Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-06-2025 Planning Board MinutesMinutes of the New Hanover County Planning Board A regular mee�ng of the New Hanover County Planning Board was held on February 6, 2025, at 6:00 PM in the New Hanover County Historic Courthouse, 24 North Third Street, Room 301 in Wilmington, North Carolina. Members’ Present    Colin Tarrant, Chair   Cameron Moore, Vice Chair  Kevin Hine Clark Hipp Hansen Mathews Kaitlyn Rhonehouse Pete Avery Members Absent None Staff Present Rebekah Roth, Director of Planning & Land Use Robert Farrell, Development Review Supervisor  Kemp Burpeau, Senior Deputy County Atorney Zach Dickerson, Senior Planner  Ka�a Boykin, Planning and Land Use Supervisor Timothy Lowe, County Engineer Katherine May, Associate Planner Lisa Maes, Administra�ve Supervisor Bruce Gould, Administra�ve Specialist Chair Tarrant called the mee�ng to order at 6:00 PM and welcomed the audience.  A�er the welcome remarks, Chairman Tarrant led the Pledge of Allegiance and provided an overview of the mee�ng procedures and read the Code of Ethics.   Chair Tarrant announced that items discussed during the evening's mee�ng will advance to the County Commissioners' mee�ng, scheduled for March 10, 2025. He also noted that Board Member Pete Avery will serve as the Planning Board representa�ve at that mee�ng. Chair Tarrant then reminded the Board of the Code of Ethics as adopted on January 4, 2016, emphasizing that board members must avoid conflicts of interest. Approval of Minutes The minutes from November 7, 2024, Planning Board Regular Board Member were presented for considera�on and approval. With no discussion a MOTION was made by Pete Avery, second by Vice Chair Moore and the minutes were approved unanimously. Regular Business Public Hearing Text Amendment Request (TA25-01) - Request by Tammi Pits, applicant, on behalf of Wilmington Lodge #343, Loyal Order of Moose, INC, property owner, to amend Sec�on 4.4.4 Standards for Specified Accessory Uses and Structures to allow RV and boat storage and RV camping as permited accessory uses to Lodges, Fraternal, & Social Organiza�ons with restric�ons. Senior Planner Zach Dickerson presented an overview of the proposed text amendment submited by the Wilmington Moose Lodge. The amendment as submited would add a new accessory use of Recrea�onal Vehicle (RV)/Travel Trailer Dwelling at a Lodge to the primary use of Lodges, Fraternal & Social Organiza�ons. The applicant stated a desire to amend the ordinance to fit with a service provided by the Moose Lodge since the 1980's. Mr. Dickerson stated that under the proposed amendment, RVs would be allowed for private fraternal and benevolent non-profit lodges on their property for overnight dwelling with specific standards. Those applicant- proposed standards are outlined in the staff report. Mr. Dickerson indicated this request is �ed to a zoning viola�on, in which the Moose Lodge was cited for hos�ng RVs overnight and for storage of RVs on the property. Under current zoning regula�ons, this is not permited on the site. Since that �me, the applicant has come into compliance, but they wish to resume their previous ac�vi�es legally. Mr. Dickerson discussed that because changes to the Unified Development Ordinance affect more than just one parcel, staff are researching how the requested language would be applied to not just the Moose Lodge at 4640 Carolina Beach Road, but other Lodges, Fraternal, and Social Organiza�on uses throughout the County. Staff members are also taking into considera�on this use and regula�ons on RV uses at Moose Lodges in other jurisdic�ons. Staff will compare the requested amendment to standards in other jurisdic�ons that have similar use types that offer this service. Un�l this research is complete, staff will not be able to finalize a recommenda�on, which may include suggested adjustments to the applicant's proposal in order to mi�gate poten�al land use concerns. Mr. Dickerson made clear in his presenta�on that this is an applicant led text amendment request to add RV Storage and Camping at Fraternal and Social Lodges. In the applica�on, the Moose Lodge explained that this is �ed to a service they have been providing their members with for several years. However, the property is zoned R-15 which does not allow RV Storage and RV Camping unless regulated through a Special Use Permit. The applicant’s request would permit private fraternal and benevolent non-profit lodges to host and store RVs on their property overnight. The applicant has proposed several standards for the accessory use, including days of use, number and size of sites, and membership usage. Mr. Dickerson con�nued by saying that New Hanover County currently only allows RV camping within approved campgrounds or within approved RV Storage facili�es, which have their own set of standards outlined in the UDO. He also added as a note for the Board, these types of lodges are currently allowed by right in several commercial districts and require a special use permit in residen�al districts. Mr. Dickerson discussed that staff’s request to con�nue the hearing and mater to the March Planning Board mee�ng to allow �me to prepare a beter text amendment to address issues. At that �me Mr. Btyan Debose was asked to speak to the board and acknowledged that the Applicant/Moose Lodge was aware to and supported the staff request for a con�nuance. With no further discussion Pete Avery made a MOTION to con�nue the item un�l the March Planning Board mee�ng. With no further discussion Vice Chair Moore seconded the MOTION, and the mo�on carried unanimously. Public Hearing Rezoning Request (Z25-01) – Request by Cindee Wolf with Design Solu�ons, applicant, on behalf of Ricardo San�ago, property owner, to rezone approximately 1.97 acres located at 6312 Castle Hayne Road from the R-15, Residen�al district to (CZD) CS, Commercial Services for the use of Contractor Office, Retail Nursery, and a Live /Work Caretaker Unit and other limited uses. Robert Farrell, Development Review Supervisor began his presenta�on by sta�ng that this applica�on is a request to rezone approximately 1.97 acres from a R-15 Residen�al District to a Condi�onal CS Commercial Services district for the use of Landscape Contractor Office, Retail Nursery, Wholesale Nursery, Live / Work Caretaker Unit. The property is on Castle Hayne Road just south of the Pender County line and was originally zoned R-15 in the 1980’s. The site is bordered by the B-2 Business zone to the north, south, and west, with R-15 zoning to the east. The presenta�on included aerial photography and discussion of the exis�ng single-family home, detached accessory building, and surrounding commercial and residen�al development. Mr. Farrell showed examples of wholesale nurseries and the adap�ve reuse of a house. The presenta�on then went on to describe elements of the concept plan to include. • The exis�ng house is served by a circular driveway onto Castle Hayne Road. The applica�on proposes to abandon the exis�ng driveway and replacing it with two new one-way driveways. • The exis�ng home on the south side of the property will be used as the contractor office and a caretaker unit for the owner or an employee. • The exis�ng storage building will serve as storage for the business and will include a checkout counter for retail customers. • The site includes a stormwater pond, outdoor storage for mulch and gravel and an area for a wholesale or retail nursery. Mr. Farrell provided addi�onal informa�on regarding the project and the area. There have been three commercial rezonings along Castle Hayne Road in the last few years. The proposed development is below the threshold that requires a Traffic Impact Analysis. The property currently has full access onto Castle Hayne Road through an exis�ng circular driveway, the applicant has worked with NCDOT and is proposing two new one-way driveways. Mr. Farrell then discussed that adap�ve reuse of residen�al buildings is common along largely commercial corridors, where new single-family housing development is less likely and the area’s proximity to the I-40 Interchange indicates the poten�al for more commercial growth along Castle Hayne Rd. Mr. Farrell stated that the applicant has provided several condi�ons intended to mi�gate impacts on adjacent property. However, due to past complaints from nearby homes, addi�onal considera�on may be needed as to further reduce those impacts. Mr. Farrell stated that the Comprehensive Plan designates this property as being part of the Community Mixed Use place type which encourages transi�onal uses along highways and a mix of commercial and residen�al uses. He then stated that the staff’s recommenda�on is based on policy guidance of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan, zoning considera�ons, and technical review. Since the proposed use is in line with the recommenda�ons for the Community Mixed Use place type, and is a rela�vely low traffic generator and is located near other commercial uses, staff recommends approval of the request with five condi�ons related to: • Limi�ng uses to wholesale and retail nursery, contractor office, and a Live / Work Caretaker Unit. • Driveway access • Buffers • Ligh�ng • And hours of opera�on. To conclude his presenta�on, Mr. Farrell stated that should the rezoning be approved, the project will be subject to addi�onal development review through the Technical Review Commitee and that Tim Lowe with County Engineering is here to answer any ques�ons. Addi�onally, the applicant is here and has prepared a presenta�on. On behalf of the applicant Cindee Wolf made a presenta�on. Ms. Wolf opened her presenta�on by sta�ng that the Castle Hayne corridor is the perfect loca�on for this type of use and that the loca�on would be well posi�oned to serve customers within the area. She went on to explain that the proper�es to the North and South are already zoned B-2 commercial and the reason for seeking a CS (Commercial Service) zoning designa�on was to accommodate the Live Work use type presented with this project. Ms. Wolf con�nued her presenta�on explaining how the site would be designed. The exis�ng driveway would be removed, two new in and out driveways would be constructed. The development of the property would be set well off the roadway due to the expansive R-O-W for Castle Hayne Rd. There would be no ac�vity or disturbance to the site within the 35’ rear building setback. A stormwater pond would be added to mi�gate run off. In response to noise complaints the applicant had agreed to further limit the presence of heavy equipment on the site and to limit the hours of opera�on. Ms. Wolf stated that this rezoning request was consistent with the County’s Long Range Plan and was reasonable and in the best interest of the public. As a follow-up to Ms. Wolfs presenta�on a ques�on and discussion occurred between the board and the applicant that centered around the impact of the development on surrounding proper�es. It was determined that the applicant would be willing to add addi�onal condi�ons regarding heavy equipment, that the func�on of the landscape business was installa�on only and the landscape office would be administra�ve only. The 35’ building setback area to the rear of the building would remain undisturbed in the natural state and addi�onal plan�ng placed to meet required landscape standards. No greenhouse or other raised structures would be used within the nursery and no fuel storage would occur on site. It was also discussed that within the exis�ng R-15 Zoning District a wholesale nursery would be allowed, and the associated impacts of such use might be more detrimental to the surrounding proper�es. This applica�on and the condi�onal district’s ability to place binding condi�ons on the property could provide assurances as to what would occur on the property, mi�ga�ng adverse impacts of the commercial transi�on occurring in the area. Chair Tarrant then called on members of the public who had signed up to speak. Stephen Setzer, 6413 Orange Circle, 28401 Mr. Setzer stated his name and address then proceeded to address the board. He indicated that he was opposed to the project due to poten�al noise created by heavy equipment opera�on on the site and was concerned that the proposal would impact his property values. He went on the ask that if the rezoning was approved that his input regarding equipment noise and buffering be addressed. William Croom, 6309 Orange Circle, 28401 Mr. Croom stated his name and address then proceeded to address the board. He spoke about his concerns with noise that would be generated from the site and brought up a concern regarding the slope of the property and the prac�cality of the proposed stormwater facility. He also felt the proposed zoning change and development could diminish his property value. At the conclusion of the public comment period Chair Tarrant gave the applicant �me for rebutal. Ms. Wolf indicated that the logical use of the property in ques�on is commercial, and this proposal makes sense as a transi�on to the adjacent residen�al proper�es. She went on the state that the applicant intended to use the buffer requirement op�on that consists of only planted materials as this would best serve and protect the neighbors. In her follow up comments she reiterated that the site contained no regulated floodplain and offered further restric�ons on the hours of opera�on, excluding the contractor office use on the property on Sundays. The board then proceeded to close the public hearing and enter back into the regular mee�ng to discuss the item before them. The discussion centered around exis�ng zoning, future land use objec�ves and mi�ga�ng the adverse impacts presented by this request. They stated, the proposed use is consistent with the future land use outlined in the Comprehensive Plan and the condi�onal zoning was beneficial in that it allows condi�ons to be placed to facilitate a good compromise between par�es. A 16’ to 18’ slope from the front to the rear of the property was men�oned and that no fill would be added. If engineered correctly the stormwater pond would benefit the area. They further discussed that the proposed use and allowable condi�ons are a beter development scenario than a wholesale nursery and the CS District is intended as a transi�onal zoning district. They asked for clarity on what cons�tutes heavy equipment and the need to be define it. It was discussed that the highest and best use of the property is no longer single family residen�al, and the retail nursery component of the business will need some equipment to move around large plants and landscape materials. Discussion then occurred regarding the need for addi�onal and revised condi�ons. These condi�ons would need to be clear and enforceable, par�cularly around the hours of opera�on and the defini�on of heavy equipment. Vice Chair Moore then proceeded to make the following MOTION. I move to recommend APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning. I find 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. I also find recommending APPROVAL of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because the site is located along a transi�oning commercial corridor near exis�ng commercial uses and condi�ons will reduce impacts on adjacent residen�al areas, with the following condi�ons: Proposed Condi�ons: 1. Proposed Uses will be limited to Wholesale Nursery, Retail Nursery, Landscape Contractor Office, & Live / Work Caretaker Unit. 2. Exis�ng circular driveway will be removed & abandoned. Proposed driveways to be permited by NCDOT. 3. The en�re 35' setback behind the exis�ng buildings will be considered buffer yard. No ac�vi�es shall occur in that area. A 20' Type 'A' transi�onal buffer will be maintained along the remaining common property boundaries with residen�al use by preserving exis�ng vegeta�on and supplemen�ng addi�onal plan�ngs where necessary to provide the opacity standard. 4. Exterior ligh�ng, including luminaries and security lights, shall be arranged or shielded so as not to cast illumina�on in an upward direc�on above an imaginary line extended from the light sources parallel to the ground. Fixtures shall be numbered such that adequate levels of ligh�ng are maintained, but that light spillage and glare are not directed at adjacent proper�es, neighboring areas or motorists. 5. Hours of opera�on shall be limited to M-F, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. for all uses, Sat 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. for all uses and Sun 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. for the retail nursery only. 6. No heavy equipment including but not limited to backhoes, excavators and dump trucks associated with the landscape contractor opera�ons are to be staged, stored or used on site. Any equipment associated with the retail nursery use shall be limited to the permited hours of opera�on. This MOTION was seconded by Mr. Hipp and carried unanimously. Staff Update/UDO Maintenance Amendment Concepts Presenta�on Robert Farrell, Development Review Supervisor, began by sta�ng that the purpose of the presenta�on was to get feedback on some upcoming staff led text amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance. Mr. Fa rrell indicated that the department had been regularly ini�a�ng maintenance or housekeeping amendments since the comple�on of the UDO in 2020. There are different types of maintenance amendments, some are clarifica�ons of exis�ng standards, others are to ensure the ordinance is up to date with changing legal requirements at the state level. He went on to say the atorney’s office has iden�fied three amendments to the UDO that would need to be made to ensure the county’s ordinance is up to date: 1. The first amendment is a result of state legisla�ve ac�ons which prohibit local governments from regula�ng building materials for single-family homes outside of the requirements of the Residen�al Building Code. Because the UDO has restric�ons on using shipping containers as building materials for Accessory Dwelling Units we will need to remove that provision. 2. The second amendment is related to performance guarantees for development. The state recently established a uniform review process for releasing performance guarantees that applies to all local governments. New Hanover County’s process already complies with those changes, but we need to add them to the ordinance, so they are clear to everyone. 3. The third amendment is related to non-conforming signs. The statutes were updated to allow non- conforming signs to be replaced on property without having to come into full compliance with current standards. Mr. Farrell reiterated that because these changes were the minimum necessary for the ordinance to meet state requirements, staff would be bringing the dra�s forward for a public hearing at the March Planning Board mee�ng and that he was available for any ques�ons. The board had no discussion on the three items. At that �me a MOTION was made to adjourn the mee�ng by Pete Avery, this MOTION was seconded by Kaitlyn Rhonehouse. The MOTION was approved unanimously. Mee�ng adjourned 7:36 PM