This rezoning application will be heard by the New Hanover County Commissioners on September 4, 2007 in Room 401 of the Government Center. This matter is on the agenda for 6:30 pm. See a further post to this blog for more details as to location, driving instructions, etc.
Please plan to attend!
We have made a difference -- as outlined in the next post, the developers' road proposals have improved considerably from what they originally proposed during the July Commissioners hearing. However, they don't go far enough. In working on this rezoning matter, we have had meetings with New Hanover County Planning Department, one-on-one meetings with the developers, and a one-on-one meeting with North Carolina Department of Transportation. We have reached two conclusions that transcend this specific rezoning application:
1. There is little coordination between land use planning and zoning, a county function, and transportation planning, a state function. THE NEW HANOVER COUNTY COMMISSIONERS NEED TO COORDINATE WITH NC DOT TO JOINTLY DEVELOP AN OVERALL TRAFFIC PLAN FOR THE MARKET STREET CORRIDOR. As development continues and traffic worsens, the present configuration of Market Street with its "suicide lane" joint left turn lane in the middle of the road is becoming outdated.
2. It is unconscionable that a developer can build a big-box retailer, even one the size of a Wal Mart, in any site approved for B-1 Neighborhood Commercial zoning. B-1 is for "neighborhood shopping", such as a strip center containing a supermarket and other stores. By definition, any big-box retail store requires a much broader geographic draw. This logically would be B-2, "Highway Business". THE NEW HANOVER COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MUST REDEFINE ZONING REGULATIONS SO THAT BIG BOX RETAILERS CANNOT BUILD IN B-1 ZONING. Only by doing this will our county government gain control over commercial development and serve the needs and desires of county residents.
Please come to the September meeting and support our efforts.
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
Monday, September 3, 2007
New Road Proposal from the Lowe's Developers
After additional traffic analysis and pressure from citizens, the developers of the Lowe's project at Market Street and Porters Neck Road have agreed to provide more extensive upgrades to the road network serving this site. Their new proposal includes the following:
Porters Neck Road west of Market Street (currently the Porters Neck Road stub)
This road will be increased to six lanes where it intersects with Market Street: two westbound (ingress) lanes; two eastbound lanes dedicated to left turn onto northbound Market Street; one straight-through eastbound lane for continuation across Market Street onto Porters Neck Road; and one right-turn eastbound lane for turning south onto Market Street.
This road will have a median extending 500' from Market Street into the Lowe's development. A cut-through will be provided at the point of the existing road which provides access to the First Citizens Bank branch, Wendy's and Porters Neck Shopping Center (approximately 300' from Market Street). To facilitate turns here, a left turn lane will be cut into the median with enough room for five cars to stack up. At about the same point, a right-turn lane will be added to facilitate turns into the Lowe's complex. Thus, Porters Neck Road westbound at this point will be up to four lanes wide. There will be two full traffic lanes westbound at all points on this drive into the new development.
Porters Neck Road east of Market Street
This road will be increased to six lanes: westbound, a dedicated right-turn only lane will be added at the Market Street traffic light; one straight-through westbound lane as at present; two westbound left-turn lanes as at present; and eastbound, two lanes for traffic proceeding east on Porters Neck Road.
Market Street
Market Street will be increased to 7 lanes in each direction: both northbound and southbound at the traffic light, there will be two left-turn lanes, two straight-through lanes, and one dedicated right-turn lane. Market Street south of the traffic light will gain a median strip going at least as far as the middle driveway into Porters Neck Shopping Center, and perhaps as far south as the lower, Food Lion/Cypress Ponds apartment complex entrance. At this time, the final design for this portion remains fluid. We also don't know how much of Market Street median work will be performed/funded by the developers vs. DOT, and what the timing will be for this portion of the work. Also unknown at this time is whether DOT will be addressing the need for Market Street northbound, north of Porters Neck Road, to include two lanes for continuation onto U.S. 17 rather than the one lane currently.
Suffice it to say, this intersection and stretch of Market Street will be torn up for some period of time.
Additional Roads Within the Development
From the current end of the Porters Neck Road stub west of Market, the developers have proposed a sweeping bend to the left to access the "back acreage" that is not being developed at this time (but which will be developed as a shopping center at some not-too-distant future time). This is the road that will ultimately, perhaps a decade into the future, link up with Plantation Road. This road will be two lanes in each direction. From this road, another road is proposed that will tie into the alleyway entrance alongside the dry cleaners in Porters Neck Shopping Center. The purpose of this road will be to enable traffic to move more easily between the existing shopping center and the new development. The developers have told us that configuration for this road has not been finalized. They have said both of these roads will be built along with development of this site, but have not committed as to timing.
Since these two additional roads are being proposed to the County Commissioners, completion of these roads must be part of the Commissioners' approval of rezoning and be completed prior to granting a certificate of occupancy for Lowe's. This DOES NOT meet our call for an additional access to this development but is the least residents should settle for at this time.
Conclusions
1. The road improvements now being proposed by the developers are considerably more than they originally proposed during their July presentation to the County Commissioners. This is helpful.
2. Traffic studies have indicated, and our traffic engineer concurs, that the road improvements outlined here will be adequate for Lowe's. This is probably the best we can hope for at the present time.
3. Traffic studies further indicate that the road proposals outlined here WILL NOT be adequate for the further development of the "back acreage". NC DOT has indicated an additional entrance point will be needed to handle additional traffic from a shopping center on the back acreage. We have been pushing for a second entrance as part of the Lowe's project rezoning approval because we know a shopping center development on the back acreage will not require County Commissioners' approval. Going forward, we as residents of the Porters Neck area will need to hold the developers' feet to the fire and keep pressure on NC DOT to insure that further development is not permitted without a proper second entrance. Another post to this blog outlines what we believe to be the best long-term solution to a second entrance. We believe DOT concurs with this alignment of an additional road entrance. This will be a continuing fight.
Porters Neck Road west of Market Street (currently the Porters Neck Road stub)
This road will be increased to six lanes where it intersects with Market Street: two westbound (ingress) lanes; two eastbound lanes dedicated to left turn onto northbound Market Street; one straight-through eastbound lane for continuation across Market Street onto Porters Neck Road; and one right-turn eastbound lane for turning south onto Market Street.
This road will have a median extending 500' from Market Street into the Lowe's development. A cut-through will be provided at the point of the existing road which provides access to the First Citizens Bank branch, Wendy's and Porters Neck Shopping Center (approximately 300' from Market Street). To facilitate turns here, a left turn lane will be cut into the median with enough room for five cars to stack up. At about the same point, a right-turn lane will be added to facilitate turns into the Lowe's complex. Thus, Porters Neck Road westbound at this point will be up to four lanes wide. There will be two full traffic lanes westbound at all points on this drive into the new development.
Porters Neck Road east of Market Street
This road will be increased to six lanes: westbound, a dedicated right-turn only lane will be added at the Market Street traffic light; one straight-through westbound lane as at present; two westbound left-turn lanes as at present; and eastbound, two lanes for traffic proceeding east on Porters Neck Road.
Market Street
Market Street will be increased to 7 lanes in each direction: both northbound and southbound at the traffic light, there will be two left-turn lanes, two straight-through lanes, and one dedicated right-turn lane. Market Street south of the traffic light will gain a median strip going at least as far as the middle driveway into Porters Neck Shopping Center, and perhaps as far south as the lower, Food Lion/Cypress Ponds apartment complex entrance. At this time, the final design for this portion remains fluid. We also don't know how much of Market Street median work will be performed/funded by the developers vs. DOT, and what the timing will be for this portion of the work. Also unknown at this time is whether DOT will be addressing the need for Market Street northbound, north of Porters Neck Road, to include two lanes for continuation onto U.S. 17 rather than the one lane currently.
Suffice it to say, this intersection and stretch of Market Street will be torn up for some period of time.
Additional Roads Within the Development
From the current end of the Porters Neck Road stub west of Market, the developers have proposed a sweeping bend to the left to access the "back acreage" that is not being developed at this time (but which will be developed as a shopping center at some not-too-distant future time). This is the road that will ultimately, perhaps a decade into the future, link up with Plantation Road. This road will be two lanes in each direction. From this road, another road is proposed that will tie into the alleyway entrance alongside the dry cleaners in Porters Neck Shopping Center. The purpose of this road will be to enable traffic to move more easily between the existing shopping center and the new development. The developers have told us that configuration for this road has not been finalized. They have said both of these roads will be built along with development of this site, but have not committed as to timing.
Since these two additional roads are being proposed to the County Commissioners, completion of these roads must be part of the Commissioners' approval of rezoning and be completed prior to granting a certificate of occupancy for Lowe's. This DOES NOT meet our call for an additional access to this development but is the least residents should settle for at this time.
Conclusions
1. The road improvements now being proposed by the developers are considerably more than they originally proposed during their July presentation to the County Commissioners. This is helpful.
2. Traffic studies have indicated, and our traffic engineer concurs, that the road improvements outlined here will be adequate for Lowe's. This is probably the best we can hope for at the present time.
3. Traffic studies further indicate that the road proposals outlined here WILL NOT be adequate for the further development of the "back acreage". NC DOT has indicated an additional entrance point will be needed to handle additional traffic from a shopping center on the back acreage. We have been pushing for a second entrance as part of the Lowe's project rezoning approval because we know a shopping center development on the back acreage will not require County Commissioners' approval. Going forward, we as residents of the Porters Neck area will need to hold the developers' feet to the fire and keep pressure on NC DOT to insure that further development is not permitted without a proper second entrance. Another post to this blog outlines what we believe to be the best long-term solution to a second entrance. We believe DOT concurs with this alignment of an additional road entrance. This will be a continuing fight.
Traffic Assessment at Porters Neck Road
The Porters Neck Homeowners Association (PNHOA) underwrote the hiring of a traffic consultant to review the work and recommendations of the developers' traffic engineer. Our consultant advised New Hanover County that all big-box retailers generate greatest traffic volume at mid-day on Saturday, and that a Saturday traffic study should therefore be required as part of the developers' proposal to the county. The County requested this further study, which was conducted on Saturday, August 25th by Martin Alexiou Bryson (MAB), the developers' traffic consultant.
Following is our traffic engineer's review of the several traffic studies conducted by the Lowe's project developers. This posting is made with the approval of the PNHOA. We have highlighted the conclusion because of the significance of this finding to the long-term development of the Lowe's project and related longer-term development.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Porters Neck HOA
FROM: Lawrence H. Green, P.E.
SUBJECT: Traffic Assessment of US 17 (Market Street) at Porters Neck Road
DATE: September 1, 2007
The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the findings of traffic analyses that have been conducted at the US 17 at Porters Neck Road intersection over the past 15 months as part of the proposed rezoning of a portion of the Alliance Commercial Property in Wilmington, North Carolina. Listed below is a chronological listing of the findings of various traffic reports:
- A May 2006 traffic report was prepared by Martin Alexiou Bryson (MAB) for the subject property. The original traffic report was based upon a 134,000 square foot Home Improvement Store, a 120,000 square foot Free Standing Discount Store, and 181,000 square feet of Retail Development.
- The May 2006 traffic report was conducted prior to the opening of I-140 Wilmington Bypass. In order to account for the Wilmington Bypass on traffic operations along US 17, a 30% reduction in through traffic along US 17 was assumed in the traffic report.
- Based upon the assumed site development program and the 30% reduction in through traffic on US 17, the traffic report concluded that the entire development program could be accommodated based upon the results of AM and PM weekday peak hour analyses.
- A new traffic count was conducted at the US 17 at Porters Neck Road intersection on Tuesday, June 12, 2007 to determine if traffic volumes had actually decreased by 30% along US 17 as projected in the traffic report after the opening of the Wilmington Bypass. The results of the new traffic count revealed that traffic had increased by 6% during the weekday AM peak hour and increased by 7% during the weekday PM peak hour.
- Since Saturday peak hour trip rates are higher than both the AM and PM peak hour trip rates for the proposed development, a new traffic count was conducted on Saturday, August 18, 2007 at the US 17 at Porters Neck Road intersection. The results of the new traffic count revealed that traffic activity on a Saturday was heavier than the weekday AM peak hour, but slightly less than the weekday PM hour.
- Based upon the finding that traffic activity had not reduced along US 17 but actually increased since the opening of the Wilmington Bypass, a new traffic analysis was prepared for the proposed development at the US 17 at Porters Neck Road intersection utilizing the June 2007 weekday peak period traffic volumes and the August 2007 Saturday peak period traffic volumes. However, rather than conducting an analysis with the same development program as the May 2006 traffic impact study, a new analysis was prepared by MAB dated August 21, 2007 only assuming a 170,000 square foot Home Improvement Store. The Free Standing Discount Store and Retail Development were not included in the new analysis.
- The results of the new analysis revealed that US 17 at Porters Neck Road intersection will operate at a Level of Service (LOS) “C” during the weekday AM peak hour, a LOS “D” during the weekday PM peak hour, and a LOS “D” during the Saturday mid-day peak hour. The level of service findings were based upon the assumption that the US 17 at Porters Neck Road intersection would be improved to provide exclusive double left turn lanes and an exclusive right turn lane on all approaches. In addition, a single exclusive through lane was recommended along eastbound and westbound Porters Neck Road.
- Since LOS “D” is the typical lowest acceptable grade for intersection operations, the traffic report recommended that a new connection to US 17 be provided for any new development beyond the proposed Lowe’s Home Improvement Store. This new finding in the August 21, 2007 memorandum is significant since the earlier May 2006 traffic report concluded that the entire development that included the Free Standing Discount Store and Retail Development could be supported by one access point at Porters Neck Road. Thus, the findings of the May 2006 traffic report are no longer valid.
In conclusion, the recent traffic studies conducted along US 17 at Porters Neck Road have revealed that the Wilmington Bypass has not diverted traffic as expected along US 17 in the vicinity of Porters Neck Road. Rather than experiencing a 30% drop in through traffic as projected by the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), peak period traffic has actually increased between 6 and 7 percent. Due to this fact, the August 21, 2007 traffic report conducted for the Alliance Commercial Property by MAB have concluded that a single access point to US 17 is only sufficient to support the Lowe’s Home Improvement Store. The future Free Standing Discount Store and/or Retail Development will require an additional access to/from US 17 (unless the percentage of traffic diverted to the Wilmington Bypass significantly increases).
Following is our traffic engineer's review of the several traffic studies conducted by the Lowe's project developers. This posting is made with the approval of the PNHOA. We have highlighted the conclusion because of the significance of this finding to the long-term development of the Lowe's project and related longer-term development.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Porters Neck HOA
FROM: Lawrence H. Green, P.E.
SUBJECT: Traffic Assessment of US 17 (Market Street) at Porters Neck Road
DATE: September 1, 2007
The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the findings of traffic analyses that have been conducted at the US 17 at Porters Neck Road intersection over the past 15 months as part of the proposed rezoning of a portion of the Alliance Commercial Property in Wilmington, North Carolina. Listed below is a chronological listing of the findings of various traffic reports:
- A May 2006 traffic report was prepared by Martin Alexiou Bryson (MAB) for the subject property. The original traffic report was based upon a 134,000 square foot Home Improvement Store, a 120,000 square foot Free Standing Discount Store, and 181,000 square feet of Retail Development.
- The May 2006 traffic report was conducted prior to the opening of I-140 Wilmington Bypass. In order to account for the Wilmington Bypass on traffic operations along US 17, a 30% reduction in through traffic along US 17 was assumed in the traffic report.
- Based upon the assumed site development program and the 30% reduction in through traffic on US 17, the traffic report concluded that the entire development program could be accommodated based upon the results of AM and PM weekday peak hour analyses.
- A new traffic count was conducted at the US 17 at Porters Neck Road intersection on Tuesday, June 12, 2007 to determine if traffic volumes had actually decreased by 30% along US 17 as projected in the traffic report after the opening of the Wilmington Bypass. The results of the new traffic count revealed that traffic had increased by 6% during the weekday AM peak hour and increased by 7% during the weekday PM peak hour.
- Since Saturday peak hour trip rates are higher than both the AM and PM peak hour trip rates for the proposed development, a new traffic count was conducted on Saturday, August 18, 2007 at the US 17 at Porters Neck Road intersection. The results of the new traffic count revealed that traffic activity on a Saturday was heavier than the weekday AM peak hour, but slightly less than the weekday PM hour.
- Based upon the finding that traffic activity had not reduced along US 17 but actually increased since the opening of the Wilmington Bypass, a new traffic analysis was prepared for the proposed development at the US 17 at Porters Neck Road intersection utilizing the June 2007 weekday peak period traffic volumes and the August 2007 Saturday peak period traffic volumes. However, rather than conducting an analysis with the same development program as the May 2006 traffic impact study, a new analysis was prepared by MAB dated August 21, 2007 only assuming a 170,000 square foot Home Improvement Store. The Free Standing Discount Store and Retail Development were not included in the new analysis.
- The results of the new analysis revealed that US 17 at Porters Neck Road intersection will operate at a Level of Service (LOS) “C” during the weekday AM peak hour, a LOS “D” during the weekday PM peak hour, and a LOS “D” during the Saturday mid-day peak hour. The level of service findings were based upon the assumption that the US 17 at Porters Neck Road intersection would be improved to provide exclusive double left turn lanes and an exclusive right turn lane on all approaches. In addition, a single exclusive through lane was recommended along eastbound and westbound Porters Neck Road.
- Since LOS “D” is the typical lowest acceptable grade for intersection operations, the traffic report recommended that a new connection to US 17 be provided for any new development beyond the proposed Lowe’s Home Improvement Store. This new finding in the August 21, 2007 memorandum is significant since the earlier May 2006 traffic report concluded that the entire development that included the Free Standing Discount Store and Retail Development could be supported by one access point at Porters Neck Road. Thus, the findings of the May 2006 traffic report are no longer valid.
In conclusion, the recent traffic studies conducted along US 17 at Porters Neck Road have revealed that the Wilmington Bypass has not diverted traffic as expected along US 17 in the vicinity of Porters Neck Road. Rather than experiencing a 30% drop in through traffic as projected by the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), peak period traffic has actually increased between 6 and 7 percent. Due to this fact, the August 21, 2007 traffic report conducted for the Alliance Commercial Property by MAB have concluded that a single access point to US 17 is only sufficient to support the Lowe’s Home Improvement Store. The future Free Standing Discount Store and/or Retail Development will require an additional access to/from US 17 (unless the percentage of traffic diverted to the Wilmington Bypass significantly increases).
Sunday, September 2, 2007
Letter to the Commissioners (by permission of the author)
---- Dana Binen <dbinen@bellsouth.net wrote:
Mr. Bauereis, Below is a copy of the email I just sent regarding the proposed rezoning for the Lowes project. I hope I touched upon some points that will have an impact on the county commissioners' decision. At least, they will know that folks in this area are concerned.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Dana Binen" <dbinen@bellsouth.net
To: cOkeefe@nhcgov.com Sent: Friday, August 24, 2007 9:05 AM
Subject: Development of Poerter's Neck Area: Lowes Project
Mr. O'Keefe: I request that you forward this letter to the County Commissioners prior to the September 4th meeting. Thank you for your assistance. It is important that residents affected be heard. TO: County Commissioners - Wm. Caster, R. Greer, T. Davis, Wm. Kopp, Jr., N.Pritchett
RE: Development of Porter's Neck Area: Lowes Project
DATE: August 24, 2007
FROM: Dana Binen, Concerned Resident of the Porter's Neck Area
I am writing you in opposition of the proposed changes of access to the Porter's Neck area. I respectfully request that you NOT grant the "special use B-2 rezoning" for the shopping center. Do any of you live in that area???? If so, you'd realize how congested (and THAT'S putting it mildly!!) the area already is. What is needed is BETTER access to the shopping center, not to delete what we already have. By sectioning off an entrance to the shopping center you will create more congestion on the Market Street entrances, have more auto accidents, etc., etc. Also, have you considered the detriment to the shopping center and other proposed businesses to be built that fire engines, EMS, police cars, etc. will have? There will be severe problems if these types of emergency vehicles are prohibited access into that area. I suggest you consult with each of these departments and see what their opinion is. I can't imagine that they'd be in support of this rezoning request. You will be doing everyone who travels through Market Street and that area a grave disservice if you allow this rezoning request to pass.
PLEASE consider the problems you will create if you approve this. You will be hindering an already congested area, not helping the situation at all!! Thank you for your consideration of my letter. As our (citizens) representatives, I hope you will do what is best FOR US and not be "developer friendly." We've had too much of that already in the past 20 years!!
Respectfully submitted
Dana Binen, Resident of Plantation Landing Development
Mr. Bauereis, Below is a copy of the email I just sent regarding the proposed rezoning for the Lowes project. I hope I touched upon some points that will have an impact on the county commissioners' decision. At least, they will know that folks in this area are concerned.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Dana Binen" <dbinen@bellsouth.net
To: cOkeefe@nhcgov.com Sent: Friday, August 24, 2007 9:05 AM
Subject: Development of Poerter's Neck Area: Lowes Project
Mr. O'Keefe: I request that you forward this letter to the County Commissioners prior to the September 4th meeting. Thank you for your assistance. It is important that residents affected be heard. TO: County Commissioners - Wm. Caster, R. Greer, T. Davis, Wm. Kopp, Jr., N.Pritchett
RE: Development of Porter's Neck Area: Lowes Project
DATE: August 24, 2007
FROM: Dana Binen, Concerned Resident of the Porter's Neck Area
I am writing you in opposition of the proposed changes of access to the Porter's Neck area. I respectfully request that you NOT grant the "special use B-2 rezoning" for the shopping center. Do any of you live in that area???? If so, you'd realize how congested (and THAT'S putting it mildly!!) the area already is. What is needed is BETTER access to the shopping center, not to delete what we already have. By sectioning off an entrance to the shopping center you will create more congestion on the Market Street entrances, have more auto accidents, etc., etc. Also, have you considered the detriment to the shopping center and other proposed businesses to be built that fire engines, EMS, police cars, etc. will have? There will be severe problems if these types of emergency vehicles are prohibited access into that area. I suggest you consult with each of these departments and see what their opinion is. I can't imagine that they'd be in support of this rezoning request. You will be doing everyone who travels through Market Street and that area a grave disservice if you allow this rezoning request to pass.
PLEASE consider the problems you will create if you approve this. You will be hindering an already congested area, not helping the situation at all!! Thank you for your consideration of my letter. As our (citizens) representatives, I hope you will do what is best FOR US and not be "developer friendly." We've had too much of that already in the past 20 years!!
Respectfully submitted
Dana Binen, Resident of Plantation Landing Development
Saturday, September 1, 2007
Hearing on Lowe's Development September 4, 2007
The New Hanover County Commissioners will hear the continuation of the developer's request to rezone 16.2 acres on Porters Neck Road at Market Street for a 169,000 square foot Lowe's home improvement store (and 42 possible other uses). The Commissioners meeting will begin at 5:30 pm, and this item is scheduled for 6:30 pm. If you'd like to come, please plan on arriving at 6:15 pm or so.
The meeting will be held in the New Hanover County Government Center, 230 Governmnet Center Drive, Suite 135, Room 401. This room is the Human Resources Training Center. The government center is located in the failed shopping center that you can see from S. College Street as you approach Market Street, but can't get to. To enter the government complex, turn off Oriole Drive, following signs for the government center; or turn off Eastwood Road onto Racine, pass the entrance to Home Depot, and turn right at the next intersection. There are signs here, too, for the government center.
The developer's package has swelled to 103 pages. It does contain considerable additional information from July's package, including accident data, traffic analysis data from several studies, numerous aerial photos with traffic configuration plans laid out on them, and copies of citizens' emails to the county. If you'd like a copy of this Adobe pdf file document, please email me directly at dbauereis@ec.rr.com. Warnings: a) it's a 16 mb file, so will take a while to download; b) if you read the whole thing, you'll know more than any of the commissioners, who probably won't.
I'm in the process of wading through the document, and hope to make smaller, specific topic portions of the file available shortly.
Thanks for your interest, and please come out on September 4th!
The meeting will be held in the New Hanover County Government Center, 230 Governmnet Center Drive, Suite 135, Room 401. This room is the Human Resources Training Center. The government center is located in the failed shopping center that you can see from S. College Street as you approach Market Street, but can't get to. To enter the government complex, turn off Oriole Drive, following signs for the government center; or turn off Eastwood Road onto Racine, pass the entrance to Home Depot, and turn right at the next intersection. There are signs here, too, for the government center.
The developer's package has swelled to 103 pages. It does contain considerable additional information from July's package, including accident data, traffic analysis data from several studies, numerous aerial photos with traffic configuration plans laid out on them, and copies of citizens' emails to the county. If you'd like a copy of this Adobe pdf file document, please email me directly at dbauereis@ec.rr.com. Warnings: a) it's a 16 mb file, so will take a while to download; b) if you read the whole thing, you'll know more than any of the commissioners, who probably won't.
I'm in the process of wading through the document, and hope to make smaller, specific topic portions of the file available shortly.
Thanks for your interest, and please come out on September 4th!
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Access Other than Market Street Possible?
Several comments on this blog have correctly pointed out that an additional access point for the proposed Lowe’s development and future shopping center development behind Lowe’s that intersects with Market Street is, at best, a compromise. If all the traffic winds up on Market Street, how much does it matter whether it’s all at the Porters Neck Road traffic light or spread between that light and a new one ½ mile south? An additional access as just described would have some benefit in that it would shorten the cycling time for the Porters Neck Road traffic light. That would help traffic flow, given that traffic through this area will be increasing from additional residential development in addition to shopping center traffic. It would, as the comments suggest, be better if another access point could be found that would go somewhere other than Market Street. Is this feasible?
There are only two alternatives: first, what about access from the US 17 bypass? That won’t happen, according to NC DOT who designed this new road to Interstate standards and will not permit any access other those in DOT’s long term plans. The second alternative was mentioned by the developer in earlier presentations: connect with Plantation Road, already shown on some maps as running into Murreysville Road. This was on NC DOT’s long-term plans but we understand that wetlands issues have put this way down on their list. Before considering this road, DOT will build an extension to Military Cutoff that will intersect with the bypass – this is one of the few additional exits off the bypass currently contemplated. Once this is in place, perhaps then Plantation Road will make it onto their funding horizon. In other words, that’s probably a decade away.
We’re left with two conclusions. First, an additional Market Street access point is a compromise but better than nothing. Second, this property really does not have great development potential precisely because of the access problem.
The other question, is Lowe’s better than some other alternatives? Of course it is. The developer has already threatened us, in the July Commissioners’ meeting, with Wal Mart. Here’s why that’s an empty threat: In purchasing the “back acreage” from Scarafoni Associates, owner of the existing Porters Neck Shopping Center, the developers agreed not to include another supermarket in their shopping center. The developers told us this in face to face communication but of course we haven’t seen written documentation. Wal Mart abandoned its plans in Ogden some time back, and I’ve read that they have pulled back from numerous expansion plans around the country this year because of missing their earnings targets. None of this is ironclad, but Wal Mart appears to be a low probability.
Actually, we're left with a third conclusion. It seems to us that the infrastucture problem we're facing with this development is similar to many others around the county. The root cause appears to be a lack of coordination between land use planning and zoning -- a county function -- and traffic planning, primarily a state function for our major roads. Only when that coordination occurs will we see the benefits of infrastructure needs being considered in conjuction with development occuring.
There are only two alternatives: first, what about access from the US 17 bypass? That won’t happen, according to NC DOT who designed this new road to Interstate standards and will not permit any access other those in DOT’s long term plans. The second alternative was mentioned by the developer in earlier presentations: connect with Plantation Road, already shown on some maps as running into Murreysville Road. This was on NC DOT’s long-term plans but we understand that wetlands issues have put this way down on their list. Before considering this road, DOT will build an extension to Military Cutoff that will intersect with the bypass – this is one of the few additional exits off the bypass currently contemplated. Once this is in place, perhaps then Plantation Road will make it onto their funding horizon. In other words, that’s probably a decade away.
We’re left with two conclusions. First, an additional Market Street access point is a compromise but better than nothing. Second, this property really does not have great development potential precisely because of the access problem.
The other question, is Lowe’s better than some other alternatives? Of course it is. The developer has already threatened us, in the July Commissioners’ meeting, with Wal Mart. Here’s why that’s an empty threat: In purchasing the “back acreage” from Scarafoni Associates, owner of the existing Porters Neck Shopping Center, the developers agreed not to include another supermarket in their shopping center. The developers told us this in face to face communication but of course we haven’t seen written documentation. Wal Mart abandoned its plans in Ogden some time back, and I’ve read that they have pulled back from numerous expansion plans around the country this year because of missing their earnings targets. None of this is ironclad, but Wal Mart appears to be a low probability.
Actually, we're left with a third conclusion. It seems to us that the infrastucture problem we're facing with this development is similar to many others around the county. The root cause appears to be a lack of coordination between land use planning and zoning -- a county function -- and traffic planning, primarily a state function for our major roads. Only when that coordination occurs will we see the benefits of infrastructure needs being considered in conjuction with development occuring.
Monday, August 20, 2007
The Developers’ Access Plans. A Better Long-Term Solution
What Road Improvements Does the Developer Propose?
The developer of the proposed Lowe’s at Market Street at Porters Neck Road is focusing his road improvements primarily on the Porters Neck Road stub that currently provides access to Porters Neck Shopping Center. He is willing to widen Porters Neck Road eastbound out of his development to include two left turn lanes for north on Market, one lane for straight onto Porters Neck Rd., and one right turn lane for south on Market. He will also lengthen the right turn lane on southbound Market to facilitate turning into the development. He has also said the left turn lane on northbound Market Street will be lengthened, but I don’t know whether the developer would be doing this or if there will be a reliance on NC DOT (North Carolina Department of Transportation) to do this in conjunction with a median on Market Street at this point.
Further possibilities: we have been told that northbound Market Street will get two left-turn lanes onto Porters Neck Road in conjunction with a median strip. Southbound Market Street may get two left-turn lanes onto eastbound Porters Neck Rd.; and westbound Porters Neck Road may get a dedicated right-turn lane at Market Street. These improvements appear to be the result of traffic studies that show traffic in this area has increased since the opening of the US 17 bypass, rather than the 30% decrease forecast by NC DOT while planning that project. We expect NC DOT, not the developer, will do these improvements but don’t know the time frame. These improvements would require the developer to further widen the Porters Neck Road westbound entrance for two lanes into the shopping center. This would bring the lanes of traffic on Porters Neck Road at the traffic light to six lanes. We are told the developer will also be proposing a road looping from the Lowe’s entrance to connect to the alleyway alongside the dry cleaner in the existing Porters Neck Shopping Center. Presumably, this would become a safety valve if backups at the light become too severe.
In his meetings with our group and with what he’s told the county since the July County Commissioners meeting, the developer is not willing to consider any road other than Porters Neck Road and filtering traffic through Porters Neck Shopping Center.
The Best Solution
The joint venture partnership working on the Lowe’s project has control of not only the 16 acres for which rezoning is requested, but also 50 acres behind this property. This “back acreage” will be the site for future shopping center development; indeed it’s already zoned B-1 for neighborhood shopping center.
The best solution to solving traffic problem is the following: a road through this “back acreage”, behind the existing shopping center and behind Cypress Pond apartments, linking into Hays Rd. along the southern border of the apartment complex and out to Market Street. This is undesirable from the developers’ standpoint: substantial additional expense, additional time, wetlands mitigation, and the need to either acquire additional property, obtain easements, or include other property owners in their joint venture.
Such a road would, in our opinion, in the long run make the developers’ property much more valuable: (1) a shopping center on the “back acreage” would become more attractive to quality tenants given adequate road access; (2) this road would become a parallel road to Market Street in an area that will in future face substantial additional traffic. The latter would be appreciated by residents and should be a consideration of the County Commissioners. This is the solution that should be required as part of rezoning approval. THE COMMISSIONERS MUST NOT APPROVE THIS REZONING REQUEST WITHOUT A SECOND ROAD ENTRANCE BEING BUILT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT.
Watch this Internet site for information regarding the agenda for the Commissioners’ September 4th meeting, timing of this item on the agenda, material presented to the Commissioners by the developer and where to go if you would like to attend. Thank you for your interest in this situation.
The developer of the proposed Lowe’s at Market Street at Porters Neck Road is focusing his road improvements primarily on the Porters Neck Road stub that currently provides access to Porters Neck Shopping Center. He is willing to widen Porters Neck Road eastbound out of his development to include two left turn lanes for north on Market, one lane for straight onto Porters Neck Rd., and one right turn lane for south on Market. He will also lengthen the right turn lane on southbound Market to facilitate turning into the development. He has also said the left turn lane on northbound Market Street will be lengthened, but I don’t know whether the developer would be doing this or if there will be a reliance on NC DOT (North Carolina Department of Transportation) to do this in conjunction with a median on Market Street at this point.
Further possibilities: we have been told that northbound Market Street will get two left-turn lanes onto Porters Neck Road in conjunction with a median strip. Southbound Market Street may get two left-turn lanes onto eastbound Porters Neck Rd.; and westbound Porters Neck Road may get a dedicated right-turn lane at Market Street. These improvements appear to be the result of traffic studies that show traffic in this area has increased since the opening of the US 17 bypass, rather than the 30% decrease forecast by NC DOT while planning that project. We expect NC DOT, not the developer, will do these improvements but don’t know the time frame. These improvements would require the developer to further widen the Porters Neck Road westbound entrance for two lanes into the shopping center. This would bring the lanes of traffic on Porters Neck Road at the traffic light to six lanes. We are told the developer will also be proposing a road looping from the Lowe’s entrance to connect to the alleyway alongside the dry cleaner in the existing Porters Neck Shopping Center. Presumably, this would become a safety valve if backups at the light become too severe.
In his meetings with our group and with what he’s told the county since the July County Commissioners meeting, the developer is not willing to consider any road other than Porters Neck Road and filtering traffic through Porters Neck Shopping Center.
The Best Solution
The joint venture partnership working on the Lowe’s project has control of not only the 16 acres for which rezoning is requested, but also 50 acres behind this property. This “back acreage” will be the site for future shopping center development; indeed it’s already zoned B-1 for neighborhood shopping center.
The best solution to solving traffic problem is the following: a road through this “back acreage”, behind the existing shopping center and behind Cypress Pond apartments, linking into Hays Rd. along the southern border of the apartment complex and out to Market Street. This is undesirable from the developers’ standpoint: substantial additional expense, additional time, wetlands mitigation, and the need to either acquire additional property, obtain easements, or include other property owners in their joint venture.
Such a road would, in our opinion, in the long run make the developers’ property much more valuable: (1) a shopping center on the “back acreage” would become more attractive to quality tenants given adequate road access; (2) this road would become a parallel road to Market Street in an area that will in future face substantial additional traffic. The latter would be appreciated by residents and should be a consideration of the County Commissioners. This is the solution that should be required as part of rezoning approval. THE COMMISSIONERS MUST NOT APPROVE THIS REZONING REQUEST WITHOUT A SECOND ROAD ENTRANCE BEING BUILT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT.
Watch this Internet site for information regarding the agenda for the Commissioners’ September 4th meeting, timing of this item on the agenda, material presented to the Commissioners by the developer and where to go if you would like to attend. Thank you for your interest in this situation.
Road Access Changes for Existing Porters Neck Shopping Center
Road Access Changes for Existing Porters Neck Shopping Center
How will the Lowe’s development, associated future commercial development of the “back 50 acres”, and NC Department of Transportation requirements (NC DOT) impact access to the existing Porters Neck Shopping Center?
There will be three changes to roads accessing or within Porters Neck Shopping Center:
First, NC DOT has decreed a 500’ median on the Porters Neck Road entrance. This will block traffic entering PN Shopping Center via Porters Neck Road from turning into the access behind First Citizens Bank and Wendy’s. This traffic will have to continue on Porters Neck Road to the entrance to Lowe’s and make a U-turn to get back to the existing access road. Second, NC DOT has announced plans for a median on Market Street below the Porters Neck Road traffic light. This will eliminate the ability for traffic to make a left turn off Market Street into the middle entrance to PN Shopping Center – that entrance will become “right in, right out” only. These two changes will induce shoppers to concentrate more on the lower entrance to PN Shopping Center, the one by Food Lion and access to the Cypress Ponds apartment complex. There will be a cut-through in the Market Street median, if it extends that far. However, NC DOT has no plans to put a traffic light at this point.
Finally, we have been told the developer will loop a road from the Lowe’s entrance point around to the beginning of the alleyway roughly in the middle of the PN Shopping Center, alongside the dry cleaners. This would presumably facilitate traffic to exit Lowe’s and future “back 50” commercial development via the middle exit from PN Shopping Center, particularly if exit traffic is backed up at the Porters Neck Road traffic light.
None of these changes addresses our concern that one access point, Porters Neck Road, is insufficient to service the combined development of Lowe’s and adjacent acreage. Routing traffic through PN Shopping Center will only be attractive to shoppers if backups at the traffic light become severe. If that’s the case, using the shopping center either for entrance or exit increases the probability of accidents for everyone using either Lowe’s, future stores, the bank or Wendy’s, or PN Shopping Center.
We continue to push for an additional road entrance BEFORE BUILDING PERMITS ARE ISSUED. If the County Commissioners are unwilling or unable to require the additional road entrance that is the proper up-front infrastructure for this project, THE REZONING REQUEST SHOULD BE DENIED.
How will the Lowe’s development, associated future commercial development of the “back 50 acres”, and NC Department of Transportation requirements (NC DOT) impact access to the existing Porters Neck Shopping Center?
There will be three changes to roads accessing or within Porters Neck Shopping Center:
First, NC DOT has decreed a 500’ median on the Porters Neck Road entrance. This will block traffic entering PN Shopping Center via Porters Neck Road from turning into the access behind First Citizens Bank and Wendy’s. This traffic will have to continue on Porters Neck Road to the entrance to Lowe’s and make a U-turn to get back to the existing access road. Second, NC DOT has announced plans for a median on Market Street below the Porters Neck Road traffic light. This will eliminate the ability for traffic to make a left turn off Market Street into the middle entrance to PN Shopping Center – that entrance will become “right in, right out” only. These two changes will induce shoppers to concentrate more on the lower entrance to PN Shopping Center, the one by Food Lion and access to the Cypress Ponds apartment complex. There will be a cut-through in the Market Street median, if it extends that far. However, NC DOT has no plans to put a traffic light at this point.
Finally, we have been told the developer will loop a road from the Lowe’s entrance point around to the beginning of the alleyway roughly in the middle of the PN Shopping Center, alongside the dry cleaners. This would presumably facilitate traffic to exit Lowe’s and future “back 50” commercial development via the middle exit from PN Shopping Center, particularly if exit traffic is backed up at the Porters Neck Road traffic light.
None of these changes addresses our concern that one access point, Porters Neck Road, is insufficient to service the combined development of Lowe’s and adjacent acreage. Routing traffic through PN Shopping Center will only be attractive to shoppers if backups at the traffic light become severe. If that’s the case, using the shopping center either for entrance or exit increases the probability of accidents for everyone using either Lowe’s, future stores, the bank or Wendy’s, or PN Shopping Center.
We continue to push for an additional road entrance BEFORE BUILDING PERMITS ARE ISSUED. If the County Commissioners are unwilling or unable to require the additional road entrance that is the proper up-front infrastructure for this project, THE REZONING REQUEST SHOULD BE DENIED.
Traffic Counts at Porters Neck Road
Traffic Counts at Porters Neck Road
In their presentation to the County Commissioners in July, the developers of the proposed Lowe’s project at Market Street and Porters Neck Road cited North Carolina Department of Transportation (NC DOT) traffic studies conducted in April 2005 and November 2006 that showed a 15% reduction in Market Street traffic, from approximately 42,000 trips per day to 36,000. The developers met with NC DOT and reportedly obtained approval for development of the Lowe’s project plus further shopping center development on their 50 acres behind Lowe’s and behind Porters Neck Shopping Center, using only Porters Neck Road as access.
The developers’ own Traffic Impact Analysis included traffic counts in March of 2006 and March of 2007 that showed no decrease in traffic. This was not mentioned. A further traffic count on June 12, 2007 conducted by the developer showed a 6% increase in traffic. This was also not mentioned in their July presentation to the County Commissioners.
Our citizens’ group has retained a traffic engineering consultant. In an e-mail to NC DOT, he pointed out the 6% increase in the June count and requested a Saturday mid-day peak hour analysis, because home improvement superstores generate their greatest traffic at that time. Based upon accepted traffic statistics for peak-hour traffic generation by a home improvement store, we can expect almost 1,000 cars during Saturday mid-day peak hour from a Lowe’s the size planned for this site. We now understand the developers will be conducting a traffic count on Saturday, August 25th. Results will not be available until oral presentation at the County Commissioners’ meeting on September 4th.
Watch this Internet site for information regarding the agenda for the Commissioners’ September 4th meeting, timing of this item on the agenda, material presented to the Commissioners by the developer and where to go if you would like to attend.
In their presentation to the County Commissioners in July, the developers of the proposed Lowe’s project at Market Street and Porters Neck Road cited North Carolina Department of Transportation (NC DOT) traffic studies conducted in April 2005 and November 2006 that showed a 15% reduction in Market Street traffic, from approximately 42,000 trips per day to 36,000. The developers met with NC DOT and reportedly obtained approval for development of the Lowe’s project plus further shopping center development on their 50 acres behind Lowe’s and behind Porters Neck Shopping Center, using only Porters Neck Road as access.
The developers’ own Traffic Impact Analysis included traffic counts in March of 2006 and March of 2007 that showed no decrease in traffic. This was not mentioned. A further traffic count on June 12, 2007 conducted by the developer showed a 6% increase in traffic. This was also not mentioned in their July presentation to the County Commissioners.
Our citizens’ group has retained a traffic engineering consultant. In an e-mail to NC DOT, he pointed out the 6% increase in the June count and requested a Saturday mid-day peak hour analysis, because home improvement superstores generate their greatest traffic at that time. Based upon accepted traffic statistics for peak-hour traffic generation by a home improvement store, we can expect almost 1,000 cars during Saturday mid-day peak hour from a Lowe’s the size planned for this site. We now understand the developers will be conducting a traffic count on Saturday, August 25th. Results will not be available until oral presentation at the County Commissioners’ meeting on September 4th.
Watch this Internet site for information regarding the agenda for the Commissioners’ September 4th meeting, timing of this item on the agenda, material presented to the Commissioners by the developer and where to go if you would like to attend.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
What's the Difference Between B-1 and B-2 Commercial Zoning? (More information than you really wanted...)
The following has been excerpted from the New Hanover County Zoning regulations. The Lowe’s parcel is currently B-1 with a B-2 rezoning request; the 50 acres behind this and behind the Porters Neck Shopping Center is B-1 currently.
Section 54: B-1 Business District
54-1: The purpose of this District shall be to provide convenient shopping facilities primarily of necessity goods and personal services required to serve a
neighborhood. The district's principal means of ingress and egress shall be
along collector roads, minor arterials, and/or major arterials as designated on
the County's Thoroughfare Classification Plan. (8/4/86) No B-1 Business
District shall be less than two (2) acres in area.
Section 55: B-2 Highway Business District
55-1: The purpose of this district shall be to provide for the proper grouping and
development of roadside business uses which will best accommodate the needs of the motoring public and businesses demanding high volume traffic. The district's principal means of ingress and egress shall be along collector roads, minor arterials, and/or major arterials as designated on the County's Thoroughfare Classification Plan. (8/4/86) No B-2 District shall be less than five (5) acres in area.
*Conditional Use Districts may be established for all the districts where special conditions or limitations are placed upon the uses permitted through the issuance of a special use permit and the zoning classification is voluntarily initiated by the landowner. A site plan approval is required.
Comparative Table of Permitted Uses
* Denotes Additional Permitted Use Requested by Developer for Lowe’s Project, perhaps so development could continue if Lowe's backs out
"P" is permitted use; "S" is special use requiring additional county approval; "--" not permitted
Permitted Uses: B-1 Business / B-2 Highway District Business District
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing
Agricultural Uses: P/ P
Kennels: P/ P*
Veterinaries: P/ P*
Wholesale Nurseries & Greenhouses: P/ P*
Construction
General Building Contractor: P/ --
Landscaping Contractors: P/ --
Special Trade Contractors: P/ --
Special Trade & General Contractors with no Outside Storage: P/ P
Transportation, Communication, Utilities
Bus & Taxi Terminals: P/ P
Commercial Marina with Floating Structures: S/ S
Commercial Marina: S/ P
Electric / Gas & Sanitary Services: P/ P
Electric Substations: P/ P
Mini-Warehouses: -- / P*
Post Offices: -- / P*
Telephone & Telegraph Facilities: P/ P*
TV & Radio Broadcasting: -- / P*
Warehousing: -- / P*
Water Transportation Facilities: -- / P
Other Communication Facilities Including Towers: S/ S
Antenna & Towers Less Than 70 Ft. In Height & Ancillary To The Principal Use: P/ P
Cellular & PCS Antennas: P/ P
Wholesale Trade
Wholesaling With No Outside Storage: -- / P*
Wholesaling Seafood With Water Frontage: P/ P
Retail Trade
Apparel & Accessory Store: P/ P*
Automobile Service Station: P/ P*
Automobile Dealers & Truck Sales: -- / P*
Boat Dealers: -- / P*
Building Material & Garden Supplies (this would be Lowe’s): -- / P*
Convenience Food Store: P/ P*
Drug Store: P/ P*
Eating and Drinking Places: P/ P*
Entertainment Establishments, Bars, Cabarets, Discos: S/ P
Entertainment Establishments, Bars, Cabarets, In A Shopping Center: P/ P
Farm Implement Sales: -- / P*
Food Stores: P/ P*
Fruit & Vegetable Stand Produced On Same Parcel As Offered For Sale: P/ P
Furniture, Home Furnishing & Equipment: P/ P*
General Merchandise Stores: P/ P*
Handcrafting Small Articles: P/ P
Hardware: P/ P*
Landscaping Service: -- / P*
Miscellaneous Retail: P/ P*
Mobile Home Dealers & Prefabricated Buildings: -- / P*
Retail Nurseries: P/ P*
Historic Restaurant: P/ P
Financing, Insurance, Real Estate
Banks, Credit Agencies, Savings & Loans: P/ P*
Services
Automobile / Boat Repair, Sales: -- / P*
Automobile Rentals: -- / P*
Barber / Beauty Shop: P/ P*
Business Services Including Printing: P/ P*
Camping, Travel Trailer Parks: -- / P*
Drive-In Theater: -- / P
Dry Cleaning / Laundry Plant: P/ P
Electrical Repair Shop: -- / P*
Equipment Rental & Leasing: -- / P*
Funeral Home: P/ P
Hotels & Motels: -- / P*
Indoor & Outdoor Recreation Establishments: P/ P*
Indoor Theater: -- / P*
Parks & Recreation Area: P/ P
Personal Services: P/ P
Resort Hotel / Motel: -- / P*
Stables: -- / P
Septic Tank Vacuum Service: -- / P
Watch, Clock, Jewelry Repair: P/ P*
Health
Children's Day Care: P/ P*
Educational Services
Libraries: P/ P*
Museums: P/ P
Membership Organizations
Churches: P/ P*
Lodges, Fraternal & Social Organizations: P/ P
Fraternities / Sororities, Residential: P/ P
Other
Accessory Buildings or Uses, clearly incidental to the Permitted Use or Building: P/ P
Christmas Tree Sales: P/ P
Circuses, Carnivals, Fairs & Side Shows of No More Than 30 Days Duration Per Year: P/ P
Community Boating Facility: S/ --
Private Residential Boating Facility: P/ --
Demolition-Landscape Landfill: P/ P
Dwelling Unit Contained within Principal Use: S/ S
Evangelistic and Religious Assemblies not conducted at a Church: P/ P
Government Offices & Buildings: P/ P
Offices for Private Business & Professional Activities: P/ P
Outdoor Bazaars excluding Yard Sales: P/ P
Pumpkin Sales: P/ P
Principal Use Sign: P/ P
Research Facilities: -- / P
Single Family Dwelling: S/ S
Single Family Dwelling-Attached: S/ S
Special Fund Raising for Non-Profit Organizations: P/ P
Temporary Sign: P/ P
Recycling Facilities - Small Collection: P/ P; Large Collection: S/ P
Section 54: B-1 Business District
54-1: The purpose of this District shall be to provide convenient shopping facilities primarily of necessity goods and personal services required to serve a
neighborhood. The district's principal means of ingress and egress shall be
along collector roads, minor arterials, and/or major arterials as designated on
the County's Thoroughfare Classification Plan. (8/4/86) No B-1 Business
District shall be less than two (2) acres in area.
Section 55: B-2 Highway Business District
55-1: The purpose of this district shall be to provide for the proper grouping and
development of roadside business uses which will best accommodate the needs of the motoring public and businesses demanding high volume traffic. The district's principal means of ingress and egress shall be along collector roads, minor arterials, and/or major arterials as designated on the County's Thoroughfare Classification Plan. (8/4/86) No B-2 District shall be less than five (5) acres in area.
*Conditional Use Districts may be established for all the districts where special conditions or limitations are placed upon the uses permitted through the issuance of a special use permit and the zoning classification is voluntarily initiated by the landowner. A site plan approval is required.
Comparative Table of Permitted Uses
* Denotes Additional Permitted Use Requested by Developer for Lowe’s Project, perhaps so development could continue if Lowe's backs out
"P" is permitted use; "S" is special use requiring additional county approval; "--" not permitted
Permitted Uses: B-1 Business / B-2 Highway District Business District
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing
Agricultural Uses: P/ P
Kennels: P/ P*
Veterinaries: P/ P*
Wholesale Nurseries & Greenhouses: P/ P*
Construction
General Building Contractor: P/ --
Landscaping Contractors: P/ --
Special Trade Contractors: P/ --
Special Trade & General Contractors with no Outside Storage: P/ P
Transportation, Communication, Utilities
Bus & Taxi Terminals: P/ P
Commercial Marina with Floating Structures: S/ S
Commercial Marina: S/ P
Electric / Gas & Sanitary Services: P/ P
Electric Substations: P/ P
Mini-Warehouses: -- / P*
Post Offices: -- / P*
Telephone & Telegraph Facilities: P/ P*
TV & Radio Broadcasting: -- / P*
Warehousing: -- / P*
Water Transportation Facilities: -- / P
Other Communication Facilities Including Towers: S/ S
Antenna & Towers Less Than 70 Ft. In Height & Ancillary To The Principal Use: P/ P
Cellular & PCS Antennas: P/ P
Wholesale Trade
Wholesaling With No Outside Storage: -- / P*
Wholesaling Seafood With Water Frontage: P/ P
Retail Trade
Apparel & Accessory Store: P/ P*
Automobile Service Station: P/ P*
Automobile Dealers & Truck Sales: -- / P*
Boat Dealers: -- / P*
Building Material & Garden Supplies (this would be Lowe’s): -- / P*
Convenience Food Store: P/ P*
Drug Store: P/ P*
Eating and Drinking Places: P/ P*
Entertainment Establishments, Bars, Cabarets, Discos: S/ P
Entertainment Establishments, Bars, Cabarets, In A Shopping Center: P/ P
Farm Implement Sales: -- / P*
Food Stores: P/ P*
Fruit & Vegetable Stand Produced On Same Parcel As Offered For Sale: P/ P
Furniture, Home Furnishing & Equipment: P/ P*
General Merchandise Stores: P/ P*
Handcrafting Small Articles: P/ P
Hardware: P/ P*
Landscaping Service: -- / P*
Miscellaneous Retail: P/ P*
Mobile Home Dealers & Prefabricated Buildings: -- / P*
Retail Nurseries: P/ P*
Historic Restaurant: P/ P
Financing, Insurance, Real Estate
Banks, Credit Agencies, Savings & Loans: P/ P*
Services
Automobile / Boat Repair, Sales: -- / P*
Automobile Rentals: -- / P*
Barber / Beauty Shop: P/ P*
Business Services Including Printing: P/ P*
Camping, Travel Trailer Parks: -- / P*
Drive-In Theater: -- / P
Dry Cleaning / Laundry Plant: P/ P
Electrical Repair Shop: -- / P*
Equipment Rental & Leasing: -- / P*
Funeral Home: P/ P
Hotels & Motels: -- / P*
Indoor & Outdoor Recreation Establishments: P/ P*
Indoor Theater: -- / P*
Parks & Recreation Area: P/ P
Personal Services: P/ P
Resort Hotel / Motel: -- / P*
Stables: -- / P
Septic Tank Vacuum Service: -- / P
Watch, Clock, Jewelry Repair: P/ P*
Health
Children's Day Care: P/ P*
Educational Services
Libraries: P/ P*
Museums: P/ P
Membership Organizations
Churches: P/ P*
Lodges, Fraternal & Social Organizations: P/ P
Fraternities / Sororities, Residential: P/ P
Other
Accessory Buildings or Uses, clearly incidental to the Permitted Use or Building: P/ P
Christmas Tree Sales: P/ P
Circuses, Carnivals, Fairs & Side Shows of No More Than 30 Days Duration Per Year: P/ P
Community Boating Facility: S/ --
Private Residential Boating Facility: P/ --
Demolition-Landscape Landfill: P/ P
Dwelling Unit Contained within Principal Use: S/ S
Evangelistic and Religious Assemblies not conducted at a Church: P/ P
Government Offices & Buildings: P/ P
Offices for Private Business & Professional Activities: P/ P
Outdoor Bazaars excluding Yard Sales: P/ P
Pumpkin Sales: P/ P
Principal Use Sign: P/ P
Research Facilities: -- / P
Single Family Dwelling: S/ S
Single Family Dwelling-Attached: S/ S
Special Fund Raising for Non-Profit Organizations: P/ P
Temporary Sign: P/ P
Recycling Facilities - Small Collection: P/ P; Large Collection: S/ P
Wednesday, August 8, 2007
Want to Write to the Commissioners?
Want to write or email to the County Commissioners about this matter? Since this zoning request is for a “Conditional District, B-2 zoning”, the following rules (copied from the New Hanover County web site) explain how to go about it.
Please do write or email, prior to the Commissioners’ meeting on September 4th, to the following address:
Mr. Chris O’Keefe , AICP
Planning Director
New Hanover County
230 Government Center Drive, Suite 150
Wilmington, NC 28403
His email address is as follows: cOkeefe@nhcgov.com
Be sure to request that he forward your information to the county commissioners prior to the September 4th meeting.
For your information, here are the names of our county commissioners:
William A. Caster, Chairman
Robert G. Greer, Vice-Chairman
Ted Davis, Jr.
William A. Kopp, Jr.
Nancy H. Pritchett
“In situations involving special use or conditional use
permits, interested parties are prohibited to communicate with county
commissioners prior to the official public hearing. These land use procedures are considered "quasi-judicial." As such it is improper for interested parties to discuss applications without being sworn at the hearing. Prior to the hearing, should anyone wish to provide a petition, letters, e-mail or other documentation for the county commissioners’ review, such items must be sent only to the Planning Department. The Planning Director will then copy and/or forward the information to the county commissioners for consideration at the hearing.”
Please do write or email, prior to the Commissioners’ meeting on September 4th, to the following address:
Mr. Chris O’Keefe , AICP
Planning Director
New Hanover County
230 Government Center Drive, Suite 150
Wilmington, NC 28403
His email address is as follows: cOkeefe@nhcgov.com
Be sure to request that he forward your information to the county commissioners prior to the September 4th meeting.
For your information, here are the names of our county commissioners:
William A. Caster, Chairman
Robert G. Greer, Vice-Chairman
Ted Davis, Jr.
William A. Kopp, Jr.
Nancy H. Pritchett
Sunday, August 5, 2007
Development of Porters Neck Area: Lowes Project
The following post has been sent to us by Harvey Molloy, a resident of Porters Neck Plantation.
Development of Porters Neck Area
Lowe’s Project
While most will agree that the less traffic the better, development is progress. However the proposal for developing the land at Porters Neck Center to the North and West of the Porters Neck Road intersection is flawed.
When the existing Porters Neck Center was developed the Map of Road Access that was submitted showed four access roads, three were actually provided (see map book 37 page 62). Of the three access road actually built, only one, the Porters Neck Road access is traffic light controlled.
Now comes the new project which will take the Porters Neck Road access and make that the ONLY access for over 4000 cars a day to a Lowe’s Home Improvement Center and many more as the land is built out. In addition the DOT said that they must put a 500 foot island in the access road. This means that the North access road is now denied for entry to the existing shopping center. One observer stated that they could put a gap in the island to allow access to the existing businesses in Porters Neck Center. Well if the island is to guarantee free flow to the new project, if you put a left turn opening in it, doing so cancels the effect of the island in the first place.
At the June County meeting the developer said that there was a road in back of the Porters Neck Center. The comment was either uninformed or intended to mislead. The only passageway behind the existing shopping center is a narrow delivery space behind the existing commercial establishments that is effectively blocked if a delivery truck is servicing those stores.
The problem is not with Lowe’s, rather it is the poor planning of the developer and efforts to build a minimum cost project without any concern that the traffic issue has been addressed.
This observer thinks first, it is not in the best interests of Lowe’s to allow poor planning; second, it is certainly not in the best interests of local residents and taxpayers to allow poor planning; and third, in the end all issues can be resolved if the developer will act in good faith and provide a second viable access/egress to the project.
Development of Porters Neck Area
Lowe’s Project
While most will agree that the less traffic the better, development is progress. However the proposal for developing the land at Porters Neck Center to the North and West of the Porters Neck Road intersection is flawed.
When the existing Porters Neck Center was developed the Map of Road Access that was submitted showed four access roads, three were actually provided (see map book 37 page 62). Of the three access road actually built, only one, the Porters Neck Road access is traffic light controlled.
Now comes the new project which will take the Porters Neck Road access and make that the ONLY access for over 4000 cars a day to a Lowe’s Home Improvement Center and many more as the land is built out. In addition the DOT said that they must put a 500 foot island in the access road. This means that the North access road is now denied for entry to the existing shopping center. One observer stated that they could put a gap in the island to allow access to the existing businesses in Porters Neck Center. Well if the island is to guarantee free flow to the new project, if you put a left turn opening in it, doing so cancels the effect of the island in the first place.
At the June County meeting the developer said that there was a road in back of the Porters Neck Center. The comment was either uninformed or intended to mislead. The only passageway behind the existing shopping center is a narrow delivery space behind the existing commercial establishments that is effectively blocked if a delivery truck is servicing those stores.
The problem is not with Lowe’s, rather it is the poor planning of the developer and efforts to build a minimum cost project without any concern that the traffic issue has been addressed.
This observer thinks first, it is not in the best interests of Lowe’s to allow poor planning; second, it is certainly not in the best interests of local residents and taxpayers to allow poor planning; and third, in the end all issues can be resolved if the developer will act in good faith and provide a second viable access/egress to the project.
Documents Presented to County Commissioners Available
Lowe’s Development Materials from County Commissioners’ Meeting
The developers presented their rezoning request at the July 9th County Commissioners meeting. The materials available to the commissioners ran to twenty pages. We have extracted that material from the meeting agenda, and have it available as a pdf file. If you’d like to read through this material, please email me directly at dbauereis@ec.rr.com and I’ll attach a copy to a return e-mail. You’ll need Adobe Acrobat to open the pdf file.
Thanks for your interest.
The developers presented their rezoning request at the July 9th County Commissioners meeting. The materials available to the commissioners ran to twenty pages. We have extracted that material from the meeting agenda, and have it available as a pdf file. If you’d like to read through this material, please email me directly at dbauereis@ec.rr.com and I’ll attach a copy to a return e-mail. You’ll need Adobe Acrobat to open the pdf file.
Thanks for your interest.
Friday, August 3, 2007
Proposed Shopping Center at Market St./Porters Neck Rd.
Conditional Rezoning Request: 16.2 acres at Market Street and Porters Neck Road; Proposed Lowe’s Shopping Center Development
Rezoning Request: At its 7/9/07 meeting, the New Hanover County Commissioners heard a request for conditional rezoning of 16.2 acres located off Market Street at Porters Neck Road. The parcel is located north and west of the traffic light at Market Street/Porters Neck Rd., south of the US 17 bypass, and would be accessible from Porters Neck Rd. where it currently terminates at the left turn into Porters Neck Shopping Center. This property is in the “Transition and Wetland Resource Protection Land Classification” of New Hanover County’s zoning classifications. The requested rezoning from B-1 Neighborhood Business to CD(B-2) Conditional Highway District Highway Business to locate a 169,000 sq. ft. commercial building for up to “42 possible uses”. The stated use was for a Lowe’s home and garden/building supply store, but the developer specifically asked for the additional listed uses. A B-2 Highway Business District, according to NH County zoning classifications, is “a heavy commercial zoning. Its purpose is to provide for the proper grouping and development of business uses which best accommodate the needs of the motoring public with a regional orientation. It is the least restrictive of the ordinance.”
Ken Shanklin, a well-known real estate attorney in Wilmington, handled the developer’s presentation. The proposal is to build a Lowe’s; additional stores were alluded to but not specified. The developer owns or controls approximately 50 contiguous acres to enlarge the scale of the shopping center considerably. There was no discussion of these further plans because that property is already zoned B-1 (stated use “to provide convenient shopping facilities primarily of necessity goods and personal services required to serve a neighborhood.”) The developer’s comments included the following:
The Porters Neck Road entrance to the existing shopping center is proposed to be the only entrance/egress for the new development. A traffic survey shows the Lowe’s project by itself will generate an additional 4,600 vehicles per day at the Market Street/Porters Neck Rd. intersection. Fully developed to include contiguous acreage, the developer stated the additional traffic load on this intersection would be 20,000 vehicles per day. This traffic would be handled by increasing the Porters Neck Rd. stub to include 4 lanes – two left turn lanes for turning northbound on Market Street; one straight to continue on Porters Neck Rd.; one right turn lane for southbound on Market Street. The existing southbound Market St. turn lane into the shopping center will be extended 300’. The developer’s 547 parking spaces for the Lowe’s store alone (without considering further development on the contiguous acreage) is 1 ½ times the existing spaces for all of Porters Neck Shopping Center. Currently, traffic from approximately 350 spaces use three entrances to the PN Shopping Center. This project will added another 547 spaces using the one entrance at Porters Neck Rd. almost exclusively.
The developer also stated that NC Department of Transportation was requiring a 500’ median strip on Porters Neck Road running from Market Street back into the development. Unless this is changed, drivers will no longer be able to turn into the existing Porters Neck Shopping Center, First Citizens Bank branch, or Wendy’s from Porters Neck Road.
Concerning sewer hookup during a sewer moratorium, the developer said that, by the time they’re ready for sewer, they expect the Northeast Interceptor problems to be resolved. If not, they’ll “put in a drain field.” The county commissioners indicated they would not allow a septic system, even temporarily. Sewage capacity may be available by the time it is needed.
The developer’s presentation did not address storm water management. In response to questions, he stated that storm water management would be on contiguous land, not shown on the re-zoning area maps before the Commissioners. No further questions were asked regarding how storm water would be managed, wetlands in the contiguous parcel, etc.
Opposition to this proposal came from numerous residents of the Porters Neck area and the Porters Neck Homeowners Association, with every speaker objecting to increased traffic at an already-congested intersection unless the developer can create an additional entrance to the site. NC Department of Transportation will not permit an entrance into this parcel from the new US 17 bypass, because that road has been built to Interstate standards. There are long-term plans to hook Porters Neck Road into Plantation Road, connecting to Murreysville Road. However, these plans are not even considered for funding on DOT’s project horizon, so that connection might only become available “some time in the future”. Other problems with that route are a) wetlands in the area west of the developer’s site, and b) a connection going to Murreysville Road would not be a viable alternate for anyone traveling from north or south on Market Street. The developer proposed that traffic could drive through the existing Porters Neck Shopping Center, and that they may be able to use the delivery alley behind Food Lion and other stores for an additional “road”.
The developer also mentioned several times that “they could put in a Wal-Mart” without requesting a zoning change and without any additional entrances.
We responded that we believe most people would not strongly object to a Lowe’s just because it’s a big-box retailer. What we object to is large-scale development without proper infrastructure being required up-front. The critical infrastructure need for this project is multiple entrances. No project the size of what ultimately will be built on this site should be approved without a second entrance. It should be the developer’s responsibility to make this happen. For the developer to immediately threaten local residents with a Wal-Mart is an unwelcome scare tactic.
The Commissioners voted to continue this request for sixty days for the developer to investigate options for an additional entrance. It will come back to the County Commissioners at their September meeting unless rescheduled earlier.
Next Steps:
· Will you join us in demanding a second entrance before permitting an additional 4600 vehicles per day at the Porters Neck Rd./Market Street intersection?
· Will you write to the management of Lowe’s to point out the need for additional entrance/egress?
· Will you contact our County Commissioners with your concerns?
· Will you help us mobilize residents of the “greater Porters Neck area” – Marsh Oaks, Porters Neck Road developments, Edgewater Club Road subdivisions, Futch Creek Road developments?
If you would like to help, please respond to this blog with your name and e-mail address. We’ll be in touch.
Rezoning Request: At its 7/9/07 meeting, the New Hanover County Commissioners heard a request for conditional rezoning of 16.2 acres located off Market Street at Porters Neck Road. The parcel is located north and west of the traffic light at Market Street/Porters Neck Rd., south of the US 17 bypass, and would be accessible from Porters Neck Rd. where it currently terminates at the left turn into Porters Neck Shopping Center. This property is in the “Transition and Wetland Resource Protection Land Classification” of New Hanover County’s zoning classifications. The requested rezoning from B-1 Neighborhood Business to CD(B-2) Conditional Highway District Highway Business to locate a 169,000 sq. ft. commercial building for up to “42 possible uses”. The stated use was for a Lowe’s home and garden/building supply store, but the developer specifically asked for the additional listed uses. A B-2 Highway Business District, according to NH County zoning classifications, is “a heavy commercial zoning. Its purpose is to provide for the proper grouping and development of business uses which best accommodate the needs of the motoring public with a regional orientation. It is the least restrictive of the ordinance.”
Ken Shanklin, a well-known real estate attorney in Wilmington, handled the developer’s presentation. The proposal is to build a Lowe’s; additional stores were alluded to but not specified. The developer owns or controls approximately 50 contiguous acres to enlarge the scale of the shopping center considerably. There was no discussion of these further plans because that property is already zoned B-1 (stated use “to provide convenient shopping facilities primarily of necessity goods and personal services required to serve a neighborhood.”) The developer’s comments included the following:
The Porters Neck Road entrance to the existing shopping center is proposed to be the only entrance/egress for the new development. A traffic survey shows the Lowe’s project by itself will generate an additional 4,600 vehicles per day at the Market Street/Porters Neck Rd. intersection. Fully developed to include contiguous acreage, the developer stated the additional traffic load on this intersection would be 20,000 vehicles per day. This traffic would be handled by increasing the Porters Neck Rd. stub to include 4 lanes – two left turn lanes for turning northbound on Market Street; one straight to continue on Porters Neck Rd.; one right turn lane for southbound on Market Street. The existing southbound Market St. turn lane into the shopping center will be extended 300’. The developer’s 547 parking spaces for the Lowe’s store alone (without considering further development on the contiguous acreage) is 1 ½ times the existing spaces for all of Porters Neck Shopping Center. Currently, traffic from approximately 350 spaces use three entrances to the PN Shopping Center. This project will added another 547 spaces using the one entrance at Porters Neck Rd. almost exclusively.
The developer also stated that NC Department of Transportation was requiring a 500’ median strip on Porters Neck Road running from Market Street back into the development. Unless this is changed, drivers will no longer be able to turn into the existing Porters Neck Shopping Center, First Citizens Bank branch, or Wendy’s from Porters Neck Road.
Concerning sewer hookup during a sewer moratorium, the developer said that, by the time they’re ready for sewer, they expect the Northeast Interceptor problems to be resolved. If not, they’ll “put in a drain field.” The county commissioners indicated they would not allow a septic system, even temporarily. Sewage capacity may be available by the time it is needed.
The developer’s presentation did not address storm water management. In response to questions, he stated that storm water management would be on contiguous land, not shown on the re-zoning area maps before the Commissioners. No further questions were asked regarding how storm water would be managed, wetlands in the contiguous parcel, etc.
Opposition to this proposal came from numerous residents of the Porters Neck area and the Porters Neck Homeowners Association, with every speaker objecting to increased traffic at an already-congested intersection unless the developer can create an additional entrance to the site. NC Department of Transportation will not permit an entrance into this parcel from the new US 17 bypass, because that road has been built to Interstate standards. There are long-term plans to hook Porters Neck Road into Plantation Road, connecting to Murreysville Road. However, these plans are not even considered for funding on DOT’s project horizon, so that connection might only become available “some time in the future”. Other problems with that route are a) wetlands in the area west of the developer’s site, and b) a connection going to Murreysville Road would not be a viable alternate for anyone traveling from north or south on Market Street. The developer proposed that traffic could drive through the existing Porters Neck Shopping Center, and that they may be able to use the delivery alley behind Food Lion and other stores for an additional “road”.
The developer also mentioned several times that “they could put in a Wal-Mart” without requesting a zoning change and without any additional entrances.
We responded that we believe most people would not strongly object to a Lowe’s just because it’s a big-box retailer. What we object to is large-scale development without proper infrastructure being required up-front. The critical infrastructure need for this project is multiple entrances. No project the size of what ultimately will be built on this site should be approved without a second entrance. It should be the developer’s responsibility to make this happen. For the developer to immediately threaten local residents with a Wal-Mart is an unwelcome scare tactic.
The Commissioners voted to continue this request for sixty days for the developer to investigate options for an additional entrance. It will come back to the County Commissioners at their September meeting unless rescheduled earlier.
Next Steps:
· Will you join us in demanding a second entrance before permitting an additional 4600 vehicles per day at the Porters Neck Rd./Market Street intersection?
· Will you write to the management of Lowe’s to point out the need for additional entrance/egress?
· Will you contact our County Commissioners with your concerns?
· Will you help us mobilize residents of the “greater Porters Neck area” – Marsh Oaks, Porters Neck Road developments, Edgewater Club Road subdivisions, Futch Creek Road developments?
If you would like to help, please respond to this blog with your name and e-mail address. We’ll be in touch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
