Loading...
200707 July PBM MINUTES OF THE NEW HANOVER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD JULY 5, 2007 The New Hanover County Planning Board met Thursday, July 5, 2007 at 5:30 p.m. in the Human Resources Training Room at the New Hanover County Government Center, 230 Government Center Drive, Wilmington, NC to hold a public meeting. PLANNING BOARD PRESENT: STAFF PRESENT: Sandy Spiers, Chair Chris O'Keefe, Planning Director Melissa Gott, Vice-Chair Sam Burgess, Principal Development Planner David Adams Karyn Crichton, Administrative Specialist Sue Hayes Jane Daughtridge, Senior Planner Jay Williams Sharon Huffman, Assistant County Attorney Sand SSpiers opened the meeting by welcoming the audience to the public hearing. Sam Burgess led the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance. Sue Haves made a motion to approve the June minutes. Dave Adams seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted 6-0 to approve the minutes (Wrangell by proxy). Item 1: Special Use Permit (S-577, 7/07) - Request by Progress Energy via Golder and Associates to grant a special use permit for a sanitary landfill for handling of ash byproduct to be located off Sutton Steam Plant Road in an 1-2 Industrial zoning district. John Elliott with Progress Energy requested that the item be continued until the August or September 2007 Planning Board meeting. Sue Haves made a motion to grant a continuance of the item. Jay Williams seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted 5-0 to continue the item. Chris O'Keefe reminded the petitioner that they must be cognizant to adhere to the deadlines for public notification when continuing the item. Item 2: Rezoning (Z-866, 7/07) - Request by Cameron Company LLC via Withers & Ravenel to rezone approximately 3.55 acres located south of Albemarle Rd. and west of Judges Rd., part of parcel R0500-001-001-000 in the Urban land classification from R-10 Residential District to 1-1 Industrial District. Jane Daughtridge presented slides of the property and provided an overview of the site's history, land use, land classification, zoning, access, and level of service (LOS). Ms. Danghtridge provided the following staff summary: STAFF SUMMARY The subject property is a 3.55 acre portion of a 44.8 acre parcel located off Albemarle Road and is classified as Urban on the 2006 land classification map. Primary access for the proposed rezoned portion will be from Judges Road through a shared 30 foot access easement. Judges Road is a local public street and no Level of Service has been designated. Judges Road intersects with Market Street, which is classified as a major arterial with LOS F in this location meaning traffic counts exceed design capacity. The subject property is bordered on the west by the remainder of the parent parcel zoned R-10 residential and on the north by Wild Flower Subdivision also zoned R-10 Residential. I-1 Industrial District dominates to the south and east, being Judges Road Business Park and various uses along Market Street. The Market Street road frontage is within the City of Wilmington jurisdiction. The subject property is located within the Smith Creek watershed which carries a water quality classification of C(SW) and is listed on the 303(d) impaired waters list. The portion of the parent parcel proposed for rezoning is not located in a flood hazard area. Soils are predominately Class III, with a small amount of Class IV soil. These soil classes are generally indicative of wet conditions. Public water and sewer are available in the vicinity. Fire protection is provided in this location by the Ogden Volunteer Fire Department. Chris O'Keefe provided land use considerations and the Planning staff's recommendation. Land Use Plan Considerations: The 2006 Update of the Joint CAMA Plan describes the purpose of the Urban Class as being to provide for continued intensive development and redevelopment of existing urban areas where urban services are already in place or scheduled within the immediate future. This rezoning petition proposes a change from the county's highest density residential zoning to a light industrial district, expanding an existing I-1 zoning district. Staff Recommendation: Based on the above analysis, staff feels that this proposal is consistent with the policies of the land use plan. The small 3.55 acre portion of the parent parcel is positioned as a somewhat natural extension of the existing industrial district accessed from Judges Road. Staff recommends approval of the zoning change. Dave Adams asked to see a soil map of the property. Chris O'Keefe stated that there is a relatively small amount of Class IV soil on the property that is isolated in a corner of the lot and believed that development could occur without disturbing the soil. Cindee Wolf landscape architect, representing the Cameron Company stated that the rezoning would be an extension of the existing storage facility. Ms. Wolf stated that access would be provided solely from Judges Road and not through the Wild Flower subdivision and believed there to be no negative effects to the values of adjacent residential property. Ms. Wolf stated that the ordinance requirements for buffering and setbacks would protect the two properties nearest to the rezoning. Ms. Wolf also stated that the property had been surveyed and the small amount of wetlands that were identified can be avoided. No one spoke in opposition to the item. There were no additional Board comments. Melissa Gott made a motion to recommend approval of the item. David Adams seconded the motion. The Board voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the item. Item 3: Rezoning (Z-867, 7/07) - Request by Bethany Presbyterian Church to rezone 5.26 acres from R-20 and O&I to B-2 at 2237 and 2311 Castle Hayne Road in the Transition and Conservation Land Classifications. Jane Daughtridge presented slides of the property and gave an overview of the site's history, land use, zoning, access, and level of service (LOS). Ms. Daughtridge provided the following staff summary: STAFF SUMMARY The subject property is located in the northwest portion of the county in an area classified as Transition on the 2006 land classification map. Castle Hayne Road is a principal arterial roadway with a Level of Service F in this location, meaning traffic counts exceed design capacity. The subject property is surrounded by residential zoning on north, south, west and most of the east. Seitter Acres is west and south of the church and Heritage Park is across Castle Hayne Road to the east. Just one lot on the north of the subject property separates the existing O&I portion of the subject property from B-2 zoning which is developed with a variety of commercial enterprises. The O&I Office & Institutional zoning extends across Castle Hayne Road to the northeast. The subject property is located within the Ness Creek watershed which carries a water quality classification of C (swamp water). The center of the property is dominated by Wildcat Branch, a floodway and flood hazard area, and the area experiences significant drainage problems. A county drainage project is currently under way on the property. Soils are Class II, generally indicating moderate limitations for septic suitability. Public water and sewer is not available at this location at this time. Fire protection is provided in this location by Wrightsboro Volunteer Fire Department. Chris O'Keefe provided the following land use considerations and staff recommendation: Land Use Plan Considerations: The 2006 Update of the CAMA Plan classifies the land as Transition and Conservation; the purpose of the Transition Class is to "provide for future intensive urban development on lands that have been or will be provided with necessary urban services." Conservation lands run along the extent of Wildcat Branch through the property. Conservation classification is intended to provide long-term management and protection of significant or limited or irreplaceable natural resources while also protecting the development rights of the property owner. This rezoning petition proposes a change from Residential and O&I to Highway Business. Staff Recommendation: Based on the above analysis, staff feels that this proposal is not consistent with the policies of the land use plan. The drainage sensitivity and the lack of urban services make this site generally unsuitable for the full range of highway business uses, and the residential character of neighborhoods immediately adjacent to the site is well established. Staff recommends denial of the zoning change. Dave Adams asked for details of the area's drainage study Chris O'Keefe explained that the New Hanover County Engineering department has proposed increasing the floodway to 40 feet and clearing the drainage pipes below Castle Hayne Road to help alleviate flooding. Wayne Brown, Bethany Presbyterian Church trustee, stated that they are requesting the rezoning to facilitate the sale of their property to a plumbing business that would require a B-2 district for its operation. Mr. Brown stated that the rezoning includes the property which the church is built upon and is not slated for sale; but is included to meet with County's five acre minimum requirement for B-2 zoning. Jennifer Messer adjacent property owner spoke in opposition to the rezoning expressing concern that B-2 rezoning would bring crime and vagrancy to the area. Ms. Messer stated that Castle Hayne Road is presently over capacity and has many automobile accidents and the proposed rezoning would make the traffic situation worse. Ms. Messer stated that a B-2 zoning is not in harmony with a R-20 neighborhood and lacks transition. Ms. Messer felt that the rezoning would negatively impact the value of the neighborhood and stated that there is presently an overabundance of unoccupied business space immediate north of the area. Ms. Messer also read a letter from Roy Bruce, a neighborhood resident who could not attend the meeting. Mr. Bruce opposed the rezoning due to traffic concerns, drainage issues, and the potential for additional rezoning requests. Katrina Summers neighborhood resident submitted three letters of opposition from neighborhood residents who could not attend the meeting. Sharon Malpass neighborhood resident spoke in opposition to the rezoning stating that the rezoning would exasperate the current flooding problem and that B-2 zoning would not be compatible with the character of the neighborhood given the elderly population. Onhal Midgette neighborhood resident spoke in opposition to the rezoning stating that it would exacerbate the current flooding problem flooding. Wayne Brown stated in his rebuttal that he understands the neighbors concerns and that the prospective buyer is a plumber and the storage of his business equipment necessitates the B-2 zoning. Mr. Brown explained that the County has plans to utilize two large culverts located under Castle Hayne Road in efforts to remedy the flooding issue. Mr. Brown stated that the area upstream needs to be addressed in order to prevent future flooding. Jennifer Messer stated in her rebuttal that they are not opposing the B-2 rezoning because of a plumbing business but because of all of the possible B-2 uses that could occur in the future if the property was sold. David Adams stated that the proposed rezoning would create a stark contrast within a quiet residential area and that he would have difficulty supporting the rezoning. Dr. Adams also stated that it would be a bad idea to further develop an area that is in the 100-year floodplain. David Adams made a motion to recommend denial of the item. Sue Haves seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted 5-0 to recommend denial of the item. Sand Spiers suggested to the petitioner that they talk to the Planning staff to consider other options such as a special use permit. Chris O'Keefe informed the public that the County Commissioners will discuss a drainage project on Monday, July 9, 2007 and encouraged the public to attend. Item 4: Conditional Rezoning (Z-868, 7/07) - Request by Greenhouse Properties, LLC via Withers & Ravenel to rezone approximately 0.8 acres located on the southeast corner of Carolina Beach Rd. and Manassas Dr. in the Transition Land Classifications from R-15 Residential zoning district to CD(B-1) Conditional District Neighborhood Business for the purpose of locating a 7,500 sq. ft. commercial building with unspecified uses to be chosen from a range of 19 potential uses. Jane Danghtridge presented slides of the property and site plan. Ms. Daughtridge also provided an overview of the site's history, land use, zoning, access, and level of service (LOS). Ms. Daughtridge provided the following staff summary: STAFF SUMMARY The subject property is located in the southern portion of the county in an area classified on the 2006 CAMA Land Classification map as transition. Access is anticipated to be from Manassas Dr. near its intersection with Carolina Beach Road which is a major arterial divided roadway. Level of service on Carolina Beach Road has been rated F, meaning traffic volume exceeds capacity. The subject property is south of the Sanders Road intersection which has evolved into a commercial node. The west side of Carolina Beach Road has also stripped out into commercial districts along the divided highway frontage while the east side remains residential. The subject property is part of the Battle Park subdivision and is currently vacant and wooded. Adjacent property is all zoned R-15. To the south is the County's Battle Park site. To the north and east is the remainder of the Battle Park Subdivision and is developed with residential uses. Further north is more R-15 residential development up to Christa Apartments. The subject property is located within the Seabreeze watershed drainage area which carries a water quality classification of SA and HQW(High Quality Waters). The property is not influenced by flood hazard and no areas of 404 wetlands are indicated. The site is in a shallow water table sand aquifer. The applicant plans to utilize private well and septic system since no public services are available in this location. As a condition for rezoning, the applicant proposes that the building will be 7,500 sq. ft. gross floor area and uses will be any of 19 listed uses. A companion special use permit will bind the proposed use and restrictions to this property. Chris O'Keefe provided the following land use considerations and staff recommendations: Land Use Plan Considerations: This conditional rezoning petition proposes a change from moderate density residential zoning to a conditional use neighborhood business designation for the purpose of developing a building with no exact usage defined. The ordinance describes the situations in which conditional districts might be considered, and notes that this procedure is intended primarily for use with transitions between zoning districts of very dissimilar character (e. g. R-15 and B-2) where a particular use or uses, with restrictive conditions to safeguard adjacent land uses, can create a more orderly transition. It is not intended as a routine substitute for the general rezoning procedure, or for frequent use, because creating a large number of such specialized districts can lead to excessive administrative complexity and great difficulty in maintaining consistent and predictable land use policies. The ordinance also advises that this option is intended only for firm development proposals, and shall not be used for tentative projects without definitive plans. Between 2003 and 2006, average daily traffic volume on Carolina Beach Road increased by about 8%. Average daily traffic on Manassas Drive showed a 50% decrease during the same period. No Traffic Impact Analysis was prepared for this project and traffic generation estimates were all based on retail uses. The 2006 Update of the Joint CAMA Plan describes the purpose of the Transition class as providing for future intensive urban development on lands that have been or will be provided with necessary urban services. The location of these areas is based upon land use planning policies requiring optimum efficiency in land utilization and public service delivery. In this case, services are not present and access is anticipated from a local street rather than an arterial. There is a median break at this intersection on Carolina Beach Road. The Tarin Woods Subdivision has been preliminarily approved east of Battle Park with streets that will accommodate potential interconnectivity to Manassas Drive via Appomattox Drive. The site is just north of property purchased by the county with recreation bond funds in 1992 for use as a public park. The Parks and Recreation Department has programmed $1 million for park improvements and about $500,000 for a library on the site. Based on the foregoing, this proposal would appear to be inconsistent with the clearly established residential character of the immediately adjacent area. The suggestion of such a broad range of potential uses for the site makes the character of this request more consistent with general rezoning than a conditional district request. Particulars such as storm water retention are not included, suggesting the tentative nature of the proposal. Furthermore, the lot area does not meet the minimum size requirement for a B-1 district (2 acres) and does not constitute an expansion of an existing B-1 because the divided highway is a significant barrier to the concept of adjacency. Staff recommends denial. Chris O'Keefe provided the staff's findings of fact: PRELIMINARY STAFF FINDINGS FOR THE COMPANION SPECIAL USE PERMIT: 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. A. Private well water will serve the property. B. A private septic system will serve the project C. The property would access a local public street. D. Traffic counts decreased on Manassas Dr. between 2003 and 2006 but increased on Carolina Beach Road by about 8% in the vicinity of this site between 2003 and 2006. E. Traffic circulation system will be awkward with respect to proximity of the driveway to the intersection with Carolina Beach Road and the limited stacking capacity at the median break proposed on Manassas Dr. F. Fire Service is available from the Myrtle Grove FD. G. The property is not located in a flood hazard area. H. Storm water retention is not shown on the site plan. The parcel is less than one acre but would still be subject to the County's storm water ordinance. 2. The Board must find that the use meets all required conditions and specifications of the Zoning Ordinance. A. The property is zoned R-15 Residential District. This request is made concurrent with conditional rezoning to CD(B-1) Conditional Business District. B. The size of the property does not meet the minimum district size requirement for B-1 zoning and is separated by a 160 feet right of way from the nearest commercial areas. C. The proposed range of uses is too broad to be construed as anything other than "tentative" and therefore does not meet the spirit and intent of a conditional use district as described in Section 59.7-1. D. Petitioner proposes 27 off-street parking spaces, but the precise uses are not known, so we cannot determine if the proposal will meet the requirements of Article VIII of the New Hanover County Zoning Ordinance. Retail or office uses would be easily accommodated by this number of spaces. 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. No evidence has been submitted that this project will decrease property values of adjacent parcels. B. Storm water management must perform in compliance with the requirements of the County storm water ordinance. 4. The Board must find 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 plan of development for New Hanover County. A. The 2006 Land Use Plan identifies this area as Transition, which provides for future intensive urban development on lands that have or will have urban services. This site does not have those services. B. The residential character in this area is clearly delineated. Staff comments: 1. Staff notes Tmdings of fact that contradict the purposes of conditional use district zoning and non-compliance with the standards of the ordinance. The proposal appears to fail the test for approval. Dave Adams asked if the petitioner was made aware of the difficulty that would encounter to conditionally rezone the property and if any efforts were made to reconcile some of the issues. Scott Gerot, petitioner, owner, and Manager of Greenhouse Properties, LLC asked Cindee Wolf to present the proposed plan. Cindee Wolf, landscape architect stated that the restrictive covenants for Battle Park subdivision state that all lots must remain residential with the exception of lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 which front Carolina Beach Road. Ms. Wolf stated that the original developer of Battle Park, James Hobbs, envisioned lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 for commercial use. Ms. Wolf provided details of the site plan including septic system, well, and storm water management. Ms. Wolf explained that the project does meet the minimum size requirement through its adjacency to B-1 property located across Carolina Beach Road and that historically adjacency has not been separated by a right of way. Ms. Wolf also stated that the proposal would provide neighborhood services for residential communities without having to cross Carolina Beach Road. Dave Adams asked Cindee Wolf about the topography of the site including a depression in the northwest quadrant and stated that he had difficulty envisioning the proposed building on the site. Cindee Wolf explained that the plan required filling in the depression, grading, and removing scrub plants. Lois Kelly, adjacent property owner spoke in opposition to the rezoning stating that a business would not be harmony with the residential area. Ms. Kelly stated that she did not want to live next to a business and felt that the large population of elderly residents would not either. Cindee Wolf stated in her rebuttal that the deterioration of Battle Park subdivision is unfortunate but not relevant to the proposed plan. Ms. Wolf provided further site plan details including grading, retaining wall, and rear buffer. Ms. Wolf stated that a 100% visual screening would be required between their site and Ms. Kelly. David Adams asked Cindee Wolf about the site's runoff and drainage. Cindee Wolf stated that a storm water plan would be created that would comply with the County's storm water ordinance. Lois Kelly stated in her rebuttal that she does not want to live neat to a business and have her quality of life destroyed. Ms. Kelly disliked the idea of a pizza parlor located neat to her house and having to smell a trash dumpster and to have cars parked at late hours on her driveway. Ms. Kelly also cited several automobile accidents near the proposed site. Jay Williams stated that the petition includes too broad of a range of potential uses, many of which are not compatible with a residential area. Mr. Williams agreed that he would not want to live neat to a pizza parlor; but a business that closes in the evenings, such as a doctor's office might be more acceptable. Melissa Gott agreed with Mr. Williams' statement and added that the proposed uses were not compatible with a residential area Sue Haves concurred with Mr. Williams' and Ms. Gott's statements. Cindee Wolf requested that the item be withdrawn. Chris O'Keefe stated that since the petition is associated with a rezoning, the property is subject to a one year waiting period before any petitions could be submitted per the New Hanover County ordinance. Sam Burgess provided an update of the Technical Review Committee's (TRC) activity for the month of June: 1. Village at Motts Landing (Phase 1) - The TRC voted 3-0 to permit a second one year preliminary extension for 170 lots with original terms and conditions to the project remaining in effect. 2. Middle Sound Village - The TRC voted 4-0 to preliminarily approve 25 lots with requirements. 3. Teal Creek - The TRC voted 3-0 to preliminarily approve 14 lots with requirements. 4. Pages Cove - The TRC voted 3-0 continue the item until outstanding issues were resolved. 5. Myrtle Landing - The TRC voted 4-0 to continue the item. Sam Burgess stated that the TRC would meet neat on July 11, 2007. Chris O'Keefe stated that at the last Planning Board work session, the Board decided to amend its bylaws and remove item H, the rule that stated that quarterly meetings would be held between the Planning Board and County Commissioners to discuss proposed teat amendments. Mr. O'Keefe stated that formal action was required to amend the bylaws. Sue Hayes made a motion to remove item "H" from the bylaws of the New Hanover County Planning Board. Jay Williams seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted 5-0 to remove item "H" from its bylaws. Hearing no further business, Sand,, SSpiers adjourned the meeting at 7:07 p.m.