item c1 minutes - granicus

Minutes City Council City of Wilmington

North Carolina

ITEM C1

Date: 10/6/2020 Introduced By: Sterling B. Cheatham, City Manager

Approval of Minutes of the Regular Meeting on September 1, 2020, the Special Meeting on September 8, 2020, the Agenda Briefing Meeting on September 14, 2020, the Regular

Meeting on September 15, 2020 and the Special Meeting on September 22, 2020

Bill Saffo, Mayor

ATTEST:

Penelope Spicer-Sidbury, City Clerk

Adopted at a ________________ meeting on ____________________ 2020

C1-1

CITY OF WILMINGTON REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 2020

The Council of the City of Wilmington met in regular session on the above date at 6:30 p.m., at the Wilmington Convention Center, 10 Convention Center Drive, Wilmington, North Carolina. Those present in the room at the Convention Center were: Mayor Bill Saffo, presiding; Councilmembers Charlie Rivenbark and Neil Anderson; City Manager Sterling Cheatham; City Attorney John Joye; and City Clerk Penelope Spicer-Sidbury. Those present via video conference were: Mayor Pro-Tem Margaret Haynes; Councilmembers Kevin O’Grady, Clifford Barnett, Sr, and Kevin Spears.

Councilmember Barnett gave the invocation, followed by the Pledge of

Allegiance to the Flag. Mayor Saffo conducted a roll call of Councilmembers.

****************************** PRESENTATIONS

Ms. Susan Habas, Executive Director Thalian Association Community Theatre Performances and Education gave an Update on the Management of the Hannah Block Historic USO Community Arts Center. CONSENT AGENDA

Items on the Consent Agenda were acted upon and unanimously adopted

on motion of Councilmember Anderson, seconded by Councilmember Rivenbark as presented as follows:

Approved Minutes of the Agenda Briefing Meeting of August 17, 2020, the Special Meeting of August 17, 2020 and the Regular Council Meeting of August 18, 2020

Adopted Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to enter into a Multi

Year Contract with Galls, LLC for the purchase of WFD Uniforms Adopted Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to enter into a Multi

Year Contract with Galls, LLC for the Purchase of WPD’s Class A Uniforms Adopted Resolution Granting an Encroachment for Retaining Wall

Improvements within Riverlights Age Qualified, Phase 4 Adopted Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Sign a Four year

Agreement with SpartanTec, Incorporated to Backup Data at an Off Site Location Adopted Resolution Authorizing the Award of a Contract to Brigade Boys

& Girls Club, Inc. of Wilmington, NC in the Amount of $44,260 from CDBG CV funds to provide Educational Programs and Food in response to COVID 19

************* PUBLIC INFORMATION

Ms. Helen Johnson spoke to Council about issues of racism, Confederate statues, and equality for all people and stated that a beautiful training building in memory of two outstanding black men was placed in a violent neighborhood, where people fear to tour. She stated that statues are made to remind people of the past and to show power or fear imposed on certain people and are not hidden like the training building honoring two great men. She stated that racism means to have power over another race and uses the past to destroy the future. She stated that the U.S. Census provides funds for those that are incarcerated and have had their right to vote stopped.

C1-2

REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 1, 2020 Page 2

She stated these funds are used for political purposes and it would be grand to have programs to prevent the jail population. She stated she was worth more locked up than as a good taxpayer.

Ms. Johnson stated her father was assaulted by white men but taught her

that the character of a man is in the deeds he does. Her father and other relatives served in the military, but still did not get the respect they deserved due to their color. She stated there are two types of people: small-minded that talk about people, and big-minded that make changes for all people. She stated that racism is not a word but is a lifestyle. She stated this pandemic has brought out the worst in people.

Ms. Johnson asked that Council provide programs for youth so that they

see a better world. She wants a world that makes her feel safe and helps her live to her potential. She stated that the 1898 massacre showed the world how creative and productive people can be and how it can all be taken away.

Ms. Elizabeth Losee spoke to Council about Approval of Street Signs and stated she is a resident of Pine Valley and is a representative of the Pine Valley Anti-Racism Alliance. She stated the street names in her neighborhood memorialize the Confederacy, and considering the recent Resolution identifying racism as a public health crisis, the names should be changed in order to have a perception of acceptance and equity. She stated there are those that would argue they are erasing history, but she would argue that it is better taught in the proper context through museums, books, and classrooms. She stated that controversial history has a time and place. She stated that there are no longer public accolades of Hitler, but we still know what he did and the hatred he stood for. She stated that there seems to be an attempt to preserve the Confederate ideology of white supremacy and if the City keeps these street names, we are committing to preserving the values of the Confederacy that threatened to tear the Country apart. She stated this needs to change if the City is going to progress.

Ms. Losee requested the City act and initiate a neighborhood-wide street

renaming. She stated that taking into consideration the “Rise Together” initiative promoted by Mayor Saffo, this would give Council an opportunity to show that they care about the black people in Wilmington. She stated according to the City’s Street Naming and Renaming policy, the Council can initiate the naming or renaming of any street or alley by adopting an Order after a public hearing where affected citizens can be heard. She stated it is in Council’s power to rename all the streets in question. She stated the Pine Valley Anti-Racism Alliance has constructed a list of alternate street names the community would approve of, which fall under the category of local plant life. She stated that giving these streets new names is one way for the City to become more equitable and is more than a symbolic gesture.

Mr. Obah David Ward spoke to Council about the New Wilmington

Proposal/Changing Directions and stated his interest is to restore Wilmington to the greatness it was beginning to enjoy. He stated that the former Wilmington’s rise was short lived, due to the massacre of black citizens. He stated that event has never been rectified with the justice it deserves. He stated the memorial erected was a feeble attempt to footnote a horrific happening. He stated he was here with a proposal and asked Council to be courageous and use its power to make Wilmington a shining City and achieve the potential it should have. The City must restore the trust and repair the damage done to the black community. He stated Wilmington is experiencing a booming economy, but he asked for whom? He stated at this moment we are experiencing a pandemic, righteous indignation and unrest by citizens, and wildfires that are consuming large sections of the nation. He stated that Wilmington has a unique opportunity to rise as a new City of the future and to do the right thing for all residents and to serve the poor.

Mr. Ward stated his proposal is in two parts. The first is to change the

spelling of the City’s name to Willmington, by adding an “L”, which would make it unique and would set it apart from Wilmington, Delaware. He stated the additional “L” would also stand for Love, which is what will cause the City to stay together. He stated all people living in and around the City should feel the love. He stated that he believes the

C1-3


members of Council love the City. He feels it is his job to advance the vision and plant the seeds in a direction for change. He stated people are ready for meaningful change and asked Council to imagine the new Wilmington experience.

Ms. Kristin Logan was scheduled to speak to Council about the Greenville Avenue Drainage Project, but withdrew her request.

Mr. Hunter Ford spoke to Council about Hugh Morton Amphitheater/ Live

Nation and stated he is a property owner and business owner in Wilmington. He asked that Council listen to his information and hold the vote on the Live Nation vote for a couple of weeks. He wanted to point out the impropriety in entering a second long term commitment with Live Nation, which would give them a monopoly on live music in Wilmington for the next decade. He stated it would also give a monopoly to one radio station and a single alcohol distributor for live music in Wilmington. He stated that Live Nation has extensive booking rights for, or has an interest in, 240 venues, including the House of Blues Clubs. He stated the deal the City is agreeing to is a management deal where Live Nation will manage the calendar, make improvements, and share profits from concessions, which are basically alcohol sales under the City’s nonprofit ABC permit.

Mr. Ford stated he provided Council copies of an email from Grant Lyman,

of Live Nation Carolinas in 2017 which included language that Live Nation would have exclusive rights for booking venues they operate. He stated at that point, no RFP had been issued to offer such rights and the purpose of the email was to confuse other booking agents into thinking Live Nation had exclusive rights to Hugh Morton Amphitheater through Beau Gunn Presents. He stated that Beau Gunn owns and operates the website www.greenfieldlakeamphitheater.com , which further confuses the average consumer that operation is handled by Beau Gunn and 98.3 - The Penguin and not the City of Wilmington. He stated when other booking agents have tried to book shows in 2018, they were met with resistance from band agents who believed they could only deal with Beau Gunn as a representative of Live Nation.

Mr. Ford stated that Beau Gunn refused to advertise shows on the website

he owned and aimed to mislead the public that he was in charge of Greenfield Lake Amphitheater. He stated that Beau Gunn Presents’ association with Live Nation only goes back a couple of years, and prior to that it was associated with Huka Entertainment. He stated that Beau Gunn procured an illegal deal with RA Jeffries to sell domestic and craft beer only from its distributorship, which violates the City’s ABC permit. He stated he provided an email to Council with details on additional violations. He stated the City’s ABC license is set up as a nonprofit, which makes it different than an ABC license for a privately owned music venue. Under the City’s nonprofit license, unused alcohol can be returned without penalty.

He stated that the deal with Live Nation is a deal for a special kind of

privilege at a taxpayer-funded park. He stated the minority community cannot afford $50 ticket and $10 beer, which is standard for Live Nation. He stated that giving Live Nation exclusive rights would deny minority promoters the opportunity to promote shows in the City.

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

PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearing was held on Ordinance Amending the Official Zoning

Maps of the City to Rezone Property Located at 1121 South Front Street, 1112 South 2nd Street, 101, 104, 108, 112, 114, 115 & 116 Marstellar Street from LI, Light Industrial District & R 3, Central City Residential District to UMX, Urban Mixed Use District.

Mr. Jeff Walton, Associate Planner, gave the Staff Report and stated the

Applicant proposes to rezone the property from Light Industrial (LI) and R-3, Central City Residential District to UMX, Urban Mixed Use District. The subject site includes

C1-4

http://www.greenfieldlakeamphitheater.com/


eight parcels that contain one large brick warehouse, two smaller frame structures, and vacant land. He provided Council with an aerial photograph of the site as well as the Sanborn Map of the area. He stated that according to the National Register nomination, the brick house known as the Bear-Sol Winery was built in 1913 and is a contributing structure. The nomination further states that the structure appears to have little alteration from its original appearance.

Mr. Walton provided photographs of the subject site and adjacent areas.

He stated that according to the Comprehensive Plan, the site is located in a Post Industrialization and Inner City Revitalization Area of Opportunity and is at the intersection of Special Character and Community Connector street types. He stated the Comprehensive Plan defines historic preservation as the essence of Wilmington as a southern port city and is critical to shaping Wilmington’s future urban form. He stated the proposed UMX district has the potential to meet many of these design priorities.

Mr. Walton stated that the Southside Small Area Plan supports UMX

zoning on the northern side of Marstellar Street and maintaining the existing residential on the south side. He stated a goal of the Southside Small Area Plan is to provide a mix of land uses that offers options for residents while ensuring compatibility and enhancing the neighborhood. The Plan also encourages the preservation of buildings located in the National Register of Historic Places and to pursue landmark designation for significant historic structures.

Staff is concerned that the general rezoning will not adequately protect the

historic structure on the site. He stated the existing LI setbacks of 50 feet from the front and 35 feet from the adjoining residential properties have played a role in protecting the historic structure from redevelopment, but it may also have prevented the property from a beneficial reuse, as the buildable site is limited for redevelopment. The Applicant has stated the intention of preserving the historic structure, but there is no long-term preservation assurance if the property is sold. Mr. Walton stated that on balance, the UMX standards allowing for appropriate redevelopment of the site, with the assurance of the owners that the historic structure will be preserved generally outweigh Staff’s concerns.

Mr. Walton stated this request is generally consistent with the

Comprehensive Plan, the City’s Adopted Focus Areas, and the Southside Small Area Plan. Staff believes the request is reasonable, is in the public interest, and recommends approval.

A question/answer and discussion period was held. In response to Councilmember O’Grady’s inquiry, Mr. Walton stated that

Staff did discuss a conditional district with the Applicant. He stated the application was received in September of 2019 and since that time Staff had several discussions with the Applicant about the concerns with preserving the building. He stated they discussed conditional district scenarios, as well as the possibility of a preservation agreement. He stated that ultimately the Applicant decided to proceed with the general rezoning.

Mr. Walton stated the site does back up to a residential area on the south

side of Marstellar Street. Staff felt UMX zoning would be appropriate due to the design requirements and that the size of the lots would not support a large-scale commercial operation.

Mr. Matt Nichols, Attorney for the Applicant, provided Council photographs

of the site, as well as the existing brick building at the corner of Marstellar Street. He stated his client purchased the property in 1991 and put a tremendous amount of effort into preserving the property and has no intention of tearing it down. Mr. Nichols noted that the structure could be torn down under the current zoning.

Mr. Nichols stated this site is exactly what the UMX Ordinance calls for, in

many ways, including building materials, building façade and orientation, windows, having parking in the rear of the building, and the focus on pedestrian activity with the

C1-5


sidewalk. He stated this rezoning request came about because his client realized the LI zoning on the property is outdated and the UMX zoning makes more sense.

Mr. Nichols stated the entire property is within the Growth Strategy Area of

Opportunity and is in the Post Industrial and Inner City Area of Opportunity and highlighted some of those provisions, including adaptive reuse of buildings, promoting entrepreneurship and small business development, and fostering the identity of small urban neighborhoods and sub-districts. He stated the LI zoning is not conducive to having neighborhood-type commercial uses.

Mr. Nichols stated the request is consistent with the Southside Small Area

Plan and the building in question is identified within the Plan. The Plan notes that some industrial uses are no longer viable, or have relocated, leaving many buildings underutilized or abandoned. Mr. Nichols stated that this is accurate in this case, although the building is not abandoned. He stated the UMX zoning will allow for better uses and would help with the redevelopment of the area. He stated the UMX district would be consistent with the area.

Mr. Nichols stated there is residential adjacent to the lots on Marstellar

Street, but the overall area has existing UMX zoning. He stated the property itself is Light Industrial, and there is Light Industrial in the vicinity. He stated that to the west is Heavy Industrial and this area would serve as a good transition between the Industrial and the UMX corridor to the east. Mr. Nichols provided information on past Council general rezonings to UMX and highlighted the similarities to the current request.

Mr. Nichols stated that for the zoning on the property, the residential abuts

Light Industrial, with two of the parcels in the current request zoned LI, and the remaining three zoned R-3. He stated the street is already zoned LI and the Applicant is not proposing to rezone any streets. He stated this is a safeguard, as the Applicant would not be able to have commercial access on to 2nd Street from the corner lot because of the residential zoning of the street. He provided Council illustrations of the parcels to be rezoned.

Mr. Nichols stated there are many benefits to the UMX zoning and that

Staff and the Planning Commission recommended approval of this request. He stated on the issue of general rezoning versus conditional rezoning, he stated the UMX provisions have safeguards built in, such as better parking, better landscaping, building orientation, and building materials. He stated that is why the previous UMX rezonings he referenced were general rezonings.

A question/answer and discussion period was held. Councilmember O’Grady stated that the Applicant is asking Council to

make this building more viable for commercial uses but is not willing to ensure the building is preserved. He stated that he understands the current owner is preserving and maintaining the building, but there would be no protection if the property was sold. He does not agree with the Staff that those concerns are outweighed by other considerations and stated it would be a No from him to have this kind of historic building with no assurance of preservation.

Mr. Nichols stated that had his client wanted to tear down the building, he

could have done so. Councilmember O’Grady stated he is not disputing that the current owner wants to preserve the property, but he is concerned about future owners who may want to clear the lot and build something else. He stated this is the City’s chance to protect the building.

Mr. Nichols stated that from a practical standpoint, there is nothing to be

gained by tearing the building down. If the building were demolished, whatever was built in its place would have to be the same height and the same orientation as the current building. He stated the building is the perfect example of adaptive reuse. Mr. Nichols stated his client has certain rights associated with the property and he is not prepared to give those up in the process of this request.

C1-6


Councilmember Spears stated he agreed with Councilmember O’Grady as

to the preservation of the historic building and stated it would help him to see a plan as to what will go on the property. Mr. Nichols stated there is no plan at this point. He stated his client acquired other parcels in the vicinity and it made sense to seek a rezoning to UMX. In the UMX Ordinance, it states that if you are outside of the 1945 limits, you must do a Conditional Rezoning for the UMX district. However, Council did not make that requirement for properties within the 1945 City limits. He stated when Council passed the UMX District in 2013, it also simultaneously rezoned approximately 600 parcels to general UMX, with no specific plans as to what would be built. He stated the UMX District is different within the 1945 limits due to the built-in safeguards and a general rezoning request is not out of the ordinary. Mr. Nichols stated that it comes down to whether this property is better as Light Industrial or is it better as UMX.

Councilmember Rivenbark asked Mr. John Joye, City Attorney, as to

whether a preservation easement could be placed on the property in conjunction with the general rezoning. Mr. Joye responded that for a preservation easement, or to designate the building as a landmark would require the acceptance of the Applicant. Councilmember Rivenbark stated that the Icehouse building and Babies Hospital are two examples of historic buildings the City was not able to preserve and he agrees that there should be some type of protection for the historic building in case it is sold.

Mr. Nichols stated there have been several discussions with Staff about

the building preservation. He stated that should his client want to alter or add on to the building as part of an adaptive reuse he is unsure how that would be impacted by the review process, or if it would even be allowed. His client is concerned with the third-party easement having control over his property. He stated his client has taken very good care of the property for 30 years and feels he should not have to give assurances as to the historic building.

Mayor Pro Tem Haynes asked Staff to address the Comprehensive Plan

provision number 11.1.1 and explain why they gave it an indication of Strong Support. Mr. Walton responded that Staff gave the Strong Support based on the factors of the UMX District and the fact this building already complies with a number of those provisions, including zero lot line development and having parking in the rear. Staff felt that any sort of new construction would complement the existing building. He understands Council’s concerns and stated they were discussed with the Applicant. He stated that if this application were to come back through, Staff would probably amend that provision to reflect Council’s concerns.

In response to Mayor Saffo’s inquiry, Mr. Walton stated the historic

easement would mainly cover the outward appearance of the building. The easement would be with the Historic Wilmington Foundation, and any changes would have to be approved by its Board. The Applicant would also have to discuss any changes to the property with the City’s Preservation Office. He stated that to avoid involving a third party, the Applicant could request landmark status, which would mean the exterior of the building would be preserved and any changes would have to be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. He stated that having a landmark designation would qualify the Applicant for a reduction in property taxes. He stated the height limit for UMX is generally 45 feet, but if there is a mixed use building, it can go to 55 feet. The current building is four stories and is around 45 feet. He stated the footprint of the building could expand towards the property line.

Mayor Saffo stated there is a lot of passion towards preserving this

building. He stated possible expansions of this property would be towards the north or the east where the Applicant could add onto the property if it was done well. He understands the Applicant does not want additional restrictions on the property and wants to be able to respond to market conditions. Mayor Saffo inquired of Mr. Nichols if the concern was whether a preservation easement would preclude expansion. Mr. Nichols responded that was not the concern and he did have the opportunity to briefly speak with his client during tonight’s meeting to relay Council’s concerns. Mayor Saffo inquired as to whether Mr. Nichols would like to continue this Item in order to give him

C1-7


the chance to further speak with his client about the possibility of a preservation easement. Mr. Nichols responded affirmatively and made a request for Council to continue the Item.

Following further consideration, Mayor Saffo moved to continue the

Ordinance until Council’s September 15, 2020 Meeting. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Anderson and carried unanimously.

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

Public Hearing was held on Ordinance Modifying An Existing O&I 1

(CD), Office And Institutional (Conditional District) Located At 3380 & 3400 Masonboro Loop Road To Allow For Alternative Building Elevations, Site Layout, And Outdoor Amplification Restriction.

Mr. Brian Chamber, Senior Planner gave the Staff Report and stated this

site was located on the west side of Masonboro Loop Road, just south of Andrews Reach, across from Wilmington Fire Station No. 15. He provided Council an aerial map of the site and photographs of the subject property and adjacent properties. He stated that on August 7, 2018, Council rezoned this property from R-15 to Office & Institutional-1, Conditional District, (O&I-1)(CD) for a project containing two office structures and five residential units. Each building was approved for 2,400 square feet of nonresidential ground floor uses, with two residential units on top. A fifth residential unit was approved above a detached garage in the rear. He stated the nonresidential uses were limited to office and personal services uses. He stated that a condition was placed on the property prohibiting outdoor amplification.

Mr. Chambers stated the Applicant is requesting to modify the existing

Conditional District to amend the building elevations and relocate a two-car garage in order to facilitate tree preservation. He provided a drawing with the current and proposed locations for the garage. The application also includes a request to modify the prohibition against amplified music on site so that it applies to nonresidential uses only. All the other conditions would remain in place.

Mr. Chambers showed Council the elevations that were approved in2018

and the proposed elevations for this request. He stated the Comprehensive Plan calls for development within existing neighborhoods to be consistent with the design elements of nearby structures and to enhance the overall character. He stated the Plan identifies low intensity mixed use developments as appropriate transitions between low density neighborhoods and more intensive commercial and mixed use areas. Staff believes the proposed modifications are compatible with the surrounding area and are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the City’s Adopted Focus Areas. Staff believes this request is reasonable, in the public interest, and recommends conditional approval. The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the request.

A question/answer and discussion period was held. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Haynes’s inquiry about the amplification

provision, Mr. Chambers stated that provision came about because of a concern that the open space at the rear of the property would be used for special events associated with the businesses located there. The condition was enacted to avoid that type of activity in the middle of the neighborhood. He stated the Applicant’s concern is about the residential uses and whether those tenants would be prohibited from playing music in their units. Mayor Pro Tem Haynes inquired that if the condition was modified, whether the residential units would be subject to the general provisions of the City’s Noise Ordinance, the same as the neighboring residential areas. Mr. Chambers confirmed that was correct.

Councilmember Rivenbark stated he did not consider turning a radio on as

amplified music, but would consider a guitar plugged into an amplifier as amplified music. Mr. Chambers stated the concern was the Applicant thought if a resident was playing anything that had a speaker, it would not be permitted. Councilmember

C1-8


Rivenbark stated that anything that had a detached speaker would be considered amplified music.

Mr. John Joye, City Attorney, stated the Land Development Code does not

define amplified music. He stated the only place it is defined is in the Noise Ordinance, and it is defined as any sound or noise, including the human voice that is increased in volume or intensity by means of electrical power. He stated it would be easy to assume that an electric radio would fall under that definition and that is the concern of the Applicant. The intent is for the residents to have the right to play a radio in their unit. Mr. Joye stated that this request is to modify an existing condition that says no amplified music is permitted from the site.

Mr. Chambers stated that the businesses that end up operating out of the

office spaces will not be allowed to have an event associated with that business that involve amplified music. Mayor Pro Tem Haynes stated that it needed to be clearer that the residents will still have to abide by the Noise Ordinance.

Mr. Chambers stated the Planning Commission voted 6-1 to recommend

the request. He stated the one vote against wanted to keep the current prohibition on amplification in place.

Ms. Regina Drury, Applicant and Property Owner stated that during the

2018 rezoning, a resident from Pirate’s Cove expressed a concern about noise. She stated there was a place called Halligan’s Bar that held nighttime events on their property and the neighbor stated they did not want other businesses to have events or parties. She stated at that time she was asked if she would agree to a condition of no amplified music, assuming it meant no bands, or something similar. She stated after she received approval, she had a family who lived in one of the units to ask her if they could hold their child’s birthday party on the site. She stated she informed the resident there could be no amplified music on the property at all.

Ms. Drury stated she then researched the definition of amplified music and

realized that it means anything to amplify music, such as a car radio, or built in porch speakers. She stated that going through this process, she realized there is already an existing Noise Ordinance that would govern the sound levels for properties in the City. She stated there were three residential units on the property and the Conditional District permitted her to add two more residential units, for a total of five. She stated when she realized she needed to modify the Conditional District to take the porches off the front of the building, she asked if the no amplification provision could be modified as well and Staff agreed to recommend it. Ms. Drury stated she feels the confusion comes in because of the term amplified music and that people assume there will be giant parties.

Mrs. Drury stated that after her approval in 2018, she was notified by City

Engineering that the City needed an additional eight feet for a multi-use sidewalk path. She stated this impacted the original approved plan and she needed to make changes to accommodate the City’s needs. She stated she needed to move the building back which affected the placement of the RV garage. When she moved the garage, she also moved the living space on top of it to the building in the back. During this process, she learned there is high probability the road in front of her building will be widened, or a turn lane will be added. She realized that residents would not want to sit on a porch that faced a busy road, so she decided to make private porches on the back of the property. In addition, the back building was moved in order to give an existing pecan tree more room for its roots.

Mrs. Penelope Spicer-Sidbury, City Clerk, advised Council that four written

comments had been received for this Item. The first was from Mr. Bradley Podd, 5700 Andrews Reach Loop who stated that he and his neighbors on the Andrews Reach Homeowners Association supported the decision of the Planning Commission on August 5, 2020 to limit amplified music to residential uses only for this site. He stated the modification would allow residents to make play music at their units in accordance with the City Noise Ordinance, but would still prevent amplified music at the commercial

C1-9


units. He stated that there is no opposition to the proposed modifications so long as no changes to the building heights are planned.

Ms. Spicer-Sidbury stated the second comment was from Ms. Courtney

Garbee, 5700 Andrews Reach Loop, who stated she was in support of the Planning Commission’s decision to restrict amplified music to the residential units. The third comment was from Ms. Amy Cantrill, 3428 Tansey Close Drive, who stated she was opposed to any allowance of unrestricted amplified music, as her neighborhood shares a landline with the site. The fourth comment was from Ms. Gillian Mason, 5421 Andrews Reach Loop, who stated she was opposed to any nonresidential amplified music and was only in support of the Ordinance as proposed. She stated she is opposed to anything that would render the area unsafe or deter families from living in the area.

A question/answer and discussion period was held. Everyone being given the opportunity to be heard, the Public Hearing was

closed. Councilmember Rivenbark moved approval of the Ordinance and read the

consistency statement as follows: I move to approve the proposed amendment to rezone property

located at 3380 & 3400 Masonboro Loop Road to modify an existing O&I-1(CD), Office and Institutional-1 (Conditional District) to modify the approved building elevations, adjust the location of one of the structures, and modify the outdoor amplification condition and find it to be Consistent with the relevant policies in the Comprehensive Plan*, based on the application materials, and the information provided at the public hearing and in the staff report, and to find Approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest for the following reason(s): The proposed modifications are compatible with the neighborhood and will not have an adverse impact on neighboring properties. * Per NC General Statute160A-383, the Comprehensive Plan includes the Create Wilmington Comprehensive Plan and any other officially adopted plan that is applicable.

Councilmember Barnett seconded the motion and it carried unanimously.

A Second Reading of the Ordinance was scheduled for Council’s September 15, 2020 Meeting.

************* Public Hearing was held on Revised Ordinance Amending the Official

Zoning Map of the City to Rezone Property Containing 10.45 Acres of Land Located at 111 Warehouse Lane and 3804 Market Street from CS, Commercial Services District to MF MH(CD), Multi Family Medium High Density (Conditional District) for a 192 Unit Residential Development.

Mr. Brian Chambers, Senior Planner gave the Staff Report and stated this

property is located on the west side of Wetsig Road, south of Market Street, and east of Cinema Drive. He stated the site is approximately 10.5 acres in size and is currently vacant. He provided Council an aerial map of the site as well as photographs of existing conditions at the site and adjacent properties. He stated the site is currently zoned CS, Commercial Services and surrounded by commercial and office uses. He stated the railroad right-of-way runs along the south side of the site and Fire Station No. 3 is located to the east.

Mr. Chambers stated the Applicant is proposed to rezone this site from CS

to MF-MH (CD), Multi-Family, Medium High Density (Conditional District) to allow a 192-unit residential development. Based on the estimated trips generated for this proposal, a Traffic Impact Analysis was not required. The project includes four access points on Wetsig Road and provides for the improvement and dedication of Wetsig Road as a public right-of-way between the southern boundary of the site and Market Street. Mr.

C1-10


Chambers stated the Applicant is also proposing to dedicate a new public right-of-way to provide a street connection to Cinema Drive across the adjacent fire station property. He stated that this connection is a critical component of this project and will play a significant role in the distribution of traffic on the site. He stated there is an existing transit stop at the intersection of Market Street and Wetsig Road and there are several WAVE Transit routes that run near this area.

Mr. Chambers stated the proposal includes a sidewalk along the Wetsig

Road frontage and sidewalk connections through the project. He stated that the proposed road connection at Cinema Drive would also provide a sidewalk connection to the existing network located on Cinema Drive. He stated there is a significant wetland area located on the site and the Applicant proposes to minimize the disturbed area by minimizing the number of parking spaces and locating a portion of the parking spaces to underneath the building footprint. He stated that according to the proposal, 90% of this site will be left undisturbed.

Mr. Chambers showed Council proposed elevations provided by the

Applicant. He stated the Applicant has committed to providing an affordable housing component to the project for a period of 10 years. He has committed 10% of the total number of units to be designated as workforce housing as defined under the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) High Home Rent Standards. He stated that HUD’s rents are calculated to be affordable to those making 65% of the area’s median income, adjusted for household size.

Mr. Chambers stated the Comprehensive Plan encourages quality design

and site planning, so that infill development is compatible with the natural and built environment. The Plan encourages increased residential density within close proximity to services. He stated that future residents of this property will benefit from the proximity to existing services in the area and the associated connectivity improvements will be beneficial to the community. Staff believes this request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the City’s Adopted Focus Areas. Staff believes the request is reasonable, is in the public interest, and recommends conditional approval. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of this request.

Mr. John Joye, City Attorney stated that members of Council, both present

in the room and participating remotely, have received additional documentation on this Item. He stated the Applicant and concerned neighbors have been working on additional conditions that deal with raised issues. He stated one is a condition dealing with an existing Brownfields Agreement and another condition is to deal with an appeal taken from the Subdivision Review Board that came in yesterday.

In response to Mayor Saffo’s inquiry, Mr. Joye stated that Council would

not have to take any action out of the ordinary because of the appeal. He stated that there is a condition that states that Council’s action will not become effective until such time as the approval of the Subdivision Review Board had been upheld and there were no pending appeals.

A question/answer and discussion period was held. Mr. Chambers stated that a Traffic Impact Analysis is required only when

a proposed use will generate more than 100 A.M. or P.M. trips and based on the intensity of this project, that threshold was not exceeded. He stated that Staff looked at this project in terms of proximity to services as well as the distribution of traffic and felt the services in this area would lend itself to people not needing to drive as much. He stated the Cinema Drive connection is critical for this project, as it will distribute traffic from Cinema Drive to two signalized intersections.

Councilmember Spears stated that he is not certain that we have the

means in place to circumvent the need to drive and he feels it will still be an issue for citizens as they travel back and forth.

C1-11


Councilmember Anderson stated that having additional connections will help to dispense the traffic. He stated that the WMPO had a plan to change that area and put in a median, which will change the traffic pattern, similar to what currently exists in Porters Neck. He stated the Plan was funded, but the status is not clear now considering NCDOT’s issues. He agreed with Councilmember Spears in that he is not sure how many people will walk to the grocery store, but having services close by will reduce the travel time.

Councilmember O’Grady stated that the Chair of the City’s Tree

Commission sent an email praising this project. Mr. Chambers stated the project would be conditioned to the proposed site plan which shows 90% of the property set aside and the Applicant would not be permitted to go into those areas to remove trees. The remainder of the site will be subject to the City’s existing Tree Ordinance, which requires the preservation or mitigation of any significant trees.

Mr. Dave Spetrino, Applicant, stated for this project he was able to

implement a number of details that came from successes as well as learning from failures of past projects. He stated the current CS zoning is not appropriate and would permit some uses such as storage units that would not work for the area. He stated his goal is to build places for people to live and he wants to continue that pattern of development on this site.

Mr. Spetrino stated he started this project by deciding how to protect those

features that make the site so interesting. He stated one of the fun things about building downtown is that you are surrounding by character. He provided photographs of the existing trees on the site. He stated this site was designed as if the buildings were on a hinge, in the event that he needed to move the structure to protect a resource, the core of the building could still stay put.

Mr. Spetrino stated one of the challenges of this project was how to get

people comfortable with the density and height and to avoid the parking, sprawl, and infrastructure required to get to this site. He stated the site is over 10 acres and the improvements cover less than 10% of the total site.

Mr. Spetrino stated he has been paying attention to who has been living in

the homes being built and for this site he has targeted a specific demographic. He stated his typical resident is looking for a smaller footprint and is not necessarily concerned with amenities such as a gym or a pool. The convenience of the location is such that they do not have to go far to reach the services they need. He stated his projects have been very well received by the older population.

Mr. Spetrino stated he would not use the term “affordable housing” with

this project because of the connotation and the burden associated with the term. He stated he is creating workforce housing or attainable housing. He stated the focus is on having a great space to live without the external things his residents are not looking to pay for.

Mr. Spetrino noted that the way the City calculates density punishes those

developers that want to create smaller projects. This project has 240 bedrooms in 192 homes. However, if it was 3-bedroom apartments, it would be 80 homes, and 4-bedroom apartments would be 60 homes. He stated that when discussing the traffic impacts, he was not asked about the number of bedrooms. He stated we are setting ourselves up to encourage developers to build only what they can get approved.

Mr. Spetrino stated this is a demonstrative project due to its low impact

development, density through height to minimize footprints, integrated parking under the structure, mixed uses and proximity to existing services, workforce housing, and connectivity. He stated that as to parking spaces, he wanted to err on the side of having fewer than may be necessary, rather than more. He stated there is additional space to create more parking spaces, if that becomes necessary. He stated the trees will remain and pervious concrete parking spaces will be placed around them.

C1-12


Mr. Spetrino stated he is requesting to be allowed to use a portion of the City property to make a connector road, as this component is imperative to the project.

Mr. Spetrino showed Council aerial photographs of the site. He stated

that he likes to look at projects in theory, but with a Conditional District he realizes that he must provide accurate information on the project. He stated that after hearing concerns from the neighbors, he submitted a more appropriate layout than what he originally submitted. He wanted to show that he needed to connect to Cinema Drive from Wetsig Road and he knew he wanted to do that on City property, but what he did not show on the original submittal is that there are trees that he does not want to remove or harm. He stated that he would like to make an adjustment to the plan he originally presented and provided Council the original submittal which shows the sidewalk right against the neighbor’s site, which was not his intention. He provided Council with the amended plan, labeled Sheet “B”, which shows the trees to be protected, improvements to the sidewalks, and leaves the existing driveway intact and extended to Wetsig Road. He stated he believes that works for all the involved parties.

Mr. Spetrino stated that the Pearsall Memorial Church sits on three acres

and is adjacent to his site. When he purchased the property, it was conveyed with the condition that the two sanctuaries would be preserved and protected in perpetuity. He stated his goal with the property is to utilize the bike path and the rail trail to create an entire area where the residents will find themselves where they want to be, rather than having to drive somewhere else.

Mr. Spetrino stated there were objections to this project, including the

assertion that it was too large. He acknowledged the various concerns and stated that he has thought about them and tried to navigate them, which he feels is reflected in his presentation. He stated his goal was to protect the environment and to right-size the project for the space. He stated another concern was the potential for negative impacts to the swamp forest. He stated that one of the first actions he took was to survey the wetlands and to have a silt fence installed at the 25-foot setback line, so that no one had to wonder if they were on the wrong side of the wetland line. He stated that parking was a concern, but as he stated earlier, if additional parking is needed, he can provide it, but he does not feel that forcing more parking is necessary, given the type of resident he believes will live here.

Mr. Spetrino stated that the adjacent neighbor and Wetsig Road are all

under one Brownfields Agreement. He stated there are concerns about the width of Wetsig Road and he stated he is okay if someone must drive slowly down the road because it is narrow. He stated this road is not intended to be a thoroughfare or a cut through. He stated the planned traffic circulation is very logical, and a safe way of presenting the housing that is being created at the site.

Mr. Spetrino stated another concern was potential noise, although he was

not sure how to address that, as the site is adjacent to the Fire Station and is under a regular flight path from Wilmington International. He stated that while additional cars may add sound, he does not feel this project will harm the quiet enjoyment of the businesses next door. He feels the sound can be mitigated with vegetation and landscaping.

Mr. Spetrino stated there was a concern that the Fire Department would

not be able to reach this project. He stated that there is no way the project would have gotten to this point if the Wilmington Fire Department had any objections to the proposed plan.

Mr. Spetrino stated the workforce housing component, although a small

part of the project, has been a large distraction. He stated it will work, and it will be successful, but he did not anticipate how big of a distraction it would be, both to himself, and to those talking about the project.

A question/answer and discussion period was held.

C1-13


In response to Councilmember Barnett’s inquiry, Mr. Spetrino stated that the workforce housing units in his project are floating, as all the units are the same. It prevents having haves and have-nots within the project and he believes it will keep his vacancy rate lower. Any open unit can be workforce or market-rate housing. He stated there is a cost to having vacant units, but he believes this project will have a very low vacancy rate.

In response to Councilmember Spears’ inquiry, Mr. Spetrino

acknowledged that designating 10% of the housing as workforce housing is not a whole lot, but it is more than zero. He stated that he is doing something that others are afraid to try and he included the 10-year period in the hopes that other developers could follow suit. Mr. Spetrino stated that as far as his project is concerned, he would like to see the workforce housing stay in perpetuity. He hopes that other developers will see that the concept works and can be approved by Council and will go forward with similar projects. He stated that saying forever at this point is difficult, as he can’t guarantee that a subsequent buyer would want the condition in perpetuity. He acknowledged this will not solve all the problems, but it will begin to solve one in an incremental way.

Mr. Spetrino stated this project is not seeking relief from the height limits.

He stated it is a 50-foot-tall building and that is in line with what is permitted. Mr. Matt Nichols, Attorney representing the Cinema Drive Office Park

Association spoke to Council and stated that his client is not opposed to the project, particularly the workforce housing component. His client has concerns with some of the design criteria, particularly related to the proposed public right-of-way and street to be dedicated. He stated there has been a lot of progress made today with their concerns and in light of that his presentation tonight has been abbreviated. He showed Council a map of the area, with the existing movie theater marked. He stated his client is a condominium association of office condos and is shown in purple on the provided map. He showed the City of Wilmington’s parcel in yellow and the shared stormwater pond in green. He showed an aerial photograph of the property and his client’s property in relation to the proposed project and the existing Fire Station. He also pointed out that tract of land that is being referred to as Wetsig Road, but is actually a driveway at the end of Wetsig Road.

Mr. Nichols stated that Mr. Spetrino has already addressed several of his

client’s concerns and that the Sheet B proposed by Mr. Spetrino is acceptable to his client. He stated that his client has appreciated having the Fire Station as a neighbor and stated they have had a good relationship with the Wilmington Fire Department. Mr. Nichols provided photographs of the existing buffers.

Mr. Nichols stated that making the new Wetsig Road a public right-of-way

means that his client’s property will front three public rights-of-way, which will create some nonconformity issues. He stated he feels the parties have worked through those issues as his client would have a vested interest in a fourth proposed building that he has planned for a current vacant lot.

Mr. Nichols pointed out that the parking is a concern as an adjacent

property owner, as the parking is 67 spaces short and there is no parking on the street. He asked that Council address that to ensure that his client’s parking lot will not be used for overflow parking.

Mr. Nichols requested that he have an opportunity to be heard at the

Second Reading if there are still any unresolved issues at that time. Mr. Tom West, one of the five owners of the Cinema Drive Office Park

spoke to Council, and stated he wanted to make sure that everything is done properly for his fellow owners and the area remains a quiet zone. He stated that Mr. Spetrino has made some concessions and he will have his attorney review them to ensure they are guaranteed. He stated there are tentative plans for an additional building to be constructed in the office park and he wants to ensure the setbacks will not affect that potential construction. He stated the owners are concerned with the parking, as Mr.

C1-14


Nichols described, and feels the developer should have to come forward with a plan to make up for the deficit in the number of parking spaces.

Mr. West stated that he hoped the people coming up Market Street and

making a right on to Wetsig Road are prevented from coming through the property in order to connect to Cinema Drive.

Mr. Nichols concluded his client’s presentation and stated he feels

confident the outstanding details will be worked out, but he asked that he be permitted to speak again if necessary, at the Second Reading.

Mayor Saffo stated that for Council to take a formal vote on the Item, the

Public Hearing would need to be closed. However, Council can reopen the Public Hearing during the Second Reading, should it be necessary.

Mr. Stephen Whitney, Vice-Chair of the Cape Fear Housing Coalition

(CFHC), spoke to Council in favor of the Ordinance and stated the CFHC sent a letter to Council on August 11, 2020 expressing support for the 192-unit residential development at this site. He stated the requested zoning will help to address the community’s critical need for additional housing units that are affordable for low to moderate income families. He stated the letter described five aspects of the project that are worthy of Council’s support and stated that all the Councilmembers should have a copy of the letter. He stated that having a developer address this need without public financial support is a win for the community. He stated it is also a challenge to other local developers to find similar win-win outcomes.

Mrs. Penelope Spicer Sidbury, City Clerk, advised Council that no

electronic comments were received on this Item. In response to Councilmember O’Grady’s inquiry about potential changes

to the Ordinance, Mr. John Joye, City Attorney stated that as to the conditions in the Ordinance, the Applicant must adhere to the conditions presented to Council. He stated that if the talks between the developer and the neighbor do not change any of the conditions, then the expectation would be Council could come back and vote on a Second Reading. He stated that if the parties came back and needed to change one or more of the conditions, then the request would be for Council to reconsider the Item. If the reconsideration was at a remote meeting, Second Reading would be delayed until the following Council meeting. If Council was wholly present and not participating remotely, the two votes could be conducted at one meeting. Council could also continue the Item for two weeks and conduct the vote at its next meeting, although he noted that the parties were not in favor of delaying the vote.

Mr. Joye added that he spoke with Chief Martinette of the Fire Department

about the new public right-of-way across City property and he stated that he believes it will enhance the Fire Department’s ability to respond and get the firetrucks out faster.

A question/answer and discussion period was held. In response to Councilmember Anderson’s inquiry, Mr. Joye stated that it

would be possible to make the parking requirement a range, with a minimum and a maximum number of spaces, rather than one precise number.

Mr. Joye suggested that Council hold open the Public Hearing and

continue it to Council’s September 8, 2020 Special Meeting, if that would give the parties enough time to work out the outstanding details. If all Council members are physically present at the meeting, both votes can be conducted at that time.

Mr. Nichols stated he was confident that would give the parties time to

work out the details. He stated that most of the details have been resolved and just need to be memorialized. He also wanted to confirm the issues regarding the nonconformity with Planning Staff.

C1-15


Councilmember O’Grady moved to continue the Ordinance to Council’s Special Meeting on September 8, 2020. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Barnett and carried unanimously.

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

Public Hearing was held on Ordinance Modifying An Existing CB(CD),

Community Business (Conditional District) Located At 400 Arboretum Drive For A Mixed use Development To Allow Spas And Health Clubs As A Permitted Use.

Mr. Brian Chambers, Senior Planner gave the Staff Report and stated the

site is located to the northwest of Military Cutoff Road and Station Road. He stated the site is approximately 19 acres in size and is currently under construction for a mixed use development. He provided Council an aerial photograph of the site and photographs of the existing conditions. He stated that on May 1, 2018, Council rezoned the property to CB (CD), Community Business (Conditional District) for a mixed use development with 18,000 square feet of retail, restaurant, and office space and 360 multi-family residential units.

Mr. Chambers stated the Applicant is requesting to modify the existing

Conditional District in order to allow spas and health clubs as permitted use within the development. He stated the spa and health club use generates significantly fewer trips than the currently permitted uses and noted that the traffic data included in the Case Summary is correct, but the label had not been updated. He stated that no other changes are proposed.

Mr. Chambers stated the proposed modification will allow for a use that is

compatible and would add to the variety of uses available on the site and to the surrounding neighborhood. Staff believes this request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the City’s Adopted Focus Areas. Staff believes this request is reasonable, in the public interest, and recommends conditional approval. Planning Commission voted to unanimously recommend approval of this modification request.

In response to Councilmember Anderson’s inquiry, Mr. Chambers stated

this use is permitted in the zoning district, but when the Applicant originally made the request for a Conditional District, spas and health clubs were not included as a permitted use for this site.

Mr. Matt Nichols, Attorney representing the Applicant stated that as Mr.

Chambers mentioned this is not a modification to the site plan and the requested use is permitted in the underlying zoning district. The Applicant has a tenant that will be a good addition to the mixed use development and is requesting the modification to permit the use. Mr. Nichols provided photographs of the existing development.

Mr. Nichols stated there is an existing definition for spas and health clubs

in the Land Development Code. He stated the project received unanimous approval from Council for the original conditional district rezoning and this proposed use is consistent with the original approval.

In response to Mayor Saffo’s inquiry, Mr. Joye stated that one of the

conditions is that the Applicant was required to designate 10% of the residential units as workforce housing, or to provide money in lieu of doing so. He stated that the Applicant has built the workforce housing as part of the project.

Councilmember Rivenbark inquired as to whether the provisions had been

worked out to allow the City to accept money in lieu of building workforce housing. Mr. Joye responded that Staff has been working on those provisions, although COVID has slowed it down. He stated the devil has been in the details and what the numbers will be between the payment and how the City will be able to turn that into affordable housing versus incentivizing developers to build the affordable housing units. Mr. Joye stated in this project, there was no incentive offered to the developer.

C1-16


There being no one present to speak in favor or opposition, the Public Hearing was closed. Mrs. Penelope Spicer Sidbury, City Clerk, advised Council that no electronic comments were received on this Item.

Councilmember Anderson moved approval of the Ordinance and read the

consistency statement as follows: I move to approve the proposed amendment to rezone property

located at 400 Arboretum Drive to modify an existing CB (CD), Community Business (Conditional District) to allow spas and health clubs as a permitted use and find it to be Consistent with the relevant policies in the Comprehensive Plan*, based on the application materials, and the information provided at the public hearing and in the staff report, and to find Approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest for the following reason(s): The proposed modification would allow for a commercial use that is compatible with the existing development pattern and expand the variety of uses available to residents. Per NC General Statute160A-383, the Comprehensive Plan includes the Create Wilmington Comprehensive Plan and any other officially adopted plan that is applicable.

Councilmember O’Grady seconded the motion and it carried unanimously.

A Second Reading of the Ordinance was scheduled for Council’s September 15, 2020 Meeting.

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

ORDINANCES

Ordinance Amending the Land Development Code Chapter 18, Sec. 18-287 to Remove the Major Thoroughfare Frontage Requirement for Motels and Hotels in the O&I, Office & Institutional Districts was considered on Second Reading.

Mr. Sterling Cheatham, City Manager stated that while Staff did not

prepare a presentation, they were available for any questions. Mrs. Penelope Spicer Sidbury, City Clerk, advised Council that no

electronic comments were received on this Item. Following further consideration, Councilmember Rivenbark moved

approval of the Ordinance on Second Reading, seconded by Councilmember O’Grady, and the motion carried unanimously.

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

Ordinance Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Grant Agreement with the Department of Justice and Making a Supplemental Appropriation in the Amount of $234,749 to better enable WPD to Respond to the Covid Virus considered.

Chief Donny Williams, Wilmington Police Department stated this

Ordinance is to authorize the execution of a grant agreement with the Department of Justice (DOJ). He stated they originally presented the application for this grant in May and WPD was notified of the award in June. He stated the funds will be used to purchase equipment that will aid in WPD’s response to the COVID pandemic. The equipment being purchased will include external automatic defibrillators, medical kits, decontamination tent, mobile rehab units, generators, a portable message board, portable camera towers, sterilization equipment, and radio equipment. He stated the original intent was to use $25,800 of the funds to purchase additional drones, but the DOJ is not permitting the purchase of drones until such time as they update relevant policies and provide additional guidance. It is unknown when the drones will be purchased, but the remaining equipment will be purchased immediately upon Council approval.

C1-17


Chief Williams stated that a month ago, he began releasing WPD’s drone logs for the public to see the WPD’s drone activities. He stated the challenge to his Staff was to purchase equipment that could be used in the pandemic response but could also be resources for other future situations and critical events.

Following further consideration, Mayor Pro Tem Haynes moved approval

of the Ordinance, seconded by Councilmember Barnett, and the motion carried unanimously. A Second Reading of the Ordinance was waived on motion of Councilmember Anderson, seconded by Councilmember O’Grady and carried unanimously.

************* Ordinance to Accept and Appropriate Additional Federal Coronavirus

Relief Funds Passed Through New Hanover County in the Amount of $1,645,285 to the Special Purpose Fund was considered.

Ms. Jennifer Maready, Finance Director stated this Item would accept and

appropriate additional Corononavirus Federal relief funds passed through New Hanover County to the City, in the amount of $1,645,285. She stated these funds are part of the CARES Act, which authorized two rounds of funding to the Counties. The second round of funding included a rule that 25% was to be passed through to municipalities. The allocation of the 25% to municipalities in the County was based on population. She stated the City’s allocation was $1.9 million, with the first round of $332,000 already received in June.

Ms. Maready stated these funds must be spent by December 30, 2020

and the City was required to provide a spending plan to the County, which is attached to the Ordinance. She stated the City is estimating $417,578.35 for public health expenses such as PPE and sanitation supplies, $15,000 for payroll expenses, $1,044,852.37 for compliance expenses such as telework, FMLA as it relates to the Coronavirus Relief Act, and extended internet, and $500,000 for economic support for housing assistance.

Ms. Maready stated the City has identified four points for extended

internet access to assist with remote learning and job searches. These areas are: Police Department Headquarters parking lot, Fire/Police Training Center parking lot, MLK Center parking lot, and Maides Park parking lot. She stated the internet access will extend only into the listed parking lots. She stated if the City decides to continue providing extended internet past December, there will be ongoing maintenance fees that will be included in the City’s annual budget. The County is also providing additional locations at County facilities for extended internet access. She stated once this Item is approved, Communications will work with IT to provide information to the public on the access points.

Ms. Maready stated the housing assistance funds would be added to the

funds already appropriated for the City’s CDBG-CV program to provide additional rental and utility assistance for City residents. She stated that Good Shepherd is administering this program for the City and if Council approves this Item, a modification to their contract would be brought back to Council for approval. She stated that Good Shepherd has a communication and outreach program already in place.

Councilmember Barnett stated that mental health services will be one

service that we will need to find funding to support. In response to Councilmember Spears’ inquiry, Ms. Maready stated she

would make sure that the information is being provided to the public in Spanish as well as English.

Following further consideration, Councilmember Barnett moved approval

of the Ordinance, seconded by Councilmember O’Grady, and the motion carried unanimously. A Second Reading of the Ordinance was waived on motion of

C1-18


Councilmember Spears, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Haynes, and carried unanimously.

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

Ordinance Authorizing the City Manager to Extend the Temporary

Closure of Certain Streets and Allow the Extension of Merchant Space and the Service and Distribution of Alcohol in the Public Right of Way and City Owned Streets as Part of the Stage II Covid 19 Economic Recovery Program through October 18, 2020; and Ordinance Making Supplemental Appropriation in the Amount of $20,000 from the Fund Balance of the Municipal Services District Fund and Shifting General Fund Accounts Funding of $58,750 to Continue Emergency & Temporary Downtown Outdoor Dining: Stage II Covid 19 Economic Recovery Program through October 18, 2020 were considered.

Mr. R.T. Jones, Event Coordination Specialist, stated these Items would

carry this existing program through October 18, 2020. He stated the creation of this program was in response to a request of the Downtown Business Alliance (DBA). He stated the program began on June 25, 2020 and is scheduled to end on Monday, September 7, 2020 if not extended. He stated the program has been deemed a success, based on business participation, customer feedback, and surveys from DBA and Wilmington Downtown, Inc. (WDI) and merchants are requesting to extend the program with the addition of a parklet concept in order to allow additional businesses to participate.

Mr. Jones stated the parklet concept is closing one to two parking spots in

front of a business to allow for additional dining or retail space. He stated customers would be protected inside the parklet area by highly visible, water-filled traffic barriers. The sidewalk areas adjacent to the buildings would be designated for pedestrian use. He stated the parklet concept would be operational seven days a week, but would be subject to the State regulations on serving alcohol. He stated each business would be responsible for maintaining its parklet area.

Mr. Jones stated there are 17 businesses committed, with additional

businesses expected to participate. He stated funding is available for this extension through a donation from participating businesses, the MSD Advisory Fund, existing DBA economic initiative grant funds, and City funds originally allocated for the 4th of the July celebration that was cancelled.

Mr. Jones stated Staff did receive feedback from one business on Front

Street that is opposed to extending the program. A question/answer and discussion period was held. Councilmember Anderson questioned the safety of the barriers to be used

in the parklet concept. Mr. Jones responded the water filled barriers do have the ability to stop vehicles and the only reason they are not being used as the street closure barriers is because they are difficult to move around. He stated the barriers are highly visible and the traffic downtown typically is slower than on regular streets.

Mr. Jones stated the parklet concept will assist businesses outside of the

street closure area. He stated the MSD Advisory Committee conditioned its portion of the funding for extending the program based on being able to assist businesses outside of the original program area. He stated the program is open to retail businesses, but the feedback he received is that many of them do not have the Staff to cover inside and outside of the store. He stated that many of them are not participating, but they are still in favor of the program, as it brings people to the area.

Mr. Jones stated the Ordinance would give the City Manager the ability to

further extend the program dates, contingent on available funding.

C1-19


In response to Councilmember Spears’ inquiry, Mr. Jones stated that businesses outside of the Historic District can apply for a temporary use permit in order to expand their businesses into private parking spaces. He stated the City is disseminating this information to the public.

Mayor Saffo stated at some point there needs to be a thorough evaluation

of this program, either through City Staff or through the City’s economic development partners. He stated the program has been successful in getting people downtown, but there are concerns from other businesses. He stated the other issue is a public policy issue on how the City closes streets, especially in the downtown area.

Councilmember Anderson stated that even businesses that are not

receiving a direct benefit from the program will benefit from increased business activity downtown. He stated that October 18th lines up nicely and will probably be a good time to look at ending the program.


of the Ordinance Authorizing the City Manager to Extend the Temporary Closure of Certain Streets and Allow the Extension of Merchant Space and the Service and Distribution of Alcohol in the Public Right of Way and City Owned Streets as Part of the Stage II Covid 19 Economic Recovery Program through October 18, 2020, seconded by Councilmember Anderson, and the motion carried unanimously. A Second Reading of the Ordinance was waived on motion of Mayor Pro Tem Haynes, seconded by Councilmember Anderson, and carried unanimously.


of the Ordinance Making Supplemental Appropriation in the Amount of $20,000 from the Fund Balance of the Municipal Services District Fund and Shifting General Fund Accounts Funding of $58,750 to Continue Emergency & Temporary Downtown Outdoor Dining: Stage II Covid 19 Economic Recovery Program through October 18, 2020, seconded by Councilmember Anderson, and the motion carried unanimously. A Second Reading of the Ordinance was waived on motion of Councilmember Anderson, seconded by Councilmember Barnett, and carried unanimously.

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

RESOLUTIONS

Resolution Authorizing a Professional Services Agreement with Live Nation Worldwide, Inc. for Venue Management Services at the Hugh Morton Amphitheater at Greenfield Lake was considered.

Mayor Saffo stated he was advised by City Staff that they would like this

Item continued to Council’s September 15, 2020 meeting. Mr. Thom Moton, Deputy City Manager added that questions regarding

the contract were posed at Council’s Agenda Briefing Meeting and Staff feels they need more time to get written answers from Live Nation, particularly about the use of local volunteers and concession prices.

Mr. Moton stated that AEG, the other company considered for this

contract, is very similar to Live Nation in terms of talent booking and venue management. Councilmember Anderson stated he has several questions, but he will submit those to Staff in writing.

Councilmember O’Grady stated that the Public Information speaker, Mr.

Ford, made several allegations about compliance with ABC laws and he would like to know if ALE has reviewed to see if they have any credibility.

Following further consideration, Councilmember Spears moved to

continue the Resolution to Council’s September 15, 2020 Meeting, seconded by Councilmember O’Grady, and the motion carried unanimously.

C1-20


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

Resolution Accepting a Donation of Land from Heather C. Ruddel,

Susan Stocks, and Jack G. Stocks for the Benefit of the Heal our Waterways Program and Stormwater Drainage was considered.

Mr. Fred Royal, Stormwater Manager, stated this is a unique Item where

the City was approached by a landowner and his family to accept three parcels. He stated two of the parcels are in the Echo Farms area, and the third parcel is on Beasley Road. He stated they are forested wetlands with mature trees and will likely never be developed. Staff discussed the offer and decided it was prudent to take the donation for flood storage, stormwater purposes, water quality purposes, and educational opportunities.

Mr. Royal stated there would be no budget impact to taking these

properties. Following further consideration, Councilmember Rivenbark moved

approval of the Resolution, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Haynes, and the motion carried unanimously.

************** Resolution Authorizing An Interlocal Agreement with New Hanover

County to Fund a Portion of Consultant’s Fee Utilized to Help Guide the WAVE Transit Restructuring was considered.

Mayor Saffo stated he was advised by Mr. Sterling Cheatham, City Manager that Staff is requesting to continue this Item to Council’s September 15, 2020 Council Meeting.

Following further consideration, Councilmember O’Grady moved to

continue the Resolution to Council’s September 15, 2020 Meeting, seconded by Councilmember Anderson, and the motion carried unanimously.

************** ADDITIONAL ITEMS

Mr. John Joye, City Attorney, stated he wanted to draw Council’s attention

to an email he sent earlier today that has the Governor’s most recent Executive Order that moves the State into Phase 2.5.

Councilmember Barnett reminded everyone to register with the Census

and that September 30, 2020 is the last day. He also reminded everyone to vote and to request their absentee ballots. He reminded everyone to wear their masks to protect yourself and others. He stated the Coronavirus is not going anywhere and everyone needs to continue to wear their masks, wash their hands, and keep their distance.

Councilmember Spears welcomed New Hanover County’s new School

Superintendent and hopes there will be a good relationship between the school system and the City. He also welcomed the arrival of his niece.

Mayor Saffo congratulated Mr. Wilbur Jones, who worked to have

Wilmington designed as a World War II Heritage City. He stated Wilmington is the first in the Country to receive this designation and the President will be in town tomorrow to sign that declaration at the Battleship. He stated this designation shows the tremendous efforts by the citizens of Wilmington during World War II.

C1-21


ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at

10:44 P.M. Respectfully Submitted,

Penelope Spicer-Sidbury, CMC/MMC/NCCMC City Clerk

NOTE: THE ABOVE MINUTES ARE NOT A VERBATIM RECORD OF

THE PROCEEDINGS. THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS ARE RECORDED ON TAPES 1, 2, AND 3, AND ARE INCLUDED AS PART OF THIS OFFICIAL RECORD.

C1-22

CITY OF WILMINGTON SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES


The Council of the City of Wilmington held a Special Meeting at 6:30 P.M. on the above date at the Wilmington Convention Center, 10 Convention Center Drive, Wilmington, North Carolina.

Those present were: Mayor Bill Saffo, presiding; Mayor Pro-Tem Margaret Haynes; Councilmembers Charlie Rivenbark, Neil Anderson, Kevin O’Grady, Clifford Barnett, Sr, and Kevin Spears; City Manager Sterling Cheatham; City Attorney John Joye; and City Clerk Penelope Spicer-Sidbury.

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

PUBLIC HEARINGS

Public Hearing was held on Ordinance Amending the Official Zoning Map of the City to Rezone Property Containing 10.45 Acres of Land Located at 111 Warehouse Lane and 3804 Market Street from CS, Commercial Services District to MF-MH(CD), Multi Family Medium High Density (Conditional District) for a 192 Unit Residential Development.

Mr. Brian Chambers, Senior Planner reported this Item was

continued from Council’s September 1, 2020 meeting in order to give the Applicant additional time to work with the adjacent property owners and to come to terms on the proposed improvements. He stated the site is located on the west side of Wetsig Road, south of Market Street and is approximately 10.45 acres. The Applicant proposes to rezone the property from CS, Commercial Services to MF-MH (CD), Multi-Family, Medium High Density (Conditional District) for a 192-unit residential development. This proposal includes the improvement and dedication of Wetsig Road from the property boundary to Market Street and the Applicant is also proposing a right-of-way connection to Cinema Drive.

Mr. Chambers showed Council the modified preliminary plan, which moves the right-of-way down 30-feet from the adjacent property owner. He stated the Subdivision Review Board (SRB) would consider that a minor modification and as such would not need to go back before SRB for approval.

Mr. Chambers stated that at the last meeting, representatives of the Cinema Drive Office Park appeared. He provided Council a copy of their approved site plan, which includes a future building. He stated after speaking with Zoning Staff and the City Attorney’s Office, he believes the site plan is vested and they would be able to build it as shown, regardless if Wetsig Road becomes a public dedicated right-of-way or not. He stated there is also a provision in the City Code that states a public right-of-way that is conveyed and impacts setbacks, so long as it meets 75% of that requirement would not be considered nonconforming. He stated that based on the movement of the right-of-way and those provisions of the City Code, there is minimal impact to the future development of the adjacent property.

Staff recommends conditional approval of the request.


Mr. Chambers stated there are no conditions regarding parking, so the Applicant would be held to the minimum requirements, although the City Code does allow for them to apply for an alternative parking plan that is reviewed and approved by the Technical Review Committee. Mr. John Joye, City Attorney stated that Condition Number 5 in the Ordinance has been updated to allow 80 additional parking spaces without having to come back for Council approval. He stated they would also be permitted to move their buildings up to 10 feet in order

C1-23

SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 8, 2020 PAGE 2 to fit in any additional parking. He stated it is not included on the attached site plan but does provide some flexibility for the Applicant.

Mr. Chambers stated this plan has been reviewed by the SRB and has been approved for a 30-foot wide cross-section right-of-way. There will be reduced asphalt, and curb, gutter, and sidewalk only on one side. Staff anticipates most of the traffic using the new Cinema Drive connection.

Mr. David Spetrino, Applicant, stated there were three issues that arose at the last meeting. The first was the alignment of the connector road, which now has approximately 48 feet between the road and the adjoining property line. The second issue was parking, and Mr. Spetrino stated he does not want to underpark the project, but he also does not want to overpark it. He stated he could easily put in additional parking spaces if it becomes necessary. He stated they are interested in preserving all the trees they can and not cut them down for unnecessary parking. He stated the third issue was the issue for a nonconforming setback when Wetsig Road becomes public. He stated he did not realize this would be an issue when the plan was being put together and understands his neighbors’ concerns. He stated he appreciated the work of Staff to reassure the neighbors that not only are they getting street frontage at someone else’s expense, their future development is also protected.

Mr. Spetrino stated that before the last Council meeting, the sketch was sent to the Fire Department and he has not heard that they have any concerns.

Mr. Matt Nichols, Attorney representing the Cinema Drive Office Park stated that his client appreciated that Switchyard Lane has been moved and is now 47 ½ feet from their property line. He stated he appreciated the work by Staff and the City Attorney’s Office on the vested rights issue and he feels that has been clarified.

Mr. Dan Dawson, Engineer for the Cinema Drive Office Park, stated that the property owners in the Office Park include several surveyors and professional engineers, who urge the Council to allow City Engineering Staff to provide the citizens with complete and proper application of the City standards by avoiding language that may cause Staff to think that Council is willing to waive the City standards when they have not been addressed.

Mr. Dawson stated the Cinema Drive Office Park is in favor of this project, this Applicant, and the connector road to Cinema Drive. He stated they are not in favor of the project as currently designed and are concerned it is being rushed through the City process.

Mr. Dawson stated that Mr. Spetrino pointed out at the last meeting that there has been some opposition to the project because of concerns about the residents who would live there. He stated that he is not aware of who said that, but feels the Applicant should address the concern of his supportive neighbor, rather than try to explain away deficiencies. Mr. Dawson stated this project will require at least nine waivers of City standards as it is currently proposed. He stated his client has requested justifications for those waivers and has not received a response. He stated that during the last Council meeting, discussions between the parties resulting in shifting the connector road towards the Fire Station, which addressed one of the setback problems.

Mr. Dawson stated there are three remaining areas of concern: infrastructure deficiencies, traffic problems, and land use changes. He stated that all public streets should be constructed to the City standards, with 50-foot rights-of-way and 25-feet between the faces of the curb. He stated a standard public street should be constructed from Cinema Drive to the CSX railroad right-of-way. He stated there is a concern that converting Wetsig to a public street will burden the taxpayers with having to maintain a street that does not meet

C1-24

SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 8, 2020 PAGE 3 standards and will cost money in the future to maintain and widen. He stated the Applicant is proposing to widen the existing 18-foot driveway by one foot on each side and add a ribbon on concrete along the edges. He stated that instead of the waiver, his client hopes Council would direct Staff and the TRC to work with the Applicant to provide an adequate and cost-effective cross section and pavement structure.

Mr. Dawson stated his client was concerned about an inadequate stormwater network. He stated that one of the owners at the Office Park noticed stormwater flooding across the top of Wetsig Drive in the past. He stated the existing culvert lacks the hydraulic capacity to convey the upstream runoff and the outfall for the stormwater to drain from the Applicant’s property is restricted.

Mr. Dawson provided Council a photograph of the area from 1956 to show the drainage course that existed at that time, but no longer exists. He stated there is no outflow. He stated his client wants this project to work but is concerned about the potential for long term problems.

Mr. Dawson stated that traffic will also be a problem as continuing to connect from Wetsig to Market will create a traffic cut-though. As proposed a cut through will be created from Market Street to Kerr Avenue via Westig and the new connector road, which will allow drivers to avoid three stoplights. He stated that Wetsig, from Mintz Plumbing to the right-of-way at Market should be closed and only used by O’Reillys, Mintz Plumbing, and Kyoto.

Mr. Dawson stated that a new challenge is that the Fire Chief wants the connector road to remain open, even though it is only 20 feet wide and he questions whether a $300,000 firefighting apparatus should be driven over it. He stated there are only four properties that would benefit from this road remaining open. He stated his client disagrees about the true need to keep this open for the Fire Department.

Mr. Dawson stated that Fertile Ground owns the 30-foot driveway strip from Market to the three acres of industrial property bounded by CSX tracks. He stated this property has been identified as a future hub for the light rail system. He stated that as a hub, there will be future uses that will require more than a 22-foot wide and 30-foot wide right-of-way street. He stated that existing traffic to the industrial properties need a standard City street to avoid the City having to purchase or condemn additional land to construct a proper road in the future. His client feels a standard City street should be constructed from Cinema Drive to the CSX railroad right-of-way. He stated that had a Traffic Impact Analysis been required for this project, consideration could have been given to whether additional length should be added to the left turn lane where Cinema Drive intersects Market Street.

Mr. Dawson stated that changes in the Office Park’s rear setback are not only a zoning issue but is also an issue of the distance between buildings. He stated the future building is proposed to be constructed two feet from the 30-foot right-of-way and there will be issues. He provided Council with a sketch of the proposed future building next to the proposed 22-foot street with the 33-foot right-of-way. He stated as the Applicant’s property is currently zoned, there would be a larger setback from the building to the right-of-way line and instead of a 30-foot right-of-way, it would be a 60-foot right-of-way. In that case there would be 107 to110 feet between his client’s property line the face of the Applicant’s building, but in the current plan, it is only 55 feet. He stated they are in favor of this project but feel the Applicant should have to follow the same rules as everyone else.


Mr. Dawson stated that the Cinema Drive Office Park has sufficient parking for the proposed new building.

C1-25

SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 8, 2020 PAGE 4

In response to Councilmember Spears’ inquiry, Mr. Chambers stated that the nine waivers for this project were applied for by the Applicant and granted by the Subdivision Review Board. He stated anytime there is an improvement in the public right-of-way, it must be reviewed and approved by the SRB. He stated it was his understanding it is outside of the purview of Council to grant those waivers. He stated he did not have the list of the specific waivers granted for this project. He stated an example would be only having to provide curb and gutters on one side of the road due to the width of the road. He stated that waivers are typically granted due to specific site constraints and 90% of the projects that come through are granted some type of waiver from the City’s Technical Standards.

In response to Councilmember Anderson’s inquiry, Mr. Chambers stated that Wetsig is not planned to be the primary in and out route as it is expected and is being kept for interconnectivity. It is expected most of the traffic will go in and out via Cinema Drive.

In response to Councilmember Barnett’s inquiry, Mr. Chambers stated that even though the site plan does not currently show a turn around area for emergency vehicles, that will be a requirement when the plan undergoes TRC review. He stated that the plans would have to be fully engineered and reviewed by the appropriate City Staff. He stated that City Code does not permit a project to create a stormwater condition downstream.

Mr. Spetrino stated that if the City is planning to have a transit center in this area, he requests that it be brought in from Kerr Avenue and not from his site. He stated this project has not been rushed through and he has taken his role in this project very seriously. He stated that waivers are a normal course of infill development. He stated that it would be more convenient and less costly to close Wetsig Road and he would support it if he only had to worry about his project. He stated the correct thing to do is think about the benefit of connectivity and avoid traffic congestion.

Mayor Saffo stated that from the last meeting, he was under the impression that most of the concerns were going to be resolved, however Mr. Dawson has brought up a litany of technical issues regarding this project. Council is charged with making a determination based on the technical advice and recommendations from Staff. He stated the Technical Review Committee can place additional restrictions on a project and waivers are not uncommon, depending on the site. He stated there is not a standard boilerplate way to develop a property. Council has heard the concerns from the adjoining property owners as to Wetsig Drive and as to the standard of the street.

Mr. John Joye, City Attorney, stated the Ordinance is clear that Council approval does not relieve the developer from going through the TRC process and the developer must meet all those requirements prior to the issuance of a construction release.

In response to Mayor Saffo’s inquiry, Mr. Chambers stated that the waivers for the right-of-way are all horizontal and not vertical. He stated the base and thickness of the road would have to meet standards.

Following further consideration, Councilmember Barnett moved approval of the Ordinance and read the consistency statement as follows:

I move to approve the proposed amendment to rezone property located at 111 Warehouse Lane and 3804 Market Street from CS, Commercial Services District to MF-MH (CD), Multiple-Family Residential District-Medium-High Density (Conditional District) to allow for a residential development with 192 residential units and find it to be Consistent with the relevant policies in the Comprehensive Plan*, based on the application materials, and the information

C1-26


provided at the public hearing and in the staff report, and to find Approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest for the following reason(s): The proposed rezoning provides density in proximity to services, preserves sensitive natural areas, and is compatible with the existing development pattern. * Per NC General Statute160A-383, the Comprehensive Plan includes the Create Wilmington Comprehensive Plan and any other officially adopted plan that is applicable.

The motion was seconded by Councilmember Anderson and carried unanimously. A Second Reading of the Ordinance was waived on motion of Councilmember Rivenbark, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Haynes, and carried unanimously.

****************** Public Hearing was held on Ordinance Modifying a UMX(CD),

Urban Mixed Use District (Conditional District) Located at 1531 & 1541 Eastwood Road for a Large Scale Mixed use Development and Resolution Modifying the Ordinance for a Special Use Permit for Property Located at 1531 & 1541 Eastwood Road to Allow an Increase in Height up to 75 Feet for Three Structures Within the UMX, Urban Mixed use Zoning District.

Mr. John Joye, City Attorney stated he believed that the Applicant wished to withdraw the Request to Modify the Special Use Permit and requested that the Applicant address that request with Council.

Mr. Jason Swain, Applicant, requested that Item PH2b (Resolution Modifying the Ordinance for a Special Use Permit for Property Located at 1531 & 1541 Eastwood Road to Allow an Increase in Height up to 75 Feet for Three Structures Within the UMX, Urban Mixed use Zoning District) be withdrawn.

A motion to withdraw the Resolution was made by Councilmember Anderson, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Haynes and carried unanimously.

Mr. Brian Chambers, Senior Planner gave the Staff Report for the Ordinance Modifying a UMX(CD), Urban Mixed Use District (Conditional District) Located at 1531 & 1541 Eastwood Road for a Large Scale Mixed use Development. He stated the site is located near the intersection of Eastwood Road and Military Cutoff Road and is approximately 23 acres in size. He stated the site has two single family homes and a vacant tract. He showed Council an aerial map and photographs of the site. He stated that on July 17, 2018 Council rezoned this property from R-15 to UMX (CD), Urban Mixed Use (Conditional District) for the construction of a large scale mixed use development, known as CenterPoint. Mr. Chambers showed Council the currently approved site plan and stated that Council previously approved a Special Use Permit for increased height of 75 feet for two structures, a 75-foot tall hotel and 68-foot apartment building that wrapped around the parking deck.

Mr. Chambers stated the Applicant is requesting to modify the site to relocate the hotel, which will now be at the by-right height of 55 feet. The existing Special Use Permit for the apartment building will remain in place at the 68 foot height. Mr. Chambers provided Council a chart summarizing the land use changes. He stated that originally the Applicant requested an increase in the number of apartment units and an increase in the number of hotel rooms. He stated he learned today that the Applicant wants to keep those numbers as they were originally approved, which was 300 apartment units and 200 hotel rooms. He stated the other uses being requested are reductions in the overall square footage of office, retail, and restaurant space. He stated because of the reduction in the number of trips being generated, there was no need to update the Traffic Impact Analysis.

C1-27


Mr. Chambers stated the Comprehensive Plan calls for the creation of nodes near major intersections that include a horizontal and vertical mix of uses to reinforce the efficient use of public services and infrastructure. The Plan also supports higher density along transit routes. The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of this request.


Mr. Chambers stated that the recent feedback he received from the neighbors is that they are pleased with the reduction in the height of the hotel.

Mr. Chambers stated that Staff worked with the Applicant to try and place the parking behind the buildings. He stated it did not work in every instance, as there is an entrance with parking on either side.

Mr. Chambers stated that the UMX zoning district does not have a minimum parking requirement, so any parking lot could have a building on it in the future. He stated that if a new building was added, the Applicant would have to come back before Council for approval. He stated the number of parking spaces in the deck were previously at 1,660 and now are at 991. He stated the difference in the deck spaces were added to the street parking.

Mr. Jason Swain, Applicant, stated he was back before Council to request modifications to the approved site plan. He stated this project was started four years ago, and in 2018 Council unanimously approved the plan for the CenterPoint mixed use community. He stated the modifications they are requesting were necessitated because of working with the N.C. Department of Transportation (NCDOT). Initially, at the intersection of Drysdale Drive and Military Cutoff Road, the Applicant proposed at 75-foot hotel. When they originally submitted that plan for approval, NCDOT had given its roadway plans for the Drysdale Drive extension. After they received approval, and NCDOT finished the roadway design, it was decided they needed additional right-of-way at the intersection with Military Cutoff Road and Drysdale Drive extension. He stated that they took a significant corner of the parking lot, which made it infeasible to develop a hotel there, as there was not adequate parking for loading and unloading at the hotel door.

Mr. Swain stated at that point, they decided the best way to have a hospitality component was to move the hotel to the intersection at Eastwood Road and Drysdale Drive. When the request to modify went to the Planning Commission, the Applicant left the height of the hotel at 75 feet and asked for an additional floor on the multi-family component of the project. Since that time, due to opposition from the neighbors, the Applicant withdrew the request for additional height for the hotel, which will stay at the by-right height of 55 feet, and they are leaving the height of the apartment buildings at 68 feet, which was previously approved by Council.

Mr. Richard Collier, Engineer for the Applicant, stated that CenterPoint is a mixed use that will have live, work, and play in the same development. He stated that on the site there will be apartments, a hotel, medical, offices, retail, and fine and casual dining options. He showed Council a copy of the Conditional District Zoning Modification Plan and stated there was a decrease in the overall restaurant and retail numbers. He stated that is primarily because there was originally space reserved for a big box grocery store that later pulled out of the project. He stated there is 4,300 square foot decrease in office uses and the hotel is being shifted to the corner of Eastwood and Drysdale as discussed earlier.

Mr. Collier went over the site plan and stated the hotel will stay at by-right height, 55 feet, with only its location changing. He stated the blue building is the apartment building, which will have retail on the ground floor along the plaza area and the street. He stated the apartment building was approved for

C1-28

SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 8, 2020 PAGE 7 68 feet and the parking deck was approved for 55 feet. The office and medical uses building along Eastwood Road will be at the by-right height of 55 feet. The south parking deck will remain at 55 feet as it was approved in 2018. All the retail buildings, designated in purple, will remain at the 24 to 25 feet heights. The green building is an office over retail building that will be 50 feet in height. He stated that according to the proposed site plan, there will be 55 feet on Eastwood Road, the 55 foot parking deck to the right, the green building just below that at 50 feet, the purple one-story retail buildings, and then the blue square is the 68 foot multifamily area wrapping the 55 foot parking deck.

Mr. Collier compared the approved 2018 plan to the proposed 2020 plan. He stated the biggest change is the relocation of the hotel. He stated there is more surface parking in the proposed plan, and that has to do with convenience parking for the retail uses and parking near the hotel for drop off/pick up uses. He stated there is a roundabout on the main entrance road, near the southern deck, and the alignment near Drysdale has been adjusted, mainly because of the NCDOT right-of-way issues.

Mr. Collier discussed the transportation improvements to be made to the area, by both the Applicant and NCDOT. He stated access to the site remains the same, with access from five different locations from the property: one onto Eastwood Road, one onto Drysdale Drive, and a public street connection to Military Cutoff Road from Calypso, which will be extended from Cambridge Village. There is also a proposed connection to the Mayfair Community Center to the north.

Mr. Collier stated that pedestrian interconnectivity is important and this project will extend a portion of the Cross City Trail over to Military Cutoff, which will connect across the street with the trail that goes north on Military Cutoff and will also provide access to the eastern side of Military Cutoff. They are also providing paths through their plazas and connections to Cambridge Village along the creek at the southern portion of the project.

Mr. Collier provided Council a drawing of the finished project and stated the common spaces for the project will remain the same.


In response to Mayor Pro Tem Haynes’ inquiry, Mr. Collier stated there is more surface parking in this plan than in the plan approved in 2018. He stated they located the retail and restaurant on the southern side, where the hotel previously was and have put in the parking spaces to handle that retail area as it is shown today. He stated there will be landscaped islands, along with pedestrian crossings in order to add character to the parking lot and to avoid the image of a sea of asphalt. He stated with the improvements being made at the corner, particularly with the landscaping feature, they will be able to buffer that corner so that you will not look directly into the parking areas. He stated the buildings are five feet off the street, so that they take most of the sightline. He stated as you come up Calypso Drive towards Cavalier, you would see two drive aisles and landscaped parking islands with walkways. He stated the other area beside the hotel will have a fence and landscaping along the right-of-way, so you will not see the parking from the street.

Mr. Collier stated there were approximately 400 spaces added to the surface parking and it is in the area in between the retail buildings and the hotel pad. He stated the parking deck on the multi-family building also has a 71-space surface parking lot that is under the podium of the apartments, in the space that previously housed the grocery store. He stated that out of the 400 additional spaces, 71 of them are located under the deck.

Mr. Collier stated that the main street of the project will still maintain the elements of the Comprehensive Plan, with parking beside and behind. He

C1-29

SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 8, 2020 PAGE 8 stated where the unfortunate part comes in is where Drysdale Drive is located, as all the buildings are between the street and parking. He stated on the western end, there are parking lots on either side of the entry drive. He stated that on the original plan, the street parking was proposed as parallel parking, and now it is proposed as 45-degree angled spaces, which increases surface parking along the main street through CenterPoint Drive. He stated they are not increasing the impervious surfaces, and probably have decreased it with the new plan.

Councilmember Anderson requested a rendering of the Drysdale intersection at the street level in order to visualize what the two pockets of parking there will look like. Mr. Collier stated he did not have an aerial of the intersection but stated the fence will be 6 to 8 foot tall, with brick columns and wood fencing in-between. There would be landscaping associated with the fencing.

Councilmember Anderson requested Mr. Swain to speak on the reduction of retail uses in the proposed plan and how the current economic conditions have affected the project. Mr. Swain stated the Drysdale Drive corner is critical to the project, there will be a significant amount of traffic heading in both directions. He stated their intent is to make this intersection as attractive as any part of the project, as it will be their calling card. He stated they have not picked out finishes yet, but they are working with the same firm that worked on North Hills in Raleigh. He stated they also developed the Forum, which has attractive landscaping along the front of the shopping center and will generally be the idea at CenterPoint as well.

Mr. Swain stated that since the pandemic, life in his industry has shifted. He stated they have been proactive in working with their small shop tenants. In planning for CenterPoint , one of the changes was removing the big box grocery store and the main reason for that was the closing of Earth Fare down the road. He stated they did not want to have a grocery store coming online down the road from one that was existing, but vacant. He stated that market forces determined that was the best course of action for them. He stated they changed some of the sizes and location of the different boxes to try and coincide with what they feel what will be easier to lease.

Mr. Swain stated that restaurant industry is undergoing a change right now and those that have been able to adapt to the curbside service/delivery model have been successful. He stated that overall, he feels restaurants will start looking for smaller spaces with less interior square footage, but more exterior square footage where people can come and sit outside. Additionally, they have found that those areas that have ample available curbside parking have been able to flourish during the pandemic.

Mr. Swain stated that larger projects that have larger boxes are struggling. He stated that smaller shop spaces with local tenants are more flexible and can adjust to changing market conditions.

Mr. Swain stated he would welcome the opportunity to have additional medical on this site, as he feels it is a need on this side of town. He stated if demand warranted, they could envision future development, but he does want to ensure enough parking for his retail uses.

Mr. Swain stated he would like to have a high-quality hotel and would welcome a chain such as Westin, but he cannot say for sure that is the hotel that will be there. He had conversations with all the major hotel chains prior to the pandemic, but many of the chains are slowing their development at this time.

Mr. Frank Byo spoke to Council and stated he lives in the Pointe Summerset area, which is on Eastwood, directly across from the development.

C1-30

SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 8, 2020 PAGE 9 He thanked the developer for considering the neighbor’s concerns regarding the hotel building height.

Everyone being given an opportunity be heard, the Public Hearing was closed.

Following further consideration, Councilmember Rivenbark moved approval of the Ordinance and read the consistency statement as follows:

I move to approve the proposed amendment to rezone property located at 1531 & 1541 Eastwood Road to modify an existing UMX (CD), Urban Mixed-Use District (Conditional District) for a large-scale mixed-use development (Center Pointe) to increase the number of residential units and hotel rooms, decrease the overall retail and restaurant space, and adjust the site layout including the relocation of the proposed hotel and find it to be Consistent with the relevant policies in the Comprehensive Plan*, based on the application materials, and the information provided at the public hearing and in the staff report, and to find Approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest for the following reason(s): The proposed modification would allow for a mixed-use project that would help create a transit- and pedestrian-oriented development pattern and includes a diverse mix of uses that will improve access to goods and services for area residents. *Per NC General Statute160A-383, the Comprehensive Plan includes the Create Wilmington Comprehensive Plan and any other officially adopted plan that is applicable.

The motion was seconded by Councilmember Anderson and carried unanimously. A Second Reading of the Ordinance was waived on motion of Mayor Pro Tem Haynes, seconded by Councilmember Barnett, and carried unanimously.

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

Public Hearing was held on Ordinance Amending the Official Zoning Map of the City to Rezone Property Containing 0.42 of an Acre of Land located at 2323 Wrightsville Avenue, from CS, Commercial Services to CB (CD), Community Business (Conditional District) in the Wrightsville Avenue Corridor Overlay (WACO) to Allow 4,000 Square Feet of Commercial Space and a Maximum of Five Residential Units; and Resolution Granting A Special Use Permit for Property Located at 2323 Wrightsville Avenue To Allow A New Structure Over 3,000 Square Feet And To Permit A Laundromat With No Drive Up Windows In The Wrightsville Avenue Corridor Overlay

All those wishing to speak regarding the Special Use Permit were

sworn in by Mrs. Penelope Spicer-Sidbury, City Clerk. Mr. Jeff Walton, Associate Planner gave the Staff Report and

stated this request is to rezone the site from Commercial Services to Community Business to allow a 4,000 commercial space and a maximum of five residential units. He stated a Special Use Permit (SUP) will be required to allow a new structure of 3,000 square feet and to permit a laundromat use with no drive-up windows in the Wrightsville Avenue Corridor,

Mr. Walton stated the Land Development Code requires a SUP for

new nonresidential or multi-family structures exceeding 3,000 square feet in the Wrightsville Avenue Corridor. He stated for the Community Business District, in a portion of the Corridor, laundromats with no drive up window are only permitted through a SUP. Mr. Walton showed Council an aerial map and photographs of existing conditions at the subject property as well as adjacent properties. He

C1-31

SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 8, 2020 PAGE 10 stated the parcel is vacant but was previously occupied by a self-service car wash.

Mr. Walton stated that 3,000 square feet would be used as a laundromat, 1,000 square feet would be used as commercial, and there would be five residential units as part of a commercial district mixed use development. He stated that Wrightsville Avenue has been identified as a community connector for plans and conceptual green connections as identified on the Comprehensive Plan Growth Strategies Map. He stated that infill development is consistent with the surrounding area with little impact to adjacent properties. He stated allowing services such as laundromats within walking distance of residential units is encouraged.

Mr. Walton stated the Wrightsville Avenue 2030 Plan encourages a

balanced mix of land uses that offer options for residents while ensuring new developments to enhance the Corridor and the surrounding neighborhoods. The Plan recommends phasing out CS uses and encourages neighborhood scale commercial uses.

Mr. Walton stated that by placing services and multi-family

residences within walking distance of the CSX rail corridor, the project is consistent with the broad transportation objectives of the City’s Rail Realignment and Repurposing Initiative. Staff believes the request is generally consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, the Wrightsville Avenue 2030 Plan, and the City’s Adopted Focus Areas. He stated Staff is recommending suggested conditions if Council decides to grant approval of the request tonight.

Mr. Jeff Carney, 6001 Motts Village Road, Owner of the Property,

introduced Ms. Cindee Wolf to discuss the proposal. Ms. Wolf stated this stretch of Wrightsville Avenue near the railroad crossing has transitioned over the years. She stated the carwash on the lot was an eyesore and has been demolished. She stated the Commercial Services District has much more intense uses, which are not always appropriate for the historic character of the Corridor. She stated that although the Comprehensive Plan failed to include the site as an Area of Opportunity, it is still very near properties identified as Post Industrial/Inner City Revitalization, as well as the Live/Work Innovation Zone.

Ms. Wolf stated this is a 50/50 split with the commercial use and

the residential units overhead. She stated redevelopment will improve the aesthetics of the area and will upgrade the site’s form and function. She showed Council a plan for the site and stated that everything about the site fits into the character of the Wrightsville Avenue Corridor.

Ms. Wolf stated that because the building is larger than 3,000

square feet, a Special Use Permit is required. She stated that taking down the deteriorating building meets the public health, safety, and welfare criteria. She stated there will be public services with sewer and water and will meet all City Code requirements. She stated the proposal does meet all required conditions and specifications of design. She stated the proposal will not injure the adjoining or abutting property values as the redevelopment will improve the aesthetics of the area. She stated the Applicant agrees with all the recommended Staff conditions and that this project will be an asset to the Wrightsville Avenue Corridor.

A question/answer and discussion period was held. In response to Councilmember Spears’ inquiry, Ms. Wolf stated that

the pricing for the residential units has not been determined at this time, but it will be market rate for this community.

There being no one present to speak in favor or opposition, the

Public Hearing was closed.

C1-32


Following further consideration, Councilmember Barnett moved approval of the Ordinance Amending the Official Zoning Map of the City to Rezone Property Containing 0.42 of an Acre of Land located at 2323 Wrightsville Avenue and read the consistency statement as follows:

I move to approve the proposed amendment to rezone property located at 2323 Wrightsville Avenue to from CS, Commercial Services to CB (CD), Community Business (Conditional District) in the Wrightsville Avenue Corridor Overlay (WACO) to allow 4,000 square feet of commercial space and a maximum of five residential units and find it to be Consistent with the relevant policies in the Comprehensive Plan*, based on the application materials, and the information provided at the public hearing and in the staff report, and to find Approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest for the following reason(s): The proposed rezoning would provide neighborhood-scale commercial uses that generate minimal amounts of vehicular traffic and complement and enhance adjacent neighborhoods. *Per NC General Statute160A-383, the Comprehensive Plan includes the Create Wilmington Comprehensive Plan and any other officially adopted plan that is applicable.

The motion was seconded by Councilmember O’Grady and carried unanimously. A Second Reading of the Ordinance was waived on motion of Councilmember Rivenbark, seconded by Councilmember Anderson, and carried unanimously.

Following further consideration, Councilmember Rivenbark moved

approval of the Resolution Granting A Special Use Permit for Property Located at 2323 Wrightsville Avenue To Allow A New Structure Over 3,000 Square Feet And To Permit A Laundromat With No Drive Up Windows In The Wrightsville Avenue Corridor Overlay, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Haynes, and the motion carried unanimously.

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

ORDINANCES

Ordinance Modifying An Existing O&I-1 (CD), Office And Institutional (Conditional District) Located At 3380 & 3400 Masonboro Loop Road To Allow For Alternative Building Elevations, Site Layout, And Outdoor Amplification Restriction was considered on Second Reading.

Following further consideration, Councilmember O’Grady moved

approval of the Ordinance, seconded by Councilmember Barnett, and the motion carried unanimously.

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

Ordinance Modifying An Existing CB(CD), Community

Business (Conditional District) Located At 400 Arboretum Drive For A Mixed use Development To Allow Spas And Health Clubs As A Permitted Use was considered on Second Reading.

Following further consideration, Councilmember O’Grady moved

approval of the Ordinance, seconded by Councilmember Barnett, and the motion carried unanimously.

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

C1-33

SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 8, 2020 PAGE 12 ADDITIONAL ITEMS

Councilmember Rivenbark stated the Althea Gibson and Arthur Ashe documentary aired yesterday at 3:00 P.M. on CBS. He stated that Mr. Lenny Simpson has been a long-time champion of this effort. He stated it was an excellent documentary and hopes everyone gets the chance to see it. He also spoke against littering in the City.

Councilmember Barnett echoed Councilmember Rivenbark’s

comments about the documentary. He stated that Mr. Simpson and One Love Tennis have an event scheduled for the community this Saturday. He reminded everyone to fill out the Census and encouraged everyone to register to vote.

Mayor Saffo stated that with Wilmington being named a World War

II Heritage City, he wanted to thank Captain Wilbur Jones for his effort and hard work on this recognition. He also thanked the local legislative delegation for their support and work on the effort.

There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned

at 8:44 P.M.

Respectfully Submitted, Penelope Spicer-Sidbury, CMC/MMC/NCCMC City Clerk NOTE: THESE MINUTES ARE NOT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS, BUT ARE PART OF THE OFFICIAL RECORD.

C1-34

CITY OF WILMINGTON COUNCIL’S AGENDA BRIEFING MEETING MINUTES

MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2020

The Council of the City of Wilmington held an Agenda Briefing meeting on the above date at 8:30 a.m., at the Wilmington Convention Center, 10 Convention Center Drive, Wilmington, North Carolina to review the regular scheduled Council meeting agenda for September 15, 2020.

Those present in the room were: Deputy City Manager Tony

Caudle; Deputy City Attorney Meredith Everhart; and City Clerk Penelope Spicer-Sidbury.

Those present via video conference: Mayor Pro-Tem Margaret

Haynes, presiding; Councilmembers Kevin O’Grady, Clifford Barnett, Sr., and Kevin Spears.

Mayor Saffo and Councilmember Rivenbark were attending a

Lower Cape Fear Water & Sewer Authority Board Meeting. Councilmember Anderson was absent. Mr. Tony Caudle, Deputy City Manager advised Council that Mr.

Thom Moton, Deputy City Manager would not be doing the scheduled presentation on the Mayor’s Clean Energy Police Task Force. He stated that Mr. Dave Ingram, Sustainability Project Manager and Ms. Natalie English and former Councilmember Mr. Ron Sparks, Co-Chairs of the Task Force will give the presentation.

*************** Councilmember Barnett Inquired about Item C3 (Resolution

Authorizing an Amendment to the Contract with Good Shepherd Center of Wilmington, NC Adding $500,000 of Coronavirus Relief Funds to Provide Emergency Assistance for Low Income Households Impacted by COVID 19). Ms. Jennifer Maready, Finance Director, responded there were several outreach efforts made. She stated that Good Shepherd had several methods of outreach, including media, hard copies, and a pamphlet that is available in both English and Spanish. She stated that Ms. Suzanne Rogers of the City’s Community Development Division has also been providing outreach with the assistance of the City’s Communication Staff.

Ms. Maready stated that Good Shepherd was informed on Friday

that they are receiving additional funds to help the community. She stated it was made clear that the funds from the City must be spent by December 30, 2020. She stated the CDBG funds will be available until June 30, 2021, so they will use the funds from this Item first and then move to the others with a later due date.

Councilmember Spears inquired as to whether the funds could be

used to help tenants who had to move out of a residence with back rental payments in order to help them with renting in the future. Ms. Maready stated the funds are restricted to helping people stay in a home, so they are not available if someone has already moved out.

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

Ms. Amy Beatty spoke to Council about Item R3 (Resolution Authorizing a Professional Services Agreement with Live Nation Worldwide, Inc. for Venue Management Services at the Hugh Morton Amphitheater at Greenfield Lake) and stated that in discussion with the City Attorney’s Office, they recommended continuing this Item until Council’s October 6, 2020 Meeting in order to provide for a 30-day public notice of the Item, dating back from the publication of the Item on Council’s September 1, 2020 Agenda. She stated that even though this is a management agreement, the word “rent” is used throughout. State statutes require that rental agreements of this length and term be advertised to the public for 30 days.

C1-35

AGENDA BRIEFING MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 14, 2020 PAGE 2

Councilmember O’Grady pointed out that there is a reference to

Exhibit “A” that is not included in Council’s packet and asked that it be provided.

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

Councilmember O’Grady inquired about Item R4 (Resolution Authorizing Filing of Condemnation Actions for Acquisition of Permanent Drainage Easements for Clear Run Branch Drainage Improvements Phase 1 Project Parcel #’s 13, 14, 19 20, and 25 as shown in Map Book 67, at Page 239 252 of the New Hanover County Registry, NC). Mr. Shawn Evans, Assistant City Attorney, responded that this will be a quick take condemnation and the City will have title to the property once the action is filed and will be able to proceed with the construction plans.

*************** Following a brief discussion, Mayor Pro Tem Haynes stated that

Staff is requesting Council to go into Closed Session. Councilmember Barnett made a motion to enter into a Closed Session pursuant to the provisions of N.C.G.S. §§143-318.11(a)(1), (a)(3), and (a)(5) in order for the City Council to:

(1) Prevent the disclosure of information that is privileged,

confidential, or not considered a public record pursuant to North Carolina General Statute §132-1.4;

(2) To consult with the City Attorney regarding potential legal claims; and

(3) Instruct City Staff regarding the City’s negotiating position concerning the possible acquisition of real property related to Clear Run Drainage Project.

The motion was seconded by Councilmember O’Grady and it

carried unanimously. *******************

Council recessed the meeting and went into Closed Session.

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

Recessed Meeting

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

Council reconvened its meeting and was back in open session with all present as mentioned above. Mayor Pro Tem Haynes conducted a roll call and reported that direction was provided to the City Attorney concerning the handling of potential legal claims and Council instructed Staff regarding the City’s negotiating position concerning the possible acquisition of real property. No other action was taken.

There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned.

Respectfully submitted,


C1-36

CITY OF WILMINGTON REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES


The Council of the City of Wilmington met in regular session on the above date at 6:30 p.m., at the Wilmington Convention Center, 10 Convention Center Drive, Wilmington, North Carolina. Those present in the room at the Convention Center were: Mayor Bill Saffo, presiding; Mayor Pro Tem Margaret Haynes, Councilmember Charlie Rivenbark; Deputy City Manager Tony Caudle; Deputy City Attorney Meredith Everhart; and City Clerk Penelope Spicer-Sidbury. Those present via video conference were: Councilmembers Kevin O’Grady, Clifford Barnett, Sr, and Kevin Spears. Councilmember Neil Anderson, City Manager Sterling Cheatham, and City Attorney John Joye were absent.

Mayor Saffo conducted a roll call of Councilmembers. Councilmember Barnett gave the invocation, followed by the Pledge of

Allegiance to the Flag.

************* Mayor Saffo acknowledged the passing of former Councilmember

Katherine Moore on August 30, 2020. He stated she served with the Wilmington City Council from 1991 until 2005 and served with distinction. He stated she was involved with a number of the progressive things that happened in the City for many years. He stated she operated Eastern Transportation, Incorporated, was the Mayor Pro Tem for the City of Wilmington, was the SBA spokesperson in 1991, a member of the Women’s Economic Advisory Board, on the Board of Directors for the Chamber of Commerce and BB&T, and on the Board of Trustees for UNCW. He stated she was featured nationally by USA Today, Good Housekeeping, and Enterprise Magazine.

Mayor Saffo stated he knew Ms. Moore for many years and had the

opportunity to serve with her on Council from 2003 until 2005 and she was part of the group of elected officials that brought PPD back downtown and was involved in the transfer of properties that allowed Union Station to be built. She was passionate about Wilmington and the arts and was involved in helping to raise money for the Thalian Hall remodeling.

Mayor Saffo stated she was survived by her son, Ira Braswell, and a

daughter, Katherine Moore. He stated she was a great advocate for the City and loved this community. He expressed his condolences for her passing.

Mayor Saffo asked that a moment of silence be held in her honor. Councilmember Rivenbark commented that he served with Ms. Moore

from 1993 until 2001 and stated she was passionate about everything she did. He stated that during those eight years they were always raising money for those less fortunate. He stated that during those eight years there was never a time that he called on Ms. Moore with a need that she didn’t step up to meet. He stated his heart goes out to her children.

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

PRESENTATIONS

Mr. Dave Ingram, Sustainability Project Manager, Ms. Natalie English and Mr. Ron Sparks, Co-Chairs, gave a presentation on the Mayor’s Ad Hoc Clean Energy Policy Task Force Interim Report.

Mr. Thom Moton, Deputy City Manager and Mr. Damiere Powell, Urban

Designer, gave a presentation on Riverwalk Visitors Center and Staff Recommendations Related to Safety Improvements.

C1-37


************* CONSENT AGENDA

Councilmember Rivenbark requested to pull Item C2 (Resolution

Awarding Construction Contract to East Coast Contracting, Inc. of Wilmington, NC in the amount of $672,568.57 for the Greenville Ave White Ave Drainage Improvement Project Phase 1) in order to receive additional information from Staff.

Councilmember Barnett requested to pull Item C3 (Resolution

Authorizing an Amendment to the Contract with Good Shepherd Center of Wilmington, NC Adding $500,000 of Coronavirus Relief Funds to Provide Emergency Assistance for Low Income Households Impacted by COVID-19) for additional information.

Item on the Consent Agenda was acted upon and unanimously adopted

on motion of Mayor Pro Tem Haynes, seconded by Councilmember Rivenbark as presented as follows:

Approved Minutes of the Agenda Briefing Meeting on August 31, 2020 and the Special Meeting on August 31, 2020

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

Resolution Awarding Construction Contract to East Coast Contracting, Inc. of Wilmington, NC in the amount of $672,568.57 for the Greenville Ave White Ave Drainage Improvement Project Phase 1 was considered.

Councilmember Rivenbark stated he has had conversations with people in

this neighborhood who have concerns about this project and he requested that Staff try to address some of the issues raised.

Mr. Fred Royal, Stormwater Services Manager stated that one of the

concerns was the alignment of the storm sewer and that the reason it was not being routed under the street was that there are significant utilities blocking the way. Staff looked at moving it over to avoid the utilities, but that raised the cost quite a bit and would disrupt private property and traffic patterns. He stated the second alternative was to route it as it is currently shown, in an easement the City previously purchased. He stated the easement does have 21 mature trees that have been identified for removal and he thinks that is the reason the original easement language included tree replacement, although he was not working for the City at that time. He stated the language does not include any details on the type of trees or their placement, so he has been working with the City’s Arborist, Mr. Aaron Reese, and has met with him, and representatives from the Homeowners’ Association (HOA) on site to look at these details. He stated Staff will re-engage the HOA once a contractor is hired in order to look at what trees could be moved and where to put the replacements. He stated he received an email from the Chair of the City’s Tree Commission who stated he appreciated that the City was removing the minimum number of trees needed to complete the drainage project.

Mr. Royal stated another issue was the length of time from when the

project was developed and designed until today. He stated that was due to delays from hurricanes and Staff turnover, both on the City side and for the Consulting Engineer. He stated that the final engineering product did not change when the project was restarted, as the surveys were in and the permits had been obtained. He stated they had to extend the permits, as some of them came close to their expiration dates.

Mr. Royal stated the red line on the map provided in Council’s packet is

not exact and does not go through the easement. Mr. Royal stated there were concerns from the neighbors regarding the

contractor for the project, East Coast Contracting, Inc. He stated they have completed three different capital projects for the City, so Staff has no reason to believe they will not

C1-38


be successful with this project. He stated as to the cost, there were contractors with lower and higher costs, but Staff believes this is a viable company that provided a sound cost for the project. He stated he believes this project has been on-going since 2011.

Mr. Royal stated he has met with some of the residents and will be

available in the future to meet with them again. Following further consideration, Councilmember Rivenbark moved

approval of the Resolution, seconded by Councilmember Barnett and the motion carried unanimously.

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

Resolution Authorizing an Amendment to the Contract with Good

Shepherd Center of Wilmington, NC Adding $500,000 of Coronavirus Relief Funds to Provide Emergency Assistance for Low Income Households Impacted by COVID 19 was considered.

Councilmember Barnett stated he spoke with Katrina and Liz from Good

Shepherd and learned additional information about the money for this program. He stated the funds are for COVID only and provide three months of rental or utility assistance. He stated that persons who already have Section 8 benefits, or already live in government housing will not be eligible for this program. He stated they mentioned they are looking for ways to assist those that live outside of the City. Councilmember Barnett stated he was pleased with his visit and the information he learned. He stated it will be important to reach the people who really need this assistance.


of the Resolution, seconded by Councilmember Spears and the motion carried unanimously.

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

Mayor Saffo noted that Councilmember Neil Anderson is out of town on business and his absence will be marked as excused.

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

PUBLIC INFORMATION

Mr. Matt Emmerich, 606 South 10th Street, spoke to Council about Mr. Sam Bowens and the 100-year Anniversary of Negro League Baseball. He stated that Mr. Bowens was a graduate of Williston High School and the first man from Wilmington to be a part of a World Series Championship team, the 1966 Baltimore Orioles. He thanked Mr. Fred. Bowen, Sam’s brother, Booty from Booty’s Soul Food, and City Staff for their help in this effort. He stated the City’s Parks and Recreation Advisory Board unanimously voted to recommend changing the name of Field Number 1 at the William E. Murphy Sports Complex to Sam Bowens Memorial Field.

Mr. Emmerich stated that Mr. Bowens began his professional baseball

career at age 14 on the field located at 8th and Church Streets, referred to as “The Hill”. He was the first baseman for the Wilmington Clippers, a semi-pro, unaffiliated Negro League baseball team. Four years later, as a senior at Williston High School, Mr. Bowen led four different sports teams to State titles in football, basketball, baseball, and track and field. Mr. Bowen went on to become a student athlete at Tennessee State University where he continued his semi-professional baseball career with the unaffiliated Negro baseball team, the Nashville Giants. Mr. Emmerich stated that Mr. Bowens was signed by the Baltimore Orioles organization where he spent several years working his way through the Minor League. He stated that in 1964 Mr. Bowen played his first full season in the Major League and set the Orioles Rookie Home Run Record, that would later be broken by Cal Ripken, Jr.

C1-39


Mr. Bowen was only the third black man to play for the Orioles up to that point. He garnered Rookie of the Year consideration, and on August 8, 1964, he hit a game winning home run at Yankee Stadium. Mr. Emmerich stated that Mr. Bowen’s career took an unfortunate turn in 1965 due to a leg injury. He stated that by 1966 he was relegated to a back up role. He stated that the Orioles won the American League pennant that year and went on to defeat the Los Angeles Dodgers. He stated that while Mr. Bowens did not see the field during that World Series, but was invaluable to the team in his role as a glove man and role player.

Mr. Emmerich stated he was told that the Negro League teams would

regularly come through Wilmington and play at Legion Stadium, as Godwin was off limits to black citizens. He stated that the Negro League was founded 100 years old ago, and he was informed that unaffiliated Negro League baseball was played in Wilmington up until just a few years ago. He stated that there are oral histories from those involved in the Negro League, but documentation has been difficult to find.

Mr. Emmerich stated that Mr. Bowen was one of the greatest all-around

athletes North Carolina ever produced. While his career was not long and decorated, he did reach the peak of success in baseball at a time when there were only about 300 players in the League. Mr. Bowen is in an elite company of men who have won World Series and have called Wilmington home. Mr. Emmerich stated he will continue to research Mr. Bowen and the rich history of baseball that Wilmington has produced.

Mr. Emmerich stated he understood that Council’s Naming Committee is

on a naming hiatus, but he would like to see Council commit tonight to supporting the name change of Field No. 1 to Sam Bowens Memorial Field by March 23, 2021, which would have been Mr. Bowens’ 83rd birthday.

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

PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearing was held on Ordinance Amending the Official Zoning

Maps of the City to Rezone Property Located at 1121 South Front Street, 1112 South 2nd Street, 101, 104, 108, 112, 114, 115 & 116 Marstellar Street from LI, Light Industrial District & R-3, Central City Residential District to UMX, Urban Mixed Use District.

Mr. Brian Chamber, Senior Planner stated this Item was continued from

Council’s last meeting in order for Staff and the Applicant to work together to provide assurances that the building on the site would be protected. He stated it is his understanding that the Applicant intends to request that Council remand this Item back to the Planning Commission for a consideration of a Conditional District Application.

Mr. Matt Nichols, Attorney for the Applicant, stated that in light of Council’s

comments and concerns at the last meeting and after further consideration and discussion with Staff, his client has agreed to pursue a Conditional District Rezoning, rather than a general UMX rezoning of the property. He requested that the matter be remanded to the Planning Commission for hearing at the October Planning Commission Meeting. He stated his client will propose a condition stating that the building at 101 Marstellar Street shall not be demolished. He stated his client has submitted a Conditional District Application, along with a proposed site plan, although it will most likely need additional modifications. He stated they will be ready to proceed at the October Planning Commission Meeting.

Mr. Nichols stated the building is best suited for reuse and repurposing

and his client would like to ensure that he retains the ability to add on to the building. He stated he wanted to make sure they were headed in the right direction and welcomed any guidance from Council. His client will agree to the condition that the building will not be demolished, but he would like the ability to develop the rest of the site with a thoughtful plan, in accordance with the UMX Ordinance.

C1-40


Following further consideration, Mayor Pro Tem Haynes moved to remand the Ordinance back to the Planning Commission to consider a Conditional District Application at the Planning Commission’s October 2020 Meeting.

Councilmember O’Grady stated that he hoped the condition to be placed

on the building says something more than just the building will not be demolished. He would like to see language included that the historic character of the building will remain. He commended the Applicant for proceeding this way.

The motion was seconded by Councilmember Rivenbark and carried

unanimously.

************* ORDINANCES

Ordinance Making Appropriation of $60,000 to the Parks and Recreation Capital Projects Fund for the Riverwalk Maintenance Project was considered.

Mr. David Cowell, City Engineer, stated this Ordinance would provide

funding to make emergency repairs to the Riverwalk. He stated that after midnight on August 28, 2020, a car drove into the river. The initial assessment indicates the damage includes the aluminum railing, timber rail posts and toe kicks, timber deck framing system, electrical wiring, observation stool, abandoned-in-place fender piles, and floating dock. The Riverwalk in the area is built upon a pile-supported concrete platform over the water.

Mr. Cowell stated that structural and engineering consultants have been

engaged to develop plans and a cost estimate for the repair. He stated the contractor has been engaged based on competence, experience, and availability. He stated the total repair cost is estimated not to exceed $74,000. He stated that any expenses in excess of the appropriated $60,000 will be paid from the Community Services Department’s Annual operating budget for the Riverwalk.

A question/answer and discussion period was held. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Haynes’ inquiry, Mr. Cowell stated that

Staff will provide proposals and cost estimates to the City’s Safety Manager, who will work with the insurance companies. He stated the City’s insurance carrier would probably be involved at some point, but only as it relates to recovery of the cost from the carrier that insured the vehicle.

In response to Councilmember Spears’ inquiry, Mr. Cowell stated the

railing for the Riverwalk was built according to established engineering standards and it will be put back as it was built. He stated it has been estimated that the vehicle was traveling approximately 96 miles per hour, with a perpendicular strike to the guardrails. He stated the guardrails are intended to deflect glancing blows and he does not know what would have to be built to absorb a perpendicular strike at that speed. He stated that while this accident was tragic, Staff does not intend to rebuild the Riverwalk to withstand that type of vehicle strike.


of the Ordinance, seconded by Councilmember O’Grady, and the motion carried unanimously. A Second Reading of the Ordinance was waived on motion of Mayor Pro Tem Haynes, seconded by Councilmember Rivenbark and carried unanimously.

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

C1-41


Resolution Authorizing the Award of a Contract to Strategic Finance & Marketing Consultants, Inc. d.b.a. Strategic Rail Finance in the amount of $115,000 for Professional Consulting Services for the Rail Realignment Project; and Ordinance Shifting $100,000 for the Rail Realignment Economic Feasibility Study Budgeted in the General Fund to the Special Purpose Fund and Appropriating $115,000 to the Rail Realignment Economic Feasibility Project were considered.

Mr. Aubrey Parsley, Rail Realignment Manager, stated the Resolution and

Ordinance, if passed, will enable the City to perform an economic feasibility study for the Rail Realignment project. He stated the study is a critically important step in the overall process. He stated some fundamental questions must be answered if the project is going to happen, such as who will own the railroad once it is built, who will operate it, and who will maintain it. He stated this study will vet the City’s options for these questions and will begin to prove out the revenue side of the business case for this project. He stated this will be done with a high degree of collaboration from stakeholders such as CSX, State Port Authority, NC Department of Transportation, and NC Railroad Company.

Mr. Parsley stated that Staff completed a competitive procurement

process for the study and is recommending Strategic Rail Finance as the most qualified candidate, as they have tremendous experience and qualifications in this very specialized area. He stated that funds for the study were adopted in the General Fund budget and the Ordinance tonight would move those funds into a Special Purpose Fund and would also appropriate some outside funding received from stakeholders. He stated the City’s original contribution of $50,000 has not changed.


of the Resolution Authorizing the Award of a Contract to Strategic Finance & Marketing Consultants, Inc. d.b.a. Strategic Rail Finance in the amount of $115,000 for Professional Consulting Services for the Rail Realignment, seconded by Councilmember Barnett, and the motion carried unanimously.

Following further consideration, Councilmember O’Grady moved approval

of the Ordinance Shifting $100,000 for the Rail Realignment Economic Feasibility Study Budgeted in the General Fund to the Special Purpose Fund and Appropriating $115,000 to the Rail Realignment Economic Feasibility Project, seconded by Councilmember Rivenbark, and the motion carried unanimously. A Second Reading of the Ordinance was waived on motion of Councilmember O’Grady, seconded by Councilmember Barnett and carried unanimously.

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

Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the USDA

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Notice of Grant and Agreement Award (NOA) for the Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) program in the amount of $342,942.30 and the NC Department of Agriculture and Customer Services (NCDOA) Contract in the amount of $95,261.75, for a total grant award of $438,204.05; Ordinance Appropriating $342,943 from Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and $95,262 from State of North Carolina Department of Agriculture (NCDOA) in grant reimbursement to the Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) Project to fund the removal of Hurricane Florence related drainage system blockages; and Resolution Awarding a Professional Services Contract with McGill Associates for EWP Construction Administration Services were considered.

Mr. Fred Royal, Stormwater Services Manager, stated there are seven

sites that the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) looked at after Hurricane Florence where significant trees came down and are blocking creeks and drainageways. Staff began looking at the feasibility of each of the sites for access, need, and any other issues related to removing the trees, or other debris and ended up with six sites. He stated tonight’s action will authorize the City Manager to sign the

C1-42


grants in order to have them sent back to NRCS in a timely manner. He stated the bid opening for the project is in two days and Staff feels confident they will be within the budget.

Mr. Royal stated that he would provide Council with a list of the six sites

selected. He stated these projects were identified as significant trees and were identified by the NRCS as sites the City should consider.

Following further consideration, Councilmember Rivenbark moved

approval of the Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Notice of Grant and Agreement Award (NOA) for the Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) program in the amount of $342,942.30 and the NC Department of Agriculture and Customer Services (NCDOA) Contract in the amount of $95,261.75, for a total grant award of $438,204.05, seconded by Councilmember O’Grady, and the motion carried unanimously.


of the Ordinance Appropriating $342,943 from Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and $95,262 from State of North Carolina Department of Agriculture (NCDOA) in grant reimbursement to the Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) Project to fund the removal of Hurricane Florence related drainage system blockages, seconded by Councilmember Barnett, and the motion carried unanimously. A Second Reading of the Ordinance was waived on motion of Councilmember Barnett, seconded by Councilmember O’Grady, and carried unanimously.


of the Resolution Awarding a Professional Services Contract with McGill Associates for EWP Construction Administration Services, seconded by Councilmember Rivenbark, and the motion carried unanimously.

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

RESOLUTIONS

Resolution Directing City Manager and the City Attorney to Prepare a Final Agreement with Hipp Architecture and Development, PC for Transfer and Redevelopment of City Owned Property Located at 1110 Castle Street was considered.

Ms. Erris Dunston, Special Assistant to the City Manager for Economic

Development stated the final draft of the proposal from the developer (Hipp Architecture) for 1110 Castle Street is before Council tonight for consideration. She stated this proposal was put together based on the findings from the environmental assessments and evaluations of the property. She stated the proposal contains 23 residential units that will be sold as affordable housing, up to 15 units of commercial, and a public use space. This project is estimated to cost $8 million and the developer has submitted a letter regarding his financing. She stated the developer is targeting spring of 2021 as a potential start date, provided he can get a Brownfields Agreement in place.

Mr. Clark Hipp stated that Council has been provided a lot of the overall

details about the proposal and what is before Council is a strong proposal for the redevelopment of the property. He stated they have met many of the requirements, including those related to financial responsibility for the project, to the transfer of the property to the nonprofit community land trust, and to the agreements between the development company and the land trust. He stated the residential units in the project will be sold to households making 80% or less of the area median income. Mr. Hipp stated that other members of his development team are available for any specific questions Council might have.

C1-43


Mr. Hipp stated the buildings will receive extensive rehabilitation to address the new surfaces and finishes, a new roof, and environmental issues. He stated the overall greenspace has been increased in the project and on-site parking will be provided. He stated he is hoping to encourage an event type business for one of the back buildings, as it will open onto greenspace. Alternatively, if the Brownfield issues can be addressed, his team will look at providing additional housing units in the back building.

Mr. Hipp stated regarding the environmental issues, his consultants have

reviewed the available information and feel confident that a Brownfields Agreement will be forthcoming. He stated his project schedule is based on a Brownfields Agreement being in hand by March of 2021, with the renovation of the existing buildings starting soon thereafter, and with an expected completion time during the third quarter of 2021. He stated the newer buildings will begin at the same time, but will take longer to complete, and are not expected to come online until sometime in 2022.

Mr. Hipp stated he has the financial commitments to move forward and

thanked the City for the opportunity to put his project together. A question/answer and discussion period was held. Mr. Hipp stated the new properties would be a form of condominium

ownership, with the condominium association holding a long-term lease to the land. The condominium owners would have a portion of the ownership of the lease. He stated it was more complicated than straight condominium ownership, but it has been done before.

Mr. Steve Spain of Cape Fear Habitat for Humanity, stated the area

median income varies based on family size, but the number they have been using is $56,000. He stated that while the agreement calls for 80% of the AMI, most of Habitat’s clients average around 60%, and for City ownership units they aim for 50%. He stated that will involve subsidies that Habitat provides, which enables them to serve that group.

Mr. Spain stated the Habitat units would have deed restrictions that

govern how much of the value increase the buyer can take, up to 15 years. He stated that after 15 years, Habitat steps back in order to provide opportunities for the homeowner to build wealth. He stated this is the same model Habitat uses for its single-family homes. He stated that over the years Habitat has built $6 million in equity wealth for low to moderate income communities.

Mr. Tony Caudle, Deputy City Manager stated there was not a date certain

to bring this Item back to Council, as Staff has not decided which State statute to proceed under in going forward with this project. He stated that Staff will work through the agreement and will bring the Item back as soon as possible, as Staff understands this project is high on Council’s priorities. Mayor Saffo requested that Staff give a timeframe as to when the Item will come back before Council. Ms. Meredith Everhart, Deputy City Attorney proposed that the Item come back the first week in December, in order to provide adequate time for any notice requirements. Mr. Caudle stated that if it was possible, Staff would bring the Item back to Council at an earlier date.


of the Resolution, seconded by Councilmember Rivenbark and the motion carried unanimously.

************* Resolution Authorizing An Interlocal Agreement with New Hanover

County to Fund a Portion of Consultant’s Fee Utilized to Help Guide the WAVE Transit Restructuring was considered.

Ms. Laura Mortell, Budget Director stated that questions arose in August

on this Item and Staff has additional information to provide to Council. She reviewed the history of WAVE’s funding requests, leading to the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners voting to notify WAVE of its intent to terminate its contract. She stated

C1-44


in February of 2020, the City and County elected officials revamped the WAVE Board to include City and County Staff. She stated the new Board has met regularly since February. She stated that TransPro, the hired consultant, gave its draft report in January and has developed it further since that time.

Ms. Mortell stated that New Hanover County negotiated with TransPro for

a 60-day diagnostic in order to identify cost saving opportunities for WAVE. She stated that the study was 100% funded by the County. She stated that New Hanover County also contracted with the consultant for the WAVE redesign, which would provide a blueprint for the future. She stated that contract was roughly $226,000 and the Interlocal Agreement with the County for that contract is what is before Council tonight. She stated the City’s 40% share of the fee would be approximately $90,000.

Ms. Mortell stated the focus of the WAVE Board is to balance the FY2020

and FY2021 budgets, which has been done. She stated they are also searching for a new Executive Director, which is in process. She stated they received 32 applicants and have narrowed it down to the 12 most qualified. Out of the 12 finalists, they plan to interview six candidates next week. She stated another focus is the WAVE redesign, which has been occurring since July of this year to look at the system, to include how WAVE works and how the new governing board would look. She stated the other part of the redesign is to discuss permanent funding options to meet the needs of the desired system.

Ms. Mortell stated the TransPro recommendations are being treated by

the Board as just recommendations and Staff is also talking with WAVE Staff and other stakeholders in the area. She stated once the Board is ready to make recommendations, they will present them to both the City and County governing boards for comment.

Ms. Mortell stated that TransPro was instructed to create a public transit

system from the ground up based on an area this size. She stated they created a base recommendation, with add-ons based on conversations with stakeholders. She stated the preliminary report was received in July, with the final recommendations received on September 8, 2020. The WAVE Board met on September 9, 2020 to discuss the report and will meet again on September 24, 2020 to continue the discussion.

Ms. Mortell stated that one of Council’s previous questions was about

paratransit. She stated that paratransit was in the scope of work, but it was not analyzed in totality, as their understanding was to do the non-contracted services. She stated the recommendations they included for paratransit were not really recommendations but were more of how to switch the system. She stated they retained 93% of those trips. She stated TransPro’s recommendations removed two routes and because paratransit is required within ¾ of a mile from fixed routes, if routes are removed, some of the paratransit will go away. She stated that some of the paratransit is subsidized by local dollars and that in FY 2019, it was approximately $200,000, and for FY20 it was approximately $80,000. She stated most of those amounts went to DART, which is the ¾ of a mile program that the transit system is required to have.

Ms. Mortell stated that as to the on-demand service, TransPro rebuilt the

system and recommended what they thought we needed, with some additional options. She stated the on-demand was not intended to be curb-to-curb, but instead from a point to the closest fixed route. She stated the intention is for those routes that are removed, this will get those people to another fixed route. She stated the routes would mostly be to the north, including to the VA clinic and the jail, and towards Pleasure Island. She stated the consultant estimated this service would have 49,000 trips.

Ms. Mortell stated the consultant looked at various data points and created

maps of where people got on the system and developed the recommended system with that information in mind. She stated TransPro estimated the system would retain 88% of the current customer trips and adding 7% more trips with the changes to the routes.

C1-45


Ms. Mortell stated it is difficult to compare current routes to the proposed routes, as the consultant took sections of the 14 routes and changed it to eight. She stated each of the new routes have sections of the older routes included. She stated there are directional changes in the routes as well as frequency changes. She stated that one of the consultant’s benchmarks is that dependent riders in general are willing to walk ten minutes to a bus stop, so they included a half mile buffer to show the coverage of the system. She stated that in the redesign, approximately 154 bus stops that were designated as underutilized will be removed. She also reviewed some of the recommended route changes.

Ms. Mortell stated the Downtown Trolley was not included in TransPro’s

recommendation of a right-sized system. She stated it was included as an add-on option as a seasonal route, Wednesdays through Saturdays, with a 40-minute frequency.

Mayor Pro Tem Haynes stated that her concern with doing away the

Trolley is the City is opening a park at the northern end, with an estimated 10,000 people expected to visit. She feels this should have been a consideration and would like the City to keep the Trolley and explore ways to incentivize maintaining it for the downtown area.

A question/answer and discussion period was held. Councilmember O’Grady requested that Council be provided a copy of the

final report. Ms. Mortell stated she would provide a copy tomorrow. Councilmember O’Grady stated that he does not feel the consultant

considered the human factor to these routes. He also feels the reaction from the ridership to these changes is being underestimated. He stated the City is being asked to pay for things it should not be paying for, and it is the County’s responsibility to see there is public transit for all County residents.

Ms. Mortell stated that the City can develop the on-demand ride program

as it sees fit, but there is an associated cost. Councilmember O’Grady stated his understanding was the subsidy for the on-demand rides would equal the amount of bus fare. However, going from one end of town to the other would cost significantly more and would preclude a number of riders from participating.

Ms. Mortell pointed out that the on-demand program is an option. In

response to Councilmember Rivenbark’s inquiry, Ms. Mortell stated that she did not have the exact number on how many riders in the City limits would be affected by the proposed route changes, but she confirmed that the majority of the loss is outside the City limits.

Mayor Saffo stated the City has been paying $1.5 million annually to the

transit system and if the Council wants to continue or enhance services within the City limits, they can do so, but there is an associated cost. Ms. Mortell stated that was correct and reminded Council that the second part of the WAVE Board’s focus is to discuss funding and sources for potential revenue.

Mr. Tony Caudle, Deputy City Manager stated that Council is struggling

with the same questions the WAVE Board is struggling with. He stated Staff is not ready to make recommendations on the system at this point, having addressed some of the issues raised by Council. In response to Councilmember Spears’ inquiry, Ms. Mortell stated that agreeing to pay the City’s share of the consultant costs does not mean the Council agrees with TransPro’s recommendations.

In response to Councilmember Barnett’s inquiry, Ms. Mortell stated that

the consultant will continue to work on recommendations for WAVE’s Governance model.

C1-46


Following further consideration, Mayor Pro Tem Haynes moved approval of the Resolution, seconded by Councilmember Spears, and the motion carried unanimously.

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

Resolution Authorizing a Professional Services Agreement with Live

Nation Worldwide, Inc. for Venue Management Services at the Hugh Morton Amphitheater at Greenfield Lake was considered.

Mr. Tony Caudle, Deputy City Manager stated that Staff is requesting to

continue this Item until Council’s October 6, 2020 meeting in order to meet all potential advertising requirements.

Following further consideration, Councilmember Barnett moved to

continue the Resolution to Council’s October 6, 2020 Meeting, seconded by Councilmember Spears, and the motion carried unanimously.

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

Resolution Authorizing Filing of Condemnation Actions for

Acquisition of Permanent Drainage Easements for Clear Run Branch Drainage Improvements Phase 1 Project Parcel #’s 13, 14, 19 20, and 25 as shown in Map Book 67, at Page 239 252 of the New Hanover County Registry, NC was considered.

Mr. Dave Mayes, Director of Public Services and Facilities stated the Item

is to approve condemnation for five properties on the Clear Run Branch Drainage Improvement Project. He stated Staff has negotiated settlement agreements with 57 properties in this project, but was unable to reach an agreement with these five properties.


of the Resolution and was seconded by Councilmember Barnett. A question/answer and discussion period was held. Councilmember Rivenbark stated that this project has been going on for a

long time and is sorely needed. However, he thinks there has been some misinformation passed amongst the neighbors as to payments made for some of the easements. He stated the area of the easements range from 9,000 sq. ft. up to 20,000 sq. ft, which causes differences in the value. Mr. Mayes stated that this is a problem they have faced on other projects, as neighbors can misunderstand the impacts to an individual property. He stated in this case the appraisals came back with a different square foot value, which reflects on the compensation per owner. He stated the appraisal also reflected the 75% value, which was not included in the original offer.

Mayor Pro Tem Haynes stated she would have to support the project

because it serves the greater good, as this area is known to have dangerous flooding. Mayor Saffo stated that as to the discrepancy in the opinions of value, he

wants to make sure Staff sits down with the appraiser to make certain the formula the appraiser is using is the same one they agreed to as a City. He wants to ensure the owners are getting fair and equitable value for their property.

Following further discussion, the motion to approve the Resolution carried

unanimously.

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

C1-47


REPORTS

Mayor Pro-Tem Haynes presented the recommendations of Council’s Appointments Committee for Boards, Commissions, and Committees as follows:

LOAN REVIEW BOARD Appoint Matthew Hillard - Represent Commercial Lender Term Expires: 9/15/2022 SISTER CITY COMMISSION Appoint Megan Mulllins - Represent Chamber Term Expires: 09/01/2023 ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Appoint Andrew Finch - Alternate No. 2


of the recommendations, seconded by Councilmember Barnett, and the motion carried unanimously. ADDITIONAL ITEMS

Councilmember Barnett reminded everyone to fill out the Census, as the deadline is September 30th. He encouraged people to get their absentee ballots. He encouraged everyone to help parents and students struggling with virtual school. He also encouraged everyone to wear their masks, keep 6-feet of distance and keep everyone safe.

Councilmember Rivenbark asked everyone to pick up litter they come

across.

ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at

9:22 P.M. Respectfully Submitted,


NOTE: THE ABOVE MINUTES ARE NOT A VERBATIM RECORD OF

THE PROCEEDINGS. THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS ARE RECORDED ON TAPES 1, 2, AND 3, AND ARE INCLUDED AS PART OF THIS OFFICIAL RECORD.

C1-48

CITY OF WILMINGTON SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES


The Council of the City of Wilmington held a Special Meeting at 6:30 P.M. on the above date at the Wilmington Convention Center, 10 Convention Center Drive, Wilmington, North Carolina.

Those present were: Mayor Bill Saffo, presiding; Mayor Pro-Tem Margaret Haynes; Councilmembers Charlie Rivenbark, Neil Anderson, Kevin O’Grady, Clifford Barnett, Sr, and Kevin Spears; City Manager Sterling Cheatham; City Attorney John Joye; Assistant City Attorney Shawn Evans; and City Clerk Penelope Spicer-Sidbury.

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

Mayor Saffo stated that he wanted to make everyone aware of an incident that occurred yesterday in Creekwood involving the Wilmington Police Department (WPD). He stated a gentleman was barricaded in a home and while WPD was trying to extract him, he fired shots at the Officers. He stated that Police Chief Donny Williams, Assistant Chief Dave Oyler, Deputy Chief Alex Sotelo, Deputy Chief Ben Kennedy, and Captain Matt Ingram, who was the Commanding Officer with the SWAT Team, were on scene. He stated the Officers on the property held their fire and extracted the man peacefully.

Mayor Saffo commended Chief Williams and the Police Department

for the outstanding work they did. He noted that these kinds of stories are not reported in the media, and he wanted to highlight this example of the dedicated leadership from our Police Department. He stated that he wanted to thank the WPD for a job well done and that Wilmington should be proud to have a Chief and a Police Department that do such outstanding work in often dangerous situations.

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

PUBLIC HEARINGS

Public Hearing was held on Ordinance Amending The Official Zoning Map Of The City To Rezone Property Containing 10.73 Acres Of Land Located At 321 Hooker Road From R-15, Residential District To R-7, Residential (Conditional District) For a 56 lot Single family Development; and Resolution Granting/Denying a Special Use Permit for Property Located at 321 Hooker Road to Allow for a Planned Unit Development, Residential (PUD-R) in the R-7, Residential District for a 56 Lot Single family Development.


sworn in by Mrs. Penelope Spicer-Sidbury, City Clerk. Mr. Brian Chambers, Senior Planner stated this site is located on

the south side of Hooker Road, is approximately 11 acres, and currently contains a manufactured housing park. He showed Council an aerial map, as well as photographs of the site and the surrounding areas. He stated that UNCW is located to the west, Autumn Hall is located to the north, and Bradley Creek is located to the east. He stated this site is part of the 1995 Annexation Area and was assigned R-15 zoning by the City at that time. According to New Hanover County Tax records, the manufactured home park has been in existence since 1968 and is considered a legal, nonconforming use within the City. Under City Code, the manufactured home park may continue to operate unless all the units are removed for a period at 180 days.

Mr. Chambers stated on January 19, 2019 the Planning

Commission recommended denial of a request to rezone this site from R-15 to MF-L (CD), Multi-Family, Low Density (Conditional District) for 106 townhome units. The Applicant did not appeal that decision to City Council. On May 1,

C1-49

SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 22, 2020 PAGE 2 2019 the Planning Commission recommended denial of a request to rezone the site to R-5 (CD), Residential (Conditional District) for an 86-lot single family planned unit development. Mr. Chambers stated this denial was appealed to City Council, but it was requested that the Item be withdrawn at Council’s July 16, 2019 Meeting. He stated that tonight’s Item was a request to rezone the property to R-7 (CD), Residential (Conditional District), for a 56-lot single-family subdivision. The Applicant is also requesting a Special Use Permit (SUP) for a Planned Unit Development (PUD-R), as it allows for greater design flexibility than what is possible under the general district regulations. The SUP will be required for the design that was shown to Council.

Mr. Chambers stated the proposal includes a new private street

network, stormwater facilities, and open space. He stated that access will be provided by two road connections to Hooker Road and an additional connection to Ivy Stone Court, located to the southeast of the site. The Subdivision Review Board approved the preliminary plan for this subdivision at its August 19, 2020 Meeting. Mr. Chambers stated that sidewalks are to be provided along both sides of the proposed streets and will connect to Ivy Stone Court. The Applicant is also proposing several large “tree save” areas located throughout the site. The site is located on a Watershed Resource Protection area, so Exceptional Design Standards will be required.

Mr. Chambers showed Council proposed building elevations

provided by the Applicant. He stated the Create Comprehensive Plan calls for compatible infill and redevelopment within existing residential neighborhoods. The site currently contains a legal, nonconforming manufactured housing park, which is intended to be phased out when the site redevelops. He stated the site is located within an established low density, single-family neighborhood.

Mr. Chambers stated the PUD-R provides flexibility as to setbacks,

lot dimensions, and lot coverage. He provided to Council a chart of the required City Code requirements for a PUD-R project and how this site meets those requirements, including minimum lot size, density, and setbacks. He stated there are also standards for buffering for multi-family projects and a potential affordable housing component that do not apply to this project. He stated that if Council grants the request, Staff recommends the conditions listed in the Case Summary.

A question/answer and discussion period was held. In response to Mayor Saffo’s inquiry, Mr. Chambers stated the

PUD-R provides that if affordable housing is included in a project, under certain conditions, it allows additional design flexibility beyond the overall PUD-R regulations. He stated the overall PUD-R regulations permit flexibility in lot configuration in order to meet the density. If affordable housing is included, additional flexibility is provided for parking, landscaping, open space, and any other Land Development Code considerations.

In response to Councilmember O’Grady’s inquiry, Mr. Chamber

stated that the Technical Review Committee (TRC) and the Subdivision Review Board (SRB), which include a representative from the Wilmington Fire Department, have reviewed the proposal.

Mr. Chambers stated the Applicant is proposing a payment-in-lieu

instead of building the bicycle trail. He stated the City will require any easements necessary to construct the trail once the design is completed.

In response to Councilmember Anderson’s inquiry, Mr. Chambers

stated that for every lot, .03 acres must be set aside as open space. Ms. Suzanne Bryant, Applicant, stated the property is currently

operating as a 69-unit mobile home park, and is buffered by single-family residential neighborhoods, which are compatible with the proposal she is bringing

C1-50

SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 22, 2020 PAGE 3 forward. She stated the mobile homes currently on the site vary in age, from 20 to 40 years old. She stated the prior attempts to rezone this property at a higher density came under severe scrutiny, both from City Staff and the adjacent neighbors. She stated the original intent was to include an affordable housing component, but the neighbors made it clear they would object to anything less than single-family housing. She stated the current proposal was the result of years of consideration and reflects the feedback both from Staff and the adjacent neighbors.

Ms. Bryant stated the site plan details the 56 single-family lots,

which will offer a private street network as well as active and passive open spaces. She stated there was a lot of thought given to tree preservation and there will be sidewalks on both sides of the streets. She stated the existing site does not have a stormwater system, but one is included in this proposal. She stated the plan is compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods.

Ms. Bryant stated the request for a PUD-R gives them greater

flexibility to build the type of house that is universally accepted in the greater Wilmington area. She stated the PUD-R regulations permit them to build something on these different-shaped lots while still making the streetscape aesthetically pleasing. It also permits them to preserve large clusters of trees throughout the neighborhood, while still leaving the lots usable. She pointed out this proposal does not use the maximum density permitted.

Ms. Bryant provided to Council a rendering of the proposed house

plans. She stated the houses are all 3-bedroom and will offer private driveways, two car garages, front porches, and screened back porches. She stated the houses will be architecturally compatible with Southern Oaks at Bradley Creek, which is an adjacent neighborhood that will share one of the connector streets.

Ms. Bryant stated the renderings were shared with adjacent

neighbors at two separate community meetings. She stated she feels this project is at a point where everyone feels it will be mutually beneficial.

Ms. Bryant stated if the site were to remain a nonconforming use,

they would be permitted to have 69 four-bedroom mobile homes, which is a total of 276 bedrooms. She stated the current proposal is for 168 bedrooms. She stated that as to the traffic, Hooker Road is currently operating at a Level of Service “A” and can handle capacity trips up to 9,000. She stated that currently it is handling approximately 1,700 trips. She stated the proposed intensity of this plan did not trigger a Traffic Impact Analysis.

Ms. Bryant stated they have requested three variances through the

Subdivision Review Board (SRB), which were all unanimously approved with some contingencies.

A question/answer and discussion period was held. In response to Councilmember Barnett’s inquiry, Ms. Bryant stated

the ballpark cost for one of these houses will be in the $300,000 range. She stated there are a handful of residents still living in the mobile home park. She stated the property owner is offering the residents the option of taking the trailers with them. She stated the residents do not currently own the trailers.

In response to Councilmember Spears’ inquiry, Ms. Bryant stated

she has not heard from the current residents on this project, but she would assume they are not thrilled by the proposal. She stated that as to the adjacent neighbors, in the past they have been more in favor of keeping the mobile home park, rather than the past proposals submitted by the Applicant.

C1-51


In response to Councilmember Barnett’s inquiry, Ms. Bryant stated that at this density, it would not be economically feasible to price one of the houses at a more affordable level.

Mrs. Penelope Spicer-Sidbury, City Clerk stated there were several

electronic comments received for this Item as follows:

• Mr. James Reeves, 6210 Teal Street, who stated his primary concern was the additional traffic this project will generate on Hooker Road and feels it will be dangerous for bicyclists.

• Ms. Martha Relan, 702 Woodland Forest Court, who stated that she was satisfied with the construction of single-family homes on the site as was presented during the community meeting.

• Mr. Ryan Inge, 705 Woodland Forest Court who stated he was in support of the single-family plan for the site on Hooker Road and it was be a welcome addition to the neighborhood. He stated a planned neighborhood that supports a family atmosphere and ownership is needed.

• Mr. Greg Reed, 714 Woodland Forest Court, who stated he wanted to offer his support for the Cottages at Bradley Creek, based on the project description as explained at the community meeting. He stated that one concern for Southern Oaks residents was the connection created to the Cottages through Ivy Stone Court and asked if it was possible to require speed bumps on both sides of the road to slow transitional traffic.

• Mr. Mark Bammert, 713 Woodland Forest Court, who stated that single-family homes should be the only consideration for this project as it fits the plan of the area and will not result in a dangerous increase in traffic on Hooker Road. He hoped that the safety of all the residents in the area would be considered during the discussions.


Everyone being given an opportunity be heard, the Public Hearing was closed.

Mr. Shawn Evans, Assistant City Attorney advised Council that the written comments received on this Item are pertinent for the Public Hearing on the rezoning request. However, the Special Use Permit is a quasi-judicial hearing and those electronic comments read by the City Clerk are not pertinent and may not be considered in that decision.

Following further consideration, Councilmember O’Grady moved approval of the Ordinance Amending The Official Zoning Map Of The City To Rezone Property Containing 10.73 Acres Of Land Located At 321 Hooker Road From R-15, Residential District To R-7, Residential (Conditional District) For a 56 lot Single family Development and read the consistency statement as follows:

I move to approve the proposed amendment to rezone property located at 321 Hooker Road to rezone from R-15, Residential District, to R-7(CD), Residential Conditional District for a 56-lot single-family planned unit development and find it to be Consistent with the relevant policies in the Comprehensive Plan*, based on the application materials, and the information provided at the public hearing and in the staff report, and to find Approval of the rezoning request is reasonable and in the public interest for the following reason(s): The proposed subdivision is compatible with the neighborhood and consistent with the existing development pattern.

C1-52


* Per NC General Statute160A-383, the Comprehensive Plan includes the Create Wilmington Comprehensive Plan and any other officially adopted plan that is applicable.

The motion was seconded by Councilmember Barnett and carried unanimously. A Second Reading of the Ordinance was waived on motion of Councilmember Rivenbark, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Haynes, and carried unanimously.

Mr. Sterling Cheatham, City Manager advised that Staff had no further information to provide in regards to the Resolution Granting a Special Use Permit for Property Located at 321 Hooker Road to Allow for a Planned Unit Development, Residential (PUD-R) in the R-7, Residential District for a 56 Lot Single family Development. Mr. Shawn Evans, Assistant City Attorney advised that the parties consented to merge the required Public Hearings for the rezoning and the Special Use Permit into one.

Following further consideration, Councilmember Anderson moved approval of the Resolution Granting a Special Use Permit for Property Located at 321 Hooker Road to Allow for a Planned Unit Development, Residential (PUD-R) in the R-7, Residential District for a 56 Lot Single family Development, seconded by Councilmember Barnett, and the motion carried unanimously.

********** Public Hearing was held on Resolution Granting/Denying a

Special Use Permit for Property Located at 6014 Wrightsville Avenue to Allow Construction of a Structure Over 3,000 Square Feet in the Wrightsville Avenue Corridor Overlay.


sworn in by Mrs. Penelope Spicer-Sidbury, City Clerk at the beginning of the Meeting.

Mr. Patrick O’Mahoney, Associate Planner, gave the Staff Report

and stated the subject site is located along the east side of Wrightsville Avenue, just north of the intersection at Wrightsville Avenue and Greenville Avenue. He stated the site is approximately .56 of an acre and is currently occupied by a 2,400 square foot commercial structure. He showed Council an aerial map and photographs of the subject site and adjacent properties. He stated that there are single-family uses to the south, west, and north of the site, and a horse farm is located directly across Wrightsville Avenue. He stated that commercial uses, including a convenience store are located immediately to the south and east. He stated there is a Conditional District project that was approved by Council on April 3, 2018 for the property to the west of this request and a cross access connection to that property is provided and included in the Staff Report as a recommended condition.

Mr. Mahoney stated the site was annexed into the City in

September of 2000 and is currently zoned CB, Community Business. He stated the Land Development Code (LDC) requires a Special Use Permit (SUP) for new nonresidential or multi-family structures exceeding 3,000 square feet within the Wrightsville Area Corridor Overlay (WACO).

Mr. Mahoney showed Council the proposed site plan and

elevations provided by the Applicant. The Applicant proposes to redevelop the property with a two story, mixed-use building containing 10,800 square feet of gross floor area with 23 parking spaces. The intended use of the site is to provide retail, professional office, personal services, and a maximum of six residential units. Access to the site will be provided via a driveway on Wrightsville Avenue and a cross access easement will be provided to allow

C1-53

SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 22, 2020 PAGE 6 access for the existing single-family home located to the north. The existing driveway on the adjacent property will be eliminated.

Mr. Mahoney stated the Wrightsville Avenue 2030 Plan

Recommended Land Use Map supports maintaining commercial uses at this location. He stated the Plan calls for the protection and enhancement of the unique character of the Wrightsville Avenue Corridor, while promoting pedestrian connectivity in a visually appealing and appropriate commercial development. He stated the site is identified as a Neighborhood Scale Infill Development Area of Opportunity and a Neighborhood Node on the Growth Strategies Map. The Plan encourages sizing small scale centers along corridors that are consistent with surrounding neighborhoods, while offering some commercial services to nearby residential uses. This request includes a neighborhood scale mixed-use building in proximity to nearby residential uses. Pedestrian connections are provided and parking is located to the side and rear of the building.

Mr. Mahoney stated that if Council elects to approve the SUP, Staff

recommends the conditions outlined in the Case Summary. In response to Councilmember Anderson’s inquiry, Mr. Mahoney

stated there will be a maximum of six residential unit. Ms. Cindee Wolf, representing the Applicant, stated this is another

positive change to the Wrightsville Avenue Corridor, where an older site is redeveloped and brought into compliance with what the Wrightsville Area Corridor should be. She showed Council a photograph of the site, which already exists as a commercial use. Mr. Robert High, the property owner, also redeveloped the site behind this one that faces Greenville Avenue and it has been a very positive point to the aesthetics and use of that facility.

Ms. Wolf showed Council a proposed plan for the site. She stated

that Mr. High also owns the residence shown in the upper right of the proposed plan and part of this request is a collaborative effort to eliminate the driveway that goes into that house in favor of a shared driveway with this project. She stated this action will reduce the conflict points along Wrightsville Avenue and increases safety and interconnectivity.

Ms. Wolf stated that the project is already zoned and permitted, but

the SUP is required due to the size of the building. She stated the use will not materially danger health or safety, as they are moving the parking around to the back, are increasing interconnectivity, they will have public utilities, and are eliminating one driveway. She stated the use meets all the required conditions and specifications and has been reviewed by the Technical Review Committee and by City Staff. She stated the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining properties and the location of the use is in accordance with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan.

Ms. Wolf stated that the Applicant is proposing a 50/50 split

between nonresidential residential space in the development. She stated the entire first floor is commercial and the entire second floor is residential.

In response to Councilmember Barnett’s inquiry, Ms. Wolf stated

that the community meeting was held in March and no one showed. However, she ensured that her contact information was provided, and no one seemed concerned with this particular project.

There being no one present to speak in favor or opposition, the

Public Hearing was closed.

Following further consideration, Mayor Pro Tem Haynes moved approval of the Resolution, seconded by Councilmember Anderson and the motion carried unanimously.

C1-54


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

ADDITIONAL ITEMS

Mr. Shawn Evans, Assistant City Attorney stated that the Planning

Staff extended thanks to Council for holding these Special Meetings in order to provide an opportunity to catch up with the backlog of Special Use Permits.

Councilmember Spears stated he wanted to echo the Mayor’s

kudos to the Wilmington Police Department for its outstanding work. He stated there should be more focus on mental health.

Councilmember Anderson stated that the kids will return to school

soon and he hopes that goes smoothly. Councilmember Rivenbark reminded everyone to not litter. Mayor Pro Tem Haynes recognized the death of Justice Ruth

Bader Ginsburg, which left a tremendous void on the U.S. Supreme Court. Justice Ginsburg was a pioneer in the efforts towards gender equality and led the Court in several decisions that led this Country forward in fairness and equity.

Councilmember Barnett stated the Census ends on September 30th

and it is crucial to get everyone to fill them out. He stated we will lose out on ten years of funding if everyone does not fill out their Census form. He also encouraged everyone to register to vote.

There being no further business to discuss, the meeting adjourned

at 7:36 P.M.

Respectfully Submitted, Penelope Spicer-Sidbury, CMC/MMC/NCCMC City Clerk NOTE: THESE MINUTES ARE NOT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS, BUT ARE PART OF THE OFFICIAL RECORD.

C1-55

item c1 minutes - granicus

Documents