Loading...
08-2010 August 5 2010 PBM Page 1 of 20 Minutes of the New Hanover County Planning Board August 5, 2010 The New Hanover County Planning Board met Thursday, August 5, 2010 at 5:30 p.m. in the Assembly Room of the Historic County Courthouse, Wilmington, NC to hold a public meeting. Planning Board Present: Staff Present: Richard Collier, Vice Chair Chris O’Keefe, Planning & Inspections Director Andy Heath Jane Daughtridge, Planning & Zoning Manager Troy Barboza Sam Burgess, Subdivision Planner Tamara Murphy Sharon Huffman, Assistant County Attorney Tara Murphy Absent: Melissa Gott Ken Wrangell Richard Collier opened the meeting by welcoming the audience to the public hearing. He announced that the agenda would be slightly modified to begin with the TRC Report first as it pertained directly to the item on the agenda and then progress to Item #3, the public hearing. Sam Burgess led the reciting of the Pledge of Allegiance. Item 4: Technical Review Committee Report (June and July) Sam Burgess explained to the three new board members that a a Technical Review Committee report is provided to the board each month in their Planning Board package. The Technical Review Committee reviews new development site plans, revised site plans and modifications or revisions to site plans. Mr. Burgess stated he provides a brief synopsis of each item reviewed by the TRC in his presentation to the board. Mr. Burgess provided the following report for the months of June and July. Rose Hill Landing: Phase -1 Rose Hill Landing is in the Northwestern portion of our jurisdiction and is classified as Wetland Resource Protection on the County’s Land Use Plan. An aerial view of the site shows that their primary access is off the Western terminus of Chair Road. There aren’t many land features to provide as a reference point, but the Cape Fear River is visible to the west and I-140 is located south and east of the project. Property owned by GE is shown on the upper right hand corner of the map. The site plan contains 193 units which will consist of 162 single family lots and 31 multi-family units. Approximately 29 multi-family units located on the left hand corner of the site plan and 2 additional multi-family units are located in the upper right hand central portion of the site plan. Page 2 of 20 When the TRC reviewed this plan, there was a proposal as well for Low Impact Development (LID) criteria, which is based on trying to reduce the amount of runoff by adding cisterns, bio-retention filters, reducing the width of paved roads, etc. to go a little greener. There were two separate votes, one on the low impact development criteria and one on the technical aspects of the site plan itself. In two separate votes of 5-0, the TRC approved the Rose Hill Landing: Phase 1 site plan for 193 units and the LID criteria with conditions, which were provided in the planning board package. Westside Village @West Bay Estates Westside Village is located near the northeastern portion of our jurisdiction and is classified as Wetland Resource Protection on the County’s Land Use Plan. The aerial photo shows the West Bay Estates to the right of the area and Park Ridge Manor, which includes Savannah Run Loop. The Military Cutoff Extension will essentially split the West Bay project in half. There will be access to the project from Putnam Drive, which is part of the West Bay project and from Suncoast Drive and Farrington Farms Drive, which is located just to the left of the project. The site plan for Westside Village contains 74 single family lots which will be served by public water and sewer. The road network is private, which access via Putnam Drive and West Bay Estates, in addition to Farrington Farms and Suncoast subdivisions. In a vote of 5-0, the TRC approved the site plan for Westside Village for a total of 74 lots with conditions. Belle Meade Centre Right-of-Way Dedication Belle Meade Centre was another development reviewed by the TRC during the month of July. This was primarily a road right-of-way dedication. It is located in the south central portion of the County. An aerial photo was shown reflecting the road rights-of-way reviewed by the TRC. These particular rights-of-way have been designated for public use. They are the western segment of Pine Hollow Drive which goes into Belle Meade Plantation, Sikes Drive which connects into St. Andrews Drive, which is a part of the Wilmington city limits. The southern portion of Sikes Drive connects into Hailey Village which is a high density project that is actually located in the City and Matteo Drive, which extends from that T-intersection with Sikes out to Carolina Beach Road. There have been numerous signal upgrades at Carolina Beach Road, Matteo and Silva Terra. The roads are already in place. The nodes shown at the western end of Pine Hollow and the eastern end of Matteo Drive are actually roundabouts or traffic calming devices. Mr. Burgess showed a view of the right-of-way dedication map. Belle Meade Center was conditionally rezoned by the Board of County Commissioners in December 2008 to CD B-1, Conditional Use B-1, and CD B-2 for neighborhood and highway commercial type uses. At the time of the rezoning, there was no formal dedication of right-of-way for vehicular access that had been approved for the western section of Pine Hollow, Sikes, or Page 3 of 20 Matteo. All are public streets and the purpose of the right-of-way dedication was to set things in motion where at least legally there was a dedication of road rights-of-way. The Belle Meade Center right-of-way dedication will also involve a final plat, which will need to be submitted to the County for review and approval, in conjunction with DOT approval since these roads have been designated for public use. Belle Meade Plantation Belle Meade Plantation is located near the south central portion of the County and anchored between South College Road to the East and Carolina Beach Road to the West just below the city limits of Wilmington. The applicant filed a request with the TRC asking them to consider the publicly designated roads for private use. The eastern segment of Pine Hollow Drive runs directly out to South College Road. There are other points of road interconnectivity as well, but this is a vital piece to the collector street network in the area. He presented a map of the site plan. In In a vote of 5-0, the TRC upheld their decision to keep the roads public. Detailed information and conditions for these particular items are included in the Planning Board package. Vice Chairman Richard Collier announced that three new board members were present. He introduced Tamara Carter Murphy, Troy Barboza, and Tara Murphy, who were all appointed at the July 12th County Commissioners meeting. He welcomed the three new members to the board. Vice Chairman Collier also stated that the June minutes would be approved at the September Planning Board meeting. Item 3: Subdivision Appeal (SA-27, 08/10) – Request by Mary Margaret McEachern for the Belle Meade Plantation Owners Association to overturn decision by the County’s Technical Review Committee to deny re-designation of Pine Hollow Drive (4200 block), McGinnis Lane (500-699 block) and several alleys from public to private. Sam Burgess showed various maps and photographs of the property and of the surrounding area, including photos of the streets, roundabouts, intersections, and entrances and the site map for Section 1. Mr. Burgess also provided information pertaining to land classification, access, level of service, and zoning. He noted Belle Meade Plantation is located in the south central portion of the county. St. Andrews Drive has a level of service of B and a good segment of Carolina Beach Road has a level of service of F, which falls into a level of service of E as it continues south toward Monkey Junction. There is also a level of service of F on College Road. The particular appeal involving Pine Hollow Drive and McGinnis Lane are located in the center of the map. Mr. Burgess reviewed the definitions of the various levels of service for traffic. By definition, generally a level of A-B, as seen on St. Andrews Drive, indicates that the traffic through that Page 4 of 20 particular collector road is free and stable. A level of C or D would indicate that the traffic level based on the design of the road would essentially be stable. A classification of E would mean that the road was at capacity and a level of service of F means that there has been a breakdown in the traffic, essentially meaning that the carrying capacity based on the design of the road has over exceeded its limits. As reflected in an aerial map, Mr. Burgess stated there is very good road connectivity connecting with Pine Hollow Drive, which extends east and out to South College Road. Mr. Burges noted the Belle Meade Centre right-of-ways that extend Pine Hollow Drive to its T-intersection with Sikes and Sikes eventually T-intersects with St. Andrews Drive, which is a collector road and also with Matteo Drive, which intersects with Carolina Beach Road. Just to the south, the brown areas with unit-type configurations are the HaleighVillage Project which was approved by the City of Wilmington. There is wonderful road interconnectivity going into this project, with the eventual extension of Sikes Drive. Haleigh Village also has a road connection leading out to Carolina Beach Road and also back up to Pine Hollow Drive. He also pointed out on an oblique photo the two roundabouts that basically anchor Belle Meade Plantation, in addition to showing McGinnis Lane. He stated this particular photo was probably not shot until 2006 or 2007 based on the construction shown. Mr. Burgess provided the following staff report. Project History In May of 2005, a final plat of the road network for Belle Meade Plantation: 1 was approved by the County and recorded in the New Hanover County Register of Deeds – Map Book 47, Page 387. Pine Hollow Drive and McGinnis Lane were designated on the final plat as public. NCDOT Construction Plan drawings for the road network in Section 1 were approved in the same month. In June of 2010, the TRC voted 5-0 on a motion by the Executive Director of the Wilmington MPO affirming that the roads in Belle Meade Plantation remain designated as public based on the following criteria: 1) Roads were intended to be public and were approved as public as displayed on the preliminary site plan and also on the final plat of Belle Meade Plantation. NCDOT construction plan drawings were submitted, approved and certified in accordance with NCGS 136-102.6; 2) The removal of the public road designation to private may inhibit emergency service delivery and may be in violation of Section 41-1(7)(f) of the County’s Subdivision Ordinance pertaining to street connectivity requirements; and 3) The public road is a valuable asset in the existing transportation system and a useful alternative for collecting traffic from all the surrounding developments and delivering it to aerial roadways of Carolina Beach Road and South College Road. Applicant’s Appeal The applicant’s appeal revolves basically around two elements: Page 5 of 20 1) The TRC erred in concluding that the subdivision roads are public simply because the roads were approved as public on the preliminary site plan and final plat and constructed to NCDOT specifications and recorded as public roads. 2) The TRC erred in concluding that removal of the public roads to private may be in violation of Section 41-1(7)(f) of the County’s Subdivision Ordinance that involves road interconnectivity. According to the applicant, there is no reference to or mention of any requirement in that section that the streets must be dedicated to public in order to comply with the connectivity requirements. Staff Summary Staff contends that through the County’s TRC preliminary review and approval process, Pine Hollow Drive and McGinnis Lane were clearly presented and designated on the site plan as public roads. This is affirmed through the approved site plan dated August, 2003 and signed by the TRC Chairman. In accordance with NCGS 136-102.6, construction plan drawings for Pine Hollow Drive and McGinnis Lane were submitted and approved by the NC Department of Transportation in July of 2004. Final plat review and approval by the County also contained road construction certification approval by the NCDOT District Engineer. This certificate was executed on the plat in May, 2005. It is acknowledged that the roads have not been formally submitted for acceptance for maintenance by a public authority (NCDOT). The absence of accepted road maintenance may provide opportunity for the Belle Meade residents to re-designate their roads from public to private. However, there is still opportunity to complete another petition if a formal petition has not been submitted for NCDOT to eventually accept the roads onto their state maintenance system and that doesn’t constitute grounds for re-designation at this point. The roads were presented to the County and TRC during the review process as public and recorded as public. Change of property ownership and title would not have a bearing in the decision process process by TRC. Other project approvals in the vicinity have incorporated consideration of reliance on this public road being in place. Changing the roads to private in this situation would separate an established public right-of-way, undermine the intent and language of the Subdivision Regulations pertaining to road connectivity by potentially obstructing access in the future and not be in the public interest. Based on the Subdivision Regulations, the TRC ultimately has the right within their scope of responsibilities not to re-designate the roads. Opportunity still exists for the residents on Pine Hollow Drive and McGinnis Lane to complete a petition and eventually be accepted for State maintenance by NCDOT. Also, in accordance with NCGS 136-102.8, the residents may petition NCDOT for the installation or utilization of traffic tables or traffic calming devices. In the interest of good planning and transportation policy, the County has exercised its authority to deny modification. Planning and Inspections staff concurs with the decision made by the TRC. Mary Margaret McEachern, an attorney representing the Belle Meade Plantation Owners Association, spoke on behalf of the applicant, providing a brief history of the development as presented in the applicant’s narrative. Page 6 of 20 She noted the original owner of the parcel was Atlantis Holdings, LLC. In December 2003, Atlantis Holdings, LLC deeded the property to John Galarde and his wife, who subsequently deeded the property to Galarde Development, LLC. After that, Atlantis and Galarde as co-declarants recorded the original declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions in May 2005. They also recorded the original plat on the same day, which was shown during the staff’s presentation and recorded in Map Book 47, Page 387 of the Registry. However, three additional plats were recorded by Galarde Development as Atlantic had become largely uninvolved in the development of the Belle Meade Plantation subdivision. A second plat was recorded in July 2005, a third plat was recorded in September 2005 and a final plat was recorded in November 2005. Notably, those plats do not contain the signature from NCDOT that was referenced by Mr. Burgess in the staff report. On November 23, 2005, Galarde Development deeded several lots lots in the subdivision to Kirk Pigford Construction, Inc., but retained its fee simple interest in the common areas along with its rights as co-declarant with Atlantis; however in 2010, Galarde Development and Atlantis transferred their declarant rights to Belle Meade Plantation Owners Association. Galarde also transferred fee simple interest by deed of the streets, alleys, and common areas to the association at that time. Ms. McEachern stated that basically we are dealing with a long history of state law which states that dedication is an exceptional and peculiar mode of passing title and the courts will not declare lightly a dedication to public use. This is a result of a 1967 Supreme Court case. Because there is nothing really specified in statutes regarding dedication, we must have an offer and an acceptance by a proper public authority. NCGS 132-102.6 states that an offer can be made if a plat is recorded purporting to dedicate streets to public use, it’s conclusively presumed as an offer of dedication; however, the dedication can’t be complete unless there is also an acceptance by a responsible public authority. Where an offer is made by plat, the owners in a subdivision have a right to have the road kept open, but insofar as the general public is concerned, this is only a revocable offer. Ms. McEachern pointed out there are actually 17 cases which make this point very strong so we are back to the point of even assuming conclusively there was an offer of dedication by Atlantis Holding and Galarde Development when they put the original plat on record, the acceptance has to be made in order for the dedication to be complete. Acceptance can be either express or implied. Express involves formal ratification, resolution, order, ordinance, adoption, vote, written instrument, or something formal by the authority, in this case DOT to which the roads were dedicated. She noted that none of that is present in this case; however, even in the absence of express acceptance, giving DOT the benefit of the doubt, they haven’t implied acceptance of these roads. Case law has held that improvement to streets by DOT is generally what is considered to be evidence of implied acceptance of dedication, but in this case, that has not been done. There has been no effort on behalf of DOT or any other public authority to maintain these streets. Ms. McEachern stated an offer can be revoked by an owner of record if it is not accepted and noted that is very old, long-standing case law that goes back to the beginning of our country. She commented that in this case, Atlantis Holdings and ultimately Galarde deeded the roads out prior to any formal or implied acceptance occurring on the part of DOT. The roads are now owned by Belle Meade Plantation Owners Association and they have evidenced their unequivocal intent to revoke any existing offers of dedication. They have no plans to petition to DOT or otherwise subject the roads to DOT for maintenance. In addition, the declaration which is also a public record and which was recorded part and parcel to the original plat purporting to dedicate these roads to public use is a bit ambiguous. It attempts to define the Page 7 of 20 roads to public, but later in the body of the document, it specifies the roads as private rights-of-way and goes into detail as to how the HOA has a duty to maintain those roads. That is clearly contradictory to any intent on the part of the developer and certainly the HOA to have the roads dedicated to the public for public maintenance. Ms. McEachern stated there is a general rule of statutory construction under the law that “specific” rules over “general” so in this case she would argue that the declaration which is recorded part in part to the plat specifically is not consistent with the plat, but the specifics seem to indicate that the roads are meant to be private. Because the declaration specifies private rights-of-way, everybody including the County has been put on notice as to the true nature of the roads and the plat should be revised as to be consistent with that. Ms. McEachern stated that making these roads private is not necessarily going to affect interconnectivity. The only difference from a practical standpoint is that the roads are maintained by the homeowners association and not by the public. Ms. McEachern cited Subdivision Ordinance 52-4(3), stating it specifically allows for private streets assuming that: a) They provide ingress, egress and regress to collector roads, which we can clearly see from the plat and numerous photos presented during the staff presentation; b) They are properly maintained by the HOA; and c) They otherwise comply with DOT standards. She noted that all three of those factors are present and in this particularly case, considering the equities and where this neighborhood stands presently, it is her opinion that the law is extremely strong on this point and a court would have no choice but to rule on the side of long-standing North Carolina law. She stated there simply has not been enough put in place to complete a dedication; therefore, the roads are not public and should be re-platted as private for consistency. John Hayes, President of Belle Meade Plantation Homeowners Association, explained why they are appealing this decision of the TRC. He stated that Mr. Burgess was citing what the law should be in the favor of the TRC to keep the road public for specific purposes. He commented that the ownership of the roads today and as of May 20th belongs to the Belle Meade Plantation Homeowners Association. The roads are not owned by John Galarde or Atlantis Holdings, but were transferred. He stated the contract Mr. Burgess was referring to regarding the intent was no longer valid. He commented that we try to teach our children two things: 1) Don’t lie and 2) when you recognize you made a mistake, fess up to it. He stated the HOA is asking the County to recognize the fact that these roads are owned by them and that the contract is null and void. Mr. Hayes stated that the roads are private and they intend to keep them that way. Matt DiGioia, of 5212 Masonboro Harbour, spoke in opposition. He stated he was the reason they are here and that he also owns property in Belle Meade subdivision. He stated he is a member of the Belle Meade HOA and wants to make it clear that not everyone is in favor of these roads being re-designated as private. He expressed concern about so much history related to this subdivision and explained that in 2001, he took an underutilized intersection at Silva Terra and Carolina Beach Road and optioned property at the traffic light, became a developer and began planning. He stated he began interacting with the Planning Department staff and Page 8 of 20 becoming familiar with what the County wanted to accomplish, taking note of their long-range plans for the county and their directives and mandates. He commented that at some point as a developer, he adopted the County’s vision. Mr. Digioia offered a folder containing nine years of records related to this project for the Planning Board’s review. Mr. Digioia presented a map he was given by the MPO in 2008, showing that Pine Hollow Drive has been designated as a collector for quite a long time to take traffic through that community, Cambridge Heights, Johnson Farms and ultimately deliver it out to Carolina Beach Road or to St. Andrews Drive. He also presented a map of St. Andrews Phase 2, which shows a road without a name coming down to St. Andrews Drive. It is noted on the map that the road will ultimately be dedicated to the City of Wilmington if and when needed. He explained that St. Andrews Drive is essentially where the City and County jurisdictions meet. Mr. Digioia stated that keeping in mind the County’s vision, when he was creating the site plan and interconnectivity, he began to prepare preliminary drawings for a subdivision where the termination of Pine Hollow Drive off College Road would somehow transition through a community he would design and ultimately go out to a commercial node at St. Andrews and College Road. The thought was to bring goods and services in close proximity to the markets they serve. Unfortunately, he ran into topo issues and a requirement for too much fill so that plan wasn’t feasible. He developed another plan dated June 2002, but wasn’t happy putting a straight road through those homes that were going to be developed so he educated himself on some of the neo-traditional designs, roundabouts as calming devices, and back alley design which would limit ingress/egress and the danger of backing your car out with children playing in the driveway running after balls into the street and those types of issues. He decided at his expense to research that and these are the only roundabouts on New Hanover County public streets to his knowledge. He has a letter from NCDOT for Belle Meade Center proper where he also has a fountain and some other things planned. Mr. DiGioia stated that the significance of all this is that his vision for Belle Meade Plantation was to participate in the County’s vision of the interconnectivity, believing that someday those residents that occupied those homes would be thankful that through his design, through the center islands. (He commented that when that plat was approved, John Galarde wanted to go one step further and incorporate some type of center islands so it’s his understanding that the center islands and roundabouts are a first for that community and also for New Hanover County). Mr. DiGioia stated he brought a copy of the River Road Realignment Small Area Plan done by the MPO, which encompasses Silva Terra, Hood Road, Lorraine Drive, and also talks about the importance of other interconnectivity in the community. He also brought copies of the draft traffic studies from 2003 and the Subdivision Regulations. Mr. DiGioia stated that essentially through these proceedings when he was platting that subdivision, the NCDOT and all the County agencies had to sign off on the road design before he created Belle Meade Plantation. Mr. DiGioia stated that actually John Galarde and Tim Rivenbark put in the infrastructure and he was only a declarant. The purpose of him being a declarant in that relationship was that he wanted to maintain control of the architectural design. Through Sam Goodrey of Goodrey Architects, Mr. DiGioia designed the homes, provided a life estate for the McGinnis family, and tried to preserve the name Belle Meade, which came from the 1800s. He also provided a letter written to one of the area families after he discovered there had been some oversight with courtesy access for some of the residents. He tried to provide Page 9 of 20 courtesy access that some people were unaware of. He stated he has tried to be conscientious and objective as a member of the community. Mr. DiGioia stated, in closing, he felt compelled to attend this meeting for all the people in those subdivisions that connect to Belle Meade who are unaware of these proceedings and enjoy the convenience and other attributes that the design and connectivity of Belle Meade brings. He stated his appreciation for the board’s deliberation. Ms. McEachern spoke on behalf of the applicant during the rebuttal period. She stated the Belle Meade residents aren’t trying to necessarily be hard on the County or going against the County plans, but are actually trying to say that re-platting the road as private will not interfere with interconnectivity. She believes it will make the record straight and will also allow the residents to have more control over their neighborhood and the roads which they own. She quoted directly from Subdivision Ordinance 41-1 Section 7(f), which addresses street interconnectivity requirements. She read, “Interconnected streets systems promote orderly and safe development by ensuring that streets function in an independent manner to provide adequate access for emergency and service vehicles and enhance access by ensuring continuous and connected transportation routes. All proposed streets shall be continuous and connect to existing or platted streets without offset with the exception of cul-de-sacs as permitted and accepted as provided below”. Several technical requirements are then addressed regarding nodes and links, but there is nothing in that section stating the roads have to be considered public or platted and dedicated to public use. Ms. McEachern then read Section 52-4(3), regarding “Private Streets”, which states “Streets designated as private may be allowed in subdivisions when in the opinion of the Planning Board they provide adequate ingress and egress onto collector streets and sufficient assurance is provided through legally established homeowners associations that the street will be properly maintained. All such streets shall be designated as “Private Street” on plans and plats”. Ms. McEachern stated they concede the fact that the street empties onto collector streets and don’t deny that. She noted they aren’t trying to stop the residents from other neighborhoods from being able to make their lives more convenient. All we are trying to do as owners of the roads is to enhance our rights to maintain the roads and the neighborhood as we see fit. She stated she is really not arguing with anything in particular Matt DiGioia has stated, but is agreeing with it. She said that none of these goals will be frustrated by re-platting this as private. She thanked the board for hearing their case. She then read pertinent portions of a letter from Jennifer Smith, Senior Vice President of the Legal Division for First Troy SPE, LLC, which is the bank (First Bank) that owns twenty (20) of the lots and four (4) homes in Belle Meade Subdivision. As stated stated in the letter verbatim, “First Bank and First Troy SPE, LLC have a special interest in protecting the inhabitants and the values in the neighborhood. We feel keeping the community on private roads is the best way to manage the traffic and speeding concerns of the Belle Meade residents and future residents and thereby maintain the value of the neighborhood, the safety of it and the beauty of it for not only the Belle Meade residents, but for the County as well. She offered board members a copy of the letter. Ms. McEachern then asked the Board to decide that in accordance with North Carolina law that this subdivision is not public and that the County’s own Ordinance allows for this type of configuration. She stated her plea that the board reverse the TRC’s June 9th decision. Page 10 of 20 Matt DiGioia responded, stating he wanted to draw attention to a couple of things. He commented that being a member of the homeowners association in Belle Meade, John Hayes, President of Belle Meade Homeowners Association, did not inform him nor was he part of a discussion regarding the HOA taking action this past week and having speed bumps installed within the subdivision. Secondarily, he was told in conversation with Mr. Hayes, that there would be a minor addition to the dues to pay for the speed bumps within the subdivision. He stated that right now even if the HOA decided to go back on their thoughts with privatization of the roads, because they have installed the speed bumps the NCDOT will not adopt those roads now because they are no longer compliant as far as NCDOT is concerned; therefore, if they at some point want to go ahead with the dedication. At an earlier time in 2008 and beyond, Mr. DiGioia recommended that it was the easiest thing for them to do because in private streets the Sheriff’s Department has issues with patrol and the ability to issue citations. That is why he recommended those roads be adopted by NCDOT. He stated the reason he brought up the speed bumps is that Ms. McEachern may feel she is being completely genuine that there is no intent to close that road or impede the interconnectivity, but he has been told that the President of the Homeowners Association, if he gets his way, is going to gate the community. Mr. DiGioia stated his opinion that this would set a precedent throughout the County that anybody that has a vehement homeowners association that now has a private road that would now like to put up gates and gate it, they are going to do it. He stated that he was speaking as a member of the community, as a planner, as a developer, and as someone who has spent personally $750,000 just on upgrades on the Silva Terra intersection for the public benefit in general. He noted it isn’t a charity, he hopes to make money someday on his shopping center so he isn’t crying in his beer here, but you do have to buy into the County’s vision and planning and stick to your guns and not break this down into a few residents that would like to have more peace and quiet. There is a broader sense of safety, convenience, and the County’s vision and he’s here for all the people that can’t attend and don’t understand. He doesn’t know how many times when he first came to Wilmington that he went down a road that went nowhere and I thought what in the world. Now I’ve got to turn around and find my way back out. He just wants to put a stop to this. That’s why I’m here. He thanked the board. Mr. Collier closed the public hearing. Andy Heath asked Ms. McEachern why the applicants desired to turn the roads into private rights-of-way and what benefit that would be to the neighborhood. Ms. McEachern responded that first of all as the owners of the road they really want to have control and stated she won’t deny that at one time, they did discuss the idea of putting a gate up, but that has been put by by the wayside. They really want to not only ensure the beauty of their neighborhood, but also the safety of the residents. As shown in the staff photos, the streets are tree-lined and are pretty narrow. They have had some issues with kids that live in the Johnson Farms or one of the other neighborhoods drag racing through Belle Meade. She stated they have heard as recently as yesterday, a young child had to be grabbed to be saved from a Jeep speeding through the neighborhood. They really just want to be able to put in traffic calming measures that they deem appropriate that would also work well with the interconnectivity. She commented they really only want people to drive at a reasonable speed in the neighborhood. Ms. Page 11 of 20 McEachern stated they haven’t had any luck with the Sheriff’s Department coming out and enforcing speed and recklessness, as well as criminal activity. Some damage was done to the street by someone (a kid) setting a bonfire in the street. She stated it’s a matter of them wanting to control the property they own in a reasonable manner to keep the neighborhood looking nice and also to preserve the values of their properties, but most importantly, for safety concerns. She commented that they are willing to put in their own money to do it. She stated she realizes that if DOT came in, the residents wouldn’t have to pay for their own roads and that sounds tempting, but they are of the impression that they can’t trust the State to adequately ensure the safety of their residents. Tara Murphy asked when the speed bumps in Belle Meade today went in and who paid for those to be installed. Mr. Hayes stated that the speed bumps were put in on Friday and that he received an e-mail just before he left for the meeting tonight citing two incidents of reckless driving. He stated he actually witnessed one of those incidents, which was a Jeep Wrangler went speeding through the neighborhood well in excess of 40 miles per hour down the private alleyways. Mr. Hayes was on his front porch when he saw the parent grab her 4-year old child and pull him out of the way of the speeding Jeep. Mr. Hayes stated that was not the first incident; they have presented to the TRC extensive imagery in a PowerPoint presentation of tracks and conversations that were heard with children that wanted to drag race down the street and came back that night. The skid marks are evident; they lost control and went over the islands. If any head-on traffic had been coming, it would have probably been a death. The vehicle went back over the island a second time trying to catch control and went into the trees. He commented that Ms. McEeachern was correct. There have been multiple incidents with a resident that is no longer there. It was a renter that that had set fire to the road and totally damaged the home and was eventually evicted in a foreclosure. He stated they really have no control over this and most of the residents here from Belle Meade can testify in calling the police, the issues of speed and control, you can’t cite someone for speeding when there is no posted speed limit signs. Mr. Hayes stated they posted speed limit signs and they were stolen within a week. He stated the neighborhood is out of control and is like a lawless neighborhood; so therefore, by having private streets we can put measures in place to secure our neighborhood. Mr. Hayes stated this has been presented and he said this exact comment to Mr. Collier in 2008 when they were defending Mr. DiGioia’s development. He said he was one of many residents that stood in support of Mr. DiGioia’s development knowing that it would bring closure to this whole process where it has been left vacant. In the Commissioners meeting of 2008, Mr. DiGioia was granted permission to proceed with the theater in some rezoning, but he was also required to put in traffic calming devices. Mr. Hayes stated it’s been almost two years after that event and there was nothing put in by him. Mr. Hayes stated Mr. DiGioia was ordered to do so and that was not mentioned by Mr. Burgess in his presentation, but we have not seen those so we are nowhere and that’s why we are hoping to take control. Mr. Hayes made one other point about Mr. DiGioia, noting he owns two homes in the neighborhood and he is absolutely a member of the homeowners association and not in good standing at this moment so he has no voting rights. Tara Murphy stated she understands where Mr. Hayes is coming from with concerns about crime and traffic, but really the only way that I can anticipate the problems you are talking about is if Page 12 of 20 these roads go back to being private by putting a gate up and gating that element out. She stated she has concerns moving forward that there would be a disconnect in the interconnectivity of the road system that has been strived for up to this point. Tamara Murphy asked if anyone has taken a look at how this will affect the routes that paramedics and fire rescue may have to take to get into the neighborhood, as well as their travel time. She asked if it will extend rescue vehicle travel time and asked if it had been reviewed. Corporal Fike, of the Sheriff’s Office Traffic Unit, stated he was in Belle Meade subdivision Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights last week in reference to their ongoing complaints. He stated the problem they are running into there is that those are not NCDOT State maintained streets so the Sheriff’s Office has no legal right to enforce any traffic laws other than DWI and Careless and Reckless. He commented that State law states that the speed limit is 55 MPH MPH unless otherwise posted and it has to be posted by a NCDOT speed limit sign. The subdivision stop signs and speed limit signs put up throughout the County are not enforceable. He explained that the Sheriff’s Department has no legal right to cite someone for violating traffic laws in those subdivisions. As of Friday night, there were speed bumps put in. Corporal Fike stated that based on what he has seen, the fastest he clocked a car during those four nights was 41 MPH, which is excessive for a residence but once again, he has no legal right to stop that vehicle. Cpl. Fike stated the speed bumps are very nicely design and he is very impressed with them, but the way they are designed and the closeness of their locations, they would hinder emergency services in travelling through that neighborhood to get from one side to the other. He stated that as he travelled through there on two different occasions each night, he had to come to almost a near stop to cross the speed bumps without damaging the tax payers’ patrol car because of the way they are designed. He reiterated that they are very nicely designed, but they would hinder an ambulance, fire truck or law enforcement vehicle responding to an emergency call in the area. Richard Collier asked if the Sheriff’s Department has no rights to issue citations or tickets except in extreme situations as Cpl. Fike referenced, what recourse do the residents have? Mr. Collier stated that we as the TRC, the County and the Planning Board are enforcing Subdivision laws to the best of our abilities and we set this up to be a public street and the last pin is that the paperwork was never taken to the DOT stating the roads were finished and requesting DOT acceptance. Cpl. Fike stated the Sheriff’s Department can legally enforce the laws of the State of North Carolina once the roads are taken over by NCDOT and are maintained by NCDOT regulatory signs. Richard Collier said that so up until that point whether they are public or private, in this case they own them and they are private, the Sheriff’s Department has no recourse. Cpl. Fike stated the Sheriff’s Department has no recourse other than DWI enforcement and Careless and Reckless Operation. Page 13 of 20 Richard Collier asked Cpl. Fike to clarify that if the County changed the roads from public to private, the Sheriff’s Department would still have no recourse and their speed limit and stop signs would still be meaningless even if they had 100 speed bumps. Cpl. Fike stated that the speed bumps will assist them in attempting to control and deal with what they perceive as people speeding through the neighborhood. Cpl. Fike again stated that during the 8 trips he made through Belle Meade over that four-night span, the fastest vehicle he clocked was travelling at 41 mph. He stated the biggest majority of the cars there were travelling between 27 mph and 34 mph. Richard Collier asked Cpl. Fike his opinion of what the speed limit should be on that street. Cpl. Fike stated the speed limit should be 25 MPH because of the residences. Tara Murphy asked Cpl Fike to confirm if the streets were presented to NCDOT for them to maintain that would allow the Sheriff’s Department the ability to assist the neighborhood by starting to ticket folks. Cpl. Fike confirmed Ms. Murphy’s statement and commented that once DOT takes over the roadway and installs their regulatory signs for speed limits, the Sheriff’s Department can actively enforce State law and issue citations. Tara Murphy stated the sheer fact that the Sheriff’s Department has been to the neighborhood so often, it does seem that the Sheriff’s Department is responding to their concerns. She said as a parent, she can certainly understand the need to keep the children of their neighborhood safe so it sounds like it might be a good thing to go ahead and formally request that the NCDOT take the roads over. She commented that it might alleviate some of the concerns she was hearing. Cpl. Fike stated that he couldn’t say whether it would or not, noting it is up to the residents. Matt Davis, New Hanover County Fire Marshal, stated that staff did go out and look at the speed bumps that were installed and based on our opinion, they would hinder the response of emergency service vehicles. He noted they are very concerned that additional speed reducing devices were put in without our approval, but as they stand now they are private roads so if they are private roads, they can do that. Mr. Davis said they could go back to the TRC and ask for private roads and say they are not going to put up gates, add additional speed bumps or allow onsite parking and the TRC may give them the okay providing they give the public access to the roads or they could turn the roads over to NCDOT for maintenance and have the Sheriff’s Department enforce traffic laws and go to NCDOT with the speed issue and request permission to install additional speed reducing devices under the new State law and turn them over to NCDOT. Mr. Davis stated that as long as they meet the NCDOT criteria, they would be allowed to do that, but there are some hoops they would have to jump through either way. Page 14 of 20 Mr. Davis stated that when TRC originally reviewed the plan, there were speed reducing devices such as roundabouts put in there and the TRC felt comfortable with that and that they were going to be public roads. When the residents appealed to the TRC, we heard about speed. The TRC offered the residents several avenues to address speed, but they chose to appeal and Mr. Davis stated he certainly understands that and it is there right to do so. Richard Collier stated that having the benefit of being on the board when Mr. DiGioia’s project came through, he can certainly sympathize with the residents because he doesn’t wasn’t people speeding through his neighborhood either and he now understands the deputy’s concern and better understands the Sheriff’s Department’s situation regarding enforcing laws on public and private streets. He noted that the intent from a public or private street from the Subdivision rules, the TRC, and hopefully the Ordinance in the way that it’s written, the County would like to have all the roads public because it is easier. That is because most homeowners associations do not want to maintain their streets. They don’t come in asking us to do things. They are coming in because they haven’t done anything so we usually are on the opposite side of this coin. Mr. Collier stated the County wants public streets so that they are properly maintained and the drainage is taken care of and those types of things. Public street designation also gives the Sheriff’s Department the ability to enforce that they don’t have with private streets. As stated by the applicant, re-platting the streets from public to private would have no adverse effect on connectivity is true as long as there are no gates put in place and there are no other devices put in to limit access through the street. Mr. Collier stated that nothing is changing, to leave it as a public street where they have the future ability to dedicate the street to NCDOT if they choose to do so. We aren’t taking that right away from you; however, if the streets go back to private, the residents will lose that right. Mr. Collier pointed out that if their speed bumps which were installed last Friday are not DOT standard speed bumps, they wouldn’t be able to get DOT to take the roads over. Mr. Collier stated if the subdivision came through TRC today requesting private streets and provided a litany of reasons why, the three conditions that would be on your plat would be: 1) no speed bumps; 2) no gates; and 3) no on-street parking. That’s what Mr. Davis was referring to. The County still wants the streets to act, even if they are private, private for public use because as we found out in another case recently, if we leave them as private and we come to connect on to them with the adjacent neighborhood three years from now, they’ll look at us with a lawsuit and say those are our roads; you can’t connect to them and you can’t drive across them even though there is a street stub to the right-of-way. Mr. Collier stated there are reasons for what we are are presenting and why we are presenting it, noting he would like to work out a solution. He stated he would not be in favor of going back to private streets. He stated his opinion in the TRC meeting and confirmed that he wouldn’t change his opinion. Mr. Collier said that the only thing he misstated in the meeting were that the streets were approved by NCDOT for public dedication, but the applicant is right, the dedication has not occurred. He confirmed that he misspoke that in the meeting; however, from the County’s and the TRC’s perspective, that is still a public street because it can and has the ability and was approved and watched in construction as being built to the public standards. Mr. Collier continued that it would be best in their case long term for the Belle Meade residents to still own the roads and maintain them. He stated he thinks the neighborhood is beautiful, the narrow streets are very nice and the roundabouts are really great and should limit speed and as stated during the TRC, he empathizes with the Page 15 of 20 residents if they have people speeding through their neighborhood. They should not be doing that. Mr. Collier stated it would be best to look at the speed bump options that Fire Services and the Sheriff’s Department could live with if you choose someday down the road to have your roads turned over to DOT and let them maintain them. He commented that may not be their choice from a paving scenario, but it is better for you long term. Mr. Collier asked if the speed bumps were slowing speeders down. Bill Hatcher, of 4232 Pine Hollow Road, stated the speed bumps have really helped a lot since they were installed on Friday and one of the main reasons they did that was the TRC suggested they put in some traffic calming devices on your own. Mr. Collier stated the TRC did state that they should put in some traffic calming devices “per NCDOT standards”. He explained the reason is for the Fire and Emergency Services and their trucks. Their trucks hopping over a little bump is quite different from a passenger car doing it particularly if your house is on fire or you need an ambulance coming to your home. Mr. Hatcher explained the group would like a solution between them and the County and they are willing to sign documentation that they will not gate the community. Mr. Hatcher stated that is not their intent and commented that their intent is to slow the traffic down and protect their children. He noted they have such narrow streets and the speed bumps are very effective, but if they could work with the County and preserve the safety of their families and the beauty of their neighborhood, that’s what they are about. Mr. Collier stated the board’s appreciation of Mr. Hatcher’s comments, commenting that neither the TRC nor the Planning Board want to negatively affect public safety; however we still need to make sure we aren’t setting any precedents for the rest of the County that says we’ll take all the streets back to private and then go gate them and then everyone is left locked out of each other’s neighborhoods. Mr. Collier stated that like Mr. Hatcher, he would rather have a solution. He asked Mr. Matt Davis if he knew of any speed humps, not speed bumps that may be permissible to NCDOT. Matt Davis stated that the NCDOT has a guideline that they use. They can contact Alan Pope with NCDOT and he can provide them with the guidelines or standards. He noted that basically, the law that the General Assembly passed said that the established homeowners association can put in approved speed reducing devices that are approved by NCDOT and they will recognize them. Mr. Davis stated that the speed reducing devices put in on Friday will not meet the NCDOT standards. He stated that Fire Services personnel like to see tabletops because it gives the emergency trucks time to level off so that they don’t tear up the front end of the vehicles. Mr. Davis stated that it’s really important to remember that even if you put in 100 speed bumps, if the roads are private, people can still speed and hit them as hard as they want to. He He noted that while he’d like to think speed reducing devices are the answer, they are really not the answer. Enforcement may be part of the answer and maybe roundabouts are also part of the answer or maybe some of all of it is the answer. Mr. Davis stated it is his opinion that the simplest solution is to go to NCDOT and request permission to install more speed reducing devices. If the answer is no, then you have a problem; however, if NCDOT says yes and suggests you install a tabletop Page 16 of 20 or maybe a jut out, which is another traffic calming device. If that plan was approved and the Homeowners Association was in agreement with it, they could turn the roads over to DOT, put in the speed reducing devices, have their enforcement, and have multiple layers to reduce the speed on the roads. Mr. Collier stated his belief that Mr. Mike Kozlosky of the Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Organization had provided them with the guidelines for the speed humps and stated his agreement with Mr. Davis that the best course is moving toward the department’s end and the streets being public streets because it relieves the homeowners of maintenance, but also provides them with the assurance of the public safety through the Fire Services, the Sheriff’s Department, and Emergency Medical Services access. Mr. Hayes asked in regard to the speeding and the security in the interim they were hoping that in 2008 there would have been a result that they could have dealt with if the devices had been put in by Atlantis. Mr. Hayes asked the Sheriff if in the interim they could photograph people using the alleyways which are private and going up on front lawns to avoid the speed humps. He acknowledged those are the 5% which are the extremes that need to be told and asked what they can do to address the issue and prove reckless driving. He stated he would love to have an answer for that because he hasn’t had one since he’s lived there. Cpl. Fike commented that the Sheriff’s Department does not address private property issues, but does patrol the public roadways. Matt DiGioia commented that when he was designing the roads, he had a recent conversation with Anthony Law, the head of the local NCDOT, and had to change the radius of the leg of the road that goes down to St. Andrews Drive to a 297’ radius because he would not approve any potential NCDOT road of under 35 miles per hour. He stated that with the idea of a community and an area wide speed limit of 25 MPH, he tried to preemptively force the NCDOT’s hand by reducing the radius so we can post an area wide speed limit of 25 MPH, but he couldn’t get the NCDOT to agree to it. Mr. DiGioia stated that secondarily, if you go back and review the approval of 2008, he wasn’t required to install any speed calming devices until he started to build out his shopping center. He has not because of the lack of retail development impacted the ingress/egress other than providing the interconnectivity. That being said, he noted he has placed more than one call to the NCDOT to find out what kind of traffic calming devices could be added to those roundabouts so he has been proactive in trying to find out what is acceptable to NCDOT. Mr. Collier asked for guidance from staff if it was an appropriate avenue for them to go back through the TRC with traffic calming devices leaving the roads platted as public. Chris O’Keefe stated the Planning Board doesn’t have the ability tonight to offer anything other than to either rule to support the TRC’s decision or to say that the TRC’s decision was was wrong. However, if the decision is to rule in support of the TRC’s decision after reviewing all the facts and specifications and say their assessment was accurate and correct, then the alternative would be for the homeowners to go back to TRC again with a new presentation. Mr. O’Keefe stated that Planning staff is willing to work with the homeowners on solutions. He noted the Sheriff’s Page 17 of 20 Department has been particularly responsive. He commented that he spoke with the Sheriff’s Department personally that day after the TRC meeting to inform them that 20 people had attended the TRC meeting and stated a problem with traffic in their neighborhood. Mr. O’Keefe asked for their assistance and they dispatched Cpl. Fike that evening, as well as other deputies since then. He commented that hopefully that is helping the situation. Mr. O’Keefe stated that staff will work with the homeowners group and try to guide them through adding traffic calming devices through the new DOT process, which was recommended by Mr. Burgess and the TRC. Mr. O’Keefe stated that board has to focus this decision on whether the TRC erred in making the determination that the roads are not private. Mr. Collier asked if the option was there for the applicant to withdraw their request and come back at a later date. Mr. O’Keefe stated he wasn’t sure what benefit there would be for the applicant to withdraw the request. Troy Barboza stated the speed bumps are already in, the homeowners association owns the roads now and the roads are private, and asked what more they can do if the roads are changed to public. Mr. Collier stated that the roads are public now because the plat was for public streets which requires the developer or HOA to request that they be included in the NCDOT road system. That has not occurred yet so today the rights-of-way sit in a plat as public; however they are not a true public street because you have to have the dedication to the NCDOT and the NCDOT must accept it so they are truly owned by the HOA for all intensive purposes and they are private at this moment. Mr. Hayes thanked Mr. Barboza for declaring the roads private and stated they accept that. Mr. Hayes stated that to answer Mr. Barboza’s question about the speed bumps, they have only been in since Friday. Even as the Sheriff has noted, Mr. Hayes said he found it scary to even think that some of the speeds averaged up to 31 MPH and commented commented that they could not imagine what they were prior to the speed bumps going in on Friday. After six days of data, it appears that they have stopped a considerable number of those. He stated they had heard that a few people in the neighborhood above Belle Meade on Pine Hollow Drive going east that may have complained about the speed bumps and his first reaction was they are probably the speeders because if they understood why we went to such extremes to put those in, which is to save the lives of our children and we will not stop until they are safe. Mr. Hayes said he will not say that they are 100% successful because they aren’t, but that’s why they’d like to work with the Sheriff’s Department and bring to justice those that are violating under any circumstances. He commented that no one should have the right to drive through your yard. He noted that the roads are 14’-15’ wide and the homes are only 14’-15’ from the roads. He told the board to prove to him another connector road in this County that has the traffic doing legitimately 55 mph when the homes are 15’ from that roadway. That’s the problem. They are right at our doorstep and they are going to kill one of our kids. Page 18 of 20 Mr. Barboza asked what more can they do. Mr. Hayes stated they could probably put some things on the sides to restrict the back alleys because those are strictly private. He stated they are doing this as they go along because we didn’t know the result, but we were hoping. He noted it has addressed some of the speeding, but it hasn’t addressed it to the degree that they’d like. Ms. Tara Murphy asked Mr. Hayes how the Sheriff’s Department can help them with the speeding issue. Mr. Hayes stated he doesn’t know so that’s why they are going to have a private conference with the Sheriff’s Department. Ms. Tara Murphy said it sounds like a situation where they need to formally request the dedication and the roads are taken over by the NCDOT and get good speed bumps in that are designed so that the safety vehicles can still have appropriate access. That sounds like more the win-win in order to preserve that safety. She noted they have a beautiful neighborhood and she understands completely, but in order to get that critical part of the Sheriff’s Office being able to enforce laws, they might really consider going ahead and making a formal dedication to DOT. Mr. Hayes stated they haven’t fully investigated that, but he must say those tabletops are located on the UNCW campus and they don’t stop anybody and really slow them down. He said maybe they are good for a fire truck, but they really do nothing for an automobile. He’s driven on the UNCW campus numerous times and watched people drive over them. He stated their speed bumps will force people to slow down, noting that some of the biggest violators are the UPS and FEDEX trucks, which travel 60 mph down that street. Mr. Collier stated they agree with Mr. Hayes that speed bumps will assist them in slowing down traffic, but they aren’t the total solution. Andy Heath made a motion to support the TRC’s decision to deny the appeal request by the Belle Meade Plantation Owners Association to re-designate the roads from public to private reason being the designation designation of the right-of-way, as the street is now it is basically a private street within a public right-of-way and the rights-of-way on both sides of it are public rights-of-way and he doesn’t see the benefit of taking a 1,000’ section in the middle of a collector street and changing the designation of it and possibly impacting the circulation of traffic. Mr. Collier asked Mr. Heath to clarify that his motion was to deny the appeal. Mr. Heath stated that was correct. Tara Murphy seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted 5-0 to support the TRC’s decision to deny the appeal request by Belle Meade Plantation Owners Association to re-designate the roads from public to private. Page 19 of 20 Mr. Collier stated for the record that the Planning Board, the County, and the TRC will certainly support the homeowners in working through the speed bump issues and trying to assist in reducing the speeders. Item 1: Election of Officers for FY 2010-2011 Mr. Collier stated the last item of business is the election of officers for Fiscal Year 2010-2011, which runs from August 1st through July 31st. Jane Daughtridge stated there is a standard process for the nomination and second for Chairman and Vice Chairman. Anyone currently serving on the board is eligible. After that, the board discusses the Chairmanship of the TRC because that designation is at the pleasure of the Chair keeping a link between the Planning Board and the TRC. Mr. Collier opened the floor for nominations for Chairman of the Planning Board. Tara Murphy nominated Richard Collier as Chairman of the Planning Board. Andy Heath seconded the nomination. No other nominations were made. The Board voted 5-0 to elect Richard Collier as Chairman of the New Hanover County Planning Board. Chairman Collier opened the floor for nominations for Vice Chairman of the Planning Board. Chairman Collier nominated Andy Heath as Vice Chairman of the Planning Board. Tara Murphy seconded the nomination. No other nominations were made. The Planning Board voted 5-0 to elect Andy Heath as Vice Chairman of the New Hanover County Planning Board. Chairman Collier stated that he is currently serving as Chairman of the TRC and while he enjoys that role, he would like for someone else to volunteer to take that responsibility. Jane Daughtridge explained that the Chairman of the TRC is an appointment by the Planning Board Chairman. It is actually the responsibility of the Planning Board Chairman, but is typically appointed to another board member who is willing to volunteer to serve. Chairman Collier stated he has expressed his desire for someone to volunteer to serve as the TRC Chairman, noting the TRC typically meets twice a month for 1-3 hours depending on the number of cases. The group hears subdivision projects, appeals to those, and other items and it will certainly help you as a member of the Planning Board. Chairman Collier asked for a volunteer. Tara Murphy volunteered to serve as TRC Chair if she can have a Man or Woman Friday in case she can’t make it to all of the meetings. Andy Heath stated he has substituted for Richard Collier on occasion and would certainly be willing to do that, but his travel time would probably prohibit him from doing that now. Page 20 of 20 Chairman Collier stated that usually when he can’t make it, he sends an email out to everyone on the board and to Sam Burgess asking for a volunteer. Any Planning Board member can serve as Chair for the meetings. Tara Murphy agreed to serve as TRC Chair for the FY2010-2011 and stated she is pleased to be serving. Chris O’Keefe thanked Richard Collier for serving as Acting Chair in the absence of former Chairman Jay Williams and recognized Mr. Williams, Sandy Spiers, and Sue Hayes for their service on the board. Mr. O’Keefe also thanked the three new members – Troy Barboza, Tamara Murphy, and Tara Murphy for agreeing to serve the County on the Planning Board. He stated he hopes it will be rewarding and interesting for the board members. Sam Burgess also congratulated the newest Planning Board Members and expressed his thanks to Richard Collier for his leadership as Chair of the TRC over the past few years. Richard Collier adjourned the meeting at 8:00 p.m. _______________________________________ Chris O’Keefe, Planning & Inspections Director