Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

Casey Varnell, Kitty Hawk’s town attorney, opened the November town council meeting with a request to add an item to the evening’s agenda. Eddie Goodrich, the applicant of a previously proposed text amendment regarding mini-warehouses, had reached out prior to the meeting in the hopes of discussing a recent denial of a text amendment concerning mini-warehouses. Varnell informed the council of said request and left it up to them as to whether or not the agenda item would make it on the list of the night’s topics of discussion.

“… I feel awkward discussing it when attorneys are still going back and forth,” Mayor Craig Garriss said. “I don’t want to make a decision that will affect that.” Varnell explained that the attorney associated with the text amendment had request a formal interpretation of a particular word/phrase definition within the amendment and the town has rendered the amendment for interpretation. “The appeal period is still open,” he added. Garriss recommended that Goodrich speak during public comment. The council agreed that they did not want to get in the middle of a legal issue, but did want to hear from Goodrich at the meeting.

During public comment, Goodrich requested a redo of the public hearing which was had in August. The council, in a 4-1 vote, denied to amend the maximum building size of a mini-warehouse in a planned commercial district (PCD) to a 40,000-square foot footprint. This in turn subjected a special use permit and site plan approval for a mini-warehouse facility as well as a section commercial structure to be null.

“It’s apparent by reading the minutes and watching the video that the council, or at least some members, thought this was a project proposed for the Village Commercial District in Kitty Hawk Village rather than beach commercial. We would never propose anything like this in Kitty Hawk Village.” Goodrich voiced that he felt the council had not been focused on the right zoning district and wanted everyone to understand that the proposal would have “no impact on Kitty Hawk Village whatsoever.” He commented on the “difference of opinion” between town staff and the town attorney in regard to the definition of building area.

Councilman David Hines requested that Varnell research the matter and provide his legal opinion. “I’d like to make sure we did not misinterpret it,” he said. Hines was the sole member of council who was opposed to the denial.

The public hearing which followed brought a zoning text amendment to the table. Specifically, a proposal to define accessory dwelling structures and allow accessory structures no larger than 144 square feet and no taller than 15 square feet in height to be located as close as 5 feet to side and rear property lines. Robert Testerman, director of Planning and Inspections, brought this before council due to the regulations required by Kill Devil Hills, where his property is located, in regard to adding a shed. Kill Devil Hills requires sheds to be placed 25 feet off the rear property line. “It seems like it really impacts the amount of useable yard you have by forcing it that far out.”

Mayor Pro Tem Jeff Pruitt was concerned about whether the placement of an accessory structure, depending on the orientation of a property, would impact neighboring residents. Testerman noted that as its currently written, an accessory structure can be placed as close as 10 feet to side and rear property lines. “So, it’s a difference of five feet,” he added. Pruitt asked if additional language could be integrated to prevent noise-generating additions and specify violations of noise regulations, to which Varnell made note of and included in the amendment.

“I don’t have a problem with it,” Hines said. “You get to choose which one you want to do. If you want to not have any noise and you want a little bit more yard space, then you do the five feet. If you don’t, then you do the ten and keep it the way it is. I think it’s cut and dry.” Hines moved to approve the text amendment with the addition of language regarding noise. The motion carried unanimously.

Following the hearing, Testerman proposed future discussion to provide town staff with the council’s opinion and direction on potential revisions to development regulations in the Village Residential zoning districts. He noted that concerns regarding density have frequently come up, and staff are requesting council’s opinion on whether they are comfortable with the current regulations or would like to make changes in the future.

Garriss was the first to note that in speaking with Donna Creef, government affairs director for the Outer Banks Association of Realtors, there are people who own property and have plans for it in the future. “We don’t want to do anything that will affect future generations.” Hines agreed: I think it’s something that needs to be carefully considered so there are no unintended consequences.” Pruitt chimed in, “the last thing we want to do is to hurt people’s property rights,” and reminded everyone that this was only in regard to the Village Residential zoning districts.

Councilman Dylan Tillett shared his desire for public input moving forward, and the council all agreed further research and discussion is needed.

READ ABOUT MORE NEWS HERE.

SUBSCRIBE TO THE COASTLAND TIMES TODAY!