Planning board approves new 'pool contractor' use with landscaping and setback conditions

The Currituck County Planning Board voted June 9 to approve PB26‑04, a text amendment that creates a distinct “pool contractor” land‑use category allowing expanded outdoor storage and limited street‑facing display in certain zoning districts, with added buffering and setback conditions.

Staff recommended denial of the amendment as submitted, arguing the proposed increase in allowable outdoor storage (from 25% to 50% of the buildable area) and loosened location rules would introduce industrial‑scale staging and circulation in General Business areas intended for smaller commercial uses. Planning staff said the request differs in intensity and character from contractor services the UDO envisions for the GB district.

Applicant Jordan Daner, who identified himself for the record, told the board the business has grown quickly after relocating from a home operation and now employs about 31 people, including local high‑school graduates, and installs roughly 60 pools a year. “We put in about 60 pools a year,” he said, and described a mix of retail showroom activity and periodic use of heavy equipment such as dump trucks and an 80‑foot‑boom crane for offloading. Daner said he has looked for available industrial lots in the county and asked the board for a tailored remedy that would allow his business to remain on its current commercial parcel.

Board members pressed on technical points — which pieces of equipment are stored long‑term, whether the operation is retail or industrial in character, and whether the crane or other equipment could be stowed or moved to reduce visual impacts. Staff reminded the board that storage of equipment heavier than 12,000 pounds is treated as an industrial use under the UDO, and that display landscaping and buffer details are subject to director review under the proposed language.

After extended discussion about alternatives and the risk of opening the GB district to incompatible industrial uses, a board member moved to approve the amendment with additional conditions: require a Type D vegetative buffer along the arterial frontage, permit a single display pool at a 50‑foot setback from the front property line, and maintain a 100‑foot setback before storage begins; the motion added a 50‑foot return of Type D buffering on both sides of the frontage. The motion carried on a voice vote. The item will advance to the County Commissioners for final consideration.

The board and applicant also noted implementation details that will require follow up if the commissioners adopt the amendment: whether existing fence and drainage features must be adjusted to accommodate the buffer, how display landscaping will be approved by the director, and where storage will be allowed on the owner’s outlying property should the applicant elect to relocate shells or staging yards.

Planning staff identified the change as inconsistent with key UDO policies as originally presented but recommended the board’s amended approach because it ties expanded allowances to specific mitigation measures. The board’s approval does not itself change zoning on the ground; the matter proceeds to the Board of County Commissioners.