a transitional zone between residential and commercial developments, providing a buffer between the highway and single-family residential areas. The Planning Board considered this application at the June 6, 2024 meeting. Several members of the public expressed concerns about increased traffic and project density. The Planning Board voted to recommend approval (5-0) with an additional condition limiting the dumpster location to the northern or eastern portion of the site, away from neighboring single-family residential development. The application was found to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the development scale aligns with plan recommendations and provides additional housing diversity. The project includes a voluntary condition ensuring affordability for workforce housing. Based on the Comprehensive Plan, zoning considerations, technical review, and recommended uses and residential density for the Community Mixed Use Place Type, staff concurs with the Planning Board recommendation with conditions related to exterior lighting, the addition of a right turn lane, tree protection, and fencing. An additional voluntary condition ensures workforce housing affordability for 10 percent of the units, or six (6) total units, for 15 years. There are also restrictions on the number of units and height of the westernmost structures. Mr. Farrell concluded the staff presentation, noting that several additional comments regarding this application were provided to the Board earlier today. Should the rezoning be approved, the development will undergo additional review through the County’s Technical Review Committee (TRC) to ensure all land use regulations are met. Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Farrell for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks. Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, applicant, on behalf of the property owners Giovanni Ippolito and Tanya Vlacancich, stated that she and her clients strongly believe the project aligns with staff recommendations and the Planning Board’s approval. She highlighted that the Comprehensive Plan promotes economic development and sustainable stewardship, supporting diverse housing types to meet the needs of all citizens. The designated place type for the site supports higher density development suitable for properties along busy road corridors, making lower density single-family development no longer appropriate. The rezoning request supports the concept of transitioning use and utilizing vacant parcels with available utilities and urban services. She noted the ongoing influx of new residents and the significant housing deficit driving rental costs up. Multifamily rental housing serves as a temporary solution for many who may later transition to home ownership, while others may prefer its versatility. A mix of housing types helps create a vibrant community. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 270 Ms. Wolf outlined the proposed project, which includes 64 multi-family units centered around existing trees with recreational amenities. The development will consist of four three-story buildings with 12 units each and two two-story buildings with eight units each, designed to blend with the surrounding area and provide a height transition. At least six units will be dedicated to workforce housing standards, ensuring affordability for residents, and addressing community needs. Buildings near adjacent residences are limited to two stories to ensure a smooth height transition, with a maximum height of 26 feet compared to the 40 feet allowed by right. No parking will be permitted along the drive aisle adjacent to the rear boundary, enhancing the buffer for neighboring properties. An amenity building will include a manager's office, pool facilities, and common space for residents, ensuring on-site management and 24/7 contact availability. The architectural style will follow a Mediterranean design, contributing to the development’s aesthetic appeal. Enhanced setbacks and buffering with existing trees and an eight-foot solid screening fence along the property boundaries ensure privacy and integration with the surrounding area. A retention pond with proper grading will manage stormwater, addressing runoff and drainage concerns. Existing streams and wetlands will not be impacted with the required buffers in place. The site is upstream of the closest 100-year flood limit, ensuring safety from flooding risks and compliance with County regulations. The site also has direct access to Carolina Beach Road, a major thoroughfare designed to manage higher traffic volumes, supporting the development’s connectivity and transportation needs. The project includes an extended right-turn lane and taper, subject to NCDOT requirements, to improve traffic flow and safety. The increase in traffic during peak hours is minimal compared to the existing volume on Carolina Beach Road, and cumulative traffic impacts have been considered. Ms. Wolf supported reducing the speed limit on Carolina Beach Road from 55 mph to 45 mph to enhance safety, although this is an NCDOT matter. Ms. Wolf concluded the applicant's presentation by stating that the project supports housing diversity, addresses the housing shortage, and provides affordable options for residents, aligning with the County’s strategic goals of promoting intelligent growth and positive economic development. Mixed-use development helps reduce traffic by providing local services, contributing to a vibrant community where residents can access nearby amenities. Public road improvements will ensure safe vehicular access, benefiting the overall community and enhancing infrastructure to accommodate growth. She acknowledged concerns about traffic and density, emphasizing the project’s design to mitigate these issues through enhanced buffering, setbacks, and architectural considerations. She stressed the importance of responsible driving habits and adherence to NCDOT guidelines for driveway permitting to ensure safety for all road users. The project's comprehensive design and thoughtful planning address community concerns and the County's long-term development goals. She noted that new developments are essential for community growth and economic viability, meeting County plans and policies and providing necessary mitigation for potential impacts. She emphasized the thorough review and support from staff and the Planning Board, confirming the project’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and strategic goals. Conditional zoning districts allow each project to be evaluated on its merits, ensuring responsible and sustainable development. Chair Rivenbark announced that no one signed up to speak in favor and four people signed up to speak in opposition to the request. He invited the opposition speakers to make their remarks. Nancy Steele, a resident of Mackay Court, Wilmington, NC spoke in opposition to the request on behalf of the Lord's Creek Homeowners Association and many neighbors. She presented a detailed PowerPoint highlighting concerns about overbuilding apartments in the Monkey Junction area, which is becoming saturated with over 500 approved apartment units in the past three years. She emphasized that the current application remains unchanged from a previously rejected one. Ms. Steele criticized the high-density rezoning request for its small lot size and limited green space compared to other complexes. She noted that the current market for apartments in the area is saturated, with no waiting lists and some complexes offering incentives. She expressed concerns about the lack of trees and the impact of the proposed 30 to 40-foot tall buildings on neighboring homes. She argued that the project is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, which encourages multimodal transportation and suggests that areas disconnected from mixed-use centers may not be suitable for increased density. Ms. Steele urged the Board to listen to the community and maintain the integrity of the Comprehensive Plan. Penny Willmering, a resident of Bancroft Drive, Wilmington, NC continued the PowerPoint presentation, focusing on traffic concerns. She noted that NCDOT representatives acknowledged traffic issues on Carolina Beach Road during a community meeting but reported no immediate solutions. Willmering highlighted heavy traffic and high speeds along Carolina Beach Road, presenting data from NCDOT showing 35,000 to 45,000 daily cars with no relief planned until at least 2029. She emphasized the congestion at the proposed development's entrance and exit points, stressing the hazards created by the deceleration lane used by 800 households from three subdivisions. Dr. Willmering described how church activities exacerbate traffic congestion, creating further risks. She compared the proposed development area to a safer example near UNCW, highlighting differences in infrastructure. Dr. Willmering concluded that Carolina Beach Road lacks the necessary infrastructure to support the proposed development and called for addressing traffic issues before approving further development. Tom Toby, a resident of Oliver Court, Wilmington, NC spoke in opposition to the request stating that diversity in housing does not equate to affordability. He highlighted the recent creation of numerous apartments, condominiums, townhomes, and single-family homes in the area, with multiple ongoing developments. Mr. Toby cited examples of similar neighborhoods directly off Carolina Beach Road, countering the argument that single- family residences are unsuitable. He presented data indicating a 13% vacancy rate for apartments and referenced economist Dr. Adam Jones, who noted rising vacancy rates and reduced rents at Belleville Park. Mr. Toby also discussed traffic issues, especially during peak times, and the school district's inability to manage additional students. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 271 He argued that Lord’s Creek residents deserve the same consideration as other residents and requested the Board deny the rezoning request to preserve the neighborhood. Sheila Stubbs, a resident of Glenarthur Drive, Wilmington, NC spoke in opposition to the request stating the proposed development is landlocked with inadequate open spaces. She criticized the predominance of impervious surfaces and the minimal buffer zone of trees, which provide little screening in winter. Ms. Stubbs compared the development unfavorably to other high-density developments with more amenities and green spaces. She refuted claims that the southern part of the County needs a broader range of residents, arguing that such diversity should not be confined to less affluent neighborhoods. Ms. Stubbs questioned the development's proximity to urban services, arguing it is inconvenient for residents. While supporting affordable housing, she criticized the proposed development for its poor design and lack of vision. She suggested the developer should purchase a larger piece of land closer to services to provide quality housing without negatively impacting wetlands, traffic, or the neighborhood. Ms. Stubbs asked the Board to deny the rezoning request. Chair Rivenbark stated that the applicant and opposition speakers each have five minutes to provide rebuttal remarks. In applicant rebuttal, Ms. Wolf addressed several points raised by the opposition. She noted that nearly 800 residents in the community behind the proposed development rely solely on access via Carolina Beach Road and River Road. Almost 200 of these units have been built in the last eight years, indicating ongoing development in the area. She argued that it is disingenuous for the opposition to suggest that the 64 new units would face different access challenges than the existing community, as current residents also use vehicles to access shopping and daily services. Ms. Wolf expressed skepticism that the opposition would support a commercial center in the location, even though mixed-use development is part of the corridor's planned use. She explained the project’s proximity to Veterans Park and various shopping options along Carolina Beach Road, highlighting how it aligns with the area's mixed-use and public space plans. She reiterated that the project complies with the County’s ordinance for buffering, which includes existing vegetation, replanting where necessary, and installing a screening fence. She emphasized the ongoing housing deficit and the importance of increasing density to make housing more affordable. Ms. Wolf noted that while her client’s business operations are based in New York, they own multiple properties in the County and are local taxpayers deserving of equal opportunities and considerations. She pointed out that other larger multifamily projects have been approved along Carolina Beach Road. Given the demonstrated mitigation measures and consistency with Planning Board and staff agreements, she questioned why this project should be treated differently. She reiterated that all necessary mitigation measures have been addressed and that the project has been found consistent with the staff and Planning Board guidelines. Ms. Wolf urged the Board to consider the individual merits of the project and the comprehensive planning that has addressed community concerns, emphasizing the need for the proposed development, and requested approval for the rezoning request. In opposition rebuttal, Nancy Steele stated the site is close to a recreational area, but the issue is a person cannot walk to it. There are no sidewalks on Carolina Beach Road, no shoulders, and it is dangerous to walk along it. Also, it is not just this project that adds vehicles to the corridor, it is 500 other apartments in the same general vicinity. It is the totality of all the projects. In opposition rebuttal, Penny Willmering stated the site is a small piece of property compared to others. It is also unsafe for the potential residents as they will face the same issues her community faces on Carolina Beach Road. She reiterated that there is only one way in and out. The plan is not good and poses a threat to those who live there. In opposition rebuttal, Tom Toby stated the project is in part of the narrowest part of the County, where acknowledgment has been given that traffic is near capacity already. Couple that with the addition of the other surrounding projects, traffic will be severely hampered, particularly during holidays and emergency situations. While this project is not bad, the opposition is not to the project in itself, but the location. The land does not blend well with the neighborhood, nor does it go with anything else surrounding it. There are no other buildings of this type in this immediate area. Chair Rivenbark closed the public hearing and opened the floor to Board discussion. Commissioner Scalise stated that in 2023 he voted in favor of the request, he was not in the majority at that time and regrets his vote. He will vote differently today for a number of reasons. One reason is that the current Board is the same one from 2023 that denied it. He thinks it would be a mistake to encourage applicants to listen to the Board say no, and not come back with even a little bit of a change. For the applicant to present exactly the same plan after being told no was a mistake. He stated he plans to vote “no” today. Commissioner Zapple stated as to the affordable housing issue over the past month the housing supply is at its highest level since 2020. It is up 76% from last year. While he will not base his vote on that data point, he has noticed the exacerbating need easing. He believes the traffic issues are still present, and he noted that the church’s parishioners are also opposed to the rezoning request. Also, it was denied last year, and he has not seen any changes to the project since that time. There is nothing to pull people off Carolina Beach Road, or for those who live there to be able to use services in shops, as well as no attempt to adjust the plan to provide that accommodation. He will be opposing the project as well. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 272 Vice-Chair Pierce stated her agreement with Commissioners Scalise and Zapple, noting that her main concerns are with traffic and safety in that area, the increased density, and increasing the number of people. She described her experiences traveling along Carolina Beach Road, noting the traffic is horrendous. The county manager and his team have put together an impressive multi-use plan that may eventually reach Carolina Beach Road. The hope is to see it funded in the future. She agrees with opposition speakers that there is a need for multi-use paths to get people off the road. She further stated she cannot support the rezoning request. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked Ms. Wolf if, based on the Board discussion and items presented during the public hearing, whether she would like to withdraw the petition or proceed with the vote. Ms. Wolf responded that she wanted to withdraw the petition. As the applicant withdrew the matter based on the Board discussion, no vote was taken. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY CINDEE WOLF WITH DESIGN SOLUTIONS, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF WALTER WAYNE WINNER, PROPERTY OWNER, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 0.25 ACRES ZONED R-15, RESIDENTIAL LOCATED AT 802 S. SEABREEZE ROAD TO (CZD) CB, COMMUNITY BUSINESS, FOR 1,800 SQUARE FEET OF GENERAL RETAIL SALES AND OTHER LIMITED USES (Z24-09) Ms. Doss presented the request for a conditional rezoning from the R-15 Residential District to the CB Community Business District for a 0.25-acre parcel located at 802 S. Seabreeze Road, near Carolina Beach Road, and just north of the Snow’s Cut Bridge. Originally zoned R-15 in 1971 to ensure low-density housing with private wells and septic systems, the site now has access to private water and sewer services through AQUA. Currently undeveloped, the site is part of the historic Seabreeze neighborhood, a prominent vacation resort for African Americans from the 1930s through the 1950s. Nearby developments include a conditioned CB rezoning for the former Pelican Snowball stand to the north and the Seabreeze Townhomes to the south. Ms. Doss highlighted the site’s location at the corner of South Seabreeze and Service Roads, its undeveloped status, and its proximity to the Carolina Beach and South Seabreeze intersection. The applicant proposes developing a two-story, 1,800 square foot structure for General Retail Services or similar uses. The site will have two access points: a primary entrance/exit on Service Road and a one-way exit on South Seabreeze. A six-foot high privacy fence will separate the vegetative buffer yard from adjacent residential properties. According to County Engineering, the proposed 6,900 square feet of impervious ground cover does not require state stormwater permitting. The proposed use is expected to generate a minor increase in traffic, with approximately 3 AM and 11 PM peak hour trips, well below the threshold for a TIA. The area has not experienced the same interest in higher density growth as other parts of the Carolina Beach Road corridor. The Seabreeze Small Area Plan (1989) recommended business revitalization and waterfront redevelopment. The property’s location near Snow’s Cut Bridge along a heavily traveled corridor is conducive to commercial development. The proposal includes conditions to limit some uses permitted in a CB district to enhance compatibility with the area. The proposed commercial development provides general retail in a largely residential area, benefiting from its proximity to Carolina Beach Road. The proposal meets two community-focused outcomes in the 2024-2028 Strategic Plan for sustainable land use and environmental stewardship, as the rezoning will support the community by locating a business in a transitional area along a major roadway corridor. It also supports workforce and economic development by enabling new business growth, preparing for long-term business needs, and maintaining growth within state targets. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as part of the Community Mixed Use place type, which includes commercial uses and encourages infill development. At the June 6, 2024 Planning Board meeting, the proposed rezoning was recommended (5-0) for approval with conditions that include limiting principal uses, installing privacy fencing with a buffer yard, capping impervious ground cover, and considering exterior lighting. Ms. Doss concluded the staff presentation stating that should the rezoning be approved, then the development of the site will be subject to additional development review to ensure compliance with all land use regulations. She responded to questions stating that the only entrance is off the service road and exiting can be done off Seabreeze to the right or left. Chair Rivenbark thanked Ms. Doss for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks. Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, applicant, on behalf of Walter Wayne Winner, property owner, stated Jerry and Dana Vess, contractor purchasers, are also present. Mr. and Mrs. Vess desire to locate a family business on the site. A couple of months ago the Seabreeze Village commercial project was rezoned on the opposite corner. This project is at a signalized intersection of Carolina Beach Road and South Seabreeze Road. She provided an overview of the site plan and asked Mr. Vess to share his insights on the rezoning request. Mr. Vess shared his and his wife’s background and vision for the proposed business. They moved to Carolina Beach in 2015 to pastor Seaside Chapel on Dale Road and have a passion for serving their community. As lifelong entrepreneurs, having owned a small business in the early to mid-2000s, they plan to run this new venture as a family business with their sons. The aim is to establish a neighborhood bait and tackle shop to serve both the local community and visitors. They believe the proposed location is ideal due to its proximity to the public waterway and the Intracoastal Waterway, attracting many people for recreational activities like fishing. The shop would be conveniently located near a traffic signal, allowing easy access for customers coming off the main road onto the service roads. Customers can circle through, purchase supplies, and easily return to Carolina Beach Road to head over the bridge for their activities. The location's accessibility is especially beneficial for customers towing boats, as they need appropriate driveways and space for maneuvering. They have been searching for a suitable business NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 273 location for about two years, focusing on properties that can accommodate their specific needs, especially regarding driveway access for boats. They found the current parcel, which they are in the process of purchasing, to be the best fit for their business model. They believe the proposed business will be a valuable addition to the community and enhance the local economy. Mr. Vess thanked the Board for its time and consideration of the request. Ms. Wolf stated that NCDOT has preliminarily vetted the circulation plan for this project. The plan accommodates vehicles with trailers, ensuring they can enter and exit without blocking traffic. Despite the small site size, the access road allows smooth entry and exit, enabling vehicles with trailers to maneuver without obstructing incoming traffic. The thoughtful arrangement of the building and parking area ensures that the view from the intersection of South Seabreeze Road is not of the building's rear. The applicants have committed to an architectural style that maintains a visually appealing façade on both sides, incorporating fenestration to avoid an unattractive rear view. They fully agree with the conditions. Ms. Wolf and her clients believe the rezoning request is consistent, reasonable, and in the public interest. The Comprehensive Plan's Community Mixed Use type promotes sustainable growth through sensible infill and location efficiency. The proposed development will provide commercial services that enhance the area's character. Approval of a conditional district will ensure compatibility and minimize impacts through buffers and fencing, providing an orderly and acceptable transition along Carolina Beach Road. Ms. Wolf responded to questions about future uses of the site, stating that the conditions are specific and do not include a restaurant. General Personal Services use, such as salons and tattoo shops, are permitted, though the clients would agree to not allowing a tattoo shop if required. She confirmed that water and sewer services do run to the site. She also suggested that effective signage at the corner could direct traffic to the shop, with an arrow pointing down the road. While Seabreeze Road currently has a median that might be adjusted when Seabreeze Village is developed, the median will likely remain due to lane edge improvements from the TIA for that project. Proper signage will help guide traffic in the correct direction. Chair Rivenbark announced that no one signed up to speak in favor or opposition to the request and closed the public hearing. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked Ms. Wolf if, based on the Board discussion and items presented during the public hearing, whether she would like to withdraw the petition or proceed with the vote. Ms. Wolf responded that she wanted to proceed with the vote. Vice-Chair Pierce stated that she thinks this request is a great plan for the subject area. She believes it will be good for the contract purchasers and the community. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for direction from the Board. Commissioner Zapple stated he would make a motion to approve with the added condition that tattoo shops are not allowed as an approved use for the site. A brief discussion ensued about removing tattoo shops as an allowed use on the site. Vice-Chair Pierce stated that she does not think putting such a condition on just that site is fair. Commissioner Barfield stated he would not support the inclusion of the condition and does not want the Board to leave a negative impression that it would send regarding tattoos. Commissioner Scalise stated that the larger point of the discussion is that the board does not want to specifically call out types of businesses in this fashion. Commissioner Zapple stated he would make a motion to approve without the condition. MOTION: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Scalise to approve the proposed rezoning and the Board finds it to be consistent with the purposes and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan because the proposed uses are in line with the recommendations of the Community Mixed Use Place Type. The Board also finds recommending approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the development would act as a community service business node to serve both the Seabreeze Community and the surrounding area. The following conditions will apply to this approval as follows: 1. The proposed rezoning's principal use shall be limited to: General Retail Sales, Animal Grooming Service, General Personal Services, Instructional Services and Studios, and Offices for Private Business and Professional Activities. 2. Transitional buffers meeting the requirements of a Type A: Opaque Buffer are required along all property lines adjacent to residentially zoned parcels. 3. Exterior lighting including luminaries and security lighting shall be fully cutoff fixtures that are directed downward in compliance with Figures of the UDO. In no case shall lighting be directed at or above a horizontal plane through the lighting fixture. 4. The proposed development will have an architectural design requiring the structure to be double- fronted. While the wall facing the parking lot will be the front of the structure, the wall facing S. Seabreeze Road will be designed to have an appearance similar to that of the storefront. Furthermore, approval is subject to the applicant signing an agreement acknowledging the applicant’s consent to all listed conditions. If the applicant does not provide a signed agreement within seven (7) business days from the date of approval, then the rezoning application approval is null and void. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 274 A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA 4 OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED April 7, 1971 is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book I, Section 4, Page 131. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY CINDEE WOLF WITH DESIGN SOLUTIONS, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF LALULI INVESTMENTS, LLC, PROPERTY OWNER, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 0.86 ACRES ZONED R-15, RESIDENTIAL LOCATED AT 501 AND 505 MANASSAS DRIVE TO (CZD) O&I, OFFICE AND INSTITUTIONAL FOR ONE COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE TOTALING 8,000 SQUARE FEET FOR THE USE OF MEDICAL AND DENTAL OFFICE AND CLINIC AND OTHER LIMITED USES (Z24-06) Mr. Farrell stated the request is to rezone approximately 0.86 acres from the R-15 Residential District to a Conditional O&I (Office & Institutional) District. The proposed rezoning aims to accommodate higher density residential and mixed commercial uses, reflecting the evolving needs and development trends along the Carolina Beach Road corridor. The site is located on the corner of Manassas Drive and Carolina Beach Road. The R-15 district was established in 1971 for low-density housing served by private septic and wells. The area has since shifted to higher density residential and mixed commercial uses, notably between Monkey Junction and Halyburton Parkway. The site is currently wooded, bordered by residential development to the north and east, and commercial development to the south and west along Carolina Beach Road. Mr. Farrell provided aerial views of the site, nearby residential developments, and development in the O&I district, including a medical office near Monkey Junction. The concept plan includes a two-story, 8,000-square-foot commercial building with associated parking. CFPUA confirmed the nearest public sewer access is at Appomattox Drive, approximately 1,500 feet from the subject parcels. Due to the distance, CFPUA cannot require a sewer connection, so the project proposes a private septic field for sewer service on the eastern side of the property, away from Carolina Beach Road, buffered by a privacy fence. New septic systems must be reviewed and approved by New Hanover County Environmental Health. The concept plan also includes an underground stormwater facility under the parking lot on the site's western side. A soils analysis indicated the site can support an underground system. Stormwater systems must be reviewed and approved by both New Hanover County Engineering and NCDEQ. As currently zoned, the site is estimated to generate approximately 2 AM and 2 PM peak hour trips. The proposed (CZD) O&I development is estimated to generate 19 AM and 53 PM peak hour trips, increasing the estimated number of trips by approximately 17 AM and 51 PM trips. NCDOT review limits access to right-in and right- out only onto Carolina Beach Road. Southbound traffic will use a U-turn 1,000 feet south of the site or further down Manassas Drive. Carolina Beach Road is currently over capacity near the Manassas Drive intersection. The proposed use(s) will generate moderately low traffic, potentially reducing longer trips on Carolina Beach Road. The project will be subject to NCDOT engineering review for driveway permitting. The estimated traffic generated from the site is under the 100 peak hour threshold that triggers the ordinance requirement for a TIA. It is located south of the Beau Rivage Marketplace, which includes a grocery, pharmacy, and other services. There has been increased interest in higher density residential, commercial, and mixed-use projects along the Carolina Beach Road corridor. This project would help meet the County Strategic Plan's goals because the proposed (CZD) B-2 rezoning would allow businesses that could support the surrounding community to locate in a transitional area along a major roadway corridor and in close proximity to a number of households. The project would also enable new business growth. The Comprehensive Plan designates these parcels as Urban Mixed Use, which promotes development of a mix of residential, office, and retail uses at higher densities. The Planning Board considered this application at the June 6, 2024, meeting and voted to recommend approval (5-0) of the petition with no additional conditions. Staff concurs with the Planning Board's recommendation based on the policy guidance of the Comprehensive Plan, zoning considerations, and technical review. Conditions address landscaping, signage, exterior lighting, limitation on uses, tree preservation, fencing, and a public access easement. Mr. Farrell concluded the staff presentation, stating no additional comments were received. Finally, should the rezoning be approved, the site's development will be subject to additional development review through the County’s TRC to ensure all land use regulations are met. Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Farrell for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks. Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, representing LaLuLi Investments, LLC, and Dr. Nathan Graves, stated that Dr. Graves currently operates Myrtle Grove Dentistry in the Harris Teeter shopping center. He recently purchased the subject property to relocate his practice and operate on his own property. The property is not currently used for commercial purposes. The intended use is to establish a dental office, enhancing Dr. Graves' operational control and efficiency. Ms. Wolf noted her previous work in the area, including the development of a veterinary facility across the road in 2009. The project involves creating small office spaces, operational for approximately 12 hours a day, primarily functioning on an appointment basis to ensure predictable and manageable traffic levels. Initial traffic considerations included a right-in/right-out access point off Manassas Drive. Based on feedback from NCDOT and collaboration with traffic engineers, adjustments were made to limit impacts and conflict points. The optimal solution involves placing the right-in/right-out access point as far north as possible on the site, minimizing traffic disruption, and adhering to DOT recommendations. The existing partial turn lane and taper near the site will be extended to accommodate traffic, ensuring smooth ingress and egress. Ms. Wolf concluded the applicant presentation, stating the site has access to water, with a fire hydrant located at the corner of Manassas and Carolina Beach Road. Due to the nearest public sewer being 1,500 feet away, the site will utilize a septic system. Soil testing and preliminary layouts for the septic system have been conducted to ensure suitability. Detailed design and permitting processes will involve the TRC and NCDOT to address any NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 275 remaining issues and ensure compliance with all relevant regulations. The rezoning is consistent with current development trends and plans. The proposed office use is considered reasonable, providing a suitable transition between the highway and residential areas. The rezoning request promotes public interest by fostering sustainable growth through sensible infill and location efficiency. The conditional district designation ensures compatibility with neighboring properties and minimizes impacts. Measures include installing a solid wood privacy fence on the property's rear side to provide additional privacy and separation from adjacent residential areas. Chair Rivenbark announced that no one signed up to speak in favor or in opposition to the request. Vice-Chair Pierce stated that she thinks this is the kind of development needed in the subject area to help reduce the number of people traveling into Wilmington for services. Ms. Wolf responded to questions about the project, stating the site is 200 feet deep and will be approximately 180 feet from the corner of Carolina Beach Road and Manassas Drive. Concerns were raised by the Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Organization (WMPO) and NCDOT, but the site consists of two lots. The options are either two driveways, one off Carolina Beach Road and another off Manassas Drive, or the scenario worked out with NCDOT, which is to move the driveway as far north as possible and provide a turn lane into it. Although it will have a shorter taper, it meets the requirements due to the traffic signal at the intersection of Manassas Drive and Carolina Beach Road. She further confirmed the commitment to dedicate an easement for the future multi-use path. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark closed the public hearing and asked Ms. Wolf if, based on the Board discussion and items presented during the public hearing, whether she would like to withdraw the petition or proceed with the vote. Ms. Wolf responded that she wanted to proceed with the vote. Chair Rivenbark asked for Board direction. MOTION: Vice-Chair Pierce MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield to approve the proposed rezoning as the Board finds it to be consistent with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the proposed mix of uses is in line with the recommendations of the Urban Mixed Use place type. The Board also finds approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the project would act as an appropriate transition between the highway and existing residential development. The following applicant proposed and accepted conditions will apply to this approval as follows: 1. Street yard landscaping will be installed along Carolina Beach Road to meet current Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) landscape requirements for commercial projects. 2. Any freestanding sign(s) on the site shall be monument-style with landscaping around the base of the sign. No pole signs shall be permitted. 3. Exterior lighting including luminaires and security lighting shall be full cut-off fixtures that are directed downward in compliance with Figure 5.5.4.C Full Cut-off Fixtures of the UDO. In no case shall lighting be directed at or above a horizontal plane through the lighting fixture. Light posts shall be no taller than twelve (12) feet. 4. Permitted uses are limited to:  Medical and Dental Office and Clinic  Bank and/or Financial Institution  Business Service Center  Offices for Private Business and Professional Activities  Instructional Services and Studios  Personal Services (no tattoo parlors) 5. Significant trees identified on the concept plan shall be permanently retained. 6. A six-foot-tall solid wood privacy fence shall be installed along the northern and eastern sides of the project as depicted on the concept plan. 7. A minimum 20-foot wide public access easement shall be provided along the frontage parallel with Carolina Beach Road for public bicycle and pedestrian use. Furthermore, approval is subject to the applicant signing an agreement acknowledging the applicant’s consent to all listed conditions. If the applicant does not provide a signed agreement within seven (7) business days from the date of approval, then the rezoning application approval is null and void. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA 4 OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED April 7, 1971 is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book I, Section 4, Page 132. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY CINDEE WOLF WITH DESIGN SOLUTIONS, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF PAUL E. AND DEANNE MEADOWS, PROPERTY OWNERS, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 0.93 ACRES ZONED RA, RURAL AGRICULTURAL LOCATED AT 4737 CASTLE HAYNE ROAD TO (CZD) B-2, REGIONAL BUSINESS, FOR TWO COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES TOTALING 8,700 SQUARE FEET FOR THE USE OF GENERAL RETAIL FOR A TIRE STORE AND OTHER LIMITED USES (Z24-05) Mr. Farrell presented the request stating that the applicant proposes to rezone approximately 0.93 acres from the RA, Rural Agricultural zoning district to a (CZD) B-2, Regional Business District. This rezoning aims to develop a mixed-use site that includes an existing tire store and new commercial flex space. The property has been used for NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 276 both residential and commercial purposes since before the RA zoning district was adopted in 1985. RA zoning supported low-density single-family residential development compatible with rural and agricultural settings. Over time, the Castle Hayne Road corridor has seen light commercial and industrial development. The northern portion of the site houses Dad’s Tire Store, and a single-family home that was on the site was removed after a fire. Mr. Farrell provided an overview of the site, surrounding homes in the RA district, and visuals of the proposed commercial uses. The concept plan retains Dad’s Tire Store and proposes replacing a nonconforming outdoor storage shed with a smaller tire storage building to meet rear setback requirements. The plan also includes a new flex commercial building on the site where the house was, consisting of two 1,500-square-foot units with bay doors facing Castle Hayne Road. The tire store will maintain access via three existing drives on Sondey and Castle Hayne Roads, while the flex space will use the existing drive from the single-family home. A separate parking area for the flex space will have an underground trench for stormwater management. The site will retain two significant trees. Since public water and sewer are not available, the site will use the existing septic system and private well, both of which will be expanded to accommodate the new commercial space, subject to Environmental Health Division approval and a maintenance agreement. There is one subdivision and three TIAs in the area, with the estimated traffic generation below the threshold requiring a TIA. The site's proximity to the I-140 interchange two miles south and past commercial rezonings suggest that this portion of Castle Hayne Road will likely develop into a service node, making new single-family development along Castle Hayne Road less likely. The proposed rezoning meets two objectives of the County’s Strategic Plan. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property as Community Mixed Use, focusing on small-scale, compact, mixed-use development that serves all modes of travel and includes office, retail, and other commercial uses. The Planning Board considered this item at the June 6, 2024 meeting and voted to recommend approval (5- 0), finding the proposed rezoning consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and reasonable in the public interest due to appropriate conditions reducing impacts on nearby residents. No one from the public spoke in support of or opposition to the request. Staff’s recommendation is based on the policy guidance of the Comprehensive Plan, zoning considerations, and technical review. Due to the proximity to the I-140 interchange and the changing commercial nature of the Castle Hayne Road corridor, staff agrees with the Planning Board’s recommendation, with conditions related to a limitation on allowed uses, removal of a nonconforming structure, septic and well easements, exterior lighting, and tree retention. Mr. Farrell concluded the staff presentation by explaining that if the rezoning is approved, the site will undergo additional development review through the County’s TRC to ensure all land use regulations are met. Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Farrell for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks. Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, applicant, on behalf of Paul E. and Deanne Meadows, property owners, stated that the existing building on the property was constructed in the 1970s and likely started as a large barn used by the homeowner, a trucker who serviced his vehicles. Over time, it evolved into a business, operating as Dad’s Tire Store since at least the mid-1990s. Despite being a non-conforming use under current zoning laws, the business can continue to operate indefinitely in its current state. In April of the previous year, the adjacent residence burned down. The remnants of the house and several accessory buildings were subsequently removed. Instead of constructing a new house, the owners opted to rezone the property for a small commercial building, aiming to bring Dad’s Tire Store into compliance with current zoning laws. As part of the proposal, the non-conforming shed will be removed. The property is situated along the Castle Hayne corridor, which features business districts and is designated as Community Mixed Use in the Comprehensive Plan. The plan involves subdividing the property to separate the uses, and creating a new layout where the residential driveway was to accommodate a commercial building. The new building would house Mr. Meadows' business and potentially provide additional rental space. Two significant trees on the property are to be preserved as part of the development plan. The new commercial building is designed to be fully compliant with zoning requirements. The rear building of Dad’s Tire Store will be removed to meet setback and buffering standards. Ms. Wolf provided an overview of the style and structure of the new building. A few years ago, the septic system was redone to serve the now-destroyed house. Regulations prevent new septic systems from being placed where old systems have contaminated the soils. However, there is adequate land on the property to relocate the septic system between the new building and the parking area. The well must be positioned at least 100 feet from the septic system. The property has sufficient space to relocate the well to meet this requirement. The Technical Review Committee (TRC) and the Health Department will oversee the detailed design and permitting processes to ensure all regulations are met. Ms. Wolf concluded the applicant presentation by stating that the proposal promotes sustainable growth through sensible infill development and efficient land use. The commercial development will provide essential services to the nearby residential communities, especially as the water and sewer infrastructure in the Castle Hayne area continues to develop. Rezoning the property to a conditional district ensures that the new development will be compatible with neighboring residences and minimizes any negative impacts. The rezoning provides an orderly and acceptable transition from residential to commercial use. The rezoning proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, reasonable, and in the public interest. The project supports sustainable growth and will provide necessary services to the community. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 277 Ms. Wolf responded to questions by explaining the parking spaces. In addition to the five actual parking spaces, there are two parking spaces in front of each door and potential parking inside the building. However, if someone wants to operate a salon, the septic system will not support it until there is public water and sewer. The parking, as shown, meets the criteria for the proposed use type. Chair Rivenbark announced that no one signed up to speak in favor and one person signed up to speak in opposition to the request. He invited the opposition speaker to make remarks. Ryan Meckler, resident of Sondey Road, Castle Hayne, NC, spoke in opposition, stating he is the neighbor to the rear of the proposed rezoning site. He expressed uncertainty about the type of business that will be established, its hours of operation, and whether there will be late-night or early-morning deliveries. He questioned the statement of minimal traffic impact, asking whether a proper traffic assessment had been conducted. He also highlighted changes in the stormwater management plan since June 2024, expressing worries that increased concrete, asphalt, and buildings would result in runoff water ending up on roads and neighboring properties, including his own. The stormwater runoff is supposed to flow into the Prince George Creek watershed, four miles away, and he doubts the plan's feasibility. He questioned the potential job creation of the new development, hoping it would provide more employment opportunities than the current Dad’s Tire Store, which employs few people. Chair Rivenbark stated that the applicant and opposition speakers each have five minutes to provide rebuttal remarks. In applicant rebuttal, Ms. Wolf stated that specific answers to some questions might not be available at this time. She explained that one of the units is intended for the owner's use, operating typically from 7 AM to 6 PM, with activities involving off-site client visits, suggesting a low-impact, in-and-out type of operation. The typical use for such facilities involves warehousing and storage, with items being taken off-site, and she stressed that no outside storage would be allowed, as conditioned. This means that even if a contractor uses the space, all storage must be inside the building, and contractors generally work off-site. Regarding employment, she noted that her client works alone, similar to the current operation of Dad’s Tire Store, although it sometimes has additional workers. In opposition rebuttal, Mr. Meckler restated his concerns about the water management plan, questioning how the runoff will reach Prince George Creek. He also asked for details on the size of the proposed water tank under the parking lot and whether it is sufficient for the site's needs, especially given the addition of two buildings and a driveway, which will reduce the grassy area. He pointed out that the previous house had no driveway, only grass, which absorbed water. He also contended that Dad’s Tire Store operates from 9AM to 9PM, including Sundays, and is open all day on Saturdays despite the sign indicating "by appointment only" on that day. Ms. Wolf responded to further questions, stating that she believes the businesses, including Dad’s Tire Shop, will operate from 8AM to 5PM with no night or weekend hours. Watersheds are documented on the County GIS maps, and a series of ditches, creeks, or streams likely facilitate water flow from the location. The development on the second lot, not including Dad's Tire Shop, involves less than 10,000 square feet of new impervious surfaces, so she does not think stormwater management will be required unless it meets other criteria in the County's stormwater ordinance. If the total impervious area exceeds 13,000 square feet, stormwater attenuation will be required. She further clarified that the project does not necessitate state stormwater permitting due to its size. Historically, neither of the properties required stormwater management. The plan is to use an underground infiltration system due to the sandy soils. If the soil infiltration rate or seasonal groundwater depth is insufficient, an AR-tank will be used as per County Engineering standards. She noted that there is minimal roadside ditching along Castle Hayne Road in this area, so during large storm events, excess water would rise out of the drainage basin and follow its current path. She also confirmed that the property owners desire and intend to be neighborly to the residents in the surrounding area. Chair Rivenbark closed the public hearing and opened the floor for Board discussion. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked Ms. Wolf if, based on the Board discussion and items presented during the public hearing, whether she would like to withdraw the petition or proceed with the vote. Ms. Wolf responded that she wanted to proceed with the vote. Chair Rivenbark asked for direction from the Board. MOTION: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield to approve the proposed rezoning to a Conditional B-2 district as the Board finds it to be consistent with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the rezoning provides for the types of uses recommended in the Community Mixed Use place type. The Board also finds recommending approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the application limits the uses to those which are more appropriate for the area and additional conditions reduce impact on adjacent residential areas. The following applicant accepted conditions will apply to this approval as follows: 1. The proposed rezoning’s principal use shall be limited to: Animal Grooming Services, Contractor Office (without outdoor storage space), General Personal Services, General Retail Sales, Instructional Services and Studios, Minor Vehicle Service Station, Offices for Private Business and Professional Activities, and Warehousing. 2. The attached shed that encroaches into the rear setback is to be removed, bringing Dad’s Tire Store into compliance with required setbacks. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 278 3. A septic and well easement approved by New Hanover County Environmental Health shall be recorded with the Register of Deeds guaranteeing access and maintenance for the existing septic system and any future improvements. Environmental Health approval of the septic system and well shall be required prior to issuance of construction permits for the flex commercial space. 4. Exterior lighting including luminaires and security lighting shall be fully cutoff fixtures that are directed downward in compliance with Figures of the UDO. In no case shall lighting be directed at or above a horizontal plane through the lighting fixture. 5. The two Significant Trees identified on the concept plan shall be permanently retained on site. Further, approval is subject to the applicant signing an agreement acknowledging the applicant’s consent to all listed conditions. If the applicant does not provide a signed agreement within seven (7) business days from the date of approval, then the rezoning application approval is null and void. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA CASTLE HAYNE OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED July 1, 1985 is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book II, Section CASTLE HAYNE, Page 36. BREAK: Chair Rivenbark called a break from 7:32 p.m. to 7:48 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY MATTSON WIKSELL WITH HOYT & BERENYI, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF SOUTHEASTERN FREIGHT LINES, INC, PROPERTY OWNER, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 3.73 ACRES OF A 4.24 ACRE PARCEL ZONED B-2, REGIONAL BUSINESS LOCATED AT 2824 NORTH 23RD STREET TO (CZD) AC, AIRPORT COMMERCE FOR THE USE OF MOTOR FREIGHT TRANSPORTATION WAREHOUSING TO EXPAND THE EXISTING SOUTHEASTERN FREIGHT LINES FACILITY (Z24-10) Ms. Doss stated that this application requests the rezoning of approximately 3.73 acres from the B-2 Regional Business district to a Conditional AC (Airport Commerce) district. The purpose of the rezoning is to expand the existing Southeastern Freight Lines facility to include motor freight transportation warehousing. The property, located at 2824 N. 23rd Street, was initially zoned AI (Airport Industrial) in 1976 and was rezoned to B-2 in 1986 to provide more flexibility and a wider range of potential uses. The site is currently vacant and previously housed a legal, non-conforming manufactured home park, which has since closed, leaving no tenants within the project area. An aerial photo shows the property from various angles, and Ms. Doss provided examples of developments within a B-2 district and what might typically be seen in an AC district. The applicant’s concept plan includes several key features: a proposed trailer yard expansion along North 23rd Street, proposed employee parking on the southern portion of the site, stormwater ponds to manage runoff, and access through the existing drive as well as the Southeastern Freight Line facilities. Existing mobile homes, not included in the project area, will remain, and an existing laundromat along North 23rd Street will also remain. The property currently has full access onto North 23rd Street for employee parking and access through Southeastern Freight Line for larger commercial vehicles. There are two STIPs in the area, including a roundabout at Castle Hayne and North 23rd Street, which is expected to improve traffic flow and is scheduled to begin construction in 2027. The proposed development would generate less traffic than the current zoning allows. The area has seen residential growth and an expanded transportation network on I-140, increasing the demand for commercial services along Castle Hayne Road. With the expansion of Wilmington International Airport, the County has approved other rezonings to Airport Commerce to support compatible uses that do not conflict with the airport. The proposed project aligns with the strategic goal of allowing the future expansion of an existing business. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as part of the Community Mixed Use and Employment Center place types. Community Mixed Use includes commercial uses and encourages infill development, while Employment Centers serve as hubs for employment and production with easy access to office and light industrial uses. The proposed project will provide a buffer between these development patterns. The Planning Board voted to recommend approval (5-0) during the June 6, 2024 meeting of the petition. It found the application consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as the proposed use expands a neighboring compatible use in the Employment Center. The recommendation was also considered reasonable and in the public interest, as the project provides compatible commercial development near Wilmington International Airport. Staff’s recommendation is based on the policy guidance of the Comprehensive Plan, zoning considerations, and technical review. Staff recommends approval as the proposed use expands a neighboring compatible use in the Employment Center and provides commercial development compatible with its proximity to Wilmington International Airport. Should the rezoning be approved, the site's development will undergo additional review to ensure compliance with all land use regulations. Chair Rivenbark thanked Ms. Doss for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks. Mattson Wiksell with Hoyt & Berenyi, applicant, on behalf of Southeastern Freight Lines, Inc., property owner, stated Hoyt & Berenyi are the civil engineers for Southeastern Freight Lines. He is present to answer any questions about the project. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 279 Mr. Wiksell responded to questions stating the long piece of the property is not for access, rather it is only for utility easements. It was added to the larger parcel during the purchase and will not connect to Blue Clay Road. Chair Rivenbark announced that no one signed up to speak in favor or in opposition to the request. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark closed the public hearing and asked Mr. Wiksell if, based on the Board discussion and items presented during the public hearing, whether he would like to withdraw the petition or proceed with the vote. Mr. Wiksell responded that he wanted to proceed with the vote. Chair Rivenbark asked for direction from the Board. MOTION: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Pierce to approve the proposed rezoning as the Board finds it to be consistent with the 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan because the proposed use is an expansion of a neighboring compatible use in the Employment Center place type. The Board also finds approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the project will provide commercial development that is compatible with its proximity to Wilmington International Airport. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA AIRPORT OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED October 4, 1976 is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book II, Section AIRPORT, Page 24. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A TEXT AMENDMENT REQUEST BY SAMUEL FRANCK WITH WARD AND SMITH, P.A., APPLICANT, TO AMEND ARTICLE 4 OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE USE OF SENIOR LIVING: INDEPENDENT LIVING RETIREMENT COMMUNITY FROM REQUIRING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO PERMITTED-BY-RIGHT IN THE RA, RURAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT (TA24-03) Mr. Farrell stated that the application is an applicant-led text amendment request to change the Table of Uses to allow Senior Living: Independent Living as a by-right use in the RA Rural Agricultural zoning district. Currently, this type of community requires a Special Use Permit (SUP) for projects in the RA zoning district. Allowing it as a by- right use means all reviews and approvals are granted by staff through the TRC, streamlining the process and encouraging development. Senior Living: Independent Living is defined as a housing development designed for and restricted to households with at least one member who is 55 years of age or older, living independently. Unlike continuing care or assisted living facilities, Independent Living Retirement Communities function similarly to non-age-restricted developments. The primary difference is that the private covenant restricts occupancy based on age. These communities often include a variety of housing types and amenities catering to the needs of older adults but do not provide the same level of medical or personal care services found in other senior living arrangements. Staff identified three key County plans that address senior housing needs: the Housing Needs Assessment, the Master Aging Plan, and the Comprehensive Plan. The Housing Needs Assessment highlighted a significant overall housing gap, projecting a need for 12,000 additional rental units and nearly 17,000 for-sale units over the next ten years. It also projected an almost 25% increase in senior households aged 75 and older, indicating a substantial growth in demand for senior-specific housing options. The County’s Master Aging Plan aims to attract private builders and developers by offering incentives to create lower-cost community living spaces. Local governments can incentivize such development through various methods, including relaxing zoning restrictions for specific housing types, encouraging more private investment and development. This proposed text amendment aligns with the goal of making it easier for developers to build senior housing in the RA zoning district, thereby addressing the growing need for such housing. The staff review of the proposed text amendment found it to be generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendment would allow the development of senior housing in a residential zoning district without the additional step of a quasi-judicial hearing and board approval, thus removing barriers to development and expediting the process. The Comprehensive Plan, Housing Needs Assessment, and Master Aging Plan collectively indicate a rising need for senior housing and a need to reduce barriers to its development to meet current and future demand. The Planning Board considered this item at its June 6, 2024 meeting. No one spoke in opposition or support of the request, and the Planning Board recommended approval (5-0). Staff concurs with the Planning Board’s recommendation of the proposed amendment as written. If approved, staff will update the UDO and make it available through the County website. Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Farrell for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks. Samuel Franck with Ward and Smith, P.A., applicant, stated that the use being discussed is distinguished from any other residential use solely by the imposition of an age restriction. He noted that he does not know the motivation behind the UDO's requirement for an SUP to impose an age restriction. When exploring options for a new development in the County that included an age-restricted component, he and his team encountered this requirement and, after discussions with staff, proposed this amendment. The request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan on several fronts, as stated by Mr. Farrell. Mr. Franck explained in response to questions that the practical result is that if one proposes a residential development otherwise permitted by right, with regard to density and all other technical requirements, and wants NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 280 to incorporate a 55+ age restriction via a private covenant, applicants will no longer need an SUP to impose that restriction. He confirmed that the age restriction changes the development from a by-right application to one that requires an SUP. There are no density and technical requirement perks associated with Senior Living: Independent Living Retirement Community. He advanced this amendment rather than waiting for staff due to time constraints, wanting to address the issue promptly. Ms. Roth stated that when staff first discussed this with Mr. Franck, they reviewed the minutes from when Senior Living uses were added to the development ordinance in the early 2000s. At that time, senior living communities were new to the area, leading to extensive discussions about different types of senior living. Initially, staff recommended allowing independent living by right. Still, the Board of Commissioners decided that all senior living options should require an SUP due to the novelty of the concept. Recently, staff discussed a scenario where a developer might get approval for a single-family housing subdivision and later impose an age restriction. The only recourse staff would have in such a case would be to fine the developer $100 a day for being in violation, as there is no effective way to address it retroactively. While staff supports the idea, a maintenance amendment will not be brought forward for a couple of months due to timing factors. Mr. Franck responded to further questions, stating that the code has multiple categories for senior living. Senior Living: Assisted Living includes services beyond standard residential use, such as nursing care and food services. However, the current discussion focuses on Senior Living: Independent Living, which is purely residential with an age restriction. This text amendment aims to allow age-restricted residential use by right, which is otherwise permitted by right. The code distinguishes between communities where people choose to live based on a 55-plus age demographic and those restricted to that demographic. While the code does not prevent communities from trending towards older residents, a formal age restriction currently requires an SUP. This amendment seeks to change that, allowing age-restricted residential use by right. He noted that his clients are contract purchasers of a large piece of land in the northern part of the County zoned RA and are exploring options with a desire to have one component be age restricted. This proposal aims to update the rules to make this possible. A brief discussion ensued about the request. Commissioner Barfield stated he is fine with the change. Commissioner Zapple thanked Mr. Franck for playing by the rules. Commissioner Scalise stated for the record that what is being requested is not an end around to achieve something that Mr. Franck would not otherwise be able to obtain. Rather, it is just a technical fix that allows the age component to be added to the conversation. Mr. Franck confirmed this, explaining that it allows for imposing an age restriction without requiring an SUP and nothing more. Chair Rivenbark announced that no one signed up to speak in favor or in opposition to the request. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark closed the public hearing and asked Mr. Franck if, based on the Board discussion and items presented during the public hearing, whether she would like to withdraw the petition or proceed with the vote. Mr. Franck responded that he wanted to proceed with the vote. Chair Rivenbark asked for direction from the Board. MOTION: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Pierce to approve the proposed amendment to the New Hanover County Unified Development Ordinance to allow the use of Senior Living: Independent Living Retirement Community as by-right in the RA, Rural Agricultural zoning district. The Board finds it to be consistent with the purpose and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan because it provides for a range of housing types, opportunities, and choices for seniors. The Board also finds approval of the proposed amendment reasonable and in the public interest because both the Housing Needs Assessment and the Master Aging Plan have identified a need for additional senior housing to serve current and future demand. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED FEBRUARY 3, 2020 and is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLV, Page 13.8. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A TEXT AMENDMENT REQUEST BY NEW HANOVER COUNTY PLANNING & LAND USE TO AMEND ARTICLE 10 OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TO INCORPORATE STANDARDS FOR REQUIRED AGREEMENTS TO CONDITION (TA24-02) Mr. Farrell presented a proposed amendment to the UDO. According to the UDO, if the Board of Commissioners denies an application, a similar application cannot be submitted for one year unless it meets specific ordinance conditions. Many county and municipal zoning codes include similar provisions. The purpose is to prevent the reapplication of denied projects that lack substantial differences from previously denied ones. The NCGS allows conditions to be added to conditional rezoning applications if both the board and applicant consent, and if the applicant agrees in writing. Currently, if an applicant agrees to a condition but fails to provide the required written agreement within seven business days, the rezoning approval becomes null and void and is not subject to the one- year waiting period. At the March 18th regular meeting, the Board directed staff to draft an amendment to the UDO. This amendment specifies that if an applicant does not sign the required conditions agreement within seven days of board approval, the rezoning application is considered denied. Mr. Farrell mentioned three versions of the proposed amendment: the original draft, the Planning Board’s recommendation, and staff’s recommendation based on input from the Planning Board and consultation with the County Attorney’s office. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 281 The original proposed text states that an application is denied if the applicant does not provide the required written agreement within seven business days. If denied, the application faces the same one-year waiting period as other denied applications. The Planning Board reviewed the proposed amendment during its May 2, 2024 meeting. Due to the language about rendering an application denied, the Planning Board raised concerns about the time an applicant has to sign the agreement. They discussed whether extending the period to 15 business days would address these concerns. However, Planning Board members also worried that 15 business days might not be sufficient for an applicant to review and sign the agreement in some situations. They also discussed a provision allowing applicants to request an extension from the Board of Commissioners if good faith efforts are being made to resolve condition language. The Planning Board recommended approval (6-0) to allow 20 business days from the date of Board of Commissioners' approval, unless the Board grants an extension when good faith efforts to clarify condition language are ongoing. Otherwise, the approval is rescinded, and the application is considered denied. Mr. Farrell concluded the staff presentation, stating that the intent of the proposed amendment is to ensure the language of all conditions is finalized and decided on during the public hearing. In recognition of the Planning Board’s concerns and guidance from the County Attorney’s office, staff recommends fifteen (15) business days for the applicant’s agreement to conditions to be signed and returned to the County, but that no additional extension be granted. If approved, the next steps would be for staff to update the UDO and post it to the County website. Extended discussion ensued about the request. Commissioner Scalise questioned why the request is necessary as the intention behind the existing language was to ensure that applicants understood approvals needed to be acted on quickly, without unnecessary delays. If applicants could not comply, they perhaps should not have sought approval at that time. Unless there is a legal reason, as advised by the county attorney, to extend the timeframe from seven to 15 business days, he does not see the need for the change and believes it should be left as is. Mr. Farrell responded that is the understood intent by staff from the direction of the Board. As part of the public hearing process, this request was taken through the Planning Board, which is advisory, and there were some additional concerns raised which led to staff’s proposed language. County Attorney Smith added that the amendment addresses two main issues. First, it arose from a situation where an applicant did not consent to the conditions in writing after approval. Under the current language, this did not count as a denial, which would trigger a one-year prohibition on reapplying. Second, it aims to formally delineate the number of days in the UDO. Currently, the number of days is determined by what is put in the Board’s scripts, which can be changed at any time. The amendment would make the timeframe solid and less subject to change. However, regarding the number of days, it is ultimately the Board's decision. Commissioner Scalise commented that this is a policy decision previously made by this Board and he does not necessarily want or appreciate the Planning Board giving directives to the Commissioners on policy decisions that were previously made fairly clear. He reiterated that he does not understand why this is being requested and currently is not inclined to support it. County Attorney Smith stated in response to questions that he is responsible for adding the script language. When he started with the County, he learned that the general statute requirement for the applicant to sign something in writing was not addressed. His office worked with the Planning Department and Clerk’s Office, and after staff discussion, they all ultimately decided on seven days. Commissioner Barfield stated that the Board never voted on the seven-day timeframe; it was added to the script without formal approval. If conditions are imposed at the last minute, applicants need time to assess the costs and feasibility of compliance, such as installing a large fence. Seven days may not be sufficient, so extending the period to 15 days would provide applicants enough time to evaluate costs and make informed decisions. He expressed his support for the 15 business day timeframe. Commissioner Zapple stated that conditions are agreed upon in real time during the Board meetings. He feels seven days is a reasonable timeframe to finalize the agreements without inviting renegotiation of the Board’s decisions, which could happen within 15 days. If someone realizes a mistake, they can address it immediately, triggering the one-year waiting period for reapplication. He believes the seven-day period is fair and sufficient for confirming commitments. Commissioner Barfield countered, stating his concern about applicants making decisions under duress. If they feel pressured to agree quickly just to move their project forward, they might make hasty decisions. Extending the timeframe by another week would allow applicants to make more informed business decisions, which he believes is fairer. He feels the County needs to be easy to work with and support thoughtful decision-making for the benefit of the community. County Attorney Smith responded to questions stating that, to his knowledge, nothing in the UDO addresses the matter at hand. Mr. Farrell confirmed that is correct and that the script language functions as another condition of approval. County Manager Coudriet explained that staff initially proposed seven days, but the Planning Board disagreed. To show responsiveness and good faith, staff considered the Planning Board's feedback and felt that 15 days was a reasonable compromise, even though the original recommendation was seven days. The staff aimed to balance being responsive to the Board's appointees while maintaining what staff believed was appropriate. Vice-Chair Pierce thanked staff for the explanations. While she understands Commissioner Barfield’s comments, she would think staff would want to move forward with closing a matter out within seven business days. She further stated that she is fine with seven business days. Chair Rivenbark announced that no one signed up to speak in favor or opposition to the request. Mr. Farrell responded to questions stating that no approved application has fallen through the cracks under the seven-day language over the past year. Vice-Chair Pierce reiterated that she is agreeable with seven business days. Commissioner Scalise stated the seven-day period was established to ensure that applicants promptly decide NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 282 whether to accept the agreed-upon terms at the hearing. If they do not agree within seven business days, the project is deferred for a year. Seven business days is sufficient since it extends into the next week, excluding weekends. He stated he would make the motion to approve the text amendment request. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark and asked for direction from the Board. MOTION: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Pierce to approve the proposed amendment to the New Hanover County Unified Development Ordinance to specify an applicant's refusal to sign the required agreement to conditions for conditional rezonings within seven (7) business days of approval by the Board of Commissioners is an automatic denial requiring a one (1) year waiting period before resubmittal. The Board finds it to be consistent with the purpose and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan because it provides up-to- date zoning tools. The Board also finds approval of the proposed amendment reasonable and in the public interest because it provides for clear and effective ordinance standards. Upon vote, the MOTION PASSED 4 to 1, Commissioner Barfield dissenting. A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED FEBRUARY 3, 2020 and is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLV, Page 13.9. APPOINTMENT OF VOTING DELEGATE TO THE 2024 NORTH CAROLINA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (NCACC) ANNUAL CONFERENCE Chair Rivenbark asked for a nomination of a County Commissioner to be designated as the voting delegate for the NCACC Annual Conference, which will be held August 8 – 10, 2024. Commissioner Zapple nominated Commissioner Barfield. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nomination on the floor. Motion: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Pierce to appoint Commissioner Barfield as the voting delegate for the 2024 NCACC Annual Conference. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS Appointment to the Airlie Gardens Foundation, Inc. Board of Directors Chair Rivenbark reported that one vacancy exists on the Airlie Gardens Foundation, Inc. Board of Directors, and one applicant is available for consideration. Commissioner Scalise nominated Teddy Davis for reappointment. Commissioner Zapple seconded the nomination. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nomination on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to reappoint Teddy Davis to the Airlie Gardens Foundation, Inc. Board of Directors to serve a three-year term, with the term to expire on June 30, 2027. Appointment to the New Hanover County Cooperative Extension Advisory Council Chair Rivenbark reported that two vacancies exist on the New Hanover County Cooperative Extension Advisory Council, and one application is available for consideration. Commissioner Zapple nominated Glenn McIntosh for appointment. Commissioner Scalise seconded the nomination. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nomination on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to appoint Glenn McIntosh to the New Hanover County Cooperative Extension Advisory Council to fill an unexpired term with the term to expire December 1, 2024. Appointments to the New Hanover County Inspections Department Advisory Council Chair Rivenbark reported that four vacancies exist on the New Hanover County Inspections Department Advisory Council with one application eligible for reappointment in the Engineer category, one application eligible for reappointment in the Mechanical Contractor category, and one application eligible for consideration in the Plumbing Contractor category. A request has also been received from Greg Uhl to be moved from the At-Large category to the Commercial Builder category. If approved, he will retain his current term and the clerk’s office will advertise the At-Large seat. Commissioner Zapple nominated Adam Sisk for reappointment in the Engineer category, Shawn Sweeley for reappointment in the Mechanical Contractor category, Johnny Milam for appointment in the Plumbing Contractor category, and to move Greg Uhl from the At-Large category to the Commercial Builder Category, with his term expiration to remain the same. Commissioner Scalise seconded the nominations and the request. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nominations on the floor. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 JULY 22, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 283 Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to reappoint Adam Sisk in the Engineer category and Shawn Sweeley in the Mechanical Contractor category and to appoint Johnny Milam for appointment in the Plumbing Contractor category to the New Hanover County Inspections Department Advisory Council to serve three-year terms with the terms to expire July 31, 2027. The Board also approved the moving of Greg Uhl’s appointment from the At-Large category to the Commercial Builder category, with his term still set to expire on July 31, 2025. Appointment to the New Hanover County Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Chair Rivenbark reported that one vacancy exists on the New Hanover County Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, and six applications are available for consideration. Commissioner Zapple nominated Mary Ellen Lavoie for appointment. Commissioner Scalise seconded the nominations. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nomination on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to appoint Mary Ellen Lavoie to the New Hanover County Parks and Recreation Advisory Board to fill an unexpired term, with the term to expire June 30, 2025. Appointments to the New Hanover County Planning Board Chair Rivenbark reported that three vacancies exist on the New Hanover County Planning Board with two applications eligible for reappointment and eleven additional applications available for consideration. Commissioner Scalise nominated Kevin Hine and Hansen Matthews for reappointment and Kaitlyn Rhonehouse for appointment. Commissioner Zapple seconded the nominations. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nominations on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to reappoint Kevin Hine and Hansen Matthews and to appoint Kaitlyn Rhonehouse to the New Hanover County Planning Board to serve three-year terms with the terms to expire July 31, 2027. Appointment to Trillium Health Resources – Southern Regional Advisory Board Chair Rivenbark reported that one vacancy exists on the Trillium Health Resources – Southern Regional Advisory Board with two applications available for consideration. Chair Rivenbark nominated Julie Varnam for appointment. Commissioner Zapple seconded the nomination. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nomination on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to appoint Julie Varnam to the Trillium Health Resources – Southern Regional Advisory Board in the Public Member category to serve a three-year term, with the term to expire June 30, 2027. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Chair Rivenbark stated that no one signed up to speak on non-agenda items. ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS OF BUSINESS County Commissioner Items:  Commissioner Scalise expressed his appreciation of Captain Steve Hunt with County Fire and Rescue for jumping into the Cape Fear River to save a citizen.  Chair Rivenbark commented on the recognition kids are receiving in states outside the Carolinas for being nice.  Vice-Chair Pierce reported that she has asked the county manager to follow up on letter on emissions testing letter sent to the Board.  Commissioner Zapple thanked the Commissioners for supporting him to serve as the NCACC District 4 Director.  Commissioner Barfield commented on how nice it is to be a grandparent. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Rivenbark adjourned the meeting at 8:36 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kymberleigh G. Crowell Clerk to the Board Please note that the above minutes are not a verbatim record of the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners meeting. The entire proceedings are available online at www.nhcgov.com.