Agendas and Minutes

December 7, 2000 

Planning Board

Town of Emerald Isle Planning Board Minutes

Rescheduled Regular Meeting

Thursday, December 07, 2000

 

The meeting was called to order by Chairman, Cary Harrison, at 4:00 P.M.

Members in attendance: Cary Harrison, Ceil Saunders, Phil Almeida, George McLaughlin, Ed Dowling and David Schock. Also in attendance, Carol Angus, Secretary; and Pete Allen, Town Manager.

Minutes of the regular meeting of November 13, 2000 were approved. Motion was made by Ed Dowling to approve the minutes with second by Frank Vance. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion.

Report from Town Manager – Mr. Allen gave the members a brief summary of the Town Board of Commissioner’s decisions from their meeting on November 14, 2000.

Report from Building Inspector – The Building Inspector’s Report was submitted to the members. There were no questions for the department.

Chairman Harrison advised the board members that Item B Emerald Motel, 46 room Commercial Review, on the agenda has been withdrawn until a future date.

  1. Osprey Bluff 12-lot S/D, Block 43 North, Preliminary Plat – Mr. McLaughlin had some concerns about the access of emergency vehicles, especially the large fire trucks. The ladder truck cannot be used on a slope of more than 6° . His specific concern was for lots 1, 2, 11, and 12. After discussion about this concern with Mr. Larry Spell, developer, said he would be willing to meet with Mr. McLaughlin, Fire Chief Wm. Walker, John McLean, Engineer, before the Town Board meeting to address these concerns. (This meeting was held on Monday, December 11, at 2:00 P.M.). It was also discussed to review the placement and number of fire hydrants on Christina Drive at this same meeting.

    Mr. Dowling was concerned about the insurance coverage of a residence that may not be accessible by fire department equipment. Mr. McLaughlin said this instance would be listed as "no fire protection".

    Mr. Harrison asked about changing the radius of the entry so there would be no concern about a vehicle entering from the wrong way. Mr. Spell said this would be discussed at the meeting with Chief Walker and he would do whatever necessary to make these lots accessible.

    From this point for a period of time Mr. Spell went over the maps at the board table with each of the members. Mr. McLean, engineer, added other comments that the grade could be adjusted for the street to make it more accommodating. Mr. Spell said he would also like to have the fire department bring the equipment over to the site when it is rocked to be sure the grade is not too steep. If it should prove to be too steep, the road will graded the road to make it accessible. It would not be paved until it suits the fire chief.

    Mr. Harrison then asked that Chief Walker approve all the radii of all the drives and cul-de-sac, as well as hydrants, for this subdivision during the meeting to be held later.

    Mr. Almeida asked Mr. McLean and Mr. Spell to approach the table and discussed the radius of the entrance to Christina Drive as well as the retaining walls on the slope of the property on the east side of the subdivision. The issues that Mr. Almeida had were resolved. In addition, the comps are to be revised for the piping for runoff. Mr. McLean agreed that he will define the depth and engineering for the deadmen being used for support for the retaining wall.

    Mr. Almeida asked that the 18" pipe that is referred to for runoff to the pond on the east be noted on the plat.

     

    Motion was made by David Schock, second by Ceil Saunders, to refer Osprey Bluff S/D to the Town Board of Commissioners with the condition that there be a meeting held with Fire Chief, William Walker, that he is satisfied with the slope of the road, satisfied with the radii of the road and cul-de-sac and the placement of any hydrant(s). The motion was approved unanimously.
  1. JTW, Inc., Commercial Final Plat Approval – (This project was previously reviewed and held for a detailed stormwater plan to be submitted).

    Mr. Larry LaVecchia represented this project for Oceanside Engineering. The only real concern the board had regarding this subdivision was the buffering that is required for B-3 zoning, that is not on the property. This property has an engineered plan that has the stormwater along the entire south portion of the properties. This would preclude a vegetated buffer other than some landscaping. In the subdivision to the south for the nine lots for residential construction, one of the items added to that plat was that each of those nine lots is to have a buffer installed by the developer, subsequently maintained by the owner of each property as the ownership changes. The developer of these nine lots, and the 4-lot commercial subdivision is the same party. However, should the buffer not be maintained by the residential owners, the B-3 owners may have to do the buffer.

    This was originally done because the residential lots looked as though they would be sold and developed prior to any subdivision of this commercial property. This residential buffer was then implemented to assure a buffer for this residential section.

     

    Ceil Saunders made motion, second by Phil Almeida, to recommend final approval to JTW, Inc. Commercial Plat to the Town Board of Commissioners for their approval. There was unanimous approval in favor of the motion.

     

  2. Emerald Plantation Homeowners, Special Use Request to allow boat storage within the subdivision, and to make it an appurtenant use. Mr. Harrison, chairman, advised the members that Ms. Angus had referred this item to the board because she could not issue a permit for such use without having the use reviewed by the Planning Board. Mr. Tom Ross represented this proposal. The boat storage area is to be located on the East side of the property in the area of the boat ramp. Vegetation will be planted on the roadside of the storage area to buffer the boats from the residents.

     

    Motion was made by George McLaughlin, second by Phil Almeida, to recommend this special use request for boat storage within the subdivision, as an appurtenant use, to the Town Board of Commissioners for their approval. The motion was unanimously approved.

     

  3. Possible Recommendation of Traffic Study Regarding Hwy 58, Coast Guard Rd. and Reed Drive.

    Mr. Almeida and Mr. Dowling had walked the property and found that some of the ponds had been filled. Before Mr. Almeida wants to proceed, he wants an updated drawing showing the size of the ponds and how far they are from the property lines. He also wants a stormwater plan. People at Osprey Ridge are complaining they are subject to flooding. The ponds have been filled and there is no retention capacity, and the result is flooding.

    Mr. Almeida said he saw conflicting views on the traffic studies that were done. Rezoning of the property would not be fair to the owner. On the other hand, if the project is developed in its entirety, the community would suffer further added traffic problems.

    Mr. Harrison brought the audience up to date on the studies that were done by Kimley-Horn and Benchmark, Inc. on the traffic situation at Coast Guard Rd., Hwy 58 and Reed Drive. He said there was some differing information, but other information was much in line with what the other firm recommended.

    The most seemingly logical idea was a right turn lane off Hwy 58 to the south to access the McLean property and on to Coast Guard Road near the Pebble Beach entrance. However, NC DOT will not permit such an exit off Hwy 58.

    Mr. Harrison went on to read the recommendations that were discussed by the board;

    1. That improvements to Coast Guard Rd. from approximately Pebble Beach To NC 58, as described in the reports from Kimley-Horn and BenchmarkEngineering, be considered by the BOC, and that these recommendations for improvements be implemented as soon as possible.
    2. That the Town contact NC DOT regarding lengthening the right turn lane onto Coast Guard Road, and other improvements to this intersection, and the light signal in general.
    3. That the Town enter discussions with Mr. Ronnie Watson for the purposes of considering re-routing the camper trailer traffic flow from Coast Guard Rd to Islander Dr.
    4. That BOC require the PB to examine the potential stormwater problems and solutions associated with the potential development in this area in general.
    5. That the Town require any development in this general area to be in compliance with the State of North Carolina’s Phase II 2001 Environmental Standards.
    6. That the Town consider immediately adopting the proposed ordinance written by Benchmark Engineering which would require that large commercial developments greater than a defined square footage be considered as a Special Use.
    7. That the Town consider designating a specific, and as yet undefined region of the Town’s entryway from the West as a "Gateway Area" subject to certain density, visual and screening standards. This area would roughly include both sides of NC 58 from the Town’s western limit on to an, as yet, undefined point, possibly Islander Drive.
    8. The Planning Board does not approve the request of the owners of this parcel to subdivide the 1.73 acre portion on the NC 58 side of Reed Drive Extension.

    Mr. McLaughlin said he felt the future development could only be done in conjunction with infrastructure development of the road. Rather than to let it be developed then try to figure out the road system. He went on to say that if traffic were to have a negative impact on real estate values on Coast Guard Road, it should be downzoned.

    David Schock supported the issue of the "Gateway Area" for the trees and flora on both sides of Hwy 58. The work on Coast Guard road must be planned and approved prior to any future development. He does not consider the LOS-D (Level of Service – D) an acceptable level for that intersection. (A being best with descending level of service.)

    Mr. Harrison said the traffic volume of Coast Guard Road would largely increase by approximately 6,600 cars per day.

    Ceil Saunders said she felt that there should be a budget item for the improvement of Coast Guard Road before they look at any development. Also, to keep in mind that the jogging and bike trails must be maintained.

    Mr. Harrison went on to recommend that the property immediately adjacent to Hwy 58 on both the North and South side remain B-3; but to rezone the interior portion to RMH (residential motel-hotel). This would abut RMH to RMH at the townhouses at Osprey Ridge. Reed Drive would separate the business zone from the RMH.

    Ms. Paxon Holz, trustee for McLean Residuary Trust, made the statement that she appreciated the hours of study given to topic. However, she wanted to say that the survey that was sent out some months ago, regarding business zoning, that the response was overwhelming to remain as it is. You are proposing to down zone when your own citizens say to let it remain the same.

    Ceil Saunders said she is concerned with the location of the property. Ms. Holz replied that this property would be included within this survey.

    Ms. Holz said she was opposed to any down zoning. She feels it is spot zoning.

    Mr. Gus Farmakidis rebutted with another survey and rephrase the question.

    Ms. Georgia Murray, owner of Bridgeview Campground, asked that no down zoning be done. She wants to be notified if there should ever be any such consideration.

    Mr. Bill Reist is concerned that only the southern portion of this intersection is being considered, and that both sides of Hwy 58 should be considered.

    Ms. Dorothy Marks said she had written some time ago requesting that the bike and jogging trail be installed and that there was a problem with the width of right-of-way.

    Mr. Allen, Town Manager, said that is correct, the right-of-way is 60’ wide after the intersection of Reed Drive. To do additional lanes, an additional portion of land would have to be purchased from the north or south side of the road. Ms. Marks asked what the width of the road is, and that measurement is not known.

    Mr. Farmakidis then recommended that if and when additional surveys are to be provided for these properties that the developer not be the one to pay for the survey. He said you may as well concede to whatever they want, and you know that. Those people have enough money to get any answer they want. The surveyors will represent anyone who pays the money.

    Rick Farrington asked that someone approach the crews at Hwy 24 and 58 to see if they will come over when they finish that intersection and work on the Town’s situation since they are this close.

    Mr. Tony Brilakis asked if there was a specific plan to develop these properties? The response was that there is not, only for subdivision of the property.

    Commissioner Wootten asked for elaboration of the Special Use recommended by Benchmark, Inc.

    Mr. Harrison said it would take into account the disruption of pedestrian flow, exceeding capacity of traffic, visual impacts.

    Commissioner Wootten responded that the Special Use at some point as the property was incrementally developed it could reach a maximum traffic impact on the town to the point that is was not satisfactory. At that point we could say "No" as a means of controlling how the property is developed. Mr. Harrison agreed in a manner of speaking that is correct; however, there are a number of other factors that would enter into it.

    Louis Hernandez addressed the board to say that he is a Marine at Camp Lejeune who chose to live in Emerald Isle and not in Jacksonville because what makes it all worthwhile is the first thing he sees when he comes over the bridge is the trees. He doesn’t want to see Subways and T-shirt shops.

    Mr. McLaughlin said he felt that an up to date survey be submitted with the wet lands being delineated.

    Motions was made by David Schock, second by Ed Dowling to recommend to the Town Board, based on the traffic studies, the list of considerations for their approval;
    1. That improvements to Coast Guard Rd. from approximately Pebble Beach to NC 58, as described in the reports from Kimley-Horn and Benchmark Engineering, be considered by the BOC, and that these recommendations for improvements be implemented as soon as possible.
    2. That the Town contact NC DOT regarding lengthening the right turn lane onto Coast Guard Road, and other improvements to this intersection, and the light signal in general.
    3. That the Town enter discussions with Mr. Ronnie Watson for the purposes of considering re-routing the camper trailer traffic flow from Coast Guard Rd to Islander Dr.
    4. That BOC require the PB to examine the potential stormwater problems and solutions associated with the potential development in this area in general.
    5. That the Town require any development in this general area to be in compliance with the State of North Carolina’s Phase II 2001 Environmental Standards.
    6. That the Town consider immediately adopting the proposed ordinance written by Benchmark Engineering which would require that large commercial developments greater than a defined square footage be considered as a Special Use.
    7. That the Town consider designating a specific, and as yet undefined region of the Town’s entryway from the West as a "Gateway Area" subject to certain density, visual and screening standards. This area would roughly include both sides of NC 58 from the Town’s western limit on to an, as yet, undefined point, possibly Islander Drive.
    8. The Planning Board does not approve the request of the owners of this parcel to subdivide the 1.73 acre portion on the NC 58 side of Reed Drive Extension.

    The motion was unanimously approved in favor of the motion.

     

    Sign Ordinance Revision, Section 19-132 through 19-150. –

    Due to the volume of this ordinance, Chairman Harrison felt that the Board should have more time to review this ordinance. The members were asked to review the recommendations from the committee for discussion at the next meeting.

    Motion to adjourn made by Ed Dowling, second by George McLaughlin, with unanimous approval in favor of the motion.

Posted by The Town of Emerald Isle 12/07/2000

November 14, 2000 

Board of Commissioners
Posted by The Town of Emerald Isle 11/14/2000

November 13, 2000 

Planning Board

TOWN OF EMERALD ISLE MINUTES OF THE

REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING BOARD

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2000

 

Co-chairman, Ceil Saunders, called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.. Chairman, Cary Harrison was out of town, as well as Frank Vance and Fil Almeida. Members attending Ceil Saunders, Ed Dowling, George McLaughlin, and David Schock. This did constitute a quorum. Also present: Town Manager, Pete Allen; Secretary, Carol Angus.

Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of October 16, 2000 – George McLaughlin made the motion to approve the minutes, as written, second by Ed Dowling with unanimous approval in favor of the motion.

Report from Town Manager – Mr. Allen did not have any information from the Town Board since their regular meeting is scheduled for the following evening.

Report from Building Inspector – Ms. Angus advised that James Taylor, Building Inspector should be attending the December meeting. She advised that there were permits were up at:

10 Single family dwellings permitted valued over $2,500,000.00

OLD BUSINESS:

A. Sunset Harbor, Lot 2, Block 38, Final Plat – Mr. Ricky Farrington and Mr. Bill Farrington were present to represent this project. Ms. Saunders advised that the only change or addition to be made to this plat from the Review Committee was to add the length of the concrete walkway to Bogue Sound Drive. Ms. Angus indicated to the members that this addition has been made to the plat at a distance of 72.74’. There were no further questions regarding this project.

Motion to recommend approval to the Town Board of Commissioners of Sunset Harbor, Lot 2, was made by George McLaughlin with second by Ed Dowling with unanimous approval in favor of the motion.

B. Osprey Bluff S/D – Chairman Saunders asked that this item be moved down on the agenda in order to accommodate those persons making presentations regarding the traffic studies done by Benchmark, Inc., and Kemly-Horne, Inc.

Ed Dowling made the motion to move the presentations to be done to be moved up on the agenda and hear the Osprey Bluff following the presentations. Second by George McLaughlin with unanimous approval in favor of the motion.

 

Mr. Andy Owens with Kimley-Horn, Inc. – gave an extensive presentation on the plan that the firm had developed for the Town. Kimley-Horn has been looking at the Coast Guard Road – Emerald Drive intersection for several months. They began with a traffic impact analysis of the signal itself. The conclusion was, that even with the high-density development, that the signal itself, with some minor improvements, could function adequately. Then the concern was turned to Coast Guard Road to see if it was able to handle the traffic as it exists or with possible improvments.

There was a map displayed that indicated a southbound lane (right lane) off Hwy 58 that ran south to exit onto Coast Guard Road lining up at approximately the entrance to Pebble Beach. (This would eliminate the existing Reed Dr. Ext ) Mr. Owens felt that the NC DOT might be agreeable to allowing this exit off of Hwy 58, especially if the town were to also write to make this request. He has had some exceptions made to access availability, even if additional access had previously been denied.

Mr. Owens felt that one access, or even two, on one road is going to handle the amount of traffic in the distance that is available. That was the reason they had proposed to split the traffic between two points. The proposed plan does split the property and it may not be the best situation for the developer, they may want the roadway shifted. This will reduce left turns into a road that has no signal. The plan proposed would reduce left turn volume by 40%.

The proposal shows widening of Coast Guard Rd to maximize the right-of-way, to allow for continuous left turn lanes in both directions and extending the existing left turn lane already in place to the campground.

Mr. Owens then made some additional comments regarding the proposal. One of the major items was to consider the Trav-L-Park to move their registration to the south side of Reed Drive during the heaviest tourist season to allow the long vehicles to make their left turn directly into the park to register. Three vehicles backed up can possibly be 180’.

Mr. Schock was concerned about the feasibility of D.O.T. allowing another turn lane off of Hwy. 58. Mr. Owens said he felt that there is a good case for this particular request.

Ms. Saunders said her concern is the beach traffic in the summer that is exiting the island on just the one lane, that could be a mess. Mr. Owens said that may be a problem, but it won’t be corrected by this study, they only concentrated on the Coast Guard Road side of Hwy 58.

There was some clarification given to the breakdown of the acreage of the commercial tract being considered. The entire tract is 7.3 acres. There was a misconception that the southern portion of the property was 7.3 acres in addition to the portion north of Reed Drive Ext.

Mr. Dowling was concerned about the power poles in the area. Mr. Owens said there is one large pole that may be a factor, or it may not be. Right now they don’t know. Mr. Dowling also had a question on the right-of-way of Hwy 58. Mr. Pete Allen explained to him about the 200’ right-of-way. Mr. Dowling then asked about the concern for pedestrian access as well as bicycle and jogging paths by Ms. Dorothy Marks. Mr. Owens said if had been discussed briefly, however, not pursued. A hashed crosswalk at the campground and at Pebble Beach. Mr. Owens said he thought there would be enough room to maintain the jogging/bicycle paths.

Ms. Marks addressed the safety issue of people, especially young people, being in the area of the blind curve. With pedestrians and a car turning left into Pebble Beach is a potential for an accident. Mr. Owens said that could be helped by the dedicated left turn lane into Pebble Beach. The blind curve could be cut back through development.

Ms. Marks asked with the traffic study was done and for how long a period of time? Mr. Owens said he did it himself on Labor Day Monday from 11:00 a.m. until 2:00 p.m. They felt that should be a peak period and he saw a tremendous amount of trailers checking out. The back-ground data was also used from D.O.T.

Commissioner Trainham was concerned about a 12’ median being shown on his map; this has since been changed to 4’. It can be anywhere from 4’ to 12’ feet, the rendering is only a suggestion and can be readily changed to fit the roadway.

Mr. Owens said that he did not think maintaining the Reed Dr. Ext would be a good idea. If it is maintained, to make it a right turn in and right turn out situation to avoid congestion.

Commissioner Farmer asked if the location of the wetlands can be determined by the rendering Mr. Owens has? The response was that wetlands cannot be determined at this time. She asked what one or two access points be able to handle? Mr. Owens replied one access is not sufficient to handle B-3 zoning, worst case scenario which would be a 70,000 sq. ft. super market and 10,000 sq. ft. of additional retail or fast food or bank. He did not think a 20,000 sq. ft. super market would be a problem.

Mr. William Reist, resident, asked what discussion may have been given to the northern portion of Hwy 58. There is a large piece of property there with B-3 zoning. Mr. Owens said he did not consider that, they were not asked for any portion north of the highway. He said he could look into that and make some suggestions; but had little knowledge of the area right now.

Commissioner Wootten asked he understood that the widening of Coast Guard Road was contained within the 60’ right-of-way? He felt that the right-of-way would have to be 80’. This would help the joggers and bikers.

Mr. Gus Farmakidis, resident, asked if any consideration was given to rezoning the property to residential? It’s obvious that when he tries to leave the island traffic will be bad, and now it will be worse because some "clown" wants to build there. Mr. Owens said they did traffic count and signal function, but no consideration was given to that question. He is not in a position to tell someone how to develop their property.

Mr. Michael Harvey, with Benchmark, Inc. then addressed the Planning Board. He focused initially on Land Use Options. They do agree with Kimley-Horn in a lot of issues. The first idea was to rezone the property to a lower density. It makes the most sense; however, it would put the town in an adversarial relationship with the owner. It is their property zoned B-3 a long time. The second suggestion, to develop an internal migration pattern for the property for vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Then to amend the ordinance to put the developer on notice to solve this problem and be a part of the process. There are a number suggestions they have made, some being travel aisle widths, joint exits, one unified entrance, and the major ingress/egress point should be opposite the entrance to Pebble Beach.

Mr. Harvey also suggested that DOT put a light at that intersection. He felt it approvable.

Benchmark felt Reed Drive should be developed to allow only ingress and right turn OUT, no left turn. Some internal traffic pattern be generated to direct traffic into the proposed new road (across from Pebble Beach). Mr. Harvey said some of their ultimate suggestions mirror Kimley-Horn, Inc. He said he had been told that there would be no possibility of an entrance or exit would be possible off Hwy 58, so it was not looked at. Benchmark looked at what the town now has and can do with Reed Drive.

Benchmark advocates that Reed Dr. be a one-way entrance only access. This will allow access to the three proposed lots on Hwy 58 and will act as an internal mitigation driveway to the entire acreage. Then direct traffic around a 70,000 sq. ft. retail development (worst scenario) for emergency vehicles and tractor trailer trucks. Exit to be at same area as Pebble Beach for left and right lanes. Also to develop Coast Guard Road to have three traffic lanes; two lanes as existing and one holding lane. (Mr. Harvey then referred to Kimley-Horn map for some time pointing to the mentioned map, as he proceeded.) Mr. Harvey did agree that pedestrian and cycle traffic is a concern and should be addressed due to the congestion.

Mr. Harvey recommended that the town adopt an ordinance to require certain "traffic standards" by which roadways are approved, what type of materials, etc. in hand with the traffic pattern.

Barring rezoning the best bet is to extend Reed Drive to enter only and exit opposite Pebble Beach and to petition DOT to put a light at the intersection to exit. Sidewalks also should be installed.

He felt the Kimley-Horn idea of an access off Hwy 58 is a wonderful idea, if it can be approved.

Mr. Harvey gave the audience a few scenarios of what might be developed and density that could be proposed.

Commissioner Farmer asked if it is a viable option to rezone this property? Mr Harvey, replied it is, but there is a caveat to that. You can impose an overlay on anything you wish; however, you have to have an arguable and justifiable reason to rezone. Other than the wetlands, he does not know of any other condition that is germane to this property. Benchmark would be happy to give the town ideas on how to handle that. If a traffic circulation plan ordinance would be adopted it would apply to all B-3, not just the area of this property.

Commissioner Farmer asked if a condition could be considered for aesthetics as well as traffic?

Mr. Harvey replied that it could, as this is the town entrance and the board of commissioners and planning board could try to word it in such a way that they don’t want the entrance cluttered with "x", "y", "z". This method would take a long time in producing your result.

Mr. Farmakidis asked a question regarding the proposal previously submitted by Kimley-Horn which Mr. Harvey could not answer because the proposal before them was not a Benchmark plan. Mr. Harvey went on to advise that the Kimley-Horn option ought to be investigated.

Commissioner Wootten asked Mr. Harvey to explain a "limited use permit" phrase that was in the first submittal from Benchmark. Mr. Harvey said it would require certain uses to get limited permits, based on their compliance with the regulations, as well as exceeding the regulations.

An example would be if a developer went "beyond the call of duty" the limited use could be expanded.

Mr. Ed Dowling asked if Benchmark could supply the overlay district concept, and the commissioners asked for internal traffic circulation plan, rezoning traffic standard. Mr. Harvey replied that they could "easily". It would probably be available the next week.

Mr. Dowling said "This cost would be passed on to the developer, not the town?" But Mr. Harvey said "No, the cost would have to be absorbed by the town."

Commissioner Farmer asked whether rezoning could be considered spot zoning? Mr. Harvey said the sections surrounding this property is RMH, which would mean rezoning to RMH would make it contiguous to that zone. If the town attorney were to be comfortable with rezoning to a residential zone (R-2), he is the one who would have to defend it in court. Downzoning to B-1 would arguably not be upheld. However, the town attorney would have the last word, but there is no B-1 zoning contiguous to this property.

There was some discussion regarding the cost of such an extension of this project. At Mayor Harris’ request for the present costs, Mr. Allen said it has cost almost $15,000 so far for both reports. Ms. Harris is concerned about the taxpayer paying for these fees, and the developer is "home free". Mr. Harvey said Benchmark has charged approximately $4,500 to date.

Mr. Allen asked that Mr. Harvey contact him for an estimated cost of continuing this project.

Mayor Harris asked if the developer has contacted Benchmark, Inc. Mr. Harvey said they have not, and he does not know who the developer is, and he does not care to know. It is not germane to this discussion.

Mr. Harvey added that if a plan has been submitted, the town cannot take any action to rezone that property. This was in response to a question by Mr. Farmakidis.

Mr. Schock went on to add that he feels the money would be well spent to continue this study.

Osprey Bluff S/D, 12-lots, Block 43, North of Osprey Ridge – Mr. Larry Spell was in attendance for this project. The board went over the eight questions Mr. Almeida had regarding stormwater.

There was considerable concern about the stabilization of lot 12. The members felt that rather than to make a recommendation to the Town Board, that an engineer look at the stabilization for that lot and appear again before the Review Committee. At that time if this stabilization is addressed that a Special Meeting may be held to allow this project to proceed to the Town Board in the same time frame, being their December 12, 2000 meeting. Mr. Spell advised the members that should any portion of the project not suit the Building Inspector he will not allow the Final Plat to be approved until it meets his approval.

There was discussion that stormwater plans should be required for every development in Emerald Isle to contain their first 1 ½" of stormwater. Ms. Angus advised that the Inspectors require, currently, that a plan be submitted for such stormwater; however, they are not engineers and do not know if the plan submitted is adequate.

The members were concerned that an amendment be put in place to require that single-family and duplex projects submit a stormwater plan that will accommodate the 1 ½ " of stormwater the same as for commercial projects.

Motion was made by David Schock to recommend the Osprey Bluff, S/D, to return to the Review Committee on Wednesday, November 15, 2000 to address the stormwater and stabilization concern with lot 12. Second by George McLaughlin, with unanimous approval in favor of the motion.

JTW, INC. Block 15, 4-lot Commercial S/D Preliminary and Final Plat – Mr. Joe Donnehoo represented this project.

This Preliminary plat had appeared before the Planning Board in the past; however, only one member was on the board at that time. Secretary Angus advised the engineer that the Preliminary Plat be resubmitted with the Final Plat to allow the entire board to be aware of what had transpired and be able to make a confident decision. Mr. Donnehoo said he had drawn a separate stormwater plan that will be recorded with each of the lots. This will be an assurance that each new owner knows, in advance, the depth to which he must go to develop the lots.

The Motion was made by Ed Dowling to proceed to the Review Committee with this project, second by David Schock with unanimous approval in favor of the motion.

Motion to adjourn made by David Schock, second by George McLaughlin with unanimous approval in favor of the motion.

Respectfully submitted:

Posted by The Town of Emerald Isle 11/13/2000

October 16, 2000 

Planning Board

TOWN OF EMERALD ISLE

REGULAR PLANNING BOARD MEETING

MONDAY, OCTOBER 16, 2000

 

 

The meeting was called to order by Co-chairman, Ceil Saunders. Members present were:

Ceil Saunders, Phil Almeida, George McLaughlin, Ed Dowling, Frank Vance, and David Schock and Secretary, Carol Angus. Chairman, Cary Harrison was out of town.

Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting September 18, 2000 – Motion to approve the minutes was made by Phil Almeida, second by Ed Dowling with the correction to add a word in a quote by Gus Farmakidis. The motion was unanimously approved. (Replay of the tape verified that Mr. Farmakidis did not finish his quote).

Approval of Minutes of Special Meeting, October 09, 2000 – Motion to approve the minutes was made by George McLaughlin, second by Phil Almeida with unanimous approval in favor of the motion.

Report from Town Manager – Mr. Pete Allen was attending another meeting out of town and had submitted a report of the decisions and business before the Town Board of Commissioners on Tuesday, October 11, 2000.

Report from Building Inspector – Ms. Angus reported to the board that building permits for the month of September had continued to drop with only three single family residences being permitted and a total estimated value for all permits of just over $1,000,000.00.

OLD BUSINESS:

Letter of recommendation to the Board of Commissioners regarding rezoning of current RMH (Residential/Motel/Hotel) Zoning to R-2 (One and Two family dwellings). Mr. Schock had submitted a copy of the committee’s letter to each member. The committee felt that public awareness was the best manner to approach this situation. The primary reason being that it would avoid any legal confrontation with any current landowners. The second reason is the cost which would be a minimal benefit when it could be handled by notifying all the homeowners associations or subdivision developers that this could be an infringement on their residential properties. An awareness campaign would be much more cost effective. The subdivisions that currently have covenants, if it is not already written into the documents, should add an amendment to disallow any potential hotel or motel use being able to buy up the individual property for such use.

Any subdivision not having covenants might find it to their best interest to draw such and article for their property.

Mr. Dowling asked if the next step would be to proceed with this letter to the Town Attorney prior to it being forwarded to the Town Board of Commissioners. Mr. Schock replied that it should be forwarded to the attorney. Mr. Schock said it doesn’t propose any arena where there could be legal confrontation.

Mr Schock went on to say that the Board of Commissioners was concerned about the possibility that a large corporation could purchase the RMH land, or, already built-on property in a group, to use for a motel or hotel. After conversations with Mr. Allen and some of the "legal minds" that define zoning, it gets into a highly volatile issue.

Ms. Saunders advised that since the Boards had lowered the building heights, that this would not be practical because it would cut into a corporate "dollar per acre" issue for how much they could profit by such and project. Also, without septic system being available, they would have to purchase such a large portion of land to use as septic field that it would be cost prohibitive.

Mr. Schock thinks a good campaign directed at letting the subdivision property owners know of their zoning and eliminate it through their covenants. Letters could be sent to the Property Owners Associations to alert them of this possibility. Also to do an article in the Island Review , the quarterly Emerald Tidings, and post it on the web site. Some covenants have already incorporated this into their documents, Lands End for one.

Motion was made by Ed Dowling to forward the letter submitted to the Board of Commissioners for their next meeting, second by Frank Vance with unanimous approval in favor of the motion.

NEW BUSINESS:

Bill Farrington represented this project.

Mr. Dowling said he saw no bulkheading on the slope and the other two sites had no bulkheading. He wanted to know if this board should delve into that issue.

Rick Farrington said bulkheads are highly controversial by the environmentalists.

He advised that they are encouraging the growth of beach grasses on the slopes.

There was some discussion about the water retention system for water runoff regarding how well done the system was around each building.

Mr. Dowling said he was concerned about the concrete slab for the project. Mr. Bill Farrington said that sand had all been compacted and allowed to set for six months or so, so that rain and weather will help with further compaction. Rick said there have been no washouts, even with all the rain we’ve had this season.

Mr. Almeida said he wanted to look at existing and final grades on the lot. He wanted to see the methods for storm drainage. He was advised that these maps are on file with the Inspections Department. Mr. Almeida wants the dimension of the concrete walk toward Bogue Sound, the width and length. That will be added to the revised map for the next review process.

Motion to recommend this project to the Review Committee on October 18 was made by Phil Almeida with second by David Schock, with unanimous approval in favor of the motion.

Mr. Larry Spell, developer, was in attendance for any questions the board may have.

Mr. McLaughlin asked if this project is near the "big hill"? He was advised by Mr. Spell that it "is" the big hill that the only disturbance will be to install the road and shoulders to access the 12 lots. The street will be a steep grade and the various lots undulate at the top of the hill.

The drainage plan is designated by arrows to show how the water will flow. It goes down the hill to a pre-existing culvert that is under the road to ditches along sides of the other road, through another culvert under Osprey Ridge Rd to another culvert that flows to the wetlands. The properties from the cul-de-sac will flow from an easement to the east to the wetlands area.

Mr. Almeida said (1) he does not see finished grades on the plan. Two (2) he is concerned about whether the culvert is adequate to carry that capacity. And, (3) there may be an erosion problem as development begins. What are the plans for erosion problems?

Mr. Spell said the street shoulders will be sodded.

Mr. Almeida said the finished grades are not clearly marked on the map he has; there is a lot of information in a small area. He went on to ask that, even though the map is to scale, that it might be advisable to have a larger map done to make it easier to read the information and contours. Mr. Spell said he would talk to Mr. McLean about doing that for the board.

Mr. Almeida tried to clarify what he was requesting; that a longitudinal section be prepared showing the slope along the road; i.e. how steep it is coming down. Then a profile how the erosion of the sides of the road will be controlled.

He also wants to be sure the culvert has adequate capacity for this much water.

He wants to see the computations to that end.

Mr. Dowling asked if there would be any work done in the 404 wetland area. Mr. Spell replied that that area will not be touched.

Motion was made by Phil Almeida to forward Osprey Bluffs to Review Committee, second by George McLaughlin, with unanimous approval.

  1. Sunset Harbor Condominiums, Lot 2, Block 38, Final Plat – Rick Farrington,
  2. Osprey Bluff, Block 43 North, 12-lot subdivision, Preliminary Plat –

COMMENTS:

Mr. Larry Spell wanted to make the comment related to rezoning from RMH to R2 that in all the projects he had developed, that the protective covenants would preclude the assumption of the subdivision as a motel or hotel use. He wanted to voice the opinion that he agreed with the Planning Board that the letter to not recommend rezoning was the best method to do, and to make property owners aware.

Mr. David Schock said that the west end of the island has the majority of any RMH that is undeveloped, Mr. Spell owning a portion of that. Mr. Spell said there is not enough of his property to make it feasible for such a use.

**********************************************************************

Vice-Chairman Saunders advised that additional information is forthcoming from Kemly-Horne regarding the traffic study to be done at Coast Guard and Emerald Drive by November 02, 2000.

Mr. Schock said he is still amazed that tax dollars were spent on the previous study and no resolution or suggestions were submitted by Kemly-Horne or Benchmark. We know we have a problem and have to do something, but they offered only an early September traffic count.

Mr. Dowling said he thought D.O.T. had given the best information and study. He felt that the two studies that were done had let everybody down. No safety, no sidewalk studies, no pedestrian comment, and suggestions for the blind curve and for drainage.

Commissioner Wootten added that the original intent was to determine what level of development the property could take. A lot of good points have been brought up, but the level of development is the first issue. The road needs to be improved, with an 80’ right of way all the way around the bend. He agreed that possibly the questions had not been asked correctly with the two firms.

Mr. Schock said he thought the firms would know what was wanted.

Commissioner Wootten reminded the members that a window of up to 18 months will be required by D.O.T. for their study. Possibly the developer should be a part of the solution.

Mr. Almeida said that the Kemly-Horne study was in conflict with the D.O.T. study, which said there would be acceptable level of service when the land was built out. He has been here on weekends in the summer and seen the traffic jams, that is not an accept-able level of service.

Mr. Rick Farrington and Bill Farrington advised the members of the regulations they have had to abide by in their pursuit of any development.

Mr. Almeida gave a background of the way the development has been done along Coast Guard Road. The plan to help the problem will be quite costly. Does the town want to hold the line at the present time and not make it worse?

Mr. Almeida read from a lengthy prepared statement (copy with these minutes). The end result to be that the Planning Board should require that a plan be submitted that shows how the project will contain the storm runoff. Mr. Almeida also had examples of land that had been filled, inspections done, and now some years later, that the houses are cracking.

Mr. Almeida then made the following suggestions:

  • If an owner wants to fill ponds or wetlands, they must provide a new retention basin of equal capacity. It should be above the water table.

    Examine 5 or 6 permits for fill and see if any improvements can be made. This is not to prevent filling, but to fill in a properly defined manner to not cause a problem to the neighbor or to the town.

There was then additional discussion between Mssrs. Farrington, Commissioner Wootten, and Planning Board Members. One of the issues Commissioner Wootten addressed was that the Inspections Dept. does not have the personnel or the tools to do stormwater plans, in house, for single family and duplex residences. The commercial projects are done by engineers. He asked that some engineering input be put toward residential lots.

Ms. Saunders said that those who fill property should not be able to create a problem for an adjoining neighbor, to gain an ocean view.

Some of the Emerald Isle residents made comments regarding their particular subdivi-sions or properties in regard to flooding.

Motion to adjourn made by Ed Dowling, second by Fil Almeida, with unanimous approval in favor of the motion.

Posted by The Town of Emerald Isle 10/16/2000

October 10, 2000 

Posted by The Town of Emerald Isle 10/10/2000
Page 130 of 136 << < 30 70 100 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 > >>

Archives