TOWN OF SWANSBORO
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Table of Contents I. II. III.
IV.
V. VI.
“The Task” of Implementation………………………………………………………………………………………….…..2 Survey Results – 2020 Gateway Vision Summit……………………………………………………………….…….3 Breakout Sessions – A. Map Exercise……………………………………………………………………………….….21 Gateway East End District……………………………………………………………………………………………..21 Waterfront Commercial District………………………………………………………………………………......23 Historic District……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..24 Transitional District…………………………………………………………………………………………….…………26 Ward Farm District…………………………………………………………………………………….………………….27 Commercial Belt District………………………………………………………………………………………………..29 Transitional School District…………………………………………………………………………………….……..31 School District……………………………………………………………………………………………………….………33 Gateway West End District……………………………………………………………………………………….…..36 Breakout Sessions – B. Survey Results, Concepts and Economic Sustainability……………………38 A. Survey…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……38 B. Concepts………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…..40 C. Economic Sustainability…………………………………………………………………………………………….….44 Action Items – Implementation…………………………………………………………………………………………...47 Next step….…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..………….….54
Page 1
February 18, 2013 I.
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
“The Task” of Implementation:
“An expert is somebody who is more than 50 miles from home, has no responsibility for implementing the advice he gives, and shows slides.” – Edwin Meese, III. Plan after plan, study after study, survey after survey, it can begin to feel like a Merry Go Round of non-implementation. Quite often consulting firms are brought in to work with a community to generate thought for desired outcomes. Fortunately, in the Town of Swansboro, extensive efforts have taken place thus far, clearly defining those desired outcomes. The Wooten Company recognizes these efforts and believes there is important baseline data generated to begin implementing and achieving the desired outcomes of the community. The following reports, surveys and plans have been generated to date: 2009 Gateway to Swansboro Planning Committee Report: Committee appointed by the Swansboro Board of Commissioners in July 2008, and was charged with developing a vision, specific concepts, and recommended strategies to guide the development of the central transportation gateway through Swansboro – the NC Highway 24 corridor. Adopted 2009 Swansboro CAMA Land Use Plan – A key element in the CAMA LUP is the required “Citizen Participation Plan.” The vision developed from the plan: “Swansboro desires to be a waterfront “village” community firmly based on its rich history while accepting fiscally responsible growth which is consistent with town values.” February 2010 Downtown Swansboro Renaissance Committee Report – Initiated by the Town of Swansboro Board of Commissioners with a goal to “develop a vision and a plan for preservation and revitalization of Swansboro’s historic downtown area.” 2011 Community Views Survey Report: Community views survey was distributed to approximately 1600 Swansboro households through the Town newsletter, the “Friendly City News.” 104 respondents noted needed change or improvement of sidewalks, varied shopping opportunities, NC 24 Gateway and better downtown parking. July 2011 Draft Town of Swansboro Bicycle Plan: “This plan will guide the Town of Swansboro, NCDOT, and other key stakeholders in creating a community network of bicycle trails, connecting the historic district with parks, schools, and residents.” A strategy or plan is generally developed in a planned/logical fashion in an expression of “desired” strategic direction. Strategies are more often than not implemented through people’s behavior. Political and cultural components can often form barriers in the way of desired progress. However, this is not the case in Swansboro. There is true passion in the community, as displayed at the 2020 Gateway Vision Summit, to begin implementing and achieving the
Page 2
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
community’s desires. Who takes responsibility? Later and included in this report are recommendations for implementing and achieving these desires. II.
Survey results – 2020 Gateway Vision Summit What are surveys? They are simply questionnaires you send out to a target audience to get information that is hopefully helpful to a particular cause. Why do them? With a survey, you can learn what your target audience is thinking, what motivates them and what’s important to them. A goal is to communicate with your audience to find out what they need or want and most importantly how they feel about something. Prior to the 2020 Gateway Vision Summit an online survey was constructed and conducted through SurveyMonkey as a specific follow up to previous information gathered in the 2009 Gateway Committee report. In addition, various pictures were included to solicit design preferences for various building forms ranging from singlestory commercial to multi-story and vast mixed-use. Foremost, the latest survey installment was to set the stage for prioritizing desired outcomes as first introduced in the 2009 Gateway Committee report. In addition to soliciting preferences and prioritizing desired outcomes, the survey also shares a human profile of the community answering those questions. The results of the survey are as follows, this also includes the (5) additional responses gathered the night of the Summit:
Page 3
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Page 4
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Note – the first five respondents were added post 2020 Gateway Vision Summit
Page 5
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Note – 53.13% of respondents favored the traditional 2-story commercial/residential – Structure is located in the Town of Swansboro’s Historic District.
Page 6
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Note – 44.44% of respondents chose Least appropriate for the mixed-use (multi-color palette/flat roof -4-story) structure. Picture was chosen to illustrate variation in color and setback.
Page 7
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Note – 44.44% of respondents chose Neutral for mixed-use – strip. Picture was chosen again to show color variation, setback and setting within highway strip environment. Structure is adjacent to various uses and structure types.
Page 8
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Note – 60.94% of respondents chose Most appropriate for Vast 2-story traditional-Historic Coastal. Picture was chosen to show a larger-type historical/traditional structure that could be used as mixeduse (also see use of traditional color, roof pitch, dormers, columns, porches, shutters, signage and landscaping)
Page 9
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Note – 40.32% of respondents chose Least appropriate, 35.48% Most appropriate, and 24.19% Neutral for Commercial set from highway with featured flat roof. Based on responses, style could be considered with variation. Picture was chosen to show variation in design: commercial modern flat roof, brick setback from the highway with site features (landscaping, water fountain and lighting)
Page 10
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Note – 50% of the respondents chose Least appropriate for Transitional street side, multi-story. Picture was chosen as an example of larger mixed-use development located on a corner lot/intersection. Style is typical of urban setting, however positive elements include pedestrian access, street trees, decorative lighting and traffic calming that could be implemented at various intersections on Hwy 24.
Page 11
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Note – 50% of the respondents chose Most appropriate and 43.55% Neutral for Single-story office/institutional/commercial. Picture was chosen to show a single-story structure on a stand-alone lot. Positive elements include roof variation (pitch, metal/shingle), traditional coastal character, skylight, accent lighting, columns and landscaping). Negative elements could be lack of connectivity, i.e. shared driveways. Structure currently exists on Hwy 24 corridor in Swansboro.
Page 12
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Page 13
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Table 2.1 Change/Rank Commercial centers/nodes Common development design (entrance and parking) Thematic building style and finishes Nuisance program for unsightly lots and buildings Signage issues Lack of landscaping and streetscape Traffic safety pedestrian and bike facilities (lack thereof) Street lighting (not uniform along highway
1 21.82%
2 9.09%
3 7.27%
4 5.45%
5 9.09%
6 12.73%
7 9.09%
8 9.09%
9 10.91%
10 5.15%
3.34%
18.18%
16.36%
7.27%
9.09%
10.91%
12.73%
9.09%
9.09%
3.64%
10.91%
16.36%
14.55%
9.09%
12.73%
1.82%
16.36%
3.64%
3.64%
10.91%
23.64%
9.09%
12.73%
20%
10.91%
3.64%
3.64%
9.09%
1.82%
5.45%
1.82% 7.27%
10.91% 9.09%
10.91% 18.18%
14.55% 12.73%
14.55% 14.55%
23.64% 14.55%
7.27% 7.27%
5.45% 5.45%
10.91% 5.45%
0% 5.45%
14.55%
10.91%
7.27%
7.27%
9.09%
7.27%
18.18%
25.45%
18.18%
1.82%
0%
5.45%
7.27%
7.27%
9.09%
14.55%
14.55%
10.91%
3.64%
7.27%
Page 14
February 18, 2013 Change/Rank Stormwater management Other issues: overhead utility wires, gravel parking areas and chain link fences near roadway
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT 1 12.73%
2 3.64%
3 1.82%
4 5.45%
5 3.64%
6 5.45%
7 5.45%
8 14.55%
9 25.45%
10 21.82%
3.64%
7.27%
3.64%
10.91%
7.27%
5.45%
5.45%
7.27%
10.91%
38.18%
Note – 23.64% of respondents chose nuisance program for unsightly lots and buildings as the number one priority for change. 21.82% of respondents noted commercial centers/nodes as a priority for change.
Page 15
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Page 16
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Table 2.2 Characteristics/ Rank Pride in appearance and heritage Complement historic downtown Uniqueness and identification that you are in Swansboro Typical of the Coastal region Central access to development site commercial/mixed use nodes Landscape/street trees Connectivity and multimodal (bike, ped, vehicle) Uniform and appropriate signage Business promotion (attractive/ well marketed)
1 37.74%
2 24.53%
3 11.32%
4 5.66%
5 11.32%
6 3.77%
7 3.77%
8 1.89%
9 0%
10 0%
7.55%
18.87%
20.75%
15.09%
7.55%
3.77%
13.21%
3.77%
1.89%
7.55%
9.80%
21.57%
19.61%
13.73%
11.76%
7.84%
3.92%
7.84%
3.92%
0%
5.66%
3.77%
11.32%
22.64%
9.43%
15.09%
1.89%
11.32%
7.55%
11.32%
0%
0%
7.55%
9.43%
20.75%
7.55%
20.75%
11.32%
13.21%
9.43%
5.77% 3.77%
5.77% 1.89%
9.62% 3.77%
11.54% 16.98%
13.46% 7.55%
25% 15.09%
13.46% 24.53%
13.46% 11.32%
1.92% 11.32%
0% 3.77%
1.92%
7.69%
0%
1.92%
13.46%
9.62%
7.69%
28.85%
19.23%
9.62%
7.55%
7.55%
1.89%
0%
1.89%
9.43%
7.55%
5.66%
28.30%
30.19%
Page 17
February 18, 2013
Characteristics/ Rank * Blight management (dilapidated structures renovated or demolished) unsightly development (redevelopment appropriately)
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
1 21.15%
2 9.62%
3 15.38%
4 3.85%
5 3.85%
6 3.85%
7 1.92%
8 3.85%
9 11.54%
Note – 37.74% of respondents chose pride in appearance and heritage as the number one desired characteristic of a developed and redeveloped Gateway corridor, followed by uniqueness and identification you are in Swansboro. * As indicated above, Blight management and complement Historic Downtown ranked 3rd amongst respondents. Prioritizing characteristics can be applied to measuring implementation of desired outcomes.
Note – A moratorium on development that exceeded the Town’s height requirement of 35’ expired on December 18, 2013. On December 18, 2013, The Board of Commissioners adopted the Town’s height restriction not to exceed 35’. It was requested that the height restriction be studied further as part of the initial phase of the Highway 24 Corridor Study. Responses from the survey were taken to solicit preferences on an acceptable height if the 35’ requirement was allowed to be exceeded. Recommendations will be drawn from the survey responses and comparison height matrix in Table 2.3.
Page 18
10 25%
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Page 19
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Table 2.3 Town/City
Pop. 7/2011
Growth % 2010 2.12 3.44
Basic Height limits 35’ 35’
Conditional Height limits 50’ 45’
Newport Cedar Point
4,238 1,323
Emerald Isle
3,711
1.53
50’
50’
Morehead City
8,810
1.72
50’
70’+
Surf City Cape Carteret Jacksonville
1,899 1,969 74,610
2.48 2.71 6.37
48’ 48’ FORM
48’ 40’ FORM
Havelock
21,022
1.38
35’
50’
New Bern
30,048
1.77
35’
35’
Page 20
Special Use/Conditional Use/Variance process
40’ MF plus 30’ setback plus 2’ per 1’ ht./up to 45’ certain CUP’s With certain measures (roof slope/construction type) Increased height w/ permission of Council (CUP) Can exceed up to 60’ with CUP R-13 max. height 35’ Public/semi-public, hospitals, schools, churches/temples up to 96’ where permitted Nontraditional lot development. CUP/CZ can exceed 50’ (quasi-judicial) 36’-50’ SUP 50’-60’ CUP (legislative)
Waterfront Community No Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
No
Yes
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Town/City
Pop. 7/2011
Growth % 2010 1.12
Basic Height limits 35’
Conditional Height limits 35’
Pine Knoll Shores Beaufort Nags Head
1,354 4,084 2,773
1.11 0.58
35’ 35’
35’ 50’
Manteo Washington Williamston
1,453 9,740 5,428
1.32 -0.04 -1.51
36’ 50’ 35’
36’ 96’ 40’
Edenton
5,007
0.06
N/A
*Elizabeth City
18,597
-0.46
Carolina Beach
5,773
1.17
35’ and 50’ 40’ to no max 50’
Oriental Swansboro
905 2,704
0.56 1.54
35’ 35’
35’ N/A
50’
Special Use/Conditional Use/Variance process
Waterfront Community
Multi-family and institutional up to 50’ ETJ – not over 40’ Exceptions for institutional and hotel/setback trade-offs/foot print decrease Cannot verify if any exceptions Setback trade-offs over 50’ Swop 2’ of setback for every 1’ of height above maximum 35’ for residential districts, 50’ for non-residential districts *See note 1 below
Yes
Yard req’s/sprinkler req’s for exceeding 50’ Trade-off up to 5’ additional
Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Note *Elizabeth City – Residential height limit is 40’, I-1 is 50’, CMU is 3 stories, O & I is 8 stories, other non-residential districts have no maximum height limit. However, building setbacks are increased one foot for every foot in height between 50’ and 80’. No additional setback required for buildings greater than 80’ in height.
III.
Breakout Sessions – A. Map Exercise
NODAL PLANNING (DISTRICTS) Central to a successful process of changing developmental behavior along the Highway 24 Corridor and one of the desired catalysts of change is nodal planning. A nodal plan is simply to study vehicular and pedestrian behavior and the density, and intensity of land uses within the radius of an intersection of a major thoroughfare. In a windshield survey of existing land uses along the Highway 24 corridor, distinct developmental patterns have occurred. Figure 3.1 – Gateway East End- Fish Market
Page 21
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
GATEWAY EAST END- FISH MARKET DISTRICT (PROPOSED NODE # 1)
Figure 3.2 – Work map Node # 1
Crossing the bridge on the northern end of town, a unique and picturesque scene develops, marking one of the trademarks of the Town of Swansboro, the fish and seafood industry. A clearly defined node has been established and can be considered as a gateway brand as you enter Swansboro. On Node # 1 labeled Figure 3.1 “Gateway East End - Fish Market,” local fishing boats, fish markets and restaurants are on display inviting a guest/visitor to pull in and discover an Eastern North Carolina pastime, fishing. Identified at the 2020 Gateway Vision Summit, participants made the following comments concerning the district (See sticky notes in Figure 3.2): • • •
Vacant unit on site and opportunity for Public ownership. Historic Fishing Center and need for façade improvements. Dumpsters on site without screening.
Recommendations: Considerations of public investment in district establishing a brand as you enter the community Opportunity for public vista and view noting Swansboro’s historic role in the fishing industry Façade improvement program for public-private partnership of storefront improvements Using fishing niche as a basis for establishing community and historical signage and wayfinding welcoming visitors to Swansboro Screening requirements for exposed dumpster areas
Figure 3.3 – Example of Wayfinding signage – Courtesy of Town of Cary & MERJE
Page 22
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
WATERFRONT COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (PROPOSED NODE #2) Cross the next bridge into Swansboro and take the pedestrian walk underneath to the waterfront Swansboro Bicentennial Park where a statue of Captain Otway Burns looks out to the White Oak River. Opportunities for waterfront dining such as at the White Oak River Bistro pick up the nostalgia that is perceived as you enter the Town of Swansboro via the Fish Market.
Figure 3.4 – Waterfront Commercial District (Proposed Node #2)
At the south end of the district another Town owned park “Riverview Park” provides for a great waterfront experience. Structures that exist in this district are ideal and should be protected. Identified at the 2020 Gateway Vision Summit participants made the following comments concerning the Waterfront Commercial district (See sticky notes in Figure 3.5): • •
Figure 3.5 – Work map Node #2
Page 23
Consideration for setbacks, density and height Maintain visual contact
Recommendations: Maintain public vistas and views. Town owns multiple parcels within district, opportunity to expand parks and create an interactive public space connected to eateries and residential. Protect existing structures in district essential to preserving waterfront historical presence. Wayfinding signage from first node (Fish Market) to Waterfront district. Wayfinding signage should be oriented for pedestrians and vehicle traffic
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT HISTORIC DISTRICT (PROPOSED NODE #3) Listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1990, one to twostory framed dwellings and commercial structures dating between 1890-1925 represent the majority of contributing structures protected
Figure 3.6 – Historic District (Proposed Node # 3)
by historic district guidelines and the Swansboro Historic Preservation Commission. Like the waterfront commercial district node across Hwy 24, opportunities within the Historic District are present for dining and strolls along the waterfront. Access from Node-2 “Waterfront Commercial district” to Node 3 “Historic District” provides a unique bicycle and pedestrian connection under Hwy 24. The Swansboro Historical Association, as evidenced in the brochure, provides an opportunity to study Swansboro’s rich history. Recognizing Swansboro’s rich history, The Swansboro Board of Commissioners created, in December 2008, a Downtown Renaissance Initiative in order to “develop a vision and a plan for preservation and revitalization of Swansboro’s historic downtown area.” The resolution establishing the initiative recognized the following reasons for its creation: • Swansboro’s historic downtown area and its attractive harbor are very unique and important resources that play key roles in defining the character and identity of the community; and • The downtown area faces challenges that could progressively threaten the historic resources, business prosperity, and physical condition of the downtown area; and • The importance of the downtown area and the potential threats to its future indicate a need to take determined action to protect and revive its resources, vitality, and appearance. Sound familiar….the history of Swansboro and its unique character can play a significant role in the guiding principles of development and redevelopment on the Gateway corridor.
Page 24
Figure 3.7 – Walking Tour brochure – Courtesy Swansboro Historical Association
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Figure 3.8 – Work map Node #3
Identified at the 2020 Gateway Vision Summit participants made the following comments concerning the Historic district (See sticky notes in Figures 3.8 & 3.9): • • • • • • • • •
Figure 3.9 – Work map Node #3
Historic District buildings do not say age “AD” Awareness (signage) direction “grander” Traffic – another turn lane from the west Main Street Historic District sign Do not mess with historic district boundary and codes Maintain the waterfront character Maintain the historic charm Multiple accesses on 24 Lodging options
Recommendations:
As with previous Nodes #1 & #2, enhanced wayfinding signage to the Historic District from Gateway entrances and surrounding area Enhance wayfinding signage within Historic District identifying prominent historical structures of Town significance. Property owners can participate in signage to offset production costs Continue to maintain historic status and subsequent historic guidelines and requirements Work with NCDOT to enhance multi-modal access into Historic District (round-about/turn-lane) Begin comprehensive schedule of phased implementation of recommendations from February 2010 Downtown Renaissance Committee Report
The first (3) three nodes/districts so far will have a profound importance on the remaining nodes/districts and the general development of the corridor. As mentioned at the Summit, it was put best and paraphrased by the following: “We should just continue and build from the positives of the Historic District.” Traditional place-making, multi-modal access and architectural significance are distinctively gathered in these nodes. These distinctive characteristics should be and can be united with the rest of the Highway 24 corridor.
Page 25
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
TRANSITIONAL DISTRICT (PROPOSED NODE # 4) As you exit Nodes #2 & #3, you transition into a mix of single-family dwellings converted into commercial uses, churches, and institutional uses such as the adaptive reuse – Town Hall Annex. Pockets of single-family dwellings also remain, atypical of a commercial highway corridor. Transition also begins into strip type commercial development away from the downtown historic district into an improved and heavily used transportation corridor.
Figure 3.10 – Transitional District (Proposed Node #4)
Identified at the 2020 Gateway Vision Summit participants made the following comments concerning the Transitional district (See sticky note in Figure 3.11) • •
Traffic at Sabiston Small lot sizes
Recommendations:
Consideration for realignment of intersection and creating a focal point in center of node (Sabiston and Hwy 24) Amortization and cycling out single-family dwellings along highway corridor. Figure 3.11 – Work (Assuming existing residential along map Node #4 highway corridor is considered nonconforming.) Encouragement of combining smaller lots into larger and cohesive development site (redevelopment). Encourage façade improvement of older strip development and redevelopment standards consistent along Hwy 24 Corridor.
Page 26
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
WARD FARM DISTRICT (PROPOSED NODE # 5) As you exit the “Transition” District/Node #4 and head west, you enter into larger and concentrated development comprised of various shopping centers and stand-alone commercial, typical of a major commercially developed transportation corridor.
Figure 3.12 – Ward Farm District (Proposed Node #5)
Center to the district is a major intersection, Old Hammock Road and Highway 24. A recently built Hampton Inn, setback from Highway 24 and accessed from Old Hammock Road, is a prominent structure at this intersection. In progress, the Ward Farm development located southwest of the Hampton Inn, has the opportunity to provide for many of the desired characteristics noted in the survey and 2020 Gateway Vision Summit. Identified at the 2020 Gateway Vision Summit participants made the following comments concerning the Ward Farm district (See Figures 3.13-3.15) • • • • • •
Buffer on Hwy 24 Community values Tie existing development into new development Mixed Use Expanded public facilities Pedestrian Access Figure 3.13 – Work map Node #5
Page 27
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT • • •
Sustainment of businesses Attract businesses High traffic area
Figure 3.15 – Work map Node #5
Figure 3.14 – Work map Node #5
Recommendations:
Public/private partnership for planting street trees to reduce impact from expansive asphalt. Redevelopment and development along highway corridor should have street tree requirements and shall be enforced. Development and redevelopment that occurs within the district should promote community values (types of businesses and style of architecture). Redevelopment and development along highway corridor in this district should mimic similar style to proposed Ward Farm development. Public investment should be pursued to connect Old Hammock Road to Highway 24 in a multi-modal approach. Stabilization and support of local businesses could be strengthened through planned mixed-use (i.e. more people/more shoppers and create opportunity for non-vehicular patronage). Large vacant tracts exist in this district. Search for an anchor retail/high tech office should be pursued for the promotion of existing businesses and attraction of new businesses. Upon consideration of new redevelopment and development in this node, a TIA (traffic impact analysis) should be reviewed for each new redevelopment and development. NCDOT will require certain uses based on intensity, along the Highway 24 corridor to provide for a TIA. All development and redevelopment along the highway corridor should be reviewed under a Technical Review Committee approach comprised of Town staff, DOT representative, utility providers and Town liaisons (Town Board member and/or Planning Board member). Specific items related to historic protection and landscaping should involve a member from their perspective advisory capacity.
Page 28
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
COMMERCIAL BELT DISTRICT (PROPOSED NODE # 6) Similar traits that exist in the Ward Farm district exist in Node #6 – Commercial Belt District, however the uses located within this district are more varied and include light industrial/hardware/outdoor, car dealerships, boat storage, storage building sales, furniture sales and a major gas station/eatery (similar to a truck stop). Many of the uses that are located within this district could be classified as light-industrial and should be reviewed, if located on the highway corridor, within a Special Use process. The special use process may call for appropriate screening of the uses from adjacent uses and the highway corridor.
Figure 3.16 – Commercial Belt District (Proposed Node #6)
Identified at the 2020 Gateway Vision Summit participants made the following comments concerning the Commercial Belt district (See Figures 3.17-3.18) • • • • • • •
Shallow commercial districts Small lot sizes Blight Proposed McDonald’s (vacant lot identified on map) Pedestrian Access NCDOT challenges, connectivity Identified opportunity for Safe Route to Schools
Figure 3.17 – Work map Node #6
Page 29
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT • • •
Swansboro Elementary is located just outside of district Traffic accidents at Ireland and Hwy 24 and exit of Wendy’s/Gas station complex Police block access from Swansboro Elementary site
Recommendations:
Review existing land uses in this district for consistency with “typical” commercial development. Consideration in removing use by right for light-industrial type uses located in this district. Certain uses by their impacting nature should be considered under a Figure 3.18 – Work map Node #6 Special Use process. Allow for expansion of highway district where utilization of adjacent property to rear of the highway frontage sites could be used for stormwater facilities, parking and associated development scenarios. Code enforcement standards should be enforced: demolition of dilapidated or underperforming structures to be brought into current code standards. Enforcement of advertising requirements (displays and signage adjacent to roadway). Opportunity to pursue “Safe Routes to School” funding, Swansboro Elementary is located adjacent to district. Encouragement of combining lots for cohesive central access to development site. Opportunity for urban trees to be protected on vacant lots. A traffic impact analysis should be performed at intersection of Ireland and Hwy 24 where Wendy’s and truck stop are located. Impact from school traffic should be considered. Alternative access to site should be studied. Where parcels are developed in general vicinity of school, access opportunities should be explored. Proposed McDonald’s should be considered as possible catalyst for improvement on style and theme in district. Connectivity should be enhanced to proposed site (connect over to truck stop/Wendy’s) Turn lane should be considered for entering into site. Site development should consider vacant properties across Hwy 24.
Page 30
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
TRANSITIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT (PROPOSED NODE # 7) Large tracts of vacant property transition away (south side of Hwy 24) from Swansboro High School to the Commercial Belt district. Bordering the district on the east end (north side of Hwy 24) is a car lot and a salvage yard in the unincorporated zoning jurisdiction of Swansboro. Many vehicles line the street with no real indication whether the vehicles are salvage, in repair/service or for sale. A large mini-warehouse/storage facility is located within the district surrounded by other vehicular repair units and chain link fencing. On the north side of Hwy 24 within this district, another car lot marks the western end of the district. The district is also scattered with existing single-family residential with property owners selling their own vehicles and personal property. At a focal point, an unsightly boat storage and sales facility is located at the main intersection of this district at Hammock Beach Rd and Hwy 24.
Figure 3.19 – Transitional School District (Proposed Node #7)
Identified at the 2020 Gateway Vision Summit participants made the following comments concerning the Transitional School district (See Figures 3.19-21) • • •
Parking on Highway 24 (lack of street trees/buffering) Protection of Urban forest (trees) ABC store design
Page 31
February 18, 2013 • • •
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Coastal landscape designs Medium-density residential Too many car lots; used lots how close, signage?
Figure 3.20 – Work map Node #7
Figure 3.21 – Work map Node #7
Recommendations:
Provisions and investment should be made between the Town and property owners for a street scape plan to help screen extensive road side display of vehicles, advertising/props, and consideration of removal of chain link with decorative fencing (property owner). Maintain urban forest in undisturbed areas of district. Can be used for open space for proposed residential transition into commercial space (greenway trails and bike paths). On large vacant tracts could be opportunity for planned mixed-use. Large tracts of land exist for various types of housing (senior, single-family, multi-family). All new development should consider a multi-modal approach. Review existing land uses in this district for consistency with “typical” commercial development. Consideration in removing use by right for automobile/boat sales/repair type uses located in this district. Certain uses by their impacting nature should be considered under a Special Use process. Code enforcement standards should be enforced: demolition of dilapidated or underperforming structures to be brought into current code standards. Enforcement of advertising requirements (displays and signage adjacent to roadway). Transitioning from the high school and middle school in the adjoining district, exploration of funding for Safe Routes to school for completion of sidewalk/bike facilities. Encouragement of combining lots for cohesive central access to development site. Opportunity for urban trees to be protected on vacant lots.
Page 32
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
SCHOOL DISTRICT (PROPOSED NODE #8) The focal point within this district are two (2) schools: Swansboro High School and Swansboro Middle School. At the intersection of Queens Creek Road and Highway 24, middle and high school traffic empty to this intersection. Recent construction of the State Employee’s Credit Union displays the potential of architecture that can be mimicked along the corridor. A shopping center hugs the corner of Queens Creek and Highway 24 that includes a fast food restaurant, grocery, gas station and retail strip.
Figure 3.22 – School District (Proposed Node #8)
Identified at the 2020 Gateway Vision Summit participants made the following comments concerning the School district (See Figures 3.19-21) • • •
Corner of Queens Creek and Hwy 24 should be used for library Corner of Queens Creek and Hwy 24 should provide for a “school” theme. Children’s museum or nature connection to community Outdoor ready bike paths
Page 33
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Figure 3.19 – Work map Node #8 Figure 3.20 – Work map Node #8
Figure 3.21 – Work map Node #8
• • • • • • •
Vacant space adjacent to School property fronting Hwy 24 use for athletic fields Buffering should be provided between proposed athletic field and school property Area around proposed athletic field has flooding issues School traffic Vacant buildings and Exxon access Acquire property on corner of Queens Creek and Hwy 24 for public use to the complete the school district High traffic concerns
During the 2020 Gateway Vision Summit, this area of the corridor drew the most attention. Within this district a vacated and dilapidated convenient store stands on a highly visible corner (Figure 3.22).
Page 34
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT This location was used for a test case for potential redevelopment scenarios. The scenario included in Figure 3.23, shows a varied roof line, street trees, removal of overhead power lines, removal of a taller/broken sign, replaced with eye level signage and a pedestrian cross on Queens Creek Road.
Figure 3.22 – Existing development on southeast corner of Queens Creek Road and NC Hwy 24
Additional scenarios were on display at the Summit and are included in Section IV. of this document. Recommendations:
Opportunity should be explored for a partnership between the Town of Swansboro and Onslow County Board of Education for purchase of property located on SE corner of Figure 3.23 – Redevelopment Scenario A – SE corner of Queens Creek Rd and NC Hwy 24 Queens Creek Road and NC Hwy 24. Once property has been secured for purchase, building, parking lot and signage should be demolished and site graded and seeded for redevelopment. As suggested by participants in the Summit, site should be explored for a complimentary use to schools located in this district (Ex. Museum, nature center, library) Opportunities for vacant parcel along highway to be converted into complimentary use for school such as shared athletic field for Town and school. Flood study should be considered in vicinity before redevelopment or development occurs. Landscaping/buffering and street yard should be provided upon redevelopment and development of area. Traffic impact analysis should be required for development and/or redevelopment of intersection of Queens Creek and NC Hwy 24. Policy for development or redevelopment on State Hwy 24 should be reviewed for driveway permit from NCDOT. Opportunities for improvement to intersection and access in this district and others can be achieved with coordination and communication with NCDOT.
Page 35
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Figure 3.24 – Gateway West End (Proposed Node #9)
GATEWAY WEST END (PROPOSED NODE #9) The final district on the corridor and equally important for branding the community is the Gateway West End. Large vacant tracts of land and scattered housing are present as you enter Swansboro from the west end. What appears to be a body shop/salvage yard or junk vehicle storage is prominent on the highway in this district. Most of the zoning control in this vicinity is limited and is located within the Town’s ETJ (extraterritorial jurisdiction). Critically noted, is a lack of identification that you have arrived in Swansboro from the west. Identified at the 2020 Gateway Vision Summit participants made the following comments concerning the Gateway West End district (See Figures 3.25-27) • • • • •
Sign needed as you come back to Swansboro This is the entrance way! We need to focus on making it the welcome sign (Theme for) Buffer blight on Hwy 24 by body shop/salvage yard Proposed car dealer/rezoning (Stevenson’s Toyota Stop light/traffic light should be added at divided median at SR 1434 and NC Hwy 24/Freedom Way
Page 36
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Figure 3.26 – Work map Node #8 Figure 3.25 – Work map Node #8
Recommendations:
Entrance sign as you enter Swansboro from west end. Suggestion: “Friendly City by the Sea” Considerations of public investment in district establishing a brand as you enter the community Consideration of expansion of zoning power in unincorporated areas Amortization and cycling out single-family dwellings along highway corridor. (Assuming existing residential along Figure 3.27 – Work map Node #8 highway corridor is considered non-conforming Provisions and investment should be made between the Town and property owners for a street scape plan to help screen extensive road side display of vehicles; Redevelopment and development along highway corridor should have street tree requirements and shall be enforced Development and redevelopment that occurs within the district should promote community values (types of businesses and style of architecture) All new development should consider a multi-modal approach Review existing land uses in this district for consistency with “typical” commercial development Consideration in removing use by right for automobile/boat sales/repair type uses located in this district; Certain uses by their impacting nature should be considered under a Special Use process Code enforcement standards should be enforced: demolition of dilapidated or underperforming structures to be brought into current code standards. Enforcement of advertising requirements (displays and signage adjacent to roadway)
Page 37
February 18, 2013
IV.
A.
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Breakout Sessions – B. Survey Results, Concepts and Economic Sustainability Survey:
During this session, a general overview was provided concerning the survey results as shown in Section II: • • • • •
Participation in the survey Architectural preferences Prioritization of changes desired along the NC Highway 24 Corridor Ranking of desired characteristics of the NC Highway 24 Corridor Town’s 35’ height requirement
Courtesy: Google Images – http://static.tvtome.com
Many participants at the 2020 Gateway Vision Summit noted frustration with the survey and a “steering of preference” with the survey. As noted at the Summit, the survey is to set the stage for prioritizing the outcomes from extensive efforts made before this summit to improve the NC Highway 24 Corridor in Swansboro. The number one ranked change desired along the NC Highway 24 Corridor is for a “Nuisance program for unsightly lots and buildings.” Borrowing from the phrase “Tomorrow Starts Here,” establishing a program for nuisance abatement is literally how a program for improvement can start. However, the strength in code enforcement or nuisance abatement does not solely rely on the code itself, it hinges on the support of the Board for enforcing the code. Currently under the Town of Swansboro’s Code of Ordinances, the Town has the ability to regulate: • •
The storing of trash or refuse, this includes junk Maintaining a nuisance: (A) It shall be unlawful for any person to maintain premises, including vacant lots or lands, upon which trash, garbage or miscellaneous refuse is permitted or caused to accumulate in any manner which is, or may become a nuisance, or cause injury to the health or welfare of residents in the vicinity or may injure neighboring property. Drive-in restaurants and other food establishments that permit carry-out food service shall maintain at all times on their premises sufficient receptacles for the disposal of trash, garbage and miscellaneous refuse. (B) In the event the person or persons responsible refuse to remove the trash, garbage or refuse from the property on which it is allowed to accumulate within ten days after notice in writing has been given to the person responsible, shall be deemed guilty of a violation of this section. (C) If the person responsible for the conditions named above has not acted to correct the violation, the Town Attorney shall, upon request of the Board of Commissioners, apply to the appropriate division of the General Court of Justice for a mandatory or prohibitory injunction and order of abatement within the time allowed by the court, he may be cited for contempt and the town shall execute the order of abatement. When the town executed the order, it has a lien on the property, in the nature of a mechanic's and material man's lien, for the costs of executing the order. (D) In addition to and separate and apart from the other remedies set forth in this section, a violator of any of the above provisions may be assessed a civil penalty of $10, and each and every day during which a violation occurs shall be a separate and distinct offense.
Page 38
February 18, 2013
•
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Conditions causing a nuisance: The existence of any of the following conditions on any vacant lot or other parcel of land within the corporate limits is hereby declared to be dangerous and prejudicial to the public health or safety and to constitute a public nuisance: (A)
The uncontrolled growth of noxious weeds or grass to a height in excess of ten inches causing or threatening to cause a hazard detrimental to the public health or safety;
(B)
Any accumulation of rubbish, trash or junk causing or threatening to cause a fire hazard, or causing or threatening to cause the accumulation of stagnant water, or causing or threatening to cause the inhabitation therein of rats, mice, snakes or vermin of any kind which is or may be dangerous or prejudicial to the public health;
(C)
Any accumulation of animal or vegetable matter that is offensive by virtue of odors or vapors or by the inhabitance therein of rats, mice, snakes or vermin of any kind which is or may be dangerous or prejudicial to the public health;
(D)
Any condition detrimental to the public health which violates the rules and regulations of the county health department.
The Town’s procedures for abating a nuisance in this instance: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7)
Town manager upon complaint summons investigation of condition Town manager shall notify by certified mail, the owner, occupant or person in possession of the premises Owner/occupant shall 15 days to abate nuisance Opportunity for violator to request hearing before Board of Commissioners concerning order to abate Failure to abate may result in the Town abating condition with cost to be incurred by owner If failure to pay for cost to abate condition, the Town may file a lien after 30 days after failure to pay Alternative remedies may include criminal action per NCGS 14.4
•
Sight Distance Obstructions - No person owning and/or having legal control of any property within the corporate limits of the town shall maintain or permit upon any such land any shrubbery, tree, other landscaping growth, natural growth, fence, sign, billboard, mailbox, earthen berm, object, parked vehicle, or any other obstruction or combination thereof which obstructs the view of motorists using any street or approach to any street intersection in a manner that constitutes a traffic hazard, interferes with the visibility of traffic control or warning signs, interferes with a view of intersecting traffic, or creates a condition dangerous to public safety. Conditions in violation of this prohibition shall constitute a public nuisance.
•
Standards and Responsibilities - The parties in interest of non-residential buildings and structures shall have responsibility for, and shall ensure that such buildings and structures under their ownership or control are maintained in compliance with the following minimum standards of maintenance, sanitation, and safety. o
The minimum standards are listed as A-Y in Chapter 151.05 of the Town’s Code of Ordinances.
As you can see there is already the framework for aggressive cleanup of the corridor. Suggested changes for the administration of the Code of Ordinances relative to nuisance abatement are recommended in the Actionable Items section of this document. The survey also gave direction on desired characteristics of the corridor. The number one desired characteristic of the corridor is “Pride in appearance and heritage.” As noted above in desired changes of the corridor, pride in appearance can be an indirect result of a stronger nuisance abatement program.
Page 39
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
The Town of Swansboro is known for its coastal heritage and a picturesque waterfront downtown, however this is easily lost as you drive down the Highway 24 corridor. The “gateway” corridor is the first and last impression of your Town. A second desired characteristic of the highway corridor is “complement historic downtown,” with a close third going to “blight management.” Each one of these characteristics are interrelated. If historic pride and heritage of the historic waterfront downtown is mimicked, stronger code enforcement, i.e. blight management occurs, thus the baseline for the desired character of the corridor. Since the early fall through mid-December 2012, the 35’ height requirement was the talk of the town. On December 18, 2012, the Board of Commissioners adopted the Town’s height requirement not to exceed 35’. Prior to proceeding with the 2020 Gateway Vision exercise, the Board expressed intently that the height requirements should be studied further. Two (2) questions were asked amongst survey participants, (1) Should flexibility be allowed to exceed the Town’s current height limit of 35’ and (2) If so what height should the Town consider a threshold to be? Nearly 65% of respondents agreed that if redevelopment and development met desired characteristics, then flexibility should be allowed to exceed the Town’s current height limit of 35’. Opinions varied significantly on what that threshold should be, ranging from 40’ to no max. When it comes to height, opinions vary. Is there a perfect height? The simple answer is no. Are there locations where the height of the structure matters, absolutely? The process for determining height should be made on a case by case basis when exceeding the height requirement. Considerations can include: • • • •
Adjacent uses and the height/significance/character of those structures Visual perception (setback and human scale) Density/parking availability (number of units if residential mixed use) General performance of the site (meeting desired characteristics)
B.
Concepts:
Section 3 of this report outlined the districts along the corridor. In the “School District” a test case was shown for redevelopment scenarios for an existing structure located on the SE corner of Queens Creek Road and NC Highway 24 (See Figure 4.1).
Page 40
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Figure 4.1 – Existing structure located on SE corner of Queens Creek Road and NC Highway 24 The scenarios included in Figures 4.2-4.4 show varied roof lines, height and street trees.
Page 41
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Figure 4.2 – Option A – 1.5 stories, varied roof line and street trees.
Page 42
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Figure 4.3 – Option B – 2.5 stories, varied roof line and street trees
Page 43
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Figure 4.4 – Option C – 3.5 stories, varied roof line and street trees
The purpose in presentation was to show how a site can be redeveloped and meet the desired characteristics supported by various surveys and voices heard at the Summit. Each site is different and has to be approached differently; however each site should perform to the highest standard possible. C.
Economic Sustainability:
The lasting effects from positive change in a community are measured by its economic sustainability. How does economic sustainability play into the desired changes and characteristics of the NC Highway 24 corridor? These desired changes and characteristics are the road map to available resources (capital) and their use in a way that is efficient, responsible and likely to provide long-term benefits. A sustainable economy is one that provides the monetary resources necessary to support the community. So the question was asked how do we balance the desires of the community, i.e. cost to improve the corridor, provide for a walkable community and amenities, and attract new businesses? • • •
Incentivizing new construction with density (Figure 4.5) Flexible design Capital expenditures (easier to pay for improvements with growing tax base)
Page 44
February 18, 2013 • • •
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Façade grants (incentivizing the “pride in appearance”) Ensuring that a design approach is not cost prohibitive (i.e. over regulation) Finally towns are like businesses you are in competition with your neighbor
Figure 4.5 – Example of the results of density on annual tax yield per acre
In Figure 4.5, the case is being made for density and mixed-use. The annual tax yield is not only the result of a better product, value wise (i.e. direct property tax) but indirect values of having people in the vicinity of commercial (business growth, less strain on vehicle capacity and health benefits of walking and biking – sustainable practices). After the presentations were made during the breakout session, an exchange between the presenters and audience resulted in the following comments: •
• • • •
Access (ADA) o Sidewalks o Speed limit o Stop lights Master Pedestrian/Multi-modal plan Connecting one end of the corridor to the other Walkability Lighting
Figure 4.6 – Scribed comments from Breakout Session B.
Page 45
February 18, 2013 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
A plan for all ages Empty lots, closed buildings – Nuisance Lacking theme West end, potential “tourism, business node” Height – Tiered approach Stormwater and Land Use regulations Business connectivity What is the balance between commercial and residential? Significance of survey? Steering “wrong direction” Mixed zones – restricts designs Sites are not a “level playing field”; 35’ from where Spread historic style down the corridor – blending Economic sustainability – site specific – inventory Troubled areas, partnership solutions – i.e. Board of Education Identify node owners/zones and characteristics of node Conceptual – Land use restrictions Business connectivity Commercial to Residential Balance
A general summary overview was given at the end of the breakout sessions. Included below is a summary list from the mapping breakout session:
• • • • •
School traffic am/pm Turning lanes Inventory of vacant lots and buildings Trailers being used as storage on highway Obsolete buildings Ratio of built to un-built Combining of lots and challenges of the ownership of small lots Environmental constraints Map private vs. public owners (future plans of current owners) ADT/Accident data Landscaping/buffering existing parking lots Stronger Town Regulations on stormwater Buffering of unsightly buildings Map Safe Routes to Schools
•
Cross connecting
• • • • • • • • •
Figure 4.7 – General Comments from Mapping Breakout Session A.
Page 46
February 18, 2013 V.
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Action Items - Implementation
So now what?? As alluded to in Section 1 of this document responsibility will need to be assigned to the task. However, before a task can be assigned, the task shall be clearly defined. Many comments, issues, ideas and suggestions were compiled during the Summit. From these comments, issues, ideas and suggestions, an actionable item (task) can be generated and assigned. Each comment, issue, idea and suggestion resulted in recommendations that will be used to assist in defining these tasks. In Table 5.1, a matrix is provided for each issue with a subsequent action item/task and responsibility. Table 5.1
Section
Issue
Action Item/Task
III. Gateway East End – Fish Market
**Branding
III. Gateway East End – Fish Market
Façade Improvement Program
Appoint committee in house to assist in establishing a brand for Swansboro market. Consideration of outside firm to assist in branding efforts. Solicit assistance from NC Department of Commerce in establishing Façade Grant Improvement Program.
III. Gateway East End – Fish Market
Wayfinding Signage & Gateway Signage
III. Gateway East End – Fish Market
Screening requirements for exposed dumpsters (existing)
III. Waterfront Commercial District
Maintain Public vistas and views. Setbacks, density, and height and maintain visual contact
III. Waterfront Commercial District
Expansion of waterfront park (public space) tie in with businesses
In association with the task of branding the community, consideration of an outside firm for wayfinding efforts. Wayfinding not limited to Highway 24 Corridor. Sign should be developed/erected for entrance into Town. Enforce code of ordinances under “Maintaining a nuisance” section of the Code. Modify ordinance consistent with NC General Statute 160A-174 “peace and dignity” of the city. Modify Unified Development Ordinance to allow development review under Conditional Zoning District process. Review of proposed development on waterfront should be consistent with adopted CAMA Land Use Plan. Inventory Town owned property in this district and consider expansion opportunities of public space and public amenities.
Page 47
Responsibility for Implementation Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Chamber of Commerce, Planning Board, Property owners Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Planning, Chamber of Commerce, Planning Board, Property owners Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Chamber of Commerce, Planning Board, Property owners
Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Planning Board and staff, Property owners
Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Planning Board and staff
Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Parks and Recreation staff
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Section
Issue
Action Item/Task
III. Waterfront Commercial District
Protect existing structures in district essential to preserving waterfront historical presence **Wayfinding
Expand historic district or create overlay district to protect structures important to preserving historical significance in this district.
III. Historic District
**Wayfinding
Wayfinding plan.
III. Historic District
Individual signs noting date of structures
Historic markers on structures noting age of structures.
III. Historic District
Maintain Historic Character Enhancement of Historic District – parking, signage, business growth, lodging **Traffic issues
Continue to enforce Historic District Standards. Begin phased implementation of recommendations from February 2010 Downtown Committee Report. Report should be reviewed and tasks assigned. Review traffic patterns with NCDOT, particularly at Sabiston and Highway 24. Request feasibility study from RPO/Jacksonville MPO for all high traffic intersections on Hwy 24. Modify UDO to consider incentivizing combination of smaller lots when redevelopment opportunities present themselves. Inventory non-conforming singlefamily residences on corridor and begin planning efforts for redevelopment of residential uses into commercial/ O & I type development.
III. Waterfront Commercial District
III. Historic District
III. Transitional District
III. Transitional District
Single-family and small lots on Highway Corridor
Wayfinding plan.
Page 48
Responsibility for Implementation Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Historic District Commission, Planning Board and staff
Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Chamber of Commerce, Planning Board, Property owners Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Chamber of Commerce, Planning Board, Property owners Property owners, Chamber of Commerce, Historic District Commission and Historic Preservation Society/Association Planning Staff and Historic District Commission Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Historic District Commission, Planning Staff, Chamber of Commerce Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Planning staff, RPO/MPO, and NCDOT
Planning Board, Planning Staff and Board of Commissioners
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Section
Issue
Action Item/Task
III. Transitional District
**Façade Improvement
Façade Improvement Program
III. Ward Farm District
**Street Trees
III. Ward Farm District
**Architectural Standards
III. Ward Farm District
**Connectivity
III. Ward Farm District
**Mixed-Use
III. Ward Farm District
**Stabilization of local businesses
III. Ward Farm District
**Site development standards and Traffic Impact Analysis
III. Commercial Belt District
**“Typical” Commercial & signage
Apply for Enhancement Grant from NCDOT for streetscaping along Highway 24 corridor. Sites that are redeveloped should meeting landscaping standards. Consider changing threshold for requirements for redevelopment. Develop guidelines for architectural theme for highway corridor. Guidelines should be reviewed for all development along highway corridor. Modify UDO to incorporate development guidelines. Requirements should be modified into UDO for multi-modal. Capital Improvement Program should be in place for funding of sidewalks and bicycle paths per recommendations in draft 2011 Bicycle plan. Plan should be adopted. Modify zoning and UDO to allow for more mixed use in this district. Inventory vacant space and partner with Economic Development Commission, Chamber and local business and develop web presence. Each entity should know available commercial, office space available in Town. Modify UDO to include Technical Review for all development on highway corridor. All state maintained roads should require driveway permit for site improvement. Modify Permitted Use Table for appropriate uses only on Highway Commercial corridor. Modify sign standards for less obtrusive/roadside props/advertise
Page 49
Responsibility for Implementation Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Planning Board and staff, Chamber of Commerce, Property owners Planning Board and staff, Board of Commissioners
Planning Board and staff, Board of Commissioners
Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Planning Board and staff, RPO/MPO, NCDOT
Board of Commissioners, Planning Board and staff Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Planning staff, EDC, Chamber and business owners
All Town staff, Board of Commissioners, Planning Board, NCDOT
Planning Board, Board of Adjustment, Planning Staff and Board of Commissioners
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Section
Issue
Action Item/Task
III. Commercial Belt District
Consideration expansion of properties (Highway Commercial classification) **Nuisance Abatement
Modify zoning map to allow for greater depth of Highway Commercial district to allow for associated development scenarios (stormwater, parking, etc.) Enforce Code of Ordinances for underperforming structures/properties Modify UDO for sidewalk requirements/fee in lieu program and apply for “Safe Routes to Schools”. CIP program for sidewalk/multi-modal construction. Review traffic patterns with NCDOT, particularly at Ireland and Highway 24. Request feasibility study from RPO/Jacksonville MPO for all high traffic intersections on Hwy 24. Establish TRC (Technical Review Committee) for development on Highway Corridor. Opportunity for McDonald’s to be developed as an architectural/thematic catalyst for new development on corridor. Development Guidelines. Apply for Enhancement Grant from NCDOT for streetscaping along Highway 24 corridor. Sites that are redeveloped should meeting landscaping standards. Consider changing threshold for requirements for redevelopment. Apply for Tree City USA status and establish capital for urban forest program/protection. Modify zoning and UDO to allow for more mixed use in this district.
III. Commercial Belt District III. Commercial Belt District
**Connectivity
III. Commercial Belt District
**Traffic
III. Commercial Belt District
Style and Theme
III. Transitional School District
**Street Trees Maintain Urban Forest
III. Transitional School District
**Mixed-Use
Page 50
Responsibility for Implementation Planning Board and staff, Board of Commissioners
Town Manager, Board of Commissioners and Planning and Inspections staff Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Planning staff, RPO/MPO and NCDOT
Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Planning staff, RPO/MPO, and NCDOT
All Town staff, Board of Commissioners, Planning Board
Town Manager, Planning Board and staff, Board of Commissioners
Board of Commissioners, Planning Board and staff
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Section
Issue
Action Item/Task
III. Transitional School District
**Connectivity
III. Transitional School District III. Transitional School District
**“Typical” Commercial & signage ** Nuisance Abatement
III. Transitional School District
**Nodal development
III. School District
Partnership
III. School District
Flooding
Requirements should be modified into UDO for multi-modal. Capital Improvement Program should be in place for funding of sidewalks and bicycle paths per recommendations in draft 2011 Bicycle plan. Plan should be adopted. “Safe Routes to School” as adjacent to School properties. Modify Permitted Use Table for appropriate uses only on Highway Commercial corridor Enforce Code of Ordinances for underperforming structures/properties Modify UDO to consider Conditional Zoning Districts to encourage cohesive central access to development site. Access management plan for Highway 24 should be adopted and incorporated into development ordinance. Development and redevelopment opportunities should involve discussion with Onslow County School system and should be active member on TRC review. Develop strategic plan for acquisition of property located at corner of Queens Creek and Hwy 24 for educational purposes (theme for district) Flood study should be conducted in vicinity of Queens Creek and high school.
III. School District
**Street Trees
Apply for Enhancement Grant from NCDOT for streetscaping along Highway 24 corridor. Sites that are redeveloped should meeting landscaping standards. Change req. thresholds for redevelopment.
Page 51
Responsibility for Implementation Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Planning Board and staff, RPO/MPO, NCDOT
Planning Board, Board of Adjustment, Planning Staff and Board of Commissioners Town Manager, Board of Commissioners and Planning and Inspections staff Planning Board, Board of Adjustment, Planning Staff and Board of Commissioners
Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Planning Board and staff, Onslow County Board of Education
Property owner, Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Planning staff Town Manager, Planning Board and staff, Board of Commissioners
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Section
Issue
Action Item/Task
III. School District
**Traffic
III. Gateway West End
**Gateway Entrance Signage
III. Gateway West End
**Branding
III. Gateway West End
ETJ expansion
Review traffic patterns with NCDOT, particularly at Queens Creek Road and Highway 24. Request feasibility study from RPO/Jacksonville MPO for all high traffic intersections on Hwy 24. All development/redevelopment that occurs along highway corridor should be reviewed with NCDOT for driveway permit A sign should be developed and erected immediately noting you have arrived to Swansboro. Appoint committee in house to assist in establishing a brand for Swansboro market. Consideration of outside firm to assist in branding efforts. Discussion with Onslow County and property owners to extend ETJ for zoning control. This is the “Gateway” to your community.
III. Gateway West End
**Street Trees
III. Gateway West End
**Architectural Standards
Apply for Enhancement Grant from NCDOT for streetscaping along Highway 24 corridor. Sites that are redeveloped should meeting landscaping standards. Consider changing threshold for requirements for redevelopment. Develop guidelines for architectural theme for highway corridor. Guidelines should be reviewed for all development along highway corridor. Modify UDO to incorporate development guidelines.
Page 52
Responsibility for Implementation Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Planning staff, RPO/MPO, and NCDOT
Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Chamber of Commerce, Planning staff Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Chamber of Commerce, Planning Board, Property owners Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Planning Board and staff, Onslow County Board of Commissioners, Property owners Planning Board and staff, Board of Commissioners
Planning Board and staff, Board of Commissioners
February 18, 2013
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Section
Issue
III. Gateway West End
**Connectivity
Action Item/Task
Requirements should be modified into UDO for multi-modal. Capital Improvement Program should be in place for funding of sidewalks and bicycle paths per recommendations in draft 2011 Bicycle plan. Plan should be adopted. III. Gateway West End **“Typical” Modify Permitted Use Table for Commercial & appropriate uses only on Highway signage Commercial corridor III. Gateway West End ** Nuisance Enforce Code of Ordinances for Abatement underperforming structures/properties IV. Survey Results, **Nuisance Enforce Code of Ordinances for Concepts and Economic program for underperforming Sustainability unsightly lots and structures/properties *** See buildings excerpt from Town’s Code of Ordinances IV. Survey Results, Pride and Enforce Code of Ordinances for Concepts and Economic Appearance underperforming Sustainability structures/properties *** See excerpt from Town’s Code of Ordinances. Façade Grant program. IV. Survey Results, Height Restrictions Modify UDO to include Conditional Concepts and Economic Zoning District where height is Sustainability reviewed amongst other variables in overall site development. Site specific choices are made specific to a site. Conditions are applied that provides sustainable development. IV. Survey Results, Economic Begin implementation of City Concepts and Economic Sustainability adopted plans and consider Sustainability funding Economic Development Plan for Town. Economic Development Plan can include inventory of resources, SWOT and incentives for recruitment of business and development and overall sustainment plan for Town **Items that are considered to be shared issues amongst each district.
Page 53
Responsibility for Implementation Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Planning Board and staff, RPO/MPO, NCDOT
Planning Board, Board of Adjustment, Planning Staff and Board of Commissioners Town Manager, Board of Commissioners and Planning and Inspections staff Town Manager, Board of Commissioners and Planning and Inspections staff
Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Planning Board and staff, Inspections, Chamber of Commerce, Property owners Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Planning Board and staff, Property owners
Town Manager, Board of Commissioners, Planning Board and staff, Property owners
February 18, 2013 VI.
2020 GATEWAY VISION SUMMIT – SUMMARY REPORT
Next step
The 2020 Gateway Vision Summit has produced a road map for making necessary change not only along the NC Highway 24 Corridor but for the Town as a whole. As mentioned in Section I, the Town has aggressively planned for this change with various plans and studies over the last several years. Priorities for implementing the tasks have also been vetted through various surveys and discussed openly at the Summit. Table 5.1 also provides for a trail of responsibility in completing the tasks. Each individual within the Town of Swansboro has a stake and responsibility in implementation. Next: A recommendation is to begin with the “low hanging fruit.” Code enforcement regulations already exist within the Town of Swansboro. However, how the regulations are enforced and supported by elected officials can produce positive change along the corridor. Property owner behavior will change based on the Town’s pressure/influence to do so.
Page 54