2015-12 December 3 2015 PBM
Page 1 of 8
Minutes of the
New Hanover County Planning Board
December 3, 2015
The New Hanover County Planning Board met Thursday, December 3, 2015 at 6:00 p.m. in the
Assembly Room of the New Hanover County Historic Courthouse, Wilmington, NC to hold a
public meeting.
Planning Board Present: Staff Present:
Donna Girardot, Chairman Chris O’Keefe, Planning & Inspections Director
Tamara Murphy Ken Vafier, Planning Manager
Jordy Rawl Brad Schuler, Current Planner
Ernest Olds Sharon Huffman, Deputy County Attorney
Edward “Ted” Shipley, III
David Weaver
Absent:
Anthony Prinz, Vice Chairman
Chairman Donna Girardot opened the meeting and welcomed the audience to the public hearing.
Brad Schuler led the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance.
Chairman Donna Girardot reviewed the procedures for the meeting.
Approval of November 2015 Planning Board Minutes
Ted Shipley made a motion to approve the November Planning Board minutes as written. Ernest
Olds seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted 6-0 to approve the November 5, 2015
Planning Board meeting minutes.
Item 1: Rezoning Application (Z-947, 12/15) – Request by Cindee Wolf of Design Solutions
on behalf of the property owner, Rachel Trask Gonsalves Heirs, to rezone 46.56 acres
located at 3013 & 3079 Blue Clay Road from R-20, Residential District, to (CZD) R-10,
Conditional Residential District, in order to develop a performance residential subdivision.
The property is classified as Aquifer Resource Protection according to the 2006 CAMA
Land Use Plan.
Current Planner Brad Schuler provided information pertaining to location, land classification,
access, level of service and zoning; and showed maps, aerials, video, and photographs of the
property and the surrounding area.
This is an application to rezone 46.45 acres of land located at the 3000 block of Blue Clay
Road from R-20 to a Conditional R-10 district in order to develop a 154 lot single-family
Page 2 of 8
performance residential subdivision. This property was included in a previous rezoning
application. That application included the subject property and two additional parcels of
land, and proposed to rezone the parcels to a general R-10 district. That application was
eventually denied. Therefore, the applicant is asking for this property to be rezoned to a
conditional R-10 zoning district with a proposed use and a conceptual site plan attached, as
opposed to a general R-10 district. Conditions above and beyond the requirements of the
county’s development regulations may be placed on the conditional district with the
applicant’s agreement. If the rezoning application is approved by the County
Commissioners, the applicant must then go through the County’s subdivision review
process, which includes the submittal of a preliminary plat application for review and
approval by the County’s Technical Review Committee.
The subject property is located in an area which includes a mixture of zoning districts. To
the north is a large tract of R-10 zoning which contains the Ivy Woods and Runnymeade
subdivisions. Those subdivisions were developed in the early 1990s. To the east is heavy
industrial zoning containing the North Kerr Industrial Park. To the south there is some
industrial zoning including the Airport Industrial district which contains the Wilmington
International Airport. To the west is residential zoning, including mostly the R-20 district,
and a small piece of R-15 zoning around Sandy Lane. Wrightsboro Elementary School is
located nearby along Castle Hayne Road, and has access to the roadway network that runs
between Castle Hayne and Blue Clay Road. The subject property itself consists of two
undeveloped parcels of land which front both Holland Drive and Blue Clay Road and is
located approximately one-quarter mile north of the Blue Clay Road and N. Kerr Avenue
intersection.
The conceptual site plan reflects the applicant’s proposal to develop a 154 lot performance
residential subdivision. The applicant has proposed two conditions be added to the district.
The first will require that a vegetated buffer be planted along Holland Drive to help screen
the proposed development from the existing residences located along Holland Drive. The
second condition will require that a twenty foot (20’) access easement be dedicated to the
County along Blue Clay Road in order to allow for a future multi-use path to be installed in
accordance with the Blue Clay Corridor Study. The recreation area is private and the
subdivision’s homeowners association will be responsible for the maintenance of it. The
development will install street connections to Blue Clay Road and Holland Drive, both of
which are state-maintained roads, and will also install street stubs to the undeveloped
parcels to the north and south. Street interconnectivity is a requirement of the subdivision
ordinance and is a very important development standard in the county. Having an
interconnected street system will allow for the convenient travel of the residents in the
area, reduce the amount of travel on arterial and collector streets, and most importantly,
reduce emergency response time. Staff has heard the concerns of the surrounding
residents, however, feels this connection will bring a lot of benefit to the area.
In regard to traffic, the proposed development of a 154 lot single family subdivision will
generate more than 100 peak hour trips; therefore, a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was
completed as required by the subdivision ordinance. The Traffic Impact Analysis for this
proposed subdivision examined three intersections within the area, specifically, the
Page 3 of 8
intersections at the development’s access points with Blue Clay Road and Holland Drive,
and the intersection of Blue Clay Road and N. Kerr Avenue, which is approximately one
quarter mile south of the subject property. The TIA found that those intersections will
operate at a Level of Service of B or better during the peak hours when the development is
expected to be completed in 2018. The TIA also recommended that a northbound left turn
be installed at the development’s access with Blue Clay Road, that would consist of 100
feet of storage and appropriate taper. The TIA was approved by the NC Department of
Transportation and by the Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Organization with the stated
recommendation of installing that turn lane.
The Traffic Impact Analysis included the following information. First, 154 single-family
dwellings would generate about 1,500 trips per day. These trips would include 117 AM
peak hour trips and 155 PM peak hour trips. AM peak hours are from 7AM to 9AM, and
PM peak hours are from 4PM to 6PM. The TIA expects that 15% of the trips generated by
the subdivision will utilize the Holland Drive connection to enter and exit the site, while
the other 85% would utilize the Blue Clay Road connection. Holland Drive is currently
experiencing 124 AM peak hour trips and 121 PM peak hour trips. After the development
is completed in 2018, those trips are expected to increase to 145 AM peak hour trips and
149 PM peak hour trips.
Staff has reviewed the rezoning application to determine if it complies with the 2006
CAMA Land Use Plan, which classifies the property as Aquifer Resource Protection. The
purpose of the Aquifer Resource Protection classification is to protect the Pee Dee and
Castle Hayne aquifers from diminished recharge and from contamination by inappropriate
land uses. The Plan suggests two development strategies for areas within this
classification. One is that they be developed with larger lots if septic systems are used to
help prevent cross contamination of wells, and the second is to have water and sewer
services installed in order to prevent septic system use all together. The plan goes on to
state that developments in this classification that utilize septic systems should be limited to
a density of 2.5 dwelling units per acre, while urban densities are appropriate for
developments that connect to a sewer service. Public water and sewer services have been
extended to the surrounding area, and the services would be required to be extended
though the proposed development. Development within the R-10 district typically connects
to a centralized sewer system in order to achieve the density allowed in the district.
Therefore, the goals of the Aquifer Resource Protection area would be achieved with the
proposed development. Staff recommended approval of the application with the two
conditions requested by the applicant, as it is consistent with the policies of the Land Use
Plan, specifically Policy 3.28 in that it should preserve the Castle Hayne and Pee Dee
aquifers in their present unpolluted state because development of the property will require
the extension of water and sewer to serve the area, and because the policy further states
that urban density is appropriate within the Aquifer Resource Protection Area when sewer
service is provided.
Hearing no questions or comments from the board, Chairman Girardot opened the public hearing
and recognized the applicant.
Page 4 of 8
Cindee Wolf of Design Solutions represented the owners of the property. She stated they
appreciated the board’s foresight at a previous meeting in recognizing that an R-10 zoning
seemed logical for these properties, but they also understood the concerns expressed by the
neighbors about the uncertainty of that general R-10 zoning district proposal. For that reason,
they have revamped the proposal to reflect the exact use proposed for the site, a 154 lot single
family performance residential subdivision, removing the fear of the unknown for the area
residents. In the existing scenario of R-20 zoning, the property could be developed by
performance development, which would allow 88 total units. She also quickly reviewed the
traffic impact analysis information provided during the staff presentation, noting whether the
project is built or is not built, the level of service is B and there will not be a substantial increase
in the trip generation overall for the capacities of the roads.
Ms. Wolf stated the rezoning justification is that it is consistent with the County’s policies for
growth and development as the sustainability of the County depends on sensible infill and
maximizing use of lands already accessible to urban services, water and sewer, and a greater
density of single-family development increases the tax base and makes better use of existing
infrastructure. The higher density is not inconsistent with the land classification because public
water and sewer services negate the concern of private wells diminishing the capacity of the
aquifers and of septic systems contaminating the aquifers and new development requires
stormwater management. The R-10 district is in harmony with the area as it is consistent with
the concept of transitioning uses from more to less intense, with the industrial uses and railroad
across Blue Clay Road and the rural development across Holland Drive. The nearby Ivy Woods
residential development is zoned R-10 so the rezoning would be an expansion of an existing
district. In regard to the higher density having an adverse effect on property values of existing
properties, the proposal will enhance the whole neighborhood with cost comparisons when sales
are made due to the new construction, sidewalks, curb and gutter, etc. The site plan also has a lot
of green area, which has been incorporated around the exterior particularly along Holland Drive.
Lots 1 through 10 are focused internally to the development. She explained they are proposing
streetyard landscaping along Holland Drive and are not proposing to buffer it as they don’t think
that would be appropriate. Instead, they will incorporate the streetyard per the zoning ordinance
standards for streetyards for non-residential uses in a residential district. While this is not a non-
residential use, it would be the most appropriate streetyard to make that separation between
Holland Drive. The greenspace, in addition to the trees and shrubs, would provide that separation
that this is a different development. They would also dedicate the easement along Blue Clay
Road so that the County can obtains grants or other funds to build a multi-use trail. Ms. Wolf
offered to answer questions from board members.
Ernest Olds thanked Ms. Wolf for addressing the neighbors’ concerns fro m the last proposal. In
regard to the 12 foot planned streetyard, he expressed concern that along Holland Drive the
distance proposed wouldn’t be sufficient once the lot owner is in and asked if it would be
possible to have a wider buffer to make sure the separating vegetation is maintained.
Ms. Wolf clarified the buffer. In regard to the distance between the pond and the Holland Drive
right-of-way and that right-of-way and the back of Lot 5, there is 25-30 feet of green space. The
Holland Drive right-of-way is sixty feet wide so there is currently 20 feet on either side of the
pavement that wouldn’t be touched at all; therefore, twenty feet of right-of-way green space will
Page 5 of 8
remain, which probably incorporates a ditch. In addition to that, the developer is proposing a
minimum twelve foot wide row of trees and shrubs which would meet the streetyard landscaping
standard in the ordinance, and then there would also be another fifteen foot setback before a
pond or backyard is put in. There is much more room, approximately 50-70 feet behind Lots 1
and 2 and behind Lots 6 and 7 it grows. In the worst case scenario, there will be more than 45
feet from actual street width to any use. Should Holland Drive be widened to allow for a bike
lane, etc. there would be plenty of land to do that without negatively impacting the view from
Holland Drive or from the occupants of that subdivision.
Mr. Olds stated in regard to the park in the center, there is a narrow pipe stem that connects the
park to the road and yet there is another small park by the cul-de-sac in the northeast corner. He
wondered why Lot 121 couldn’t be exchanged to develop a bigger active recreation area in the
middle of the development that has some actual street frontage where a car could pull over or
you could see into the park more clearly and have a regular lot on that corner. He proposed she
trade some land next to Lot 122 and make Lot 121 an active recreation area so that is a more
available park for the people passing or walking down the street.
Ms. Wolf commented they could flip. She felt it gave more pocket areas and generally speaking,
nobody uses these areas. If they were putting in any type of active recreation use, it would
probably be located behind Lots 11 to 17, but that internal area certainly gave all of those lots the
availability in their backyards to expand. She saw no problem with making that change as that
triangle space beside Lot 122 could be built on as easily as Lot 121.
Mr. Olds thought it would be a way to make that active recreation area a little nicer amenity for
the whole neighborhood in general. He then inquired how mailboxes would be managed for the
subdivision, as the postal service is not keen on individual boxes being located at every
driveway.
Ms. Wolf stated the mailbox issue would be addressed with the details at a later time.
Mr. Olds encouraged the development to consider spacing the mailboxes out and making them
more conveniently distributed. He explained his neighbor has clusters of mailboxes located every
dozen houses and it works fine, but other neighborhoods have one essential area for mailboxes
that turns into a small public parking lot in the afternoons.
Ms. Wolf stated that since they don’t intend to build a formal amenity area with parking for the
subdivision, they will work with the postal service to locate mailboxes. .
David Weaver stated he like Mr. Olds’ suggestions and Ms. Wolf’s design, as well as her
willingness to change it and asked if there was a need to have another pedestrian access from the
north side of the active recreation area.
Ms. Wolf responded that if Lot 121 was flipped for the opposite place beside Lot 122, it would
be more logical to put in a little drive with two parking spaces and have the sidewalk around the
internal street system. If you are coming to that park, which is probably unusual, a single
Page 6 of 8
entrance would be just as easy as a double entrance. She suggested that a pedestrian easement
could be provided between Lots 111 and 112.
Mr. Weaver was amenable to Ms. Wolf’s suggestion to provide a pedestrian easement between
Lots 111 and 112. He commented he also thought the site plan has a good layout.
Chairman Girardot asked if the streetyard was preferable to installing a berm to provide baffling
and more privacy to residents on Holland Road.
Ms. Wolf explained a berm must go up and go out so it would be a problem for existing
vegetation. The maintenance of berms can also be problematic. There is also a pond and ponds
are generally not fenced. She felt that unless it stayed heavily wooded behind lots 1 and 2 and
lots 6 and 7, the owners that build there would likely prefer and install fences.
Chairman Girardot opened the opposition portion of the hearing.
Laura McLean, a resident at 60 Holland Drive, stated she is opposed to the rezoning request. Her
property faces the proposed subdivision and she felt the 88 to 90 units would detrimentally affect
the neighborhood. People who attended the community meeting were not happy; women were
crying; people were yelling and going nuts at the meeting. It was impossible for Ms. Wolf to sell
the idea that the neighborhood would be changed for the better. Instead, it will make it worse.
She felt people would either look at the board as the people responsible for ruining the
neighborhood by cramming in as many people as possible or as the sensible people who realized
the infrastructure can’t handle the influx of people. She expressed disbelief that only twenty
people would come from those 154 units as indicated by the traffic study, noting almost eighty
people currently go by her home at night. She also stated concern that two railroad crossings are
located within a half mile of each other and the subject property will be in the middle of that. Ms.
McLean also pointed out that Wrightsboro School is overcapacity and wondered where the kids
in that neighborhood would go to school.
No one else from the public spoke in regard to the rezoning.
Chairman Girardot closed the public hearing and opened the discussion period.
In response to several questions from Jordy Rawl regarding the history of the property located
north of the proposal, Brad Schuler stated that the property was zoned R-10 several decades ago
and part of the subdivision was developed through the performance residential standards, but a
majority of it was developed through the conventional residential standards. The property was
originally zoned R-20 in 1974, but he was unsure if the Aquifer Resource Protection designation
was in existence at that time. It was an area where utilities were not located nearby and so the R-
20 district was the more appropriate district in order to utilize septic systems. The minimum lot
size in R-20 is 20,000 square feet. There may be instances where it is larger depending on the
soil type to support the septic system. Septic s ystem requirements are much stricter now than in
the 1970’s. An entire repair area must be dedicated in the event that a septic system fail s where a
new septic system can be placed. The area required for a septic system is much larger now than it
was in the 1970’s.
Page 7 of 8
Mr. Rawl stated he was trying to understand what the spirit and intent of the property was and
why there is R-10 bordering what was R-20 by-right forty years ago.
In response to Ms. Girardot’s inquiry, Mr. Schuler explained that four parcels were included in
the original application and pointed out the location of the other two parcels on the map that
were included in the previous rezoning application. One parcel was south of the new proposal
and one parcel was located to the north.
In response to an inquiry from Mr. Weaver, Mr. Schuler reported that staff had not been
contacted by the owners of the property to the south or by the church to the north.
Jordy Rawl asked Mr. Schuler and Mr. McDow to comment on the interconnectivity of the
existing, new and proposed developments in the area, as well as plans for future
interconnectivity.
Mr. Schuler explained that Alex Trask Drive connects into the Ivy Woods and Runnymeade
subdivisions on Old Mill Road, which connects into both Blue Clay Road and Castle Hayne
Road. Galway Road ends in a cul-de-sac and stubs into the proposal. There is also a future stub
road so developers of the vacant parcel north of the proposal will likely be required to connect
that roadway stem over to Galway Road. He noted having more options will potentially alleviate
some of the traffic congestion on the other roads.
Bill McDow of the Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Organization (WMPO), a city agency,
reported in regard to new roads or connector streets in the project area, there are no new
roadways proposed in the 2040 or 2035 Transportation Plan. He was also not aware of any
widening projects for the Blue Clay Road area.
Chairman Girardot entertained a motion from the board.
Chairman Girardot read the procedure and appeals statement.
Ms. Wolf confirmed the applicant would like to continue with a vote by the planning board and
also accepted the two proposed conditions, as well as the change to flip-flop the active recreation
area with Lot 121 and add either green space, pedestrian or a pedestrian access easement along
the sides of Lots 111, 112, and 113 so that there would be a north and south approach to the
active recreation area.
Ted Shipley made a motion to recommend approval, as the Planning Board finds this application
for a zoning map amendment of 46.56 acres from R-20, Residential District, to (CZD)
Conditional Zoning Residential District R-10, as described is:
1. Consistent with the purposes and intent of the 2006 CAMA Land Use Plan because
the proposed performance residential subdivision must install water and sewer service,
and thus it should not diminish the recharge of surrounding aquifers, thereby
complying with the development strategies of the Aquifer Resource Protection land
use classification and Policy 3.28 of the Land Use Plan;
Page 8 of 8
2. Reasonable and in the public interest because it provides for increased density in areas
best suited for development while not impeding the quality of life of the existing
residential communities; and
That conditions be set such that:
1. The street yard plantings for the non-residential use in a residential district will be
installed along the Holland Drive frontage.
2. A 20 foot non-vehicular and pedestrian access easement will be dedicated to New
Hanover County along Blue Clay Road for a future multi-use path proposed in the
County’s long-range plans.
3. There is a south and north approach to the recreation area on the site plan noted as the
active recreation area in the center of the site plan by swapping out Lot 121 to another
area of the map and providing access from the north.
David Weaver seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted 6-0 to recommend approval of
Rezoning Request Z-947 with three conditions.
Other Business
Planning Manager Ken Vafier provided the following announcements:
A consensus was reached at the first agenda review meeting to eliminate the 9:00 a.m. quarterly
workshop meetings and instead incorporate future quarterly workshops into the Planning Board
agenda review meeting schedule, beginning one hour earlier at 3:00 p.m. rather than 4:00 p.m.
The first Planning Board Workshop will be held at 3:00 p.m. on Tuesday, January 5, 2016. Staff
will present Chapter 5 of the NHC Comprehensive Plan, which contains the implementation
strategies, to obtain planning board feedback.
Mr. Vafier thanked board members for providing input on the surveys distributed in November.
In response, staff has implemented new strategies to increase the efficiency of distributing
information to the board. First, the packet schedule has been adjusted to allow earlier distribution
and provide board members more time to review the agenda package. Second, the Technical
Review Committee (TRC) presentations, which are lengthy and very detailed, will be condensed
at the meetings. This is one of the only methods available to disseminate that information to the
public. These are by-right projects so many of the approvals occur outside the public realm. Staff
will continue the presentations in a much more abridged manner and will provide the same
reports in the packet. Staff will continue to seek ways to streamline staff reports.
In response to an inquiry from Mr. Weaver, Mr.Vafier reported that TRC agenda packages are
published on the New Hanover County website and distributed to the TRC Sunshine List. There
is not a public notice requirement; however, the meeting schedule is adopted annually and posted
on the website.
Chairman Girardot adjourned the meeting at 6:50 p.m.