Wilmington Design Adjustment Committee Meeting – November 16, 2022
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Wilmington Design Adjustment Committee Meeting – November 16, 2022
The Design Adjustment Committee of Wilmington met on November 16, 2022, at approximately 1:30 p.m. (the agenda listed 1:15 p.m., but minutes recorded a 1:30 p.m. start) in City Council Chambers to consider adjustments to technical standards for three development proposals. The meeting included approvals of minutes, a continued project, a continuance request, and a new request.
Consent Calendar
- Minutes Approval: The minutes from the September 21, 2022 special meeting and the October 19, 2022 regular meeting were approved unanimously (5-0) with no corrections.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Proximity at Watermark: No members of the public spoke during the public hearing for this item.
- 5067 & 5069 Peachtree Avenue: Craig Newzack (address: 5054 Park Avenue) stated he had no objection to the road extension but asked whether the property would undergo a rezoning. Staff noted they would discuss the rezoning question after the meeting. Newzack also mentioned that about 100 trees had been removed from the lot, but this was not directly related to the adjustment request.
Discussion Items
1. Proximity at Watermark (Old Business – DAC-9-922)
The committee considered five adjustments for a proposed 248-unit multiple-dwelling residential development at 4126 River Road (rezoned to MD-17(CD)). The applicant, represented by Mike Brown, Brian Eckel, and Cindee Wolf, revised the plan after a continuance from October 19, 2022. The adjustments requested were:
- Relief from standard cross-section for a residential collector street: Reduce right-of-way from 60 ft to 50 ft, pavement width from 30 ft to 23 ft, and eliminate sidewalk on one side due to environmental constraints.
- Relief from minimum horizontal centerline curve radii: Reduce from 200 ft to 150 ft on the collector street due to environmental constraints.
- Relief from maximum cul-de-sac street length: Increase from 500 ft to 668 ft due to site constraints and alignment with a northern access drive.
- Relief from maximum private drive length: Increase from 800 ft to 1,614 ft due to internal circulation and site connectivity.
- Relief from minimum property line offset for a driveway along a major thoroughfare: Less than 75 ft due to limited frontage on River Road.
During discussion, Mr. Cramer expressed concerns about adjustments 3 and 4, arguing that a redesigned street layout could meet standards without variances. The committee debated whether a hardship existed. Mr. Vandermeyden and Chair Gordon supported the adjustments, citing topographic constraints (wetlands, river) and the need for efficient site circulation. The applicant noted that the northern access easement is shared with industrial users and cannot be dedicated as a public street without burdening other property owners.
2. Helmsdale Phase II (New Business – DAC-11-1122)
The applicant requested a continuance to the December 14, 2022 meeting. The committee unanimously (5-0) granted the continuance.
3. 5067 & 5069 Peachtree Avenue (New Business – DAC-12-1122)
The applicant, Steve Dutton, requested relief from the standard city cross-section for a minor residential street to extend an existing gravel road (Peachtree Avenue) to serve two vacant lots. The standard requires 16 ft pavement, curb, gutter, plazas, and sidewalks; the applicant proposed a 16-ft wide gravel road. The committee discussed drainage concerns, noting that gravel roads can cause runoff onto adjacent properties. Chair Gordon emphasized the need to address drainage through the right-of-way permit process.
Key Outcomes
- Proximity at Watermark:
- Adjustment 1 (cross-section): Approved 5-0 (motion by Gordon, second by Vandermeyden) based on environmental constraints.
- Adjustment 2 (curve radii): Approved 5-0 (motion by Gordon, second by Cramer) based on environmental constraints.
- Adjustment 5 (property line offset): Approved 5-0 (motion by Gordon, second by Cramer) based on limited frontage constraints.
- Adjustment 4 (private drive length): Approved 4-1 (motion by Gordon, second by Elrod; Cramer dissenting) based on internal circulation and site connectivity.
- Adjustment 3 (cul-de-sac length): Approved 4-1 (motion by Vandermeyden, second by Gordon; Cramer dissenting) based on site constraints, including proximity to wetlands and alignment of the northern access drive.
- Overall preliminary plan: Approved 5-0 (motion by Gordon, second by Vielkanowitz) with conditions outlined in the staff report. The plan does not specify public or private street status; the applicant indicated willingness to maintain it privately.
- Helmsdale Phase II: Continued to December 14, 2022 meeting (5-0).
- 5067 & 5069 Peachtree Avenue: Adjustment approved 5-0 (motion by Gordon, second by Vielkanowitz) with the condition that drainage be addressed through the right-of-way permit process.
The meeting adjourned at 2:46 p.m.
Meeting Transcript
What is it today? We'll call the meeting to the design adjustment committee to order. Before we get started, I have to read an introduction. The design adjustment committee's purpose is to establish clear and measurable review criteria for the consideration of major deviations from the city's technical standards and specifications manual. These hearings are quasi-judicial evidentiary hearings. That means it's like a court hearing. Appeals of the design adjustment committee are to the board of adjustment. A written notice must be filed with the city clerk within 30 days of the committee's decision. Appeals are set for hearing before the Board of Adjustment within 30 days or as soon thereafter as practicable. The parties of the of these cases are entitled to an impartial board. If a board member has a fixed opinion about the matter or financial interest in the outcome, a close relationship with the affected person, or has had any ex parte communication about the matter. Please disclose that information to determine if a recusal is necessary. City staff will introduce the proposed project to the committee, and the committee members may ask questions. The applicant may present additional information about the project, and the members may ask questions. If anyone wishes to provide evidence at today's hearing, witnesses must sign in at the clipboard in the back of the room and be sworn in. Because witnesses are to provide sworn testimony. Please focus on the facts and standards, not personal preference or opinion. When a witness comes forward to give testimony, please come to the podium, state your name and address for the record, and speak clearly. At this time, staff will administer the oath for any individuals who intend to provide testimony. If I could have staff applicants and members of the public who wish to speak today, to please stand, raise your right hand. Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you. First item on the agenda is approval of the minutes. Ums anybody have any corrections? If not, do I have a motion? Motion to approve the minutes from the last meeting. I think we have two, the September 21st and uh the last meeting, October 19th. You want to do them both together? I think we can. Okay. Motion to approve uh both uh meeting meeting minutes from the prior two meetings. I'll second that. Any other discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Motion carries. That brings us to our first item, which is a continued item from our last meeting, proximity at Watermark. Brian. Good afternoon. Uh, this request was continued from your October 19th meeting. It's allow time for the applicant to adjust their plans based on the feedback they've received of the committee at that time. Again, this project includes approximately 40.45 acres. Um it's currently zoned MD 17 CD high density multi-dwelling residential and was recently approved for a 248 unit apartment development uh through rezoning. The project uh includes two access points, one on River Road, one at the intersection of independence, and one to the north near Coleman Drive. Uh there's the uh requested adjustments have been modified since the last meeting since the applicant is now introduced a new public street. Uh so the requested adjustments for you today are relief from the standard cross section for a residential collector street, relief from the minimum horizontal center line curve radii on a residential collector street, relief from the maximum length of a cul-de-sac, the maximum length of a private drive, and then relief from the minimum profit line offset for a driveway along a major thoroughfare. That's all that staff has at this time. I have answered any questions. The applicant is prepared to make a presentation as well. Any questions for Brian?
openpublica.com