200407 July PBM
MINUTES OF THE
NEW HANOVER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD MEETING
July 1, 2004
The New Hanover County Planning Board met Thursday, July 1, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. in the
County Court House, 24 North Third Street, Wilmington, NC to hold a public meeting.
Members Present: Staff Present:
McKinley Dull, Chairman Baird Stewart, Senior Planner
David Girardot Sam Burgess, Planner
Michael Keenan Linda Keough, Administrative Secretary
David Adams Holt Moore, Assistant County Attorney
Walter Conlogue, Vice Chairman
Members Absent:
Frank Smith
Robin Robinson
Chairman McKinley Dull opened the meeting by welcoming the audience to the public
hearing. Sam Burgess led the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Chairman
Dull proceeded with the approval of the minutes. Michael Keenan moved to approve the
June minutes. Walter Conlogue seconded the motion. The Board approved the June
2004 minutes by a vote of 5-0.
Chairman Dull informed the audience that Item 6: Special Use Permit request by Design
Solutions for Bradley Point LLC to expand an existing Membership Sports and
Recreation Club into an existing O&I Office and Institutional District had been
withdrawn and will not be heard. Chairman Dull then proceeded with the first hearing
item.
Item 1: Rezoning: Request by Carlton Fisher for Jere LeGwin to rezone
approximately 2.3 acres of property located in the Southwest corner of Mendanhall
Drive and Market Street from Conditional Use B-2 and R-15 to O&I Office and
Institutional (Z-778, 07/04).
Baird Stewart presented the slides and gave a brief review of the site's history, land use,
zoning and related information.
Walter Conlogue asked the applicant if he was planning to get a curb cut from Market
Street. Carlton Fisher, applicant, replied that he was not adding one there but at the
entrance from Mendenhall Drive.
Chairman Dull asked for comments in favor or opposition. There were no speakers.
Chairman Dull closed public comment.
1
STAFF SUMMARY:
The July 2004 Planning Board Public Hearing marks the eighth anniversary of the first
rezoning that was requested for the subject property. In July 1996 the subject property
was rezoned to CD (B-2) for use as a retail nursery. Ultimately the retail nursery did not
materialize and the property was rezoned back to R-15 Residential with the comment
"future rezoning for this site should only be considered when the owner had firm
development plans for the land." However, in the spring of 2001 the owner presented a
small-scale office retail conditional use site plan, which ultimately expired in the spring
of 2003 as a result of inactivity.
While this may seem like a pattern, there are two likely explanations for the inactivity on
this parcel. One explanation is that the owner who is also the developer of the Country
Haven Subdivision is seeking a compatible use and neighbor for the property and the
other explanation is that the subject property is located in a transition area between
Porter's Neck and Ogden. A significant amount of strip development has occurred along
Market Street from the City limits to Ogden. Proceeding north from Ogden the
commercial development begins to diminish somewhat up to the regional commercial
node that is developing at Porter's Neck Shopping Center. In anticipation of the I-140
interchange near Porter's Neck there has been a development boom in this corridor
between the subject property and Futch Creek Road. Other vacant commercial tracts
between Ogden and the subject property are preparing for development as well.
The subject property is designated Urban Transition by the Comprehensive Plan, is
within the Urban Growth Boundaries, and water and sewer is available nearby. The site
is adjacent to an established church, the O&I parcel across Mendenhall is under
construction, and while the staff has not supported previous rezoning efforts on the
subject parcel, establishing an O&I zoning to the north and the residential districts south
of the subject property. Based on the current pattern of development, the consistency
with the Comprehensive Plan, and the use of the O&I District parcel to establish a
transition for office and institutional uses, staff recommends approval.
Michael Keenan made a motion to recommend approval of the rezoning request as
submitted. Walter Conlogue seconded the motion. The Board voted 5-0 in favor of the
motion. This item will be heard at the August 2, 2004 County Commission meeting.
Item 2: Rezoning - Request by Joe Taylor for Gateway Church to rezone
approximately 4.07 acres of property located at 6631 and 6639 Gordon Road
adjacent to Farrington Farms Subdivision from O&I Office and Institutional to
CD(I-1) Conditional Use Light Industrial for a mini warehouse project (Z-779,
07/04).
Baird Stewart presented the slides and gave a brief review of the site's history, land use,
zoning and related information.
The applicant, Joe Taylor, Attorney representing Gateway Church, stated that this is not a
request for a mini-warehouse but is a residential storage unit. Mr. Taylor provided an
2
overview of the proposed facility and explained that the proposed facility generates only
24 traffic trips per day and is visually low profile.
Mr. Girardot asked how this project would exclude commercial users. Mr. Tam replied
that it will not happen because the facility is not built or catered to that type of use. Mr.
Taylor added that the hours of operation and limited use does not allow for commercial
use. Mr. Taylor further stated that the Board could recommend prohibiting any use other
than residential storage.
William Ambrose Project Contractor, stated that the lighting on the proposed site would
be halogen lighting faced into the facility and can be made not to disturb surrounding
properties.
David Adams asked how many units are proposed. Mr. Taylor replied by stating that 500
units are proposed.
Baird Stewart stated that he had received the tree survey and noted that there were three
trees on the property that could be considered significant trees and need to be protected.
He added that there is one other tree that should be looked at to determine if it is a
significant tree.
Patricia Lepiarz, resident of Farrington Farms abutting property, stated that the
comparable storage facility in Carolina Beach has a traffic light for entering and leaving
the property and this project does not. She also stated concerns of vans and pickup
trucks coming and leaving the property on Gordon Road.
Nancy Lepiarz, resident, stated that the road is 24' wide and there is a 6' fence, which
does not buffer noise. The building would take away the trees that now buffer noise. Ms.
Lepiarz also stated that she is concerned about losing birds in her back yard and feels that
this project would decrease the value of her property.
Mr. Taylor stated that he would talk to the neighbors and show them what he is
proposing. Mr. Tam added that he felt that the neighbors should look at the fact that if
this project is not approved office strip buildings could go in and generate many more
traffic trips in a day.
STAFF SUMMARY:
The subject property is located at the intersection of Gordon Road and Ogden Park Drive.
The petitioner is requesting a rezoning from O&I Office and Institutional to CD(I-1) for a
Mini-Warehouse project. This area of the County is developing rapidly. The
construction of Ogden Park is in its final stages. The eastern end of Gordon Road from
Ogden Park to Military Cutoff has recently been widened and improved. New
development in the area is beginning to establish itself and present a finished appearance.
Across Gordon Road from the subject site is an established I-1 Light Industrial Zoning
district which has a variety of uses including convenience service stations, office and
institutional uses and industrial uses. Recently, the Board approved a Conditional Use I-
3
1 Light Industrial Office Park adjacent to the Gresham Place Apartments further west and
across Gordon Road. The Conditional Use rezoning across the road was presented once
as a straight rezoning and then modified to a conditional use rezoning primarily to
establish a commercial/industrial boundary and to protect the nearby residents.
Ultimately several conditions were placed on that project including a condition
prohibiting Mini-Warehouses.
The zoning on the north side of Gordon Road is primarily residential. Nearby uses are
predominantly institutional type uses with the Public Park and Eaton elementary School
that are typically found in established neighborhoods. The subject property is in a
transitional area between these land uses and the residential developments to the west
along the north side of Gordon Road. Nine lots in the Farrington Farms subdivision abut
the property. The transitional nature of the subject property is likely the reason that it has
been the subject of 2 other zoning cases in the last 4 years. The site is also heavily
wooded with several significant trees along the front.
In August 2000 the Planning Board unanimously recommended approval of a rezoning
request for Office and Institutional for a portion of the subject site. At the same meeting,
however, the Planning Board voted 5-1 to recommend denial of a special use permit for a
convenience store on the property. Ultimately The Board of Commissioners denied the
zoning change. In November 2002 the Planning Board heard a rezoning request for B-1
Neighborhood Business which was ultimately modified to O&I and was eventually
approved by the Board of Commissioners.
Given its location on the heavily traveled Gordon Road and triangular shape of the
property the subject site would be difficult to develop residentially, therefore, Staff
continues to believe that O&I Office and Institutional is the appropriate zoning for the
property and offers the most protection for surrounding neighbors. Staff recommends
Denial.
PRELIMINARY STAFF FINDINGS:
1. The Board must find 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.
A. The Subject property is located within the Ogden VFD.
B. Proposed access to the site is from Gordon Road, Gordon Road is classified
by the New Hanover County Thoroughfare Classification Plan as a Collector
Road.
C. The site will be served by County water and sewer.
2. The Board must find that the use meets all required conditions and specifications of
the zoning ordinance.
A. The applicant is proposing 73,100 s.f. of mini-warehouse space and a 40'00'
office with 4 parking spaces.
B. A site plan that can meet the landscaping, setback, and buffer requirements of
the ordinance has been submitted and reviewed. However the tree survey for
the site is incomplete.
4
C. Two significant trees including a 45' Oak are proposed for removal. If
removed as proposed these trees shall be mitigated in accordance with section
67 of the ordinance.
D. Although actual landscape plans are not shown on the plan, there is sufficient
area shown to accommodate landscaping and buffering.
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 western property line of the subject property abuts Farrington Farms
Subdivision, which is an R-10 performance residential subdivision. Zoning
on the adjacent parcels to the east is O&I Office and Institutional.
B. Zoning across Gordon Road from the property is zoned I-1 Light Industrial.
C. In addition to abutting nine existing homes in Farrington Farms the subject
property is across the street from Ogden Park and Eaton Elementary School.
D. A recent conditional use rezoning less than 100 feet away across Gordon Road
from the subject property was approved with the condition that mini-
warehouses are not permitted.
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 site is classified Developed by the New Hanover County Comprehensive
Plan. The purpose of the Developed class is to provide for continued
intensive development and redevelopment in existing urban areas. These
areas are already developed at a density approaching 1,500 units per square
mile. Urban services are already in place or scheduled within the immediate
future.
Recommended Planning Staff Conditions:
1. The proposed removal of the two significant trees should be denied
2. Lighting should be confined to the site and directed away from the Farrington
Farms Subdivision.
3. Limited hours of operation shall be established.
4. Architectural controls as proposed by the applicant shall apply.
5. Security fencing along Ogden Park Drive should be consistent with the estate
style fencing proposed along the Gordon Road frontage.
6. Access should be limited to one curb out on Gordon Road. (if this were an office
type use an access to Ogden Park Drive would be appropriate)
7. The fence along the bufferyard adjacent to Farrington Farms shall be at least 8'
high and the Board may want to consider requiring a wall and additional buffer
width to provide additional noise protection and reduce long-term maintenance
issues associated with a wood fence.
David Adams stated that he was concerned with the traffic findings and
commercialization of the property.
5
Michael Keenan stated that the applicant's other mini-storage facility in Carolina Beach
abuts to residential property but does recommend that the neighbors see the down side to
denying this project and decide what they would like to see go before the Commissioners.
He further stated that this use may be considered less intrusive than other uses that could
be on this property.
David Girardot stated that this is a warehouse and is inappropriate in this setting
Walter Conlogue stated that not long ago the Planning Board put a condition on a
property across the street that a warehouse would not go onto the property. Mr.
Conlogue further stated that this is, however, one of the least intrusive types of uses for
the property.
Chairman Dull stated that this would not be a bad use for this location. He added that he
is concerned that there is too much on Gordon Road in that area. Chairman Dull stated
his concerns with having two driveways on Gordon Road. Mr. Taylor replied that the
two driveways are due to saving trees on the property.
Walter Conlogue suggested bringing the project back with a redesign, additional
landscaping and downsizing the project.
Michael Keenan made a motion to recommend denying the zoning request in the current
condition stating that there should be a reduction in the number of units, moving the units
back on the property not allowing access behind these units except for fencing and
landscaping, increased landscaping and buffering on all 4 sides, and including staff's
recommended conditions. Motion was seconded by David Adams. The Board voted 5-0
in favor of the motion to deny the request.
Item 3: Special Use Permit - Request by Karen McIntyre for a Special use Permit
to operate a Child Daycare Facility for 12 children in an R-10 Residential District
located at 4530 Noland Drive in the Churchill Estates Subdivision (S-520, 07/04)
Baird Stewart presented the slides and gave a brief review of the site's history, land use,
zoning and related information.
Karen McIntyre, applicant, explained that she is licensed by the State to care for 5
children and is applying for the special use because it is a State requirement in order to
have after school children in her home.
PRELIMINARY STAFF FINDINGS:
A. The board must find 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.
a. The subject property is located within the Winter Park VFD
b. The site has access to Noland Drive which is a public right-of-way
c. The site is served by County Water and private Sewer/Septic
6
d. The proposed use will occur in an existing home that is currently used as an
in-home daycare for 5 children or less
B. The Board must find that the use meets all required conditions and specifications of
the zoning ordinance.
a. Child Daycare is permitted by special use permit in the R-10 District. The
subjectparcel is approximately 12,000 s.f. and is zoned R-10.
b. There is sufficient space to accommodate ingress, egress, and parking in a
manner to provide access without backing onto the public right of way.
c. There is an existing fenced play area.
d. No outside signs are proposed.
e. Operation of the facility shall comply with the provisions of the General
Statutes of the State of North Carolina and other applicable federal or local
codes.
f No new buildings are proposed.
C. 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 subject property is located in an R-10 residential district.
b. Child Daycare facilities are permitted by special use permit in all residential
districts.
c. Child Daycare facilities are operated in numerous homes throughout the
County. Some Child Daycare Facilities have been approved in close
proximity within Churchill Estates.
D. 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 site is classified as Developed by the New Hanover County
Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of the developed class is to provide for
continued intensive development and redevelopment of existing urban areas.
b. Several policies in the Comprehensive Plan support establishing programs for
elderly, special needs, and children.
STAFF COMMENTS:
1. In 1996 a daycare on Ray Drive nearby was approved with 5 pre-school children and
3 after school children.
2. Reducing the number of children may alleviate some neighbors concerns
David Adams made motion to approve the special use request allowing 10 children.
David Girardot seconded the motion. The Board voted 4-1 in favor of the motion with
Chairman Dull opposed.
7
Item 4. Special Use Permit - Request by Brian and Pamela Donnalley for a Special
Use Permit to operate an Indoor/Outdoor Recreation Establishment in an R-20
Residential district located at 7325 Darden Road on the west side between Middle
Sound Loop Road and Wendover Lane (5-521, 07/04)
Pamela Donnallev, applicant, explained their background and involvement in the Middle
Sound area and their intentions to provide this recreational facility to the area. Ms.
Donnallev explained that they were aware that the proposed retention pond may need to
be moved on the property and the bathhouse would only be approximately 600 sq. ft. She
explained that they have placed some self-imposed restrictions on their application which
include no P.A. system, no alcoholic beverages, hours of operation from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00
p.m., no hosting of swim teams, interior perimeter fencing, and low lighting on the
facility. Mr. Donnallev stated that they were willing to dedicate 2/3 of the property to
buffering and the fence would be placed inside the wooded boundary. Mr. Donnallev
further stated that they would like their project to be secluded from the residential areas
but want the residents to be involved.
Mr. Keenan was concerned that the tennis courts would be too close to the residential
homes.
Hal Teimage, resident of Middlepoint, stated that he did not know of any other facility of
this type in the area and feels that this project offers amenities that he would like and
would like to see it approved.
Anne Lorenz, resident of Middle Sound Loop, stated that she lived in California for a
number of years and was a member of a similar facility and loved it. She feels that this
facility is needed.
Gretchen Estes 3405 Graylyn Terrace, stated that she is in support of this project.
John Moran, 224 Wendover Lane, stated that he would be happier with the Donnelly's
project with a 60' buffer than some other development.
William Aaron 232 Wendover Lane, stated that he is not opposed to the project but
would like to be sure that the next person who owns the property cannot change the
restrictions.
Betty Russell, 7337 and 7341 Darden, presented a petition against the project and stated
that she would like a 60' buffer around the entire perimeter of the project. She stated that
she is also concerned about the environmental and noise factors in addition to the fact
that no traffic study has been done.
Phil Triece stated that he was at the Homeowner's Association meeting the evening
before to discuss the project with the Donnalleys. He stated that they had agreed on a 60'
buffer around the entire perimeter of the property at the meeting and feels that the
Donnalley's should stand by the agreement. He was also concerned that there was no
traffic study done as well as the requirement for turn lanes.
8
Gloria Adams 221 Bloomington Lane, stated that she against the project since her
property abuts the proposed project.
Karen Hilla, 622 Timber Lake Lane, stated that she purchased some property on the
Middle Sound Road and will be building some homes in that area. She stated that there
are no permits for this proposed project for water and sewer, etc. She also stated that she
is concerned about the parking.
Mrs. Donnalley stated that 2600 sq. ft. of parking space is opened to the club members.
She also stated that there would be a snack bar.
PRELIMINARY STAFF FINDINGS:
1. The board must find 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.
A. The subject property is located within the Ogden VFD.
B. The site is served by private water and County Sewer.
C. Access to the site is from Darden Road, which is a Public Right of Way.
D. The Subject property is in the Pages Creek Drainage area.
E. Proximity to the SA waters may affect the stormwater management for the
project.
F. According to the "Soil Survey of New Hanover County, North Carolina," the soils
onsite are a combination of Leon Sand and Murville fine sand which are both
class III soils with the seasonal high water table at or near the surface.
2. The Board must find that the use meets all required conditions and
specifications of the zoning ordinance.
A. The site is located in an R-20 Residential Zoning District. Indoor/Outdoor
recreation facilities are permitted by special use permit in the R-20 Residential
Zoning District.
B. A site plan which meets the requirements of the ordinance has been submitted.
C. Adequate landscaping and buffering can be accommodated to protect adjoining
residential uses from lights and noise.
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 site is heavily wooded with dense new and old growth trees.
B. There are existing homes on Wendover Lane and on other nearby properties to the
east and west.
C. No evidence has been presented that the proposed use will injure the value of
adjoining or abutting property values.
9
D. The proposed Indoor/Outdoor Recreation Facility will provide residents of
Middle Sound, Wendover North and surrounding neighborhoods recreational
opportunities that are not otherwise available nearby.
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 site is classified as Resource Protection by the New Hanover County
Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of the Resource Protection Class is to provide
for the preservation and protection of important natural, historic, scenic, wildlife
and recreational resources. Commercial uses are allowed provided important
resources are not adversely impacted.
B. Policies in The Comprehensive Plan support locating commercial and recreational
uses in close proximity to the markets they serve.
STAFF COMMENTS:
1) Site disturbance shall be confined to the minimum area needed to construct the
facility. Stormwater management may limit the size of the facility.
2) All areas outside the limits of disturbance shall be retained as undisturbed buffer area.
3) Pond should be moved into the site to accommodate additional buffer and tree
retention in the northwestern corner.
4) Buffering shall be supplemented as necessary in the setbacks in accordance with
section 67.
David Adams stated that he felt that the project would add positive values and the
applicant has accommodated the residents. However, he is concerned that the applicant
is not familiar with the property as well as the fact that they have no topography and not
much knowledge of the drainage on the property.
Mr. Conlogue stated that the applicant should meet with the staff to decide where the
retention pond should be placed due to the wetlands on the property. Mr. Conlogue
further stated that the applicant should place a 60' buffer around the property as requested
by the homeowners. He suggested that it would be more fair to the members of the
community to have swim meets with a limit to only one home team and one competing
team at a time.
Michael Keenan explained that this is a special use in a residential area, which is
permitted. They would not be turning it into commercial property. Mr. Keenan added
that he would like to see the 60' buffer.
Chairman Dull felt that the project would be good for the area
Mr. Conlogue made a motion to approve the special use request with the staff's four
comments, the list from the prior evenings homeowners' meeting, a 60' buffer and the
Donnalley's self-imposed restrictions, which include no PA system, and only two
10
competing teams at a time. The motion was seconded by Michael Keenan. The Board
voted 5-0 in favor of the motion.
Baird Stewart reminded the applicant that they should submit a revised site plan and the
project would be heard at the August 2, 2004 County Commission meeting.
Item 5: Zoning Text Amendment - Request by Design Solutions to Amend Section
50.5 The Table of Permitted Uses of the New Hanover County Zoning Ordinance to
permit Membership Sports and Recreation Facilities by Special Use Permit in the
O&I Office and Institutional District. (A-337, 07/04).
Baird Stewart explained the request and reviewed the staff summary.
If approved an "S" would be placed in the appropriate column of Section 50.5 The
Permitted Use Table.
STAFF SUMMARY:
The applicant proposes to amend the table of permitted uses to allow "Membership
Sports and Recreation Facilities," by special use permit in the O&I Office and
Institutional District. The justification for this request is that currently the Ordinance
allows "Indoor & Outdoor Recreation Establishments Commercially Operated" by
special use permit in the O&I Office and Institutional District.
Comparing these two closely related uses and the districts where they are permitted,
brings to question why there is a distinction between Membership Sports and Recreation
and Commercially Operated Indoor/Outdoor recreation. The distinction comes from the
historic context. In 1969 when the Zoning Ordinance was adopted Indoor Recreation was
a permitted use in the B-2 District and outdoor recreational uses such as driving ranges,
and miniature golf were separate and distinct uses. In 1976 the Outdoor recreation was
added to the Indoor Recreation by a text amendment that ultimately allowed a skate
boarding facility. In 1978 a text amendment established a use for Health Spas, which
were defined as "commercial enterprises, private clubs, or businesses established for the
purpose of providing an indoor facility for physical exercise with the use of athletic
equipment and accessory services. The term health spa includes private exercise clubs,
figure salons, or health clubs." Ultimately these uses took their current form in 1981 with
the establishment of the permitted use table. At that time Commercially Operated
Indoor/Outdoor Recreation was strictly limited to Commercial Districts and Membership
Sports and Recreation Facilities were permitted in Commercial Districts and permitted by
special use in the residential districts.
Over time the distinction between the uses has become unclear as Commercially
Operated Indoor/Outdoor Facilities are permitted by right or by special use permit in all
but the B-1 and R-20S districts. Membership Sports and Recreation Facilities are
permitted by right or by special use permit in all but O&I, AI, and SC Districts. Perhaps
the distinction has become a difference of for profit or nonprofit, in any case the Board
may want to consider just having one use "Indoor & Outdoor Recreation Establishment"
11
and keep the additional restriction for those permitted by special use. The use would be
permitted by right or by special use permit in all districts as it basically is now.
If the Board does not wish to eliminate the Membership Sports and Recreation Use then
Staff would recommend approval of the amendment to allow Membership Sports and
Recreation by Special Use Permit in O&I as requested by the applicant.
PD R20S R20 R15 R10 B1 B2 11 12 OI AR At SC RA
Indoor/Outdoor
Rec. Facilities P S S S P P P S S S P S
Commercial
Membershp
Sports & Rec. P S S S S P P P P P S
Walter Conlogue made a motion to approve the request as submitted. Michael Keenan
seconded the motion. The Board voted 5-0 in favor of the motion.
Item 7: Special Use Permit Revision - Request by Andrew and Kuske Consulting
Engineers for Ogden Twelve LLC to amend the site plan for a Special Use Permit
for 156 unit apartment complex and 21,600 s.f. commercial space within an existing
B-2 Highway Business District at 7720 Market Street on the east side adjacent and
north of Mercer Marine (S-511, 12/03)
Baird Stewart presented the slides and gave a brief review of the site's history, land use,
zoning and related information.
Ken Shanklin provided handouts for the Board members, which included the original site
plan and a revised site plan to comply with Stormwater Management.
David Adams asked if the site plan had been reviewed for infiltration. Cindee Wolfe,
Design Services, replied that it had already been addressed and permitted.
Baird Stewart went over the Revision Summary and Findings of Fact.
REVISION SUMMARY:
Background: The Three Oaks Special Use Permit was originally presented to the
Planning Board in December 2003 as a sketch plan. Based on some of the comments
received at that meeting the petitioner made some revisions and presented a site plan, at
the January 2004 Planning Board meeting, showing 156 residential units and 21,600
square feet of commercial/office space. The discussion about the project centered around
buffers along the North and South property lines, building setbacks, tree preservation, the
rezoning of the adjacent property to the north, and the proposed stormwater infiltration
system. Ultimately the Planning Board voted 5-1 to recommend approval with the
following 5 conditions, which were adopted by the Board of Commissioners and
incorporated into the Special Use Permit.
12
1) A 20 foot buffer in accordance with the buffering standards of section 67 of the
zoning ordinance shall be provided along the southern property line which shall
satisfy any potential buffering requirements that could result from redevelopment
on the Howell tract to the south,
2) The developer shall make all improvements recommended in the traffic impact
analysis,
3) Every effort should be made to preserve regulated trees. Transplanting of smaller
onsite trees should be considered to fulfill some of the landscape requirements,
4) County fire services requests the onsite installation of 6 fire hydrants or sureties
guaranteeing their installation,
5) Access shall be provided through the property to the Foy tract to the north.
Revision Summary:
The proposed revisions to the site plan are a result of changes to the Stormwater
Management system. Based on preliminary soil testing, the applicant intended to utilize
an underground infiltration system to meet the State stormwater requirements and utilize
a stormwater pond on the back of the site to accommodate the County stormwater
requirements. In February 2004 further investigation of the site soil characteristics and
water table indicated that the seasonal high groundwater table was shallower than
anticipated. In order to utilize an infiltration system there is a minimum separation
required between the seasonal high groundwater table and the bottom of the stormwater
collection basin. Because of the high groundwater table the developer was left with two
options. Either add fill to the entire site and keep the underground infiltration or change
the system to an aboveground system where fill would be added to create infiltration
basins in the natural low area Both options would have ended up being presented to the
Board as a revision because a substantial amount of additional site disturbance is
necessary to accomplish the project.
The project with the proposed revisions meets the minimum requirements of the
ordinance, however staff is concerned about the exceptional design components of the
special use permit section 72-38. The applicant's narrative submitted with the site plan
revision describes several NC DENR Stormwater BMPs that have been or will be
incorporated into the project. For the Board's reference the following is a list of notable
changes to the site plan that have occurred as a result of the stormwater management
system.
1) The Infiltration System has be changed to an aboveground system
2) The infiltration system encroaches into the rear bufferyard but the minimum
20' bufferyard remains undisturbed.
3) Grading will occur in the COD setback.
4) A retaining wall has been added at the edge of the Southern bufferyard.
5) A retaining wall has been added to protect trees across from the community
pool & clubhouse as to the north of the pool & clubhouse area.
6) Some buildings have shifted and parking has been rearranged
PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION 1/8/04:
13
Cindee Wolf from Design Solutions presented the request and reviewed the site plan.
Representing an adjacent Commercial property Lonnie Williams spoke in opposition to
the project by stating that residential uses in this intensive commercial district is not in
harmony with the area. Mr. Williams stated a concern that buffer requirements could
affect his client's ability to redevelop their property and requested that the burden for the
buffering between commercial and residential be applied to the subject property and not
to his client's property. The Planning Board discussed the potential buffering issues and
building setbacks with regard to all of the surrounding properties. Ultimately the
Planning Board voted 5-1 to recommend approval with the following 5 conditions; 1) A
20 foot buffer in accordance with the buffering standards of section 67 of the zoning
ordinance shall be provided along the southern property line which shall satisfy any
potential buffering requirements that could result from redevelopment on the Howell tract
to the south, 2) the developer shall make all improvements recommended in the traffic
impact analysis, 3) Every effort should be made to preserve regulated trees. Transplanting
of smaller onsite trees should be considered to fulfill some of the landscape requirements,
4) County fire services requests the onsite installation of 6 fire hydrants or sureties
guaranteeing their installation, 5) access shall be provided through the property to the Foy
tract to the north.
PRELIMINARY STAFF FINDINGS:
1, The board must find 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.
A. The subject property is located within the Ogden VFD.
B. Proposed access to the site is from Market Street (US 17). Market Street is
classified as an Arterial Road.
C. Connection to County water and sewer is proposed. Water and Sewer
construction
D. plans will be required.
2. The Board must find that the use meets all required conditions and specifications
of the zoning ordinance.
A. The subject property is zoned B-2 Highway Business. Neighborhood
Commercial
B. uses are permitted within the B-2 District. Residential uses are permitted by
C. special use permit in the B-2 District.
D. Commercial uses shall be limited to those uses permitted by right in the B-1
E. Neighborhood Business District.
F. Setbacks for the first 500 feet of the project are subject to the Special
Highway
G. Overlay District requirements. A site plan meeting the setback and buffer
requirements of the ordinance has been submitted. Additional setbacks and
buffering may be required if the adjacent rezoning request to the north is not
successful.
H. There are 156 proposed residential units. The overall commercial square
footage proposed is 21,600 square feet.
L A traffic impact analysis has been submitted and reviewed for the project.
14
J. Stormwater management will be handled through a combination of
underground infiltration and a pond. Detailed plans will be reviewed by
County Engineering during the Construction Plan phase.
K. The swamp forest area on the southeast portion of the property is entirely
preserved and a COD setback has been shown on the site plan.
L. There is a host of regulated and significant trees onsite. The project is subject
to landscaping and tree protection requirements of section 67 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
M. Signage for the project is subject to the Special Highway Overlay District
requirements.
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 buffer strips shown on the site plan meet the minimum requirements of
the ordinance, however, stormwater management ponds are not permitted
within the buffer area.
B. The adjacent property to the north is vacant. The large property to the east is
occupied by one dwelling unit. The property to the south is occupied by two
different commercial businesses.
C. No evidence has been presented that the proposed project will negatively
affect adjoining property values.
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 site is classified as resource protection by the New Hanover County
Comprehensive Plan and is within the urban growth boundaries. The purpose
of the Resource Protection class is to provide for the preservation and
protection of important natural, historic, scenic, wildlife and recreational
resources.
B. The property was rezoned from residential to highway business in 1997.
C. Housing policies in the comprehensive plan state that "The County and City
shall continue to support and enhance a broad range of affordable housing
programs and increase affordable rental housing."
Planning Staff Comments and recommended Conditions:
1) The developer shall make all improvements recommended in the Traffic Impact
Analysis.
2) Every effort should be made to preserve regulated trees. Transplanting of smaller
onsite trees should be considered to fulfill some of the landscape requirements.
3) County Fire Services requests bonding or installation of 6 fire hydrants.
15
4) Provisions should be made for additional access to the project to and from adjacent
properties that may be developed especially to the north. County Fire is also
concerned about connectivity issues.
NCDOT Comments:
1) Due to the volume of traffic generated, this will be forwarded to Congestion
Management in Raleigh for review upon submittal for a driveway permit.
2) Provide stub outs for interconnectivity to adjacent parcels.
3) Install directional crossover/left-over to restrict exiting left turns.
4) Based on the projected volumes, this development will probably require a traffic
signal warrant analysis.
5) The US 17 corridor is being studied for access management improvements. Any
driveway permit application will also be reviewed by the Regional Traffic
Engineer. Also, even if full movement or entering left turns are permitted now,
they may be restricted in the future.
Michael Keenan made a motion to approve the special use request with staff'
recommendations. David Girardot seconded the motion. The Board voted 5-0 in favor of
the motion.
Item 8: Subdivision Ordinance Text Amendment (Continued Item) - Request by
Staff to amend Section 41-1(6) of the New Hanover County Subdivision Ordinance
to re-establish a minimum lot width for conventional subdivisions (A-336, 06/04)
Baird Stewart explained the staff request and recommendations.
If approved Section 41-1(6)(g) of the Subdivision Ordinance would be amended to
add the following underlined text:
(g) Each lot of a subdivision shall individually abut or be adjacent to an approved
public or approved private street or private access easement. Condominium and
townhouse-style subdivisions may be exempted from this requirement at the
discretion of the Technical Review Committee, provided that in all cases each
individual lot shall be assured safe and reasonable vehicular access to and from an
approved street. (3/03). Every Conventional residential lot shall front a public or
private street or access easement for a distance of at least 34 feet.
STAFF SUMMARY:
Until recently when the County adopted the Subdivision regulations from the Unified
Development Ordinance there was a minimum 40-foot lot frontage requirement for all
residential lots. The proposed amendment would strictly apply to conventional
subdivision lots and by default minor subdivisions. The minimum frontage requirement
prevents subdivisions with multiple flag lots, which are not a desirable subdivision
pattern. Although staff has not received a significant number of proposals with multiple
flag lots, there have been some presented and recorded.
16
Previously there was a 10 foot discrepancy between the required 40' lot frontage and the
30' private access easement. It makes logical sense that the minimum lot frontage should
be consistent with the minimum access easement width. Anticipating the adoption of
some other portions of the UDO, Staff recommends making the frontage requirement
consistent with the proposed 34' private access easement that is recommended by the
UDO committee.
Walter Conlogue made a motion to approve the request as submitted. David Adams
seconded the motion. The Board voted 4-1 in favor of the motion, with Michael Keenan
opposed.
Other Items of Business
Sam Burgess gave an update on the Technical Review Committee's activity during the
month of June 2004.
Mr. Burgess stated that the committee met to discuss four preliminary site plans and
discussed one sketch plan in the month of June. Three of the site plans were reviewed
under Performance Subdivision Guidelines and one was reviewed under Conventional
Subdivision Guidelines.
1. Sapphire Ridge Subdivision - 13 lots approved with City water and County sewer.
Two road stubs and a driveway permit required.
2. Becker Woods - Approved for 29 lots with Private Water and Sewer
TRC required a road stub and waived the length of the cul-de-sac due to
environmental challenges.
3. Ocean Forest Ridge - Approved for 16 lots with Individual wells and septic tanks.
Road ROW north and easement to the south to be connected by paved access road
4. Winds Ridge (Revised) - Approved for 63 lots County water and Sewer
The TRC also discussed a sketch plan for Willow Glen for 530 units and would be
scheduled July 7u, with TRC.
Baird Stewart informed the Board that Chairman Dull and Michael Keenan's term with
the Planning Board will expire on July 31st. Therefore, the County Commissioner's will
be making new appointments at their next commission meeting.
Being of no further business, Michael Keenan made a motion to adjourn the meeting.
Chairman Dull seconded the motion, which the Board unanimously approved. The
meeting adjourned at 10:25 pm.
Dexter Hayes, Planning Director
17