Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-11-18 Regular Meeting NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 NOVEMBER 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 364 ASSEMBLY The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met on November 18, 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 Pastor of Community Engagement, Javi Mendoza of Port City Community Church, provided the invocation and Vice-Chair Pierce 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. Commissioner Zapple asked that Consent Agenda Item #4: Adoption of Budget Amendments be pulled for further discussion and made a motion to approve the remaining Consent Agenda items. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield to approve the remaining Consent Agenda items as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Minutes – Governing Body The Board approved the minutes of the October 21, 2024 Regular Meeting. Acknowledgment and Termination of New Hanover County State of Emergency Proclamations for Potential Tropical Cyclone Eight and Hurricane Helene – Governing Body The Board acknowledged the State of Emergency proclamations dated September 18 and 27, 2024 and adopted the Termination of the State of Emergency proclamations dated November 18, 2024. Copies of the proclamations are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLV, Page 20.1. First Reading: Approval of Solid Waste Franchise Agreement for Eastern Waste and Recycling, Inc. – County Attorney The Board approved the first reading to authorize the issuance of a solid waste franchise agreement to Eastern Waste and Recycling, Inc. A second reading is required. Discussion and Adoption of Budget Amendments – Budget Assistant County Manager Lisa Wurtzbacher and Chief Financial Officer Eric Credle responded to Commissioner Zapple’s inquiries, explaining the budget amendment rolls over funds for various matters. The Community Justice Center item reflects the New Hanover Community Endowment grant, and the General Government item funds stormwater grant studies for Acorn Branch and Pumpkin Creek. Note: The Board adopted budget amendment 25-022, amending the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2025. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for direction from the Board. MOTION: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield to approve Consent Agenda Item #4: Adoption of Budget Amendments. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the budget amendment is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLV, Page 20.2. REGULAR ITEMS OF BUSINESS CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF ADOPTION AWARENESS MONTH PROCLAMATION Commissioner Barfield read the proclamation into the record recognizing November 2024 as Adoption Awareness Month in New Hanover County and thanked staff for their work to make adoptions possible in the community. Health and Human Services (HHS) Social Services Manager Brian Bocnuk and Social Work Supervisory Tiffany Bickel thanked the Board for considering the proclamation. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 NOVEMBER 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 365 Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple to adopt the proclamation recognizing November 2024 as Adoption Awareness Month in New Hanover County. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the proclamation is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLV, Page 20.3. CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF DIABETES AWARENESS MONTH PROCLAMATION Chair Rivenbark read the proclamation into the record recognizing November 2024 as Diabetes Awareness Month in New Hanover County. HHS Public Health Nurse Supervisor Panza McNeill thanked the Board for considering the proclamation. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple to adopt the proclamation recognizing November 2024 as Diabetes Awareness Month in New Hanover County. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the proclamation is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLV, Page 20.4. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY SCHOOLS CAPITAL REQUESTS Chief Financial Officer Eric Credle presented the following information:  New Hanover County Schools (NHCS) capital requests:  Three requests: capital project transfers, applications for school lottery funds, and funding for phase two repairs at New Hanover High School (NHHS)  Request 1, Capital project transfers:  Transferred from:  $ 17,273.68: Deferred, underground storage tank replacement project  $ 58,950.00: Deferral of construction of culinary classroom at NHHS  $ 99.80: Deferral of Trask/Laney traffic improvements  $ 62,840.45: Savings from the completed Porters Neck modular project  $129,768.00: Savings from the completed NHHS roof and site drainage project  Total deferrals and project savings: $268,931.93  Transferred to:  $ 69,500.00: Direct digital control front-end system at Carolina Beach Road complex  $ 69,663.93: Roof repairs at various schools  $129,768.00: NHHS phase 2 repairs  Total transfers in: $268,931.93  Request 2, Application for School Lottery Fund projects:  Lottery funds currently unallocated: $1,336,882  Three new requests:  $100,000: NHHS intercom replacement  $ 50,000: Direct digital control front end system at Gregory, Noble, NHHS  $800,000: NHHS phase two repairs  Total: $950,000:  Pro Forma Lottery Funds remaining = $245,882*  * Also includes $141,000 deduction related to the pending application  Request 3, Funding for phase two renovations at NHHS:  NHHS scope of phase one and phase two repairs:  Phase one – Complete:  Primarily consisted of foundation work on the South wall (facing Market Street), stabilization, interior drywall and plaster removal, and analysis of the east and west ends of the building  Total cost of $2.8 to $2.9 million:  Fully funded by previously approved county capital allocations, capital transfers, and lottery funds  Phase two:  Replace east and west walls  Repair along the entire southern wall of the school that faces Market Street  16 classrooms and 15 offices are currently closed  By starting immediately, the full building is expected to re-open at the start of the next school year  Total phase two cost: $7,655,162  County funding source: NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 NOVEMBER 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 366  The $6,4254,394 is a not-to-exceed amount  Phase one project savings of approximately $200,000 which provides County contingency and could result in lesser funding amount Extensive discussion followed regarding the ongoing repairs and future of New Hanover High School. NHCS staff reported completing phase one, which included stabilizing the southern foundation and the eastern and western walls. This phase also uncovered interior structural issues, cleared debris from the crawl space, and addressed foundational problems to guide the scope and budget for phase two. Staff noted that the completed and planned work focuses on providing long-term stability, with no temporary fixes beyond current shoring. The Board raised concerns about the feasibility and sustainability of continued investments, particularly the risk of escalating costs and discovering additional issues after repairing one area. NHCS staff acknowledged these concerns, emphasizing that the $6.4 million phase two request is essential to address the most critical areas. They reassured the Board that external experts, including specialists in historic building restoration, reviewed the building and confirmed its repairability. Ongoing work includes a comprehensive study of facility conditions and a master plan to assess broader campus needs and future costs. Commissioner Barfield emphasized the need to avoid a “sunken cost” scenario, where resources repeatedly fund repairs without achieving a clear resolution. He compared the situation to decisions about the Government Center, where opting for new construction eliminated ongoing maintenance costs. He and other Commissioners expressed concerns about the project's long-term implications, particularly if additional costly repairs emerge later. He also highlighted the unique challenges of repairing historic buildings, where resolving one issue often creates unintended consequences elsewhere. Commissioner Zapple questioned the accuracy of cost projections, raising concerns about unforeseen issues during repairs. NHCS staff acknowledged the inherent uncertainties in construction but emphasized steps to minimize risks, including phased work and close collaboration with contractors, engineers, and restoration specialists. They noted that while additional repairs are expected, they are unlikely to match the severity of the current issues. Commissioner Zapple also raised questions about broader building conditions, specifically areas like Brogden Hall, which have faced significant water damage and structural integrity problems. Discussion then ensued on the broader funding strategy. NHCS staff clarified that the $6.4 million request would not impact other capital projects, as the funds would come from the capital improvements fund, which currently holds over $13 million. They assured the Board that no projects would face delays. The Board also explored bonds and other funding mechanisms to address future needs comprehensively. NHCS Interim Superintendent Dr. Chris Barnes emphasized the immediate need to provide students with a safe and functional environment. He noted that even if the Board pursued new construction, completing it would take at least five years, making the current building essential in the interim. He stressed the importance of phase two repairs to stabilize the building and ensure students can return to a safe space. Commissioner Scalise supported the facilities study, explaining that it will provide critical data to determine whether renovation or new construction offers the most cost-effective and sustainable solution. While acknowledging the financial challenges, he expressed support for moving forward with phase two to meet students’ immediate needs while awaiting the study’s findings. The Board emphasized the importance of using the forthcoming facilities study to make informed decisions and to ensure that taxpayer dollars are used wisely while providing safe, effective solutions for students and staff. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Scalise to approve the capital project transfers requested by New Hanover County Schools, approve the three Public School Building Capital Fund Lottery applications, and approve the phase two New Hanover High School repair request and adopt budget amendment 25-023. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the budget amendment is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and contained in Exhibit Book XLV, Page 20.5. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A JOINT APPLICATION WITH THE CITY OF WILMINGTON TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG) PROGRAM Chair Rivenbark stated that the JAG program provides states and units of local governments with the funding necessary to support community programs in areas such as law enforcement, prosecution, drug treatment and enforcement, crime and victim witness initiatives, planning, evaluation, and technology improvement programs. The JAG grant process requires a public hearing to be held to discuss the use of funds. New Hanover County and the NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 NOVEMBER 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 367 City of Wilmington are certified as disparate agencies. The 2025 JAG grant funding of $62,545 is eligible as a joint allocation of $10,191 to the county and $52,354 to the city. Submittal of a joint application is required. The New Hanover County portion of the funding would be used to purchase a portable camera system, which will be used to deter crime. This system will allow the Sheriff's Office to quickly gain situational awareness without delay and with minimal resources. There is no local match requirement. He asked for a motion to open the public hearing. Motion: Commissioner Scalise MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple to open the public hearing. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Major Eric Edwards with the Sheriff’s Office stated that the County will use the funding to purchase a portable camera system to deter crime. This system will allow the Sheriff's Office to quickly gain situational awareness without delay and with minimal resources. Chair Rivenbark stated that no one signed up to provide public comments on the matter and asked for a motion to close the public hearing. Motion: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Scalise to close the public hearing. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Chair Rivenbark stated that if approved, the Sheriff’s Office will be authorized to submit a joint application for the 2025 JAG Grant with the City of Wilmington, and the County Manager is authorized to execute the required County/City Memorandum of Understanding. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark requested direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Scalise to authorize the Sheriff's Office to submit a joint application for the 2025 JAG Grant with the City of Wilmington and authorize the County Manager to execute the required County/City Memorandum of Understanding. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARING AND DENIAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY SETH HUNTT WITH SOURCE CONTRACTING, LLC, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF STOREHOUSE HOLDINGS, LLC, PROPERTY OWNERS, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 0.47 ACRES LOCATED AT 1132 S. SEABREEZE ROAD FROM THE (CZD) R-7, CONDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL MODERATE DENSITY DISTRICT TO (CZD) B-2, REGIONAL BUSINESS FOR THE USE OF CONTRACTOR OFFICE AND OFFICES FOR PRIVATE BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES (Z24-18) Senior Planner Zach Dickerson presented a request to rezone approximately 0.44 acres from a Conditional R-7 Residential district to a Conditional B-2 Regional Business district. The rezoning would allow for the construction of a three-story office building. The parcel, located along the banks of the Intracoastal Waterway, was rezoned to Conditional R-7 Residential in February 2024. It is adjacent to an existing bed and breakfast to the south and situated within the Historic Seabreeze community. The 1989 Seabreeze Small Area Plan highlighted the site, which emphasized revitalizing local businesses and redeveloping the waterfront. The concept plan proposes a three-story office building with parking located beneath the structure and at- grade in front. Additional parking will be available across the street on a separate B-2 zoned lot, which permits parking by right. The building exceeds environmental requirements by maintaining a 100-foot setback from the mean high water line, surpassing the 75-foot conservation resource setback. The project also includes plans to enhance pedestrian safety by collaborating with the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) to install signage and striping for a crosswalk connecting the satellite parking to the main site. Developers project the site will generate approximately 15 AM and 19 PM peak hour vehicle trips, with access provided along South Seabreeze Road. The surrounding area features a mix of uses, including single-family homes and boat storage facilities. Recent rezonings in the area highlight a shift toward balancing commercial and residential growth. The proposed project supports the County’s strategic goals by fostering business growth while minimizing residential development in flood-prone areas. The 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan (Comprehensive Plan) identifies the site within the Community Mixed Use place type. The proposal aligns with the plan’s goals by promoting business development compatible with the area’s mixed-use designation. The Planning Board reviewed this request during its September 5, 2024, meeting and voted to recommend approval (6-0) with eight specific conditions. These conditions address permitted uses, outdoor storage, pedestrian connectivity, building size limits, and fencing requirements. The Board found the proposal consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and appropriate for restoring the parcel to its original zoning designation, aligning with nearby land uses. Staff recommends approval of the rezoning request, concurring with the Planning Board’s decision based on policy guidance from the Comprehensive Plan, zoning considerations, and technical review findings. Mr. Dickerson explained that any approved development must undergo technical and zoning compliance reviews to ensure full adherence to applicable ordinances. He also confirmed that public comments submitted before the hearing were shared with the Board earlier in the day. Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Dickerson for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks. Madeline Lipe, an attorney with Ward and Smith, LLC, representing Seth Huntt of Source Contracting, LLC, the applicant, on behalf of Storehouse Holdings, LLC, the property owners, presented an overview of the request to rezone the subject property back to Conditional B-2 (Regional Business) zoning from its current Conditional R-7 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 NOVEMBER 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 368 (Residential) zoning. The applicant seeks approval for limited uses, specifically a contractor office or offices for private business and professional services, emphasizing that no other B-2 uses would apply. In her review of the property and surrounding area, Ms. Lipe noted that to the north, a small vacant lot adjoins a residential dwelling predating the zoning regulations. To the west, properties at 1109 and 1105 are owned or under contract by the applicant, with boat storage facilities surrounding much of the site. To the south, the property borders a bed and breakfast. Surrounding properties are zoned B-2, allowing various commercial uses. The subject property was conditionally rezoned to R-7 earlier this year by a previous owner, permitting two detached residential dwellings under specific conditions. The current applicant, as the new owner, seeks to restore the B-2 zoning for the proposed limited business purposes. Ms. Lipe explained that the proposed uses for a contractor office or professional service office align with the area’s character and are designed to minimize impacts on nearby residential properties. The uses generate minimal noise and traffic, avoid light pollution, and function in ways like residential uses compared to other permitted B-2 activities. She acknowledged that the surrounding B-2 properties are not conditionally rezoned, meaning they could be developed for various uses without restrictions. By comparison, the applicant’s proposed restrictions on use reflect an effort to ensure compatibility with nearby residences. She shared the concept plan for the development. It includes the use of an already B-2-zoned property directly across the street for parking, limiting additional impacts on the subject site. The conceptual plan focuses on maintaining complementary development to the residential character of the broader area. The applicant, Source Contracting, LLC, is the proposed business for the site. Ms. Lipe explained the suitability of the requested rezoning to accommodate the needs of the business while preserving harmony with the local environment. Ms. Lipe asked Chris Baker with Source Contracting, LLC to provide further details about their planned operations. Chris Baker with Source Contracting, LLC, shared that in 2018, he met Mr. Freeman, the owner of a convenience store in the Seabreeze area that also operated as a bait shop and U-Haul rental location. After persistent efforts, he successfully leased the building, which was described as dilapidated at the time. After significant effort to revitalize the property, it was transformed into a snowball shop that operated for several years. The experience fostered a deep appreciation for the Seabreeze community, its history, and its unique character as a mixed-use area combining businesses and residences. He then recounted learning about the rich history of Seabreeze through stories shared by Mr. Freeman, gaining insight into its past as a vibrant, diverse community. When the opportunity to work on the subject property arose, the company viewed it as a chance to contribute meaningfully to the area. He expressed the desire to grow roots in the Seabreeze community and create a legacy. He also emphasized their commitment to honoring the community’s heritage while contributing to its future development in a way that reflects their deep appreciation and respect for the area. He thanked the Board for considering the application. Ms. Lipe continued the presentation by providing a conceptual plan and proposal for rezoning, emphasizing efforts to balance development with environmental preservation, compatibility with neighboring properties, and alignment with county planning goals. As to tree preservation and site enhancements, the concept plan notes four live oak trees on the property, including two specimen live oaks near Seabreeze Road and two additional live oaks closer to the intracoastal waterway. While the current conditions require preserving only the specimen live oaks, the applicant proposed a condition to preserve all four live oaks, underscoring their commitment to environmental conservation. She also noted a 100-foot coastal resource setback, exceeding the standard 75-foot requirement, further preserving the shoreline, and enhancing the viewshed for neighboring properties. She then presented the differences between the by-right development option, which allows two detached single-family residences with a 75-foot setback and a potential height of 44-feet, to her client’s proposal. The key differences include reduced impact on views, dedicated office use, and parking plans. The proposed building height is 50-feet, only six feet higher than the by-right limit, but the setback of 100-feet offers less visual impact to neighboring properties. The proposed rezoning limits the use to a contractor office or professional office, eliminating potential residential development in the flood-prone area. On-site parking will be supplemented using an existing B-2-zoned parcel across the street, eliminating the potential for vertical development on that lot. The rezoning request aligns with the Comprehensive Plan’s designation of the site as a Community Mixed Use place type, which encourages compact, small-scale mixed-use development, including office uses like the one proposed. The plan also supports the County’s strategic goal to reduce residential lots in flood zones, further emphasizing the proposal’s alignment with county objectives. The applicant engaged with community members, and Ms. Lipe noted that 10 of the 13 public comments submitted before the meeting expressed support for the proposal. To address concerns raised during the process, the applicant included conditions that restrict the building size to a maximum of 8,500 square feet, below the 8,900 square feet allowed under B-2 zoning. The plan also includes a six- foot privacy fence along the southern boundary to address concerns from the neighboring property owner and voluntary side setbacks to further minimize potential impacts on adjacent properties. Ms. Lipe provided an overview of conceptual renderings illustrating the development’s appearance from Seabreeze Road and the Intracoastal Waterway, showcasing the preservation of live oaks and the building’s design. She also described nearby land uses, including boat and trailer storage, jet ski operations, a bed and breakfast, and residences, situating their proposal as a complementary and consistent addition to the area. She concluded by reaffirming her client’s commitment to responsible development, addressing community concerns, and aligning the project with County goals for sustainable growth. She requested the Board’s approval of the rezoning with the proposed conditions to allow the development of a contractor office or professional office. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 NOVEMBER 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 369 Chair Rivenbark announced that no one signed up to speak in favor and four people signed up to speak opposition to the request. Michael Dinkins, resident of South Seabreeze Road, spoke in opposition, stating that it is too large for the Seabreeze area and inconsistent with its predominantly residential character. He noted that while the area historically had small-scale "mom-and-pop" commercial activity, the proposed 50-foot office building for regional business and private professional use feels out of place. He raised concerns about the potential for future changes in the building's use if the property is sold, creating uncertainty for residents. He also expressed frustration that neighboring property owners, including themselves, had not been contacted for input as suggested by the Planning Board. While acknowledging the project’s quality, he emphasized that it does not align with the wishes of the existing residential community and urged the Board to maintain the area's residential focus. Cate Scanlon, resident of South Seabreeze Road, spoke in opposition, citing the project’s scale and incompatibility with the community's predominantly residential character. She noted that while much of the area is zoned B-2 for commercial use, no new commercial buildings have been constructed since 1971, with most growth being residential. Barriers to commercial development include small lot sizes, lack of public water and sewer infrastructure, and high building costs in a flood zone. Only 1.4 of the area's 26.4 acres support active commercial use. She highlighted the property’s recent rezoning to residential (R-7) in February 2024, which had strong community support, and criticized the current push for another rezoning so soon after. She questioned the justification for reversing the decision and emphasized that residential growth better aligns with the area’s current use and community-focused identity. She urged the Board to reject the rezoning and preserve Seabreeze’s sense of community, describing it as a place where neighbors connect and engage in daily life. She urged the Board to uphold its original decision to support residential development. Kathy Tylee, resident of South Seabreeze Road, spoke in opposition, stating her support for maintaining the property's residential zoning and emphasizing the Board's previous decision as the right one for the community. She noted that Seabreeze has increasingly developed as a residential area over the years, with past rezoning efforts supporting the growth. She highlighted the area's beauty and potential as a residential waterfront community, contrasting it with nearby commercial uses like storage facilities, which she feels do not align with the community's vision. She criticized the outdated nature of the Comprehensive Plan and land-use designations, stating that the original commercial focus for Seabreeze is no longer relevant. She pointed out that both the Tax Office and land-use experts now recognize Seabreeze as primarily residential, with outside planners agreeing that residential development is the best fit for the area. She urged the Board to preserve this trajectory and uphold the residential zoning, expressing hope for Seabreeze’s continued growth as a cohesive residential community. Chair Rivenbark stated that the applicant and opposition groups each have five minutes for rebuttal comments. Applicant rebuttal: In rebuttal, Ms. Lipe addressed concerns about the property’s rezoning history and the proposed use. She acknowledged that the property was rezoned to residential (R-7) earlier in the year under a different owner but explained that the new owner’s vision aligns with the Comprehensive Plan, which designates the area as a community mixed-use place type. She clarified that conditional zoning inherently allows for flexibility as property ownership and visions evolve, emphasizing that the current request is narrowly tailored for light commercial use, akin to residential activity. In response to concerns about future property uses, she stressed that any changes outside the proposed uses would require the same public and governmental review process, ensuring ongoing community input and oversight. She also noted that while Seabreeze has seen significant residential growth, other commercial uses exist in the area, and the proposal remains consistent with existing B-2 zoning and the Comprehensive Plan. Regarding concerns about flood zones, she highlighted the risks of residential development in such areas, pointing out that avoiding residences in floodplains is a key component of the County’s strategic plan. She also disputed the relevance of the Tax Office’s designation of Seabreeze as primarily residential, stating that this determination has no bearing on the zoning decision or policy documents under consideration. She concluded by emphasizing that the proposal incorporates conditions to protect neighboring properties and aligns with the Planning Board’s unanimous approval and staff’s recommendation, urging the Board to approve the conditional rezoning request. Opposition rebuttal: In rebuttal, Steven Tylee, a resident of South Seabreeze Road, spoke in opposition, questioning why an 8,585-square-foot building would be considered suitable for the Seabreeze area, which he emphasized as primarily residential. He highlighted the community's prior support for the February rezoning to residential and expressed frustration over the perceived reversal of progress. He stated that moving from residential back to commercial zoning is counterproductive and inconsistent with the community's vision. He urged the Board to maintain the previously approved residential zoning and oppose the current project, reiterating the community's preference for residential development in the area. In rebuttal, Ms. Scanlon noted that none of the ten public comments supporting the proposal came from individuals living in Seabreeze. Upon her quick review, the supporters appeared to be affiliated with Source Contracting as employees, friends, or realtors doing business with the company. She emphasized this point to highlight the lack of local support for the project from within the Seabreeze community. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 NOVEMBER 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 370 With rebuttal time ending, Chair Rivenbark closed the public hearing and opened the floor to Board discussion. In response to questions, Planning Board representative Hansen Matthews confirmed the Planning Board’s approval recommendation in February 2024 to zone the property residential and its subsequent approval recommendation to reverse that zoning to commercial. He explained that the Planning Board often deals with requests falling within a broad gray area of uses rather than having one definitive "highest and best use." While he could not speak in detail about February's decision, he explained the Board's reasoning for the recent vote. He noted that the property had been zoned B-2 for many years and that planning staff had expressed a preference for mixed- use development in the area. In February, the proposal for residential zoning seemed reasonable based on the evidence presented. However, the current applicants proposed an office use that aligns with the existing B-2 zoning and the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal also received support from Planning staff. He highlighted that the applicants agreed to conditions like limiting the building size and adding privacy fencing to address community concerns. He also noted that while Seabreeze has not seen much recent commercial development, the proposed office would be higher quality and more aesthetically appealing than existing commercial uses. After thorough discussion, the Planning Board determined that the proposal was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and staff recommendations, leading to a unanimous vote in favor. Development Review Supervisor Robert Farrell and Mr. Dickerson responded to further questions confirming that one of the conditions prohibits outside storage, including materials and heavy equipment. They clarified that while fleet vehicles, such as pickup trucks used for project sites, would be allowed, storing heavy equipment like backhoes would fall under the prohibited outside storage condition. As to the applicant’s ability to be allowed to request a rezoning to expand the allowable uses, they explained that the applicant could file such a request, but it would need to follow the same process as the current rezoning request, ultimately requiring review and approval by the Board. Commissioner Zapple expressed concern about the potential for repeated reversals, citing the two conflicting Planning Board decisions within nine months on this property, to which Messrs. Farrell and Dickerson acknowledged the possibility of similar future scenarios. Commissioner Barfield stated his difficulty with supporting the application, citing the historical challenges of the B-2 zoning in Seabreeze, which previously rendered much of the land undevelopable due to restrictive setbacks and the lack of water and sewer access. He noted that the Comprehensive Plan reduced setbacks, enabling some conversations about growth, but for decades, the zoning effectively left properties without viable development options. Reflecting on the area's history and personal connection to Seabreeze, he voiced continued support for residential zoning along the waterfront, consistent with his prior vote to rezone the parcel to residential. While supportive of commercial development along the Carolina Beach Road corridor, he opposed placing an office building next to existing residences, stating it was incongruent with the neighborhood's character. He stated his preference for maintaining the area's residential focus and concluded that he could not support the current request. In response to questions, Mr. Dickerson stated that staff’s position in February 2024 was an initial recommendation of denial of rezoning from B-2 to R-7, and then the Board chose to express policy desire to the contrary. Commissioner Scalise stated that he does not like the ping pong and cannot support the request. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked Ms. Lipe 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. Lipe responded that she wanted to proceed with the vote. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for direction from the Board. MOTION: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple to deny the proposed rezoning. While the Board finds it to be consistent with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it provides uses in line with the Community Mixed Use place type, the Board finds denial of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the use is too intense for the generally low intensity area. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY CINDEE WOLF WITH DESIGN SOLUTIONS, APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF ZCH INVESTMENTS, LLC, PROPERTY OWNER, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 11.26 ACRES LOCATED AT 4200 CASTLE HAYNE ROAD FROM THE R-20, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO THE (CZD) CB, COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT FOR THE USE OF OUTDOOR RECREATION ESTABLISHMENT (Z24-20) Development Review Planner Amy Doss presented a request to rezone approximately 11.26 acres at 4200 Castle Hayne Road from R-20 Residential to Conditional CB (Community Business) to accommodate a driving range and miniature golf facility. The property is currently undeveloped and zoned R-20 Residential. It is bordered by existing residential properties and is located within an area zoned for a mix of Residential, Commercial, Industrial, and Planned Development uses. The site is situated along Castle Hayne Road, approximately one mile north of the Moore’s Crossing mixed-use area and other recently approved commercial rezonings. The surrounding area has seen increasing commercial development, making residential use less likely. The concept plan reflects that the main office and rental counter will be positioned near Castle Hayne Road. A miniature golf course, tee boxes for the driving range, chipping and putting greens, and a maintenance shed will be distributed throughout the property. A septic tank is planned within the driving range area, with a stormwater pond located between the parking lot and Castle Hayne Road. Full access to Castle Hayne Road will be provided for NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 NOVEMBER 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 371 the site. The applicant aims to maintain a recreational focus, with amenities that blend into the surrounding environment and meet local needs. As to traffic and compatibility, the proposed development will generate modest traffic increases compared to the current zoning but remains significantly below the threshold that requires a traffic impact analysis (TIA). Landscaping buffers will be installed between the development and adjacent single-family homes, as required by the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). The applicant has proposed limiting the height of lighting poles and limiting flood lighting to the to align with the facility’s business hours, reducing potential disruptions to nearby residential properties. The project supports two County strategic goals: 1) enhancing community well-being by providing recreational opportunities and 2) promoting workforce and economic development through a local business investment. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property within the Community Mixed Use and Employment Center place types, which support commercial and recreational uses as well as infill development. The proposed use aligns with existing commercial and residential developments along Castle Hayne Road and anticipated growth in the area. At its October 3, 2024 meeting, the Planning Board unanimously recommended approval, finding the project consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Board emphasized that the proposed uses are appropriate for the area and that the additional conditions mitigate impacts on adjacent residential properties. Staff concurs with the Planning Board’s recommendation, citing policy guidance, zoning considerations, and technical reviews. The recommended conditions include: 1. The only permitted use is for a miniature golf establishment and a golf driving range. 2. Hours of operation limited to: a. 9 am – 8 pm Sunday – Thursday b. 9 am – 10 pm Friday and Saturday 3. In addition to UDO Section 5.5 Exterior Lighting, which regulates max illumination levels and full fixture cut-offs, the following will apply: a. Lighting poles for security lighting in the parking area and mini-golf areas would be limited to a 16- foot height. b. Lighting poles for flood lighting of the driving range would be limited to 35-feet and turned off outside of the hours of operation. c. Lighting fixtures shall be numbered such that adequate levels of lighting are maintained, but that light spillage and glare are not directed at adjacent property(ies), neighboring areas, or motorists. Ms. Doss concluded the presentation, stating that if the rezoning is approved, the project will undergo further development review to ensure full compliance with all applicable ordinances and requirements. Chair Rivenbark thanked Ms. Doss for the presentation and invited the applicant to make remarks. Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, representing ZCH Investments, LLC, property owner, presented the proposal to develop an 11-acre family-owned recreational facility centered on an adult golf driving range and a miniature golf course. The project also includes additional amenities such as horseshoes and cornhole to create a well-rounded, family-friendly destination. She emphasized the goal of filling a recreational gap in the Castle Hayne area while ensuring the project aligns with community needs and environmental sustainability. Initially, her client explored the possibility of a larger scale "garage village" development, a concept involving upscale units for enclosed storage or personal spaces. However, after meeting with neighbors and gathering feedback, they opted to pursue the current project, which is believed to suit the local area better. She noted that while other commercial rezonings have occurred along the Castle Hayne Road corridor, those projects primarily involve contractor offices and have not significantly enhanced the area’s offerings. This recreational facility aims to provide a meaningful improvement to the corridor while maintaining compatibility with nearby uses. Due to the lack of public utilities in the area, the project will utilize a private well and septic system. To address feasibility concerns, work was conducted with environmental specialists to identify a viable septic field sized to support the facility’s maximum usage. The design includes a repair area as required and ensures that the septic field will be fenced to prevent damage from golf ball collection activities. She confirmed that the property lies outside flood hazard zones, alleviating concerns raised during public input. She reiterated that the site’s low surface coverage relative to other types of development, such as residential or commercial, further minimizes environmental impacts. Lighting and operational considerations were key aspects of the plan. The plan is to install LED lighting fixtures that meet “dark sky” criteria, ensuring minimal light pollution. Parking lot lighting will be limited to 16-foot poles while lighting for the driving range will be restricted to 35-foot poles, oriented away from Castle Hayne Road and neighboring residences. All lights will be turned off outside operational hours. Evening operations will vary seasonally, and options such as glow-in-the-dark golfing will add to the facility’s appeal. The project layout also preserves significant wooded and wetland areas at the rear of the property, maintaining the site’s natural character and reducing its overall environmental footprint. Access to the facility will require an NCDOT driveway permit. The project’s design balances accessibility with a minimal environmental footprint, and community concerns are addressed regarding flood hazards and septic feasibility. By conducting thorough environmental assessments, the site's suitability has been demonstrated for the proposed use. Ms. Wolf confirmed that her client accepts the recommended conditions of approval, including restrictions on lighting height and hours of operation, to ensure minimal disruption to the surrounding community. She NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 NOVEMBER 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 372 highlighted the project’s alignment with County goals for low-impact infill development and economic growth. The proposed recreational facility will enhance the character of the Castle Hayne Road corridor, provide a needed service to the community, and contribute positively to the local economy. She noted that her client is excited about the potential for their project to attract families, improve the area’s recreational offerings, and serve as a model for thoughtful, community-oriented development. Chair Rivenbark announced that no one signed up to speak in favor or opposition to the request, closed the public hearing, and opened the floor to Board discussion. In response to questions, Ms. Wolf confirmed that if public water and sewer infrastructure are extended to within 500 feet of the property, there is generally a requirement to connect within a designated period, as per state statutes. This type of development is advantageous because it requires minimal infrastructure upgrades while providing significant value and utility. If water and sewer services become available along Castle Hayne Road, the property could transition back to residential use, aligning with the mixed-use land classification promoted in the area. This flexibility supports long-term planning objectives, allowing for potential residential development at the rear of the property while maintaining commercial use upfront. The connection available in the Chair Road area is quite a distance away. The chance to use Sledge Road as an access point is negligent as it is only an easement. The tee boxes are positioned to allow golf balls to travel approximately 300 yards to the far end, based on standard driving range dimensions. After discussion during the Planning Board hearing, netting was deemed unnecessary for the site and is also expensive. As to the lack of trees, she noted that the existing ditch on the southwest side where there are 20-foot buffer yards. The existing vegetative buffer in that area will remain, but an open course is desired. A tree removal permit was issued early on to have septic system testing completed, and more trees are shown on the aerial photos. 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. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for direction from the Board. MOTION: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chair Pierce to approve the proposed rezoning to a (CZD) CB, Community Business district. 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 both the Community Mixed Use and Employment Center place types. The Board also finds 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 conditions will apply to this approval as follows: 1. The only permitted use is for a miniature golf establishment and a golf driving range. 2. Hours of operation limited to: a. 9 am – 8 pm Sunday – Thursday b. 9 am – 10 pm Friday and Saturday 3. In addition to UDO Section 5.5 Exterior Lighting, which regulates max illumination levels and full fixture cut-offs, the following will apply: a. Lighting poles for security lighting in the parking area and mini-golf areas would be limited to a 16- foot height. b. Lighting poles for flood lighting of the driving range would be limited to 35-feet and turned off outside of the hours of operation. c. Lighting fixtures shall be numbered such that adequate levels of lighting are maintained, but that light spillage and glare are not directed at adjacent property(ies), neighboring areas, or motorists. 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 is considered denied. Upon vote, the MOTION PASSED 4 TO 1, Commissioner Scalise dissented. 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 38. COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS Appointment to the New Hanover County Board of Adjustment Chair Rivenbark reported that a vacancy exists on the New Hanover County Board of Adjustment, and one application is eligible for reappointment and eight other applications are available for consideration. Commissioner Scalise nominated Caleb Rash for reappointment. Vice-Chair Pierce seconded the nomination. Hearing no further nominations, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the nomination on the floor. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 NOVEMBER 18, 2024 REGULAR MEETING PAGE 373 Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to reappoint Caleb Rash to the New Hanover County Board of Adjustment to serve a three-year term, with the term to expire December 1, 2027. Appointments to the New Hanover County Cooperative Extension Advisory Council Chair Rivenbark reported that there are two vacancies on the New Hanover County Cooperative Extension Advisory Council at this time, with one application eligible for reappointment and one additional application available for consideration. Commissioner Zapple nominated Andy Almeter for reappointment and Jay Denmark for appointment. Commissioner Scalise 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 Andy Almeter and to appoint Jay Denmark to the New Hanover County Cooperative Extension Advisory Council to serve three-year terms with the terms to expire December 1, 2027. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Chair Rivenbark stated that two people signed up to speak under public comment and invited them to provide comments. Dr. Jon Martell, Cape Fear Five Star Project Chief Executive Officer and resident of Oakland Drive, Wilmington, NC, requested the Board adopt a resolution addressing hospital quality at Novant-New Hanover Regional Medical Center. The resolution calls for transparency and accountability from Novant Health, which acquired the hospital in 2021, to meet a contractual obligation to position the facility in the top 10% of national quality metrics. The hospital is currently rated as a two-star hospital by Medicare, and he emphasized the need for a quality improvement plan, measurable benchmarks, and resource commitments. The resolution asks Novant Health to present a comprehensive five-year strategic plan within three months and provide public updates every six months until the hospital achieves a four-star rating or for five years, whichever comes first. Logan Secord, a resident of Newton Drive in Wilmington, NC, voiced concerns about the proposed Sledge Hill development, which includes plans for 4,000 homes on a 4,000-acre tract. He highlighted that over 75% of the land consists of wetlands, leaving only 1,000 acres available for building. Secord argued that staff improperly used the entire parcel's boundary to calculate density, violating the UDO. He pointed out that the UDO designates the area as rural agriculture, limiting development to one unit per acre. The proposal, however, would allow four units per acre, far exceeding the allowable density and contradicting the intended very low-density residential character. Secord urged the Board to refer the matter to the Zoning Board of Adjustment, which reviews deviations related to topographical constraints and appeals of administrative decisions. He cited statutory provisions permitting appeals and called on the Board to uphold the rule of law by pursuing an appeal to ensure due process is followed. ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS OF BUSINESS There were no additional items of business. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Rivenbark adjourned the meeting at 6:06 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.