Loading...
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.