Loading...
02-02-2023 PB MINUTES1 | Page Minutes of the New Hanover County Planning Board February 2, 2023 A regular meeting of the New Hanover County Planning Board was held on February 2, 2023, at 5:00 p.m. in the New Hanover County Historic Courthouse, 24 North Third Street, Room 301 in Wilmington, North Carolina. Members Present Staff Present Donna Girardot, Chair Rebekah Roth, Director of Planning Jeff Petroff, Vice Chair Ken Vafier, Planning Manager Colin Tarrant Robert Farrell, Senior Current Planner Hansen Matthews Zachary Dickerson, Current Planner Clark Hipp Julian Griffee, Current Planner Pete Avery Amy Doss, Current Planner Sharon Huffman, Deputy County Attorney Absent Members Kevin Hine Chair Donna Girardot called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Planning Manager Ken Vafier led the Pledge of Allegiance. Board Member Hansen Matthews requested to be recused from agenda item number four. Vice Chair Jeff Petroff made a MOTION, SECONDED by Board Member Clark Hipp, to recuse Mr. Matthews from agenda item number four. Motion to recuse Mr. Matthews carried 6-0. Approval of Minutes Minutes from the December 1, 2022, Planning Board meeting were presented to the members. No changes or amendments were identified. Board Member Hansen Matthews made a MOTION, SECONDED by Vice Chair Jeff Petroff, to approve the minutes as drafted. Motion to approve minutes carried 6-0. Minutes from the January 3, 2023, Planning Board Agenda Review meeting were presented to the members. No changes or amendments were identified. Vice Chair Jeff Petroff made a MOTION, SECONDED by Board Member Hansen Matthews, to approve the minutes as drafted. Motion to approve minutes carried 6-0 Minutes from the January 5, 2023, Planning Board meeting were presented to the members. No changes or amendments were identified. Vice Chair Jeff Petroff made a MOTION, SECONDED by Board Member Colin Tarrant, to approve the minutes as drafted. Motion to approve minutes carried 6-0 NEW BUSINESS Rezoning Request (Z22-23) – Request by Cindee Wolf with Design Solutions, applicant, on behalf of 6844 Bayat Land, LLC, property owner, to rezone two parcels totaling approximately 3.83 acres of land located at 6830 and 6844 Carolina Beach Road from R-15, Residential to 2.00 acres of (CZD) B-1, Conditional Neighborhood Business for a convenience store and 1.83 acres to (CZD) R-5, Conditional Moderate-High Density Residential for 12 single-family attached dwellings. Current Planner Zach Dickerson provided information pertaining to location, land classification, access, transportation, and zoning. He showed maps, aerials and photographs of the property and surrounding area and gave an overview of the proposed application as referred to in the staff report. 2 | Page Mr. Dickerson stated that the request was to rezone two parcels to a CZD B-1 district and a CZD R-5. He stated the property was located on the western side of Carolina Beach Road and that the applicant was proposing to construct a 6,000 square foot convenience store with a 16-pump fueling station. He stated that the proposal also included 12 single-family attached homes arranged in triplexes. He stated that the proposed concept plan included a bufferyard along the southern boundary that would consist of an 8-foot-high screening fence with pedestrian gate and sidewalk connection from Southern Exposure to the convenience store. Mr. Dickerson stated that access to the subject property was from Carolina Beach Road, an NCDOT maintained Urban Principal Arterial highway and would be limited to a right-in/right-out movement on Carolina Beach Road with a 200-foot right turn lane on southbound Carolina Beach Road, prescribed by the Traffic Impact Analysis. He stated that the proposed convenience store with fuel stations would generate approximately 506 AM peak hour trips and 430 PM peak hour trips, while the 12 single-family attached dwelling units would generate 6 AM and 7 PM peak hour trips. He stated that a Traffic Impact Analysis was conducted for this project and was approved on January 12, 2023. He provided information on the improvements required by the Traffic Impact Analysis which included the extension of the northbound U-turn lane on Carolina Beach Road from 100 feet of storage to 200 feet of storage and the installation of a southbound right turn lane on Carolina Beach Road. Mr. Dickerson stated that while the subject property was located south of the Monkey Junction Growth Node, it was in close proximity to another fuel station at the corner of Myrtle Grove Road, only accessible to northbound traffic on Carolina Beach Road. He stated that this proposed mixed-use project would provide a fuel station on southbound Carolina Beach Road in the B-1 portion, serving as a transition between the road corridor and the existing single-family housing development to the south and the proposed higher density single-family housing to the west. Mr. Dickerson stated that the 2016 Comprehensive Plan classified this area as Community Mixed Use and the proposal was generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s recommendations for the Community Use place type. Mr. Dickerson stated that staff had originally recommended a continuance of this proposal to allow for additional clarification of site access and stormwater. He stated that based on conversations with NCDOT, the WMPO, and New Hanover County Engineering, questions regarding site access and stormwater have been addressed. He stated that staff found the proposal was consistent with the recommended uses for the Community Mixed Use place type and with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan. He stated that the applicant and staff had proposed the following conditions to aid in the compatibility with nearby uses: 1. A private access easement would be dedicated to establish a permanent access for the three properties to the rear of the development. 2. The bufferyard along the southern boundary will include an eight-foot-high screening fence with a pedestrian gate and sidewalk connection from the terminus of Southern Exposure roadway to the convenience store. 3. The owner will cancel the contract for the existing billboard on the site. The billboard will be removed prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. 4. Exterior lighting, including luminaries and security lights, shall be arranged or shielded so as not to cast illumination in an upward direction above an imaginary line extended from the light sources parallel to the ground. Fixtures shall be numbered such that adequate levels of lighting are maintained, but that light spillage and glare are not directed at adjacent property, neighboring areas, or motorists. Light posts shall be no taller than twenty feet. Mr. Dickerson stated that if the rezoning were approved it would be subject to Technical Review Committee and zoning compliance review processes to ensure full compliance with all ordinance requirements. Chair Girardot opened the public hearing and recognized the applicant. Ms. Cindee Wolf, applicant, provided a summary description of the proposed project. She stated that the subject site was south of the Myrtle Grove Road signalized intersection with Carolina Beach Road and with adoption of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and this entire corridor determined to be Community Use place type, it promoted the development of 3 | Page residential communities with more density, and retail services. She provided information of the project and stated that a convenience store was conducive for comfort and ease and would be strategically positioned for proximity and accessibility. She stated that the project plan included the convenience store and a transition of a small residential community of 12 townhomes behind it. She stated that the applicant committed to a sidewalk along the frontage of Carolina Beach Road along with walks connecting to the homes and installing a pedestrian gate in the buffer fencing along the southern boundary so that the old Cape Cod neighborhood would have easy access to this also. She stated that the applicant had an arborist on the site to inventory the existing vegetation and that although there were originally plans shown for stormwater management on the concept plan that went out to the community meeting, the applicant opted for the undersurface infiltration to address runoff especially for tree preservation. She stated the soils were tested for the necessary seasonal ground water depth and infiltration capacity. She stated that a Traffic Impact Analysis was required and had been accepted by the WMPO and NCDOT. She stated that the analysis indicated that with the recommended improvements in place, the proposed site was not expected to have a detrimental impact on transportation capacity and mobility in the study area and that levels of service at turning points would either remain constant or in a couple of cases improve. Ms. Wolf stated that there was a narrow roadway along the southern boundary of the site, that when Old Cape Cod was developed, the Southern Exposure Street right-of-way was stubbed into the property line with the assumed potential of extension and interconnectivity; however, there was a historical easement deeded of 16-feet to Carolina Power and Light for access to their facility. She stated that at a community meeting the applicant had offered a layout that would have created a new road right-of-way for safer travel and interconnectivity that she believed was originally intended, but the neighbors were adamantly opposed. She stated that the plan was to buffer that boundary, preserve their drive, and to still provide, after the fence, the gate so that they would have access to the services. She stated that the bufferyard with screening fence would be installed along that boundary for both visual and physical separation. She stated that as part of the design for the turn lane, the applicant would construct the full width down to the driveway. Ms. Wolf stated that to the rear of the site there were undocumented encroachments of drives to access three properties behind the subject site and that the applicant provided an access easement so that those properties could still be accessed. She stated that approval of the rezoning was reasonable, consistent and in the public interest. She stated that the 2016 Comprehensive Plan designated the area for this type of development, and that the proposed plan would provide a lacking service that was compatible with the tract’s proximity along the corridor. She stated that the proposal improved the form and function of a site, maximized the land use efficiency, and provides an opportunity for good economic development. In response to questions of the Board regarding the type of buffer that would be located between the residential and convenience store, Ms. Wolf stated that there would be a fenced buffer. She stated there would be a fence with an opening in the gate for community access. In response to questions of the Board regarding the stormwater system, Ms. Wolf stated that to her understanding was that the townhomes and convenience store would both have their own under pavement infiltration system and would be designed independently based upon the amount of impervious surface of each “sub-project.” In response to questions of the Board regarding the stacking lanes, Ms. Wolf stated that it would be about 300-400 feet from the egress to get to the stacking lane for the U-turn to go north. In response to questions of the Board regarding private wells on the property, Ms. Wolf stated that she was unsure if there were but if so, they would have to be formally abandoned and that would be coordinated through TRC and the Health Department along with the septic system because there was an existing house and a trailer home on the site. Chair Girardot opened the hearing to those with questions or in opposition. Ms. Allison Carlyle, 6921 Southern Exposure, spoke in opposition to the project and expressed her concern with potential danger to the environment and health effects to the residents. She stated that the Homeowners’ Association had not had an opportunity to meet with residents, and that they would like to put together their own impact analysis for the community. 4 | Page Unidentified resident, 6921 Southern Exposure, spoke in opposition to the project and expressed her concern with the traffic egress coming out of Southern Exposure to get onto the highway. In rebuttal to the opposition, Ms. Wolf stated Southern Exposure was not intended to be a public thoroughfare. She stated that she could not address comments about pollution but there were rules and regulations to control these types of facilities with methods of design and permitting regulations intended to protect the surrounding public. In rebuttal to Ms. Wolf’s comment regarding regulations intended to protect the surrounding public, Ms. Carlyle stated that Ms. Wolf was referring to a case study from 2015; however, the most recent 2019 case study of living within close range of a fuel source like this referred to living within 524 feet. She stated that they lived less than 500 feet from the proposed site and that the emissions from this development would affect the community’s health. Chair Girardot closed the public hearing and opened for board discussion. Board discussion focused on changes to standards for underground fuel tanks that improve safety, on the traffic impact of the proposed project, and on the improvements required by the Traffic Impact Analysis. Board Member Hansen Matthews made a MOTION, SECONDED by Vice Chair Jeff Petroff, to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning to (CZD) B-1 and (CZD) R-5, with the following conditions: 1. A private access easement would be dedicated to establish a permanent access for the three properties to the rear of the development. 2. The bufferyard along the southern boundary will include an eight-foot-high screening fence with a pedestrian gate and sidewalk connection from the terminus of Southern Exposure roadway to the convenience store. 3. The owner will cancel the contract for the existing billboard on the site. The billboard will be removed prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. 4. Exterior lighting, including luminaries and security lights, shall be arranged or shielded so as not to cast illumination in an upward direction above an imaginary line extended from the light sources parallel to the ground. Fixtures shall be numbered such that adequate levels of lighting are maintained, but that light spillage and glare are not directed at adjacent property, neighboring areas, or motorists. Light posts shall be no taller than twenty feet. The Board found to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it provided for the types of uses and the residential densities recommended for a Community Mixed Use place. The board also found recommending APPROVAL of the rezoning request was reasonable and in the public interest because the project would provide housing and commercial services to those along the Carolina Beach Road corridor and nearby residents. The MOTION to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the proposed (CZD) B-1 and (CZD) R-5 rezoning request carried 6-0. Rezoning Request (Z23-02) – Request by Samuel Franck with Ward and Smith P.A., applicant, on behalf of Swartville, LLC, property owners, to rezone two unaddressed parcels (Parcel IDs R02500-002-030-000 and R02500-002-006-000) totaling approximately 104 acres of land located between Castle Hayne Road and Blue Clay Road south of Interstate I-140 from R-20, Residential to R-7, Residential Moderate Density. Current Planner Julian Griffee provided information pertaining to location, land classification, access, transportation, and zoning. He showed maps, aerials and photographs of the property and surrounding area and gave an overview of the proposed application as referred to in the staff report. Mr. Griffee stated that the request was to rezone two parcels totaling 104 acres from R-20 to R-7. He stated that property was located between Blue Clay Road and Castle Hayne Road, just south of I-140. He stated that the original zoning was applied in 1972, and zoning in the vicinity included B-2 and I-1 to the north across I-140, RMF-L to the east, R-10 to the south, and R-20 and R-10 to the west. Mr. Griffee stated that the applicant had indicated that access to the subject sites was provided by an access easement, connecting the sites to Castle Hayne Road, near the Rock Hill Road intersection. 5 | Page Mr. Griffee stated that compared with the maximum development allowed under the current R-20 zoning the proposed district’s maximum allowed density would result in 426 more dwelling units. He stated that the estimated traffic generated from those units, if developed as single-family detached units, would result in an additional 255 AM peak hour trips and an additional 367 PM peak hour trips. He stated that a traffic impact analysis was not required for straight rezonings as a specific development proposal was required to thoroughly analyze potential trip generation. Mr. Griffee stated that the subject property was located along an access easement that connected only to Castle Hayne Road, an NCDOT minor arterial, to the west and had no direct access from I-140 to the north and the CSX railroad right-of-way to the east. He stated that this area was located in close proximity to the Wrightsboro commercial node and the General Electric facility at Castle Hayne Road and I-140. Mr. Griffee stated that the 2016 Comprehensive Plan classified this parcel as within the General Residential place type, a designation intended to provide opportunities for low to moderate density housing. He stated that the proposed R-7 district allowed for a maximum of 6 dwelling units/acre, which was generally consistent with the density range recommended for the General Residential place type. He stated, along with the preferred density range, the proposal promoted the uses recommended within the General Residential place type, and supported the Comprehensive Plan’s goal to provide for a range of housing types and opportunities for households of different sizes and income. He stated that the subject site was in close proximity to the Employment Center and Urban Mixed Use place types located just north of I-140 at Castle Hayne Road. Mr. Griffee indicated that future development could accommodate residential developments that would support commercial and industrial developments that were anticipated within these place types. Mr. Griffee stated that staff found the request consistent with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because the proposal provided for the density and range of housing options recommended in the General Residential place type and in the public interest because the proposal could accommodate residential uses that could support the nearby Employment Center and Urban Mixed Use place types. Mr. Griffee stated that if the proposal were approved any future development would be subject to Technical Review Committee and zoning compliance review processes to ensure full compliance with all ordinance requirements. In response to questions of the Board regarding conducting a Traffic Impact Analysis, Mr. Griffee stated that a Traffic Impact Analysis would be required dependent upon the scale of development per the Unified Development Ordinance. He stated that a Traffic Impact Analysis was triggered at the 100 trips generated within the peak hours. He stated that because this proposal was a straight rezoning, there was no concept plan, so it was reviewed at the maximum density allowed within the zoning district. Chair Girardot opened the public hearing and recognized the applicant. Mr. Samuel Franck, applicant, provided a summary description of the proposed project. He stated that the site had not been designed so it was unknown the number of units there would be; however, it would include attached units, townhomes or triplexes that would generate a lower trip generation. He stated that presuming that it was less than the maximum density, it was an expectation that they would be over the 100 peak hour trip generation that would trigger a Traffic Impact Analysis. He stated that the community was in need of missing middle housing, less expensive moderate density housing that could support economic centers and reasonable population growth in the county. He stated that the proposal would provide for smaller lots and greater density which would result in less expensive housing options with the availability of water and sewer. Mr. Franck stated that the proposal was appropriate for the area and that he agreed with Mr. Griffee’s presentation of the proposal. Chair Girardot opened the hearing to those with questions or in opposition. With no one signed up to speak in opposition or with questions, Chair Girardot closed the public hearing and opened to Board discussion. 6 | Page Board discussion focused on site access, the site location, potential impacts on infrastructure, and the lack of a concept plan since not required for a straight rezoning. Board Member Pete Avery made a MOTION, SECONDED by Board Member Colin Tarrant, to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the proposed rezoning to an R-7. The Board found it to be CONSISTENT with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because the project provided for the density and range of housing options recommended in the General Residential place type. The Board also found RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the project was reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal could accommodate residential uses that could support the nearby Employment Center and Urban Mixed Use place types. The MOTION to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the proposed R-7 rezoning request carried 5-1. Vote: Yes – Colin Tarrant, Jeff Petroff, Donna Girardot, Hansen Matthews, Pete Avery; No – Clark Hipp. Rezoning Request (Z23-03) – Request by James Yopp with River Road Construction, LLC and Hoosier Daddy, LLC, applicant and property owner, to rezone 29 parcels totaling approximately 42.10 acres of land, including 5741 Carolina Beach Road and 18 unaddressed parcels on Shiloh Drive north of Manassas Drive, from R-15, Residential to CZD R-5, Residential Moderate High Density for 10 single-family residential lots and 327 residential townhomes with associated open space and amenity center. Senior Planner Robert Farrell provided information pertaining to location, land classification, access, transportation, and zoning. He showed maps, aerials and photographs of the property and surrounding area and gave an overview of the proposed application as referred to in the staff report. Mr. Farrell stated that the proposal was to rezone 42.10 acres from R-15 to CZD R-5. He stated that property was located at Carolina Beach Road, and the original zoning was applied in the 1970s. He stated that at the time, the purpose of the district was to ensure housing densities remained lower due to the need for private wells and septic systems. He stated that since then, public water and sewer has become available in the area. He stated that the total concept plan included 10 single-family lots with 327 single-family attached dwellings in quadruplexes, triplexes and duplexes, and that the concept plan could be broken into two interconnected portions. The southern portion at Shiloh Drive and Manassas Drive includes 24 quadraplex residential units, 2 triplex units, and 1 duplex for a total of 104 dwelling units. He stated that the southern portion of the project would connect with existing road stubs at Sweet Gum Drive, Sand Ridge Avenue, and Black Ash Run in the existing Tarin Woods Subdivision providing multiple points of ingress and egress through the development. He stated that Shiloh Drive was also proposed to extend north and connect to an adjoining commercially zoned parcel on Carolina Beach Road owned by the applicant. Mr. Farrell stated that while not under consideration as part of the proposed rezoning, future commercial services on the adjacent parcel would be accessible by vehicles through the connection. He stated that the concept plan showed the attached single-family units sited perpendicular to the rear of existing houses to reduce potential visual impacts, which had been included as a condition of the project. Mr. Farrell stated that the northern portion of the project included 10 single-family residential lots transitioning from Tarin Woods to the south into 23 quadraplex units, 40 triplexes, and 1 duplex for a total of 224 single-family attached residential units. He stated that the northern portion included a connection to the eastern end of Rosa Parks Lane that continued north to the new proposed roadway connection onto Carolina Beach Road. He stated that the connection to Rosa Parks Lane would not be for ingress or egress as Rosa Parks Lane was a private right-of-way. He stated that the applicant had proposed a condition to preserve existing landscaping or install traffic prevention measures to restrict access to Rosa Parks Lane from the existing and proposed developments. Mr. Farrell indicated that the new proposed access road would provide a continuous connection from Carolina Beach Road, through the proposed development and existing Tarin Woods, south to Manassas Drive and back to Carolina Beach Road with additional access east to Myrtle Grove Road. He stated that the placement of the proposed attached housing on the Ironwood Drive extension was designed to reduce the number of individual driveways to ensure the road served as a connector through street between Carolina Beach Road and Tarin Woods. Mr. Farrell stated that access was proposed at Manassas Drive, an NCDOT-maintained secondary road from Carolina Beach Road, an NCDOT-maintained Urban Principal Arterial highway, and a new proposed access road into the northern portion of the site parallel to Rosa Parks Lane. He stated that access at Manassas Drive was a right- in/right-out with a stoplight on Carolina Beach Road and that the new proposed access to the north of the site would 7 | Page be right-in/right-out. He stated that the proposed northern access road was currently under review by NCDOT and would increase internal circulation for existing developments and help mitigate additional traffic on Carolina Beach Road between The Kings Highway and Manassas Drive. Mr. Farrell provided information depicting the estimated trip generation for the site. He stated that the proposed development would generate approximately 170 AM and 200 PM peak hour trips. He stated that new developments that were anticipated to generate more than 100 trips during any peak hour were required to submit a Traffic Impact Analysis as part of their rezoning application. He stated that the approved Traffic Impact Analysis analyzed the development for three phases with a proposed 125 single-family dwellings and 241 townhomes and based on the unit count proposed in the Traffic Impact Analysis, the estimated trip generation resulted in 204 AM and 255 PM peak hour trips. He stated that the number of units analyzed by the Traffic Impact Analysis was higher than what was proposed in the current application resulting in a reduction of 33 AM and 54 PM peak hour trips. He stated that the proposed development would be built over three phases with the following notable roadway improvements: 1. The extension of the southbound U-turn Lane on Carolina Beach Road south of Rosa Parks Lane would provide 500 feet of storage, 50 feet of deceleration and 100 feet of taper and optimize single timings. 2. Construction of the new proposed site access to Carolina Beach Road with an internal protected stem of 175 feet measured from the right-of-way line with right-in / right-out ingress and egress lanes and stop controls on the westbound approach. 3. Construction of a northbound right turn lane on Carolina Beach Road from the U-turn bulb south of the proposed access. 4. The Traffic Impact Analysis required the developer to construct a future third access into the site meeting NCDOT roadway standards. Mr. Farrell noted that while this improvement was not included as part of the conditional rezoning application the applicant had included a condition requiring the future construction in accordance with the Traffic Impact Analysis. Mr. Farrell stated that the proposed attached housing type increased housing diversity in the area and acted as an appropriate transition between the commercially zoned Carolina Beach Road corridor and the existing lower density Tarin Woods Subdivision, which itself acted as a buffer for even lower density residential development east towards Myrtle Grove Road. He stated that the property was located south of the Myrtle Grove shopping center and Monkey Junction commercial node providing services, amenities, and educational and employment opportunities. He stated that the proposed concept plan included a new site access that would serve as an internal connector road for the existing and proposed residential developments in the area. He stated that the 2016 Comprehensive Plan classified the property as General Residential and Urban Mixed Use and because of the general nature of place type borders, sites located in proximity to the boundaries between place types could be appropriately developed with either place type, allowing site-specific features and evolving development patterns in the surrounding area to be considered. He stated that staff found the proposal was generally consistent with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan and recommended approval because the proposed density, housing type, and increased interconnectivity were in line with the recommendations of both the General Residential and Urban Mixed Use place types and the proposed development acted as an appropriate transition between existing commercial and residential use in the area. He stated that the applicant had agreed to four additional conditions related to reducing visual impacts on adjacent properties, roadway improvements, access, and stormwater: 1. Attached residential dwellings on the east side of Shiloh Drive shall be sited perpendicular to neighboring single-family residential lots. 2. The improvements required as part of each phase of the approved 2022 Traffic Impact Analysis must be completed by the end of the build out year listed in the TIA for each phase. Planning staff is authorized to accept 8 | Page changes to the timing provided such changes are approved by NCDOT and the WMPO. While not shown on the proposed development, the TIA required future third access into the site meeting NCDOT roadway standards for Phase 2 must be completed by the build out year of 2026 unless otherwise approved by NCDOT and the WMPO. 3. Existing trees shall be retained, or another appropriate traffic prevention measure shall be established at the eastern terminus of Rosa Parks Drive to prevent vehicular ingress and egress until such time a written agreement is reached to provide connectivity. An access easement shall be recorded on the final plat from the edge of pavement to the property line with Rosa Parks Drive to ensure the possibility of future access. 4. Any portion of the proposed development that utilizes any portion of the existing stormwater management system for Tarin Woods Subdivision that is not accepted into the Tarin Woods property owners’ association, must enter into a stormwater maintenance agreement with the Tarin Woods property owners’ association. Mr. Farrell stated that if the rezoning were approved it would be subject to Technical Review Committee and zoning compliance review processes to ensure full compliance with all ordinance requirements. In response to questions of the Board for a brief history of prior rezonings for this property, Mr. Farrell stated that this site had previously before the board at least 2-3 times over the past several years most with a request to rezone for higher density, and to his knowledge all resulted in either being withdrawn or denied. In response to questions of the Board regarding an additional Traffic Impact Analysis, Mr. Farrell stated that there would not be an additional TIA required for this project. Mr. Farrell stated that future development to the parcel to the north was not part of the current application. Chair Girardot opened the public hearing and recognized the applicant. Mr. James Yopp, applicant, agreed with the information provided by Mr. Farrell and provided a summary description of the proposed project. He stated that the proposal was a project that they had been working on for quite some time. He provided information indicating the changes from the initial rezoning showing new traffic access and egress if approved along with the new TIA studies that would need to be made along HWY 421 just south of the Rosa Parks Road. He provided information showing traffic flow out of the Tarin Woods subdivision to and from the surrounding school areas. He stated that the project was consistent, reasonable and in the public’s interest because it provided for increased housing with infill development on an under-utilized tract of land where access to utilities and road improvements already exist. He stated growth should be accommodated with a variety of housing types and price points, and that the proposal provided an orderly transition between the existing lower density residential areas and the anticipated higher density development adjacent to Carolina Beach Road. In response to questions of the Board about declarant rights to Tarin Woods, Mr. Yopp stated that he still had declarant rights and was trying to provide connectivity roads which was part of the operating agreement. In response to questions of the Board about the directional arrow indicated near the open space on the concept plan he had presented, Mr. Yopp stated that originally, he had been looking to provide roadway interconnectivity in that location; however, since the last proposal, they moved forward with the residential units which required additional open space. He stated that the directional arrow represented the area that would provide pedestrian access to an open space that would be part of the Tarin Woods community. In response to questions of the Board about the area surrounding the existing plat, Mr. Yopp explained that the colors on the site map indicated areas that had already been constructed. He stated that the new proposal for the area off of Shiloh Road, which was a dirt road and was never approved by NCDOT, had been platted as individual lots but had no water and sewer. Chair Girardot opened the hearing to those with questions or in opposition. Ms. Michelle O’Brien, 5949 Appomattox Drive, spoke in opposition to the project and expressed her concern about incorrect data in the 2021 traffic analysis and stated that there had been a growth in residents since then and did not include tourist season from May to August. She stated that the proposal created a traffic burden on US Hwy 421, 9 | Page Manassas Road, and other roads without the attempt to meet the guidelines of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan. She stated that data for the traffic impact analysis was conducted based on City of Wilmington and NCDOT guidelines and the proposed project was not within the City of Wilmington. She stated that the traffic count from September and December 2021 was incorrect because the COVID pandemic had a major effect on traffic. She stated traffic volumes increased 2 percent from September 2021 to September 2022. She stated that the applicant spoke about affordable housing; however, there was no commitment for housing in urban development, subsidized housing or to pricing levels that would be considered affordable, and that the applicant made no commitment as to the price of the government subsidy eligibility of the proposed housing. Ms. Barbara Garrow, 805 Liberty Landing Way, spoke in opposition to the project and expressed her concern with increased traffic on Carolina Beach Road, flooding in Tarin Woods, inability for emergency vehicles to get through streets with extra cars parked on road, and the density of the project. Ms. Chris Birkmeyer, 6149 Sweet Gum Drive, spoke in opposition to the project and expressed his concern with the proposed zoning and stated that R-7 zoning would be more appropriate. He stated that he was concerned with the traffic study and that there should be a dedicated connected road from the street system though the community that would be publicly maintained so that they did not have to bear that cost, and there needed to be conditions placed on the project regarding garages if there were to be any. Mr. Shawn Bunge, 6119 Tarin Road, spoke in opposition to the project and expressed his concern about the increase in traffic on Carolina Beach Road. He stated that the project went against the 2016 Comprehensive Plan and did not fit the area. He expressed concern with the Monkey Junction area not meeting the 2016 Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Joe Francheetti 1116 Tarin Road, spoke in opposition to the project and expressed his concern with increased density and the long-term plans for overcrowding and future failing infrastructure. Ms. Gail Tabor, 6130 Shiloh Drive, spoke in opposition to the project and expressed her concern about increased traffic onto and off of Shiloh Road onto Manassas Road. Ms. Vivian Ardecsky, 6001 Appomattox Drive, spoke in opposition to the project and expressed her concern about increased density in an already overcrowded area, increased traffic and accidents, and decreased home values. Ms. Brenda MCombie, 1150 The Kings Highway, expressed her concern was that NCDOT approve the egress point before the project is approved, and was in opposition of the project possibly coming over to the Kings Highway. Ms. Barbara Dinkins, 1017 Rosa Parks Road, expressed her concern with the density of the project and the ecosystem being destroyed. She stated that she thought it would be single family homes but asked the Board to consider that her property was adjacent to the project, and she was concerned about buffers around her property and the noise. In rebuttal to the opposition, Mr. Yopp stated that the Comprehensive Plan called for affordable housing and that the project site backed up to the Urban Mixed-Use areas and meets the requirements of the plan. He stated that parking on the road was part of the POA and was not approved in the subdivision but would be handled by the owner’s association. He stated that connectivity was a part of New Hanover County’s Technical Review Committee and that they have met the required obligations and made improvements as part of utility improvements and interconnectivity for the growth of New Hanover County. He stated that there were sidewalks in the subdivision as a requirement of R-15 zoning. He stated that this was a better way to provide egress and ingress related to evacuation routes. Mr. Howard Resnick, Engineer, stated that the traffic counts were taken in 2021 when they were cleared to resume taking traffic counts. He stated the counts did not include summer traffic as schools were not in session and would add to the traffic count; however, the traffic counts represented in this project did represent an average weekday of an average time of year. Mr. Yopp stated that Manassas Road was an NCDOT right of way and controlled by the NCDOT. He stated that after the completion of the dual rights and the improvements on Carolina Beach Road, NCDOT repaved Manassas Road. Mr. Resnick stated that Manassas Road was clearly signed for the U-turn movement and requirement to yield and it was a violation of statute not to do so. 10 | Page Mr. William Mintz , 614 Antietam Drive, spoke in opposition of the project and expressed his concern with the wetlands and the Venus flytraps no longer there. He expressed his concern with traffic on Manassas Road and flooding in the area. In response to questions from the Board regarding traffic studies conducted during tourist season, Mr. Scott James, WMPO stated that tourist traffic count would not be used for development review was because they wanted to review consistent local traffic, and tourist traffic would be considered seasonal and hard to use as a predictive factor for any type of infrastructure. He stated that this concern had been heard before and his staff are scheduled to conduct summer traffic counts to include the work week and weekend traffic to be able to provide a more indicative number of what the tourism brings in terms of daily and weekend numbers. He stated that the most recent counts that could be offered would be from 2022 for certain locations and 2021 for all count locations. He stated that planning capacity as outlined in the staff report was not the ultimate measured capacity of the road but was capacity at which the WMPO would recommend the government consider taking additional action. Chair Girardot closed the public hearing and opened it for Board discussion. Based on Board member discussion which focused on the future development, added density and traffic capacity of the corridor, Mr. Yopp requested a continuance to the March 2, 2023, Planning Board meeting. Board Member Clark Hipp made a MOTION, SECONDED by Vice Chair Jeff Petroff, to approve a CONTINUANCE to the March 2, 2023, Planning Board Meeting. The motion to approve a continuance to the March 2, 2023, Planning Board Meeting carried 6-0. Rezoning Request (Z23-04) – Request by James Yopp with River Road Construction, LLC, applicant and property owner, to rezone two parcels totaling approximately 13.94 acres of land located at 6900 Carolina Beach Road from R-15, Residential and CZD O&I, Office and Institutional to CZD RMF-L, Residential Multi-Family – Low Density and CZD B-2, Regional Business for a storage facility and 126 multi-family units. Current Planner Amy Doss provided information pertaining to location, land classification, access, transportation, and zoning. She showed maps, aerials and photographs of the property and surrounding area and gave an overview of the proposed application as referred to in the staff report. Ms. Doss stated that the proposal was to rezone a portion of two parcels totaling 13.94 to CZD RMF-L and CZD B-2 district to develop 126 multi-family units and a 6,000 square feet mini storage facility. She stated that on June 16, 2014, the property was rezoned to CZD O&I for Boat and RV storage with 74 berths permitted outside. She stated that there was currently a single-family residence located on the site and that the applicant proposed to construct a 6,000 square foot mini storage and 126 Multi Family units located in 7 buildings and that amenities included a pool and walking trails through the passive recreation open space. She stated that access to the subject property was proposed from Carolina Beach Road, an NCDOT maintained Urban Principal Arterial and would be limited to a right-in/right-out movement on Carolina Beach Road with a secondary access from Southern Charm Drive, a local NCDOT road. She indicated that no gates would be installed at these access points and all storage would be interior and was subject to the design standards from the 2020 Unified Development Ordinance. Ms. Doss stated that as currently zoned, the development would generate approximately 20 AM and 30 PM peak hour trips. She stated that under the proposed development the site would generate approximately 63 AM and 76 PM trips for an increase of approximately 43 AM peak hour trips and 46 PM peak hour trips. She stated the adjacent property was mainly single family residential and conservation, with a business use in close proximity along Carolina Beach Road. She stated that the proposed mixed-use project located the commercial use along Carolina Beach Road and low-density multi-family housing between R-15 and performance R-15, providing a transitional type of infill development. She stated that the 2016 Comprehensive Plan classified the area as Community Mixed Use and that this project was generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s recommendations for the Community Mixed Use place type, promoting a mix of commercial and residential development at moderate densities. She stated that staff found the proposal was generally consistent with the recommended uses for the General Residential and Community Mixed Use place types, the context and compatibility were congruent with the evolving residential and commercial development patterns in the immediate surrounding area, and with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan. 11 | Page The following proposed conditions were proposed by the applicant and staff: 1. Any RV and Boat storage must be located on the interior of the mini storage and may not be visible from a public right-of-way. 2. The access easement from Southern Charm to Carolina Beach Road shall have a public access easement. 3. The access easements from both Southern Charm Drive and Carolina Beach Road shall not be gated. 4. Multi-family structures shall be limited to three stories. The mini storage height will be limited to 3 stories or 50 feet. Ms. Doss stated that if the rezoning were approved it would be subject to Technical Review Committee and zoning compliance review processes to ensure full compliance with all ordinance requirements. In response to questions from the Board about the density for the adjoining property, Ms. Doss stated that the property was performance R-15 and that she did not calculate the density for the adjoining property. In response to questions from the Board about height limitations, Ms. Doss stated that the proposed condition stated that the mini storage height will be limited to 3 stories or 50 feet. Ms. Rebekah Roth, Director of Planning, stated that the current height in the B-2 district was limited to 3 stories or 50 feet and was part of the amendment adopted in 2021. She stated even though the condition was keeping the project to the height limits currently allowed within the district, that meant if the county changed the ordinance in the future and additional height was possible, this project would still be limited to the height limits currently in the ordinance. Chair Girardot opened the public hearing and recognized the applicant. Mr. James Yopp, applicant, provided a summary description of the proposed project and agreed with the information provided by Ms. Doss and Ms. Roth. Mr. Yopp stated that the egress and ingress was off Carolina Beach Road just south of Southern Charm Way and the passageway though did connect and provide a new means of egress and ingress for emergency services to the Cape Cod subdivision as well as the proposed apartment complex. He stated that the condition that they agreed to as not to gate that means of ingress and egress in connection to Southern Charm Way or Carolina Beach Road, however there may some gating allowed into the storage facility since it would probably not be always manned. He referenced the study provided from the Traffic Impact Analysis that indicated that the project did not meet the 100-vehicle threshold to trigger a Traffic Impact Analysis. He stated that the proposal was consistent with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan and in the public interest because it provided for increased housing with infill development on an underutilized tract of land where access to utilities and road improvements already existed. He stated that growth should be accommodated with a variety of housing types and price points and that the proposal provided an orderly transition between the existing lower-density residential areas and the anticipated higher-density development adjacent to Carolina Beach Road. In response to questions from the Board about storage at the facility, Mr. Yopp stated there was no laydown yard on this site and that the square footage was limited based on the setbacks to the B-2 zoning. He stated that buffer and parking requirements still had to be met. He stated there would be no outside storage. In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Yopp stated there were wetlands on the western part of the site and that the site was currently zoned for RVs and boats and is being requested to be changed to mini storage along Carolina Beach Road. He stated that the concepts of architectural design are still being talked about. In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Yopp stated that the increase in size of the storage facility beyond staff’s description would not affect the acreage of the proposed development. He stated there was existing vegetation on the northern and southern parts of the site that they were looking to retain. He stated that the anticipated separation between the adjoining residential property would be a vegetative buffer based on the needs of the site. Ms. Roth stated that she would have to research further but that there was no county standard requiring a vegetative buffer between the multi- family component of this project and the commercial component, however if it was something that the board was interested in, that may be something that Mr. Yopp would agree to offer as a condition. Mr. Yopp stated that fencing and gates were anticipated around the mini storage and gating around the perimeter. He stated that they would keep the 20- 12 | Page foot buffer to maintain the significant trees and landscape in the area along with the existing fence and would agree to it as a condition. In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Yopp stated that for an enclosed facility, there was a different type of egress and ingress than that of an open and exposed storage facility. Chair Girardot opened the hearing to those with questions or in opposition. Mr. Jeremy Eller, 128 McQuillan Drive, spoke in opposition to the project and expressed his concern about the increase in traffic on Carolina Beach Road and the utilization of Myrtle Grove Road and McQuillan Road. He stated a 3-story development surrounding the smaller community did not fit the area. Mr. Shawn Bunge, 6119 Tarin Road, spoke in opposition to the project and expressed his concern with the impact on the school system and the increased traffic in the area. He stated the density of the project was not conducive with the current road system in place. He spoke about lack of interconnectivity to local businesses, sidewalks and bike lanes or bike paths and things that would improve the community. Ms. Jen Mangiacapre, 818 Southern Charm Drive, spoke in opposition to the project and expressed her concern about increased traffic and stacking lanes onto Southern Charm Drive. She spoke of increased noise to the area, the type of buffering and safety behind the project, trash maintenance and storage, and lighting. In response to the question posed by Ms. Mangiacapre, Mr. Scott James, WMPO, stated that the NCDOT would review whether the turn lane for the project to the north for that site needed to be continued or whether it could have a break. He stated that his understanding was that the current proposal would have a continuous turn lane that would terminate at the existing public access easement. This, being a separate project, would not necessarily require the turn lane to be made continuous across the interstitial part between the two. He stated that the concern as raised, would be that if the NCDOT looked at the location of both consecutive turn lanes, and realized that the weaving maneuver that may result was more trouble than it was worth, then the NCDOT could condition that turn lane be made continuous or full length; this could result in what would in effect be a third travel lane. In response to Mr. Scott James’ comment, Mr. Howard Resnick, Engineer, stated that the NCDOT turn lane improvement plan showed the extension for the existing turn lane that currently served McQuillan Drive extending in front of the project all the way to Southern Charm Way. In rebuttal to the opposition, Mr. Yopp stated that the proposed project did not connect to McQuillan Road. He stated there could be a connection from one of the stub roads across from one of the water treatment stations, but he chose not to provide that connection because it would impact some wetland area and it was a concern brought up at one of the community meetings. He stated that egress and ingress was going directly out on to Carolina Beach Road. He stated as a concern about Southern Charm Road, there was a stub road for interconnectivity, and it was recommended by staff that they make it an interconnectivity point because Southern Charm Road was currently one way in and one way out and provided a dual way in and out. Mr. Yopp stated that he did not have information regarding a bike plan along Carolina Beach Road. He stated redistricting would be handled by the School Board. He stated that the project followed the 2016 Comprehensive Plan and the need for housing affordability and that the units were condensed to townhome sized units and not as large as apartments. He stated that during TRC process, they must show adequate trash/recycling locations on the site as part of approval. Chair Girardot closed the public hearing and opened it for Board discussion. Board discussion focused on the proposed structure height and adequate buffers, Board Member Clark Hipp made a MOTION, SECONDED by Vice Chair Jeff Petroff, to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the proposed (CZD) RMF-L and (CZD) B-2 for multi-family development and mini storage with the following conditions: 1. Any RV and Boat storage must be located on the interior of the mini storage and may not be visible from a public right-of-way. 2. The access easement from Southern Charm to Carolina Beach Road shall have a public access easement. 3. The access easements from both Southern Charm Drive and Carolina Beach Road shall not be gated. 13 | Page 4. Multi-family structures shall be limited to three stories. The mini storage height will be limited to 3 stories or 50 feet. 5. The bufferyard between the new residential structure and the adjacent residential be no less than 20-feet. The Board found it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because it was in an area designated as Community Mixed Use and General Residential and provided for the types of uses recommended by these place types. The residential densities were in line with those recommended within these place types, and the project would provide housing and commercial services to those along the Carolina Beach Road corridor and nearby residents as recommended in the Comprehensive Plan. The Board also found APPROVAL of the rezoning request was reasonable and in the public interest because the proposed residential and commercial uses were in line with the density and uses in the surrounding area. The motion to recommend approval of the proposed rezoning to (CZD) RMF-L and (CZD) B-2 carried 6-0. Rezoning Request (Z23-05) – Request by Frank Chapman with Davie Construction Co., applicant, on behalf of Milton Turner Schaeffer, III, property owner, to rezone the approximately 1.7-acre parcel located at 4629 Carolina Beach Road from CZD B-2, Regional Business to a new CZD B-2 district to convert an existing single-family home for office and veterinary services. Current Planner Julian Griffee provided information pertaining to location, land classification, access, transportation, and zoning. He showed maps, aerials and photographs of the property and surrounding area and gave an overview of the proposed application as referred to in the staff report. Mr. Griffee stated that the proposal was to rezone 1.7 acres from CZD B-2 to a different CZD B-2 to renovate a vacant single-family dwelling for veterinary services. He stated that the subject site and the adjacent .22-acre parcel to the south were originally a part of the Carolina Dog Sports development approved in case Z21-20. He stated that since then, the .22-acre parcel was rezoned to allow for a residential use of that property and that the subject site remained zoned to allow for the development and uses adopted as outlined within the Carolina Dog Sports development, which limited the uses allowed to Indoor Recreation Facilities, Retail Sales, General, and Animal Grooming Services. He stated that the site plan that was submitted required a stormwater control facility, though none was intended. He stated that the applicant worked with engineering to create a slightly different plan, which was below the impervious area threshold that required a stormwater device. He stated that the applicant proposed to remove two well houses and an existing manufactured home located behind the single-family dwelling and to limit future uses to Veterinary Services, as well as the three approved uses within Z21-20 – Indoor Recreation Facilities, Retail Sales, General, and Animal Grooming Services. Mr. Griffee stated that the currently approved development was estimated to generate more trips than the proposal. He provided the estimated peak hour trips for the Carolina Dog Sports facility indicating 46 AM peak hour trips and 73 PM peak hour trips and estimated peak hour trips for the for the 2,400 square foot Veterinary Services use indicating 7 AM peak hour trips and 4 PM peak hour trips. He also provided trip generation figures for the requested uses, if the development were to change operations into one of those permitted uses. He stated that the property fronted Carolina Beach Road and was expected to be a right-in, right-out only access. He stated that the proposed site plan reduced the overall square footage from what was currently approved by approximately 19,600 square feet, that the uses within this proposal contributed towards the mixture of uses already existing within the area, and that the proposal could serve as a transitional use between the adjacent commercial mini-storage facility and residential uses. He stated that the 2016 Comprehensive Plan classified the property as Community Mixed Use, which recommended a mixture of uses that included low to moderate intensity retail and services that could support nearby neighborhoods. He stated that the subject site was located on Carolina Beach Road between an established residential use and institutional establishments where transitional commercial uses could be appropriate. He stated that the proposal was in line with the uses recommended within the Community Mixed Use place type. 14 | Page He stated that staff found the proposal generally consistent with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan, was in the public interest, and recommended approval with the following applicant’s proposed condition: 1. Permitted uses of the site are limited to Veterinary Services, Indoor Recreational Facility, Retail Sales, General, and Animal Grooming Services. Mr. Griffee stated that if the rezoning were approved it would be subject to Technical Review Committee and zoning compliance review processes to ensure full compliance with all ordinance requirements. In response to questions from the Board regarding the use of the site, Mr. Griffee stated that the delineated vacant single-family structure would be rehabbed and renovated for veterinary services. He stated that the ordinance outlined whether deviations to an approved concept plan could be approved administratively. He stated that increasing the square footage could trigger a major deviation that would have to go through another rezoning process. Ms. Roth stated that under the minor deviation standards staff had the ability to approve something that was enlarged by no more than 10 percent; however, because the proposal was just under the impervious surface threshold that would require a stormwater facility, it was unlikely that even that level of increase would not trigger a change to the site layout that would require it to return to this board. Chair Girardot opened the public hearing and recognized the applicant. Mr. Frank Chapman applicant provided a summary description of the proposed project and provided visual information showing the proposed renovation of the single-family structure and the proposed site plan. Chair Girardot opened the hearing to those with questions or in opposition. With no one signed up to speak in opposition or with questions, Chair Girardot closed the public hearing and opened to Board discussion. Vice Chair Jeff Petroff made a MOTION, SECONDED by Board Member Clark Hipp, to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the proposed (CZD) B2 with the following condition: 1. Permitted uses of the site are limited to Veterinary Services, Indoor Recreational Facility, Retail Sales, General, and Animal Grooming Services. The Board found it to be CONSISTENT with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan because the project provided a type of use recommended in the Community Mixed Use place type. The Board also found recommending APPROVAL of the rezoning request was reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal was located within an area that possessed a mixture of uses and higher intensities. The proposal was similar in form and density to other nearby projects and would serve as a benefit as it provided an appropriate transition between adjacent land uses. The motion to recommend approval of the rezoning to CZD B-2 carried 6-0. OTHER ITEMS Ms. Roth presented some Unified Development Ordinance amendment concepts. She stated they were not time sensitive and would not be brought back to this board until an undesignated future time. She stated that the first was the Electric Vehicle Charging Station standards originally presented this past fall. Staff was continuing to work with stakeholders to put together some draft language to bring back before the Board in the future before releasing it for public comment. She stated staff had also had some conversations regarding questions received about community meetings because not everyone held community meetings in the same manner, and there weren’t clear expectations for either the Board or for residents as to what is really expected. She stated that in the county’s current ordinance standards, staff was very limited on what was required for a complete application submittal and staff anticipated updating forms for greater consistency and to provide clearer expectations as to what is appropriate before submitting something that comes before the Board. Chair Donna Girardot adjourned the meeting at 9:08 PM. Please note that the above minutes are not a verbatim record of the New Hanover County Planning Board Meeting.