HomeMy WebLinkAboutSpecial Use Permits 2025SUP Page C0UNTY��F NEW HANOVER Mmm� .�n� -
100
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ORDER TOISSUE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
Special Use Permit for a Senior Living, Assisted Living Facility in an R-15, Residential District
The County Commissioners for New Hanover County (the "County Commissioners"), having held
a public hearing on K4ay5i 2025to consider application nurnberS25-OI submitted by Marcos
Vidal with Carillon Assisted Living, LLC (the "Applicant") to place Senior Living, Assisted Living
Facility oOanapproximately 1O.61 acres on land identified as Parcel Identification R02800-004-
011-000 and R02800-004-012-000 and having heard all of the evidence and arguments presented
at the hearing, the County Commissioners conclude that the Applicant produced competent,
material, and substantial evidence tending to establish the existence of the facts and conditions
which Section 10.3.5.D of the County Unified Development Ordinance requires for the issuance
ofaspecial use permit, and from the evidence adduced atthe hearing, the Commissioners make
the following FINDINGS OFFACT and draw the following CONCLUSIONS:
1.The County Commissioners FIND ASAFACT that the following specific requirements set forth
in Section 10.3.5.D /1-4>ofthe County Unified Development Ordinance WILL besatisfied if
the property is developed in accordance with the plans and findings submitted to the County
Commissioners.
/1\ The use will not mnateho||« endanger the public health or safety if located
where proposed and approved;
/2\The use meets all required conditions and specifications of the Unified
Development Ordinance;
(3) The use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting
property, orthat the use isopublic necessity; and
(4) The location and character of the use if developed according to the plan as
submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be
located and in general conformity with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan
for New Hanover County.
Page I of 5
2. Therefore, because the County Commissioners conclude that all of the general and specific
conditions precedent to the issuance of special use permit HAVE been satisfied, IT IS
ORDERED that the application for the issuance of a special use permit be GRANTED.
Ordered this 5t' of May, 2025
Page 2 of 5
Bill Rivenbark, Chair
Attest:
Kytroftwell, Clerk to the Bc ard
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact:
(in Accordance with Section 10.3.5 of the New Hanover County Unified Development
Ordinance)
Conclusion 1: The Board must find that the use will not materially endanger the public health
or safety where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and approved.
Con1piled Facts May or MAy., Not Support the Board's Conclusion
Relevant Finding of Fact Presented to Date
A. Public water and sewer are not available through CFPUA. There is a funded project to
bring CFPUA sewer to this area, starting construction in late 2025. Public water is also
planned for this area but not yet funded.
B. The subject property is located in the New Hanover County Northern Fire Service District.
C. Access to the site will be provided by a full -access driveway to a service road off Military
Cutoff Extension.
D. There are wetlands delineated on the site- 4.30 acres of them will be impacted for this
project, while 4.32 will remain undisturbed.
E. The proposed use will generate an estimated additional 18 AM/23 PM peak hour trips.
F. Military Cutoff Extension, opened in 2024, does not have current traffic counts.
Conclusion 2: The Board must find that the use meets all required conditions and specifications
of the Unified Development Ordinance.
Compiled Facts Mai or Ma Not Support the Board's Conclusion
Relevant Finding of Fact Presented to Date
A. An Assisted Living Facility is allowed by Special Use Permit in the R-15, Residential zoning
district provided that the project meets the standards of Section 4.3.2.13.4 of the Unified
Development Ordinance.
B. Section 4.3.2.B.4.a requires a minimum lot size of 5 acres. The concept plan indicates that
the two subject 5.31 -acre parcels will be recombined, resulting in a total site area of 10.61
acres.
C. Section 4.3.2.B.4.b states that maximum building height shall be limited to 35 feet when
buildings are placed within 50 feet of single-family residential lots or parcels. The concept
plan states a maximum height of 35 feet.
D. Section 4.3.2.B.4.c states that except as otherwise required by subsection b above, the
height of buildings may be increased to no more than 50 feet when setbacks are increased
to equal the proposed height of the building. The concept plan states a maximum height
of 35 feet.
Page 3 of 5
E. Section 4.3.2.B.4.d states that the site must be served by public water and sewer. The site
currently does not have oCCasJ to public water and sewer. The Lost Frontier Project /s
expected to serve this property with public sewer by the end of 2025. There is currently a
planned but unfunded project tVbringpub0cwx7t8rservic8h]thiSOrea./fappnOve6the
project cannot move h]rm/and until the water and sewer projects are complete Or the
applicant voluntarily pays t0extend utilities b7the site.
F. Section 4.3.2.B.4.e states that the rnaxinnurn impervious area shall not exceed 50 percent
of the net acreage. In areas where coastal storrnvvater rules apply, those Urnds will
supersede this provision. This site is not in o coastal stormm/oterarea. The concept plan
states that the total impervious surface on the site is I20,100squore feet. The net site
acreage of2Ll61acres equals 462272square feet. The proposed impervious surface on
the site is26percent.
G. Section 4.3.2.B.4.f states that open space and improved recreation space shall be
provided at a rate of2O percent of net acreage. Vegetative buffers of not less than ZOfeet
are required for all proposals. The conceptplan states that 2.2 acres, 21 percent, including
the courtyard amenity, are provided osopen space onthe site.
H. Section 4.S.2.B.4.gstates that frontage on an arterial orcollector roadway is required.
This site has frontage On o service nOac/ off Military Cutoff Extension, a Principal Arterial
Roadway.
|. Section 4.3.2.13.4.11h states that all other local, state or federal permits or authorizations
are required. [}ther/ncoLstate, orfedero/permits mrauthorizations will berequired before
TRC approval orCertificate of Occupancy as determined during the TRC review.
J. Table 5.l2Astates that lparking space per 3 beds isrequired. Thefoc/0ty/sexpected to
have 89 beds- this would require 30 parking spaces. 61 parking spaces are provided.
K. Table 5.4.3.13.1 states that "A|| Other Residential Uses" must provide a 20'TvpeA: Opaque
'Transitional Landscape Buffer where the development abuts undeveloped land inthe R-
15 district. The concept plan shows o 20' landscape buffer around the perimeter »fthe
parcels.
Conclusion 3;The Board must find that the use will not substantially injure the value of
adjoining or abutting property or that the use is a public necessity.
A. The proposed assisted living facility is located along a service road that serves a principal
arterial roadway. The surrounding land use includes acellular tower and vacant land.
B. The land use in the immediate vicinity ofthe subject site is zoned residentially.
C. The site is adjacent to the Hanover Reserve Planned Development which is not yet built
out.
D. No evidence has been submitted indicating whether this project will Or will not
substantially injure thevo|ueofackoiningorebuttingproperties.
Page 4 of 5
Conclusion 4: The Board must find that the location and character of the use if developed
according tothe plan as submitted and approved will beinharmony with the area in which it
is to be located and in general conformity with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for New
Hanover County.
A. The subject site iscurrently undeveloped.
B. The site is bounded by property zoned R-15 and Planned Development (PD). The Hanover
Reserve Planned Development is adjacent tothe site tothe southwest- this project is
currently not yet built out.
C. No known cultural orarchaeological resources are identified on site.
D. Existing land uses in the immediate surrounding area include a cellular tower and vacant
land.
E. The Comprehensive Plan classifies the property as Community Mixed Use. The intent of
the Community Mixed Use place type focuses on small-scale mixed -use development that
serves all modes oftraffic and includes uses such asrecreational and institutional. The
proposed use would provide an additional low -impact residential use to potential future
residential areas at a site that could act as a transition from the highway to adjacent low
density residentially zoned parcels.
Page S of S
SUP Book Page 101
COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ORDER TO DENY A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
Additional Dwelling Allowance in an R-15, Residential Zoning District
S25-02 — Tarin Woods Additional Dwelling Allowance
The County Commissioners for New Hanover County (hereinafter "County Commissioners"),
having held a public hearing on the 2nd day of June, 2025, to consider application number S25-02
submitted by applicant Attorney Samuel Potter with Equitas Law Partners, LLP, on behalf of
property owner Hoosier Daddy, LLC, for a special use permit for an Additional Dwelling Allowance
for additional density up to 10.2 dwelling units per acre in a R-15, Residential district on
approximately 43.50 acres located at 5741 Carolina Beach Road, and having heard all of the
evidence and arguments presented at the hearing, the County Commissioners make the
following CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. That the proposed use DOES NOT satisfy the second general requirement listed in the
New Hanover County Unified Development Ordinance (hereinafter "UDO"); namely that
the use meets all required conditions and specifications of the LIDO due to the following
FINDINGS OF FACT:
a. Section 3.2.8.D states the maximum building height in the R-15 district is 40 feet.
The maximum building height may go up to 44 feet for structures elevated on
open foundations consisting of piers, posts, columns or piles. Building 46 on the
concept plan is proposed at 50 feet tall, exceeding the maximum height allowed
in the R-15 district.
b. Section 3.1.3.E.2.b states the development shall have direct access to and from an
existing major or minor arterial as indicated on the most recent officially adopted
Wilmington MPO Functional Classification Map. This direct access requirement
will be satisfied if one or more property boundary lines is contiguous with and
utilizes access to and from an existing major or minor arterial, or the development
accesses an existing major or minor arterial roadway by a NCDOT-maintained
public street, or by a private street designed and constructed in accordance with
the County's minimum standards for a collector road. There was not sufficient
evidence presented to determine if Rosa Parks Land complies with the County's
access requirements.
2. That all of the specific requirements set forth in Section 10.3.5.D of the LIDO WILL NOT
be satisfied if the property is developed in accordance with the plans submitted and the
evidence in the record.
3. That the inability to meet one of the four requirements under Section 10.3.5.D means the
project must be denied. The County Commissioners, having made the FINDINGS OF FACT
and CONCLUSIONS OF LAW that the applicant's project was not supported by competent,
material, and substantial evidence showing that this project meets all required conditions
and specifications of the UDO, and understanding that failing to meet one required
condition means the project is denied, did not move forward to consider the other three
requirements.
Wherefore, all of the general and specific conditions precedent to the issuance of a special use
permit HAVE NOT been satisfied, IT IS ORDERED that the application for the issuance of a special
use permit be DENIED.
Ordered the 2nd day of June, 2025.
Signed and entered this the 16 1h day of June, 2025.
/ 2 e"� 2
LeAnn Pierce, Vice -Chair
Attest:
I
AXk 14
. . . . . . . . . .
&im-Iis
COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ORDER TO DENY A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
Mixed Use Development in a B-2, Regional Business District
524-04 - Bayshore Townhomes Multi -Family in B-2
The County Commissioners for New Hanover County (hereinafter "County Commissioners"),
having held an evidentiary hearing on the 2nd day of September, 2025, to consider application
number S24-04 submitted 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 of commercial space in a B-2, Regional Business district on a 3.21-
acre parcel of land located at 8138 Market Street, and having heard all of the evidence and
arguments presented at the hearing, the County Commissioners make the following
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. That the applicant submitted two applications to New Hanover County for special
use permits. One is referred to as S24-04, which sought a special use permit for
Multi -Family in an area zoned B-2, and a second which is referred to as S24-05,
which sought a special use permit for an Additional Dwelling Allowance in an area
zoned R-1 5.
2. The applicant's application for each special use permit contained a proposed
condition that each special use permit "shall not be effective without the approval of
the separate SUP pertaining to the overall project..."
3. The applicant's application for each special use permit contained a proposed
condition that "the property comprising the overall project will be combined under
common ownership, and the project thereafter will be master planned and
developed as such pursuant to the provisions of the subject SUPs."
4. The "overall project" as used by the applicant means both S24-04 and S24-05.
5. S24-04 and S24-05 must be considered together in total.
6. The Annual Average Daily Trip (AADT) Planning Capacity for Market Street is 41,369
trips.
7. The Annual Average Daily Trip (AADT) Latest Traffic Volume for Market Street is
43,000 trips.
8. Market Street is currently above capacity.
9. The applicant's Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) completed in 2023 and supplemented in
2024 by a technical memorandum estimated that 525-04 and S25-05 would
generate an additional 124 AM peak hour trips and 174 PM peak hour trips.
10. Based on the affidavit and report of Zach Bugg, Phd1, PE2 , the applicant's TIA
understated the likely traffic impact of S25-04 and S25-05, by using an assumed
background annual growth of 1 % instead of 2%, using trip generation estimates
based on ITE land use code 220 instead of ITE land use code 215, by incorrectly
asserting that traffic volumes in the vicinity have decreased since the 2023 opening
of Military Cutoff Extension, and by making no mention of several other
developments approved by the Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Organization
(WIVIPO) prior to the project's revised 2027 build -out date.
11. Access to the property is provided by a single right -in, right -out access onto Market
Street, An emergency -only access gate is proposed for Brays Drive.
12. Based on the testimony, affidavit, and report of Michael E. Bearak, IVISP', CSHM',
CS M p5, the increase in traffic density and traffic flow, along with the single right -in
right -out onto Market Street will result in many drivers, who are attempting to travel
south, cutting across multiple lanes of traffic to make a U-turn at Cypress Way Pond,
which is only 250 feet from the proposed drive, increasing all hazards to motorists
on Market Street and making Market Street more dangerous.
13. Based on the testimony, affidavit, and report of Michael E. Bearak, MSP, CSHM,
CSMP, that the single access point will require all vehicular traffic for the 242
dwelling units in S25-05, having to travel through this portion of the project which
will include both multi -family residential and commercial uses, which will place both
motorists and pedestrians in danger.
14, Porter's Neck Elementary and Laney High School are over capacity.
15. Based on the testimony, affidavit, and report of Michael E. Bearak, IVISP, CSHM,
CSIVIP, the overcrowding of the public schools assigned to this area can decrease
educational quality and create a greater risk of violence due to: greater noise and
distractions, less personalized instruction, increases in disciplinary problems, poor
buildings or environmental conditions, and increases in illness risks.
1 PhD, Civil Engineering, North Carolina State University.
2 Professional Engineer in North Carolina, Maryland, and Virginia.
3 Master Safety Professional, National Association of Safety Professionals.
4 Certified Safety Health Manager, Institute of Hazardous Materials Management.
5 Certified Safety Management Practitioner, Institute of Hazardous Materials Management.
16. Based on the affidavit of Ernest W. Olds, AIA1, the overall project creates a
development that is more consistent with a dense urban core of larger cities as the
buildings create "long walls" along the vehicular paths, and because the units would
have only very small front lawns and no rear yards, thereby creating a development
that is not in harmony with the surrounding area.
17. Based on the affidavit of Michael Rose, a former North Carolina town manager and
experienced local government planning professional, that the overall project is not
in harmony and not consistent with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan, because the
majority of the overall project is outside the Porter's Neck High Growth Node of New
Hanover County's 2016 Comprehensive Plan, and the proposed uses create a
significant difference in density compared to the existing low -density development,
and the overall project area is not an appropriate transition area.
18. This subject property is shown as Urban Mixed Use in the 2016 Comprehensive
Plan.
19. This subject property is adjacent to commercially zoned properties to the north,
south, and west. The site is adjacent to industrially zoned property to the west and
then lower density residentially zoned parcels.
20. This application seeks a density of 19.3 dwelling units per acre.
21. This application must be considered together with 525-05, and when considered
together the overall density of the project is 9.5 dwelling units per acre.
22. The proposed density of the overall project of 9.5 dwelling units per acre is not
"generally consistent with the nearby communities" as stated in the 2016
Comprehensive Plan.
23. The proposed single access is functionally equivalent to a cul-de-sac which is
discouraged under the 2016 Comprehensive Plan and therefore not in general
conformity with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan.
24. The proposed use of the overall project is substantially more dense than the
surrounding uses and is not in harmony with the area.
Based on the foregoing FINDINGS OF FACT, the County Commissioners make the following
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
6 Member of American Institute of Architects, and a registered architect in North Carolina, Delaware,
Maryland, South Carolina and Virginia.
1. That the proposed use DOES NOT satisfy 10.3.5.D.1. the first general requirement
listed in the New Hanover County Unified Development Ordinance (hereinafter
"UDO"); namely the requirement that the use will not materially endanger the public
health or safety if located where proposed and developed according to the plan as
submitted and approved.
2. That the UDO's inclusion of this special use as a possible use in this zoning district
creates a rebuttable presumption that this use is in harmony with the surrounding
area and in general conformity with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for New
Hanover County; and that opponents presented substantial, competent, and
material evidence to rebut this presumption, and therefore the County
Commissioners conclude that the proposed use DOES NOT satisfy 10.3.5.D.4 the
fourth general requirement listed in the UDO; namely the requirement that the
location and character of the use if developed according to the plan as submitted
and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in
general conformity with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for New Hanover County.
3. That the inability to meet any of the four requirements under Section 10.3.5.D means
the project must be denied. The County Commissioners, having made the FINDINGS
OF FACT and CONCLUSIONS OF LAW that the applicant's project does not satisfy all
the required conditions and specifications of the UDO, and understanding that failing
to meet two required conditions means the project is denied.
Wherefore, all of the general and specific conditions precedent to the issuance of a special
use permit HAVE NOT been satisfied, IT IS ORDERED that the application for the issuance of
a special use permit be DENIED.
Ordered the 2 n' day of September, 2025.
Signed and entered this the 15 th day of September, 2025.
T"Y
William E. Rivenbark, Chair
Nq
A
Attest:
K berleigh &trowell, Clerk to the Board
COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ORDER TO DENY A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
Additional Dwelling Allowance in an R-1 5, Residential Zoning District
524-05 - Bayshore Townhornes Additional Dwelling Allowance in R-15
The County Commissioners for New Hanover County (hereinafter "County
Commissioners"), having held an evidentiary hearing on the 2 nd day of September, 2025, to
consider application number S24-05 submitted by Bayshore Townhomes, LLC, applicant, on
behalf of Herbert Parham, property owners, for a special use permit for an Additional
Dwelling Allowance for 242 row -style dwelling units in a R-1 5, Residential district on a
30.22-acre parcel of land located at the 8100 block of Market Street, and having heard all of
the evidence and arguments presented at the hearing, the County Commissioners make
the following FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. That the applicant submitted two applications to New Hanover County for special
use permits. One is referred to as S24-04, which sought a special use permit for
Multi -Family in an area zoned B-2, and a second which is referred to as S24-05,
which sought a special use permit for an Additional Dwelling Allowance in an area
zoned R-1 5.
2. The applicant's application for each special use permit contained a proposed
condition that each special use permit "shall not be effective without the approval of
the separate SUP pertaining to the overall project..."
3. The applicant's application for each special use permit contained a proposed
condition that "the property comprising the overall project will be combined under
common ownership, and the project thereafter will be master planned and
developed as such pursuant to the provisions of the subject SUPS."
4. The "overall project" as used by the applicant means both S24-04 and S24-05.
S. S24-04 and S24-05 must be considered together in total.
6. The Annual Average Daily Trip (AADT) Planning Capacity for Market Street is 41,369
trips.
7. The Annual Average Daily Trip (AADT) Latest Traffic Volume for Market Street is
43,000 trips.
8. Market Street is currently above capacity.
9. The applicant's Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) completed in 2023 and supplemented in
2024 by a technical memorandum estimated that 525-04 and S25-05 would
generate an additional 124 AM peak hour trips and 174 PM peak hour trips.
10. Based on the affidavit and report of Zach Bugg, Phd', PE2 , the applicant's TIA
understated the likely traffic impact of S25-04 and S25-05, by using an assumed
background annual growth of 1 % instead of 2%, using trip generation estimates
based on ITE land use code 220 instead of ITE land use code 215, by incorrectly
asserting that traffic volumes in the vicinity have decreased since the 2023 opening
of Military Cutoff Extension, and by making no mention of several other
developments approved by the Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Organization
(WIVI PO) prior to the project's revised 2027 build -out date.
11. Access to the property is provided by a single right -in, right -out access onto Market
Street. An emergency -only access gate is proposed for Bra)(s Drive.
12. Based on the testimony, affidavit, and report of Michael E. Bearak, MSp3, CSH M4,
CSMp5, the increase in traffic density and traffic flow, along with the single right -in
right -out onto Market Street will result in many drivers, who are attempting to travel
south, cutting across multiple lanes of traffic to make a U-turn at Cypress Way Pond,
which is only 250 feet from the proposed drive, increasing all hazards to motorists
on Market Street and making Market Street more dangerous.
13. Based on the testimony, affidavit, and report of Michael E. Bearak, MSP, CSHM,
CSIVIP, that the single access point will require all vehicular traffic for the 242
dwelling units having to travel through the mixed -use portion (multi -family
residential and commercial uses proposed in S25-04) of the overall project which
will place both motorists and pedestrians in danger.
14. Porter's Neck Elementary and Laney High School are over capacity.
15. Based on the testimony, affidavit, and report of Michael E. Bearak, IVISP, CSHM,
CSIVIP, the overcrowding of the public schools assigned to this area can decrease
educational quality and create a greater risk of violence due to: greater noise and
distractions, less personalized instruction, increases in disciplinary problems, poor
buildings or environmental conditions, and increases in illness risks.
1 PhD, Civil Engineering, North Carolina State University.
2 Professional Engineer in North Carolina, Maryland, and Virginia.
3 Master Safety Professional, National Association of Safety Professionals.
4 Certified Safety Health Manager, Institute of Hazardous Materials Management.
5 Certified Safety Management Practitioner, Institute of Hazardous Materials Management.
16. Based on the affidavit of Ernest W. Olds, AIA6 , the project creates a development
that is more consistent with a dense urban core of larger cities as the buildings
create "long walls" along the vehicular paths, and because the units would have only
very small front lawns and no rear yards, thereby creating a development that is not
in harmony with the surrounding area.
17. The vast majority of the subject property in 524-05 is not within the Porter's Neck
High Growth Node of New Hanover County's 2016 Comprehensive Plan.
18. Based on the affidavit of Michael Rose, a former North Carolina town manager and
experienced local government planning professional, that the project is not in
harmony and not consistent with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan, because it is
outside the Porter's Neck High Growth Node of New Hanover Count)(s 2016
Comprehensive Plan, and the proposed uses create a significant difference in
density compared to the existing low -density development, and the subject property
is not an appropriate transition area.
19. This subject property is shown as General Residential in the 2016 Comprehensive
Plan.
20. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan defines General Residential as:
This place type focuses on lower -density housing and associated civic and
commercial services. Housing for the area is typically single-family or
duplexes... Access to areas outside these residential areas are provided by arterial
roadways, but still allow for interconnection between other place types. Limiting cul-
de-sacs is encouraged to promote better internal circulation and minimize high -
volume traffic roads within the area. Types of uses include single-family residential,
low -density multi -family residential, light commercial, civic, and recreational ... The
ideal density for multi- and single-family residential is low (ranging up to
approximately eight units per acre). Density within the General Residential place
type may be limited by flood plain, wetlands, or other natural or manmade features
and generally should be consistent with nearby communities,
21. Adjacent properties to the north, south, and east are single family residential.
Properties to the west, towards Market Street, are a mix of commercial and
residentially zoned property.
22. This application seeks a density of 8.37 dwelling units per acre.
6 Member of American Institute of Architects, and a registered architect in North Carolina, Delaware,
Maryland, South Carolina and Virginia.
23. This application must be considered together with 525-04, and when considered
together the overall density of the project is 9.5 dwelling units per acre.
24. The proposed density of 9.5 dwelling units per acre is greater than the "ideal
density" of approximately 8 dwelling units per acre as stated in the 2016
Comprehensive Plan.
25. The proposed density of 9.5 dwelling units per acre is not "generally consistent with
the nearby communities" as stated in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan.
26. The proposed single access is functionally equivalent to a cul-de-sac which is
discouraged under the 2016 Comprehensive Plan and therefore not in general
conformity with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan.
27. The proposed use is substantially more dense than the surrounding uses and is not
in harmony with the area.
Based on the foregoing FINDINGS OF FACT, the County Commissioners make the following
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
That the proposed use DOES NOT satisfy 10.3.5.D.1. the first general requirement
listed in the New Hanover County Unified Development Ordinance (hereinafter
"UDO"); namely the requirement that the use will not materially endanger the public
health or safety if located where proposed and developed according to the plan as
submitted and approved.
2. That the UDO's inclusion of this special use as a possible use in this zoning district
creates a rebuttable presumption that this use is in harmony with the surrounding
area and in general conformity with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for New
Hanover County; and that opponents presented substantial, competent, and
material evidence to rebut this presumption, and therefore the County
Commissioners conclude that the proposed use DOES NOT satisfy 10.3.5.D.4 the
fourth general requirement listed in the UDO; namely the requirement that the
location and character of the use if developed according to the plan as submitted
and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in
general conformity with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for New Hanover
County.
3, That the inability to meet any of the four requirements under Section 10.3.5.D
means the project must be denied. The County Commissioners, having made the
FINDINGS OF FACT and CONCLUSIONS OF LAW that the applicant's project does not
satisfy all the required conditions and specifications of the UDO, and understanding
that failing to meet two required conditions means the project is denied.
Wherefore, all of the general and specific conditions precedent to the issuance of a special
use permit HAVE NOT been satisfied, IT IS ORDERED that the application for the issuance of
a special use permit be DENIED.
Ordered the 2 n' day of September, 2025.
Signed and entered this the 15 th day of September, 2025.
... .. . .. ...
.. . .
William E. Rivenbark, Chair
43&
Attest:
/Y
Is
Ll
Kymberleigh G. Q/ 6well, Clerk to the Board