Town of Oak Island Brunswick County, NC The Town of Oak Island will preserve, protect, and enhance the quality of the natural and cultural environment of the community. In order to achieve this goal, the Town will improve the quality of its waterways, natural environment, beaches, dunes, water access and residential areas. The Town will maintain a unique scale and character that fosters a sense of community to make the Town a desirable place to live, work and call home, and a family vacation destination. The Town will also develop efficient sidewalks, bikeways, and roadway systems to protect its attractiveness in the future. The Town will also expand its recreational opportunities for residents of all ages and abilities. The Town will balance social and commercial needs and objectives for economic vitality. I. START-UP Planning Board Meeting Agenda November 15, 2018 10:30 AM Town Hall Council Chambers 1. Call to Order: 2. Additions or corrections to the agenda 3. Approval of the Minutes: (10-18-2018) 4. Public Comment: Please state your name and address for the record. II. OLD BUSINESS 1. Fill Text Amendment III. NEW BUSINESS 1. Minor Subdivision Text Amendment 2. REPORTS/UPDATES 1. Board Member Reports 2. Staff Reports (Council meeting) 3. OTHER Future Meetings: 12-11-18 Adjournment 4601 E. Oak Island Drive Oak Island, North Carolina 28465 Phone: (910) 278-5011 Fax: (910) 278-1711 Website: www.oakislandnc.com
MINUTES PLANNING BOARD OCTOBER 18, 2018 10 a.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS TOWN HALL Present: Chairman Denise Pacula, Vice-chairman Bob Carpenter, members Cathy Bowes, Mike Defeo, Clay Jenkins, Lynn McDowell and Willie Williams, Planning and Zoning Coordinator Jake Vares and Assistant Manager/Town Clerk Lisa P. Stites, MMC. Chairman Pacula called the meeting to order at 10:32 a.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. Approval of the Agenda: Mr. Carpenter made a motion to approve the agenda. Mr. Defeo seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Mr. Carpenter made a motion to approve the August 16, 2018 Minutes as presented. Mr. Williams seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. There were no Public Comments. New Business - Pine Forest Parking: Mr. Vares said this proposed change was initiated by the Pine Forest developers. The table section is 10-19.6. They are asking to change the amount of spaces required per dwelling unit; the change would affect the mainland only. Chairman Pacula said she was surprised this was not already in the UDO; she said she thought it was. Other members who were involved in the UDO process agreed. Ms. Bowes said she thought the number should be 2 spaces per unit. Chairman Pacula explained that the number 1.75 came from a total number of spaces divided by the number of units. Mr. Carpenter said that most couples would have two vehicles, and he said he was concerned there wouldn t be enough parking for visitors. Mark Brambell, representing the Pine Forest developers, said that when the initial application was submitted, it was under the old ordinance. He asked what the standard is today; Mr. Vares read from the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). Mr. Brambell reviewed what is being considered for an apartment complex with 150 units, with 1-bedroom, 2-bedroom or 3-bedroom units; he believed this plan would require 369 parking spaces based on the previous ordinance. It would also require more than a half-acre of additional paving. With the change being requested, it would require 273 spaces; garages are also planned for some of the units. Mr. Brambell said that what the Town requires for parking is much higher than other towns, even Wilmington. Mr. Carpenter said that the standard was put in place for the island and said that it might be too restrictive for the mainland. The Board had additional discussion on the parking requirements. Mr. Defeo asked what the issue was with meeting the current ordinance on the mainland. Mr. Brambell said that for smaller homes, the number of parking spaces required was too many. Mr. Carpenter suggested requiring 2 spaces for the first 5 habitable rooms. Chairman Pacula said that she would not be comfortable making the change for single-family homes for the entire mainland. Answering a question from Mr. Jenkins, Mr. Brambell said that the 1.75 that he was requesting came from Brunswick County s ordinance, so what he was requesting was the standard for the surrounding areas. Mr. Williams said he liked the idea of also requiring ones space per every five units. Ms. McDowell asked what demographic the apartments would be marketed to. Mr. Brambell said that he wouldn t expect people younger than 20 renting apartments there. He said in general, apartments are not always full, that renters are not always there at the same time, and that some apartments have just one resident. One of the latest trends is adding a dedicated garage for apartments. Mr. Vares reminded the Board that their decision couldn t be based on demographics, etc. Jim Cerullo, with Paramount Engineering, also present on behalf of the Pine Forest developers, spoke about the general parking needs for apartment complexes. Mr. Carpenter said that he could support 2 spaces per unit with one extra space per five units. Mr. Jenkins said that by requiring 2 spaces, it doesn t use up that much more land. He said that his concern is that with people visiting family at the beach, there wouldn t be enough parking in the 1
MINUTES October 18, 2018 Planning Board Page 2 of 4 summer. Mr. Brambell said that Mr. Jenkins calculations didn t include area for the road for the parking lot; it would be an extra quarter-acre for 39 additional spaces. Mr. Brambell also said that they didn t anticipate the same level of transient traffic or summer traffic for this development. He also said there was a real lack of affordable housing in this area. Mr. Defeo said that he was concerned about making a distinction between the island and the mainland and that in the future, people would ask for the island regulations to match the mainland regulations. Mr. Vares spoke about some of the differences for mainland development versus island development which are already included in the UDO. Mr. Brambell and the Board discussed how many and what type of rooms are generally in an apartment. They also discussed the setbacks and the room available for parking. Mr. Vares said he thought the solution found for dealing with parking on the beachfront has been working, and he wouldn t want that to change. Mr. Carpenter made a motion to require two spaces for up to five habitable rooms and one additional space per habitable room on the mainland, and that it is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Ms. Bowes seconded the motion. The Board discussed the math. Mr. Jenkins asked Mr. Vares if he saw an advantage to keeping the parking requirements separate for mainland residential versus mainland multifamily. Mr. Vares said they have different intensity and density in terms of land use; specification for parking, for the most part, is advantageous. Mr. Brambell also spoke in favor of keeping the regulations separate for mainland residential and mainland multifamily. Mr. Carpenter amended his motion to state that the motion was for mainland single-family residential only (not multifamily). Ms. Bowes seconded the amendment. The amended motion passed unanimously. Mr. Williams made a motion to require 1.75 spaces per dwelling unit for mainland multifamily development and to adopt the associated plan consistency statement. Mr. Carpenter seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. New Business 2 - Mr. Vares said this proposed text amendment was staff initiated and was fairly clerical in nature. The description for R-6MH should have been amended to remove 2- and 3-family dwellings and to add tiny homes during the UDO process. Mr. Vares said that technically, this text amendment would be inconsistent with the Land Use Plan, though it will match with the UDO. The Town can adopt something that is inconsistent with the Plan, but it has to be documented why it was adopted (this is included in the plan consistency statement). Mr. Vares said that what he is asking is that the Table of Uses and the description match each other. Ms. Bowes made a motion to adopt the changes to the description to R-6MH as presented and to adopt the plan consistency statement. Mr. Carpenter seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. New Business 3 - Fill Text Amendment: Mr. Vares said this had been discussed by the Planning Board extensively in 2015. The primary change proposed is that the word greater would be replaced with less. He said that it would prevent someone from adding excessive fill higher than a neighbor. Mr. Vares also said that the stormwater ordinance referenced is also corrected with its new number. Chairman Pacula said that she thought that the reason greater was kept so that if an older house was three feet below the road, a new house didn t have to be built to that. Chairman Pacula said that the way she remembered it, the public was asking to know what the Town was doing for its stormwater program. She said she recalled the Town s stormwater engineer saying that the Town has a lot of pipe and that much was in need of repair; she recalled there being discussion about the Town needing to work on its own stormwater infrastructure as well. Mr. Vares said that though they are related, they are actually two separate topics. Mr. Carpenter suggested tabling this item until Development Services Director Steve Edwards can be present to provide more information. Ms. Bowes asked for some visual representation to help illustrate the issues. 2
MINUTES October 18, 2018 Planning Board Page 3 of 4 Mr. Williams made motion to table this item. Ms. Bowes seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Board reports: Mr. Carpenter said in August, he noticed there was black screen netting on a fence in a corner of the airport in the area where the helicopter is. He said that the information he learned about people staying at the airport was not what was presented to the Board. Chairman Pacula suggested Mr. Carpenter file a report as a citizen. Chairman Pacula welcomed new member Lynn McDowell to the Board. Staff Reports: The next meeting is November 15. He said the UDO had been adopted; pages with any changes will be provided to the members. The Coastal Resources Commission meets in November and will consider the Town s requested amendment for the Development Line. Mr. Vares reported that the Town Manager s meeting with the State stormwater person regarding the Town s stormwater enforcement was delayed. He said that Council wanted to move forward with the tree ordinance amendment, though the Planning Board has not yet made a formal recommendation. Mr. Carpenter made a motion to adjourn at 12:06 p.m. Mr. Williams seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Denise Pacula, Chairman Attested: Lisa P. Stites, MMC Assistant Manager/Town Clerk 3
MINUTES October 18, 2018 Planning Board Page 4 of 4 4
TOWN OF OAK ISLAND PLANNING BOARD AGENDA ITEM MEMO Agenda Item: Old Business No. 1 Date: 11/5/2018 Issue: Fill Text Amendment Department: Planning & Zoning Administrator Presented by: Jake Vares Presentation: None Estimated Time for Discussion: 35 Minutes Subject Summary: Staff is suggesting a minor change to the Unified Development Ordinance definition of Fill. The Planning Board reviewed this text amendment many times back in 2015 and eventually gave a recommended to Town Council, which was adopted. No fill ordinance existed before that. The Planning Board reviewed this article last month and decided to table it. As one can see from the attached proposed ordinance excerpt; the word greater is replaced with less. The benefit of this change is that it prevents one from potentially adding excessive fill at a higher elevation than their neighbor, causing runoff on adjacent properties. A staff drawing is attached to illustrate the effect of the current fill ordinance. Research was done to determine how Brunswick County treats fill. Topography design standards are required for major and minor subdivisions. Section 6.4.4 - Design Standards states The finished topography of any lot altered shall be aligned with and graded with existing neighboring elevation in such a manner as to minimize erosion. In any case where two (2) feet of fill are added to a lot, the lot owner shall be required to obtain an engineered storm water plan indicating that the use of fill shall in no way create a burden on adjacent property; The fill definition references stormwater sections that no longer exist with the newly adopted UDO (Unified Development Ordinance). As you can see from the attached UDO excerpts the stormwater sections merely references the state stormwater regulations making them one in the same with our local ordinances. Section 18-655 and section 18-666 no longer exists, so that same verbiage was inserted into a new UDO section number 10.105 instead. The last sentence describing building height is removed because it is superfluous since that definition now already exists separately. Attachments: Proposed Ordinance Amendment Recommendation/Action Needed: Approval Suggested Motion: I make a motion to approve or deny the proposed text amendment and to adopt the associated plan consistency statement. Planning Board Recommendation: TBD Funds Needed: $0.00 Follow Up Action Needed: Forward recommendation to Town Council 5
Attachment SECTION A.3 DEFINITIONS. Fill, lot. The amount of fill added to a lot will be no greater than one foot above the crown of the road or even with the highest adjacent lot, whichever is greater less, and will not be greater than is necessary to meet the health department requirements for an improvement permit. Fill greater than one foot will have an engineered fill plan for stabilization and stormwater retention. Lots requiring fill greater than one foot for the purposes of elevating above flood for letters of map amendments through filling, leveling a lot with drastic elevations or for the purpose of commercial stormwater designs may do so in accordance with Section 10.105 sections 18-655 and 18-666. Building height shall be measured from the average finished grade of the four corners of the structure. Building, height of The vertical distance from the average finished grade at the four corners of the structure to the highest point of the structure. PART IX. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SECTION 10.104 GENERAL PROVISIONS. The owner and/or applicant developer shall comply with all applicable requirements and thresholds established by the NC Department of Environmental Quality (Division of Water Resources and Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources), and the US Army Corps of Engineers, and as adopted by the Town in Code of Ordinances, Chapter 18, Article V - The Phase II Stormwater Ordinance, and Article VI - Illicit Stormwater Discharge Ordinance for the Town of Oak Island, North Carolina. All applications for approved stormwater control plans must be submitted to the UDO Administrator who will forward them to the Stormwater Administrator. SECTION 10.105 FILL For developments requesting fill over one foot engineered stormwater retention measures such as retention ponds or an underground infiltration system, and a Soil Stabilization Plan is required. PART X. TREE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Attachment B 6
Fill Drawing Attachment C Holden Beach Ordinance 158.09 DEVELOPMENTS THAT DO NOT REQUIRE STATE CERTIFICATION. Any land disturbing activity (as defined in earlier section of this chapter) must comply with the criteria presented below. A development which is under one acre and does not infringe upon any State-defined Areas of Environmental Concern will usually not require State Certification. However, such developments shall be subject to the certain town requirements as discussed below: (B) The amount of any fill materials to be placed for whatever purpose (height above existing grades) shall be limited to either 12 inches above the average centerline of the road adjacent to the property or not to exceed the height required by the County Health Department for approval of a septic system permit. After any parcel of land has been filled to the subject height as required by the County Health Department, if a septic tank permit is not obtained within 60 days, the fill materials placed shall be removed and the parcel of land returned to its original condition. If it is proposed to place fill materials on the property outside of the area of the septic tank and drain field, the additional area capable for building a structure shall be treated as an impervious surface for stormwater management purposes. (7) In those cases where the property in question (with the Health Department approved soil added) is lower than adjacent property, additional fill materials may be added to bring the property up to the existing grade of adjacent properties, so long as that addition is approved by the County Health Department. 7
8
TOWN OF OAK ISLAND PLANNING BOARD AGENDA ITEM MEMO Agenda Item: New Business No. 1 Date: 11/5/2018 Issue: Minor Subdivision Text Amendment Department: Planning & Zoning Administrator Presented by: Jake Vares Presentation: None Estimated Time for Discussion: 20 Minutes Subject Summary: Staff is suggesting a change to alter the section in the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) that covers minor subdivision requirements. The previous Zoning Ordinance required that the minor subdivision process could not be initiated again within a 3-year period after implemented. The reason for that is because that way a minor subdivision could not be used as a loop-hole to avoid doing a major subdivision. Otherwise a large development could simply apply for twenty (for example) minor subdivision application plats in a row in order to circumvent the major subdivision requirements that an application of that sort would trigger. A major subdivion requires review by the Planning Board, site-design requirements, open-space requirements, street standard requirements, etc. The point when a subdivision jumps from a minor to a major is when it reaches five lots. A minor subdivision can have four lots while a major subdivision is five or more. When calculating the total number of newly created lots within a subdivision the original tract is counted as well. Attachments: Proposed Ordinance Amendment Recommendation/Action Needed: Approval Suggested Motion: I make a motion to approve or deny the proposed text amendment and to adopt the associated plan consistency statement. Planning Board Recommendation: TBD Funds Needed: $0.00 Follow Up Action Needed: Forward recommendation to Town Council Attachment 9
SECTION 5.3 ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL - MINOR SITE PLAN, MINOR SUBDIVISION, OR MAJOR SUBDIVISION FINAL PLAT. Administrative approval includes: $ Minor Site Plans. Include the following: (1) Buildings or additions with an aggregate enclosed square footage of less than 7,000 square feet; (2) Buildings or additions involving land disturbance of less than one (1) acre; (3) Multi-family development involving fewer than ten (10) dwelling units; (4) Parking lot expansions which comply with this Ordinance with no increase in enclosed floor area; (5) Revision to landscaping, signage, or lighting which comply with the requirements of this Ordinance; (6) Accessory uses which comply with the requirements of this Ordinance; (7) Site plans which do not require a variance or modification of the requirements of this Ordinance, and otherwise comply with this Ordinance; and (8) Site plans which do not require easement dedication or street construction. $ Minor Subdivisions. A subdivision that does not involve any of the following: (i) the creation of more than a total of five (5) lots; (ii) the creation of any new public streets; (iii) the extension of a public water or sewer system; or (iv) the installation of drainage improvements through one (1) or more lots to serve one (1) or more other lots. $ The minor subdivision process may not be used a second time on the original parcel within three years of the date of recordation by the register of deeds. $ Construction and As-Built Drawings $ Minor or Major Subdivision Final Plats NOTE: A sketch plan and/or pre-application meeting is not required for a final plat submittal. Previous Zoning Ordinance Sec. 18-412. - Procedure for review of minor subdivisions. (a) (b) Applications which meet the criteria for minor subdivisions as defined in section 18-374(a) may be submitted to the subdivision administrator for review and approval. Any person who proposes minor subdivision must consult with the administrator to ensure that he understands the requirements for approval of the plat to be submitted. The final plat shall contain the information required by section 18-474. A plat that has been reviewed and given final approval by the administrator shall be certified by the signature of the subdivision administrator. If the lots in the proposed subdivision are not to be served by municipal sewer service, a site/soil evaluation shall be made by the county environmental health section or other properly certified party acceptable to the town for each lot depicted on the minor subdivision plat. Copies of these evaluations shall be forwarded to the administrator prior to final approval. The town shall bear no liability or responsibility for the credibility of these evaluations or for lots created which are ultimately not determined to be suitable for on-site wastewater disposal by the environmental health section. 10
(c) (d) (e) Any minor subdivision so approved must be recorded in the county register of deeds office within six months of the date of approval. Two copies of the recorded plat must be transmitted to the department of development services prior to the issuance of any development permits on the property. The minor subdivision process may not be used a second time on the original parcel within three years of the date of recordation by the register of deeds. Each proposed minor subdivision application shall demonstrate compliance with the current land use/management plan of the town as the plan may be amended from time to time and any land use or management/protection plan, as such plan may be amended from time to time, that may exist only for the protection of specific areas of the town (i.e., Fragile Area Management Plan for Western End of Oak Island or other such plan as may be adopted or amended by the town). Compliance with these plans is mandatory and the approval of subdivision must include a finding by the administrator of such compliance. Should any party disagree with the administrator regarding a determination of compliance with official plans, the plat shall be forwarded to the planning board and town council for review through the major subdivision process. (Ord. of 6-12-2001, ch. 2, 3.2; Ord. of 1-8-2002, ch. 2, 11