Wilmington Design Adjustment Committee Meeting – July 17, 2024
Wilmington Design Adjustment Committee Meeting – July 17, 2024
The Design Adjustment Committee (DAC) of the City of Wilmington met on Wednesday, July 17, 2024, at 1:30 p.m. in City Council Chambers, Skyline Center, 929 North Front Street, Wilmington, NC. The sole new business item was a request by applicant Scott Myers for design adjustments to allow construction of a single-family dwelling at 6430 Head Road, currently zoned R-20(L). After hearing staff presentation, applicant testimony, public comments, and deliberation, the committee voted 5-0 to deny both requested waivers. The meeting adjourned at 2:18 p.m.
Consent Calendar
- Approval of Minutes – June 12, 2024: The minutes were approved unanimously (4-0, with Chairman Gordon abstaining as he was absent from that meeting).
Public Comments & Testimony
- Robert McEachern (6428 Head Road): Submitted four photos of the access easement. He stated that without significant improvement to the road, adding another house is impractical. He noted that fences built on both sides of the easement prevent vehicles from pulling over, requiring one vehicle to back up. He expressed concerns about increased traffic during construction and for emergency vehicles, and noted that he and his 88-year-old neighbor maintain the road.
- Laura Head Lambert (6432 Head Road): Expressed concerns about the narrow width (11 feet) and lack of turnaround for emergency vehicles. She stated that the fire hydrant at the corner is now at a 45-degree angle due to vehicles backing up. She noted that former Zoning Administrator John Fullerton and current Zoning Administrator Kathryn Thurston said the next house would need to improve the driveway to meet city standards. She submitted a transcript of a voicemail as evidence.
- Jane G. Bailey (2139 Gaddis Road): Owner of 6430 and 6436 Head Road. She stated the road has been used for 150 years and argued that one more car will not make much difference. She expressed frustration that the financial burden of bringing the access up to city standards has prevented sale of inherited lots.
Discussion Items
- Staff Presentation (Miranda Frantz, Planner I): The applicant requests design adjustments from the city's technical standards for a new single-family dwelling along an existing non-conforming private access easement. The easement currently serves three dwelling units; the proposed would be the fourth. Requested relief:
- Street right-of-way, pavement width, alignment, and geometric design standards:
- Required easement width: 34 feet; existing: 11 feet at narrowest point.
- Required paved surface width: 20 feet; existing: 11 feet, gravel, no pavement.
- Maximum length from public street: 400 feet; proposed length: 1,115 feet.
- Street right-of-way, pavement width, alignment, and geometric design standards:
- Applicant (Scott Myers): Stated the property is under contract and he desires to keep the area as is. He proposed an emergency turnaround in the southwest corner using a utility easement to the west, possibly a gravel T-turnaround near a fire hydrant. He noted two of three current residents maintain the road.
- Committee Questions and Fire Department Concerns:
- Chairman Gordon and Master Firefighter Coleman expressed concerns about the 11-foot width (equal to maximum firetruck width), the fences on both sides, and the lack of turnaround. Coleman stated the recommended width for one-way is 14 feet; 18 feet recommended. He noted the access road must be within 150 feet of a turnaround. The existing gravel surface is acceptable as an all-weather access.
- Assistant City Attorney Satterfield advised that the city cannot require the easement to be fully accessible, and that changes to the design could return to DAC for approval.
- Committee discussed the possibility of adding pull-offs or a turnaround, but no agreement was reached with neighboring property owners.
Key Outcomes
- Motion to Deny: Chairman Gordon made a motion to deny both waivers (Waiver 1: width/pavement; Waiver 2: length). The motion was seconded by Mr. Henley.
- Vote: The motion carried unanimously, 5-0.
- Next Steps: The applicant may propose a revised design with additional width, pull-offs, or a turnaround and return to DAC for approval; otherwise, an appeal to Superior Court is possible.
Meeting Transcript
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 deviation from the city's technical standards and specifications manual. The design adjustment committee does not consider housing type, cost of the proposed unit, occupants, building material, unit size, number of bedrooms, or the architectural design of the structures. These hearings are quasi-judicial evidentiary hearings. That means they're like a court hearing and the committee's decisions are constrained by the standards in the ordinance and based upon the facts presented. All variance requests require a four-fifths vote of the committee to grant the variance. Appeals of committee decisions are to superior court. These parties are uh to these cases are entitled to an impartial board if a board member has a fixed opinion on the matter, a financial interest in the outcome, a close relationship with an 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 committee members may ask questions. The applicant may present additional information about the project and 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. I think it's still there, 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 all individuals who intend to provide witness testimony. All right, I'll ask staff applicants and members of the public who wish to speak. Will they stand and raise their 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. The first item on the agenda is approval of the last minutes. Has everyone had a chance to review the minutes? If not, do I have a motion? Or if so, do I have a motion? Chairman of Chairman, I'll make a motion to approve the minutes. Second. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed. I'm gonna abstain from that since I wasn't in the last meeting, so that was four. Aye. First item on the agenda is Head Road. Does staff have a presentation? Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. Site includes 0.46 acres and is located within the R20 residential legacy district. The applicant proposes a new single family dwelling unit along a non an existing non-conforming private access easement. The proposed dwelling unit would be the fourth dwelling unit to utilize the private access easement. However, the easement does not meet current standards for development. The applicant proposes to keep the private access easement as is and request the following relief from the technical standards and specifications manual. Private access easements require a width of 34 feet, easements 11 feet at its narrowest point, and relief is requested. Private access easements require a pavement width of 20 feet. The easement width is 11 at its narrowest point and consists of gravel and relief as requested. The maximum length of a private access easement is 400 feet to the furthest unit from a public street. The length of the private access easement from Head Road to the subject property is roughly 1,115 feet, and relief is requested. That concludes staff's presentation. The applicant is here as well. Thanks, Miranda. Is there could you define or what does residential legacy district mean?
openpublica.com