Wilmington Design Adjustment Committee Meeting – January 17, 2024
Wilmington Design Adjustment Committee Meeting – January 17, 2024
The Design Adjustment Committee of Wilmington, NC met on January 17, 2024 at 1:33 p.m. in City Council Chambers at Skyline Center. Vice-Chair Denys Vielkanowitz presided with members Travis Henley, Chris Elrod, Carel Vandermeyden, and Eric Seidel present. The committee considered two requests for design adjustments from the city's technical standards. Both were approved unanimously (5-0). The meeting adjourned at 2:40 p.m.
Consent Calendar
- Minutes from the regular meeting of December 13, 2023 were approved unanimously.
Public Comments
Cape Landing (516 & 520 Mosley Street):
- Karl Boykin (Manley Avenue resident) expressed concerns about a lack of sidewalks on Mosley Street and an unpaved section north of the site. He noted the development serves senior citizens and asked about plans for paving.
Xanadu (4606-4612 Patrick Avenue):
- James Robinson (one Quick Stone Lane) argued the development would depreciate property values in a historically middle-class Black neighborhood. He stated the project felt like a "done deal" against residents' wishes.
- John Wilder (4607 Patrick Ave, retired Marine, 46-year resident) expressed concerns about overcrowding, emergency access (fire truck turnaround), loss of a wind buffer from trees, and potential negative impact on property values.
- Elijah Burr (4628 Patrick Ave) raised concerns about a large live oak tree split between his property and a neighbor's near the proposed cul-de-sac and sought details on the survey regarding his fenced backyard.
- Anastasia Ferrell (owner of an adjacent lot) requested the road be extended for easier emergency services access for her grandfather, citing an incident where a van got stuck on the existing dirt road.
- Ina McDonald (4614 Patrick Ave) questioned the road configuration and a red circle near her property; she also noted a previous developer removed part of her fence.
- Janie Jenkins (4613 Patrick Ave) expressed concerns about backing out of her driveway into a new intersection and increased traffic.
- Janice Pool (address not stated) expressed safety concerns.
- Carol Young (Kerr Avenue) highlighted increased traffic hazards on Kerr and Patrick Avenues, lack of a traffic light, and risk to children.
Discussion Items
1. Cape Landing – Request for Design Adjustment (Driveway Length) Staff planner Patrick O'Mahony presented the request to exceed the 500-foot maximum private driveway length by 115 feet (proposed 615 feet) for a 60-unit affordable senior housing project on an undeveloped 7.87-acre site zoned R-5 (proposed MD-10(CD)). Applicant Howard Resnick (CSD Engineering) explained limited access options due to wetlands and an unimproved section of Mosley Street to the north. Committee discussed secondary access, sidewalk improvements along Mosley Street, and the lack of connectivity to adjacent parcels. Public comment addressed sidewalk absence. The committee found the driveway length justified by topography and site constraints.
- Motion: Eric Seidel moved to approve the adjustment, seconded by Captain Chris Elrod.
- Vote: Approved 5-0.
2. Xanadu – Request for Design Adjustments (Non-Standard Street Design) Staff planner Miranda Frantz presented six requested adjustments to the city's technical standards for a local street serving five proposed residential lots on an existing 30-foot-wide public right-of-way. The adjustments included: a 30-foot right-of-way instead of 40 feet; sidewalk on one side only (instead of both); no plaza between sidewalk and curb; a 35-foot horizontal centerline radius (standard 100 feet); zero-foot tangent length between horizontal curves (standard 100 feet); and a 621-foot cul-de-sac length (standard 500 feet maximum). Applicant Cindee Wolf (Design Solutions) provided history and design rationale. Committee discussed tree preservation (especially a large live oak near the cul-de-sac), sidewalks, drainage, and off-site impacts. Public comment reflected concerns.
- Motion: Vice-Chair Vielkanowitz moved to approve adjustments 1–4 and 6, and to conditionally approve adjustment 5 (cul-de-sac length) with the condition that impacts on any vegetation or significant trees at the end of the cul-de-sac be lessened through the Technical Review Committee (TRC) process. Seconded by Carel Vandermeyden.
- Vote: Approved 5-0.
- Separate Motion: Vice-Chair Vielkanowitz moved to conditionally approve the preliminary plan with staff conditions and justification of access within existing right-of-way. Seconded by Captain Elrod.
- Vote: Approved 5-0.
Key Outcomes
- Both design adjustment requests were approved unanimously (5-0).
- The next regular meeting of the Design Adjustment Committee is scheduled for February 21, 2024.
Meeting Transcript
We'll bring the meeting of the design adjustment committee to order. Um I need to read a statement for the group here, the large group. Uh the meaning of the design adjustment committee will now come to order. The DAC's purpose is to establish clear and measurable review criteria for the consideration of major deviations from the city's tech standards and specifications manual, building design, material standards, and subdivision standards. The DAC does not consider the housing type, the cost of the unit, occupants, building materials, unit size, number of bedrooms, or the architectural design of the structures. These hearings are quasi judicial evidentiary hearings. It means it's like a court hearing and the committee's decisions are constrained by the standards and the ordinance and based on the facts presented. All variants request require a four-fifths vote of the committee. Appeals of the DAC decisions are to the superior court. A written notice of appeal must be filed with the city clerk within 30 days of the DAC's decision. Appeals are set before set for hearing before the board of before the superior court within 30 days or soon thereafter as practicable. The parties to these cases are entitled to an impartial board. If a board member has a fixed opinion about a matter, a financial interest in the outcome, a close relationship with an affected person, or has 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 DAC and the DAC members may ask questions. The applicant may present additional information about a project and the members may ask questions. If anyone wishes to speak today, please sign in like on the clipboard in the back and be ready to be sworn in. If I could have every applicant, staff, and anyone who wishes to speak today to please stand up and raise your right hand. Please note that if you are not sworn in, you would you would need to be sworn in in order to speak. Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you. So in respect to everyone that was just sworn in that wishes to talk, um, please focus on the facts and the standards that are presented today. This this meeting is intended to discuss the variances that are being requested to our technical standards. When a witness comes forward, please give your testimony. To give your testimony, please come to the podium first and then state your name and address for the record. And please speak clearly. At this time, staff will administer. Oh, we just administered the sorry about that. So the first order of business is the approval of the previous meeting minutes. Did everybody have a chance to read through the minutes? Does it have anybody have any comments? No comments. Is there a motion to approve? So moved. All right, motion to approve. Is there a second? Second. All right. Everybody in favor of approval. Say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. All right, that brings us to the first item on today's agenda. Good afternoon, Chair, members of the committee. Um, this first item uh is for design adjustments located at 516 and 520 Mosley Street. Um, the site contains approximately 7.87 acres. Um currently zoned R5, medium density mixed residential district. Um they are proposing a rezoning uh with this request uh to be heard after the DAC decision. Umly scheduled for next month's planning commission meeting.
openpublica.com