Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

At its April 21 meeting, the Currituck County Board of Commissioners met for a public hearing in regard to a request for a preliminary plat use permit to develop a 56-lot conservation subdivision in the Powells Point area, located on the north side of South Spot Road.

Before the hearing began, legal counsel for the applicant, represented by Ashley Honeycutt Terrazas and Jamie Schwedler of Parker Poe, formally requested the recusal of Vice-Chair Selina Jarvis. The request was based on alleged prior expressions of bias and undisclosed ex parte communications concerning the project, citing potential violations of North Carolina General Statute 160D-109(d) and relevant case law (notably Dinger v. Lincoln County).

A memorandum and sworn affidavit were submitted in support of this motion, asserting that Jarvis made statements at a community meeting that suggested a predetermined opposition to the project. In response, Jarvis denied having a fixed opinion and clarified her attendance at the meeting was in response to a public invitation. She maintained that advising citizens of their legal rights to present evidence did not constitute bias and declined to recuse herself.

Following a brief recess for the county attorney to review the affidavit, the board deliberated the matter. Commissioner Michael Payment moved to allow Jarvis to fully participate in the hearing and subsequent vote, with commissioner Janet Rose seconding. The motion passed with a 6-1 vote, with commissioner Tony Angell as the sole dissenting member.

Planning and Inspections director Jennie Turner then provided an overview of the preliminary plat special use permit. The proposed development is a 65.99-acre single-family residential project located on four parcels of land, with primary access points from South Spot Road and Caratoke Highway. The site is zoned Single-Family Residential (SFM), Agricultural, and General Business, with a proposed density of 0.91 dwelling units per acre, which is within the allowable threshold. The development will feature conservation-based design, preserving woodlands and wetlands, and meeting the required 40% open space standard.

Turner explained that the proposed development would connect to county water, utilize on-site septic systems, and manage stormwater through a system of ditches, swales and a retention pond. Streets will meet local standards, with internal sidewalks and a multi-use path along the Caratoke Highway access road. The Technical Review Committee found the application consistent with the Unified Development Ordinance, and approval conditions may include timing restrictions to align with available public school capacity.

Terrazas then addressed the board to outline the forthcoming presentation of evidence in support of the special use permit request. Four expert witnesses were introduced: Mark Bissell, a professional engineer, spoke to three of the required findings: consistency with the land use plan, the project’s non-detrimental impact on public health and safety, and its adequacy concerning local school capacity; Andy Deal, a civil engineer, provided testimony specifically regarding stormwater management in support of the project’s alignment with public health and safety standards; Andrew Topp, a traffic engineer from VHB, presented analysis on traffic impacts to reinforce that the development would not endanger public welfare; and Hunter Howell, a licensed real property appraiser in North Carolina, addressed whether the proposed subdivision would be in harmony with surrounding properties and not adversely affect adjoining land values.

Payment raised concerns about potential traffic impacts from the proposed subdivision, particularly during peak summer weekends when southbound congestion near Grandy and along Caratoke Highway is common. He questioned whether consideration had been given to how additional turning movements – particularly left turns into the development – might worsen existing backups, especially with nearby traffic heading to the landfill and recreational areas. In response, it was noted that the developer intends to provide private trash collection services to reduce additional traffic to the county landfill.

Angell questioned the feasibility of site drainage given the area’s topography, noting a 12-foot ridge running southwest to northeast near the proposed stormwater pond. He expressed concern about how effective water capture would be in the lower southeastern portion of the site – particularly near lots 30, 31, 41 and 49 – given the slope and the potential for stormwater to stagnate instead of draining properly. He specifically asked how water would be directed without causing a persistently wet area between the lots and South Spot Road.

In response, Bissell deferred to the stormwater engineer for technical specifics but explained that the plan involves excavating lower areas near the existing Tigmatar Ditch to use the fill material for elevating the lots. A berm would be constructed along the ditch to manage water retention and prevent uncontrolled flow toward South Spot Road.

Chairman Paul O’Neal sought clarification from Deal regarding the effect of the proposed development on downstream drainage, specifically questioning whether the project would maintain current conditions or potentially improve them. O’Neal suggested that based on Deal’s explanation, one might infer that the drainage could actually be improved as a result of the development’s design.

In response, Deal explained that while the project would not increase stormwater flow into the Tigmatar Ditch at the point it leaves the development, it would in fact reduce flow levels during more frequent storm events, such as the 10-year event. For less frequent but more extreme events – such as the 100-year storm – the flow rates would be maintained at current levels. Deal emphasized the project’s commitment to ensuring that no additional stormwater runoff would be introduced downstream beyond existing conditions.

Regarding mythologies for taking into account traffic patterns and the impact this would have on existing traffic, Topp explained that data from an automatic traffic recorder located on the Wright Memorial Bridge – operated by NCDOT and recording year-round – was used to obtain a baseline understanding of average daily traffic on U.S. 158 near South Spot Road.

While the traffic count for the specific study was conducted in December, the team applied a standard seasonal adjustment factor of 1.53, derived from August 2023 traffic volumes, to project summer conditions. This practice is a recognized method within the traffic engineering profession to account for seasonal variation in areas with tourism-related fluctuations.

In response to a question, it was confirmed that the traffic counts were taken only on weekdays and did not include weekend traffic, such as increased activity from trips to the county landfill. However, the representative noted that weekday-only counts are standard practice in traffic impact studies (TIS) and are accepted by NCDOT for this type of analysis.

Jarvis inquired about the level of service on South Spot Road in relation to access points for the proposed subdivision. Specifically, she questioned whether any consideration had been given to limiting Pine Brook Lane to a right-turn-only exit in order to potentially improve traffic flow and reduce congestion on South Spot Road. Her suggestion aimed to encourage southbound traffic to exit via South Spot Road and northbound traffic to use Pine Brook Lane, thereby distributing traffic more efficiently.

Topp explained that both Pine Brook Lane and South Spot Road access points were designed for full movement – allowing both left and right turns – based on existing infrastructure, site alignment and the presence of turn lanes. He stated that the majority of traffic generated by the development is expected to exit directly onto U.S. Highway 158, as the design routes the flow in that direction. Topp did not anticipate significant congestion or rerouting toward Dare County or the Outer Banks via South Spot Road as a result of the current access configuration.

Howell testified that the proposed subdivision would likely have a positive impact on surrounding land values, citing examples of similar developments in eastern North Carolina. He concluded that the project is consistent with the area and wouldn’t negatively affect neighboring property values, referencing comparable subdivisions in the vicinity. Howell also noted that the proposed landscaping buffers meet or exceed standard requirements.

O’Neal asked Howell to clarify the type of homes expected to be built within the proposed subdivision, noting that such details are typically important for assessing impacts on surrounding property values. Howell responded that while the exact home models and price points were not central to his appraisal analysis, the evaluation was based primarily on the type and density of the development. He noted that the proposed density of 0.91 units per acre aligns with similar residential developments in Currituck County that have demonstrated neutral or positive impacts on nearby property values.

According to Howell, new construction typically brings homes of equal or higher quality than existing housing in the area, contributing positively to neighborhood cohesion and property value stability. He estimated that the expected home size on 25,000-square-foot lots would likely range from three to four bedrooms and approximately 1,800 to 2,200 square feet.

Payment turned to Turner about school capacity in relation to current and future residential development. Turner confirmed that the reported 92% committed capacity at the elementary school level includes approved but unbuilt projects, which could significantly increase enrollment demands once constructed.

Payment noted that adding this project and others could potentially raise the elementary school’s committed capacity to around 98%. The high school’s committed capacity is currently much lower, at around 5%. Payment also pointed out that individual homes being developed on farmland and large lots outside of formal subdivisions could further impact school capacity, but are not currently factored into committed capacity calculations.

Turner also clarified that dumpster storage is not allowed in designated open space areas, including areas along the highway frontage labeled as open space on the plat, even if they don’t count towards the required open space calculation. The applicant initially suggested a dumpster location in this area for convenience but ultimately agreed to use curbside trash collection.

During public comment, several residents came forward in opposition of the proposal. Senator Bobby Hanig expressed concerns about the proposed development, emphasizing the need for the applicant and county to act as “good neighbors” and consider broader community impacts. He highlighted recurring flooding issues in the area, noting that 40 acres south of the development site have experienced severe flooding multiple times, and urged that the broader drainage problem be resolved before approving new development.

Hanig also criticized the traffic study, citing its failure to capture peak tourist activity, and raised concerns about pedestrian and cyclist safety on South Spot Road. He requested a 100-foot undisturbed buffer along the road to maintain the area’s rural character and questioned the waste management plan, septic system impacts and potential future land use changes. Hanig concluded by urging the board to fully address these concerns before granting approval.

Angell raised concerns about stormwater management in the proposed development, specifically the risk of increased runoff affecting neighboring low-lying properties. Deal explained that stormwater would be directed to an on-site pond and roadside ditches would be regraded to ensure proper flow. He assured that the development would not collect water from South Spot Road and would maintain positive drainage across the site.

Deal also addressed concerns about potential blockage of adjacent property runoff, confirming that the design would accommodate existing flows and ensure no new barriers would cause water to back up onto neighboring parcels. He emphasized that the plan would comply with stormwater regulations and manage both on-site and off-site water flows.

Bissell reaffirmed the applicant’s willingness to contribute positively to existing drainage issues in the area. If approved, the development team would conduct detailed stormwater modeling to better understand downstream conditions and identify factors contributing to flooding challenges. Bissell stated that the developer is prepared to clear and improve the Tigmatar Ditch downstream, pending property owner consent, and potentially construct a berm along South Spot Road to protect nearby properties from runoff.

Additionally, the project would bring public water service to the area, allowing adjacent property owners to tap into the water line, which is currently unavailable.

In regard to phasing, Terrazas shared that the project would be developed in two phases, with Phase 1 consisting of 35 lots and having an earliest record date of June 2026, and Phase 2 comprising 21 lots with an earliest record date of December 2026, approximately six months after Phase 1.

Following a thorough discussion, the applicant offered several conditions, including curbside trash pickup, an emergency vehicle entrance on South Spot Road, and potential improvements to the area’s ditches and culverts contingent on research and studies deeming them necessary.

The public hearing concluded with the board tabling a decision on the proposed development until the May 19 BOC meeting, pending further review of the project’s drainage plan and review of all matters discussed throughout the evening.

READ ABOUT MORE NEWS HERE.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE COASTLAND TIMES TODAY!