Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Regulations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County staff propose moving retaining‑wall technical standards out of zoning code to technical manual
Summary
Planning staff proposed amending the Unified Development Ordinance to remove mechanically stabilized‑slope height limits and place technical design standards in the IDS manual so engineering staff — not the Planning Board — review retaining wall design and approvals.
Precise County planning staff briefed commissioners on May 4 on UDO amendment UDO CC32, which would remove mechanically stabilized slopes (retaining walls) and related height limits from Chapter 8 of the Unified Development Ordinance and relocate technical specifications into the county’s IDS standards manual.
Planning director Chris Murphy told the board current UDO provisions allow wall sections up to 10 feet to be approved by erosion control staff while taller walls require an alternative compliance process reviewed by the Planning Board. "The planning board certainly isn't qualified to review those — they're not engineers," Murphy said, adding that public works and erosion control staff will develop technical IDS standards to provide engineering review and a streamlined, inter‑departmental approval process.
Murphy said the change matches practice in peer communities and that NC DOT would retain its separate review for walls in state rights‑of‑way. He noted the Planning Board unanimously recommended approval at its January 8 public hearing and that Winston‑Salem city council adopted the change on March 23, 2026. Commissioners asked about safety concerns tied to the previous 10‑foot cutoff; staff said that provision likely dated to step‑back and collapse concerns from 25–30 years ago, but permitting and inspections remain in place and engineers must seal designs under the proposed framework.
If adopted by the board, the UDO would defer design thresholds to the IDS technical manual and rely on erosion control, utilities, and public works engineering review rather than land‑use hearings for technical determinations.
