Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-04-03 Agenda Review NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 AGENDA REVIEW, APRIL 3, 2025 PAGE 475 ASSEMBLY The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met on April 3, 2025, at 4:02 p.m. for Agenda Review in Conference Rooms 138-139 at the New Hanover County Government Center, 230 Government Center Drive, Wilmington, North Carolina. Members present: Chair Bill Rivenbark; Vice-Chair LeAnn Pierce; Commissioner Dane Scalise; Commissioner Stephanie A.C. Walker; and Commissioner Rob Zapple. Staff present: County Manager Chris Coudriet; Clerk to the Board Kymberleigh G. Crowell; and County Attorney K. Jordan Smith. Chair Rivenbark called the meeting to order and announced that staff would provide an update, followed by a discussion of the agenda items for the April 7, 2025 Regular Meeting. STAFF UPDATE Planning and Land Use Operations Supervisor Ken Vafier updated the Board on the northern watersheds flood mapping project:  Northern Watersheds Flood Mapping Project:  Background:  Beginning in 2018, New Hanover County (County) adopted or had all flood insurance rate map (FIRM) panels updated in three iterations: 2018, 2019, 2025.  Certain areas within the County were not mapped, despite being physically located within the vicinity of or along the watercourses in the County.  In 2021, County staff identified 12 study areas in the northern portion of the County where additional study and mapping of watersheds is necessary to provide adequate data to display potential flooding risks.  Purpose, needs, and objectives:  As development continues in the unincorporated areas of the County, especially in northern portions that are transitioning from agricultural and timberland to residential and commercial, the gaps in the flood mapping data should be analyzed.  This information is required to inform a wide range of land use planning and policies for transportation, infrastructure design, water resources, environmental assessments, regulations/enforcement, and the formulation of comprehensive plans.  With updated floodplain mapping data, County staff, property owners, the development community, and other stakeholders will have access to additional information necessary for decision making.  Data will assist with decision points in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan update.  Study areas: Island Creek, Kings Grant Tributary, Murrayville Tributary, Ness Creek, Ness Creek Tributary 1, Ness Creek Tributary 2, Prince George Creek, Prince George Creek Tributary 3, Pumpkin Creek, Spring Branch, Wildcat Branch, and Acorn Branch:  Methodology and results:  Advisory Flood Hazard Areas mapped with the same methodology as used to delineate current FIRMs.  Survey work and field work performed in Fall 2023 – Winter 2024.  Modeling analysis.  Preliminary results delivered in Summer 2024.  Staff analysis Fall 2024.  Data publication and outreach Spring 2025. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 AGENDA REVIEW, APRIL 3, 2025 PAGE 476  Next steps:  Provide study materials and results to the Board on March 2025.  Meetings with external stakeholders: March/April 2025.  Publication of data: April 2025.  Technical Sessions with property owners: April 2025.  Final Report and closeout: April 2025. A brief discussion ensued about the Flood Analysis Overview map. Mr. Vafier explained in response to questions that the orange areas show flood zones adopted on the current FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), while the remaining areas, though unmapped, serve as advisory zones based on the report. He clarified that the map legend defines the 1% flood zone as an area with a 1% or greater annual chance of flooding, commonly known as the 100-year flood zone. The 0.2% flood zone is referred to as the 500-year flood zone. Development within the orange areas falls under floodplain management requirements. The advisory zones, shown in other colors, give residents information about their potential risk and encourage mitigation. Mr. Vafier noted that the project identifies 1,135 parcels with 765 structures considered at risk for future development. Staff have already begun conversations with some stakeholders but focused this presentation on informing the Board. Staff also plan to meet with Wilmington International Airport, NCDOT, and Cape Fear Public Utility Authority, whose infrastructure projects may be affected. A technical session scheduled for later this month will provide an opportunity for property owners to speak with staff and project team members, ask questions, and learn about possible next steps. On development reviews, Mr. Vafier stated that staff factors in floodplain data when evaluating impervious surface impacts. In response to questions about policy, County Manager Coudriet said the Board may consider future changes but stressed that this presentation serves as an informational briefing. Many affected property owners may not yet realize the potential flood risk. When discussing the VE flood zone, Mr. Vafier explained that it includes a 1% annual flood risk and added danger from tidal influences. He pointed out that FEMA excluded advisory zones from the 2018 map update due to cost, scope, or assumptions that undeveloped land posed minimal risk. Given the area’s rapid growth, staff rejected that assumption and prioritized sharing the data with the Board before informing the public. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark thanked Mr. Vafier for the presentation. Consent Agenda Item #3: Adoption of Resolution Authorizing the Negotiation of an Installment Financing Contract Not to Exceed $22.0 Million, Directing the Publication of Notice with Respect Thereto, Declaring the Intent of the County to Reimburse Itself for Capital Expenditures From Proceeds Thereof, and Providing for Certain Other Related Matters. Chief Financial Officer Eric Credle, in response to questions regarding the Cape Fear Community College capital improvements, stated that this matter was part of last year’s budget. The work is currently in progress, and he noted that the largest component is the HVAC upgrades in Building S. Regular Agenda Item #6: Consideration of Approval of the Second Amendment to the Development Agreement to Increase the Guaranteed Maximum Price for the Redevelopment of the Wilmington City Block Bounded by Chestnut Street, Grace Street, North Second Street, and North Third Street; and Adoption of a Budget Amendment to Fully Fund Project Grace Direct Costs. County Manager Coudriet explained that the increase in project costs, especially for exhibits, is due to design progression and inflation. The original exhibit estimate of $7.25 million has doubled to $14.7 million, primarily due to additions such as a planetarium and the Curious Nature exhibit. Some costs will be offset through fundraising. Mr. Credle reported that funds originally borrowed for Blue Clay Park were reallocated to Project Grace after the County received a state budget grant, eliminating the need for the original loan. Chief Facilities Officer Sara Warmuth reported that $5.4 million is being added to the development agreement with Cape Fear Development for the exhibit components, infrastructure, furniture, AV, and security equipment. She addressed the discrepancy between the $14.7 million and $14.9 million exhibit cost figures, attributing it to rounding. The $14.7 million includes design, fabrication, and installation, while an additional $2.945 million covers infrastructure. Of the $21.5 million direct contract budget, $5.4 million is now within the development agreement, leaving $16 million in direct contracts. Approximately $1.3 million of that will fund special inspections, library shelving, AV and security systems, and office furnishings which are items to be procured outside the general NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 AGENDA REVIEW, APRIL 3, 2025 PAGE 477 contractor, Monteith. County Manager Coudriet added that this structure mirrors past projects like the Government Center, where direct contracts were used to reduce costs and retain control by limiting general contractor oversight. Regarding the status of the construction contingency, Facilities Project Manager David King reported about 50%, approximately $1.4 million, remains and is considered favorable progress given the project’s complexity and location in a historic area. Regarding the use of the post-employment benefits fund, Mr. Credle explained that $4.9 million was reallocated from the which has built up incrementally since 2008. Since retiree medical expenses are paid on a "pay-as-you-go" basis, the fund was not contributing to long-term liabilities. County Manager Coudriet added reallocating the unused funds was a more effective financial decision. Mr. Credle confirmed that the post- employment benefits fund balance is now zero. Regular Agenda Item #7: Consideration of Resolution Approving the Issuance of not to Exceed $855,000,000 Tax-Exempt Bonds to be Issued by the National Finance Authority for the Benefit of Novant Health, Inc. County Attorney Smith explained that the hearing is a procedural requirement under the 1982 Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) and does not create any financial obligation for the County. The bonds will support 19 projects across 10 counties in North and South Carolina, with each affected jurisdiction required to hold a similar hearing. Although the bond issuer is based in New Hampshire, the process follows federal law and poses no risk to the County. Regular Agenda Item #8: Text Amendment Request (TA25-02) - Request by New Hanover County Planning and Land Use to amend Section 4.4.4, Section 6.3.2, Section 2.3, and Section 11.7 of the New Hanover County Unified Development Ordinance related to Accessory Dwelling Units, performance guarantees, and non- conforming signs to meet North Carolina General Statute requirements. Development Review Supervisor Robert Farrell reported that the amendments align the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) with state law, specifically in areas related to accessory dwelling units (ADUs), performance guarantees, and nonconforming signs. Regarding the use of unconventional materials such as shipping containers for ADUs, Mr. Farrell clarified that the County treats these as building materials and permits their use if they meet building code requirements and pass inspection. Planning and Land Use Director Rebekah Roth addressed concerns about regulating the appearance of structures. She emphasized that the amendments do not weaken existing standards but instead ensure compliance with state law. She also clarified that the updates do not affect current regulations on short-term rentals. Discussion ensued about allowing licensed engineers to override decisions from the Inspections Department by certifying compliance under their seal for bonded infrastructure improvements. Mr. Farrell stated he would seek additional clarification before Monday. County Attorney Smith explained that, under state law in effect for about five years, an engineer or architect may certify that a component complies with state building code, and the County is required to accept that certification if properly submitted. Regular Agenda Item #9: Rezoning Request (Z25-02 – Medical Office) – Request by John Hinnant with Eastern Carolinas Commercial Real Estate, applicant, on behalf of Paul and Jane Chaucer, property owners, to rezone the existing (CZD) CB, Community Business zoning of approximately 0.36 acres located at 2626 Castle Hayne Road to (CZD) B-1, Neighborhood Business for the use of Medical and Dental Office and Clinic and other limited uses. In response to questions, Ms. Roth clarified that the project does not require sidewalks or multi-use paths. Mr. Farrell added that sidewalk recommendations follow current Board policy, which applies only to Carolina Beach Road south of Monkey Junction due to the adopted master plan for that area. The Board discussed whether to extend sidewalk planning countywide and incorporating pedestrian infrastructure into the County’s comprehensive planning process. County Manager Coudriet confirmed that the County, not NCDOT, will be responsible for maintaining any sidewalks or multi-use paths, which should factor in future policy decisions. After further discussion, the Board did not reach a consensus to expand the sidewalk requirement beyond the current area but agreed to continue discussing it. Regular Agenda Item #10: Special Use Permit (S24-04) - Multi-Family in B-2 - Request by Bayshore Townhomes, LLC, applicant, on behalf of Bee Safe Porters Neck, LLC, property owners, for a special use permit for a 62 unit multi-family development with 1,800 square feet of commercial space in a B-2, Regional Business district on a 3.21-acre parcel of land located at 8138 Market Street and Special Use Permit (S24-05) - Additional Dwelling Allowance - Request by Bayshore Townhomes, LLC, applicant, on behalf of Herbert Parham, property owner, for a special use permit for an Additional Dwelling Allowance for 242 row-style dwelling units in an R-15, Residential district on a 30.22-acre parcel of land located at the 8100 block of Market Street. County Manager Coudriet stated that a continuance request has been received from Gary Shipman, the applicant's attorney, for this matter to allow time to further work on the details of an access plan. The applicant team has already identified two options but needs more time to finalize a third. County Attorney Smith reported that Grady Richardson, the attorney for the opposition, opposes the continuance. He added that Mr. Shipman was not present out of courtesy to Mr. Richardson, who could not attend the meeting. If the item is continued, Mr. Richardson would not be available until the July 21, 2025 meeting. Board members expressed concern that no one from the applicant’s team was present to speak on the request. County Manager Coudriet confirmed that Mr. Shipman submitted a written continuance request to the Planning Director in accordance with ordinance requirements, and that the request was shared with the Board earlier that morning. At the Board’s direction, Deputy County Attorney Karen Richards contacted Mr. Shipman, who confirmed he would arrive as soon as possible. BREAK: Chair Rivenbark called for a meeting break from 5:37 PM to 5:47 PM. Chair Rivenbark stated Mr. Shipman was present and asked if there was Board direction. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 36 AGENDA REVIEW, APRIL 3, 2025 PAGE 478 MOTION: Vice-Chair Pierce MOVED, SECONDED by Chair Rivenbark to approve the continuance request of Agenda Item 10 for Special Use Permits S24-04 and S24-05 based on the request from Gary Shipman, attorney for the applicant, to the July 21, 2025 regular meeting. Gary Shipman, attorney for the applicant, responded to questions by explaining that, Since the last continuance, the applicant team had engaged in ongoing discussions with attorneys, interested parties, and community observers to gather input and consider suggestions, particularly regarding a potential expanded use of Brays Drive. He emphasized that these conversations aimed to better inform Porters Pointe residents and support a request for a minor modification, as defined under applicable regulations. He stated that he had previously agreed to a continuance at Mr. Richardson’s request, as Mr. Richardson had indicated he was not prepared to move forward at that time. Although no direct communication has taken place between them since, Mr. Shipman stressed that the issue remained significant to both the public and the future of the project. Mr. Shipman requested the continuance to allow the applicant team time to respond to concerns that arose earlier in the week and to compile additional information that may be relevant to the Board’s future consideration. He concluded by offering to answer any questions from the Board, so long as they did not relate to the merits of the petition itself. Hearing no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark asked for a vote on the motion on the floor. Upon vote, the MOTION PASSED 4 TO 1; Commissioner Walker dissenting. Regarding combining the two applications into a single item, Ms. Roth explained that the second application cannot move forward unless the first application is approved. Since the requests are interdependent, both must be approved for the project to proceed. If S24-04 is denied, the Board must also deny S24-05. As to the public hearing format, she noted that speaker time is doubled to reflect the two cases being heard together. Before the hearing begins, and prior to swearing-in any speakers, Deputy County Attorney Richards will review the rules of procedure to ensure clarity. When asked whether the applicant could submit a substantially different proposal following the requested continuation, Ms. Roth explained that once staff finalize the report, any new information or changes must be presented during the hearing. The Board may choose to allow additional time for review or expert input, but the process does not allow for full resubmission. In response to questions about gating road stub-outs under the UDO, Ms. Roth stated that while the UDO does not prohibit gating, any such proposal must comply with the fire code and go through the Technical Review Committee (TRC) process. She noted that although she is not a fire code expert, staff can make someone available to address any technical questions. ADJOURNMENT There being no further discussion, Chair Rivenbark adjourned the meeting at 6:00 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.