Agenda 2006 12-04
AGENDA NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Assembb Room, New Hanover County Historic Courthouse
24 North Third Street, Room 301
Wdmington, NC
ROBERT G. GREER, CHAIRMAN. WilLIAM A. CASTER, VICE-CHAIRMAN
TED DAVIS, JR., COMMISSIONER. WilLIAM A. KOPP, JR., COMMISSIONER. NANCY H. PRITCHETT, COMMISSIONER
BRUCE T. SHELL, COUNTY MANAGER' WANDA COPLEY, COUNTY ATTORNEY' SHEILA SCHULT, CLERK TO THE BOARD
December 4, 2006 5:30 p.m.
Meeting Called to Order............ ......... ................................. ........ .................. ........Chairman Robert G. Greer
Invocation. . . . . . . .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... . . . . . . . . .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .Pastor Patrick Hall
Pledge of Allegiance.. ..........................................................................................................v ice-Chairman William A. Caster
Approval of Minutes - Regular Meeting November 13,2006...... .... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .... ... ... ...... ..Chairman Greer
Meeting of Water and Sewer District - Approval of November 13,2006 Minutes....District Chairman William A. Kopp, Jr.
Administration of Oaths of Office
Robert G. Greer... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . The Honorable John 1. Carroll, III, Chief District Court Judge
William A. Caster...... ........................... .......... The Honorable John J. Carroll, Ill, Chief District Court Judge
Election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman... ................ ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ..Wanda M. Copley, County Attorney Presiding
Meeting of Water and Sewer District
Election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman... ... . . . . . .. . . . .. ... . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .... Wanda M. Copley, County Attorney Presiding
Break
ESTIMATED ITEMS OF BUSINESS Page
TIMES No.
6:00 p.m. 1. Approval of Consent Agcnda 5
6:05 p.m. 2. 19
6: 10 p.m. 3.1 Public Hearing 21
Modification of Approved Site Plan - Request by Howard Capps for Diako
Construction, Inc. to Increase the Size of the Convenience Center and to
Modify the Layout of the Approved Site Plan Originally Approved by
Conditional Rezoning on 10/05 for a Convenience Center and Boat Storage
Facility at 4601 Gordon Road (Z-802, 07/05)
6:25 p.m. 3.2 Public Hcaring 35
Conditional District Rezoning - Request by Howard Penton, III to Rezone
Approximately 34.98 Acres Located at 4299 N. College Road from R-I5
Residential and a Sliver of 1-2 Industrial Zoning District to CD(R-IO)
Conditional District for Residential Use (Z-852, 11/06)
6:55 p.m. 3.3 47
Conditional District Rezoning - Request by SENCA Properties, LLC to
Rezone Approximately 50.35 Acres Located in the 9000 Block of Market
Street as Follows: 31.31 Acres from R-I5 Residential to CD(O&I)
Conditional District for Expansion of New Hanover County Regional Medical
Center Facilities and Stormwater Facilities; and 18.47 acres from R-I5
Residential to CD(B-l) Conditional District for a Variety of Mixed Uses (Z-
853, 11/06)
7:35 p.m. 3.4 Public Hearing 67
Rezoning - Request by Ward & Smith, P A for Bill Clark Homes of
Wilmington, LLC to Rezone 104.6 Acres Between the 2000 and 2100 Blocks
of Castle Hayne Road from R-20 to R-15 Residential District (Z-854, 11/06)
8:00 p.m. Break
8: 10 p.m. 3.5 Public Hearing 77
Conditional Use Zoning District (continued from November 13,2006) -
Request by Ward and Smith, P A for Bill Clark Homes of Wilmington, LLC to
Rezone Approximately 5.8 Acres at 5025 and 5031 Carolina Beach Road (off
Appeals Road) from R-15 to CD(R-1O) High Density (Z-851, 10/06)
8:30 p.m. 4. 91
Special Use Permit - Request by David Ward Concerning Validity of Original
Special Use Permit (S-13, 06/71)
9: 10 p.m. 5. 133
9:20 p.m. 6. Presentation: 2007 Countvwide Revaluation 135
9:25 p.m. 7. Meeting of the Water and Sewer District 137
10: 10 p.m. 8. Non-Agenda Items (limit three minutes)
10:20 p.m. 9. Additional Items
County Manager
Commissioners
Clerk to the Board
County Attorney
10:30 p.m. ADJOURN
Note: Times listed for each item are estimated, and if a preceding item takes less
time, the Board will move forward until the agenda is completed.
2
MEETING OF THE WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT
ASSEMBL Y ROOM, NEW HANOVER COUNTY HISTORIC COURTHOUSE
24 NORTH THIRD STREET, ROOM 301
WILMINGTON, NC
ESTIMATED ITEMS OF BUSINESS Page
TIMES No.
9:25 p.m. 1. Non-Agenda Items (limit three minutes)
9:30 p.m. 2. Presentation: Highwav 421 Wastewater System Update 139
9:45 p.m. 3. Consideration of A \vard of Change Order for Phased Wellficld Construction 141
and Approval of Associated Budget Amendment 2007-39
9:55 p.m. 4. 145
Wellficld, Concentrate Line and Drinking Water Lines - Final Design.
Pennitting, Easements and Wetlands Mitigation and MonitOling and Approval
of Associated Budget Amendment 2007-38
This page intentionally left blank.
CONSENT AGENDA
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ITEMS OF BUSINESS Page
No.
1. 7
2. Approval to Accept Work First Demonstration Grant, Approve New Position and 9
3. Annual Approval of Public Official Bonds 11
Approval of Budget Amendments:
4.1 07-085 Environmental Management - WASTEC 13
4.2 07-091 Sheriff's Office 15
This page intentionally left blank.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Consent Item #: 1 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: County Manager Presenter:
Contact: Andre Mallette
SUBJECT:
Reconsideration of the Request by Planning Staff to Name a Newly Constructed Service Road located Just
Northwest of the Porters Neck Road/Market Street Intersection and Running Parallel to US Highway 17 North,
Porters Neck Community
BRIEF SUMMARY:
A solution has been reached with emergency service personnel that will not require us to rename this stretch of road. A
sign will be posted to identify the turn onto the service road and those properties along that road will be identified in our
emergency system. This will allow emergency 911 services to be provided without the residents' addresses changing.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: N/A FINANCE: N/A BUDGET: N/A HUMAN RESOURCES: Approve
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Consider solution.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 4-1, Pritchett opposing.
This page intentionally left blank.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Consent Item #: 2 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: DSS Presenters: LaVaughn Nesmith, Ann Barkley
Contacts: LaVaughn Nesmith, Ann Barkley
SUBJECT:
Request to Accept Work First Demonstration Grant, Approve New Position and Associated Budget Amendment
BRIEF SUMMARY:
DSS recently received notification of approval for a Work First Demonstration grant entitled, "Building on Strengths and
Partnerships." This grant was awarded with the purpose of implementing strategies to (1) move the Work First eligible
population more quickly into employment, (2) assist in increasing North Carolina's Work First participation rate to ensure
continued Federal funding, and (3) provide the Work First population with sufficient supportive services to increase their
employability. DSS requested $236,603 and was awarded the total amount for FY 06-07.
Within that budget, one Social Worker (Zone 1) position was requested, which will be utilized as a job coach/job locator for
Work First clients. For FY 06-07 the grant includes an allocation of $30,311, which includes fringe benefits, beginning
January 1,2007. It requires no County dollars and will be funded as long as grant money is received. It is anticipated that
allocations will be received for at least two additional years. DSS is requesting approval ofthis grant and position.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Approve grant, position and associated budget amendment.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: No Change In Position(s) Number of Positions: 1
Explanation: This position will be fully funded with State money. The position will be eliminated if/when funds are
discontinued.
ATTACHMENTS:
~
iii.:":::':
07-087.doc
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: N/A FINANCE: Approve BUDGET: HUMAN RESOURCES: Approve
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Recommend approval.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Budget Amendment
BUDGET AMENDMENT Number: 07-087
DEPARTMENT: Department of Social Services
BE IT ORDAINED by the New Hanover County Commissioners that the following amendment be made to the annual
budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2007:
Section 1. The following appropriation is hereby made to the General Fund, and that the following revenue is estimated to
be available to meet this appropriation.
Expenditure Decrease Increase
Work First Demonstration Grant:
Salaries and Wages $23,297
Social Security Taxes $1,783
Retirement-local Government $1,139
long Term Disability $65
Medical Insurance Expense $4,027
Contract Services $54,200
TANF Grant Child Daycare $130,092
Client Transportation $22,000
Revenue Decrease Increase
Work First Demonstration Grant:
Work First Demonstration Grant $236,603
EXPLANATION: To accept new Work First Demonstration Grant entitled "Building on Strengths and Partnerships"
that will aid Work First participants. This Grant supports the hiring of a new Social Worker position.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
APPROVAL STATUS: To be approved by Board Of Commissioners
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Consent Item #: 3 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Legal Presenter: Kemp Burpeau, Deputy County Attorney
Contact: Kemp Burpeau, Deputy County Attorney
SUBJECT:
Annual Approval of Public Official Bonds
BRIEF SUMMARY:
Pursuant to General Statute 58-72-20, the Board is to annually review the Surety Bond coverage for the Finance Officer,
Sheriff, Register of Deeds and Tax Collector. Staff has verified that adequate coverage is in full force and effect.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Enact Bond Approval Resolution.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: No Change In Position(s) Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
~
. ......
... .
B ondt..pprovalil.nnual. doc
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: FINANCE: Approve BUDGET: HUMAN RESOURCES: N/A
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Recommend approval.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOND APPROVAL
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 58 of the North Carolina General Statutes, the
Board of County Commissioners conducts an annual review of public official bonds;
and
WHEREAS, said bonds have been reviewed by the County Attorney and found
to be in full force and to be in proper format.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of County Commissioners does hereby approve
the Surety Bond for the Finance Officer, Sheriff, Register of Deeds, and Tax Collector.
This designation of approval is hereby incorporated within the respective bond as if set
out in its entirety on the face thereof.
This the 4th day of December, 2006.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY
(SEAL)
Chairman
Board of County Commissioners
ATTEST:
Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Budget Amendment
Consent Item #: 4.1 Estimated Time: Page Number:
BUDGET AMENDMENT Number: 07-085
DEPARTMENT: Environmental Management - WASTEC
BE IT ORDAINED by the New Hanover County Commissioners that the following amendment be made to the annual
budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2007:
Section 1. The following appropriation is hereby made to the Environmental Management Fund, and that the following
revenue is estimated to be available to meet this appropriation.
Expenditure Decrease Increase
Environmental Management -
WASTEC:
Capital Outlay Equipment $70,427
Revenue Decrease Increase
Environmental Management -
WASTEC:
Miscellaneous Revenue $70,427
EXPlANA TION: Insurance payment received for the loss of SP-1200 CAT loader/tractor to a fire. Funds to be put
toward the purchase of a replacement loader/tractor.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
APPROVAL STATUS: To be approved by Board Of Commissioners
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
This page intentionally left blank.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Budget Amendment
Consent Item #: 4.2 Estimated Time: Page Number:
BUDGET AMENDMENT Number: 07-091
DEPARTMENT: Sheriffs Office
BE IT ORDAINED by the New Hanover County Commissioners that the following amendment be made to the annual
budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2007:
Section 1. The following appropriation is hereby made to the General Fund, and that the following revenue is estimated to
be available to meet this appropriation.
Expenditure Decrease Increase
Contingencies:
Contingencies $5,574
Sheriff's Office:
Support Services:
Capital Outlay - Equipment $5,574
Revenue Decrease Increase
EXPLANATION: To budget General fund/Contingency funds of $5,574 (one-half of the $11,148 cost) for a wireless
panic alarm security system to be installed in the County Courthouse.
The Sheriff will pay one-half of the alarm system's cost from Federally Forfeited Property funds. The Sheriff is
requesting Board approval to use Contingency funds to pay one-half of the cost.
The wireless system includes 22 panic alarm buttons located throughout the Courthouse for additional security.
The panic buttons will tie into the current radio system used by the Deputies assigned to the Courthouse.
ADDITIONALINFORMA TION: With approval of this budget amendment, the amount available in Contingency will
be $314,082.
APPROVAL STATUS: To be approved by Board Of Commissioners
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
This page intentionally left blank.
REGULAR AGENDA
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ESTIMATED ITEMS OF BUSINESS Page
TIMES No.
6:00 p.m. 1. Approval of Consent Agenda 5
6:05 p.m. 2. Consideration of a Proclamation to Designate the First Fifteen Days of 19
December 2006 "Stockings for Seniors Days"
6: 10 p.m. 3.1 Public Hearing 21
Modification of Approved Site Plan - Request by Howard Capps for Diako
Construction, Inc. to Increase the Size of the Convenience Center and to
Modify the Layout of the Approved Site Plan Originally Approved by
Conditional Rezoning on 10/05 for a Convenience Center and Boat Storage
Facility at 4601 Gordon Road (Z-802, 07/05)
6:25 p.m. 3.2 Public Hearing 35
Conditional District Rezoning - Request by Howard Penton, III to Rezone
Approximately 34.98 Acres Located at 4299 N. College Road from R-15
Residential and a Sliver of 1-2 Industrial Zoning District to CD(R-lO)
Conditional District for Residential Use (Z-852, 11/06)
6:55 p.m. 3.3 Public Hearing 47
Conditional District Rezoning - Request by SENCA Properties, LLC to
Rezone Approximately 50.35 Acres Located in the 9000 Block of Market
Street as Follows: 31.31 Acres from R-15 Residential to CD(O&I)
Conditional District for Expansion of New Hanover County Regional Medical
Center Facilities and Stormwater Facilities; and 18.47 acres from R-15
Residential to CD(B-l) Conditional District for a Variety of Mixed Uses (Z-
853, 11/06)
7:35 p.m. 3.4 Public Hearing 67
Rezoning - Request by Ward & Smith, P A for Bill Clark Homes of
Wilmington, LLC to Rezone 104.6 Acres Between the 2000 and 2100 Blocks
of Castle Hayne Road from R-20 to R-15 Residential District (Z-854, 11/06)
8:00 p.m. Break
8: 10 p.m. 3.5 Public Hearing 77
Conditional Use Zoning District (continued from November 13,2006) -
Request by Ward and Smith, P A for Bill Clark Homes of Wilmington, LLC to
Rezone Approximately 5.8 Acres at 5025 and 5031 Carolina Beach Road (off
Appeals Road) from R-15 to CD(R-lO) High Density (Z-85l, 10/06)
8:30 p.m. 4. Public Hearing 91
Special Use Permit - Request by David Ward Concerning Validity of Original
Special Use Permit (S-13, 06/71)
9: 10 p.m. 5. Consideration of Countywide Goals for FY07-08 133
9:20 p.m. 6. Presentation: 2007 Countywide Revaluation 135
9:25 p.m. 7. Meeting of the Water and Sewer District 137
10: 10 p.m. 8. Non-Agenda Items (limit three minutes)
10:20 p.m. 9. Additional Items
County Manager
Commissioners
Clerk to the Board
County Attorney
10:30 p.m. ADJOURN
Note: Times listed for each item are estimated, and if a preceding item takes less
time, the Board will move forward until the agenda is completed.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Regular Item #: 2 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Aging Presenters: Annette Crumpton and Faye Jacobs
Contacts: Annette Crumpton or Faye Jacobs
SUBJECT:
Consideration of a Proclamation to Designate December 1-15,2006 "Stockings for Seniors Days"
BRIEF SUMMARY:
For the past three years, the Department of Aging has partnered with Comfort Keepers to provide Christmas gifts for Home
Delivered Meals, Congregate Nutrition clients and Foster Grandparent volunteers. In 2005, four hundred and sixty gifts
were distributed to elderly persons identified as needing assistance or who are alone.
The Department of Aging and Comfort Keepers are requesting that the Commissioners proclaim December 1-15 as
"Stockings for Seniors Days" in New Hanover County. On December 2, 2006, a Christmas tree will be placed at Wal-mart
(Monkey Junction). The tree will contain stocking ornaments with Christmas gift wishes. The public will have an
opportunity to adopt a senior for whom they will purchase a gift. During December 1-15, trees will be located at K& W
Restaurant and Chick - Fil-A (Market Street and Mayfaire). Stockings for Seniors will make Christmas a joyous time for
these seniors.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Request Commissioners proclaim the first 15 days of December as "Stockings for Seniors Days" in New Hanover County.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: No Change In Position(s) Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
~
........
. ..
Stockings for Seniors Proclamation. doc
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: N/A FINANCE: N/A BUDGET: N/A HUMAN RESOURCES: N/A
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Recommend approval.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
PROCLAMATION
BY THE
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
STOCKINGS FOR SENIORS DAYS
2006
WHEREAS, seniors are one of the most vital and growing populations within our community;
and
WHEREAS, as the senior population of New Hanover County increases, so does the need for
additional assistance and services; and
WHEREAS, the Meals on Wheels Department of the New Hanover County Department of
Aging and Comfort Keepers, a local in-home care company, have collaborated to create a project
focusing on securing and distributing holiday gifts donated by caring citizens to seniors who need
assistance or have issues of isolation and loneliness; and
WHEREAS, in 2003, the Angels for Seniors project originated and 250 seniors who were
enrolled in the elderly nutrition program known as home Delivered Meals at the Department of
Aging were identified as having unmet basic needs and became the recipients of much needed
items of necessity as gifts; and
WHEREAS, from 2003-2005, the Angels for Seniors project secured and distributed much
needed items of necessity as gifts to a total of 1,085 seniors who were enrolled in the Department
of Aging elderly nutrition program known as Home Delivered Meals and Congregate Nutrition
and also to those enrolled in the Foster Grandparent Program; and
WHEREAS, in 2006 the Angels for Seniors project name was officially changed to Stockings for
Seniors.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED by the New Hanover County Board of
Commissioners that December 1-15,2006 be designated as "Stockings for Seniors Days" in New
Hanover County, and urge all members of our community to adopt a senior by selecting a
stocking ornament from the Stockings for Seniors tree located at Wal-Mart at Monkey Junction
during the annual one-day event from 10 a.m. until 3 p.m. on Saturday, December 2,2006 or
from trees displayed between December 1-15,2006 at the New Hanover County Senior Center at
2222 South College Road, K & W Cafeteria in the Hanover Center Shopping Center on Oleander
Drive, Chick-fil-A in the Target Shopping Center on Market Street or from the newest tree
location at the Chick-fil-A at Mayfaire Center.
Adopted this 4th day of December 2006.
Chairman
Attest:
Shelia L. Schult, Clerk to the Board
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Regular Item #: 3.1 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Planning Presenter: Chris O'Keefe
Contact: Chris O'Keefe
Item Does Not Require Review
SUBJECT:
Modification of Approved Site Plan - Request by Howard Capps for Diako Construction, Inc. to Increase the Size
of the Convenience Center and to Modify the layout of the Approved Site Plan Originally Approved by Conditional
Rezoning on 10/05 for a Convenience Center and Boat Storage Facility at 4601 Gordon Road (Z-802, 07/(5)
BRIEF SUMMARY:
On October 3, 2005, the County approved a conditional rezoning on the subject property. The approved uses were a 3,500
sq. ft. convenience center with a carwash and a 2,400 sq. ft. boat house with surface boat storage. Since the time of
approval, the property has been sold and the new owners wish to modify the convenience store portion of the site plan.
Separating the carwash from the convenience center, enlarging it, and moving it to the front of the parcel and enlarging the
convenience store was deemed to be outside the authority of staff to administratively approve minor modification. This is to
because of the enlargements and because the relocation of the carwash changes the internal circulation of traffic on the
site, and brings it to a place of prominent visibility at the front of the site rather than being more buffered from view, as in the
original approval.
The Planning Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the item.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
The County Commissioners may approve or deny the modification to the conditional use rezoning request.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
~ ~
........
. ..
Z-802 modification-Finding of Facts.doc Z -802-M odification Petition Summar}'. doc
zoning map, applicant materials, original Z-802 (7/05) order with site plan, and modified site plan
ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
Case: Z-802, Modification 11/06
APPLICANT: Howard Capps for Diako Construction, Inc.
REQUEST: Modification of site plan to enlarge convenience store and relocate carwash
to front of property
LOCATION: Gordon Road at 1-40 Interchange
History:
On October 3, 2005, the County approved a conditional rezoning on the subject property.
The approved uses were a 3,500 sq. ft. convenience center with a carwash and a 2,400 sq. ft.
boat house with surface boat storage. Since the time of approval, the property has been
sold and the new owners wish to modify the convenience store portion of the site plan.
Separating the carwash from the convenience center, enlarging it, and moving it to the
front of the parcel and enlarging the convenience store was deemed to be outside the
authority for minor modification because of the enlargements and because the relocation of
the carwash changes the internal circulation of traffic on the site as well as bringing it to a
place of prominent visibility at the front of the site rather than being more buffered from
view as in the original approval.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION
At its November 2, 2006 meeting, the Planning Board voted unanimously to recommend
approval of the modification. No one from the public was present to speak in opposition.
Staff Preliminary Findings
1. The Board must find that the modification will not materially endanger the public
health or safety if located where proposed and developed according to the plan as
submitted and approved.
A. Public water and sewer is available near the site.
B. Access to the site is from Gordon Road, a major collector.
c. The property is served by the Ogden Volunteer Fire Department.
i>~ Z-802 applies to 4.46 acres.
E. The location of the 60 foot drive access remains the same as in the original approval.
2. The Board must find that the modification meets all required conditions and
specifications of the zoning ordinance.
A. The specified conditions of the original approval are still in effect. Those are: Right-in,
right-out only at the entrance to Gordon Road; Lighting not to shine on Evans residents;
and Fence to extend entire length of property boundary adjacent to Evans residences.
B. All other local, state and federal laws and standards apply.
3. The Board must find that the modification will not substantially injure the value of
adjoining or abutting property or that the use is a public necessity.
A. No evidence has been submitted at this time to show that adjoining property value would be
injured.
4. The Board must find that the location and character of the use if modified according to
the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be
located and in general conformity with the plan of development for New Hanover
County.
A. The New Hanover County Comprehensive Plan classifies the site as Urban. The purpose of
the class is to provide for intensive urban uses where infrastructure is in place to support it.
B. Other uses in the immediate vicinity are residential.
Staff Comments:
1. All findings of fact are positive.
2. Project must still comply with conditions of 8-802.
ACTION NEEDED
(Choose one)
1. Motion to approve the modification based on positive findings (with or
without conditions)
2. Motion to table the item in order to receive additional information or
documentation (Specify).
3. Motion to Deny based on specific findings in any of the 4 categories above,
such as lack of consistency with adopted plans or determination that the
project will pose public hazards or will not adequately meet requirements of
the ordinance.
---.--
Case: Z-802, 07/05 - Modification 11/06
Petition Summary Data
OwnerlPetitioner: Howard Capps for Diako Construction, Inc.
Existing Land Use: Vacant
Zoning History: July 7, 1972 (8B), then October 3,2005 to CD(B-l)
Land Classification: Urban
Water Type: Public nearby
Sewer Tvpe: Public nearby
Recreation Area: Ogden Park
Access & Traffic Volume: 22,321 ADT near Gordon Rd and 1-40 (Aug. '04 MPO)
Fire District: Ogden VFD
Watershed & Water Qualitv Classification: C(SW) Smith Creek
Aquifer Recharge Area: Primary or secondary recharge area for Castle Hayne or
Peedee aquifers
Conservation/Historic/Archaeological Resources: None on this portion of the
overall site, drained swamp forest and special flood hazard area located at rear of
second lot (boat storage) portion of site
Soils: Baymeade (Class II); Johnston (Class IV); (Dorovan (Class IV)
Septic Suitability: Class II (Moderate Suitability); Class IV (unsuitable)
Schools: Blair Elementary
-
{----1/Y' j}_
1 1___ f
r J I ! t:j'.,
I ~~~~~7~11-13/ ___
/ I I ~
/ '"
I /----------./--
fJi L ~'.. c'_, I
/ ---------------
I - c,_ '.
~~U J / I
/ j --::::::J~I 7G:3~G"""'~!f
-L I If/ / I T I IJJ
'/ / / t----. &1--
'/ I., '.
,1 II I I ~~:'~_"~
[rr- I / ~L_ I~:~ ;
. ~c...,.:;'::1 I 1 , ,
... .... ~
............. I I; I / -:0... ............ ~
. .' , , ,.........
.. ,0 ......
,. m
./, L ~
',x /' "I '1 1....
,,'&,"., . L ' -'7
ii',>. .'......". "./ . "'. I
""I,." 1
~"'~:":'i) ::~
"'. >;:<z "cZ, " K ~\ .'.., '0"':
/ . "l."Jij0TJ:' -
77 ,,- I I "if~ l~
,....~
fl,O~ I
>8-G~ ~,.~o~ m
~ ..... ~
l// !\) ~"Fii ! l' I,
Ifj J!f (ia:Ke-!. J /
'--. . C,',l" , J
., c" ! k~i, C I
",0 i ~ c" ~
g ...... '''&
!...... ..."'.. ..... ... ~ - .R..;" 'i"i'"
f i<<..-'::: _ ../
I _ .... " ..,
: ~ I. . ....i.. (~~....... /
r .. , .' '.,..... ~.
~ ljl~.,.N ;ro... i i. - ~ if / / / / 1 ~l
.~ ~N i-H-t-+-+. ~
15.<!!" '--'" 0
~ ~ ~, , : '
-"N ." . 1/., T
1 ~ 5i .,.., i':,. .. ., h '..f-u> ,t;;ur g! T j J---.- f!i
· ~C""" ,'e . Cc-.L. ,
o ~ ~ lliJ,..I~ '.~:~:\1. ~tJ'1 ~ !~ "G3"~s j n
o · '. "'0 "". , r LI/I'--~ " 1 -----~lw
'"8.2 -',ll! iIii..," ".,,<1, :"lll i.ILZ:~'.,!, -- ~lf f!i!~.:; J Iii
co '2'E g '15 !riiiil~iliJl~' '1iJ \ rn ffil----L g r- _lJ
o 0.. , '. "" . __ . ,_
I - \j ~ 11 2. ffi,~ 'ft '." lit '.!!1 " =I a: 'e- _ i ~
:: ~ ~ 8 .- ~ ~! ~ i~ '1\ :~ I~ is i~ <(1 f-- 15
~ c ~ 0 - 10m, 'U.O I~ I
N 0 c..," -" !!1!>-' '>-'iJj''',
OClO ~ ~ is "Jl :; :d i",d tAl i
E: 0. w,
J IOOoL.. _ ',.._
N u c( .2 --l..
/~ /
-
APPLICANT MATERIALS
Plan Modification to
Plan Approved on October 3, 2005
Case Number 2-802
(October 5, 2006)
On October 3, 2005 the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners approved a request for a
3,500 sq. ft. convenience center with car wash and a 2,400 sq. ft. boat house with surface boat
storage. At that time the site zoning was changed from R -15 to CD (B-1) to allow these two uses
on the site. Since that time the property owners have sold the property to another group that
desire to modify the site plan. (See e-mail letter dated October 4, 2006 from Bob Brantley, with
Bunn-Brantley Enterprises, Inc. which outlines reasons for change in site layout).
PLAN MODIFICATION
Special Use Permit
October 5, 2006
General Requirement #1
The Board must find "that the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety if
located where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and approved"
This site has direct access to Gordon Road and 1-40, with one being a major thoroughfare
adjacent to an interstate highway. For that reason, this use which was approved by County
Commissioners on October 3,2005, will not endanger the public health and safety if developed
as shown on this modified plan.
General Requirement #2
The Board must find "that the use meets all required conditions and specifications of the Zoning
Ordinance. "
This modified site plan as shown meets all Zoning Ordinance requirements related to building
setbacks, buffer areas, SHOD setbacks and parking area requirements.
General Requirement #3
The Board must find "that the use will not substantially irifure the value of adjoining or abutting
property or that the use is a public necessity. "
Development of this site with a convenience center will most likely increase the land values of
the adjacent property. As noted earlier, the location of this site at the intersection of a major
thoroughfare and an interstate highway makes it more suitable for commercial development than
residential development.
General Requirement #4
The Board must find "that the location and character of the use if developed according to the
plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and
in general conformity with the plan of development for New Hanover County. "
This Gordan Road and 1-40 intersection location is an excellent site for this proposed use. The
modified site plan has been developed in compliance with the SHOD requirements. Storm water
drainage will be addressed by use of storm water detention pond planned at rear of adjacent
B-l(CD) property. As Gordon Road continues to develop, more 0 & 1 and B-2 zoning and uses
such as exist across Gordon Road now can be anticipated.
Page lof2
Howard T. Capps and Associates, Inc.
From: "Bob Brantley" <bob@bunnbrantley.com>
To: "Howard Capps" <brinker1@earthlink.net>; "Howard Capps" <htca@bellsouth.net>
Cc: "Dean Harrison" <dhbear1@mindspring.com>; "Marty Pittman" <marty@bunnbrantley.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 8:32 PM
Subject: Bunn Brantley's brief bio
Howard:
In response to you request, I submit the following as it relates to the experience of me and my staff at Bunn
Brantley Enterprises, Inc. I also want to address your questions about why we have laid out the revised plan as
we have done.
Since the early 1980's, I have been personally involved in the site and architectural design and construction of
over 300 convenience stores, car washes, and fleet fueling centers. That segment of the retailing industry is, in
fact, my personal and my company's specialty. Dean Harrison of our staff is one of the most experienced canopy
layout experts in the southeastern United States. Revenue from design/build of convenience stores represents
(over the last 20 years) approximately 85% of the company's total revenue. Our customer list includes
approximately 40 of the leading oil marketers in North Carolina and Virginia. We do business in NC, SC, Virginia,
and West Virginia. Our repeat business includes the largest oil marketers in the middle and eastern part of North
Carolina. We have customers that have used us exclusively to design their sites, facilities, and public image for
20 years. That alone speaks to the ability of our company to properly plan and construct this type of facility.
The site plan as originally approved is, in concept, about the only way that the site can work for this type of
merchandizing. The fact is, however, that the fueling drives the customer count. The customer count drives the
success or failure of the venture. The proposed fueling layout will create traffic "traps", which will eventually drive
down the repeat customer count; that is why I spread the islands out. All customers that have completed
transactions at the fueling islands can leave the site moving forward 100% of the time. Your layout will
undoubtedly cause customers to be unable to move forward because of blocked lanes in front of them. Not
convenient, therefore not a pleasant buying experience. Our proposed layout will allow 5 points of exiting the site
after purchasing fuel or parking (on the west) side of the C store: 1) one each two way traffic point between the
store and the islands 1 & 2, 2) two each one way points between islands 3 & 4 and islands 5 & 6, 3) one
each two way traffic point between islands 5 & 6 and the car wash, 4) and one each one way point between the
car wash and the front grassed area. Finally on the parking issue, C store parking habits dictate that the parks be
adjacent to the C store if one expects patrons to use the parking spaces. The approved plan has all of the
parking for the C store as remote. That is not how we, as C store consumers, will use the parking facilities. As
you can see, Dean and I have all of our parks perpendicular and adjacent to the store.
Parking for the C-store on the east side will be adequate for the projected C-store customers. I doubt seriously
that there will be more than an hour or so per day that those eight parking spaces will overflow. If my experience
are right, most of the time those customers will not even need to go to the west side of the store.
We really see those westem side parks for employees.
Finally, I do not know how many times I have seen car washes attached to the rear of C stores that failed in the
marketplace. A car wash has to be seen to be successful. That is why I put it out front. Given the geometry of
the lot, that is the only place it can go and still be seen by the buying public. A car wash and the building shell
that envelops it represents an investment of in excess of $300,000.00 for these owners, and it is imperative that it
be properly positioned to prompt impulse piJrchases. In an effort to soften its presence on this lot, I proposed and
the owners have agreed to having a glass (transparent) building. By using that type of design, it will not
conceptually dominate and overwhelm the canopy and C store architecture.
Bob Brantley
Bunn-Brantley Enterprises, Inc.
389 Instrument Drive
Rocky Mount, NC 27804
10/5/2006
COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ORDER GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
For A Convenience Store & Boat House in a CD (B-1) District
Conditional Use Neighborhood Business District
Z-802, 07/05
The County Commissioners for New Hanover County having held a public hearing on October 3, 2005 to
consider application number Z-802 submitted by Howard Capps for James Wicker to permit a
convenience store and boat house in a Conditional Use Neighborhood Business District located at 4601
Gordon Road and having heard all of the evidence and arguments presented at the hearing, make the
following FINDINGS OF FACT and draw the following CONCLUSIONS:
l. The County Commissioners FIND AS A FACT that all of the specific requirements set forth in
Section 72-27 of the County Zoning Ordinance WILL be satisfied if the property is developed in
accordance with the plans submitted to the County Commissioners.
2. It is the County Commissioners' CONCLUSION that the proposed use DOES satisfY the first general
requirement listed in the Ordinance; namely that the use will not materially endanger the public health
or safety if located where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and approved.
In support of this conclusion, the Commissioners make the following FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. Public water and sewer is located near the subject property.
B. The subject property has direct access from Gordon Road (public)
C. The property is located within the Ogden VFD.
D. The property contains approximately 4.46 acres.
3. It is the County Commissioners' CONCLUSION that the proposed use DOES satisfY the second
general requirement listed in the Ordinance; namely -that the use meets all required conditions and
specifications. In support of this conclusion, the Commissioners make the following FlNDINGS OF
FACT:
A. The project is proposed to have a 3,500 square foot convenience center with three covered
gas pumps, car wash, and 2,400 square foot boat house.
B. A 60 foot access easement from Gordon Road will serve the facilities.
C. Setbacks and bufferyards shall be met in accordance with Zoning requirements.
D. A NCDOT Driveway Permit will be required prior to construction
E. A tree inventory has been submitted with the site plan.
4. It is the Oounty Commissioners' CONCLUSION that the proposed use DOES satisfy the third
general requirement listed in the Ordinance; namely that the use will not substantially injure the value
of adjoining or abutting property, or that the use is a public necessity. In support of this conclusion,
the Commissioners make the following FJNDINGS OF FACT:
A. Adjoining land uses are residential which will be protected by required setbacks and
bufferyards.
B. The property adjacent and to the west is the northbound ramp to 1-40.
C. Convenience centers, gas pumps, car washes, and boat houses are located through-out the
County.
5. It is the County Commissioners' CONCLUSION that the proposed use DOES satisfy the fourth
general requirement listed in the Ordinance; namely that the location and character of the use if
developed according to the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which
it is to be located and in general conformity with the plan of development for New Hanover county.
In support of this conclusion, the Commissioners make the following FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. The site is classified as Urban Transition on the County's Land Use Plan. The purpose of the
Urban Class is to provide for future intensive urban lands that have been or will be provided
with necessary urban services.
6. Therefore, because the County Commissioners conclude that all of the general and specific conditions
precedent to the issuance of a SPECIAL USE PERMIT HAVE been satisfied, IT IS ORDERED that
the application for the issuance of a SPECIAL USE PERMIT BE GRANTED subject to the followi.ng
conditions:
A. Right-in, right-out only at the entrance to Gordon Road.
B. Lighting not to shine on Evans residents.
C. Fence to extend entire length of property boundary adjacent to Evans residences.
7. Other:
A. All other applicable federal, state and local laws.
Ordered this 3 rd day of October 2005
~~
Robert G. Greer, Chairman
Attest:
~~~~ L.~~\\
Clerk to the Board
This page intentionally left blank.
-_."._.~,,~..--~.-.... I:1UHU..LI:1;j lfFoN 'U01.dUIWHM. .." 010 .
'^ ~ ~'UI ~~;:;":;~-:~;~~';';""OH la1Ua"a~-el01S 1-eO(f/aJUaIU~;~~J ~: i! ~ *
nQ ~ I I t oJ t t Q . e. I .. d -----'
~ n; ~ ::=> -I... F-I P-eoH UOP10D ! ~ "~.. ~ ; m ~
'~
Z
OlCIWOIO.I'OIQ.IellU' /\. <( ~..
-1. ~
D- ~
w 0 ~
If-.
. -,
I VJ
I ,
_'--- ") i ~
-- -- /; ;~
/' L. .. ~,g.
/' /' --/ I~% I ~ lIe
./ -- !~B~! 'i~~l
/' .--- i;~
f"-,..., / __ ~ Jl
/F / ;."-../ ~ ~
~;;//h f /' ~!
"l1f I" / ff !8g m.
~ ;/," ~ oN ,", 0,"0
I "~J/' oN. .'. ....,
# !!' ;~~ ~~l ~ff]
N .. 0'" ." 8"0
1 I
I ,
- ~ /
/ l
/' "~a!:! ~
- !~!~; ~,ii
~.!l. ~il
10 e; ~~~~~ ~~~
~ ~"i ~1~e! joi
g"~~" \'i~~ ~
d~.@ . ~
~ ~ ~". ,
~ .~~~
~
'-4"'- -, -- ,'-'''""" -':,,<, ,
~ ,
~
z " I
o Sj .
:!l :r: ! i ~
I. i:i2 ~^ I I
o ., I
~ I 1
l' I I
~ !. .
;0' I
lh :.
i 7 !1~ I, ..~
= 0,. IE "1
1 jl~ I~ h
I , ., .!.
1 ~ I .,~
I :
1 I
\ : !
I I
I
I
I ,
'W-~-'!~.!.2' ' ~. ,;: ~~
20l;.a~~-___-~~;;;;;;_5~::lQ ~!"
-'----,-- ~C~:';:
~,
This page intentionally left blank.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Regular Item #: 3.2 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Planning Presenter: Chris O'Keefe
Contact: Chris O'Keefe
Item Does Not Require Review
SUBJECT:
Conditional District Rezoning - Request by Howard Penton, III to Rezone Approximately 34.98 Acres located at
4299 N. College Road from R-15 Residential and a Sliver of 1-2 Industrial Zoning District to CD(R-10) Conditional
District for Residential Use (Z-852, 111(6)
BRIEF SUMMARY:
At its November 2, 2006 meeting, the Planning Board voted 5 to 2 to recornmend approval of this proposal. Two nearby
property owners expressed concerns about flooding in the area and the possible impacts of additional development near
Pumpkin Kiln Branch.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
The County Commissioners may approve or deny the conditional use rezoning portion of the request.
If the zoning is approved the County Commissioners must approve or approve with conditions, the accompanying special
use permit.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
~ ~
........
. ..
Z-852-Staff Summary.doc Z -852-Petition Summary. doc
applicant materials, color sketching of site plan, and site plan
ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
A motion to approve the conditional use rezoning was approved 4-1, Pritchett opposing.
A motion to approve the accompanying special use permit was approved 4-1, Pritchett opposing.
CASE: Z-852, 11/06;
PETITIONER: Howard Penton, III for Pumpkin Powerline Properties
REQUEST: From R-15 Residential and 1-2 Industrial Districts to CD(R-
10) Residential District for residential use
ACREAGE: Approximately 35 Acres
LOCATION: 4299 N. College Rd.
LAND CLASS: Resource Protection and Conservation
PLANNING BOARD ACTION
At is November 2, 2006 meeting, the Planning Board voted 5 to 2 to recommend approval of
this proposal. Two nearby property owners expressed concerns about flooding in the area
and the possible impacts of additional development near Pumpkin Kiln Branch.
STAFF SUMMARY
The subject property is located on N. College Road, just north of the intersection with Blue Clay
Road. N. College Road (NC 132) is an identified arterial on the thoroughfare plan. Level of
service has been rated E on this segment of College Road, meaning traffic volume is at capacity.
The subject property is currently undeveloped, wooded acreage with a 150 ft. power line right-of-
way bisecting the property. Along the northern boundary of the subject property has recently
been rezoned to CD(R-IO) for the Parson's Mill Farms subdivision. West of the site is the
County Jail property, zoned 1-2. The southern boundary adjoins vacant, wooded property zoned
R-15. To the east across N. College Road and beyond the existing road right of way is Pumpkin
Creek Subdivision, also zoned R-15.
The subject property is located within the Prince George Creek watershed drainage area. The
southernmost portion of the property is within a special flood hazard area. The site is in a
primary or secondary recharge area for the principal aquifers. Public water and sewer are
available in the vicinity. Current sewer capacity is limited to incremental allocations for new
development.
As a condition for rezoning, the applicant proposes that the use will be restricted to 114
residential townhomes which will meet all the requirements of the zoning ordinance.
Additionally, all of the townhomes will be clustered out of the flood zone and wetland protection
areas, leaving the entire property south of the power line for stormwater management and
potential recreational amenities. A companion special use permit will bind the proposed use and
restrictions to this property.
Land Use Plan Considerations:
This conditional rezoning petition proposes a change from moderate density R-15 residential use
to the County's highest density R-IO residential designation. The change would extend an
existing R-l 0 residential district. The resulting density increase as proposed would be 27 units.
Between 2001 and 2005, average daily traffic volume increased by about 21 % on N. College
Road in this vicinity. No points of interconnectivity are proposed within the surrounding area.
The 2006 Update of the Joint CAMA Plan describes the purpose of the Resource Protection class
as providing for the preservation and protection of important natural, historic, scenic, wildlife,
and recreational resources. The Aquifer and Wetland Resource Protection Areas are subclasses
of this classification. The Aquifer subclass recognizes the location of the Castle Hayne and Pee
Dee aquifer recharge areas needing protection from diminished recharge and potential
contamination. Protection strategies in the plan encourage larger lot development if septic
systems are used. The Wetlands Resource Protection subclass and the Conservation
Classification areas on the subject property have been avoided.
Related Policies:
3.26 "Ensure that all land use and development decisions protect groundwater aquifers."
3.28 "Preserve the Castle Hayne and Pee Dee aquifers in their present unpolluted state as the
primary groundwater resources for the County."
3.28.4 "Allow density to increase to urban densities in the Aquifer Protection Areas as sewer
service is provided."
3.28.5 "Require on-site infiltration to the extent soils allow."
4.1 "Designate sufficient land area and suitable locations for the various land use types."
5.5.5 "Encourage development within the urban services area where existing infrastructure is
available."
5.7 "Preserve the character of the area's existing residential neighborhoods and quality of life."
10.4 "Protect water quality by ensuring that drainage from land use activities has a rate of flow
and volume characteristics as near to predevelopment conditions as possible."
Based on the foregoing, this proposal would appear to be consistent with the strategies for
resource protection and conservation. Staff recommends approval.
ACTION #1 NEEDED:
Adopt a statement in accordance with NCGS 153A-341 which requires that "prior to
adopting or rejecting any zoning amendment, the governing board shall adopt a statement
describing whether the action is consistent with an adopted comprehensive plan and
explaining why the board considers the action taken to be reasonable and in the public
interest. "
PRELIMINARY STAFF FINDINGS FOR THE COMPANION SPECIAL USE PERMIT:
1. The Board must find that the use will not materially endanger the public health or
safety where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and
approved.
A. Public water and sewer are accessible for the property.
B. The property accesses an identified arterial.
C. Fire Service is available from the Castle Hayne VFD.
D. The property is located in a flood hazard area, however, all townhome
development has been designed outside the flood hazard area.
E. Stormwater retention has been included in the proposed site plan and is located
within the wetland and flood prone areas of the property.
2. The Board must find that the use meets all required conditions and specifications of
the Zoning Ordinance.
A. The property is zoned R-15 Residential. This request is made concurrent with
conditional rezoning to R-l 0 Residential.
B. The proposed use is limited to attached single family residential.
C. Density for this project will be limited to 3.3 units per net acres and is proposed
at 114 units.
D. Petitioner proposes off-street parking that exceeds the requirements of Article
VIII of the New Hanover County Zoning Ordinance by providing 243 spaces
compared to 228 spaces required.
E. Traffic circulation system will be via internal driveways and must provide
adequate access for emergency service vehicles.
F. A traffic impact analysis was not required by NCDOT for this project.
G. Buffer of at least 20 feet will be required along the northern boundary of the
property .
H. A tree survey must be performed and trees must be protected and mitigated as
required in Section 67 of the zoning ordinance.
3. The Board must find that the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining
or abutting property or that the use is a public necessity.
A. No evidence has been submitted that this project will decrease property values of
residents who live nearby.
B. Stormwater management must perform in compliance with the requirements of
the County ordinance.
4. The Board must find that the location and character of the use if developed
according to the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area
in which it is to be located and in general conformity with the plan of development
for New Hanover County.
A. The 2006 Land Use Plan identifies this area as Resource Protection and
Conservation, which provides for the preservation and protection of important
natural, historic, scenic, wildlife, and recreational resources.
B. Policies in the plan support higher density in Aquifer Resource Protection areas
when public services are available.
C. Parson's Mill Farms is designed as a residential community along the northern
boundary ofthe subject property.
Staff suggested conditions:
1. Staff finds these findings of fact to be positive.
2. Project must go through the County's Technical Review Committee
procedure.
ACTION # 2 NEEDED:
(Choose one)
1. Motion to Approve (with or without conditions) based on positive findings of fact.
2. Motion to table the item in order to receive additional information or
documentation (Specify).
3. Motion to Deny based on specific findings in any of the 4 categories above, such as
lack of consistency with adopted plans or determination that the project will pose
public hazards or will not adequately meet requirements of the ordinance.
Case: Z-852 (11/06)
Petition Summary Data
Owner/Petitioner: Howard Penton III
Existing Land Use: Vacant (R-15 & 1-2)
Zoning History: July 7, 1972 (Area SA)
Land Classification: Aquifer Resource Protection; Wetland Resource Protection;
Conservation
Water Type: Public in vicinity
Sewer Type: Public in vicinity
Recreation Area: Castle Hayne Park
Access & Traffic Volume: N. College Rd (NC 132), an identified Arterial
Traffic LOS is E(2005) with ADT approximately
13,255 (4/05); compared to 11,000 ADT (2001)
Fire District: Castle Hayne FD
Watershed & Water Quality Classification: Prince George Creek (C,SW)
Aquifer Recharge Area: Primary or Secondary Recharge for Castle Hayne and
Peedee aquifers
ConservationlHistoric/Archaeological Resources: Special Hazard Flood Zone
(AE)
Soils: Pn Pantego Loam; To Torhunta loamy fine sand; St Stallings fine sand
Septic Suitability: Class III severe limitations and Class II rnoderate limitations
Schools: Wrightsboro Elementary
..................-
...... .
.
.
.
,
.
,
.
.
.... ~
.... .
..... - .
...... ~ .
...-....... 0 ~
..- .
-",II.. ~
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
N
~C
ci:U
u
~ rc-,
z _
~
C Cl
"m <(
0.. 22
:fi "C (!J ~
-- "'C g u; co
.. 1:: C Ij:.. .0, N I .
g> == ~ Gl R....103
l>j~ j liid!:.;~ ;:
~~~"Ei
;: ~8~~
~~.s~.= g
... Il"lI .. .:.:: ~ "'t
NCCi'li::c..* "
1t)~;S~E", ~;..
'9 :gl()~~ ~
N o-.r;' a,'" .. ~
uo:::<t's
APPLICANT MATERIALS
Narrative:
The subject property is located on the west side of North College Road between Blue
Clay Road and Parmele. The site is currently zoned R-15 Residential with a remnant
piece of 1-2 Heavy Industrial in the corner near the jail site. This application requests a
rezoning from the current classification to Conditional Use R-lO Residential. Utilizing
the performance residential subdivision criteria in the zoning ordinance the proposed
development minimizes impact to natural resources on the site. The opening ofthe 1-140
bypass and the proposed interchange at Blue Clay Road, make this part of the county
more accessible. The continued success and expansion of the North Campus of Cape
Fear Community College, contribute to the desirability of this area. The proposed
rezoning is also consistent with other recently approved development proposals.
CD Application
1.) Several policies in the Comprehensive Plan address strategies to protect and preserve
wetlands and flood prone areas. Additionally, there are also policies that promote a broad
range of affordable housing. The Conditional Use R-lO Residential proposal
demonstrates that through the use of clustering, impacts to wetlands and floodplain are
minimized. The proposed project preserves all of the Class IV soils on the site and
impacts less than half an acre of wetlands. The extensive area of natural open space also
preserves the site's natural aquifer recharge.
2.) According to the 2006 CAMA Land Use Plan Update, the subject property is inside
the urban service boundary and falls within the land classifications; aquifer resource
protection, wetland resource protection, and conservation.
3.) Several neighborhood changes have occurred that would make a townhome
development in this location a desirable use. The opening of the 1-140 bypass and the
planned interchange at Blue Clay Road improves the accessibility of the area to other
parts of New Hanover County. The continued expansion and success of the North
Campus of Cape Fear Community College also make this a desirable location for this
type of development. The proposed conditional use zoning is consistent with the recently
approved Parson's Mill subdivision adjacent to the subject property.
4.) Through the use of New Hanover County, the proposed rezoning and associated site
plan sustains the natural recharge of the Castle Hayne aquifer and entirely preserves the
conservation.
. r':'c>..
. ';;t
WHNT YOU MUST ESTABLISH TO GET A CHANGE
<..';'.....'./ :
47/ .. ZONING OF PROPERTY
~,/ .
'onditional Use D:istrict Zoning is established to address situations where a particular land use
would be consistent with the New Hanover County Land Use Plan and the Zoning Ordinance
objectives but for which none of the general zoning maps should also be based on aLand Use Plan,
you must explain ih the space below how your request satisfies each of the following requirements:
.5:u a.-f1-achu;L ,
1. How would the requested change be consistent with the County" s Policies for Growth and
Development?
2. How would the requested zon"e change b.e consistent with the property's classification on the
Land Classification Map?
3. What significaij.t neighborhood changes have occurred to make the original zoning inappropriate,
or how is the la,nd involved unsuitable for the uses permitted under the existing zoning?
4. List proposed eonditions ~d restrictions that would mitigate the impacts of the proposed use"
I
SITEPL.\N
- Tract b0undaries and total area, plus location of adjoining land parcels'and roadways"
- Existing zoning of the tract and neighboring parcels and proposed tract zoning.
- Proposed use ofland, structures and other, improvements. For residential uses, this shall
include:number, height and type of units and site plan outlining are to be occupied by each
structure andlor subdivided lot boundaries" For non-residential uses, this shall include
approximate square footage and height of each structure, an outline of the area it will 0 ccu py
and the specific purpose for which it will be used.
- Development schedule including proposed phasing.
- Traffic imd Parking Plan to include a statement of impact concerning local traffic near the
tract, p~oposed right-of-way dedication, plans for access to and from the tract, location,
width abd right-of-way for internal streets and location, arrangement and access provisions
for parking areas.
- All existing and proposed easements, reservations, required setbacks, rights-of-way,
buffering and signage.
- The one hundred (I 00) year floodplain line, if applicable
- Location and sizing of trees required to be protected under Section 67 pfthe Zoning
Ordinance.
- Any additional conditions and requirements, which represent greater restrictions on develop-
ment and use of the tract than the corresponding General Use District regulations, which are
the minimum requirements in the Conditional Use District, or other limitations on land which
may be regulated by State law or Local Ordinance.
- Any other information that wilI facilitate review of the proposed change.
In signing this peti~ion, I understand that the existing zoning map is presumed to be correct and that I
have the burden of proving why a change is in the public interest. I rther understand the
singling out of one parcel ofland for special zoning tre tu r ed to County policies and
the surrounding neighborhood would probably be ille al ert t at all information presented
in this application is accurate to the best of my knowl d inti tion, and belief.
,
.
Special Use Permit
Requirement #1
The board must find "that the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety
if located where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and
approved. "
. The site has access from North College Road, all NCDOT permits for access will
be acquired prior to development.
. Project will be served by NHC water and sewer. All required local, state, and
federal permits will be acquired prior to installation of services.
. Stormwater management will be provided in accordance with all local, state, and
federal requirements.
. According to the ITE Trip Generation Manual the proposed project creates less
than 100 peak hour trips.
Requirement #2
The board must find "that the use meets all required conditions and specifications" of the
Zoning Ordinance.
. The proposed site plan has been prepared in accordance with NHC performance
residential requirements for R-lO Residential zoning.
Requirement #3
The board must find "that the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or
abutting property or that the use is a public necessity."
. The existing zoning is R-15 Residential with a remnant piece of 1-2 Industrial
zoning.
. The proposed zoning is Conditional Use R-lO Residential.
. Adjacent zoning is Conditional Use R-lO Residential, 1-2 Industrial, and R-15.
. The proposed project is concentrated adjacent to the recently approved R-lO
zoning district.
. The adjacent R-15 district is protected by a substantial amount of conservation
and open space.
Requirement #4
The board must find "that the location and character of the use if developed according to
the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be
located and in general conformity with the plan of development for New Hanover
County."
. The proposed project is similar in character to the adjacent approved R-lO project.
. The subject property falls within three land classifications: aquifer resource
protection, wetland resource protection, and conservation.
. Through the use of the NHC performance residential criteria, the proposed project
has minimal impacts to wetlands and preserves the majority of the wetland
resource protection and conservation areas.
. Stormwater management is proposed in an area which causes the least disturbance
to these resources and promotes aquifer recharge.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Regular Item #: 3.3 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Planning Presenter: Chris O'Keefe
Contact: Chris O'Keefe
Item Does Not Require Review
SUBJECT:
Conditional District Rezoning - Request by SENCA Properties, llC to Rezone Approximately 50.35 Acres located
in the 9000 Block of Market Street as Follows: 31.31 acres from R-15 Residential to CD(O&I) Conditional District for
Expansion of New Hanover County Regional Medical Center Facilities and Stormwater Facilities; and 18.47 Acres
from R-15 Residential to CD(B-1) Conditional District for a Variety of Mixed Uses (Z-853, 11/(6)
BRIEF SUMMARY:
At its November 2,2006 meeting, the Planning Board recommended approval of the request by a vote of 3-1. Two
members of the board recused thernselves based on financial conflict of interest. Speakers from the public spoke both in
favor and against the proposal. Chief among the concerns expressed by the opponents was the traffic impact on an
already overburdened system and water quality impact of irnpervious coverage in the Futch Creek drainage basin.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
The County Commissioners may approve or deny the conditional use rezoning portion of the request.
If the zoning is approved, the County Commissioners must approve or approve with conditions the accompanying special
use permit.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
~ ~
........
. ..
Z-853-Staff Summary.doc Z -853-Petition Summary. doc
zoning map, Nadeau letter and applicant materials package including site plan
ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
The item was continued to the January 8, 2007 rneeting.
CASE: Z-853, 11/06;
PETITIONER: SENCA Properties, LLC
REQUEST: From R-15 Residential to CD(O&I) and CD(B-l)
ACREAGE: Approximately 50.35 Acres
LOCATION: 9000 block of N. Market St. (US 17)
LAND CLASS: Transition
PLANNING BOARD ACTION
At its November 2, 2006 meeting, the Planning Board recommended approval of the request
by a vote of 3-1. Two members of the Board recused themselves based on financial conflict
of interest. Speakers from the public spoke both in favor and against the proposal.
Chief among the concerns expressed by the opponents was the traffic impact on an
already overburdened system and water quality impact of impervious coverage in
the Futch Creek drainage basin.
STAFF SUMMARY
The subject property is located on N. Market Street, just south of the intersection with Scott's Hill
Loop Road. In September of2005, this request was denied by the County Commissioners. One
lot within the former proposal master plan was rezoned CD(O&I) for an outpatient surgery
facility which is currently under construction. The applicant requests that 31.31 acres of the total
acres be changed to a Conditional District (CD) for Office and Institutional (0&1) use by New
Hanover County Medical Center (26.93 acres) for use options of hospital, personal care facilities
dnd/or offices for professional activities, and for a stormwater facility (4.95 acres) that will help
serve the overall development. The remaining 18.47 acres is requested to be changed to
Conditional District (CD) for Business District (B-1) uses predominated by private medical
offices with associated retail and restaurant uses, but also including other potential mixed uses,
such as second-story residential dwellings, food stores, barber/beauty shops, dry cleaners, drug
stores, health club, convenience food stores, and others.
Market Street (US 17) is an identified arterial on the thoroughfare plan. Level of service was
rated F, by the MPO in 2005, meaning traffic volume exceeds capacity. The site is located north
of the 1-140 by-pass, so there is no traffic flow offset at this time, however, road improvements
are currently under way by NCDOT to install a "super street" concept along this segment. Within
the next 10 years, a Hampstead by-pass project could help manage traffic flow in the vicinity as
well. A traffic impact analysis has been completed. Since 2001, average daily traffic has
increased by about 27 %. The site is within a Special Highway Overlay District and subject to
special standards to preserve visual appeal. Traffic within the site is facilitated via a network of
radial streets and driveways converging at a traffic circle in the center of the project.
The subject property is currently undeveloped, partially cleared acreage. Public water and sewer
will be required and is available in the general vicinity.
The subject property is located within the Futch Creek watershed drainage area. None of the
subject property is located in a flood hazard area. The site is in a primary recharge area for the
Castle Hayne and PeeDee aquifers.
As a condition for rezoning, the applicant proposes that the uses will be restricted to those noted
on the site plan. A companion special use permit will bind the proposed use and restrictions to
this property. The project design has attempted to avoid development in the most sensitive areas
of the property and has incorporated a stormwater infiltration system into the design to treat
fUnoffbefore it flows off of the property.
Land Use Plan Considerations:
The 2005 Update of the Joint CAMA Plan describes the Transition classification as areas
providing for future intensive urban development on lands that have or will have urban services.
One of the specified goals described in the plan reads, "Our region will offer outstanding,
affordable health care systems and facilities." For the portion of this project that focuses on the
aspects of medical care and service, this project would appear to offer opportunity to help address
that goal in a rapidly developing portion of the region. Many individual policies in the plan have
applicability to this proposal. They encourage environmental sensitivity in project design and
provision of standards and facilities to maintain quality of life and reduce dependence on the
automobile. Two policies appear to particularly support the type of concept proposed.
4.3 Maximize effectiveness of commercial uses by assuring that land is available for commercial
uses within close proximity to the markets they serve and by ensuring that such uses do not
diminish the quality oflife in nearby residential areas.
5.1 Promote mixed use development away from sensitive areas within the urban services area and
higher density mixed use in redevelopment projects in order to maximize benefits from available
infrastructure, preserve valuable natural resources including open space, and reduce dependency
on the automobile.
This conditional rezoning petition proposes a change from moderate density R-15 residential use
to an array of institutional, office, retail, service and residential uses envisioned to serve the
medical and related needs of an expanding population in northern New Hanover and southern
Pender counties.
Based on the foregoing, this proposal would appear to be generally consistent with the Land Use
Plan. To better address quality of life considerations and to address the healthcare needs of the
areas growing population, staff recommends approval of the proposed rezoning.
ACTION #1 NEEDED:
Adopt a statement in accordance with NCGS 153A-341 which requires that "prior to
adopting or rejecting any zoning amendment, the governing board shall adopt a statement
describing whether the action is consistent with an adopted comprehensive plan and
explaining why the board considers the action taken to be reasonable and in the public
interest."
PRELIMINARY STAFF FINDINGS FOR THE COMPANION SPECIAL USE PERMIT:
1. The Board must find that the use will not materially endanger the public health or
safety where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and
approved.
A. Public water and sewer has been extended to the property by the developer.
B. The property accesses an identified arterial with a Level of Service F, indicating
that flow exceeds current capacity. Internal circulation of traffic and external
improvements to the existing roadway as shown in the traffic Impact Analysis
anticipate mitigating traffic impacts on the overburdened N. Market Street
arterial.
C. Fire Service is available from the Ogden Fire Department.
D. The property is not located in a flood hazard area.
E. Stormwater retention facilities have been included on the proposed site plan.
2. The Board must find that the use meets all required conditions and specifications of
the Zoning Ordinance.
A. This request is made concurrent with conditional rezoning to CD(O&I) and
CD(B-l) as indicated on the site plan.
B. The proposed uses will be limited to those listed on the approved site plan for
each portion.
C. Petitioner proposes off-street parking of 631 total spaces for the CD(B-l) portion
and 898 spaces for the CD(O&I) portion. The 40 potential upper-story
residential units can be accommodated as dedicated or shared parking within the
CD(B-l).
D. Traffic circulation system will be via internal streets and driveways with three
drive accesses to N. Market Street (US 17). A traffic impact analysis has been
prepared for this project which includes certain recommendations to mitigate
traffic impacts of the overall project.
E. The property is subject to the Special Highway Overlay District (SHOD).
F. A tree survey has been provided. The eventual method of protection or
mitigation will be developed in compliance with Section 67 of the County
ordinance.
3. The Board must find that the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining
or abutting property or that the use is a public necessity.
A. No evidence has been submitted that this project will decrease property values of
residents who live nearby.
B. Stormwater management systems must be designed in accordance with the
County's ordinance in order to reasonably protect adjoining properties from off-
site runoff impacts.
4. The Board must find that the location and character of the use if developed
according to the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area
in which it is to be located and in general conformity with the plan of development
for New Hanover County.
A. The 2006 Land Use Plan identifies this area as Transition Classification, meaning
an area where intensive urban development is anticipated and where services are
or will be provided.
B. Policies in the plan support mixed use projects away from sensitive areas and in
the urban services area in order to reduce dependence on the automobile.
Staff suggested conditions:
1. NCDOT and MPO technical staff must concur with the TIA recommendations
for road improvements.
2. Internal street system must provide adequate access and maneuverability to
accommodate emergency vehicles to the satisfaction of County Fire Services.
ACTION # 2 NEEDED:
(Choose one)
1. Motion to Approve (with or without conditions) based on positive findings of fact.
2. Motion to table the item in order to receive additional information or
documentation (Specify).
3. Motion to Deny based on specific findings in any of the 4 categories above, such as
lack of consistency with adopted plans or determination that the project will pose
public hazards or will not adequately meet requirements of the ordinance.
Case: Z-853 (11/06)
Petition Summary Data
Owner/Petitioner: SENCA Properties
Existing Land Use: Vacant (R -IS) Requesting 31.31 acres to CD( 0&1) and 18.47
acres to CD(B-1)
Zoning History: July 6, 1971 (Area S); Prior Request denied 10/0S
Land Classification: Transition
Water Type: Public in vicinity
Sewer Type: Public in vicinity
Recreation Area: Ogden Park
Access & Traffic Volume: Market Street, an identified Arterial
Traffic LOS is F(200S) with ADT approxirnately
26,S97( 4/0S)
Fire District: Ogden FD
Watershed & Water Quality Classification: Futch Creek (SA)
Aquifer Recharge Area: Primary Recharge for Castle Hayne and Peedee aquifers
ConservationlHistoric/ Archaeological Resources: SHOD; no other protected areas
Soils: Ly- Lynn Haven fine sand, Kr- Kureb sand, Mu- Murville fine sand, Wa-
Wakulla sand, Ke- Kenansville fine sand
Septic Suitability: Mu & Ly are Class III, severe lirnitations; Kr, Wa & Ke are
Class I, suitable
Schools: Blair Elementary
~.(~/o!io'
t
.J
c?
cJ
J
~
.,
;,'\
It)
...-
I
a:
'"
"0 It)
~ ...-
:Z I
::E a:
0 "
c:3 ~ !i I~'~TrFJTI'i'r!' i' i'~r i; r i' ir I' I' r i' I: f,ffi'!, !'i'jj"]'!'!I
;:"0 _ 0. '"
<II.... "C ~ g t?
-.... c en :;:: N
C - ~ "~D
olll Cl' .
Ot: G) . . :':<
;;;!. -I ...:<
~o :r: [3 III aJ '--1 !II I, I.U J[b I j '~Iz ~: --1 --1 U :1
~a: ~ ~ I.U t ~ w ~ I.U :J 15 B5 I I I I [ IS; :~ '0 I~ 1(3 I e: ~ ~::l ~
<0 oil <( ffi ~ ~ & ~ ,~ :c ~ ~ j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z D I I I ~ I :~:~ i~ I~ i~ ~ lj;j j Ij I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ j ~
0::::-0 ,~ ffi '0 [ ,u 0 ~ u I~ > I~,~ ~ u ~ ~ ~ g 'w:. ~ I~ ,> 0 I~ I~ ~ r I~:~'~ I~ o'~ ~ " ~ 9
-oilZ
...-ow g o ~ 0 12!2 0 Q) z ~ Ie: i= i=:::ii 2 LL I' 'w , I Ie: I '--.J ri ,(e: u IW u Ul ~ F IF i= <(,Ul 1::2: --.J F 0
CZ~le~'lD ~Igffi~ffiffi~ e~WI~~,~c5~~1~12oIDI~:IC:~Qffiffiffiffil(J)~~~~ffiI
~;~~~~~I~~~~~~~~~~15~~~~I~~I~~~~~~&~~~ii~~~~1
...- -00
0.. +y
M~~ " ..- 2 ~ >- [;j I~ ~ ::l 2 ['u f ~ If If c: c: [;j ;;;:1= i5 ~ :I: ~ ffi ~ W Cij 1~ W ,'~ Ill- > I~ 1:5 jf f f If 19 Ig 1m ~c: ~ f I?:
It) _ <J '" o ~ 5! I~ ~ 2 I~ Z ~ l(i 9 (j (5 ~ ~,~ ~ ~ Cl :I: ~ Z "I:c iIi " ffi Cl'~ Ig I~ ~ ~ G (i '(i (i Ie} I~ 0 Iz ~ 11= (3,~
'9 ~=a ~ eX ~ @ ~,~ * t~ ~ I~ I~ ~ ~ lli g li'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ l~ ffi'~ I~ ~ '~:~ I~ I~ i~ ~ l~ 1m ~ ~ I~ ~ ;~ g I~ ~ I~
Nd:~
September 6, 2005
Mr. Mike Nadeau
Creative Properties
15894 Highway 17
P.O. Box 56
Hampstead, NC 28443
Re: Z-807, 08/05 (Medical Mall- Scotts Hill)
Dear Mr. Nadeau:
The New Hanover County Planning Board in regular session on Thursday, September I, 2005 recommended approval
of your request to rezone approximately 26.65 acres of property from R-15 Residential to CD (0&1) Office and Institution and
approximately 18.47 acres of property from R-15 Residential to CD (B-1) Neighborhood Business located near the 9000 block
of Market Street. The vote by the Board was 4-2. This recommendation of approval by the Board also includes the following
conditions:
1) No single story structures be permitted,
2) Appropriate screening of dumpsters, electrical boxes, and other services to enhance the aesthetics of the buildings,
3) That the tree preserve space (90') be reinstated on the current site design per the 06/10/05 site plan,
4) That the petitioner request Dr. Mike Mallin to determine whether addition stormwater monitoring is needed on site,
5) That a complete tree survey of all regulated and significant trees be provided and tree removal permits obtained prior to any
land disturbance on site,
6) That all required buffer areas remain undisturbed with grading limits stopped outside the buffer,
7) Staff shall meet with the applicant or project manager to field verify the conservation resource swamp forest (WSF) and
appropriate 50 foot setbacks,
8) Intersections design shall be consistent with NCDOT's access management plans for this section of Market Street (US
Highway 17) including any improvements needed on Market Street,
9) A secondary road access connection to Scotts Hill Loop Road be completed prior to 50 percent occupancy of the project, and
10) The main entry street be a public right of way to provide access to County property and future residential development.
II) The Scotts Hill Village" component of the plan will be limited to 202,000 square feet with a maximum retail use of 80,000
square feet and no building footprint exceeding 25,000 square feet.
12) All uses consistent with the approved plan and list of approved uses be required.
This recommendation by the Planning Board has been forwarded to the Board of New Hanover County
Commissioners. They will meet to act on this petition on October 3,2005 at 5:30 p.m. on the third floor of the Old County
Courthouse, located at the corner of Third and Princess Streets in Wilmington. Please share this information with your
clients.
Please remit 12 copies of the revised site plan prior to September 16, 2005 for distribution to the Board of County
Commissioners for their meeting on October 3, 2005. Contact me if you have questions. I may be reached at 798-7441.
Sincerely, cc: Planning Board members
Clerk to the Board
S.A. Burgess
Planner
APPLICANT MATERIALS
!
Scott's Hill Village Revised -New Hanover County/Pender County. NC
1.0 Executive Summary
The proposed Scott's Hill Village development is located east of US 17 in between Creekwood
Road and Scott's Hill Loop Road South in both New Hanover County and Pender County, North
Carolina. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was perfonned for this development by Kimley-Horn
and Associates, Inc. in February 2005. However, the analysis presented herein is required as a
revision to that document due to the expansion of the property into Pender County and the
following changes in land uses:
. 19 additional single family dwelling units
. Removal of all proposed apartments and senior housing
. 16,800 additional square feet (s.f.) of clinic space
. 38,300 less s.f. of general office space
. 6,300 additional s.f. ofrrledical office space
. 13,680 additional s.f. of retail space
The development is expected to be complete (built-out) in 2010. Since the site falls within the
limits ofNCDOT Project R-2405, the design year (2020) of this project was also analyzed. This
report presents trip generation, distribution, traffic analyses, and recommendations for
transportation improvements required to meet anticipated traffic demands.
The following is a summary of roadway improvements committed by the adjacent Sidbury Road
Development for build-out of Phase I of that development in 2009:
,
US 17 at Scott's Hill LOOD Road South: ,
. Install traffic signal
"
US 17 at Sidburv Road:
. Install traffic signal .(
US 17 at Scott's Hill Loop Road North:
. Install traffic signal
Based on the capacity analysis presented herein, the following roadway improvements are
recommended to mitigate proposed site traffic (all improvements recommended are consistent with
the "super-street" corridor on US 17):
US 17 at Entrance #1:
. Construct an exclusive northbound right-turn lane on US 17
1 I
~_~ KimIey-Hom
_ and Associates, Ino.
~_"_M_.~~_M
~
Scott's Hill Village Revised -New Hanover County/Pender County, NC
US 17 at Entrance #2:
. Construct an exclusive southbound left-turn lane on US 17
. Construct an exclusive northbound U-turn lane on US 17
. Construct an exclusive northbound right-turn lane on US 17
. Provide dual westbound right-turn lanes on Entrance #2
. Install traffic signal
US 17 at Entrance #3:
. Construct an exclusive northbound right-turn lane on US 17
US 17 at Scott's Hiil Loop Road South:
. Construct an additional southbound left-turn lane on US 17 (to tenninate as an eastbound
right-turn lane at Driveway #1)
. Construct an exclusive northbound U-turn lane on US 17
. Construct an additional westbound right-turn lane on Scott's Hill Loop Road South
US 17 at Sidbury Road (recommended when the commercial portion of the site along Scott's Hill
Loop Road South is developed):
. Construct an exclusive northbound U-turn lane on US 17 in addition to the existing
northbound left-turn lane
. Construct an additional eastbound right-turn lane on Sidbury Road
(Note: The additional eastbound right-turn lane may or may not be required based on future
growth and development. These improvements are also recommended in conjunction with Phase
II of the SidburyRoad Development)
!
Scott's HilI Loop Road South at Drivewav # 1 :
. Construct an eastbound right-turn lane on Scott's Hill Loop Road South
. Provide exclusive northbound left- and right-turn lanes on Driveway #1
f
Scott's Hill Loop Road South at Drivewav #2: ---
. Construct an eastbound right-turn lane on Scott's Hill Loop Road South
The following roadway improvements are committed by the adjacent Sidbury Road Development
for build-out of Phase IJ; of that development in 2020:
US 17 at Scott's Hill Loop Road NorthlSidburv Drivewav 1:
. Construct an exclusive southbound right-turn lane on US 17
. Construct dual exclusive northbound left-turn lanes on US 17
. Provide triple eastbound right-turn lanes on Sidbury Driveway 1
2
~_~ Kimley-Hom
_ and Assoclales,lnc.
- -------_.__.---.~. ..,.- ,-.-- --_._~-_._....._,._.._-
. I I - 110.-1...10. O. .:::....:.r-'...I. 1'fC...;;>...:;..;;;..I-.... '-""'-' "'-'''~'-'
-,
Scott's Hill Village Revised -New Han()ller County/Pender County, NC
Based on the capacity analysis presented herein, all of the study intersections are expected to
operate at an acceptable level-of-service at project build-out in 2010.
In 2020 all of the study intersections on US 17 are expected to operate at an unacceptable level-of-
service in. either the AM or PM peak hour with or without the proposed project in place due to the
excessively high background volumes. The NCDOT projected TIP design year volumes alone on
US 17 at Scott's Hill Loop Road South exceed the capacity of a 6-lane divided arterial. With the
additional of the Sidbury Road development traffic, the 2020 background traffic volumes exceed
the capacity of an 8-lane divided roadway. The proposed Scott's Hill Village development trips
will only amount to 12% of the total 2020 projected volumes on US 17. Furthennore, it should be
noted that the design year volumes added to the volumes projected for the Sidbury and Scott's Hill
VIllage developments result in an annual growth on US 17 of over 8% per year for 17 years, which
is well beyond the consistent growth rate of approximately 4.6 to 4.8% per year experienced on
this corridor. Actual future growth may be significantly less than projected herein for the 2020
condition.
The recommended roadway improvements are shown on figures 8 and 9.
,
,
I
''\
3
~~ Kimley-Hom
and ASsoci8les. Inc.
~ At
j I~
~
sp:
i'l
ii~
~~
21100--4
~::r::
~oo 11
~ ~;:~ t
~O].d~
z :.i::o "S
~U~~I;
~CJ):fc L
..
"~ "~~~:.,
"~,
~::\::~,
'<,~~~ ~
.~'
''::<:~'-.
'~'''-''
, '''':::~
This page intentionally left blank.
PREUMINARY REZONING PLAN
Scotts Hill ViIJ~"ge
.. ~
--=..L . I I I
~~~....
" ,~
N.~6T
-
~
.......
- .
r "Sea Us Hill Village"
SITE: DATA: ZONED: Proposed B-1
Lot Area = ra47 acre
Disturbed Area = 15 acre x
8 BLDGS-Height = 35'mox;mum or NHC Ordinance
606 regular spaces
5 Loading spaces
20 Handicap spaces. van accessible .'~
IMPERVIOUS AREA TABULATION; -"'::!? - ~-- ._"
Predeveloped - 0.00 acre \
Postdeveloped - \
Q. Buildings - 105.250 sf
b. Parking & Street - 297,000 sf -
TOTAL = 9.25 ocres ~\.
..
APPROXIMATE BUILOING LOT COVERAGE - 15? I
APPROXIMATE IMPERVIOUS LOT COVERAGE - 50?
"'<6 I .
NOTE WELL: MAXIMUM TOTAL AREA OF RETAIL USAGE .
~ L
ALLOWEO IS TO BE UMITED TO BO,OOO SF. s~l'4t
NOTE WEll: NO PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINT
IS TO EXCEED 25,000 SF. I
USES ALLOWED IN B-1 CONDITIONAL DIS1RICT:
MISC-
OFFICES FOR BUSINESS &: PROFESSIONAL ACTIVl11ES
ACCESSORY BLDGS INClDENTAL TO PERMITTED USES
SINGLE FAMILY DWEWNG ATTACHEO, SECOND STORY
ONLY. MAXIMUM OF 40 UNITS
GOVERNMENT QfACES ole BUILDINGS
PRINCIPAL USE SIGN
TEMPORARY SIGN . "N.H.R.M.C. Tract-
RETAIL -
APPAREL &: ACCESSORY STORE SITE DATA; ZONED: Proposed Od" (CD)
CONVENIENCE FOOD STORE Lof Area = 26.93 acres
ORUG STORE Disturbed Area = 25 acres :t
EA11NG ole DRINKING PLACES Bldg.Heighf = J5'max. or as per NHC ordinances
FOOD STORES 858 Regular spaces or os per NHC ordinances
GENERAL MERCHANDISE STORES 4- Loading spaces or as per NHC ordinances
MISCELLANEOUS RETAIL 36 Handicap spaces or os per NHC ordinances and ADA
FINANCING - IMPERVIOUS AREA TABULA nON:
SE~~~~~ .:REDIT AGENClES. SAVINGS &: LOANS PredeveJaped - 0.00 acre
Posfdeveloped -
BUSINESS SERViCES INCLUDING PRINTING o. Buildings - not to exceed .3.3 acres
DRY CLEANING b. Parking & Street - 10.7 acres :I:
MEMBERSHIP SPORTS ole RECREA 11001 CLUBS APPROXIMATE BUILDING LOT COVERAGE -
PERSONAL SERViCES 15?
BARBER I BEAUTY SHOP APPROXIMATE IMPERVIOUS LOT COVERAGE = 60?
U11L111ES -
TELEPHONE'" TELEGRAPH FACILITIES USES PERMITTED IN 0&1 CONDITIONAL DIS1RICT;
_ PERSONAL CARE FACILITIES
_ OFFICES FOR PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES
- HOSPITAL
From: "David Hollis" <dhollis@hdsilm.com> Hanover Design Services, P.A.
To: "Mike Nadeau" <mike@creativeproperties.biz> 319 Walnut Street
Cc: "Greg Wayne" <gwayne@hdsilm.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 26,200610:50 AM Wilmington, N. C. 28401
Subject: RE: Scotts Hill stormwater management practices Phone: 910-343-8002
Mike:
All stormwater management systems are to be designed to or above State and New Hanover County
requirements.
State regulations govern water quality and treatment methodologies could include BMPs (best management
practices) such as infiltration, wetlands storage, vegetated "rain gardens", ponds, porous pavement, filter strips
and swales, as well as other accepted practices. Plans are approved by DENR I Division of Water Quality.
County regulations govern stormwater rate and are among the strictest in the State, restricting the post-
development runoff rate to or below predevelopment levels for the 2-, 10-, and 25-year events. Existing on-site is
an approved, constructed stormwater management pond sized for the existing Surgicenter site and future
commercial planning as reflected on the rezoning Conditional Development Plan. This pond discharges into an
essentially landlocked delineated wetlands conservation easement for recharge and preservation. All plans are
approved by New Hanover County Engineering.
A third set of regulations govern sedimentation, and the prevention of any erosion or deposition of sediment into
waters or wetlands. Engineered methodologies include filter fabric, inlet and outlet protection, sediment traps and
basins, vegetated berms, swales and diversions, as well as construction sequencing and maintenance
scheduling. Plans are approved by New Hanover County Engineering under authority of the State Land Quality
Section.
All future phases of construction require individual permits from the appropriate agencies, involving detailed
scrutiny of stormwater management plans.
David
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Stormwater Infiltration Study
for the
Proposed Scotts Hill Village Project
October, 26, 2006
SENCA Properties, LLC, engaged The Clark Group to
evaluate site-specific geological circumstances at the proposed
project site in order to determine whether infiltration could be
utilized as a viable stormwater management strategy. The
studies involved the installation of seventy-five piezometers
and test wells, the conduct of extensive hydraulic testing of
surficial and subsurface materials, and the generation
hydrogeologic models to assess the feasibility of stormwater
infiltration. The purpose of the studies was to provide
information to the project architect and engineer to be
considered in the design process.
In the course of the investigation, it was determined that the
site is situated in a karst geologic terrane, whereas an
underlying limestone unit has been chemically weathered to
develop a system of collapsed cavities (dolines, aka sinkholes),
which are filled with overlying permeable sands. The resulting
sinks are natural recharge areas for the underlying limestone
aquifer. These features are also uniquely suited to stormwater
infiltration.
Measured hydraulic loading rates were adequate for the design
to anticipate zero runoff, although the engineered design does
incorporate a safeguard route of overflow via a grassy swale
buffer to an existing isolated wetlands system.
Measured infiltration rates in the project area ranged upward
from one to over eight inches per hour, which are well in excess
of the state-required minimum of one-half inch per hour under
similar permitting scenarios. The project engineer's design of
the stormwater infiltration system utilized areas of high
capacity.
Overall, the unique characteristics of this project site have
allowed the design of a system that should ensure no
stormwater leaves the site via surface water discharge.
.
SCOTTS HILL VILLAGE PROJECT
RE-ZONING SUMMARY
10/26/06
SENCA Properties, LLC, a partnership of 105 physicians, proposes a comprehensive plan to
locate a wide array of medical services in one location to serve the fast growing communities of
northern New Hanover and southeastern Pender Counties.
The first step, a new, four operating room, out patient surgical center is currently under
construction. The petition recently submitted to New Hanover County proposes rezoning 50.35
acres adjacent to the surgi-center as follows:
26.93 acres shall be sold to New Hanover Regional Medical Center. An 0&1 Conditional
District (CD) is proposed to accommodate their future extension of medical services to
northern New Hanover County.
18.47 acres will be developed under a B.l Conditional District (CD), providing
predominately private medical offices with complementary retail and restaurant uses
planned.
4.95 acres within the 0&1 (CD) zone will serve as a storm water facility for both sections
above.
Question: What is a Conditional District?
The conditional district approach effectively allows creation of a site-specific zoning. Detailed
conditions are imposed, which very specifically limit the uses allowed, as well as the amount of
open space, and other factors. Effectively a "special use" permit, the planners and citizens have
assurance that a project will be built as specified. Any significant change with the plan would
require a new permit be applied for and be approved.
The specific uses requested in each Conditional District are listed on the attached site map.
Question: Will storm water runoff impact the creeks?
A storm water system has been designed and permitted to capture and contain runoff. Extensive
study concludes the geological substrata and the surface soils create rather unique conditions that
allow all storm water to be contained and infiltrated. The system shall not discharge into Futch
or Foy Creeks. Geologist Paul Clark and engineer David Hollis have provided brief written
summaries. The detailed studies and analyses have been shared with several local environmental
groups and are available for review upon request.
.
Question: Will the project overburden the roadways?
The county-mandated Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) from last year was updated to
include:
A. The 2000 acre residential and commercial project planned for Sidbury Road and Hwy 17;
and
B. A hypothetical full build out of the entire 240 acre "Skipper Property", well beyond the
scope of the 50 acre rezoning
The detailed report by traffic engineers Kimley Horne of Raleigh concludes:
". . . all of the study intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable level of service
at project build out in 2010."
And as a practical matter, most nearby residents who receive medical services at this complex
will have been saved a 20-plus mile round trip into the heart of Wilmington.
Question: Will exterior lighting be regulated?
Yes, New Hanover County ordinance requires commercial lighting be buffered. Scotts Hill
Village will utilize "shoebox" style low light emissions fixtures with cut-off features.
Question: Will green space be preserved within the project?
The design illustrates a total impervious area (buildings, roads and parking) of23.25 acres within
the 50.35 acre rezoning area, or about 46% overall. Generally speaking, most commercial
projects range from 75-85% impervious area.
Part of that green space will be the natural ridge adjoining the main entrance road to the south.
Rather than being grated flat for development, this ridge will be left with its natural slope intact
and most trees preserved.
Question: Will wetlands on site be disturbed?
Yes, just under 1/10th of an acre will be filled for a road crossing under a permit issued by the
Corps of Engineers. However, the remaining 7.15 acres of delineated 404 wetlands (98.6%)
remain undisturbed over the development of the entire 240 acre Skipper Property.
Question: Will septic tanks be utilized?
No, SENCA has extended both the water and sewer mains from the Plantation Landing
subdivision up to highway 17 to service the entire property. Further, by county mandate, a 16"
main will extend south along Highway 17 to create a loop system, enhancing pressure.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Regular Item #: 3.4 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Planning Presenter: Chris O'Keefe
Contact: Chris O'Keefe
Item Does Not Require Review
SUBJECT:
Rezoning - Request by Ward & Smith, PA for Bill Clark Homes of Wilmington, llC to Rezone 104.6 Acres Between
the 2000 and 2100 blocks of Castle Hayne Road from R-20 to R-15 Residential District (Z-854, 11/(6)
BRIEF SUMMARY:
At its November 2, 2006 meeting, the Planning Board recommended approval of this rezoning request by a vote of 6-1.
Traffic was an issue of concern as well as uncertainties as to potential connectivity to Arlington Drive. One adjacent owner
expressed concerns about the potential density of development on the site.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
The County Commissioners may approve or deny the petition.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
~ ~
........
. ..
Z-854-Staff Summary.doc Z -854-Petition Summary. doc
zoning map and applicant materials
ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 4-1, Davis opposing.
CASE: Z-854, 11/06;
PETITIONER: Ward & Smith, PA for Bill Clark Homes
REQUEST: From R-20 Residential to R-15 Residential District
ACREAGE: Approximately 104.6 Acres
LOCATION: between 2000 and 2100 block of Castle Hayne Road
LAND CLASS: Transition & Conservation
PLANNING BOARD ACTION
At its November 2, 2006 meeting, the Planning Board recommended approval of this
rezoning request by a vote of 6-1. Traffic was an issue of concern as well as uncertainties as
to potential connectivity to Arlington Drive. One adjacent owner expressed concerns about
the potential density of development on the site.
STAFF SUMMARY
The subject property is located along Castle Hayne Road north of the 23rd Street intersection.
Castle Hayne Road is classified as an arterial roadway which experienced a 23% increase in
traffic volume between 2001 and 2005. Level of Service is F on Castle Hayne Road as of
November 2006. LOS on 23rd Street is rated C&D. The opening of the Martin Luther King
Parkway and 1-140 bypass has resulted in a decline in traffic volume from 21,533 in 2005 to
17,821.
The subject property is currently vacant with one unoccupied dilapidated residential structure
along the highway. A borrow pit used for recent highway construction in the area has created an
11.2 acre lake in the center of the property. Land to the south is zoned R-15 and is developed in
single family residential use along Arlington Drive. South of the project and along Castle Hayne
Road is zoned B-1 Business. Immediately north ofthe subject property, zoning is R-20
Residential and is currently in agricultural use. Further north is the Seitter residential subdivision
along Carl Seitter Drive. To the east, across Castle Hayne Road, zoning is AR Airport
Residential, transitioning to B-1 at Spring Road.
The property is relatively near the airport and is identified within the airport transition zone
indicated by the Airport Height Ordinance, however, elevations below 182' would not need
special authorization from the FAA. The property is located within the Ness Creek watershed
drainage area and is slightly influenced by flood zone on the extreme west portion of the site.
Water and sewer are currently not available near the site. Sewer lines may be extended at the
developer's expense. Sewage from the site would be treated at the Northside Treatment facility.
Currently capacity at the facility is limited and is being allocated in 15,000 gpd (approximately 41
sf homes) units.
Land Use Plan Considerations:
The 2006 Update ofthe Joint CAMA Plan describes the Transition classification as areas
providing for future intensive urban development on lands that have or will have urban services.
The property is within the Urban Services Boundary and public water and sewer are available in
the vicinity.
This rezoning petition proposes a change to allow higher residential density by an expansion of
an existing R-15 district (Arlington Drive). Such a change would expand the residential density
policy in the area and increase density on this acreage from 1.9 units per acre to 2.5 units per net
acre on performance residential design or 4.25 to 10.2 per acre for high density by special use
permit. Subtracting the acreage of open water, the maximum scenarios would be:
R-20 R-15
Performance Residential 177 units 234 units
High Density 397 units 953 units
The Transition Classification allows for intensive development where urban services are
provided. Policies in the land use plan encourage preservation of the character of existing
neighborhoods and quality of life with the primary strategy to integrate development and growth
with input from residents, and also to develop design standards to replace use standards.
The character of the surrounding residential development is low density to the north and moderate
density to the immediate south. Connectivity with these neighborhoods is not likely. It should be
noted that a zoning boundary irregularity from the past places the district line through the center
of properties on Arlington Drive and will create a narrow strip ofR-20 between the R-15
Districts. That discrepancy will need to be addressed to make the boundary consistent
Traffic in the area is a significant consideration. The adjacent neighborhoods have not been
designed with street stubs for interconnectivity although future development may provide those
connections. A TIA has been developed in anticipation of future subdivision. The TIA
recommends improvements which would help to mitigate the impact on Castle Hayne Road.
Weekday average trip generation for single family detached units is estimated to generate 9.57
trips per day (ITRE manual). Approximate traffic additions would be:
R-20 R-15
Performance Residential 1,694 2,239
High Density 3,799 9,120
Staff Recommendation:
Based on the above analysis, staff recommends approval ofthis rezoning.
ACTION NEEDED:
(Choose one)
1. Motion to Approve (with or without conditions) based on positive findings of fact.
2. Motion to table the item in order to receive additional information or
documentation (Specify).
3. Motion to Deny based on specific findings in any of the 4 categories above, such as
lack of consistency with adopted plans or determination that the project will pose
public hazards or will not adequately meet requirements of the ordinance.
Case: Z-854 (11/06)
Petition Summary Data
Owner/Petitioner: Ward & Smith for Bill Clark Hornes
Existing Land Use: Vacant (R-20) Requesting (R-15)
Zoning History: July 1, 1974 (Area lOA)
Land Classification: Transition & Conservation
Water Type: Public - 1 mile or less
Sewer Type: Public - 1 mile or less
Recreation Area: Cape Fear Optimist Park
Access & Traffic Volume: Castle Hayne Rd., an identified Arterial
Traffic LOS is F (Nov. 2006) with ADT approximately
17,821 (Nov. 2006)
Fire District: Wrightsboro FD
Watershed & Water Ouality Classification: Smith Creek and Ness Creek (C, SW)
Aquifer Recharge Area: Secondary Recharge for Castle Hayne and Peedee
aquifers and Discharge area for groundwater flow
Conservation/Historic/Archaeological Resources: PartiallOO-year flood zone;
Class IV soils: Jo and Do; Swamp Forest
Soils: Le- Leon, Kr- Kureb sand, Se-Seagate fine sand, To- Torhunta loamy fine
sand
Septic Suitability: Kr is Class I, suitable; Se is Class II, Moderate limitations; Le
and To are Class III, severe limitations
Schools: Parsley
;:>
.. ~
..
E
0 z'
:>:
-l! :;;
0 c
., <( ~
0 ~ 0.
;;; (!J "
"tl u; 0
.- 0
l: 0> '" N
.s G> ....~~
:5 J :. ;1E~
'j;
'"
cc '"
Q 1:
,.. .,
,... ~~
lld"-Ii: 1: .+.
It;t .e.~
CC)O'E..
~~Q.
a:<(
APPLICANT MATERIALS
,.........
"",
",-"
m
I-
~
1-- .
:r:,
,..... .. fJ,"~':.::i
i
"...." ..,
-..'.... ,
. ~'-". "
""\1
R-20"""".._ '-" ..
'.. "."
'"
.. ...., ".c._
-"
'1.,
'".. ..
.'
SITE '~u. .- ,
.-
",.
.'
'''.
1
.. ;
P ARAMOUNTE NEW HANOVER COUNTY
ZONING MAP
E' N 0 I NEE R lNG, I N C01
This page intentionally left blank.
WHAT YOU MUST ESTABLISH TO GET A CHANGE
ZONING OF PROPERTY
Your intended use of propertyuponrezoning is completely irrelevant, except for conditional use district
proposals. The North Carolina General Statutes require that zoning regulations shall be made in accordance
with a comprehensive plan. Since amendments to zoning maps should also be based on a Land Use Plan, you
must explain in the space below how your request satisfies each of the following requirements:
I. How would the requested change be consistent with the County's Policies for Growth and
Development?
The requested change of zoning is consistent with the county's land use plan. The purpose
of the transition class is to provide for future intensive development on lands that have
been or will be provided with necessary urban services. In the 2006 CAMA plan update,
the subject property is located within the urban services boundary; therefore, the area
requested ~o be rezoned is part of the urban service area. Public water is available to the
subject property and public sewer will soon be available to the subject property. The
rezoning being requested is consistent with the current zoning in the area which is R-15.
2. How would the requested zone change be consistent with the property' scIassificationon the Land Classi-
ficationMap?
The property is currently classified as urban transition and is in an area to provide for future
intensive development on lands that have or will be provided necessary urban services.
This project will meet the requirements for water and sewer in accordance with the City of
Wilmington standards. This property also has direct access to a major arterial road.
3. What significant neighborhood changes have occurred to make the original zoning inappropriate, or howis
the land involved unsuitable forthe uses pennitted underthe existing zoning?
The property was previously used for farming. Currently, it is overgrown with trees and
brush. The property was recently used for mining of soils to assist off-site projects which
created a 19 acre man-made lake. This lake will be used as an amenity for future residential
development. The adjacent land to the south is currently zoned R-15 and is a developed
subdivision. With the ongoing revitalization of the downtown area and the close proximity
of the subject property to the newly completed by-pass, this area of the county will begin to
experience residential growth. Other surrounding properties have been recently rezoned to
R -15 and this request is consistent with their recent rezonings.
In signing this petition, I understand that the existing zoning map is presumed to be correct and that I
have the burden of proving why a change is in the public interest. I further understand the singling
out of one parcel ofland for special zoning treatment unrelated to County policies and the surrounding
neighborhood would probably be illegal. I certifY that all information presented in this application is
accurate to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief
This page intentionally left blank.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Regular Item #: 3.5 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Planning Presenter: Chris O'Keefe
Contact: Chris O'Keefe
Item Does Not Require Review
SUBJECT:
Conditional Use Zoning District (Continued from November 13, 20(6) - Request by Ward and Smith, PA for Bm
Clark Homes of Wilmington, llC to Rezone Approximately 5.8 Acres at 5025 and 5031 Carolina Beach Road (off
Appeals Road) from R-15 to CD(R-10) High Density (Z-851, 10/06)
BRIEF SUMMARY:
This item is a continuation from the November 13, 2006 County Commissioners meeting. At the October 2, 2006 Planning
Board meeting, the Planning Board voted 4-0 to recommend approval of the requested conditional district zoning request,
including the staff's recomrnended conditions plus one added condition that construction is only permissible Monday
through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Several residents of the Willoughby Park neighborhood expressed concerns
about drainage and traffic, particularly construction traffic. The complete list of conditions agreed to by the applicant were:
1. Developer to construct a coated chain link fence and a split rail fence around the retention pond.
2. Developer to plant a 5-foot vegetative buffer across the southeastern property line to conceal
the retention pond.
3. Developer will limit construction to Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
The County Commissioners may approve or deny the conditional use rezoning portion of the request.
If the zoning is approved the County Commissioners must approve or approve with conditions the accompanying special
use permit.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
~ ~
........
. ..
Z-851-Staff Summary. doc Z-851 Petition Summary. doc
zoning map, applicant materials, site plans
ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
A motion to approve the rezoning failed due to the lack of a second.
CASE: Z-851, 10/06 - CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 13, 2006
PETITIONER: Ward & Smith, PA for Bill Clark Homes
REQUEST: From R-15 Residential District to CD(R-IO) Residential
District High Density Development
ACREAGE: Approximately 5.8 Acres
LOCATION: 5025 and 5031 Carolina Beach Road (interior lots)
LAND CLASS: Urban
At its October 2, 2006 meeting, the Planning Board voted 4-0 to recommend approval of the
requested conditional district zoning request, including the staff's recommended conditions
plus one added condition that construction is only permissible Monday through Friday
from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Several residents of the Willoughby Park neighborhood
expressed concerns about drainage and traffic, particularly construction traffic. The
complete list of conditions agreed to by the applicant were:
1. Developer to construct a coated chain link fence and a split rail fence around the
retention pond.
2. Developer to plant a 5-foot vegetative buffer across the southeastern property
line to conceal the retention pond.
3. Developer will limit construction to Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to
6:00 p.m.
STAFF SUMMARY
The subject property is located off Carolina Beach Road adjacent to the Willoughby Park
development, approximately half a mile northwest of Monkey Junction. Access is from local
streets, Appeals Road off Willoughby Park Road, onto Carolina Beach Road, an identified arterial
on the thoroughfare plan. Level of service has been rated E on Carolina Beach Road, meaning
traffic volume is at capacity. No service ratings are available for the local streets.
The subject property is currently undeveloped, wooded acreage at the rear of residential
properties along Carolina Beach Road. To the north ofthe subject property is a high density R-15
residential project (The Lakes at Johnson Farms). West of the site are older R-15 residential
parcels separating this site from B-2 commercial zoning. To the east is the Willoughby Park
neighborhood, which is a satellite annexation within the City's jurisdiction. Further east is the
Walmart and Lowe's Home Improvement Conditional B-2 shopping area. South of the project is
a mix ofR-15 and CD (B-2) with R-IO residential further south.
The subject property is located within the Motts Creek watershed drainage area. It is not within a
special flood hazard area. The site is in a primary recharge area for the principal aquifers. Public
water and sewer are available at the site. There are no known locally protected conservation,
historic or archaeological resources on the site.
As a condition for rezoning, the applicant proposes that the use will be restricted to a high density
residential project which will meet all the requirements ofthe zoning ordinance. A companion
special use permit will bind the proposed use and restrictions to this property.
Land Use Plan Considerations:
The 2006 Update ofthe Joint CAMA Plan describes the urban classification as areas providing
for "continued intensive development and redevelopment of existing urban areas. These areas are
already developed at a density approaching 1,500 dwelling units per square mile. Urban services
are already in place or scheduled within the immediate future."
Policies in the land use plan encourage designation of sufficient land area and suitable locations
for the various land uses and encourage preservation of the character of existing neighborhoods
and quality of life with the primary strategy to integrate development and growth with input from
residents, and also to develop design standards to replace use standards. Transition of lands from
one use to another is not specifically addressed.
This rezoning petition proposes a change from moderate density R-15 residential use to the
county's highest density R-IO residential designation. The change would create a new R-lO
district of 5.8 acres adjacent to a multi-family zoning designation within the City's jurisdiction.
The resulting increase would be 5 units for performance residential development and 39 units for
high density development.
Between 2001 and 2005, Average daily traffic volume increased by 30% on Carolina Beach road
in this vicinity. Traffic from the site will utilize Appeals Road to access Willoughby Park Road.
All traffic will feed into Carolina Beach Road from Willoughby Park Road. Appeals Road
intersects with Willoughby Park Road and stubs out at the eastern property boundary of this site.
No other points of interconnectivity have been provided within the surrounding area.
The Urban land classification promotes more intense urban development. Increases in intensity
have been considered and approved in proximity to Monkey Junction to support the area
becoming an urban node. The increase in intensity is consistent with the adjacent multi-family
and nearby high density projects. For these reasons, staff recommends approval of the proposed
rezoning.
ACTION #1 NEEDED:
Adopt a statement in accordance with NCGS 153A-341 which requires that "prior to
adopting or rejecting any zoning amendment, the governing board shall adopt a statement
describing whether the action is consistent with an adopted comprehensive plan and
explaining why the board considers the action taken to be reasonable and in the public
interest."
EXAMPLE:
The County Commissioners find that this request for zoning map amendment from R-15
Residential to CD(R-lO) Residential District is (or is not):
1. Consistent with the purposes and intent of the urban land classification and the
associated land use policies adopted in the 2006 land use plan;
2. Reasonable and in the public interest to increase high density residential density
option from 10.2 units per acre to 17 units per acre in this location because the
companion special use high density project cannot achieve the maximum density on
this parcel within the context of all the development standards imposed by the
ordinance.
PRELIMINARY STAFF FINDINGS FOR THE COMPANION SPECIAL USE PERMIT:
1. The Board must find that the use will not materially endanger the public health or
safety where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and
approved.
A. Public water and sewer are accessible for the property.
B. The property accesses an identified arterial via local streets meeting the access
requirements of Section 69.9(A)2 for residential high density projects.
C. Fire Service is available from the Myrtle Grove Fire Station.
D. The property is not located in a flood hazard area.
E. Stormwater retention has been included in the proposed site plan.
2. The Board must find that the use meets all required conditions and specifications of
the Zoning Ordinance.
A. The property is zoned R-15 Residential. This request is made concurrent with
conditional rezoning to CD(R-l 0) Residential.
B. The proposed use is limited to attached single family residential.
C. Density for this project is limited by the standards of Section 69.4(5)(B) and
results in 43 allowable units on the 5.8 acre site.
D. Petitioner proposes off-street parking that exceeds the requirements of Article
VIII of the New Hanover County Zoning Ordinance by providing 90 spaces
rather than 86 as required.
E. Traffic circulation must meet the standards and requirements for private streets
outlined in the subdivision ordinance, and the street system must provide
adequate access for emergency service vehicles.
F. A traffic impact analysis was not required by NCDOT for this project.
G. Buffer of 52 feet will be provided between the existing conventional R-15
residential use and this property in accordance with Section 67-4(3) of the zoning
ordinance.
H. A tree survey has been performed and trees will be protected and mitigated as
required in Section 67 of the zoning ordinance.
3. The Board' must find that the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining
or abutting property or that the use is a public necessity.
A. No evidence has been submitted that this project will decrease property values of
residents who live nearby.
B. Stormwater management must perform in compliance with the requirements of
the County ordinance.
4. The Board must find that the location and character of the use if developed
according to the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area
in which it is to be located and in general conformity with the plan of development
for New Hanover County.
A. The 2006 Land Use Plan identifies this area as Urban, which allows for higher
densities and intensities where public water or sewer is available.
B. Policies in the plan support preservation of residential character and quality of
life in existing neighborhoods.
C. Willoughby Park is a community of attached dwelling units and The Lakes at
Johnson Farms is a single family high density community.
Staff suggested conditions:
1. Coordinate with the City of Wilmington to confirm the appropriate design
standards for connection to Appeals Road, a public street in the city's
jurisdiction.
2. Site plan must be reviewed by TRC and comments or conditions accepted.
ACTION # 2 NEEDED:
(Choose one)
1. Motion to Approve (with or without conditions) based on positive findings of fact.
2. Motion to table the item in order to receive additional information or
documentation (Specify).
3. Motion to Deny based on specific findings in any of the 4 categories above, such as
lack of consistency with adopted plans or determination that the project will pose
public hazards or will not adequately meet requirements of the ordinance.
Case: Z-851, 10/06
Petition Summary Data
Owner/Petitioner: Ward & Smith, PA for Bill Clark Homes of Wilmington,
LLC
Existing Land Uses: Vacant Proposed: CD(R-lO)
Zoning History: April 7, 1971 (Area 4)
Land Classification: Urban
Water Type: Public
Sewer Type: Public
Recreation Area: Myrtle Grove Park
Access & Traffic Volurne: Appeals Rd./Willoughby Park Rd. (Local Access) to Carolina
Beach Rd. (Major thoroughfare) 32,705(2005); ADT 25,000
(2001)
LOS: Carolina Beach Road = E (At Capacity)
Fire District: Myrtle Grove FD
Watershed & Water Quality Classification: Motts Creek (C;SW)
Aquifer Recharge Area: Primary recharge for principal aquifers.
ConservationlHistoric/ Archaeological Resources: No locally protected considerations.
Soils: Lynn Haven (Ly), Leon (Le)
Septic Suitability: Severe limitations
Schools: Pine Valley Elementary
-N~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~N~~~
c
'0;
'15.
'0 go
"'C 8
<: :<i
Gl
" Cl ":l
" Gl
E -I
00
~:c
U) a: t:
o .so!
- "'u
C _= .~
~ n::Ui
~.. ~~
~ 'g~ " .. ~
I "Q. . bl
N "D.
11:<
APPLICANT MATERIALS
WHAT YOU MUST ESTABLISH TO GET A CHANGE
ZONING OF PROPERTY
Conditional Use District Zoning is established to address situations where a particular land use
would be consistent with the New Hanover County Land Use Plan and the Zoning Ordinance
objectives but for which none of the general zoning maps should also be based on a Land Use Plan,
you must explain in the space below how your request satisfies each of the following requirements:
I. How would the requested change be consistent with the County's Policies for Growth and
Development?
See attached.
2. How would the requested zone change be consistent with the property's classification on the
Land Classification Map?
See attached.
3. What significant neighborhood changes have occurred to make the original zoning inappropriate,
or how is the land involved unsuitable for the uses permitted under the existing zoning?
See attached.
4. List proposed conditions and restrictions that would mitigate the impacts of the proposed use.
See attached.
SITE PLA.N
Tract boundaries and total area, plus location of adjoining land parcels and roadways.
Existing zoning of the tract and neighboring parcels and proposed tract zoning.
Proposed use ofland, structures and other improvements. For residential uses, this shall
include number, height and type of units and site plan outlining are to be occupied by each
structure and/or subdivided lot boundaries. For non-residential uses, this shall include
approximate square footage and height of each structure, an outline of the area it will occupy
and the specific purpose for which it will be used.
Development schedule including proposed phasing.
Traffic and Parking Plan to include a statement of impact concerning local traffic near the
tract, proposed right-of-way dedication, plans for access to and from the tract, location,
width and right-of-way for internal streets and location, arrangement and access provisions
for parking areas.
All existing and proposed easements, reservations, required setbacks, rights-of-way,
buffering and signage.
The one hundred (100) year floodplain line, if applicable
Location and sizing of trees required to be protected under Section 67 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
Any additional conditions and requirements, which represent greater restrictions on develop-
ment and use of the tract than the corresponding General Use District regulations, which are
the minimum requirements in the Conditional Use District, or other limitations on land which
may be regulated by State law or Local Ordinance.
Any other information that will facilitate review of the proposed change.
In signing this petition, I understand that the existing zoning map is presumed to be correct and that I
have the burden of proving why a change is in the public interest. I further understand the
singling out of one parcel ofland for special zoning treatment unrelated to County policies and
the surrounding neighborhood would probably be illegal. I certify that all information presented
in this application is accurate to the best of my ~nOWI~pge~j'~.IWlllo~;:::~nd.'1ief.
SigriatU;.e ofPc;tiii6rier andf6r Owner
WHAT YOU MUST ESTABLISH TO GET A CHANGE
ZONING OF PROPERTY
Conditional Use District Zoning is established to address situations where a particular land use
would be consistent with the New Hanover County Land Use Plan and the Zoning Ordinance
objectives but for which none of the general zoning maps should also be based on a Land Use
Plan, you must explain in the space below how your request satisfies each of the following
requirements:
1. How would the requested change be consistent with the County's Policies for
Growth and Development?
The property that is the subject of this rezoning request is classified as Urban.
The County's Policies for Growth and Development indicate in the Urban Land
Classification that single-family residential uses are transitioning to either higher
density residential uses or commercial or office uses. Furthermore, the Urban
Land Classification policies support increased density in areas that have the
necessary services. The purpose of the Urban Land Classification is "to provide
for continued intensive development and redevelopment in areas that have all of
the urban services necessary to support that development." The Land Use Plan
states that higher density should be allowed where adequate infrastructure exists
and where natural conditions would not be adversely affected which will take
pressure off of areas that are more sensitive. Since the subject property is in the
Urban Land Classification, it is appropriate to rezone this property from a
single-family residential use to a higher density multi-family use. This request is
consistent with the surrounding land uses which are currently zoned multi-family
by the City of Wilmington to the east and R -10 High Density Development by
New Hanover County to the north. The property to the west is transitioning from
single-family residential to higher density uses as is evidenced by the property
that is currently zoned B-2 to the west of the subject property.
2. How would the requested zone change be consistent with the property's
classification on the Land Classification Map?
The Land Classification Map currently classifies this property as Urban. As
discussed above, it is appropriate for single-family residential uses to transition to
higher density residential uses within the Urban Land Classification because of
the availability of urban services necessary to support that development.
Therefore, the requested change is consistent with the property's classification on
the Land Classification Map and is consistent with the surrounding uses.
3. What significant neighborhood changes have occurred to make the original
zoning inappropriate, or how is the land involved unsuitable for the uses
permitted under the existing zoning?
The surrounding properties have transitioned from single-family residential
development to multi-family development. Since the subject property is
surrounded by multi-family and business development, it is appropriate that this
zoning change be permitted in order for this property to be developed
consistently with the surrounding properties. Additionally, the City of
Wilmington's plan for the single-family lots that front on Carolina Beach Road is
to rezone those lots to multi-family or office and institutional uses. Any zoning
in this corridor by the County should be consistent with the City's plan.
4. List proposed conditions and restrictions that would mitigate the impacts of the
proposed use.
The conditions and restrictions that are being proposed are those consistent with
the requirements for a Special Use Permit for High Density Development in the
R-lO zone.
This Petition along with the accompanying Application for Special Use Permit
comply with the requirements for High Density Development.
MINGTON, LLC
/'-
I
., Attorney
943362-00001-001
WLMAIN\149554\1
WHAT YOU MUST ESTABLISH FOR A
SPECIAL USE PERMIT
Authority to grant a Special Use Permit is contained in the Zoning Ordinance, pursuant to section 71.
The Zoning Ordinance imposes the following General Requirements on the use requested by the
applicant. Under each requirement, the applicant should explain, with reference to attached plans, where
applicable, how the proposed use satisfies these requirements: (Attach additional pages if necessary)
General Requirement #1
The Board must find "that the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety if located where
proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and approved."
Statement by Applicant: This request is for High Density Development in the Urban Transition Area
because adequate services are available, the environmental impacts of the proposed development are
minimized, and there is adequate open space provided in compliance with Section 69.4: High Density
Development.
General Requirement #2
The Board must [md "that the use meets all required conditions and specifications" of the Zoning
Ordinance. "
Statement by Applicant:
The Site Plan attached complies with all of the requirements of Section 69.4: High Density Development
in the R-lO district.
General Requirement #3
The Board must [md "that the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property
or that the use is a public necessity."
Statement by Applicant:
The proposed High Density Development will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting
property because the surrounding uses are high density multi-family or business uses. The subject
property is located along a major thoroughfare in the Urban Land Classification which is an appropriate
location for High Density Development.
General Requirement #4
The Board must find "that the location and character of the use if developed according to the plan as
submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in general
conformity with the plan of development for New Hanover County."
Statement by Applicant: The location and character of the proposed High Density Development in
accordance with the plan as submitted is in harmony with the area in which it is located and is in general
conformity with the Plan of Development for New Hanover County. Specifically, the surrounding uses
are multi-family and business uses. The Plan of Development for New Hanover County provides that in
the Urban Land Classification, it is appropriate to transition single-family residential development to high
density development because the infrastructure is available for higher density development. Existing
surrounding uses are multi-family high density development and the trend has been along Carolina Beach
Road to transition from single-family residential development to higher density residential development
and commercial or institutional uses. This application is consistent with that plan and trend.
The Zoning Ordinance in some instances, also imposes additional specific requirements on the use
requested by the applicant. The applicant should be prepared to demonstrate that the proposed use will
comply with each specific requirement found section 72_, (as applicable). He/She should also
demonstrate that the land will be used in a manner consistent with the plans and policies of New Hanover
County. The Board of Commissioners may impose additional conditions and restrictions that they deem
appropriate prior to the issuing of the Special Use Permit.
I certify that all of the information presented in this application is accurate to the best of my knowledge,
information, and belief.
BIlL~~;~~~~N.LLC
By. ./ III . <(/
Tl16mat . JohrtS'o~, Attorney
WLMAIN\149564\1
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Regular Item #: 4 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Planning Presenter: David Ward
Contacts: Holt Moore and Chris O'Keefe
Item Does Not Require Review
SUBJECT:
Special Use Permit - Request by David Ward to Deny Validity of Original Special Use Permit (S-13, 06/71) Issued at
1512 Burnett Road. The Planning Board Voted 6-0 to Recommend to the Board of Commissioners that the Validity
of the Permit be Affirmed.
BRIEF SUMMARY:
The New Hanover County Planning Board in regular session on Thursday, December 1 , 2005 voted 6 to 0 to recommend to
the New Hanover County Commissioners that Special Use Permit 13 is valid and not a violation of the New Hanover County
Zoning Ordinance Section 109/1, paragraph (e).
The item was placed on the 01/09/06 and 05/01/06 agendas and withdrawn each time.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
The County Commissioners may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the Special Use Permit.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
NOTE: Please see Interoffice Memo which lists the documents contained in the 37-page attachment. Item 5 on the memo
describes another attachment package containing 86 attachments. Due to the length this packet is not included in the
agenda packet, but the documents are available for review in the County Manager's Office.
ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
The item was withdrawn at the request of the petitioner.
SPECIAL USE PERMIT
S- 13,06/71;
Request By: David and Violet Ward
Location: 1512 Burnett Road
Planning Board Recommendation
The New Hanover County Planning Board in regular session on Thursday, December 1,
2005 voted 6 to 0 to recommend to the New Hanover County Commissioners that Special
Use Permit 13 is valid and not a violation ofthe New Hanover County Zoning Ordinance
Section 109.1, paragraph (e).
Staff Summary
David and Violet Ward claim that a Special Use Permit issued in June of 1971 to Homer Ward
(deceased) is invalid. The permit issued to Homer Ward was to construct a bulkhead, boat ramp
and pier in Myrtle Sound near Carolina Beach. David and Violet Ward claim that Homer Ward
provided false information when obtaining the permit and are now challenging the validity of
Special Use Permit-13. The challenge is based upon the following section of the New Hanover
County Zoning Ordinance. The Board of Adjustment heard a similar appeal on August 23,2005.
The Board of Adjustment concluded that the permitted uses occurring on the site had vested the
permit.
Section 109: Vesting Rights
109.1: Any site-specific development plan approved by the County pursuant to this Ordinance
shall terminate as follows:
(e) Following recommendation of the Planning Board and upon findings by the County
Commissioners, by ordinance after notice and a hearing, that the landowner or his representative
intentionally supplied inaccurate information or made material misrepresentations which made a
difference in the approval by the approval authority of the site specific development plan.
f\' .'
I < I.. :"..," ,.1' . ' "
f ' ' '
" ~,.,' ,. . I:.'. : .,' .' '1" . I t .Fl
. I. I' I
I ". Ii:) : I ," I I I
_ /, _' I ',' ,e I I
,.., " ,,- ' , '
I' ~' -~ IL, '.' I ". ".. I'
L.- . ." ~,Li:
-i _,_' 1:-' i'
'" , _ ",' "c::" , !, I
, " _, - I " I
" ,e ,,- ~ 'I
I, '.' ",,--' , ' ' ' -L,' 'I.'.
, -, ' ' , ~-
-+, ' ' , I " ' " 'L..
- "
, '>, .
, f..' , ' ... -- .;,." "."
- '
1 " : '.
.' -
, . ,~ 1f' .'''',~
j" I '.
"M ' " '
0" ' '
" , r--
, )"" 1 COASTALAV .j ,:. .'. '-'...'.,
>-- al ''', I . - ...,./--- .. . , .
II ' ' L' 1'\ I ',-' ' ..", ..,f .
I ~--I l' I ,.'
: t" T'TI
. Ln:!~ I --""",..; EEl r ' \I
L Ii' "!' ' "
>--L Il' ~ "'I " ~
" "' ..11 ,'-
i-'-.." \f"F!L' ~ t,1 ""~o91 - '" r
1 h~~'tLl L.. lro' I) , .,
; NJ& ~F\e' - 1~ ~ -II' I
I I ',,-," ' " .. -'
0' -I --p "
,"" "' p
'15 L-.i'al I rnl~ .~. .' e-
, ~I ,-'
. / ~, ' ,,:!! ' ~ J I '
, I rlTim 'I Ii: -"I ~ f- "M..~ ';
I' I - I I i=: II T: l'j;." '" '1 / ·
,;" ~ 11 r -HI-" ~
, jlr\\ ~,; 1,-1 " , \"
, I \.L ., I , ~ ! ' 'L I
/,/ .." 'T~~r==I-29 \Tl "> ~- I
r- T T I I Tsc:.. '::{;j, : --, ,~- V ,j ,
I" · I r' I" '-"'fi/ .
;:: c-.'-i ~Fc;:tJ' afJ.I;"~~~--::" L-- i:gj C l~H::::
~ -y.~ ~ ~ ' ''IIm>ri'. " ",JI '
-.1J l--=:=J~ll H- H ,U a IiJ7J~ D 1~~fJ t'O."3",. 1- I i.---. \~
r -r I qr'o, - ,".,"'-l W '.J '\
] ,,= -n i DO ""\ '- ,--...,'>,~ ~
~ I~I I'~ ~ ,~ w '~l-;-! ,,'-'fir! I ell C I ~ ['r--: ',~
c ~ w ~ I i ~ ~ I 00 f- ~rr~'
~;7j ~_ ': _~ i 1--1--
~~ "2 ~ ~ ~ ~I I I' I' I I _, ''''""" I '--1_ :"'&"
;: ~ _ '" J, I ",. ,.00 1'---
~. & _ ", .,' 1 '~"" - f- i-,
",,'03 ,..R'l ' ~I' 'Co _ . , TTII h. ~ _'f--'
~~ ,....[0j 'ffi I~, ,~I~,;;!!, I ~.f-l.....1 1.' f-
,....~:!2 '~,~' ..I~I~ ~~I, '-, ! I:'~(~:- --'--'
t: " ,0 , " ,~'. ,,, "",",' ' · ~ '-" ~
<0 "'c "I "'I""" ~ '" ' .-- ~ -
~~ '~~ .~ ~ ,~ I~ II~ ~ ~ I~ ~ I Q~- --~ , II !l-- -6 - c- if-_ f--'
'" ~ ,,"' 8 Q ~ I~ I'" ,'~I . I
_ o~ ' , ' ,I" 0 : , ". J'" d ' '
. ,. . 0'"'' ..,. ~ " v' " "
I ~"~ '~I ,,'~;; {~hl~ I~ I fflj";,, n?' "flq''(3'7'7ltAN fie ~~~'~ ',---
.... I' ~ ," . '\1-L:":'::Ufl~~-1-~~f-- f--
---, ,,~ . IL 0-' I--- -
I! III ~
. ......;.. Ii' I 1--1
,ii.r ...-\\ I /-
, /'/"'---------.J........ 1--1
~ "i-1
New Hanover County
Planning Department
County Annex Building
230 Marketplace Drive, Suite 1 50
Wilmington, NC 28403
Dexter L. Hayes P 910.798.7165
Director F 910.798.7053
INTEROFFICE MEMO
December 30, 2005
Susan Wynn
Executive Assistant to the County Manager
Re: January 6,2006 CC Meeting
Dear Susan:
The following is a description for each of the documents submitted by the
planning department for Itern 6 of the Public Hearings items for their January 9,
2006 County Commissioner Meeting. Let us assurne that attachment one (1) of
thirty-seven (37) is the letter addressed to Holt Moore and signed David and
Violet Ward.
1. Attachment one (l) came from David and Violet Ward.
2. William A. Raney, Jr., Attorney for David and Violet Ward, submitted
attachments fourteen through thirty-seven (14-37).
3. Attachments 2-11 came from the planning staff file, but were originally
submitted by Kenneth Shanklin, Attorney for Tim and Donnie Ward.
4. Ann Hines, Chief Zoning Enforcement Official for New Hanover County,
submitted attachments twelve and thirteen (12 & 13).
5. The other attachment package containing eighty-six (86) attachments was
submitted by Kenneth Shanklin, attorney for Tim and Donnie Ward, as a
formal response to the formal complaint by David and Violet Ward.
Please contact our office if we can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
Steve Candler
Senior Planner
.
Mr. Holt Moore October 21,2005 David N. Ward
Assistant County Attorney Violet P. ward
320 Chestnut Street 1508 Burnett Rd.
Wilmington, N.C. 28409 Wilmington, N.C. 28409
Dear Holt,
This is a request to be placed on the earliest available County Commissioner
meeting agenda. Citing county ordinance 109.1 (E) and upon the evidence that we have
recently acquired from The Army Corps of Engineers. We wish to formally ask for a
hearing with the Board of County Commissioners November 7, 2005. This is in reference
to Special Use pennit 13 issued to Homer Ward at 1512 Burnett Rd. We have acquired
evidence that will show that Homer Ward did knowingly violate this ordinance. Several
weeks ago in a meeting with Ann Hines, David Weaver, and Kemp Burpeau; we
discussed this issue at great length. Also I have discussed this issue with you Holt, and I
do greatly appreciate your help, and respectively ask for this hearing. You have been so
kind, and helpful, and all of us in the Tucker Burnett Subdivision do wish to thank you.
Yours Truly,
David Ward
Violet Ward
J Hr. -.r:1er
. I .' d,
.1 Mr. Sande ~
Col. Denison! s
Mail ~~ ~~f .
OPER r" /~
SAWJC 14 Januazy 1969
.,.. /fI",
/~r......'
j'-; 6 r
Mr. Homer H. w.rd
2914 IBke Shore Drive
vt1ld~ H. C. 28401
ltl . - -- ..---.'.
- ........'.. \
~.. Dear Mr.. wari:
0 Reference if) ~ to -.your application cJa1:ed 14 ~Hibe,r 1968 f~.a per-
lilt ~o ~ a bu1'khead. bOat dip iiDd pier :f.1a Myrtle Sound mar
Q, CarOUna Beach, N. C. .
N. In ~spops.e 'to ay pub1:l.Q '1lOti~ dated 2 DeeeIIber 1961, J.ssued to ~
..... '. ~.. your proposal "to aU knOWIl interested partlee~ t:he state of lforth caro-
Una has not" fura1shed the1r e.~ to your~. In case.s where pro-
o. posed work 1$ ~j~ona'1e but ..me8 S:~~ autharlttea decllneto give
their eoeseut to the work, 11: 1,s DOt U8bB1 for die CoztIa of EDgiueers to
0- issue a pendt s1Dce it becates practkaUy of DO value and _y be re-
0'" g8l'ded as 8ft aet of ~ tesy. . t:.'l":
~ ". Thexefore. you are lot.4w that' your p1'()~ :Is UDGbjectiouabls and a
:..~!-::.:. :!. pend1: win be':iSsued .. the CODS8B"t of . State 18 funished tins
~. - - .-,----' ---- ........~'. ..--- --.
S1Dcerely yours, .
PAUL S. DENISON
Colonel, 0cmp8 of ~i~8
District Engineer
Copy fundahed:
Mr.. lIC' bept of Water & Air.
~.. Ba1e~ !fC 27603
. . . 'L4. ~.~~., 1::
Mr. Turner "
Mr. SaDdQrso~ -
Col. Denison/s(3\
Mail aA~1
" OPER ) J-(.,'
sAWS (Pendt 110. J.2..:6l}) 10 March .1969
Mr. ~ H. Wari
291" I.eke Slaore Drive
WllJ11ingtOll, lI. C. 28401
0- - . .
0 Deer Mr. Wari: . -
~~ In ~ w11:11. yOur wrlUen ftIl188t ... 1.& Bov9llhr 1968, tbere 18
Q. i_loBed . ~ ~.. t1te.........~~ of rhoat ~_ kWIeed.
and a pier ill MntJa SoImIJ .... Ciro1t8a..... blew IIDcwv c..ty, lI. C..
.0, If .8IlY ~ .... 1a the loCat1on or p1aDa of tbe atnctUre or work
(lJ. .... fouQd ~...., .. ~ of "on.il1 ,. ~ ~d.0D8 or
othrmdae, Rd_ p1aDa 6au'W .. ....tted pNIIpt1p to tbe District En-
......;. . g188er III ..... ftilt 6He :nw1sed ,tau. if fou1IIJ uaob;lectioDlll)Ja, IIaY
....;:
Q.. ~" tlM! *~ z:eq,u1nd bJ law ~ etilMU~QD 18 bega.
....... ~
q> Your attaD.tUa Is eenM to eGDCIltiola (:I.) of t1Ie iDC1asec1 puatt which n-
qulft8 ~ peNittee bJ DGtify tId.8 otftce ~.. ~. tbe 0<11 lne,..ent:
~. . ad eoIIP1at:I.DD c1atea. -~!~.
"" In rea...... to .. "'lie lIGtiee dat:ecl 2 DeoeIIber l.968, 1..... to eaaoance
. your pnposal to an boND LaWl___ ~. tM State of )fQrth Carolina
... C. G. "lUs. lac... ~elMitd c( fta. A eopy eae'h of thtU letters
1s t.lDsIkt. Ia ~ vJ.t1l tDt last __~ ta pu'8Il'8Pb t;;of the
St~'s letter. '/WI atte4ttoa :la 1sW'lted to ~.1. OODd1t1oa (It) in tbe
pem1t.. 1B ~_ wttlt the 1aUw -en. C.. G. WlWs., 'be., your ttten-
tioa is 1DV1ted 1:0 the tlIllft ... lUw 4l~ to the peftdt. .
~ly~"
3 IDcls PAUL 8. >>JIllSON
1. l\md:t 16.'12-69 "C'o1oMl, CoI'ps of ~~l'S \
v/'tllllNe actioa fUel' D1atd.ct EagiDeer
2. Cy ltr 6 _ 69 t. State I
\ #,
S. Cy l1:r 10 Dee '* .. i
O. G. WU1ts. lac. !
,
.Copy t'umishell wI. :lIIck: ;~-
'\
lltr... He Dept of ..... . Ail' n
l \
J Resources, ~gh, He 27683 \'\
,
I
J 'j
\ \
/ . .
,
,
i ~.
!
.
- . , 1-
-'
r -
STATE OF NORTH CAROUNA
i
DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND AIR RESOURCES
ROBERT W. SCO'IT S. VERNON STEYDI8. .IR.
GOVERNOR CHAIRMAN
P. D. DAVIS P. GREIilR ~
WALTER II. FRANKLIN VICE.CH4UUI_
..I. NELSON GIBSON. .IR.
..I. II. .IARREIT DR. ROBERT .... ROeS
WAYNE MABRY W. aRADY STEVENS
..I. EUGENE PI!NLAND RAYJIOND S. TAJ..TON
..I. AARON PREVOST GLENN II. TUCKER
GEORGE E. PICKETT. ~
TEu:P_ 829.3003
E. C. HUBBARD ~. DnIIa:TDa
TEUPHOHa 829.300lJ
P. O. Box B3112
RALtElCiH. H. C. 27803
, . March 6, 1969.
-
~ Colonel Paul S. Denison
0 District Engineer .-.
u. S. Army Engineer District, Wilmington'
0 Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
N' Wilmington, North Carolina 28,401
- Dear Colonel Denison:
Q. This is in response to your public notice dated December 2, 1968,
0 concerning an application by Mr. Homer H. Ward for a permit to construct
Ow. a bulkhead, boat ramp, and a pier in Myrtle Sound in the AIWW near
Carolina Beach in New Hanover County, N. C. The views of~affected State
"- agencies haVe been obtained.
The state has no objection to the proposed work. The granting of
an easement to fill to Mr. Ward has been approved by the Governor and
Council of State. It is requested that the use of the pier be so controlled
as to not add polluiion to the adjacent waters. . - -- .
Request that the applieant be advised of the requirement that earth-
moving equipment ldlich operates in publicly owned tidelands and navigable
waters within the State be registered by.the owner of the equipment with
this Department.
Sincerely, (ff;~
5Piekett
cc: Mr. Frank Turner
Mr. J. K. Jarrett
7 9 0 0 I 2 0 0 4 I I
\ ..~-
.'
I g. ~ .g. et- 0 ~ () {i'
..... .... .114 g
i;t lD 8 0 cr
~ ~ 4 0" . i~ 5
.~ "1 .... (\)
(\) P. 0" lD (I) cr ~
~ m ..... ~
g: g (I) p. 0 CD
~ .... -I ~ Ib ~t
cr (I) cr .m ~ 'd
0 ~ .cr (\)
lD a' "1 a g a
0" off CD lD ~ CD
'CD g P.
s:: () .... lD g: ~
:(1) () 0 ..... ~ ~
i9 cr ::s g () Ib CD
~ m Cf- (I)
CD "1 ct- 0 ~ Gtl.
g. CD ~ l ~ cr .....
f} ~ ::r fa
',CD a ~
,p. p. g '11)
s: cr s: CD ~
:~ 0" ~ lD 0' CD a
0 'd lD ::r m
ct- Ib "1 ..., !'~ S- .-
::r et' CD ~ Ii \. j
,lD lD .... 0 Z '"1 .~ Po
It t'...Jo ~ l\ et'
~ 6 lD ft 0" ::r
'~ '0 .i1 () a (\) ~
et' "1 'd
l\ :: .~ - lD tA ::i
.~ p.. .. 0 ~
a Po' II) lD
et' lD 0' i II) g.
g: ::r CD ''cS '"1 -J
. CD c..... 0 lD ~
lD s:: ~ 0 cr
'"1 I'd fa 4. m g \!.
~ lD cr m lD m .
g. ~ i\) fa ..... .
0 m 0' p: ~ 'j
..... ..... CD .....
8 ~ CD ct- ..... I-' 0
P. ~ 01 ..... t3 g:
CD .. .. c:t-
lD f! g;.<4 ct- (I)
!} 0
5 0 lD
..., p.. P. II)!; a t3 .ct-
et' ct- . Ct- . , a g
s: et' CD
0" l !!I ij ct-
CD ~ lD Qtl . ~
p.. p. CD g: ~
I ..... cr t blD
III 0 ~
I'd lD 0 t3 ~
.g s:: ;:! ~. ~
CD ~ ,~ ~ g: ~
p..
CD () ~ .... lD 0'
~ '"1 CD ' CD II)
0 ~.' m lD g: m
lD ct- S-
.~ ct- B.o g:l ~ ~. ,
~ ~ l
g; 0 0 ~.
lD lD CD ' ' t g ~
CD
l c:t- I'd ~ oq {i' Ib
0 ~ CD
lD p.. i Ii
a 0:'
!i
rI" If
..~-..
--
(a) That the work aba1l be subject to the su:pervision and approval of the District Engineer, Corps of Engineers.
in eharge of the locality, who may temporarily sospend the work at any time, if in his judgment the interests of navi-
gation 80 require..
(11) That any materla1 dredged in the prosecution of the work herein authorized sball be removed evenly and no
large refuse piles, ridges 8allIIS the bed. of the waterway, or deep holes that may have a tendency to cause injury to
navigable channela or to.the hanks of the waterway sball be left. If any pipe, wire, or cable hereby authorized is laid
in a trench, the fm-mation of P"""A-t ridges across the bed. of the waterway sball be avoided and the back filling
shall be so done as not to inerease the CDBt of future dredging for navigation. Any material to be deposited or
dumped under this authorisatiao, either in the waterway or on shore above high-water mark, shall be deposited or
dumped at the loeaJity shown on the drawing hereto attached, and, if so prescribed. thereon, within at behind a good
and substantial bulkhead at l-~ such as will prevent escape of.the material in the waterway. If the mate-
rial is to be deposited in the harbor of New York, or in its adjacent or tributary waters. at in Long Island Sound, a
permit therefor must be previousIJ" obtained from the SUpervisor of New York Harbor, New York City.
(Il) That there shall be DO umea_"h~ interference with navigation by the work herein authorized.
(Il) That if iItspection6 at any other operations by the United Statea are necessary in the interest of navigation,
all expenses eonnected therewith sbaJl be home by the permittee.
(8) That no attempt sball be made by the pem1ittee or the owner to forbid the full and fre&-ue by the public of
all navigable waters<< or adjacent to the work or structure.
N (I) That if future opeiatioDa by the UDited Statea require an alteration in the position of the structure or work
herein authorized, or if. in the opinion of the Sec:retary of the Army, it aba1l cause unmpcmable obstruction to the free
- navigation of said water. the cnmer will be reqvhed 1IpclD due notice from the Secretary of the Army, to remove or
alter the stmetura1 work or o1Jstruetions cansed thereby without expense to the United States, so as to render naviga-
V tion reasonably free, easy. and DD01IStrocted; and if. upon the expiration or revoeation of thia permit, the structure,
fill, excavation, or other .....difi...Atinu of the wlOtel....-.se hereby autborized sball not be completed, the owners shall,
0 without expense to the United StateS, and to such extent and in such time and 1Jl&Jlller as the Secret8ry of the Army
may require, remove all or any portion of the ,...........l'~ struc:ture or fill and restore to its former eondition the navi-
0 gable capacity of the watm:coarse. No claim aba1l be made ~ the United States on aceount of any auch removal
or alteration.
('If (g) That the United States sball in no _ be liable for any damage or injury to the structure or work herein
authorized 'Which may be caused by or result from future operations undertaken by the Gcmlmment for the eonserva-
- tion or improvement of navigatiou, or for other purposes, and no claim or right to c:ompensa.tion aba1l accrue from
any such damage.
0 (k) That if the dispJay.of JigJda and sigDals on any work ~e'reby authorized is not otherwise pro'flded for by law,
such lights and sigDals as may be prescribed. by the U. S. Cout Guard. shall be installed and maintained by and at the
0 expense of the owner.
(i) That the permittee sIIall DOtify the said distric:t engineer at what time the work will be commenced, and as
0'> far in advance of the time of ~_.._-~ as the said district engineer may specify. and shall also notify him
promptly. in writing. of the -t of work, suspension of work, if for a period of more than one week,
resumption of work, and its completion, 31st
" h1 That if the stmc:tare or work herein authorized is not eompleted on or before da7
. ... of~ . 19-12. this permit, if not previoualy reYOked or spec:iiicall7 ~, shall cease and
be null and void.
(k) ftat: the peni:ttee 8ba11. C-.q ~tq wi1:h ..., regu1at1oas, coaditloae,
or bau detioas affeet1Dg the work 'here. ~ if and wheD leau.ed by 1:he
Feder@. Water PoUutf.on CGatnl Ad1d~itlh1lttc. 811I4I- 'tile State water pollutiOn.
cOfttl'Ol ageaey havtas jari.ad:letic:wa 1:0 abate .. plv-.-dId. vater pG1.brti..." Sueb reg-
ulattOO8, cGDd:t:ti.. or lutruc1:1ona iB etfect or .pnea:1W by 'tile Fedenl Water
P01lut:f.-. Coatrol MdDistratu. or State ~ Be hereby ..ae a edition of
tld8 pel'llit.
By authority of the Secretary of the Army:
-G2~ L...A ~,.. - ....-
PAUL S. DDlISOtl
~=of~er8
~~~ 1721 ~r
(CivID '!'Ids................. BD :r-" ............ w_ may be _lI1ItII.........
.... ____.-:-.-...c& _llIe4HI
- . . ..
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
NOTE.-U is to be understood that this iDstrumen1; does DOt give any property rights either in real estate or mate-
rial, fir any exd:asive privileges; and that it does not authorize any injury to private p:roperty fir invasion of pri-vate
rights, or any iDfringement of Federal, State, fir Ioeallaws or regulations, nor does it obviate theneeessityof obtaining
Sf4t8 IUSW to the work autbD~ IT --Y_ -_ '~-9P&BF ~ <=MBHiMlHPf 88 Fa Mil B81f"
al!ltIfS 'flfIIl'"1!BHe ..RIa, aF 1l.\:II8ikft8!f. (See eu-iagll v. Chieago,l88 U. 8.,.410.) --
PERMIT
W11tdttgtOD DistriC't, Corps of Engineers.
WiJ.IdBgtOD, Rorth Cuo1.ba . 1%,
10 Mucib
Hr. . B-.el' B. Ward
2914 take Shore Drive
0' WiJJd.Dgt_, R. C. . 28401
Dear Sir: ~~....' .
-
..... Reterr1ng to lITi Uen request dated 14 JIoIIeaber 1968
a ;. > ... .
Q I have to inform you that. upon the recouaendation ot the Chiet ot Engineers.
N and under the provisions ot Section lOot the Act ot Congress approved March :So
- 1899. entitled -An act Ja8ld.ng appropriations tor the construction. repair. and
0 ...
preservation ot certain ~b1ic 1I'Orks on rivers and harbo~s. and :tor other pur-
0
0- poses. - you are hereby authorized by the Secretary o:t the AIyrY.
" to construct a \JtI1~t bctIt.l!!I..tu..~<<-.)
:lD Myrtle Sound about .w~.!'aJJ~ 1:he A1:la1d:1c Intra-
coastal Waterway.
....~.!Ie.. ~~I.~haml.""""tIuI".. _debltellOhat ID
_ ICMIq ..... ....... Cll' .... 01' ~ .ur...u- bJ" poIata of _)
:lD accordance with the plans shown on the dra1ting attached hereto
(Or ~, iii-.. .. n1lllll>cr or _ ddJlIte f!loootl~ --.)
"PJ:bp08ed Pier Portion Tueker-8uraett S.b-D1v., Myrtle Grove SOImd. HO\Oember 9,
1968" .
SUbject to the tollowing conditions:
,
."'---- ~.....-...- -,.- ~..,
,
-"j-- .
~ - _.... \-
>.- . .,
~ a/
, < '
& ~
tIJ ~
~~: ~i1-'D
· I-./.~. .''c..'.lI.fl....) -; ~I[.~." ...~~
~ ::a-1P'" ". -'
- - - .
. .",
.,~ . - ,-- .:'.."
"'~e"."
'"" .....'..~..,.....~......... .
~.......
~'~/.'
....,~..!
lQ"f l~i
~: I
-. It I l:rt
. .oJ:" ". ;':"i
-- ~ h'"
- <- -....",,"
"'l-
e i
~"',,,:'<' . '.. :~ vie' IN. rrv M' - AP' '. ff'f-'
,. .' . '.. -:0 i I
.;;,.:.. .C'C" '.. '. J . .. . . ~".
SCA.-US; '''::=~'
~ :.';; it
r'~' &.0' 1
I' M
.. ~.~. ~_.
.. \9 e" p,a...~...".
o
__H. \V.l-. - ORA\VI.I ..., A. Ii .~.i)Y::.~.r: '''Ii
.,..
APPL.aA.~N' ~j
. . ..HOMJ?r ~'"'.\\!~.,
. '. . '. ......_."".. '.' ....'. . ~~:'~~
TYP't:AJ. ~N DF PlSA '. .N~N'~fJNJ!1
,
..t)-
...
0
.
0'
o.
N ' .
-
0
0 ',:'f, ,_~'~.~~ "._'!:'._-:-- _ .:c~,~; -;..:r.:7.~U;-- ",':~~.o:.
~ -,-" .,}cCC ,- .".'~'<t",';'
".'
.
,
-- - - -
UI "
/ -
CD
.'--
0
0
('l!(.
_.
0
C).
~.
"...,.
:
~~: ., ~
. EXHIBIT
. ,~
!
o..?' ,-"'"-- - ,. .. -'.", ',:,," ..,..... ~
~~~~~~~' "'-, ,;::~-~:,~~:;-'~ <2:-~-:;"_;m_..:.2\~.;~'':-L.s_', ...;..<"
"..,...,..,-,., -'"----
:.,..'" o~::...: ~ -" ,
~ A F .te l.I' o ..L I <::r 71 ~,
'SD~hf'., "Wl,.tc ~, \ i 1 b ~,\;\<'J
J {' ,{". "'t
~. '.<)~ ti
,vb+(t /" Pu. V"-\ P ,~
ljCl ~
""""^,,.~,_.h_.,'~"'" I
.
.
COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER, NORTH CAROLINA
ORDER AFFIRMING DECISION
OF CH1EF ZONING ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL
The Board of Adjustment for the County of New Hanover, held a public hearing on
August 23, 2005 to consider application number ZBA-756, submitted by Violet P. and David
Ward, an appeal from the detennination by Chief Zoning Enforcement Official Ann Hines, that
Tim and Donnie Ward continued to have a valid special use permit for the property located at
1512 Burnett Road, in Wilmington, North Carolina, to use the property as a commercial marina.
Having heard all the evidence and arguments presented at the hearing, the Board makes the
following FINDINGS OF FACT and draws the following
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The Special Use Permit at issue became vested initially under the common law
principles found in the case law because there was sufficient activity and expenditures during
the period after the permit was issued to so vest.
2. The Board does note that the Appellants cited the failure to meet the vested rights
statute requirements as a basis that the permit either did not become vested initially or
eventually lapsed, but the Board fmds this irrelevant as staff has indicated that their basis for
concluding that the permit became vested initially was the common law vesting found in the
case law, not the vesting rights statute, and once it became vested under those principles, it
continued to run with land, regardless of the level of activity which followed, as described in
the fmdings below.
3. The Special Use Permit at issue did not lapse due to a lack of activity on the site
at some point after the issuance of the permit.
4. The Appellants' primary contention, as stated in the appeal paperwork, Was that
the subject permit lapsed because of inactivity on the site. However, the Zoning Ordinance
states that the conditions of a permit run with the land and shall be binding on the original
applicants, their heirs, and assigns. Inherent therein is the fact that the permit itselfruns with
the land. In the absence of any legal authority to the effect that a permit, once activated,
lapses from inactivity, the Board concludes that the subject permit continues to be active and
runs with the land, regardless of whether the activity described in the permit is ongoing.
The preceding CONCLUSIONS are based upon the following findings:
1. The sale of fuel and snacks, along with some limited rental of wet boat slips
occurred on the site both before and after issuance of the special use permit.
2. Drinks, fishing supplies, fuel and motor oil were sold on the site in the early
1970s.
3. Boats docked at the subject property for the purposes described above during the
early 1970s.
4. A beer license was in existence for the subject property, issued to Homer '1,,'1 ard, at
a minimum, during the years 1974, 1978, and from 1982-1983.
5. Gas tanks and pumps were installed on the site in 1975.
6. The site ceased being used as a marina in or around 1980, which cessation lasted
at least ten years.
Based upon the preceding Conclusions and Findings of Fact, the Board hereby affirms
the determination of the Chief Zoning Enforcement Officer.
Ordered this /1 day of U/";;! 'im.r
,.v-t .
L/{~ ~ >
Secretary to the Board
./C' .'
NOTE: If you are dissatisfied with the decision of this Board, an appeal rnay be taken to the
Superior Court of New Hanover County within 30 days after the date this order is served on you.
See Section 123-1 of the New Hanover County Zoning Ordinance: (1/4/93)
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA BEFORE THE NEW HANOVER COUNTY
COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER PLANNING COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF TERMINATION )
OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT #13 ) MEMORANDUM OF PETITIONERS
ISSUED TO HOMER H. WARD ON ) DAVID AND VIOLET WARD IN SUPPORT
JUNE 7, 1971 ) OF TERMINATION
)
BACKGROUND
A special use permit was issued on June 7, 1971 to Homer H. Ward
for a marina on land owned by Homer Ward on Burnette Avenue and
adjacent waters. The application was considered by the New Hanover
County Planning Commission prior to consideration by the County
Commissioners. The Petitioners, David Ward and his mother Violet
Ward, live on the property owned by Violet Ward adjacent to the Homer
Ward property.
The Petitioners contend that the special use permit was obtained
by the land owner or his representatives by intentionally supplying
inaccurate information or by making material misrepresentations which
made a difference in the approval by the County Commissioners of the
site specific development plan.
ORDINANCE PROVISIONS
Sl09.1 (e) of the New Hanover County zoning ordinance provides in
pertinent part:
1'l109.1: Any site specific development plan
approved by the County pursuant to this Ordinance
shall terminate as follows:
(e) Following recommendation of the
Planning Board and upon findings by the County
Commissioners, by ordinance after notice and a
hearing, that the land owner or his
representative intentionally supplied inaccurate
information or made material misrepresentations
which made a difference in the approval by the
approval authority of the site specific
development plani
OFFICIAL RECORD
The Planning Board is entitled to take official notice of the
County records. The County records on this issue consist of the
following:
1. Minutes of the Planning Commission (Board) at the time this
item was considered. (Exhibit 1)
2. Minutes of the County Commissioners meeting of June 7/ 1971.
(Exhibit 2)
3. Site plan showing existing and proposed development of the
property. (Exhibit 3)
4. Special use permit dated June 7/ 1971. (Exhibit 4)
REPRESENTATIONS AND INFORMATION SUPPLIED BY
HOMER WARD OR HIS REPRESENTATIVES
1. The Planning Commission (Board) minutes indicate that the
application is to expand a marina. This establishes that Ward
represented that a marina already legally existed at the site.
2. The County Commissioners minutes indicate that
representations were made as follows:
a. "Mr. Ward started the marina before the area was zoned."
2
b. "Mr. Mallory (planning director) . showed the
commissioners a map on which Mr. Ward has shown what he
plans in the future. " (Presumably this is the site
plan contained in the County records) .
c. "Mr. Ward informed the planning commission he has
permits from the Corps of Engineers and State for
dredging. "
d. II [M]ost of the dredging and filling has been done."
THE REPRESENTATIONS WERE MISREPRESENTATIONS
1. There was no existing marina.
a. The structures authorized by a Corps of Engineers permit
issued in 1969 was for a pier and boat ramp only. No
mooring pilings were permitted and no dredging was
permitted. (Exhibit 5, 5 pages)
b. Two of Homer Ward's sons have offered sworn affidavits
in a related proceeding that the marina was constructed
and operated "after the issuance of special use permit
#13" (Exhibit 6, 2 pages) ; and "after the special use
permit was issued. II (Exhibit 7, 3 pages) .
c. Testimony of witnesses who lived near or frequented the
site during the period from March 7, 1969 when the Corps
of Engineers permit was issued and June 7, 1971 when the
special use permit was issued is that no marina
3
operations were occurring prior to the time the special
use permit was considered by the County Commissioners.
d. Services such as the fuel dock were not begun until 1976
(Exhibi t 8).
2. "Mr. Ward started the marina before the area was zoned."
a. The sworn affidavits of Tim Ward and Donnie Ward
(Exhibits 6 and 7 show that the marina was not in
operation until after the special use permit was issued
on June 7, 1971.
3. Mr. Ward informed the Planning commission he has permits from
the Corps of Engineers and the State for dredging.
a. The Corps of Engineers in 1969 did not permit dredging
(Exhibit 5).
b. No State permit was ever issued for dredging (Exhibit
9) .
4. Most of the dredging and filling has been done.
a. Any dredging was done illegally (Exhibit 10).
b. No permit was ever issued to dredge (Exhibits 5 and 9).
c. It is a material misrepresentation to represent that
dredging has been done without indicating that the
dredging was not lawfully done.
MISREPRESENTATIONS MADE A DIFFERENCE IN THE APPROVAL
Virtually all of the factors considered by the Planning Commission
( Board) and the County Commissioners were misrepresentations. The only
4
conclusion that can be drawn is that the factors contained in the
minutes were the factors that were deemed important and were used as
the basis for granting the special use permit. Accordingly, the
standard for terminating the permit under n09.1(e) is met and the
Planning Board should recommend a termination of the permit to the
County commissioners.
A termination does not unfairly or unduly affect the property
owner as no marina operations have been carried out on the property for
many years. Even if the 1971 special use permit is terminated, the
property owners may still proceed with requesting a special use permit
for any new or expanded marina operations. In fact, the current owner
is currently pursuing a special use permit which has to go through the
same procedural process and findings whether it is considered a new
application or an amendment of an existing permit.
CONCLUSION
The Petitioners respectfully request that the Planning Board
recommend to the Board of Commissioners that they terminate special use
permit #13 in accordance with the provisions of &109.1(e) of the New
Hanover County zoning ordinance.
5
Respectfully submitted this 1st day of December, 2005.
WESSELL & RANEY, L.L.P.
By: tAJ ~ a.
William A. Raney, Jr
Attorney for petitio rs
107-B N. Second Street
P.O. Box 1049
Wilmington, NC 28402
Telephone: (910 ) 762-7475
NC Bar No. 5805
WAR\environ\R05-304-001
6
Page. 372
- 3 -
2. A nine acre parc'el of land (Shady Haven Subdivision) located East of nine acre p
U.S. 421 and West of S. R. 111492 at the western extension of Seaview of land (Sh
Road trom R-15 (Res"identlal) to R-lO (ReSidential) Haven Subdi
Mr. Mallory stated that t~is property was to be used as a Mobile Home
Subdivision. He also stated'that the basic' difference between the R-15 and
R-lODis.trict' i's sl.ze of individual lots for single family structure~ R-lO
allows lots of 10,000 square feet. if a. water system is provided that meets
the requiremen.ts of the Health .Department. Mr. Mallory said that the Planning
Department r'ecommends approval of this petition. Mr. von Oesen asked about an
existing pond within the subdivision. Mr. Mallory stated that the.pond would
be filled prior to .approval of the. final plat.'
Mr.. Cantwell.made a motion. to recommend approval of this request to"
County Commissiopers..Mr. Emmart,seconded the motion and it' was approved by
the' members.
APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL USE .PERMIT (COUNTY): Mt. Pilgrim
Missionary.
. . Baptist Chu
1. Application to expand Mount Pilgrim Missionary Baptist Church on
Carolina Beach Road (detached kit.chen facility). The property is in an
'R-l.5 Zone.. . . .
Mr. Mallory stated that the 'Planniti'g Department has no objections to the
Special Use Permii: but the develop'er 'should he requ-ired to res.ubm'it a sketch
that is' d'ra~ to scale, "sho~ing th'e boundaries .of the lot, church extensions
correctly located' and it" the .extension is. to be 'connected to the church.
"Mr. Emmart made a motion to recommend. approval to the County Commissioners
subject to the petitioner resubmitting his sketch. Mr. Davis seconded the
Iilotion and it was approved by the members.
2. Application' to ex~and the Special Use ~Ma:rinal.located on lots 1, 2, 3, .& 4 Special Use
between Burnetf"'1l:venue. (S.R,' 1527) and Myrtle Grove Sound. The. property (Marina) On
~isinanR-15~01\e. ,- " l,2,3,&4be
, , . - . ..' . . ,. " Burnett Ave
;-:-=':Mr. Mah-orY~ed that the planning Depar-tment reCOm\nends approval. of the' Myrtle Grov
Special. Use Permit .subject to. the' following condition.s:
10 That 50%' nf the off-street parking should 'be '25 feet in length.
2. That the' sign .shoild not be larger than 32 sq. ft. and should not
be illuminated.
3. That nO"Construction of boats shall be permitted on the lot.
4. That when th'e proposed club hou"e is cOnstructed, additional off-
street parking be provided in accordance' with the Zoning
'Ordinance', .
5. That sales and services connected with the operation of the club
ho.use facility shall be:inciderital to the marina's operation.
6. That. the sale 'of boating and fishing supplies except gasoline and
oil .iihall be' in an enclosed structure.. .
7. That 1;10 smoking' signs shall be posted at each gasoline pOint,
. Dis'cussion followed concerning larger parking spaces for cars with boat
trailers.' It was agreed that. in No. 1 above the length' of 50% of the off-
, street parking spaces be'increas,id to 32 feet in length,
Mr. von Gesen made a motion to' r.ecommend approval .of the' Special Use
Permit to the Cou~ty Commissioners subject to the conditions 'listed by the
Planning Department. It was seconded' by Dr. Pickard and approved by the
, members. . .
PROPOSED. AMENDMENT TO COUNTY ZONING ORDiNANCE:
1. Amend Article VSectio1;155,Subsection 55-3 by adding the following:
(5) Research facilities
Mr. Mallory stated .that this was' the amendment. that had.'been discussed
at the May 5,: 19'71 meet.ing to allow' research facilities in a 'B-2. District as'
a Special Use~ .
. . Dr;. Pickard moyed th.a t the Planning Comniissiot! recommend approval of the
amen!il11entto.the.county:,Commissibners, .It was seconded by Mr. Cantwell and.
approved by the'members. . . .
OT.HER aUSlNESS :., . c.;.... T l..~_~. OTHER BUSIli
- -
. . ~ ----1~-
- . ------ --------- < '-
l:'\}',J\U'l!E.s, OJ? '1,\\1;; l'Ui.Wu.nG -J1.ltlB. ' Vi
\
ro1$LtO ll:SA.rmro anQIAu US:8, 'PERMITS -, ' ' , ,
" ,
........ ~. J!ahi(la opel1.e:"i pU~;I,ie 1ie/;:t'ine;' on l'QllowiD{l; 'sJ!tlC1Bl Ufl8 P4X'lll:\;..::.:. ;
1. APplication to 9xpahd Mount! Pilj:t'iJlI niel!l1ona~ Ba~t1sl; Cburch on Oat'Olina Bevaoh
Road. (de!;Bohctd. ki-tcben 1'acUit,.. The property ia in an ll-lS Zone.
2. ~pplieation to expand the apocia1 Use (Marina) located on lot$ It 2, ~, & 4_ba-
tWeen Burnett A.venue s.n4 Myrtle Gro.,.. Sound. Th. propert;r is in an 11-15 Zone.
No. 1 _ Mount< P13.tt'i'lll MiesiolUlrt :Baptist: Oh'ln'ch WI1S dh<:ms!Sed tint. 'l!he1:e l/8.$ no
cQ~ent !ro~ anrone present. ~
, Mr. MalloI''' atated t111. reque$t was consid.ered b,. the PlanningOO!lllllhsiot1 at. their last
Ileeting and the COlll_ission recollllnends epP1;'Oval of the ~qV.9sted. ~ecial use pe111it ~ subject ,.
to revision of the sketch p18n that was sube1tted with t1ieir app1 c&tion. . All of tbr: items
t~~ ve~ OD the plana were found to be not lo~ated proper17 and 11' the7 would resubmit the
- plein 35 it, .&uo\114 bed.r$wU' to IJcalft, tlie l'bmd.n6 Ooiulliuion does r~ollllll~nd. that tblll bpechl
,1189 penit t,\e issued. )/"
\., '- No. 2 _ Karina Was di.f!lcUlilQed ne~iJ. ~.~ were noobjectiona.
t1r. l1eU-Or1 stated Mr. Ward 1I1la:r.'tled. the tlal'1na be1:o1'e 1;1:I.e a.rea W$!S zoned. and. showed th~
OOllU!li,lIli1ionera a up on. wbi<ll1 Hr. WaN b.l/<8 .bown. what he fllms :l.n the tl1ture, 80 tba.1:l he will
not haye t;u 00.. back rcq\l..ll~ epeci.a1. uee 1Jel'llita eac tl.... l'S1:o.. \hrd in.f01"1l1e4 the :nan-
td.ng COIlIli..aion he batt j!~it. roll tbe CO~8 of EDgineer8 and State 1':):1:' d2:ede;i~ aud. tloab
or tlbe dre4Si-nS and til '1n6 haD 'been done. '!!be Plaim,inS D$pv.rt'aent re'3Q_enda i.88'Ua~e ot
Ilplfoial us. perait, wbjet:.ll to the tol.1.oW1~t, '
1. ~~ ~ ot the .ort-street P.~ 8~.Ol!l. b9 'at least 32 teet 1n 1ength.
2. Proposed. sign not ~o be 1arge1' than 32 square teet inaize - QOn-il1uaina~ed.
3. ~a1; no cQl:18tru(l1;ion of: 'bollte be po1:'lllitted on the 10~.
4. '<<heu' proposed -01\\1:) bl)\uua 1a 00l1struetedad41tiona1. o1'r-lJtree~ parking speen be pro-
vided in e.ocordance vi.th the Zonina Ordinence. '
~. 111 aa1eaand seX'Yice8 con,n4c'ted with the operation Qf the ol~b .taoili1<;T shall be in-
cidental to the _ri.na operatli.OWJ. "'loo
6. Ba1.e of boat-in,; and Uahiug 8UllPl..:Lea ucept BIl],. ot gasoU.tul -md 011 8h.11 be fro.
an enc1Qsed atruebure.
7. !to 1lI.oldt16 d!;1\s 8b:a11 'b<< po"tedll' nch I3l.l.lJoline poitlt<.
11r. at!\ll lIOYed, aeoQnd.ed ~ Mr. 1.1.IU'ka, tbAt 8~citll use peradtlS b'1 sranbed in both :l.n~
fltULCu, lS\1:ieot to.eeting the requ1:rG1U)nta reooaended. by the Planni:~ Occasion. Motion
oarried \U1Il 'llIousl)'. '
(''\!1019tNG .urmA IN VI01llIH OF W1IH1NG'1'ON OOIiLEGE w "
, '. Hr. f(al101'7 atate 'the P1&iU1.i.ng Departmont b8.lJ been. lIorkiug on ot'~ler ane.afor countl1'
i:onifllS end at .vetl:! 111 Me,. a aap vas pl"Gsented. to the 'Planni.nS COll\llli "ls:l.on tor troposed
~oning of a~ll'aroun Wllmine;\ion Oollege and at that tbG it was voted. to hold t II publie
" hearing in June.. but ~U$t .trior to .avertbibg 'tbu1 received. "ora Wi1.aingtotl Ool1o&e 18 foing
to request abt1exati~n ",hie 'vill .rrect th.e PJ."opc)sod. soning, lie> the! P1U)hitlg OO1ll1ll.illeion s
going to .h.elve tMe llt'C!:1l until l.ater..
~ A.rter d:l.aeuss1.ollt Mr. ll."''1'188 l'eQ\leDted Mr.. Mallc'-7 to p:J;<oaent' to thg p1atlAlngQolllmieaion
the OQ.IIl1aBi.Qn~rB I views t)! the delfirabilitJ' of b.livil1lS a pI1blio helt.l'ln..; at; an. ellt'~ date on
-tiMs 1ll.11tt;er. 'rhe Bov.N VIl8 ot the ,opinion 111 should go .bUd. vi.tb. 'llonl.ng ot this eree...
ZOJ{ntG, OF POR'fEa I S m:o~. tnEA - "
_ 1U'. l1all()~ ll'te#IIlb.'ted'iiap ot ?orter' B Heok A're8 going 1000 feet tn the norlhern side of
u. S. 17 vbieh b bU1eBl~ re'sidential 811d stated thli! Planning Depfl.rt~ltent will recolllllend. 11l()!Sl
of it be !l;oncd 11-1~ or!l.- witl1 exception of tvo b\\Binosses at the in~orleotiot1. Ee.rlhst
dnte plJ:bUC hearing elln be 'held. would b(l first OOIGll1:Lusionel"'s' lIle..t1ng: in Jul.y.
tu'. 'riilliatD.t:I lllcri~d.t seconded b;rt1r. Oxenf41d, tb>>.1.i pUblic hearins be soheduled tOl' ~otlip.
Area No.. 5 rot' first meeting in. .lul1" wl1ich ",ill be on 't\l.e5d'lQ', Ju1.7 6. Hodon carri.ed
~n8ni110U5),Y,
:R't'PORT QN 'I'lA'1!EB.SREOl'ROOnAl1 ...
. fir. Sam <JOi:;'"llTstt'iet CQltl'lel'vQ'tionist ~ U. S. l1epa:l:'ttllElnt of: Al5l''icu.l tur~ t and Kr. Qeor~e
.. __~ ....'l<,..~ ,.."...n. \J/'llterabed. A.dvillorr CQwt eel l'epol'tedon tl:VJ \late:;"f?b~d Program.
a .. .~..... _.t _,r."",""{ 1"1:0" "1=41:
g
~i
..--- .-
SPECIAL USE PERHIT
,
NE'"1'l HANOVER COUNTY
Permit No. 13
Application No. 14
Zone R-15
A Special Use Permit is herehy granted by the Board of County Commissioners ~
after consideration by the Wilmington-New Hanover Planning Commission to
HOlller H. Ward
to use the land located at Route 2. Box 241-DD. :Burnet te Av,e. (s. R. 1527)
tor Marina
based on the following conditions: (1) That 50% of the off-street parking spaces
be at least 32 feet in len~th.
(2) Proposed s:ill:n not to be larJ.1:er than 32 square feet in size - non-illuminated.
1) That no construction of boats be, permitted on the lot.
(4) When proposed club house .is constructed additional off-street parkin~ spaces be
provi.ded in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance.
(5) All sales and services connected with the operation of th,e club facilitv shall
l!.~__incidental to the marina operations.
(6) Sale of boating and fishing supplies except sale of gasoline and oil shall be -
from an enclosed structure.
'.
(7) Ro smoking signs shall be posted at each gasoline point.
"
This Special Use Permit shall be subject to the conditions listed above and
the ~rri.ng Ordinance of New Hanov~~QQ.l!~X. H~,.t.~e ,cond itio~ so specified
or any part thereof shall be held void or invalid, or if any such conditions are
not complied with, this Special Use Permit shall be void and of no effect. The
Special Use Permit is authorization for the Build~ng Inspector to issue a building
permit for the use listed above. ,r---..
--:,).
Chairman of County
June 7, 1971
LL Da.te
1Ii..fl! "'T
Mt.'}l ~-{ '~j m 1
iT" ~ ~;!
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
PO BOX 1890
WILMINGTON NC 28402.1890
October 3,2005
Regulatory Division
Honorable Elizabeth Dole
United Sfates Senator
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 122
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
Dear Senator Dole:
Thank you for your September 17, 2005, inquiryregarding correspondence you received from
Mr, David Ward (rmdated). Mr. David Ward wanted to know what Department of the Army permits
were authorized to HOlI!Er Ward _at 1512 Burnett Road,for the_construction of a marina, in Myrtle _,
Grove Sormd, New Hanover County.
We have thoroughly searched our records and :files and have concluded that a Department of
the Army permit was issued to Mr. Homer Ward in 1969 (enclosed). This permit authorized the
construction of a private bulkhead, boat ramp and pier on the property in question. In addition, I
have enclosed several general permits that have authorized the maintenance and repair of these
structures subsequent to the original permit (enclosed). According to our records no other permits
have been issued to Homer Ward at this location.
AB always, your interest in this matter, our regulatory program, and all Wihnington District
matters is greatly appreciated. Questions or <;:omments regarding this correspondence may be
directed to Henry Wicker of the Wilmitigton Regulatory Field Office at (910) 251-4930.
Sincerely,
Enclosures
,.--
~'IlIBIT <....
t'''-I1i_', ~
"'~"'l"". ~_
W ~j i\1 ,~,"'Sf}f7". ~
Mr. Greer!~
Mr. Turner:' 1;f)
Mr. SandQr8~~
Col. Denisonjs(3)
Mail f,.~1
. OPER""j J-er-
SAWkS (Permit No.. 12~69) 10 March ,,1969
Mr.. H~ H. Ward
2'914 !eke Sb~ Drive
Wilmington. N. C. 28401
0-: <,
."".
0 ~ar Mr.. Ward:
'lII::f> In aeco1"dance with yOur written request dated 14 November 1968, there is
0, ine~ a ~t; author:birig t.be.C4~ction of a~.boet ramp, bulkhead.
and a pier in Myrtle Sound near' CmUna'8Qch {nNew Hanover, COUnty, N. C.
'0, If ,any iJItrl;erial changes in the lae.atton or plans of the' $~ or work
A ar$ found nee..ry on ac(!:oun't of unf<)l'esecm Ql' 4te~" c9oo11:1ons or
ot:lterw.tas, revise<! plaos $holJld be 8l1blidtt.a FOI\ptly to 1lte n18trtct En-
~';:. ginser in <<d(tt t~t th4se X1W'iaed ,lans. if foUnd unobject1o~1a, may
'''~
Q- :receive tlte $~al :r:equbed by law b~'9te COll$thq:t1on is 'begu.tt.
Q: Your attention :J..s called to condition (1) of the inelosed persa1.t which re-
quires th~ ~ttee tono-t.ify tbis office !'!llative to the eomme~nt
0-. , and c.ple , on dates. . ,-:.~~ ' ,
~.", In l'e$pans8 to.my publle notice dated '2 Dec.ar 1968~ issued to announce
your proposal to aU kn()W interested pari1.es, the State of NortbCal'oUna
,and O.C. WiWs, Inc:.. fqndshed cOlilllents. A copy eaCh cd! their letters ..,:
is inclosed. In connection with ~ last sentenee 1n paragraph ~hof the <::""-
State's l.etter:j yolU' attenttw is invited to speeial condition (k) in the
~ peri1lit. ~ ~tiOD w11:hthe letter frOlllO. G. WilUs" 'lM., )'Quratten--
tJ,on is invited to the wave wash f1:f.er attached to the pet1td:t.
S:i.~ee:tely YQurs;
:; 1m: le ' , PAULS. t>SNISON
1. Pennit No..D-69 'Colonel, CoX'ps of Eng1nee~$ )
iN/wave action fUel: ' nistd.ct Englneet" \
2. Cy ltr -6 Mat' 6.9 tat State I
\ A
3. Cy ltr 10 Dee 68 fm 1
e.G. Willis. Ine. r
.Cfjpy furnished 'W/o :1ne3.$% --\
DiX'., Ne Dept of Water &: Air ,\
~ .~
, ,
.i Re$Qurees.. ~~igh, Ne 27603 ','\
! . "
....... ~ l
/ ' I
~ \ \
I \H.
i
j \ \
j
i
.! \
/ \
:\
~ \
. ~"""''''D ~~'T
ti"'u ~, f~ kt::it ti
-' ..
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
NOTE.-It is to be understood that this instrument does not give any property rights either in real estate or mllte-
rial, or any exclusive privileges; and that it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of private
rights, or any infringement of Federal, State, or local laws or regulations, nor does it obviate the necessity of obtaining
Sw.te assent to the work authorized. IT HElIElX En'IlEEEEIJ TIlE .'lOODUT OF Tnn FOOIJIUI:. CeVillUlMDHT Be Y..U111.B €EH'f
eER-U3 THE FUBue Rf13IU3 SF U"',','IBA-'fiBU. (See Cummings v. Chicago, 188 U. S",410,) 16-1316S-a
PERMIT
Wilmington District 'f1 Corps of Engineers.
WUmington, North Carolina
------10--Marcb----------------. 1%9
Mr. Homer H. Ward
2914 Lake Shore Drive
0' WfJ.In1ngton. N. C, .28401
near Sir: :1;':-~~. .
-
V. Referring ~o written request dated 14 November 1968
0 " ~. -r
~ . .>-
Q I have to inform you that, upon the recommendation of the Chief of Engineers,
N and under the provisions of' Section 10 of the Act of' Congress approved March 3,
- 1899, entitled "An act making appropriations for the construction, repair, and
0 .--
preservation of' certain ~Ublic works on rivers and harbo~s. and for other pur-
0
0- poses," you are hereby authorized by the Secretary of' the A~y.
" to construct a bulkhead. b~t r~thanW~et k)
. - - - ere elJCl' eprO ureorWOr a
in Myrtb Sound about (tP2~~~!n!lil.\'t~f.1j,t~. !N.~rwY;!~rn~ the Atlantic Intra-
coastal Waterway.
m n~arCJtol1n! ~~h tn i!ew J!a:t'tov~ Co~ J!. C. . ,
(Here to nam e ..eare. we - own ocall -pr era T a '..". or CltT-.lIt . dl.h",.. In miles and tenths from 1lOIIl8 d.llnlte point In
tho oem.. statlnlt whether above or below or' aivinlt direction by points of ,,,,,mpas..)
1n accordance with the plans shown on the dI'awing attached hereto
(Or drawinlts, aive 1ile number or other de1inite ipentificatlon mark..)
"Proposed Pier Portion Tuc~...Bu:rnett Sub-Div., Myrtle Grove Sound, Nwember 9,
1968fl ,
subject to the fOllowing conditions:
I ,..,-
. ~iW'E'H" B~"T ~
//" )1 /'1 m 'i j:,~ '.
~^ '" J,"c'j,.
(a) That the work shall be subject to the supervision and approval of the District Engineer, Corps of Engineers,
in charge of the locality, who may temporarily suspend the work at any time, if in his judgment the interests of navi-
gation so require.
(b) That any material dredged in the prosecution of the work herein authorized shall be removed evenly and no
large refuse piles, ridges across the bed of the waterway, or deep holes that may have a tendency to cause injury to
navigable channels or to-the banks of the waterway shall be left. If any pipe, wire, or cable hereby authorized is laid
in a trench, the formation of permanent ridges across the bed of the waterway shall be avoided and the back filling
shall be so done as not to increase the cost of future dredging for navigation. Any material to be deposited or
dumped under this authorization, either in the waterway or on shore above high-water mark, shall be deposited or
dumped at the locality shown on the drawing hereto attached, and, if so prescribed thereon, within or behind a good
and substantial bulkhead or bulkheads, such as will prevent escape of 'the material in the waterway. If the mate-
rial is to be deposited in the harbor of New York, or in its adjacent or tributary waters, or in Long Island Sound, a
permit therefor must be previously obtained from the Supervisor of New York Harbor, New York City.
(e) That there shall be no unreasonable interference with navigation by the work herein authorized,
(d) That if inspections or any other operations by the United States are necessary in the interest of navigation,
all expenses connected therewith shall be borne by the permittee.
(e) That no attempt shall be made by the permittee or, the owner to forbid the full and free-use by the public of
all navigable wate:rs-at or ll-djacent to the work or structure.
<< (I) That if future operations by the United States require an alteration in the position of the structure or work
herein authorized, or if, in the opinion of the Secretary of the Army, it shall cause un~sonable obstruction to the free
- navigation of said water, the owner will be required upon due notice from the Secretary of the Army, to remove or
alter the structural work or obstructions caused thereby without expense to the United States, so as to render naviga-
o;::r- tion reasonably free, easy, and unobstructed; and if, upon the expiration or revocation of this permit, the structure,
fill, excavation, or other modification of the watercourse hereby authorized shall not be completed, the owners shall,
e without expense to the United StateS, and to such extent and in such time and manner as the Secretary of the Army
may require, remove all or any portion of the uncompleted structure or fill and restore to its former condition the navi-
o gable capacity of the watercourse. No claim shall be made against the , United States on account of any such removal
, or alteration.
N (g) That the United States shall in no case be liable for any damage or injury to the structure or work herein
, , authorized which may be caused by or result from future operations undertaken by the Government for the conserva-
__ tion or improvement of navigation, or for other purposes, and no claim or right to compensation shall accrue from
any such damage.
o (h.) That if the display,of lights and signals on any work l;!~eby authorized is not otherwise proVided for by law,
, such lights and signals as may be prescribed by the U. S. Coast Guard, shall be installed and maintained by and at the
expense of the owner.
o (i) That the permittee shall notify the said district engineer at what time the work will be commenced, and as
far in advance of the time of commencement as the said district engineer may specify, and shall also notify him
0'- promptly, in writing, of the commencement of work, suspension of work, if for a period of more than one week,
resumption of work, and its completion. 8ls
'" (j) That if the structure or work herein authorized is not completed on or before .._____n__~!_____________________ day
of -De.eemher-------___ 19..72, this permit, if not previously revoked or specifically extended, shall cease and
be null and void.
(k) 'that the permittee shall comply pr01Ilptly with 8l'lY regulations, condittons;
or il1St1l'uotions affecting the work hereby alfthOl'i2:ed if and when 1s-eued by "the
Feder~ Water Pollution Control Admi.n1st:ration and/or the State water pollution.
contt"01 ageDCY 'having jurisdiot1<m to abate or prevent water pollution." Such reg-
ulations. illonditioDS or instruetions in effect or .preseribed by the Federal Water
PoU\ttion Control Administration or State a~y are hereby made a condition of
tbis permit:.
By authority of the Secretary of the Army:
-G2.~~f."-#_
PAUL S. DENISON
Co10M1~ C.....o:t1)S at Engineers
D1std.c't' tnglneer
ru~o~~ 1721 (Civil) This lann supersedes ED Fonn VG, dated 1 Apr 48. wblcb m.y be used untn exbausted.
v. s. GOYE~N.DT 'IIII'HII(;, OP'nCE 1&-13168-5
. ~O~T r-
m' g;t~ rJJ .---> "--___.~
(,flj
-''''''', '...','". "-.
j . . .. ...~.~.. . -
....... .................... .....__....c.. ... .._... . "_'_'''-''.;""'._' ,...".
....' ",.;- ~"..lT''=-!:-.'':'';-'''' ".,' . -. ..?;_".: ,.
. . ~
;; . r ~'T~"
.' ... ~'.~ ,\"
.... . .''-..
. ,. - ".- . . ...,- ~..
~ (
I. . . f...... ...>J. ."
~~
I
. fj
'11) !U
~: ~ _r\!?~ "" ~
R:l ' ~ "'" ~J ~ . 10 " !.A
;, ....' ........6\)",'" t) ~ . ..1.1 ---~-rr-"'L;;.;.\;,,.."......
.'~..'..~'.....""'.' .. . .~Q ."''''' , . ..' .....~......'...:wiI....I1.....PRSR
' :il_~' . ~"\' G. ;'Xl' --.' '. ,..~i . ", '.. '. i:i,:;'~~ ..... .
"'. ............'.."".'.. . ..... ........ ...... r;:8f) l;lL;V R .AVE.. f ,ff..... ..... . ..' ."~ ...i..,.: . "':."".'.':..[...1'.. ~,.
. . '~'. ~.\ '0, ~. _cg...., -<10 I' : ,."ro,.
L~' .. 'ft.?'" ;(,.\()~ . ~ ~M~i ..' ~/_.; If ~"~ ~
i E.i'~.?)~.. . ... .'. < .~...'.. './;i ......... ..... f~/ ....'
...,. --,,, ~J~~ lq I .~
'" .... ..,':...".".>:>:.:..i.. i,,' . 13. r lfl'
.... !r f ~..
"-J'!i8" .
-'. '-. ~'" ". /:
."-- ~ f.1"
. ~.. -~
.~ . l'
,.f...."".,;,(.:c.' ~,.. ......... '. .... .., ..... ......., ~/
,"L...N~.,E VICfNITVMAP.. I,
.... .,.""""",.;,.,. '.. 'IJ..' . ." . ,..... il'-.
~ . 6,CA.....t: . .. == l;5a:::>. '
.. '.- . '. . .- -'
'.' ..~' .. 'r.....' ". ,. :.t;:J.! s.o. .....,..,
~ :r;" -;
,
I ~
t
i" .' I~" .
I .. 19.~~=~_..
t,; '. 0 ..... '.. .. ....... "';
:,j H. \V. 1-. - . .DRA\Vt-.) ~y A;f:I!~~,W4:~.l~~~~i~~;:;.t;g,!Jt.~
.
. /~-, /;=:>, (J5J '\\,r'.
.
\~;/0' ~ if
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE
SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION
COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER 04 CVS 2195
TIMOTHY H. WARD and DONNIE H. )
WARD, )
)
Plaintiffs, ) AFFIDA VIT OF TIMOTHY H. WARD
)
-vs- )
)
NEW HANOVER COUNTY, )
)
Defendant. )
I, Timothy H. Ward, being first duly sworn, depose and say that:
l. I am one of the Plaintiffs in this action.
2. I have personal knowledge of the matters set forth herein.
3. I am 47 years old, having been born in New Hanover County on October 22, 1956.
4. I am one of the owners of the property located at 1512 Burnett Boulevard,
Wilmington, New Hanover County, North Carolina, which property is identified as Lots 1,2,3 and
4 of Block 3 of Tucker-Burnett Subdivision, as more particularly described in that General
Warranty Deed dated and recorded on June 20,2001 in Book 2963 at Page 412 of the New Hanover
County Registry ("Subject Property" or "Father's Property").
5. My father was Homer H. Ward. My mother was Frances Ward.
6. I resided in New Hanover County until 1985, and I returned in 2001. I currently
reside in New Hanover County.
7. My father was an electrician by trade, and I helped my father and older brother,
Donnie, with his business, known as Azalea Electric, during high school.
8. In 1969, my father obtained a Permit form the Wilmington District of the U.S. Anny
Corps of Engineers to dredge the riparian area of the; ~l;ll:>ject Property for the construction and
operation of a marina. .
9. A copy of the Corps of Engineers' Permit is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit
"A."
IBST 6.___
\ .
10. As I recall, my Father's Property was dredged in 1971 after issuance of the COlpS of
Engineers permit.
11. On June 7, 1971, my father obtained Special Use Permit No. 13 from the New
Hanover County Commissioners.
12. After the issuance of Special Use Pem'llt No. 13, I assisted my father and brother,
Donnie H. Ward, in the construction, operation and maintenance of the marina that is located upon
the Subject Property.
13. The marina operation was called "Ward's Marina."
14. My father operated the marina on, the Subject Property for a number of years until
his death in January 2000 in New Hanover County.
AND FURTHER THIS AFFIANT SA YETH NOT.
This the \"5\ day of October, 2004.
~~gd.~o1J
TIMOTHY H. WARD
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBJD
BEFORE ME THIS THE 1 ~
DAY OFOCTOBER, 2004
PC=n ~o.i [Stamp-Seal]
\\,,"1""1/
Notary Public' , ,,\\ ~ eRAI II"
~ ~~............G '~
~.- -.,
~ /'~OiAAy"'" ~
My Commission Expires: : ! \0=
- z . --.~ . z -
lo l:z.e;, 10 ( ~ ~\ PUB\...'C, ..i:-ff
.-;. ~ ..... .. ....~ ~
~ At"" ......... 0 "
"ll OVER C, \\"
11"""",\\\
2
t'; _cli , ~~[pDW
.
.
.
STATE'OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE
SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION
COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER 04 CVS 2195
TIMOTHY H. WARD and DONNIE H. )
WARD, )
)
Plaintiffs, ) AFFIDA VIT OF DONNIE H. WARD
)
-vs- )
)
NEW HANOVER COUNTY, )
)
Defendant. )
I, Donnie H. Ward, being first duly sworn, depose and say that:
l. I am one of the Plaintiffs in this action.
2. I have personal knowledge of the matters set forth herein.
3. I am 52 years old, having been born in New Hanover County on February 20, 1952.
I have lived in New Hanover County my entire life.
4. I am one of the owners of the property located at 1512 Burnett Boulevard,
Wilmington, New Hanover County, North Carolina, which property is identified as Lots 1,2,3 and
4 of Block 3 of Tucker-Burnett Subdivision, as more particularly described in that General
Warranty Deed dated and recorded on June 20, 2001 in Book 2963 at Page 412 of the New Hanover
County Registry ("Subject Property" or "Father's Property").
5. My father was Homer H. Ward. My mother was FrancesWard.
6. From 1968 and continuing until my second year in college at the University of North
Carolina at Wilmington, I resided on the Subject Property with my father and mother.
7. My father was an electrician by trade, and I helped my father with his business,
known as Azalea Electric, during high school and college. I graduated from college in 1974 and
subsequently married and moved out of my father's residence on the Subject Property.
8. My wife and I lived in a trailer in Wheel Estates in Wilmington for several years
prior to building a house that is located in the Tucker-Burnett Subdivision, a couple of blocks from
my father's residence at the Subject Property.
~1\'~j.fI!T 7-~--
'CU;,_
--
, , ,
~j
9. In 1969, my father obtained a Permit from the Wilmington District of the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers to dredge the riparian area of the Subject Propeliy for the constmction and
operation of a marina. / -I . .
~ ,
10. A copy of the Corps of Engineers' Permit is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit
"A."
11. As I recall, the property was dredged in 1971 after issuance of the Corps of
Engineers permit. ' -
12. On June 7, 1971, my father obtained Special Use Permit No. 13 from the New
Hanover County Commissioners.
13. I attended the Special Use Permit hearing in Wilmington with my father.
14. After issuance of these permits, I physically assisted my father with the dredging of
the canal in the riparian area of the Subject Property next to the Intracoastal waterway, helped my
father with the construction of the improvements authorized by Special Use Permit No. 13, helped
my father with the erection of a business sign for the marina, sold gas, sodas, snacks, bait, food
stuffs, etc., to customers of the marina and other odd jobs as requested by my father.
15. My father and I wired the electrical facilities for the marina, as he was an electrician.
My father requested and obtained a special transformer from CP&L for providing additional
electricity to the Marina buildings. This special transformer still exists at the original location.
16. The marina operation was called "Ward's Marina," and I stilI have the original sign
used by my father to advertise the marina to the public. A photograph of this marina sign is
attached hereto and marked as Exhibit "B." This sign is over 30 years old. My father operated the
marina on this property for a number of years, and I had the occasion to visit with him and assist
him with the operation almost e~y unH! his death in Januar.r2000 in New Hanover County.
'"" ----. '" ~..,,-- ~-
17. The lumber that my father and I used to build the pier house and other marina
structures was purchased from Godwin Lumber Company in Castle Hayne. I remember going to
Godwin's with my father.
18. My father also obtained a business license from New Hanover County for the
operation of ills marina and for the sale of beer, gasoline, soft drinks and fishing and boating items
commonly found at marinas.
19.'>1 .A,.1t~LJ.,~ _~~..sLal~~. e.e.rm!t, was issued to my father, he operated the Subject
Property as a conirnercial marina and sold gasoline, beer and other items to the public.
20. I personally recall an incident in the mid-1980s when a barge destroyed pati one of
the marina buildings. My father was compensated by an insurance company for this loss.
2
, ,
21: During the early 1970s, Monty Etheridge; one of my father's customers, operated a
shrimp boat, which he moored at the marina. As I recall, this was between 1972 and 1974.
22. My father receivrcI income fromt9~?peratiop of ~e commercial marina on the
Subject Property from moorings; boat slips; boat limnchings, and sales of gasoline, drinks, snacks
and other items.
23. Myfather also had the marina dredged on occasion.
.,;j-^ l>i._ -
;
24. tQer~~~allydre~ the site plan u~~d by my father for the mari~ In addition to wet
boat slips, dry boat stbragewas clearly planned for the marina a~ the marina.
25. TwoI11edianic,al boat lifts had been used at my father's property for years after the
issuance of Special Use Petiriit No. 13. _
AND FURTHER THIS AFFIANT SA YETH NOT.
I JI- ..
This the _ day of October, 2004.
T2~ ~)~
DONNIE H. W ARb
SWORN TO AND SUBSC~ED
BEFORE ME THIS THE I L
DA Y OF OCTOBER, 2004
.p~G~ ,\\\'MttJJhjJrJeal]
\,\ ~ CRAIG '"
Notary Public ~ " !j>.: ....... ".
~ ~ .... ..... ,"-
... ... '."
~ I 0IAAV\ ~
~ : ~' ~u=
; z i .....~ j z =
': ~~ G 't.-~
My Commission Expires: ::;. .... PUB\..'\ .... ~
~ ~ ..... ..... ~ ~
10 (2.-ClOl ' ~~ ........ 0 '
"'" OVER G \""
""1111\\\\\
3
1
, I
.
.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned does hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing and attached
AFFIDA VIT OF DONNIE H. WARD
was this date served by telefax before 5:00 p.m. and depositing said copy in the United States Mail,
postage prepaid, and addressed to the following attorneys at the indicated addresses:
Mr. E. Holt Moore, III
Assistant County Attorney
320 Chestnut Street, Room 309
Wilmington, NC 28401
Telefax: 341-4170
Mr, William Norton Mason
SHIPMAN, MASON & WRIGHT
11 S. Fifth Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28401
Telefax: 762-6752
This the 1st day of October, 2004.
~~
KENNETH A. SHANKLIN, NCSB #05826
MA TIHEW A. NICHOLS, NCSB # 23403
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
214 Market Street
P. O. Box 1347
Wilmington, NC 28402-1347
Telephone: (910) 762-9400
Telefax: (910) 251-1773
4
FEB-18-2005.FRI05:13 PM COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFlCE FAX NO, 9103414170 P l'
.....-...-----..::::--.! .-" --. ...__':~-~' ~",".m'~" rt\." .;~~ A \- .~ r-/;.t'
.r '_:', .. ,~. . :;; \ 1\ r: ~~1 p n W~~l j l; \' \ t (, ! !" Pi I t, L 9)9 ! ~ ~ ,4 ,,\ ' u.lot J U
\,." _ '.j, vi. i ~r..!' -,) ~ ~.!..lJ'I'l u.\> } \1.1.' 1 I.' 'y' . v .
FACI~ITY DATA SH~ET - PAGE al DF 01
DWNfR NAI E-----.: HO~ER H. WARO FACILITY IO: 0-023010
O~NER AD RESS-"''''~ in z aox 2:41 -I)D it{.
FACILITY i'o,A,-.;E-'""-: HO"'lER 1-1.. WARD b ~ ~ ~ ~~
fACIun AODRE:~i$: ~T 2. 30:" 2.41 -DJ .k~ -~~~
f1A/~(J.4) ~~
rANK TAN~ PROOUCT ~' OATS '
NUI'1SER. t:A~AC i. n HClRcD WSTALLEO
J ;4- ------?-
. 2 2000 ~It:SH Cnv ~~ OQ/O~/l!:!~
1 4000 G4S0L.INS q:,..,., ~f~ ~ 06/04/1.976
If ...... L T "./~
TO At Fi:'~ FOR. "ft-lIS FACIUiY; $ ~!J ~..;...~~~
---
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - ~ ~ -\- - -
\
"
1 "'l THr: I !,J"",WE~i lDP::R,HDR OF nns f'AC!L!TV"
U~DeR P!NA~lTY CF LAW [ CSRTIFY THAi TH~ INFORMATtON THAT !
HJ'Vi: P,ltDV11).ED r-s Ji;.C(:U~U\TE
fj I' / I
?R!~T ~A~2: _Li~~~_~__t.t~~lLT~-
SI:;NAn.m.E-: _t'XUAd_y(-~%" ----
DATc------; ~~~~~~~~~------------
fJ/n
,~;
~
. I it'l1ll1'II'IB'"!'IT ~
~ .Ill'""-,,, 1i1
.j"');\ " . ..(" ,1 ' , ---~--
ft.I if}' .~~~
Ill-- .... __ ~ I ...... I . '"' L.. r- p.C
AWA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
MidJael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
November 21,2005
David Ward
1508 Burnett Road
Washington, NC 28409
Dear Mr. Ward:
Reference is made to our recent telephone conversation concerning any permits that may have
been issued to Homer Ward at 1512 Burnett Road, adjacent to Myrtle Grove Sound, Wilmington.
After a comprehensive search of our on-site permit files, as well as a search of our penn it
tracking database, the only permits Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) and/or State Dredge
and Fill Law permits that I can find that have been issued to Homer Ward were (1) a general
permit for a boat slip in 1992, and (2) a general permit for a bulkhead in 1993, Additionally, two
general permits for bulkheads were issued to Mr. Tim Ward at the site in 2004.
r would also like to let you know that Mr. Tim Ward is in the process of applying for a CAMA
Major Permit to dredge a portion of the property in front of his property. and to construct a
multi-slip docking facility. As. an adjacent property owner, Mr. Ward will be required to notify
you of his intentions to apply for this permit. and you may provide any specific comments you
have on the proposed project at that time. As we have previously discussed, the fact that Mr.
Ward is applying for a permit does not mean that a permit will be issued. A decision on whcther
or not to grd.Ilt a permit will only be made after COOrdinating with various state and federal
environmental review agencies.
I hope that the above information is useful. Please let me know ifI may provide any additional
permit histories at: this location,
Sincerely, ~'
J);,/// ~
Doug Huggett
Major Pennit Coordinator
Cc: Jim Gregson
400 Commerce Avenue, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Phone: 252-808-2808' FAX: 252-247-3330 \ Internet: www.nccoaslalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity' Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recyded \ 10% Posl Consumer Paper
f:""H,DeT q
-t.~"'^, ~ - _' .~c.i _ _
~' . oiL);1
p.3
....~ ~ ~~ ~. ~., ~~....
...,......-..~\
,~f~:tt~ at~.orlfr C!Jaralina _
":in ,-.......,. at - ." j 9 ., (
c:uE:par.u~~J.u .' f;..~
C!jJ1IU1ttttanan 2mb'tyett.el.opnunt - ",.J
,...,.
RODCI'Il' w. .~COTT ;:Rllleig~ 27611 - _ .. .:,'
GO~kRNOA .. :
J;;muary 12, 1971:.:--.. .. \, ,.. D/VI.!;ION or- COMMERCIAl.
ROV G. SOW'cRS, JR. I' f ,,'.' ANOsPORTS ~15HlIRJft.:i
DlkCC"rOR :., ,'''".'j -'.,:: !'., '.' "f I"~'!.' 'r'1:;LEPI10NE--: B;:g-37G)
..... ',.. . " . . '. _ i . ._'
",~(~ \,J /{;fi~!
MEMORANDUM TO - T. L. Linton (Ed Yadc)
From Jim Brown
Subject App. for C&D Permit - H. H. Ward - da~ed 1-12-71 _
While flying wi~h Piloc Arthur Rose January 11. we observed a dredging operacion
in Myrtle Sound on the west side of the I~ approximateLy LIZ mile south of the
Carolina Beach Inlet. Mr. Ward was having the dredging done by Harrelson &
Thomas (co-owners of dredge OWAR #1001). I stopped and talked with the dredge
owner.. and with Mr. Ward. No C&D permit had been applied for. A federal permit
was obtained for construction of the bulkhead and to fill within the bulkhead.
but not for excavation of fill ~aterial~ from submerged bottoms. The f.ederal
permic is No. Y-661 dated December 2, 1968.
I i.nfot'lned Mr. Ward that he must; obt.ain ;;t State pet'Olit for any dredge and fill
W04K begun after January 1. 1970, in addition to his federal permit, and nlso
that the federal permit obtained did not cover dredging which is pr~$~otly being
done. I a150 mentioned to Mr. Harrelson that this is the second case in which
his dredge had been involved in unauthorozed dredging.
I assisted Ml:'. Ward in completing application forms, maps. ~tc. to apply for
the State permit. These should reach your office at about the same time as this
memorandlllll~
From being on site, it was quite obviou$ tha~ ~he dredging in progress was nav-
ing little effect on .fishel,-ies resourCes of the aXl~n., and that all spoil materia.ls
weLe being adequately confined behind existing bul~lead. Had an applicatioQ been
filed. it is tny opinion that: there 'WOuld have been no. objcct:ions voiced A8ainst;
issuance of a pp.rmit~
Since the Operation was approximately 2/3 completed, Hr. Ward and the dredge
owners were quite com:e,ned .about the. stoppa.ge of th:i.s projQct. I i.nformed
them that I had no aut.hority to allow conti,nunnce, but I \~ould r.~la.y the ci.r-
CUtIlsl.;ance to the fishcri.es COllunissionQr for his ..~onsi.deral:ion in allowing Con-
tinuation ot the project.
Jim Brown
EXHIBIT/-Q~-
---
This page intentionally left blank.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Regular Item #: 5 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Budget Presenter: Cam Griffin
Contact: Cam Griffin
SUBJECT:
Countywide Goals for FY07-08
BRIEF SUMMARY:
Each year at the beginning of the budget process, the County Commissioners establish goals for the County to guide the
development of the budget for the next fiscal year.
The attached draft goals address long-term concerns and issues and provide direction to County departments in
establishing the budget for their department.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Staff recommends that the Commissioners consider the attached draft goals for FY 07-08.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
~..<,
..:::.:.:::::::
Countywide GOALS condensed,doc
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: N/A FINANCE: N/A BUDGET: HUMAN RESOURCES: N/A
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Establish goals.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
DRAFT
COUNTYWIDE GOALS
As recommended by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA), and the National
Advisory Council on State and Local Budgeting, the following Countywide Goals have been
designed to guide the development of the fiscal year 2007-2008 budget. These goals have
been developed to provide direction for County departments in their allocation of resources to
areas the County Commissioners deem to be most important.
Long-Term Goals:
. Provide a Safe Community for All New Hanover County Citizens.
. Continue Investing in Technology for Citizens to Easily and Efficiently Conduct County
Business.
. Protect the Environment and the Quality of Life Enjoyed by New Hanover County Citizens.
. Ensure the Health and Welfare of all New Hanover County Citizens.
. Ensure Equality for All New Hanover County Citizens.
. Provide Prompt, Courteous, and Professional Services to the Citizens of New Hanover County.
. Provide for the Educational, Cultural, and Recreational Needs of the Community.
. Ensure the Financial Stability and Legal Protection of the County.
. Promote Sound Economic Growth.
(revised)
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Regular Item #: 6 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: TAX Presenter: Bob Glasgow
Contact: Bob Glasgow
Item Does Not Require Review
SUBJECT:
2007 Countywide Revaluation
BRIEF SUMMARY:
The Tax Administrator will provide an overview of the results of the 2007 countywide revaluation. Specific examples of
increases/decreases in the tax value throughout the County will be provided for the municipalities and fire district.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Hear presentation.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: No Change In Position(s) Number of Positions:
Explanation:
ATTACHMENTS:
ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Hear presentation.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
The mailing of revaluation notices will be delayed until the end of January in order to capture the actual market value of real
estate sales through December 31,2006. The presentation will occur at the January 22,2007 meeting.
This page intentionally left blank.
MEETING OF THE WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT
ASSEMBL Y ROOM, NEW HANOVER COUNTY HISTORIC COURTHOUSE
24 NORTH THIRD STREET, ROOM 301
WILMINGTON, NC
ESTIMATED ITEMS OF BUSINESS Page
TIMES No.
9:25 p.m. 1. Non-Agenda Items (limit three minutes)
9:30 p.m. 2. Presentation: Highway 421 Wastewater System Update 139
9:45 p.m. 3. Consideration of Award of Change Order for Phased Wellfield Construction 141
and Approval of Associated Budget Amendment 2007-39
9:55 p.m. 4. Consideration of Funding for Water Treatment Plant, Maintenance Building, 145
Wellfield, Concentrate Line and Drinking Water Lines - Final Design,
Permitting, Easements and Wetlands Mitigation and Monitoring and Approval
of Associated Budget Amendment 2007-38
This page intentionally left blank.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Water & Sewer Item #: 2 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Water & Sewer District Presenter: Greg Thompson
Contact: Greg Thompson
SUBJECT:
Highway 421 Wastewater System Update
BRIEF SUMMARY:
On October 7, 2005, the Board requested staff to pursue the assessment and feasibility of providing sewer along the 421
corridor. On February 20, 2006, the Board approved a request for professional services from W. K. Dickson to renew the
existing permit and to develop an assessment of cost to provide service to the area.
As a result of these efforts, W. K. Dickson has completed the study and DWQ renewed the NPDES permit in June 2006
with conditions of future progress. W. K. Dickson will present the findings of the study identifying options for consideration.
The summary and recommendations are listed on pages 14-15.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Consider options identified in presentation and direct staff to perform further actions, if desired.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: No Change In Position(s) Number of Positions:
Explanation: No funding involved
ATTACHMENTS:
421 Wastewater System Investigation - Draft - Prepared by W.K. Dickson
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: N/A FINANCE: N/A BUDGET: N/A HUMAN RESOURCES: N/A
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Consider options.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
The item was continued to the December 18,2006 meeting.
This page intentionally left blank.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Water & Sewer Item #: 3 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Water & Sewer District Presenter: Greg Thompson
Contact: Greg Thompson
SUBJECT:
Award of Change Order for Phased Wellfield Construction and Approval of Associated Budget Amendment
BRIEF SUMMARY:
On October 18, 2004, the Board awarded the contract to construct two (2) 12-inch production wells and three (3) monitoring
wells to Cayton's Well Drilling and Pump Service, Inc., for $153,780. Additional work was added to the project with three (3)
change orders totaling $101,263. The current project total is $255,043.
New Hanover County has the opportunity to proceed with phased wellfield construction. Cayton's Well Drilling and Pump
Service, Inc., has developed a method of entering the well sites without impacting wetlands. The company has provided a
quote to construct the remaining nineteen (19) production wells and nineteen (19) observation wells for $1 ,280,740.
The phased construction of these wells, prior to award of the Water Treatment Plant and Wellfield Construction Project, will
reduce potential construction and scheduling conflicts in the wellfield area. Award of this contract modification at this time
to Cayton's Well Drilling is recommended due to wetlands access efficiencies and reduced cost for project design, bid,
award, and administration.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Staff recommends award of the change order to Cayton's Well Drilling and Pump Service, Inc., in the amount of $1 ,280,740
and requests approval of the associated budget amendment.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: No Change In Position(s) Number of Positions:
Explanation: WellfieldlWater Treatment Plant
ATTACHMENTS:
~ ~
Iiil.:-:::,:
Summary of Quotes from Cayton's Well Drilling, pdf 2007.38, doc
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: FINANCE: BUDGET: HUMAN RESOURCES: NIA
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Recommend approval.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
The item was continued to the December 18, 2006 meeting.
Phase Well Construction Costs: Summary of Quotes from Cayton's Well Drilling and Pump Service, Inc,
All Mobilizaton $50,000
C Peedee Production Well $83,000
C Peedee Observation Well $7,125
C Castle Hayne Production Well $34,185
C Castle Hayne Observation Well $2,425
F Peedee Production Well $83,000
F Peedee Observation Well $7,125
F Castle Havne Production Well $34,185
F Castle Havne Observation Well $2,425
G Peedee Production Well $83,000
G Peedee Observation Well $7,125
G Castle Havne Production Well $34,185
G Castle Hayne Observation Well $2,425
H Peedee Production Well $83,000
H Peedee Observation Well $7,125
H Castle Havne Production Well $34,185
H Castle Havne Observation Well $2,425
I Peedee Production Well $83,000
I Peedee Observation Well $7,125
I Castle Havne Production Well $34,185
I Castle Hayne Observation Well $2,425
J Peedee Production Well $83,000
J Peedee Observation Well $7,125
J Castle Hayne Production Well $34,185
J Castle Hayne Observation Well $2,425
K Peedee Production Well $83,000
K Peedee Observation Well $7,125
K Castle Hayne Production Well $34,185
K Castle Havne Observation Well $2,425
M Peedee Production Well $83,000
M Peedee Observation Well $7,125
N Peedee Production Well $83,000
N Peedee Observation Well $7,125
0 Peedee Production Well $83,000
0 Peedee Observation Well $7,125
WTP Site 22 Castle Hayne Production Well $34,185
WTP Site 22 Castle Hayne Observation Well $2,425
WTP Site 22 Castle Havne Production Well $34,185
-
GM Cayton Proposal All Wells
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Budget Amendment
Capital Projects
BUDGET AMENDMENT Number: 2007-39
DEPARTMENT: Engineering
BE IT ORDAINED by the New Hanover County Commissioners that the following appropriation be made to the Water and
Sewer District ordinance:
Section 1. The following appropriation is hereby made to the Water and Sewer District Funds, and that the following
revenue is estimated to be available to meet this appropriation.
Expenditure Decrease Increase
Water and Sewer Administration:
Transfer to Capital Project $1,280,470
Wellfield Water Treatment Facility:
Capital Project Expense $1,280,470
Revenue Decrease Increase
Water and Sewer Finance:
Appropriated Fund Balance $1,280,470
Wellfield Water Treatment Facility:
Transfer In Enterprise $1,280,470
EXPlANA TION: Well drilling contractor will be adding additional well sites to the Wellfield Water Treatment
Facility site.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
APPROVAL STATUS: To be approved by Board Of Commissioners
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Water & Sewer Item #: 4 Estimated Time: Page Number:
Department: Water & Sewer District Presenter: Greg Thompson
Contact: Greg Thompson
SUBJECT:
Approve Funding for Continued Development of Water Treatment Plant, Maintenance Building, Wellfield,
Concentrate line and Drinking Water lines - Final Design, Permitting, Easements and Wetlands Mitigation and
Monitoring and the Associated Budget Amendment
BRIEF SUMMARY:
Mr. Dan Dawson of W. K. Dickson and Ms. Kim Williams of Land Management Group presented the status of the subject
project to the District at the April 3, 2006, regular meeting. Since then there have been several accomplishments:
Completed and submitted wetlands permit application
Completed and submitted CAMA permit application
Completed and submitted concentrate NPDES permit application
Completed construction of two (2) production wells at plant site
Construction ongoing of two (2) well pump houses with controls at plant site
Completed NCDENR Public Water Supply approval for 19 new wells
Porters Neck Water Tower constructed, testing ongoing
Awarded contract to begin constructing portion of concentrate line
The project is entering the final design and permitting phase and funds are required to complete final design and permitting
as follows:
Funds in the amount of $660,000 would be used to contract W K Dickson to:
Finalize design and permitting of the water treatment plant
Finalize design and permitting of the maintenance building
Finalize design and permitting of the concentrate line
Finalize design and permitting of the waterline on Edgewater Club Road
Finalize design of SCADA and power supply for wells
Finalize geotechnical design of roads accessing remote well areas
Finalize wetlands survey and route surveying
Finalize Water System Management Plan
Finalize Operations and Maintenance Plan
Finalize Emergency Management Plan
Finalize Groundwater Protection Plan
Design/monitor system for wellfield and groundwater withdrawal analysis
The wetlands permit application is complete. Response to agency comments, wetland impact mitigation design,
construction, and monitoring are the required final phases.
Funds in the amount of $90,100 would be used to contract Land Management Group to:
Finalize response to wetland comments from agencies and public
Finalize wetlands mitigation and restoration planning and design
Provide 4-acre mitigation construction oversight
Purchase wetlands plants for 4-acre mitigation site
Plant wetlands plants for 4-acre mitigation site
Provide five years monitoring and reporting for wetlands mitigation
Easements must be acquired by New Hanover County along the route of the concentrate line and associated water lines.
Staff estimates that $360,000 will be required to purchase easements along the five (5) mile long route of this line.
RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:
Staff recommends Commissioners agree to fund the Wellfield and Water Treatment Facility Capital Project in the amount
of $1 ,110,100 to take the project up to construction award of the Water Treatment Plant, Maintenance Building and
Wellfield and approve associated budget amendment.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Will above action result in: No Change In Position(s) Number of Positions:
Explanation: WellfieldlWater Treatment Capital Project
ATTACHMENTS:
~
Water Treatment Plant and Wellfield Project. pdf
~ ~
... .:.. Iiil.:-:::,:
~~
WTP Schedule,pdf 2007.38. doc
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL: N/A FINANCE: N/A BUDGET: HUMAN RESOURCES: N/A
COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Recommend approval.
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.
(jj
.S1
0
0
"'-
N
1Il
lij
c:r
.,
.c
0
,5
~
......
()
a>
'--'
0
L-
a..
"'0
a>
~
a>
S
"'0
C
CO
......
C
CO
a..
......
c
a>
E
......
CO
a>
L-
I-
L-
a>
......
CO
S
0
I
Z
<1z~
::; C!
CJ ::
This page intentionally left blank.
^T~;r m'~,._
!
;01 '"
~~
l~ !?
0
I"! M
0>
1;;1 "
0(
~ .
I'"
-"
11111
t~
11111
::i!:i
~~
~l~_!
!lD!
1,1
~
,~1
1~1
! ~i
;....,1
)<<11
h:;;l
I~ "
"
, I ... ~ ~
g!,.:l !? '" .!2
'" 111 ~
f-
Nl(lIi " ro ro "
1~1 ~ " E ,5
:;; " '6
H ... x X 111
!? "
101 w w Cl
0
101 M
OJ ... a. .u
,,[ ..
~ Ul
G
... g>
131 !?
1-" N f
ra " ~
!jl "
1-,1 .., "
1m! '"
111
1,,,1 a.
!.~ Co
I"" '"
1::;;1 E
~L~,l E
" Co "
~I[ijl " UJ
~ 111 0
f'" E
1"1 .!2 E "
~ " '0
r;;1 UJ ii.
~-'~t"'""M"""'"-' ... ..-..-.., ..... -'-~'... ~"....
^" n'm~.~"_ I
,,~ _~_'"m^'.'~_.vm .""m~~_"__~~_ ~~,__~~ ~~~~.___~ ""_'__~_.' "'~.~_
"
0
U (5'
2
1!i z
0
0 Cl '"
u z ~
~ Q. '"
(5' 0
~ g- "
Z 0> Ci "
0 " " Z " ::;
'c " w a:: 't>
Cl '0; '~ :e u "
z E :e :I: '"
Q. " " 0 Z 0; '"
, 0:: a. U ,s " '"
, Z .c ::2 "
1 0 .e '3' u '3' ':; " -'" a,
1= :l Q; '" c. e
ro " 'E m ~
U > '" 't> ;; In " C. UJ a.
" " i'l
, ::> e 'in '" C. ::> E " E
II:: a. 8 '" E a. E '" " " 0
f- a. .c Cl .!! '" '" U
Ul 0( a. 0 0 " -'" iii "
! e u z u " .!! 't> "
z 11 't> " 0( c. '" "
0 '" a. " " ,;1 E a. .e " '" 3
U 0 :;; " ~ 0 >- :g 0 " '0; 't>
i " " t5 0 :g " 't> ::;; ~ "
..J m 't> e " 2 z a. U m '" " .c
..J UJ 0 a. 0> 'E " 0: 2 "
'" 1!i w 't> " Oi " UJ
W ~ .s " Cl " " " E! ~ ~
" :;: " E > "
E 0> " 0 0 0( '" E u: " " a. " "
'" C U " g 0 U ,., II! 0<: 0 0 a. '[
'" " :;; .s 0
z W :I: .c '0 ~ ~ " '" 0 .~ " a.
-'" Ul Z 0 Z " a. "- " a. ,~ 13
'" I 0( !l ;:e II! '[ '" " ~e
'" :J: " '0 " '[
f- I a. a. a. iii z 0 ~~
i- u a.
,
, 1 ,,~
Cl ;;~
- I~ iN iM ;s:-g
t'5:
.~~
a.o
This page intentionally left blank.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION
Meeting Date: 12/04/06
Budget Amendment
Capital Projects
BUDGET AMENDMENT Number: 2007-38
DEPARTMENT: Engineering
BE IT ORDAINED by the New Hanover County Commissioners that the following appropriation be made to the Water and
Sewer District ordinance:
Section 1. The following appropriation is hereby made to the Water and Sewer District Funds, and that the following
revenue is estimated to be available to meet this appropriation.
Expenditure Decrease Increase
Water and Sewer Administration:
Transfer to Capital Project $1,110,100
Wellfield Water Treatment Facility:
Capital Project Expense $1,110,100
Revenue Decrease Increase
Water and Sewer Finance:
Appropriated Fund Balance $1,110,100
Wellfield Water Treatment Facility:
Transfers in Enterprise $1,110,100
EXPLANATION: Design permitting and easements of the Wellfield Water Treatment Facility.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
APPROVAL STATUS: To be approved by Board Of Commissioners
COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:
Approved 5-0.