Loading...
Agenda 1999 07-12~~ AG E N DA -~ . G ,, ; ~~apHOYER C~ y~ P ry~. ~ 1 ~ ,, ~ ~ ~,# Ilw r _ 2 " N~~~ IMPO~E%P/ ~~ ~~ NORt111CP NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMIVIISSIONERS Courtroom 317, New Hanover County Judicial Building 316 Princess Street Wilmington, NC WILLIAM A. CASTER CHAIRMAN • ROBERTG. GREER VICE-CHAIRMAN BUZZ BIRZENIEKS, COMMISSIONER • TED DAVIS, JR., COMMISSIONER • CHARLES R. HOWELL, COMMISSIONER ALLEN O'NEAL, COUNTY MANAGER • WANDA COPLEY, COUNTY ATTORNEY • LUCIE F. HARRELL, CLERK TO THE BOARD July.,12, 1999 6:30 p.m. " i '-~ MEETING CALLED TO ORDER (Chairman William A. Caster) INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE NON-AGENDA ITEMS (Limit three minutes) APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ESTIMATED ITEMS OF BUSINESS , ' TIMES ." 6:40 p.m. 1. .Presentation of Resolution to Mrs. Barbara Schwartz for Outstanding "/' Contributions to Cape Fear Community College and the Community " 6:50 p.m. V"~~~ Update on Status of Contract with Corrvantis, Inc. ~00 p.m. 3. Presentation Concerning Drainage Problems in Gordon Woods Subdivision By Ms. Susan Gregory, Resident 7:10 p:m. 4. Presentation of Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing 7:20 p.m. 5. ~ Consideration of Resolution Supporting the Approval of the Wilmington Urban Area Transportation Plan 7:25 p.m. 6. -onsideration of Hazardous Materials Reporting Fees 7:35 p.m. ~. 7. Consideration. of Approval of Plan to Develop a New Federal Point VFD Station 7:40 p.m. 8. Consideration of Items Concerning Mason's Inlet 8.1 Public Hearin: Mason Inlet Relocation Project and Adoption of Final Assessment Resolution. 8.2 Capital Project Ordinance for Mason Inlet Relocation Project; Award of . Contract #99-0359 -ATM for Engineering and Consulting Services for the Mason Inlet Relocation Project . 9. Public Hearings: -~;' > ~5 p.rn. 9.1 Item 1: Zonin~Text Amendment -Request by staff to clarify the clustering of - Residential units on lands classified "Conservation" on the Land Classification Map. (A-289, 3/98; Revisited 4/99, 5/99, 6/99) PAGE NO. 1 3 7 9 11 23 43 59 99 8:20 p.m. ~ . 9.2 Item 2: Rezoning -Request by I~en Parker for Juanita Farrow and Minnie 103 ` Vowell to .rezone 8.5 acres.located in the 8300 block of Market Street, southeast .. Side, to B-2 from B=1 and'R-15 (Z-661, 6/99) •. e .. _ ,.y , 8:40 p.m. 9.3 Item 3: Rezoning -Request by Ken Parker for Hayes and Sandra Corbett to 107 Rezone 8.5 acres located in the 8800 b1'ock of Stephens Church'Road, northwest , . Side, to B'-2 from R-15. (Z-660, 6/99) _ ~. ". 9:00 p.m. , 9.4 .Item 4; Rezonins; -Request by David Barefoot for Courtney Wright to • 111 Rezone approximately 1.16 acres located in the 7000 block of Carolina Beach Road, west side, to B-2 from R-15. (Z-662, 6/99) , 9:15 p.m. 9.5 .Approximately 1.49 acres located in the 6200 block of Carolina Beach Road, 115 west side, from O&I to B-1. (Z-663, 6/99) 9:25 p.m. 9.6 Item 6: Rezoning -Request by Vera Wilson and June Gilbert to rezone 1`19 1.57 acres located in the 2600 block of Castle Hayne Road, west side, to O&I from R-20. (Z-664, 6/99) • ' ~' 9:35 p.m. 9.7 Item 7: Rezoning -Request by George Saunders to rezone 2.29 acres located 123 in the 8500 block of Market Street, southeast side; to B-2 from R-15.'(Z665, 6/99) ~ ' 9:40 p.In. 9.8 Item 8: Rezoning -Request by Leo Nowak for Billie Miller to rezone 127 approximately, 1.40 acres located in the 4900 block of CarolinaBeach Road, ~ !' east side, to B-2 from R-15. (Z-666, 6199) 9:45 p.m. . , • . 9.9 Item 9: Rezoning -Request by Leo Nowak for Robert Downing to rezone 7.4 131 acres located in the 4800 block of Carolina Beach Road, east side; ~to B-2 from R-15. (Z-667, 6/99) 10:00 p.m. 9.10 Item 10: Special use Permit -Request by Sherwin Cribb, RLS for Hill/Williams 135 Construction to build a 32 lot project south of Horne Road, west side of Carolina Beach Road. (S-442, 6/99) , . ,. ~'~ , 10:15 p.m. 9.11 Item 11: Rezoning -Request by Jim MacDonald for Stephen and Annette Ko111 139 to rezone approximately 1.4 acres located in the 5600 block of Carolina Beach Road, west side, to B-2 from R-P5. (Z-668, 6/99) 10:30 p.m. 10. 'Designation of Voting Delegate forthe N.C. Association of County 143' ' Commissioners 92"d Annual Conference in Asheville, NC, August 19-22, 1999 , . ,. 10:40 p.m. 11. Consideration of Resolution Requesting Elimination of Impact Fees 145 ' 10:45 p.m. 12. Consideration of Resolution Supporting Clean NC 2000 _ ~ 147 10:55 p.m. 14. Meeting of,the Water and Sewer District ~ 151 ADDITIONAL ITEMS County Commissioners ~ ~ ' County Attorney County Manager 11:15 p.m. ADJOURN • • • ' CONSENT AGENDA NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS July 12, 1999 ITEMS OF BUSINESS PAGE NO. 1. Approval of Minutes 157 2. Approval of Department of Aging application to Cape Fear Memorial 159 Foundation for grant monies of $21,250 to fund wellness program at Nutrition sites 3. Approval of Retired Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP) Grant for 1999- 2000. 171 4. Approval of Contract for Professional Services with UNCW for Tidal Creek 173 Quality Studies 5. Approval of Community Lead Poisoning/Healthy Home Initiative (CLPP/HHI) 183 mini grant -New Hanover County Health Department Health Homes Initiative 6. Approval of Budget Amendment #2000-01 192 MEETING OF THE WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT COURTROOM 317, NEW HANOVER COUNTY JUDICIAL BUILDING . 316 PRINCESS STREET WILMINGTON, NC July 12, 1999 6:30 P.M. ITEMS OF BUSINESS 1. NON-AGENDA ITEMS_ (limit three minutes) 151 2. Approval of Minutes 153 ~. ADJOURN J NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12/99 Regular Item #: 1 Estimated Time: Page Number: Department: Governing Body Presenter: William A. Caster, Chairman Contact: Lucie F. Harrell SUBJECT: Presentation of Resolution to Mrs. Barbara Schwartz for Outstanding Contributions to Cape Fear Community College and the Community BRIEF SUMMARY: Presentation of Resolution RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Adopt the Resolution. Chairman Caster, on behalf of the Board, will present it to Mrs. Schwartz. FUNDING SOURCE: ATTACHMENTS: Copy of Resolution ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW COUNTY MANAGER'S Ci Present Resolution to Mrs. OMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMEN'1•S: .COUNTY COMMISSIONERS , APPROVED C~- REJECTED 0 REMOVED O POSTPONED ~ HEARD O DATE , 1:~ I~Z ~ ~5~a~,~„ 0 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 0 Resolution Honoring Outstanding Contributions to Cape Fear Community College WHEREAS, Barbara Schwartz served as a trustee of Cape Fear Community College from 1977 until 1995 and $om 1997 to the present, at which time she served as Chairman of the Board ~ from 1984 until 1987; and ~ WHEREAS, Barbara Schwartz served as the College's "Legislative Liaison" for the North Carolina Association of Community College Trustees for several'years; and ~ WHEREAS, Barbara Schwartz's generosity has resulted in the formation of an endowed scholarship given in memory of her husband, Toe Schwartz, for future generations of students; and _J WHEREAS, Barbara Schwartz's dedication to the education of students has continued in ~ significant contributions of financial resources, time, and unending energy; and WHEREAS, Barbara Schwartz's leadership and dedication to the community for more than --'-~ two decades have been invaluable to the success and progress of Cape Fear Community College; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners extends its grateful appreciation and hereby recognizes Barbara Schwartz for her outstanding contributions to the community and to Cape Fear Community College. This the 12'~ day of July, 1999 William A. Caster, Chairman ~~,~:., ATTEST~~ ~~~f~~~ 4~~~'9~tz~. Clerk to the°Board ~ '. ~ .s.~ .. ~ r'~~ l NEW HANOUER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION ~~ Meeting Date: 07/12/99 Regular Item #: 2 Estimated Time; ..Page Number: Department: County Manager. Presenter: Board of Social Services ~ • Contact: Wayne Morris • ~ - SUBJECT: Update on Status of Contract with Corrvantis, Inc. BRIEF SUMMARY: The Board of Social Services met on June 8, 1999 to .review the request of Corrvantis, Inc. to amend the County's contract with Service Design Associates. An update of the meeting and current contract status a will be provided. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: FUNDING SOURCE: ATTACHMENTS: ~. . REVIEWED BY: LEGAL: NIA FINANCE: BUDGET: NIA HUMAN RESOURCES: N/A COUNTY MAGI COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: - Hear repo".._ RS' ~ • r COUNTY COMM1~S10~1~~ APPROVED D REJECTED ~ REMOVED ~ P05Ti'ONED CYO HEARD 2~9y _ (1998-99) Derrick R. Anderson,. Chairman Richard C. Snyder, Vice-Chairman Thomas E. Arthur Frances C. Castillo Sherman L. Griner NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF SOCIAL SERVICES ' 1..650 GREENFIELD STREET , ~P~ST•OFFICE DRAWER 159 WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1559 TELEPHONE (910) 341-4700 FAX (910) 341-4022 - ~ ' June 9, 1999 William A. Caster, Chairman New Hanover County Board of Commissioners 320. Chestnut Street ~ - . Wilmington, NC 28401 Dear Chairman Caster: ~~ The New Hanover County Board of Social Services met in special called session at '8:00 a.m: on June 8, 1999, to consider a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners on the .t operation of the Child Support Enforcement program in New Hanover County. Upon ~a joint motion by Sherman Lee Griner and Richard C. Snyder and a second by Thomas E. Arthur, the board voted unanimously to recommend that the program remain with Corrvantis and,that . Corrvantis' request for a change in the payment schedule be granted and the request for a change -in overhead calculations be .denied. .The complete recommendation including the Board's rationale is included in the enclosed memorandum. - '~ We appreciate the opportunity to carry out our statutory'duty of advising you on this important ,._ program. Sincerely, ~ ...,,~ '~~~" V r r. `-'~~ ~;*,;~De~Y ck~RK~-Anderson ale ~~,, Cha:irrnai~~~~~~, Enclosure .. ~ ' ,r~ 4~~, .. , ;~ L- MEMBER: NORTH CAROLINA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTYBOARDS OF SOCIAL SERVICES l~~Ell~I®R.~TI~UM TO: - New Hanover County Board of Commissioners -Chairman William A. Caster,,Vice- Chairman Robert G. Greer, Commissioner Buzz Birzenieks, Commissioner Ted Davis, Jr., Commissioner Charles. R. Howell FROM: New Hanover County Board of Social Services -Chairman Demck A. Anderson, Vice- ChairmanRichard C. Snyder, Thomas E. Arthur, Frances C. Castillo, Sherman Lee Criner DATE: June 8, 1999 RE; Child Support Enforcement The 1970's Social Security Act Title IV-D authorized Child Support Enforcement Program with the intent to collect child support from absent parents to~ offset public assistance. The New Hanover, County Commissioners designated the program,to be run by the New Hanover County Department of Social Services. In 1997 a new computer system (ACTS) was installed necessitating increased staffing if the program was to comply with federal guidelines. The New Hanover County Department of Social Services was informed by the New Hanover County Manager that approval of additional staff positions was }unlikely. The New Hanover County Board of Social Services began looking into alternative forms of 1 complying with federal guidelines and effectively providing the federally mandated service. ~. f At the New Hanover County Board of Social services Budget Retreat of March 6, 1998, Service Design Associates (SDA) made a presentation to takeover the Child Support Enforcement Program. As part of the negotiations, SDA agreed to hire the county child support staff at a twenty percent increase in salary, nearly double staffing and guarantee that New Hanover County would receive no less than $175,000.00 revenue over expenditures annually. As a condition precedent to transferring the program, SDA was to procure a performance bond. The three year contract was subsequently recommended by the New Hanover Board of Social Services and adopted by the New Hanover County Commissioners through September 30, 2001. Mr. Corriveau approached Wayne Moms, Director of New Hanover County Department of Social Services, in April of 1999 requesting to renegotiate or amend the contract. It was at this time the county discovered SDA/Corrvantis had not obtained the performance bond. Corrvantis is a company owned and operated by Dennis Corriveau who was formerly with SDA. Numerous questions quickly arose. as to whether or not there was a.valid contract with Corrvantis? Had Corrvantis breached the contract by not obtaining the. performance bond? Had New Hanover County waived Corrvantis' failure to obtain a performance bond? Was Corrvantis a viable company? Mr. Moms informed the New Hanover County, Commissioners of the situation at their May 3, -1999, meeting. You asked that we make a recommendation. _ Our board scheduled a meeting for May 13, 1999, and requested the attendance of Mr. Corriveau and members of his staff. Our board also requested that members of the New Hanover County Finance an New Hanover County Board of Commissioners June 8, 1999 .. ~j Page 2 of 2 Attorney's office attend. The meeting was conducted with the intent of gathering relevant and exhaustive information so as to make an informed recommendation to you. Exchanges of information continued to occur following that meetini;. ' Mr. Corriveau was given a specific deadline by which to provide financial records and t obtain a performance bond. These conditions have been met. Corrvantis is now in compliance with the contract ` and has stated'he will abideby the terms and conditions of the contract, although he may fiave to reassign some employees to other areas of the business. Mr. Corriveau is still interested in renegotiating the contract. Mr. Corriveau indicates that his company is not profitable because'of the diminishing welfare roles, which he did not properly account for in his business plan. The following is a summary ofthe current situation: y~. ~ ~ ~ ~ > 1. The year prior to the contract with SDA/Corrvantis, New Hanover County's cost for operating the program exceeded revenues by approximately $141;000.00. ~• 2. Corrvantis has remedied any bi•each.of the contract by procuring a performance bond. 3. ~' Current employees with Corrvantis (former employees of social services) indicate they do not wish to return as county`employees based on the county''pay schedules. 4. ~ Corrvantis ~is requesting a payment schedule to help hiss cash flow: ' 5. Corrvantis~ is requesting a reallocation of overhead expenses. ' 6. Corrvantis will abide by the terms of the contract but will reallocate employees to help with expenses. . 7. ~ ' At the end of one year Corrvantis is no longer under a obligation to reserve employment `~ for the former'employees of social services. ~ '' •~ ~. - - ~ . Our Board has looked hard at this situation keeping in mind two primary goals. First, we must`insure that an appropriate level of service is provided to~New Hanover County citizens. Second, if the first :condition is being met; then we should look to the most cost effective method of providing the service: We were also minaful that we not recommend any action to you that puts New Hanover County at risk ofbreaching the contract and providing Corrvantis with legal remedies against new Hanover County. Based on the above, our board recommends that the program remain with Corrvantis. Our board further recommends that'New Hanover County grant Corrvantis' request fora payment schedule but deny.the request for a reallocation of overhead: ~' Our position is that we have a valid contract with Corrvantis and he has an obligation to abide by its terms acid condition: It is our opinion thatathe granting of the payment .- schedule'doesnot materially alter the contract. Our Board will remain diligent in tracking the performance of Corrvantis to insure that the proper level of service is being provided. ~If in the future, our Board: discovers Corrvantis is not providing an acceptable level of service, we will revisit the"situation and notify you at once. The situation can be re-evaluated at that time. 6 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ~- ~ REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07/1.2/99 Regular Item #: 3 Estimated Time: Page Number: t Department: County Manager Presenter: Dave Weaver Contact: Dave Weaver SUBJECT: Presentation Concerning Drainage Problems in Gordon Woods Subdivision by Ms. Susan Gregory, Resident BRIEF SUMMARY: Ms. Susan Gregory, a resident of Gordon Woods, has requested an opportunity to .make a presentation to the Board concerning a drainage problem in Gordon Woods Subdivision in the Gordon Road area, as evidenced in the attached letter. County Engineering staff met with Ms. Gregory since the attached letter. was written. Staffs initial conclusion is that Gordon Woods is a low, flat area and that drainage ditches serving the area need maintenance. The county does not own or have responsibility for maintenance of these ditches. Existing developments are in compliance with County regulations. ' RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: The Board should listen to Ms. Gregory's presentation. . FUNDING SOURCE: NA ATTACHMENTS: ~ ' Letter REVIEWED BY: . LEGAL: NIA FINANCE: N1A BUDGET: N/A HUMAN RESOURCES: N/A COUNTY MANAGER'S COM E AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Hear Ms. Gregory's concerns COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS COMMENTS: rCOUNTY COMMISStO~lE1t~~ . APPROVED O REJECTED O REMOVED D POSTPONED ^ . HEARD ^ r DATE , --7IIZ ~~~~~ r. u 1 JUN-2~-99 M9N,11~~5 / ~• . . . June 2~, 1999 Chairman ~itl Caster - • . New Hanover County Commissioners ; Room 30S 320 Chestnut Street . W ilmington, NC 28401 .' ~ „ Dear Chairman Caster: ~ ~ . This letter is a request to be,l,~eard before the next Cernniissiore lYleetiz~g, July 12; 1999;" ,.Reg~rcling the drainage problem in Gordo- ~ ~ ~ • We have tried in vain to seek helm fram the cmu,nty en,8iheers, and realize n~ cane will take responsibility fvr out' c~ntinueus fl0®ding probietns. It appears we have n~ drainage regulations in New kIaz~e~ver Coutxty and we ara at a toss as tb what to. , d~ next_ We, as tax-paying cikizens ofRlew Hane~ver C®uzt,ty sh~utd have stirrie support and consideration with this pro~letrt, Since this cannot be made the developers responsibility and tfte county has no rasp®nsibility, (quite frankly, we Ei~ nut understand wliy ttie cou~~ty did nit plan and permit this development in a proper mat'u're', and/er will nit pernlit and plan ~ , . • surrounding developments correctly ~ order to prevent flooding hZ the Gordon Wo~~ds area. tide hgpe the can ~ ~n t_be agenda fir the~eld meetzng regarding cur prot~lem. ,. Respectfully, ~; C~~ _ J ~: ,~ Susan Gregory Residents of Gordon 17Voods ,_,~`. •c / J ;l ~~ nJ /~ >> ~ \ ~ ~ ,-; ~, . .. ~ Fax Note , X671 (Date ~' g ~~ ~ ~.J w'~ rv ~.a.~ : k ,' ~ 'Pyhone ~ ~+~4f~ ~' _ i ~~ yp gg ~~ qq+ ~~~Td+~l t~y7! Fax # pp (5,1( n Y ~~.. V V~ #~~..~ cc ~ ~ ~~~~ ~G p g ! d y~ ~ry p lYTti ~ Y Y ~ ~ + g Ap hone ~; `1 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ' REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12/99 Regular Item #: 4 Estimated Time: Page Number: Department: County Manager Presenter: Wes Beckner, BB&T Contact: Patricia A. Melvin SUBJECT: Presentation of Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing BRIEF SUMMARY: New Hanover County was required to conduct an analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing as a result of receiving $1.8 million in Disaster Recovery Initiative funding from HUD. In addition, HUD requires the submission of an Action Plan to address findings of impediments to fair housing. The required Analysis and Action Plan .has been completed. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Hear presentation. Accept analysis. Approve submission of action Plan to HUD. Provide direction to Team on implementation. FUNDING SOURCE: N/A ATTACHMENTS: The document is voluminous and will be distributed under seperate cover. REVIEWED BY: LEGAL: NIA FINANCE: N/A BUDGET: N/A HUMAN RESOURCES: N/A - COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Concur with motion recommended above. /„ ,~ - COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS: • rCOUNN COMMISSIONQ~S~~ APPROVED REJECTED REMOVED Q P4STPaNED ^ HEARD D II ~. ~ ~`~~I 1 p ,,~ ') ~, e~ Analysis of Impediments~to Fair Housing Choice _ - r Coun :October 30 X998 . for New Hanove ty • Executive Suinr~ary . • i °Introd~ction ~ • ;.. ~ .. ~ 'Title VIII of the Fair Housing Act declares, "It is the policy of the thlited States to • ~ , . - q .provide, tivithin Constitutioncrllimttations, for fair hotrszrag throughout the irTrrited Stcites. " The 1998 'Fair Housing Impediments Analysis for New Hanover County was initiated as • * • part _of the compliance for receiving grants from both the Department of Housing and' Urban Development (HUD) Disaster Recovery Initiative (DRI) program and the State of • ' North Carolina's Small Cities Block Grant Program. • { • . • The Impediments Analysis followed the guidelines recommended by HLTD. As part of its .,• ~ - ~ grantee certification; the County agreed that it would Af`tirmatively Further Fair Housing . (AFFH) by conducting an analysis of impediments to fair housing. choice, then develop an • 1 - "action" lan to take a ro riate actions at overcoming'the effects of the identified ' p pp p ~;' ~ I impediments. ~_ _ • ~ The responsibility for the Impediments Analysis was assigned to the New Hanover County Planning Department, which administers the County's Community Development Block• - Grant (CDBG) Program. The Analysis was completed with assistance from Ken Weeden ' { & Associates, Inc:, (KWA) Planning Consultants,.based in Wilmington. KWA has 1 ' ', prepared similar studies for numerous local governments in both North and South " , Carolina. The effort was 'also assisted by the New Hanover County Human Relations i ._ Department staff. Local input was very important to the validity of the Analysis. ~, Therefore, an extensive effort was made to obtain direct input from the community of • i large through a variety of methods, including: • Meeting with representative minod•ity real estate professionals; . 1 .,• ~ ~. J ~ -. ^wi d r f~ .. ., r • i :' ~z • o Discussions with the Executive Officer of the `Vilmington Regional ' Association of Realtors, (which covers all of New Hanover County); • ~ . Development and implementation of a Fair FIousing Survey, which.was • mailed to across-section of the New Hanover-Wilmington Housing and ` ~ . , . , Community Developmenf Agencies and Lending Institutions; ' ® Collecting and analyzing basic demographic data, land use policies, the County Zoning Ordinance and zoning map, relative to fair housing, and •: • .. ~ reviewing information on the County's Fair Housing Policies, and record • of Fair Housing complaints. • - :. ° • ~: •. . • A basic definition ~of Fair Housing is: .•~ .` The ability of persons regardless of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial statzrs, or national of~igin of similar income levels to hcn~e cn~ailable to them the scinae horsing choices. `' °` •_ II. Findings . • • ,~ ° There-does not appear to be any major impediments to fair housing stemming from ' ~_ " existing County policies and/or regulations. The major or significant identified impediments, relate to mortgage financing, and some elements of discrimination in bcrying ~• and selling. Below is a summary from the study. 1.. According to analysis of the Home Mortgage Disclosure-Act (HMDA) data for • ~~ ~ .199.6, dis grit and ire uit , in obtainin mort age: financing in eneral .from ' P Y ~ Y g g~ ~~ g ~ • ' ~ major lending institutions by ethnic minorities, is an impediment to Fair Housing •~ Choice in the New Hanover-Wilmington area. For example, in 1996 the loan . ~ . denial rates for all reporting lending institutions for all ethnic groups, was 20.7/0. 2 ~ ~. r ~, ~ However, the loan denial rates for black loan. applicants was 3-1.4%, 49.9% for ` . . , . ~: Hispanics; and 1.7.0% for whites. Ethnic minorities are more than twice as likely to be turned down for a mortgage loan, than whites. Among some individual lenders, ~ ~. "` the denial rate is as high as,100%. (Tables and graphsand lender-by-lender 'analysis are contained in the full report). 2. The low number"and percent of mortgage loans originating in census'tracts with greater thin 50% minority population, also indicates an impediment to ` ~ ~ ~ ~ Fair Housing Choice in the New Hanover County area. ~ ~` _ 3. Direct input from local minority real estate professionals, indicated,that there are " ~ ~ unfair practices in conducting property."appraisals and in providing home.. . _ ... owners insurance, relative fo minorities. ~ 4. Minority real estate professionals also expressed a belief that, although very subtle, ' . ~, • . "racial steerin " discriminato influence in buying and selling), does occur in g ~~ ry the New Hanover County-Wilmington area. ~ ~ . " ~ •" 5. ~ Comments and remarks from the survey indicate that some unfair housing ~ ~ , practices, which violate the 1988 Fair Housing provisions for disabled and - physically and mentally clzadlenged .persons ma_y also be taking place in the New Hanover-Wilmington area. ... 6. While. not "direct" impediments to Fair Housing, both the survey results and the demographic/income/housing markets overview, demonstrate that there is a " discrepancy between income levels and housing affordability. There is a need for r. _ ' more "affordable" housing in New 13anover County for low and moderate- income residents. _ ~ _ . , . - , . ... 3 l% fl J ~~ 'liable'of Contents ` Pale ` L Fair Housing Strategy: Introduction ..................................:. 2 A. Preface .....:....... ....... ................ .:....:....... _ 2 ~ . B. Purpose ............ .................:....:....... ............. 2 , C. Format ........... ......................................... .:.... 4 ' II. Summary of Impediments and Fair Housing Concerns ............. 5 , ' III. Fair Housing-Strategy: Action Plan .................:..:...... ~ ~ ~ 7 _ A. The°County's Response to the Analysis and Impediments ... 7 ' ., . . 1. Background and Introduction :. .......:.....:.......................... 7 ~ . _ 2. Fair Housing Action Plan; Strategy Development Process ....:.:.. 9 - B. Issues, Objectives, Implementation Actions (HUID's Suggested Format). 19 1. Protected Classes ......... ...................................... .... 19 2. 3 Land Use Zoning and Development Policies .................. MunicipaUCount Services 21 23 . . y ......................... , ................... 4.~ Location of Subsidized Housing..........: ...................... 24 . .. ° 5. Buying, Selling, Renting ............. ......... ............ ' 25 6. Advertising ............................. . ......................... 27 7. Housing Brokerage Service .............................................. 29 . 8. Lending ....:............................................................. .:.... 30 , 9: Supply ofAffordable Housing ..........:..... ........:... ..:.:.......... 30 10, ~ Economic/Income Barriers to Affordable Housing .............:.......:.. 34 ~~ C. Fair Housing Support: Coordination Infrastructure ......:.. 36 IV. Tune Tables for Achievement ................. .:......................:...............39 - - V. Summary; Priorities ...~ .........................:..............:......:.:.:..:.... 40 ~, I. FAIL H®USIh1G STRATEGY: INT'IZ®DUCTION A. Preface: ' ~ Through its Community Development programs, HUD's overall fair housing goal is ` ~ • to expand housing mobility, diversity, and to widen freedom of choice in housing decisions without regard to race, national origin, religion, familial status; or .' handicap. In developing this Fair Housing Action Plan, New Hanover County , .` shares that goal. ~ ., B. Purpose: . ;, . " ~ The first major activity in fair housing planning is to: "conduct an analysis, to - ' identify impediments to fair housing choice within the jurisdiction. " New Hanover." ' County, with the assistance of a consultant put forth sigrvficant effort to develop an • " ~ "Analysis of Impediments of Fair Housing .Choice." .This analysis was completed in y October-1998. The next major activity in fair housing planning is to develop ~, "actions" to overcome the effects of the identified impediments, i.e., a fair housing - ~ "action plan." .This is the County's Fair Housing Action Plan. HUD suggests that Y ~ the Fair Housing Action Plan be developed as part of the Consolidated Planning - • process for entitlement grant recipients and describe milestones, timetables and } measurable results for .each of the four (4) years following the completion or the .. update of the Analysis of Impediments. New Hanover County is not an entitlement . • recipient, but developed its Fair Housing Impediments Analysis in response to both receiving a Disaster Recovery Initiative (DRI) grant and as: an eligible recipient of ~ , Small Cities Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) fixnds, administered by the North Carolina Division of Community Assistance. ~~ p . _. '. 2 ~~ -J II. NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NC: SUMMARY OF IMPEDIMENTS AND FAIR HOUSING CONCERNS New Hanover County's Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice was completed in October, 1998. Below is an excerpt summarizing the major findings: There does not appear to be any major impediments to fair housing stemming from existing County policies'and/or regulations. The major or significant identified impediments, relate to mortgage financing, and some elements of discrimination in baying and selling. 1. According to analysis of the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data for 1996, disparity and inequity in obtaining mortgage financing, in general, from major lending institutions by ethnic minorities, is an impediment to Fair Housing Choice in the New Hanover-Wilmington area. For example, in 1996 the loan denial rates for all reporting lending institutions for all ethnic groups, was 20.7%. However, the loan denial rates for black loan applicants was 34.4%, 49.9% for Hispanics, and 17.0% for whites. Ethnic minorities are more than twice as likely to be turned down for a mortgage loan, than whites. Among some individual lenders, the denial rate is as high as 100%. (Tables and graphs and lender-by-lender analysis are contained in the full report). 2. The low number and percent of mortgage loans originating in census tracts with greater than 50% minority population, also indicates an impediment to Fair Housing Choice in the New Hanover County area. 3. Direct input from local minority real estate professionals, indicated that there are unfair practices in conducting property appraisals and in providing home owners insurance, relative to minorities. • 5 • • 4. Minority real estate professionals also expressed a belief that, although very subtle, "racial steering", (discriminatory influence in buying and selling), does occur in the New Hanover County-Wilmington area. 5. Comments and remarks from the survey indicate that some unfair housing practices, which violate the 1988 Fair Housing provisions for physically and mentally challenged persons may also be taking place in the New Hanover-Wilmngton area. 6. While not "direct" impediments to Fair Housing, both the survey results and the demographic/income/housing markets overview, demonstrate that there is a discrepancy between income levels and housing affordability. There is a need for more "affordable" housing in New I~anover County for low and anoderate income. residents. All of the above impediments were identified in the Analysis of Impediments, and would usually be the only ones addressed in this separate "Fair Housing Action Plan" for New Hanover County. However, New Hanover County officials, after reviewing the Analysis of Impediments, decided to take a different approach, which might be considered innovative. The County's response and it's process in developing the Action Plan,'is described in the following .section. r 6 ,-, III. FAIL HOUSING STRATEGY: ACTION PLAN A. The County's 12esponse to the Analysis and Impediments to Fair Housing Choice: (AI/FH): An Innovative Approach. 1. Background and Introduction When the draft of the AI/FH was delivered to the New Hanover County Planning Department, copies were also distributed for review to the County Managers office and the Director of Human Relations. Both the County Manager and the Human Relations Director were concerned about the presence of even relatively minor "impediments" in New Hanover County, compared perhaps to larger, more urbanized areas. Also, both were concerned . about the perception that any difficulties which impeded housing choice in a fair and equitable manner, whether in buying or selling, brokerage services or lending, renting or in obtaining insurance, were not isolated, but "community problems" which would require. "community solutions". s So, after consultation with the Chairman of the County Commissioners, the County Manager, and Human Relations Director agreed to put together a representative "Community-Wide" Fair Housing Task Force. This Task Force would be given the charge of reviewing, in detail, the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, and,developing appropriate local strategies. Eventually sixteen (16) county representatives were appointed. They met for the first time on March 19,1999. The sixteen members, which re-named themselves the "Fair Housing Coalition", included the following community representatives: 7 New Hanover County Fair Housing Coalition, 1999 Coalition Member Representative Race -Gender 1. City Exec. BB&T WM 2. Human Relations Housing Representative BM 3. County Commission, Chairman WM 4. African-American Real Estate Broker BF 5. City Exec. Nations-Bank WM 6. County Planning Director WM 7. City of Wilmington Community Development Director WM 8. Community Development Corp: Director BM 9. Pres. Of Black Chamber of Commerce BM 10: County Manager WM 11. President-Elect, Association of Realtors WF 12. City Exec. Wachovia Bank WM _ 13. Director, Human Relations BM 14 Pl i C lt t BM . ann ng onsu an 15. County Community Development Administrator BF . 16. Team Process Facilitator ~ ~ WM 17. Assistant Count.~~er BF W=white; ~=blaek; M=male; F'=fea-ale This team representing elected officials, lending institutions, real estate brokerage, the African-American community, and local government administration, met four times with the help of a "Process" Facilitator, between March 1999, and June 1999. 8 1, j 2. Fair Housing Action Plan; Strategy Development Process A. 1Vleetin~ Number 1: In their first meeting, members received an "Executive Surrunary" of the Impediments Analysis which was reviewed by the Consultant who helped develop the Report. The purpose of the initial meeting was, "to recognize and understand the nature of our fair housing problems and to develop strategies to reverse these issues. A corollary objective is to build some institutional stakeholders in assuming responsibility for bringing about change ". After much discussion, the Process Facilitator asked the team to develop a "Context Map"* to help more clearly define the problems. The six defusing elements of the Context Map were as follows: 1. Define Current State 2. Strengths of the Current state 3. Detene desired Future State 4. Barriers to Future State 5. Strategic Levers, ie. How to "bridge the gap" between Current and Future States 6. 1Vletrics, i.e. ineasureanents of success The results of the Context Map for the New Hanover County Fair Housing Action Plan, as stated by those present, is presented below. A. CURRENT STATE 1. Higher loan denial rates for minorities. 2. Development costs are going up and there are no incentives to develop affordable housing. *Developed by the VTA Group. , 9 3. Lack of education in financial Tanning. p 4. Not enough affordable housing or housing for those with special needs. 5. Causes of fair housing problems are complex. 6. Racial steering in properties. 7. Lack of diverse economic opportunities. 8. Few minorities employed in lending and housing brokerage. 9. Banks have active loan programs 10. Limited use of CDC by lenders B. STRENGTHS • 1. Forming of this team (the Coalition). 2. Growing and Diversifying Community; low interest rates; low unemployment. 3. Active programs in banks. 4. Timing right to .act, recognition of issues. C. FUTURE STATE: DESIRED 1. On-going education program, community outreach. 2. Equity in treatment. 3. Housing supply being available along income lines. 4. Property appraisals conducted the same for all. 5. Continued collaboration among housing professionals, government and community action groups. 6. Lenders aggressively seeking affordable housing loans. 10 .l 7. More disclosure of fair housing violation penalties. ' " ~ 8. , Fair housing no longer being an issue.. 9. Efforts to deal with land issues, i.e. incentives for the development of ~ housing for low and moderate income persons. D. BARRIERS . 1: Lack of education and awareness; lack of diversity training. 2. Lack of trust of lenders by minorities and~lack of success getting loans by~ minorities. 3. Discrimination. :. 4. Low "wealth concentration" of minorities; income disparity. E in the Ga STRATEGIC LEVERS (Brid ) ~ " . ~ ~ p 1. Develop an education strategy. . 2. Improve existing programs. 3. Include other stake holders. ,~ j ~ ~. METRIC: MEASUREMENT ., 1. Improved balance in loan denial rates. 2. Increased perception of fair treatment.. ' At the end of the first meeting members of the team were given full copies of the . ~ Impediments Analysis, and pre-set the agenda for the next meeting. _ ~ 11 r ,. -~ ' B. Meeting 1~lumber 2: The purpose of the .second meeting was defined as follows: ~~ "'~ l . Review the Fair Housing Impediments Analysis. • ~ ~ 2. List educational efforts already in place dealing with fair housing issues. . , ~ 3. Prioritize list of areas where fair housing issue education is Tacking. 4. List the next steps. 5. Volunteers to work on action teams. The majority of the discussion at the second meeting focused on developing an "education . . .component" of a Fair Housing Action Plan. The results are summarized below. , ~: •, 1. What educational activities are already in place? a. Human Relations Commission: Education on laws dealing with discrimination in the loan process - ; . ~ through: ~ .: . ". • ~ 1. Workshops , 2. Annual Seminar ~ ~ .,' ' ' ', 3. Video on Public Access TV • ~ . " ' ~ 4. Presentation to Organizations . ' b. Community Development Corporation •CDC~ " 1. Monthly home buyer's meetings . ~ 2. Housing Fairs • c. NationsBankBankAmerica " -, :; r; , ~~ r~ . 1. Fair lending. program 2. Consumer advocate 3. Internal counseling d. Real Estate Profession , . 1. Diversity training . 2. Where are educational gaps? . a. No good mechanism to get information to those who need it , ` ~ b. Need better communication systems . - c. Need a common group of programs. offered by banks and real estate professionals. d. Need to change perceptions of minorities toward lending institutions e. Need better marketing efforts. ~ , f. People tend to be "one-on-one" oriented in dealing with housing issues ' 3. What are our next steps? . ' a. Clarify what real estate.professionals, banks,'CDC and all those involved ` in the process do for the buyer, so it can be properly and clearly : - communicated, through: . ~ 1. Focus groups; and; ,~ ~ 2. Face to face meetings ~ , b: Determine the best ways to communicate information to the target. groups, e.g.; ~ ~ . 1. Through churches, - 2. Through community resource groups, ' 3. Bank displays at real estate offices; .. ~ ~ 4. Co-op advertising, ~ i 5. Develop a clearing house for information .. 13 ~~J ~.. 6. Bring both businesses and industry "to the table" (e.g., via incentive programs) 4. Team Volunteers (Two Teams: Clarification and Communication) a. Clarification of Information Team: (representation) African-American real estate professional Bank CRA rep. Bank City exec.(1) Pres.-Elect, Association of Realtors City Community Development Mgr. b. Communication Team Urban Consultant CDC Dir. Bank exec. Bank City exec. Human Relations Rep. County CDBG Administrator '~ The Coalition decided to draft "Charters" for the two sub-teams, at their next meeting, i.e., Meeting Number three. C. Meeting hTumber 3: At the third meeting, the Coalition members developed detailed Charters for the two sub-teams, i.e. Communication Team and Clarification Team, as follows: 1. Communication Team Charter Task: To communicate information dealing with fair housing to the public and the housing industry and also develop a plan for delivery of the information in a way that our desired outcomes are accomplished. Purpose: Due to common concerns about fairness in the housing market we ~~~ must make available relevant and reliable information about housing 14 n I • - to those that don't know about it and improve the quality of their. lives. . . Deliverables: 1 ~ 1- A report and action plan ~ ' 2- A monitoring system ' - 3- Documents containing Housing information ` 4- Establish a clearing house for the information .. 5- A mechanism to get information out to those that.need it. ~ ' (community outreach, new,releases, etc:) Measures of Success: 1-The housing market is "open" to those perceived to not have access to housing now. 2- There is improvement in the quantity and quality of community i h i i ~ ~ . on on ous ng ssues educat wide information and 3- There are higher rates of home. ownership 4- More minorities are serving in the real estate industry.. ' ~ Ground Rules: - 1- We will have planned agendas ' 2- Meetings will be facilitated. 3- Respect will be given to the opinions of others 4- Have food at every meeting ,. 5- Set time frames for every meeting and stick to them (begin and end on time) 6- -Every meeting will have an action list Time Lines: On-going (Will depend on feedback from the County Commissioners). ' ~ 15 ., 2. Clas°flfcateoss 'Yeasts ~lsas~es• ' ~ 'Yask: To facilitate an environment aimed at assisting both the customer . and financial institutions to identify the,product that best fits the . customers' needs. Pus°p®se: 7Co gain success in home ownership by enabling ill potential ' .. homeowners to be aware of financing programs available, and to , _ better understand loan application processes and debt management. ~' ~elives~bEes: - 1- A list of financial institutions, products, and government programs ~ . currently available for potential homebuyers including down t i paymen stance. , ass ~- 2- A list of affordable housing available" 3- A list of required documentation, process, and requirements for loan application . ~- A design for consumer credit counseling program with a list of . credit agencies. 5- An education process for banks and financial institutions on consumer needs. lYfeassss~es of ~sicccss: . " 1- A comprehensive list of information identified in the ' deliverables that will be useful in communicating the availability o~ resources. 2= Education of all participating members of the home buying process, i.e. the home buyer, the financial institutions, the • .government, the Realtors, and the sellers. - 16 "1 Ground Rules: 1- ,Meeting will be well attended ~ , " 2- We will need additional meetings 3- Participants will be dedicated Time Line: On-going-(Will depend on feedback from the County Commissioners) , After the charters were discussed, the Coalition decided; that prior to the fourth meeting, the consultants would draft the Fair Housing Action Plan, addressing all of the. Action Plan elements identified by the Coalition, as well as those elements required by HUD. The . Coalition also decided to continue its existence even beyond the completion of the Action _ _ Plan. Among the items designated for Meeting Number four were: 1.Review and agree on the Action Plan draft. 2. Plan how to present the Action Plan to the Commissioners. D. Meeting Number 4: ` At the fourth meeting, the Coalition reviewed and discussed a draft of the fair. housing action plan; agreed on a plan "how" to present the impediments analysis and action plan, to the County Commissioners; and, agreed on the draft of the Team Charters, developed in Meeting No. 3. The plan to present. the information to the County Commissioners was-determined as follows: 1. Present background of the impediments analysis document, the process of its - • origin, and the members of Fair Housing Coalition. (To be presented by the ` County Manager). - , `. . 17 . ') t, ., 2. Present the meeting process that the Coalition used; how it arrived at its current oint• and the results which have been achieved. o be resented p ~' P by a member of the Coalition).. . 3. Ask the Commissioners whether they approve the Action Plan. 4: Ask the Commissioners for direction on how to proceed after HUD reviews and accepts the Plan. 5. Ask the Commissioners if the Coalition should remain intact, i.e., continue. . 6. Ask the Commissioners what role will County agencies have in this process. 7. Ask the Commissioners for atime-frame for the Coalition's process. ,, ~. ;: B. Issues, Objectives, Implementation Actions; (According to HUD's suggested format). ,. ' ' ~ 1. Protected Classes: General ., a. Objective < . ' New Hanover County, consistent with its responsibilities as a grant recipient of Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery and/or HOME Funds, is committed to the eradication of ' discrimination and unfair treatment in the sale, rental, brokerage, °~ ' ' - appraisal, or the obtaining of financing, for housing, especially if based on race; color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, or . national,origin. Increased public education and community ` . awareness are foundational elements of this objective. b. Implementation Actions 1. New Hanover County already has an adopted Fair Housing Ordinance,.which is the administrative and enforcement responsibility of the County Human Relations Commission. Also, the County has established aommmunity-citizen's . "Fair Housing Coalition." Both the Commission and the. .~ . Coalition will be involved in implementing the Fair Housing Action Plan. 2. The County will utilize its existing broad network of cooperative relationships with an array of public and private entities--including tl the New Hanover County Human , T ~ Relations Commission, and the newly formed Fair Housing Coalition-- to promote public awareness and education ' i~ throughout the Wilmington-New Hanover County area 19 ~.. ') ..:. , ' - concerning Fair Housing obligations. Specifically, the ~ ` County Community Development Staffwill identify additional agencies and organizations (both public and • private), which could work with the Fair Housing Coalition, (FHC). 3. The FHC, which brought together many entities "to the .. ~ table," including Tenders, real estate professionals, citizens, and representatives of minority organizations, etc., will ~, continue to meet occasionally (meeting schedule to be determined), to review the progress of .developed goals and strategies on achieving fair housing and fair lending . objectives. ~ . 4. The New Hanover County Human Relations Commission, as a HUD substantially equivalent agency, will-continue to ' receive fair housing complaints and in cooperation with the Community Development Staff, assist in coordinating the . activities of the FHC. - • c. Time Table `. The FHC was established and became operational during the third . quarter of FY '99, and, with the permission and support-from the County Commissioners, will continue through FY 2000. d. Resources/Coordination The activities of the.FHC should be jointly coordinated by the CDBG Coordinator, staffrepresentative of the County Manager's office and - the Human Relations Commission staff. Other resources for coordination will include the Community Development Corporation, 20 ' f ~ , the North Carolina Black Chamber of Commerce, the Greater Wilmington Area Chamber of Commerce, and the Wilmington Regional Association of Realtors. 2. Land Use, Zonpng and Development Policies a. Objective Currently, zoning and other land use controls in the County do not appear to be discriminatory in terms of fair housing. New Hanover County intends to continue to assure that its local land development policies, including zoning, do not serve as impediments to fair housing opportunities. Instead, it is the intention of New Hanover County that land use controls be reviewed anal modified if legally feasible and necessary, to affirmatively further fair housing • opportunities. This objective shall not only include assurances prohibiting discrimination against members of protected classes, (including those with special housing needs), but also include actions to aid in the feasible development of "affordable" housing for the protected classes. b. Implementation Actions 1. The zoning ordinance and map will be reviewed by the CDBG and/or planning staffto determine if there are adequate amounts of land presently zoned for multifamily developments and/or "affordable" housing, in the County . 2. Initiate discussions with representatives of the local home- - building industry to mutually explore how modified land use . controls can truly serve to affirmatively further the 21 development of affordable housing. Some issues may include encouraging more new development in "flexible" zones with smaller square-foot minimum building requirements, (e.g. 5,000 S.F.), if water and sewer are available, reductions in minimal "yard" requirements, e.g., front yards, side yards, and rear yards. These actions. could reduce a developer's costs, thus lowering overall housing cost to low-and-moderate income purchasers. 3. Maintain the existing policy statements contained in the current City-County Land Use Plan, in future Land Use Plans for the County. Current policy statements, among other supportive elements, address the desire for a diversity of housing types and neighborhoods to be developed within New Hanover County. 4. The CD13G Administrator acid Human 1Zelations staff will conduct discussions with providers of "Special Needs" housing, i.e., for persons with handicaps and/or other disabilities, on how local development policies could better facilitate the development of housing for persons in this protected class. c. 'Tines Table Actions related to the review of zoning and land development policies will be initiated during the second quarter of Fiscal Year 2000. d. ltesoey rce/Coordination • 22 The CDBG Administrator and Human Relations staff will coordinate with other staff in the Planning Department as well as with representatives of appropriate "Special Needs" housing providers in the Wilmington-New Hanover County area. 3. Municipal/County Services a. Objective • From the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, it was determined that unequalization of municipaU county services was not an impediment in New Hanover County, since. the County does not provide a variety of "urban" type services. The impediments review showed that it is existing County policy to provide all of it services on an equal geographic basis. It is the County's intent to continually implement these policies so as to further promote the provision of and support of fair housing opportunities. b. Implementation Action . 1. Continue to implement policies on equal provision of municipaUcounty services in order to affirmatively further fair housing by helping provide necessary support services to . "affordable" housing developments, when feasible. c. Time Table Implementation of this policy is continuous and on-going. d. Resources/Coordination 23 • 4. Responsibility of service provision lies with several County departments. Whenever new "affordable" housing developments are proposed, the CDBG Administrator will coordinate with the appropriate County departments to help assure equal provision of all municipaUcounty services in anon-discriminatory manner. Location of Subsidized Housing a. Objective There are no conventional subsidized, or public housing located in New Hanover County. The City of Wilmington Housing Authority manages the area's public housing and also administers the Section 8 rental assistance payments program. These units are also concentrated within the City limits. If the development of subsidized housing becomes a possibility in New Hanover County, the County will assure that the location of such housing is not scrutinized by any "different" siting criteria or review process than for similar non- .subsidized housing developments. Each potential housing development site, whether subsidized or unsubsidized, is required to be evaluated according to the County's consistency review criteria, such as compliance with zoning and subdivision ordinances. As an .affirmative measure, however, it is further the intent of New Hanover County that the locations of subsidized housing not be unduly concentrated in low-income and/or minority areas. • b. Implementation Actions 1. The Fair Housing Coalition will concentrate its educationaUpublic awareness campaign on landlords and 24 C potential landlords for Section 8 rentals. The aim will be to increase their understanding of Fair Housing requirements. 2. During each year covered by this Fair Housing Action Plan, the County will continue to implement uniform site development/site location "consistency review" criteria, in a non-discriminatory manner. 3. Where the potential for new subsidized housing exists in the County, the review process should include input from the CDBG Administrator. 4. The CDBG Administrator will offer assistance to potential developers of subsidized (or "affordable") housing by helping to provide information on possible available development sites outside of existing minority and/or low-income concentrated areas. c. 'l'ime Table Implementation of this objective, including any necessary monitoring, or information/assistance to developers, will be continuous throughout the period covered by this Fair Housing.Action Plan. d. Resources/Coordination As necessary, the CDBG staff will coordinate with other Departments and other development review entities in County government. • 5. Buying, Selling, Renting 25 A a. Objective New Hanover County recognizes that many subtle factors of buying, selling, and renting of housing are "institutionalized" and that often this institutionalization is unfair or discriminatory. The County further recognizes that the subtlety of institutionalized practices are often not the result of malicious intent, but the result of ignorance of the fact that certain practices are actual violations of the fair housing law. Therefore, it is the intent of the County to increase overall public education and awareness of Fair Housing Laws and related practices, especially among landlords and homesellers. b. Implementation Actions 1. The Fair Housing Coalition, (FHC) will utilize acquired and/or developed brochures, pamphlets, posters, etc., (such as those used by the New Hanover Human Relations Department and the State Human Relations Commission) to be widely disseminated throughout the community. As noted in the first part of this Plan, the FHC will expand its representation to include other "stakeholders", such as landlords, representatives of handicapped housing agencies, and other human services delivery agencies. 2. Members of the expanded FHC will help educate their respective constituencies and/or organizations. This could include, for example, representatives from the Association of Realtors, property management agencies, and lenders' representatives. Also, individual members of the FHC may be available for presentations to civic and/or business • 26 organizations concerning the awareness of fair housing requirements. 3. Implementation of this objective will necessarily be in coordination with the implementation of other Fair Housing Action Plan objectives. (See•Objectives 1, 8 and 9): ~, - c. Time Table The activities of the Fair Housing Coalition (FHC), if sanctioned by the County Commissioners, will begin during the first quarter of the FY 2000 program year. ' d. Resource/Coordination d H i i R l i The CDBG Ad ff ill di strator an uman m n e at ons sta w coor nate • the activities of the FHC. • 6. Advertising - a. Objective. In the absence of proper education and public awareness of fair ' ~ ~ housing requirements, the County recognizes that it is quite possible ~~ . for some housing advertisements to contain overtly discriminatory ~ language. It is the intent of New Hanover County to identify all area . ~ - ~ media which advertises housing and housing availability in order to ~ inform them of the fair housing requirements, and to minimize and/or eliminate this factor as an impediment to Fair Housing Choice. b. Implementation Actions ~ ' ~ - 27 . I 1. The CDBG Administrator and Human Relations staff.(and the FI~C), will consult with HUD, if needed, in order to obtain information and examples of required and legally acceptable fair housing advertising language. „____. _-__.._ ~_----....__~_ ___-~__ ___ __.,- o____.,.._.~, .,_ limited to: local newspapers; TV stations; Shoppers; - entertainment magazines; the Association of Realtors; property management companies; and publishers of real estate publications. 3. .The CDBG Administrator and Human Relations staff (and - - the FHC), will, from time to time, monitor or.review housing advertisements (for rent especially), to look for ` - ' discriminatory elements; e.g., by race, religion, or against ~ families, or persons with disabilities/handicaps. Where ~ ~ ~~ ~ discriminatory language is detected, both the source of the . advertisement and representatives of the media source will be ~ ~ - i notified in writang of fair housing requirements. This ~ . notification may come from the County's CDBG I Administrator, Human Relations staff, or tl~e Chairperson of the Fair Housing Coalition (if one is selected). The New '~ Hanover County Human Relations Commission, as a HUD 'i ' ' i designated "Substantially Equivalent "agency, currently receives local Fair Housing complaints, and, like HUD, has ' the authority to adjudicate them: °~ ~ i . , i 28 •~ c. Time Table t Implementation of this objective will begin after the establishment of the FHC's general public awareness and community education activities. The advertising education/monitoring activities shall continue throughout the period covered by this Fair Housing Action Plana d. .Resources/Coordination Available resources for coordination include the County CDBG, Administrator, Human Relations staff ; NC Human Affairs ~ . Commission, the Wilmington Regional Association of Realtors, HUD's Division of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, and the County's Fair Housing Coalition (FHC). 7.. -Housing Brokerage Service . ~~ . a. ®bjective While the Analysis of Impediments did not indicate that the provision '. of housing brokerage service was a "direct" impediment, input from minority real estate professionals indicated some problems in this area. One problem appears to be "under-representation" of ~ minorities in the area's housing brokerage market, i.e., the real estate profession. Another problem relates to a lack of understanding and consistent implementation of Fair housing requirements in brokerage, appraisals, and in home insurance. i b. Implementation Action ~ 1. The CDBG administrator and FHC will meet with some of the, existing minority real estate representatives and other 29 I _ community representatives in the New Hanover County ' ~ market, along with officers of the Association of Realtors, to discuss ways to encourage more minority participation in~the real estate profession. c. Time Table Initial meeting to discuss minority representation in housing brokerage services will be held in the second quarter of FY 2000. 8. Lending , ~ . _ a. ®bjective . The following statement was presented as one of the major conclusions of the impediments fo fair housing choice:, "A parent unequal access to wort a e rnancin , p g g .f g ,~ from some lending institutions serving the New Hanover County-Wilmington .area indicates the presence of a very real impediment to fair housing ' choice for Ethnic Minorities: " (p. 41) ~ ` Some.other statements concerning lending, which were in the. ' _ .,.. impediments analysis were as follows: "With most lenders, though not all, Blacks have a significantly higher chance of being turned down for a mortgage loan than for Whites" (p. 40) . ,. 30 I i n The individual institutions total "percent of denial" rates for Black loan applicants ranged from a low of 0% to a high of 100.0% denials. This information was extrapolated from an analysis of the 1996 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (1=IMDA) data for the Wilmington- . New Hanover County MSA. Although the data does not indicate reasons for loan denials, the initial analysis leads the County to establish the following fair housing/fair lending objectives: i. Increase mortgage financing to minorities and low to moderate income families. ii. Increase loan origination in census tracts with greater than 50% minority concentration i iii. Attempt to discover reasons for disparities in mortgage loan approvals for minorities and low-moderate income persons, and begin to address those reasons. b. Implementation Actions 1. Make contact with and begin conducting meetings with all major mortgage lending institutions in the New Hanover ~ County area. Meetings will beheld to present results of the i impediments analysis, especially analysis of the HMDA data and to discover CRA products/activities. ~ I 2. The Fair Housing Coalition will enlist the aid of ~ . representatives of lending institutions in trying to identify ..I 31 some reasons for the racial and income disparity in mortgage loan approvals. The FHC will attempt to get the lenders to . work together as an informal "group," yet recognizing the diversity of the loan products, including CRA products. 3. Members of the FHC will work with the lenders to help . ~ identify and/or develop opportunities for increased home ' mortgage lending activity among minorities and low/moderate income persons in general, and in minority concentrated census tracts iri particular. It is highly likely that - many lending institutions may already have suitable loan products developed in response to the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), but which may not be widely • known among minorities and/or low-moderate-income persons. 4. The CDBG staff and the FHC will make an extra effort to disseminate information on CRA-type lenders' products into the minority and low-income community. This will include working with churches, civic groups, human service delivery agencies, such as the New Hanover County Community Action Agency, and neighborhood development agencies such as the local Community Development Corporations. ~ _ c. Time Table ~ i ' During the second quarter of FY 2000, initial contact will be made . with lending institutions and other cooperative agencies in order to j * ,. begin implementation of this objective. It is the implementation's .. _ intent that measurable results, i.e., increased number/percent of loan ~ I ~ i . i ,. . i 32 ~ . approvals, can be seen at the end of the first fiscal year covered by this Fair Housing Action Plan. 9. , Supply of Affordable Dousing a. Objective During the analysis of impediments, both the demographic and housing market analyses showed that the-issue of inadequate supply . of housing which is economically accessible to low and moderate . income persons, is a concern in New Hanover County. Therefore, • New Hanover County will adopt; as a major objective, the following: Increase the supply of affordable housing for citizens with low to moderate incomes. b. Im lementation Actions P . 1. The CDBG Administrator will research other successful . . models for developing new low and moderate income . ~ housing, (single family and multi family), from other cities. • 2. The FHC will assess these models, meet with local builders, . developers, lenders, etc., and try to determine their . i - applicability and feasibility for New„Hanover County. The FHC will recommend the most, suitable model- for implementation in New Hanover County. j 3. The County will work with both private for-profit and private i ,. . non-profit groups to help seek funding or leveraging i . 33 t i mechanisms , to help expand the supply of affordable housing m New Hanover County. 4. The County will seek financial resources to continue and/or . expand.the First Time Homebuyers assistance program, currently operated in the County by CDC's. This program appears to be quite successful. . c. Time 'Table ~ . Researching of existing models, i.e., ways to expand the supply of affordable housing in New Hanover. County, wall be initiated no .later than the fourth quarter of FY 2000. Meetings with selected local entities will begin no later than the beginning of the third quarter, FY 2000. d. Res®earces/C®®rdinati®n Different local governments.(both entitlement.and non~entitlement) communities, will be contacted for information on their housing development programs. - 10. Eton®mic/Inc®me 1$arriers fo Afff®rdable Dousing a. ~ ®bjective ,. . . ~ New Hanover County recognizes that in one sense, economics , i.e., . income, is the single most prohibitive barrier or "impediment" to anyone's housing choice. The need for overall Economic Development, especially continual diversification of its economic ~, base, is a ongoing issue in New Hanover County in general as well as in the City of Wilmington. j . 34 ,. • j Relative to fair housing choice, and general housing choice, it is the' County's aim to increase incomes for low and moderate income • persons through expanded economic development. , b. Implementation Actions 1. The CDBG Administrator will meet with various County and City economic development representatives to discuss and/or • ~ ~ mutually explore ways County CDBG programs might assist other economic development initiatives: ~ . .~ 2. The FHC may wish to meet with and coordinate some . economic development objectives with the recently formed "Partners for Economic Inclusion". c. Time Table ' Discussions with,various economic development representatives shall begin no later than the fourth quarter of FY 2000. d. 'Resources/Coordination ' Coordination agencies and/or representatives may include various , ~. public and private Economic Development entities. B. - Fair Housing Support: Coordination Infrastructure New Hanover County already has a firmly established Fair Housing "infrastructure" in place, both through existing public and private programs and activities. This - ` "infrastructure" is summarized below: . " a _ 1. Public .. , . ' a.. New Hanover County Human Relations Commission - _ In 1980, the New. Hanover County Board of Commissioners both adopted a . Fair Housing Ordinance and officially established the New Hanover County 'r ~ Human Relations Commission. The county's fair housingordinance was ^ ~ modeled after the federal law and is "substantially~equivalent" to.the federal ~' statutes.. The county's fair housing ordinance also set forth procedures for _. . . ~ the handling of fair housing discrimination complaints, i:e., throughthe Human Relations Commission. ~~ ,. . 'The County's Human Relations Commission conducts the following activities: education/outreach, intake, investigation, and administrative - ~ hearings. The Commission has a staff, headed by a Director, which :, . continuously conducts all of the above activities, as .well as conduct . ~ `- workshops and seminars on fair housing, fair employment, etc. The County, via, the Human Relations Commission, is committed to ensuring .that all ~ . - citizens are offered equal opportunity in~their right to attain safe, decent, __ _ sanitary and affordable housing: 'It is part of the Commission's goal to educate and inform the citizen's: of New Hanover about. fair housing rights. The Human Relations Commission also seeks to educate` and inform local . .businesses; including those involved in housing brokerage services, (real ' - ~ estate. offices, banks, landlords, etc.} about fair housinglaws and how to ~~ - prevent discrimination. .. ~~ .. 36 ~. ~, ~iK Summary New Hanover County's current profile of Fair Housing programs and activities, primarily through the well established County Human Relations Commission, and its Community Development programs, which are administered by the County Planning Department, and the newly formed Fair Housing Coalition, indicate the potential for on-going and future collaborative efforts between public entities, private entities, and advocacy groups. All of these entities have the potential to contribute to the County's overall. efforts to affirmatively further fair housing and effectively address identified impediments, through involvement in implementation of the County's "Fair Housing Action Plan" . 38 ~; 39 .J (ay g EW,. }Q. gyQy TK V p~y~ Ty C ~. • • AJ ~LYI IYHAII\ H • P~®~ E ~~1J' .~ ~. All of the issues and activities to be addressed in New Hanover County's Fair Housing Action Plan may be considered as "priorities." However, during the first year of the Action Plan, the following actions/activities shall be considered top priorities: A. , Establishment of the 1" air Housing Coalition, i.e., a coordinative relationship with other coflnnaunity entities. ~. ~ Addressing disparities in home mortgage lending, based on the Hl6'Ifl)A analysis. . C. C®ntinue, and seek to expand 1~'air Housing Education and Advareness activities. ' _ As stated in other portions of the Action Plan, each ,year the Plan will be evaluated. x I I 40 • • 7 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12/99 Regular Item #: 5 Estimated Time: Page Number: Department: County Manager Contact: Dave Weaver Presenter: Dave Weaver SUBJECT:' , Adoption of a Resolution Supporting the Approval of the Wilmington Urban Area Transportation Plan BRIEF SUMMARY: The Board has been requested by Mr. Robert F. Warwick with the Community Growth Planning Core Team to recommend approval of the Wilmington Urban Area Transportation Plan. The Plan will be reviewed by the Transportation Advisory Committee on July 15. If approved, the TAC's recommendation will be sent to all member jurisdictions for approval and then submitted to the State. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: The Board should approve the resolution. FUNDING SOURCE: NA ATTACHMENTS: WPWin 6.1 REVIEWED BY: LEGAL: NIA FINANCE: COUNTY MANA Recommend app BUDGET: NIA HUMAN RESOURCES: N/A TIONS: STONERS' • COUNTY COMMI~1 APPROVED (~~' REJECTED D ::~ REMOVED [] '' POSTPONED D ',, HEARn ^ ®ATE , --il-lZ ~~_ O~w 11 RESOLUTION ~ . OF THE NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WHEREAS, transportation issues of crowded streets and unsafe conditions rank among the top concerns of County residents; WHEREAS, the County's rapid population growth and the increasing draw of our community as a regional service acid trade center will exacerbate these issues; and WHEREAS, the Wilmington Urban Area Transportation Plan has been reviewed by the Community Growth Planning Core Team and discussed at three public forums throughout the County; ~~ NOW, THEREFORE, the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners approves the Wilmington Urban Area Transportation Plan and recommends that the Transportation Advisory Committee adopt it for eventual submittal to the State. , . Adopted July 12, 1999. Bill Caster, Chairman Board of Commissioners New Hanover County ATTEST: Lucie Harrell, Clerlc to the Board CYf CY+1l~~~''~1'>lll~'y~ 4J~ 9 ~.~r ~YY pp~qq ~`/~~ ^5 6„p ~~VC~ :~ 1 ' +'y 12 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ .± L,~'~ • C • June 8, 1999 Segment Team Members Community Growth Planning 1~~ 7 1 ,,-:;:, Enclosed herewith is a summary of the draff of the Wilmington Urban Area Transportation Plan that has been. reviewed by the Community Growth Planning Core Team. It will be discussed at public forums on Jug e 15 at Myrtie Grove Middle School at 7:00 p. m., June 16 c!t New Hanover High School at 7;00 p.m. and on June 22 at Leland Middle School at 7;00 p. m. The Wilmington Area TAC will meet to approve this Plan on July 15, 1999, We are asking your organization to promote the public forums concerning the Transportation Plan and to review the Plan. We are asking all of the organizations that have participated in our Community Growth Planning process to approve the Transportation Plan that is adopted by the TAC. As you are probably aware we had a Transportation Summit in Wilmington on May 26 at UNC-W. The Transportation Plan was discussed in depth at this Summit and various concepts regarding transportation were reviewed at the Summit. The Community Growth Planning Team wants to send our Transportation Plan to the North Carolina Department of Transportation with the endorsement of as many .organizations as possible. We are going to be going to the DOT and requesting additional funds for tL~.P~!~!m!n.a ~n ryr°ry `^~° ^°°~' v~~~r~ranrt`_ 1f your organization will pass a resolution approving the Transportation Plan to be adopted by the TAC on July 15, 1999, it will be of great help thus' when we qo to Raieic~h to present our Plan Thank a ~ f :.ar support. Yours very truly, ~~ ~~ l~~r~.~~ ~ R. F. Warwick, Chairman Community Growth Planning Team t_ 13 One Estell Lee Place ~ Wilmington, NC 28401 • Telephone 910.162.2611 TefeEax 910.762.9765 z ~ v a ~_ ~~< ~11~ 1 ~ ~ ,o~;, ~~~ ~~°' ~ ~~ ~~~~~00 cti O ,tt G, ~~ ' u~~ro.'.: ~ d E ~. ~ .~_'o ~ _'=~' `. ^~ ~~ , /~ O ~ ` ~y ` ~ V q0' • O O ~ • D O~ ~ ; • 1~ ? I O ! MoM • ~ P": o \ poo ~~ ~ ~ o ~ m ~o ZZ~ t7 • O O. 000 r7~^ ~. ~~'~' O= 1 O O 1~ V .gyp ^ .dp r /~ ~ t] Z '• ~ V a v a ~~ ~~~ ~...~, ate. ~ r ~ \ ~ ~ ~ ~,- - -- i--- -,, o°° °' °' ., p °° ~~ ~ ~ o p p `°~.,, , i ~Od SI O 0 NO^m 'e ,, 9 O dmfh d N • ~ONQ N M /J'IO ~com ~N~l 000 .. N \\ i 0 0 O h ch 7 Q' 0` ~ ~ .. ll Q ~ O. P(7 e N d N c7 p '. 000 =c7~ ~ ' p 1 , y ~ N o7 n a0 C6 ~ y ue \ \ a` • ~ 9 P7P~ O ~~ 'S 1~ ~~ ~ `~OOPOP ~ I~ ~ f 1~ m O 'O~~ Je' ~ a O00 / B O O ~ 1 1 000 1_ d NN0 ~ O Vld 1 ~ Vl Q~ - d W^ .~ y Q n 1 N d0 /! 41 ~ 1 ~ I ~ O Y I < ' 000 - ~ _ m } ~ OV ON j I O 0 - W ~ P< ~ ~ aw !~ O ~ n d OON I ~ ~J ONQ ~ ~ _, ~~ .. ~ r N c7 ~ J c7 (7 ~ p ~ ~a O v~'- iti O O O ~ `d7 ~~ w ' ~ o o ~ `_C~ ~ rn~^ ~ ~ - o 0 ~'"~ °O~n ~ oo °000 o mom ,. O a- d P ~ T ~?, 0 d p0, if1 an d O `J ~ vl h.~ u1' h .. O O ~ ~e ~On Nf`N 000 "J ~ \ md^ '. / OOm t M~ N dPd ~ l (h r M 1 G. ~' n a V O T a~ ~ ~~ 4~ /' I - // ~ e' ` /~ ~~ ~rt7 de aOOO' I ~ {' u^ 1 0 dNV1.' 1 '~ 1 ~ 000 r~m1~' ~/ O 1 P m<"J N 1 'I ~/ ~~ P O d 1 ~~ N O O a.,r ~' ~~~~- M ~ 1 7w1 vPi O n e -{ . "~~ ;~f~ J • ~1 ~ m d J~ ~ rn O o ~.,\ ~~ ~ '~ 1 t'1 w p O ~ $1 \ ~ th ~ O . ,r 1 v NOp ~ • s 1 'w ~ Ada ; • ~~ { ~ ~ ~, ~ S 6 / 7 // ~ OO ' ~ d ~ _ i ~ ~. ~' f o 0 ``~ ~ 1 .,, k ~ O ~ i f `~ ~ ~1\ ~, ~• ~ \ o Jr ~ ~~ 7 i ~ _ _' ~ ~ of ~ l . ~ tiN'M1 L r~ ••~ _~ \ { ~, ~A•• ` ~~ ~ H ~~ - _ r -_ - ~ %~ `o _ '+ - W _ ~~ ,. _ , _ _ ~ r ~.. a ~e o o ~~ _ ~. ..o.~ u~uMwAu d //II 1xo~oY~Rrw rw ~' • P ~ l~ r ...~. u~ao .\ _ _ a. ~~ ~ ~...~... ~ ~ . • ---- s ;~, 1 ',`,,' . ~...; ~ i[/ / / ~/ -~ ~ % ~/, .,: .' o` o. ,~ ;-~ < _. I <: / ri ,- ~. > ~ t. - _ ~~ l' _ .~ 4 ~ ~ _ o ~ I ~,< m~R ~~ ~ nY~ , / ~ `~ .r. ~~ j~J ~.~~.o ~~ ~ I, i i- I ., y ~. ~ ~ iCCHECDAIMENDED t WILMINGTQN NEW HANOVERCOUNTY BRUNSWICK COUNTY • NORTH CAROLINA ewroeru =nuuwnana 1 ~,.,.~,~.~. • 15 Abbreviated Summary: W~lmi~~gton Urban Area DraftTi~a~sportatiori -Plan 1999-2025. Prepared for: The Greater Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Organization June 4,1999 Prepared by: The City of Wilmington Transportation Planning 16 r:iements of the 1Jratt tsreater wiimington urC)an area transportation rlan Introduction The following information is an abbreviated summary of the recommendations of the draft 1999 Wilmington Urban Area Transproation Plan. The Greater Wilmington Urban Area has been growing very quickly. It is estimated that the urban area population will increase from approximately 150,000 people in 1997 to over 210,000 people in 2025. This growth will mean that the 660,000 daily trips handled by the transportation network will grow to over 1,000,000 daily trips in 2025. This Plan was created with the philosophy that a wide range of integrated transportation alternatives must be available to the residents of the Wilmington Urban Area to provide a safe and efficient transportation network. Bicycles Bicycles play an important role as part of the Wilmington Urban Area Transportation Plan. Bicycles provide riders with exercise, they do not pollute, and they are an entertaining and cost effective form of transportation. Bicycling has become a preferred method for visiting the tourist attractions in places as diverse as Washington DC and Nantucket. Certainly the Wilmington Urban Area with its many historic sites can achieve this type of success with the proper infrastructure- safe and accessible bicycling facilities. The University of North Carolina at Wilmington is also placing an increased emphasis on bicycle planning to meet the transportation needs of its students. The recommendations for the bicycle portion of this Plan call for the creation of a network of on road bicycle lanes and signed routes augmented by off-road bicycle paths to serve as both transportation and recreational facilities. Over 100 miles of roads in New Hanover County and approximately 20 miles of roads in Brunswick County are proposed for improvement in this Plan , to create a cycling network. The proposed improvements range from installing Share the Road signs and route identification signs to adding striped outside lanes or separate bike paths parallel to existing roads. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) TDM refers to a complex of measures designed to reduce the number of automobiles on the road particularly during the morning and afternoon peak hours. These measures include but are not limited to carpooling, vanpooling, park and ride, and flexible work hours. The draft Transportation Plan recommends a flexible program to implement these measures geared to the needs of individuals and employers in the Urban Area. The Federal Government provides tax incentives to employers that implement these measures. Another incentive for employers to participate in this program include reducing the need to provide employee parking, typically about $10,000 per space. Another, reason employers may want to participate in this program is that typically employees that participate in these programs are absent less often and they amve at work on time more often. It was calculated from examples of successful programs that in 2025 successful implementation of TDM could remove 23.000 vehicles per day from the Urban Area streets. These vehicles would primarily during rush hours. Unlike fixed route transit service TDM measures are not confined to any particular jurisdiction. A map showing the anticipated impact of TDM measures is attached. In order to establish a successful TDM program work must begin today to create the type of 17 participation in TDM that will positively impact the street network in 2025. The short range goal ~~ements of the liratt c7reater wiimington urnan Area transportation rian of the TDM program is to have 3 major employers participating in the program in the next three years. Ultimately it is anticipated that 10 major employers will participate in this program. The first step to implementing this strategy is to have a program coordinator in-place to explain the , program to prospective participating employers"and their employees and to handle administrative . . tasks such as grants to purchase vehicles. Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) provide motorists with advanced information on both recurring congestion (such as rush hour traffic or special events) and non-recurring congestion (traffic accidents and similar events) as well as advising them on the best travel route for specific purposes. This type of information maximizes the carrying capacity of streets while minim zing the individual motorists drive time, creating the most efficient use of the transportation, infrastructure. ITS is also one of the most cost effective measures possible to maximize the transportation systems efficiency. The following list of locations and technologies are recommended in this Plan. Dynamic Message Signs-Dynamic message signs may be remotely programmed to provide motorists with the .most current traffic information and detailed instructions on how to avoid congested areas. The following is a list~of recommended locations for dynamic message signs, US 17 Bypass I-40 ' Draw Bridges Oleander Drive Smith Creek Parkway College Road Additional Camera Locations-Traffic monitoring cameras provide the traffic operations center with real time information on traffic conditions so that appropriate change to signal timing may lie . made. These cameras also allow the monitoring of an area for traffic accidents. Fixed Route Public Transportation (Buses) Fixed Route Transit Service: Fixed route transit service provides the back bone of any public transportation system. Currently the Wilmington Transit Authority carves approximately 4,300 people a day ridership is currently generally limited to those who do not have access to.an automobile. Key Recommendation: One of the key recommendations of this plan is the unification of the New Hanover County Transportation System and the Wilmington Transit Authority. This proposal anticipates economies of scale for the operation of both systems maximizes the efficiency of their coordination. The University of North Carolina at Wilmington has recently recognized the benefits of transit service in preserving valuable space for growth by denying parking permits to. students who live within on-mile of campus. The policy should achieve rivo goals-reducing the number of v , automobiles on and around campus, and saving the land and funds needed to provide parking to 1 ~ students. The two routes added to meet the demand generated by this policy will significantly increase the WTA's ridership. -~ dements oz the liratt ureater wummgton urnan Area transportation rian This Plan recommends that the service be expanded for the urban area transit system to carry over 19,000 people a day. This goal can be achieved by expanding the existing transit network from 7 to 14 routes. There are several elements that can make a transit sv_ stem successful. A short discussion of some of these issues follows: Adequate Service: The transit system must provide service to locations that people wish to access especially their homes, work sites, shopping, and recreational facilities WHEN they wish to go there. Competitive Advantage: The public must erp ceive that a transit system has competitive advantages over the automobile. In reality fixed route transit service has several advantages over the automobile. Lower cost to the rider: The Wilmington Transit Authority charges $.75 per trip regardless of the trip length. The Automobile Association of America estimates that the average cost of operating an automobile is greater than $.30 per mile. This cost fluctuates with the price of gasoline. Less stress: The transit rider does not have the stress of driving in heavily congested conditions or finding a parking space. Reliability: Employers can find that transit increases their employee reliability because fixed schedules requires employees to arrive at a fixed time. Strategies for Success: Desirable and Acceptable: Raiding fixed route transit service must be viewed as desirable and acceptable to the general public. Service should be targeted to the general public who own automobiles as well as to those who do not have access to an automobile. This will require upgrading buses, bus stops, and vehicles. Operating Frequency: The service must operate frequently enough to serve the needs of persons making unplanned trips generally at least every thirty minutes. Cost of Service: Currently the WTA has an operating budget of $1,950,000. It is anticipated that if the service is upgraded'as recommended in this Plan that the cost of the service will rise to about $4,000,000 annually. Route Deviation Transit Service: Route Deviation Service provides more choices to riders. Route deviation service is usually performed by smaller vehicles. This service schedules the vehicles to arrive at a given point, such as a shopping center, at a given time. However; a route deviation vehicle does not follow a fixed route when traveling from point to point its route may vary to pick up passengers who call ahead of time along the way. This strategy provides transit service to a greater number of people and allows for the greatest possible flexibility in meeting their needs. It also lowers the cost of transit service to less heavily developed areas by eliminating the need to operate a separate van service in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. It is proposed that this service go into affect for Carolina Beach and Kure Beach as well as the unincorporated portions of New Hanover County. Brunswick County and the Brunswick. County municipalities located within the urban area should also strongly consider participating in this program. This service would probably require about $150,000 in subsidies annually. ~ 19 ~xements oz the lirart greater wummgton urnan Area •lransporcat~on rian Highway Proiects Providing an adequate road network that minimizes the impact to the natural and human ~ environments while providing the greatest number of route choices is the greatest challenge faced by this Plan. The street network is the skeleton that makes the alternative forms of land transportation such as Transportation Demand Management and bicycling possible, and certainly no bus system can be independent of the street network the buses use. The map at the end of this • section shows Thoroughfare Plan with the changes recommended in this document. ` The following list highlights the major road projects included in the Transportation Plan. Independence Boulevard (Randall Parkway to Smith Creek Parkway)-This project has.been included in all recent versions of the •urban area transportation plan: This connection completes a major north-south corridor from River Road in the south to Smith,Creek Parkway in the north. Southern Bridge-In the 1993 Pian this project extended from Independence Boulevard (formerly Titanium Road) across the Cape Fear River and up Eagle Island to an interchange with US 74/'76 at US 421. This Plan recommends that the southern terminus of the .project remain Independence Boulevard but that the western terminus be moved to the west and south of the towns of Belville and Leland ending an interchange with US 74/76 at the southern terminus of the Wilmington US 17 Bypass. The updated computer model determined that this recommendation would alleviate traffic on the bridges crossing the Cape Fear River. It is also in agreement with the 1998 Cape Fear River Corridor Study conducted by the 'City of Wilmington, New Hanover County, and Brunswick County: College Road-College Road and Oleander Intersection This intersection currently handles over 80,000 vehicles per day in 1999. It is anticipated that it will carry well over 110,000 vehicles per day in 2025. This crucial nexus will be unable to process this amount of traffic in its current configuration. It is therefore recommended that an interchange be constructed at the intersection of College Road and Oleander Drive. It is recommended that this be a single point urban interchange constructed on the west side of College Road to minimise the impacts in the vicinity of Wrightsville Avenue. It is also recommended that the elevations for this interchange begin prior to Wrightsville Avenue and that the ramp be constructed so that traffic on Wrightsville Avenue and Peachtree can proceed across College Road under the ramp. College Road Widening-Traffic volumes on College Road will grow from approximately 60,000 vehicles per day to about 80,000 vehicles per day in 2025, due to the lack of alternative routes it is recommended that College Road be widened to eight lanes. from I-40 to Shipyard Boulevard. Kerr Avenue-Ken Avenue Extension It is recommended that Kerr Avenue be extended from Peachtree Road to Oleander-Drive. This connection should be a right in right out only intersection with Oleander Drive. There should NOT be a' median cut of any type for this extension due to the proximity of the College and Oleander intersection. This facility would provide an alternative to Peachtree Road as an outlet for Ken Avenue. , • Ken Avenue Widening-It is recommended that the portion of Kerr Avenue between Smith Creek Parkway and Market Street be widened to alleviate congestion on Ken Avenue between the 2 0 commercial nodes along Market Street and Smith Creek Parkway. ~,tements of the lirart treater wummgton urnan area iransportanon rian Smith Creek Parkway-Smith Creek Parkway Interchanses Due to the high traffic volumes . anticipated on Smith Creek Parkway by the year 2025 it is recommended that interchanges be installed along Smith Creek Parkway at its at grade intersections with Kerr Avenue, College Road, and Market Street. US 17/Wilmington Bypass-Completion of this project as outlined in the 1993 Plan is a very high priority. Blue Clay Road Interchange-The 1986 Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan recommended an interchange between Blue Clay Road and the Wilmington Bypass. This interchange was removed from the 1993 Plan because of the proximity of the Blue Clay Road interchange to the Castle Havne Road interchange. The final location of the Wilmington Bypass makes an interchange with Blue Clav both feasible and desirable. Masonboro Loop Road/Pine Grove Road Corridor-Intersection of Holly Tree Road and Pine Grove Road This unique intersection presents a challenge to the motorist. The east bound motorist on Holly Tree Road attempting to turn left is easily confused by the islands in this intersection. In order to alleviate this confusion it is. recommended that a roundabout be installed at this location to eliminate the confusing set up of this intersection and the traffic signal. General Recommendations-It is also recommended that, as the warrants for traffic signals are met along the Pine Grove Road/Masonboro Loop Road corridor, the construction of roundabouts should be considered instead of traffic signals. This recommendation should be followed up wtih a study of the Masonboro Loop Road/Pine Grove Road corridor to determine the feasibility of retrofitting this comdor into amulti-lane boulevard with roundabouts acting as the primary traffic control device at intersections. • 21 22 C% • • NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date:- 07/12/99 Regular Item #: 6 Estimated Time: Page Number: Department: Emergency Management Presenter: Dan Summers, Steve Yandle, Member of the Local Emergency Planning Committee Contact: Dan Summers SUBJECT: Hazardous Materials Reporting Fees BRIEF SUMMARY: The Department of Emergency Management and the Hazardous Materials and Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) request the County Commissioners to enact an ordinance requiring facilities which store hazardous materials in the County to pay an annual reporting fee. The fee will support emergency response planning and programming for chemical and hazardous materials incidents. The Hazardous Materials and Emergency Planning Committee is a partnership of local business, industry, hospitals, governmental agencies and the general public sanctioned by the Department of Emergency Management and the Board of County Commissioners. The Hazardous Materials and Emergency Planning Committee has attached a resolution of support for the reporting fees. The hazardous materials to be reported and fees levied are based on the list of chemicals and quantities as required under the Superfund Amendments and Re-authorization Act (SARA Title III), North Carolina Right to Know State, .OSHA Process Safety Management and US EPA. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Recommend the County Commissioners approve the attached resolution and authorize the Department of Emergency Management to collect such fees to support the emergency planning and program effort. If the fee schedule is approved, the County Commissioners should approve related BA #00-0002. FUNDING SOURCE: Outside Sources ATTACHMENTS: Resolution from the Hazardous Materials and Emergency Planning Committee. Ordinance to amend chapter 6.7 of County Code to include Hazardous Materials Reporting Fee. Fee Schedule BA00-0002.w REVIEWED BY: LEGAL: N/A FINANCE: Approve Recommend approval. NERS' M BUDGET: Approve ND RECD HUMAN RESOURCES: N/ OVED f PON RI7 ~;=~; ..~ ~ ., 23 ~~ ~3A00-0002 wpd ~~ Page 1 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD. ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12/99 , .Budget Amendment DEPARTMENT: Emergency Management BUDGET AMENDMENT #: 00-0002 ADJUSTMENT DEBIT CREDIT' Hazardous Material Chemical Fee $15,000 Salaries and Wages ~ $15,000 EXPLANATION:•~To budget hazardous material reporting fees to fund a po f the Emergency Management Specialist position. APPROVAL STATUS: To be approved by Board Of Commissioners ~`~~~`"~ t~~101~ pP4R0~ED (~ ~~ 24 `R~ECTED ~ ~~h~~~„ ~~. REMOVES ~~~ ~ <~, ppS,TPONED d HEARD o ~t~ r ,,, -'~ 1 °~ ~1 '~ ~ lJ 1 ~i V HAZARDOUS MATERIAL AND EMERGENCY PLANNING COMtiIITTEE (S.A.R.A. Title III L.E.P.C.) P.O. BOX 1525 20 NORTH FOURTH STREET . WILIvffNGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1525 T TELEPHONE (910) 341-4300 FAY (910) 341-4299 EMERGENCY tifAitiAGE~SEN Whereas: New Hanover County has an active Local. Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) whose charge is to assist in preparing for, responding to, recovering from and mitigating the effects of a hazardous materials incident. Whereas: New Hanover County's Local Emergency Planning Committee is authorized to conduct its business under the Superfund Amendments and Re- Authorization Title III Act, North Carolina's Right to Know Statue, New Hanover County Resolution by the Board of Commissioners and New Hanover County's Department of Emergency Management Mission Statement and Ordinance. Whereas: The Local Emergency Planning Committee is a partnership of all local hazardous materials reporting facilities, public safety agencies, hospitals, governmental _ agencies, community environmental interest groups and the general public. Whereas: New Hanover County has been recognized as having an active Local Emergency Planning Committee committed to maintaining a safe community while supporting business and industry. Whereas: New Hanover County is in the top ten rated communities in the State of North Carolina for the most hazardous chemicals in storage or in process within the State. Whereas: New Hanover County has local businesses and industries who are mutually dedicated to sound emergency planning to protect the community, the environment and business operations. Local industries consider minimal annual reporting fees as a routine cost, whose proceeds are best utilized to support prudent local emergency planning. Whereas: New Hanover County's Department of Emergency Management has an eminent need to expand it's services to improve hazardous materials response planning, industry consultation, incident reporting, training, and community awareness. Whereas: New Hanover. County will be similar to many industrialized communities across the state and nation who collect hazardous materials reporting fees to support community emergency planning programs. • 25 _j ..~ 05/~3/A9 WED 11:35 Fr1X 910 341 4299 NHC E~ERG ~G~3T Be It Resolved: New Hanover County Department of Emergency Management and the Local Emergency Planning Committee by unanimous vote hereby request the New Hanover County Board of County Commissioners to. enact a local ordinance. The ordinance shall require reporting facilities to submit annually with their Tier 11 inventory a ,hazardous materials reporting fee. The fee schedule is attached and subject to review by the Local Emergency Planning Committee and the County every two years from the date of the ordinance. Those fees collected shall directly support the staffing, operations, equipment, supplies and programming effort for community emergency planning as authorized by the Director of the .New Hanover County Department of Emergency Management. - Signed, this day, Wednesday,- May 19, t 999 . by the. ,Chairman of fhe New Hanover County Local Emergency Planning Committee and Committee Members. . , ~ „ C~ oos Member Name- Agency/Organization ~ _ ~ ~ C `~ ~ " ~ 1 / , r ~~,_ Chairman ~ lC. ~i ~z~ zti~ -~ j~-~ ~.... ~- , Vice Chairman ivC~,1~~~sc~-- Cfl. ~;z~ ~~'vtiG`'~ ` ~.,`~.,-_~.~ C-.~ , ,Secretary ~~-4-~.J ~~.•~,,~a., ~ . ~L ~~ (~---- . q ' `--~='- ,/ ~~-l~~ ~ .. alt ~~ ~ ~~~" r2~ 5 (J ~~ 4 / L-=~ -~ ~ :v O f /fN ~~ ~/p'~ C~~L=fit. ~~-cT~'c ~, ~ f ,~w / MSZJ.J1.~o 7Y .CG' SG~/~ ' i~'~ ~ .~~.~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~s~/ ~ ~C.Y-0 Y~~ `.v./ .~~/Y /~-~v ~l C' 4' _ r I ~ ~ /~ /A' 2 6. /`~ -~ ' ~ \ -.) ~i • 3 Tier II Reporting Fees June 17, 1999 SARA Title III, Section 312, requires that the owners or operators of any facility that is required to prepare or have available a material safety data sheet (MSDS) for a hazardous chemical under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 must prepare and submit an emergency and hazardous chemical inventory form if the quantity of those hazardous chemicals present equals or exceeds established threshold reporting quantities. The chemical inventory form to be submitted is known as a Tier II report form. This form must be submitted by March 1 of each year. Governmental organizations including school system (s) are exempt from reporting fees. Governmental organizations are not excluded from reporting hazardous materials inventories for obvious emergency response concerns. The New Hanover County Department of Emergency Management and the Local Emergency Planning Committee have established fees for the purpose of supporting the activities required by SARA Title III. For example, the fee you owe depends upon the maximum amount of hazardous chemicals in your facility, at any one time during the calendar year. This reporting and fee structure corresponds to the federal and state reporting requirements. This means that even if you store hazardous chemicals for only one day, you still owe the full fee and must report annually. The facility fee rates are as follows: Category A: $300 for each facility that stores one million pounds or more of any single chemical at any one time during the previous calendar year. Tier II REF: Range Value 06-11 Category B: $150 for each facility that stores fewer than one million pounds of any single chemical at any one time during the previous calendar year. Tier II REF: Range Value Ol-OS Category C: $50 for each facility that stores, in underground storage tanks only, any single chemical at any one time during the previous calendar year. Tier II REF: Range Value 04-11 Attachments enclosed provide additional information on the federal requirements and reporting range values. • 27 ti !~~~=003 66.wpd~.r. ~.w .... _..-_.,._._.......-._.._ ... ..~.-...~..,..~. -.~..,.,,~.. ~..M..M..~_-,_w.~...w..........~...__........... ... Pag~.~~ .~ W~ - .,.~ ., AN ORDINANCE. OF THE ®R.~FT NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS The Board of Commissioners of New Hanover County, North Carolina, does hereby ordain that New Hanover County Code Chapter 6.7, Emergency Services. Proclamations. and Restrictions be amended by th_ e addition of a new article, to be designated Article V, Hazardous Materials Reporting Fee: , Article V, Hazardous Materials Reporting Fee Section 6.7-41 Fee. ' Any person or entity required by law to annually submit Tier II inventory of hazardous materials shall pay to New Hanover County the fees set forth in a schedule approved by the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners. Section 6.7-42 Fee Schedule Review. The Director of Emergency Management shall review the fee schedule every two (2) years and make recommendations to the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners as to any suggested alterations. Section 6.7-43 Fee Application. :~ Any fees collected pursuant to this Article shall be applied to support staffing, operations, equipment supplies, and programming efforts of the Director of Emergency Management resulting from and associated with New Hanover County hazardous materials reporting administration. Section 6.7-44 Enforcement. Failure to pay the fees required by this Article shall be enforceable by one or more of the following procedures: , Violations of this article may be punished as provided in G.S. 14-4, and each day's continuing violation is a separate and distinct offense. 2. This division may be enforced by any one (1) or more of the remedies authorized by G.S. 153A-123. - 3. For-any violation hereof, the Director of Emergency Management may issue a civil citation which subjects the offender to a civil penalty of Five Hundred ($500.00) Dollars to be 'recovered by the County in a civil action in the nature of a debt if the offender does not pay the penalty within twenty (20) days after being cited for the violation. 2 ~ Except as expressly amended above, Chapter 6.7 shall remain unaltered, in full force and effect. :~ 0 9466 vv d .~.~. w~ ~.. .~ _ ...~ ,, ,_,_...._. ~ p ~ ..~.. .~. _._. Page ~ ~. .~ - This the day of , 1999. [SEAL] ATTEST: Clerk to the Board • NEW HANOVER COUNTY William A. Caster, Chairman Board of Commissioners • 29 ~~i ,~ -- ~ . ~- Fee Schedule Information Attachment 1 Hazardous Materials Notification, Reporting and Recordkeeping Summary Source: Bureau of National Affairs ti 30 ~,' • No. 113 541:2001 Nt3TIFICATION, R.:e,~fl~'I'ING, ~~"~ It~,Ci3R~~~,r.~ING ~'~.~~~~~ ~,~~c~~~~~g. ~flt~f~-~g ~T~~~~ ~~~~i~~ 302 ~~3L~~°Y ~~1~3i= Facilities that use extremelyr hazardous substances or chemicals may be subject to Section 302 of the Emergency Planning and Communit~,~ Right-fio-know pct. The EHS chemical list includes a threshold plan- ning quantity for each substance. If this amount is present at. any manufacturing plant, warehouse, hospital, farm, small business, or other facility, the owner or operator must notify the state emergency response commission. This lets planners know what hazardous chemicals are being used and stored in your communi~j. Failure to comply with this provision could lead to penalties of up to $27,500 a day for each day the violation continues. Businesses were required to provide Section 302 notifications by Nlay 17, 19~r, o~ within SO gays after the facility first begins handling an extremely hazardous substance in excess of its TPQ. Federal facilities, are required to provide such notification by yIarch 3, 1994. AP~LlC~~'~t~~i ©F ~®Ll~~ J • How ~o Notify Notification should be in writing, and should spec- ifythe name and an accurate street address (not post cffice box number) of the facility. (See p. 591:1001 for the names and addresses of the state emergency re- sponse commissioners.) ~'ou do not have to notify the Environmental Protection Agency or the local com- mittee. This initial notification is required to be made only to the state emergency response commis- sion. EPA, however, has requested that the state commissions notify the appropriate EPA federal re- gional offices of the names and addresses of the facil- ities providing notification. Following that initial notification, however, if EPA makes additions to the EHS list, companies must notify the SEIZC and the local emergency plan- ning commission if they have a reportable quantity of the newly listed substance. That notification must be made within 60 days of EPA's listing. Businesses also must provide dual-notification within 60 days after they first begin handling the EHS in excess of its threshold planning quantity. Facilities that are covered by the law, because they have a listed chemical in sufficient quantity, but fail to notify their state commission face the possibility of substantial fines (See p. 551:4001 for a rundown of the penalties for non-compliance.) Calculating the threshold Planning Quantity To determine whether a facility has a'~reportable amount of an extremely hazardous substance that equals or exceeds the threshold planning quantity, the facilit,~ owner or operator must determine the total amount of the substance present at any one time. 2-6-9'1 Storage of the substance at several different areas of the same facility, the method of storage of the substance, or the number of containers the substance is stored in does not matter in making this determi- nation. The factor that determines whether the threshold planning ,quantity is met is the total amount of. the substance present. Calculating T'P'Qs far I`iliotures Note: EPA says that if a facility that produces, uses, or stores mixtures "knows or reasonably should know" the components of a nzi~ture (and at least one of those components is covered), they must notify the state commissio~i and participate in local emergency planning. Howe®er, EPA says the facility is not obligated to ask the manufac- turer about a mixture's components. To determine whether a sufficient amount to meet or exceed the TPQ for a listed substance is present, special attention should be given to mixtures. EPA adopted the so-called 1 percent de minimis limit of the extremely hazardous substance in mixtures, so- lutions, or formulations for determining quantities applicable to the threshold planning quantities. What this means is that at concentrations of less than 1 percent in a mixture, calculations are not necessary to determine if the total amount of the hazardous substance meets the emergency planning TPQ. EXAiVIP1,E: If the threshold planning quantity for a chemical on the list is 100 pounds and that chemical is 2 percent by weight of a mixture, notifi- cation would be necessary if 5,000 pounds or more of that mixture is present at a facility. Note: Alloys, amalgams, or polymers are not con- sidered mixtures by SPA for the purpose of TPQ Coyyright ~ 1997 by The Barean of National ?.Beira, inc. 0-87119-931-L97/$0+$1.00 ;~ Attachment 1 Page 1 31 ~',. `, ~~: :,~ 5~! i' ~Gi~' ~i~~TiF'i~ATiGi*T, REPOPs^1il~TG, A~i~J RLVO1lrljYll~tLPi~G calcuiaii~a io determine 2rrce; gency planning eligi- biliiy. also do not i0 carz,;'use the emergency planning notayicaticn req?.cirements wiitt the emergency re- lease noii~zcaticn requirement. Thera is no de minimis a~,cantity under either Section 103 of the Superfund law (Cn.i~sCL~l) or EPCRA Section 30.E (emergency release ncii~zcation}. YV-nen determining if notfzcaticn is required fer,a release of mixtures and solutions contWining extremely hazardous sub- stances or hazardous substances, E`PA applies the' weight percent calculations as illustrated in the ex- ample in this section. See p. 511:111 of t,~is guide for mixture rule under Section 103 of the Superfund law: ~alculati~g the TPA for solids Extremely hazardous substances that are solids are subject to either of two threshold planning quan- tities; 10;000 pounds cr 500 pounds as shown in the table of substances found in ~~ction X31:3001 of this guide. The lower quantity applies only if the solid exists in powdered foul, and has a particle size of less than 100 microns; or is handled in solution or in molten form; or meets the criteria for a National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) rating of 2, 3, or 4 for reactivity. If the solid does not meet any of the above criteria, it is subject to the 1fl,000 pound threshold. You can determine the 1G0 micron level by multi- plying the weight pe=cent cf solid with a particle size . less than 100 microns in a particular container by the quantity (weight) of solid in the container. N o. 113 Y:,u car. determine the amount of solid in solution by multiplying the weight percent of solid in solution in a particular container by the quantity (weight) of solution in the container. The amount of solid (weight) in molten form must be multiplied by 0.3 to find out if the lower threshold planning quantity is met. ~`acility Emergency coordinator Facilities that meet the criteria outlined above, in addition to, informing the state emergency response commission of this fact, also must designate a facili- ty representative to work ~-ith the local emergency planning committee. The company must notify the local planning committee of the designation of 'the facility `representative. Prrivic3ing ~fornaation ~'o Teo ~o~ninittees , The law gives broad information gathering powers to the local committees. The owner or operator of a facility is responsible for informing the local plan- ning committee of any changes occurring at the site that might be relevant to emergency planning.-The determination of what is relevant rests with the fa- cility owner or operator. Furthermore, the owner or operator; at the request of the local emergency plan- ning committee, must promptly provide the local corrimittee with any information necessary to devel- op or carry out the local emergency plan. Z_~ 2 - Right-To-Baow Planning Gnide 0-87179-931-1/97/$0+$1.60 24 ---~,., 1 Attachment :~1 Page 2 .~ -,; ,~ ,__ _,~~ No. 72 ,,; • ~. ~~1:2~t~1 NOTI~`ICATIOid, ~t.~POP'rING, ~'~D ~t~COP.D3~~Pi~`iG ~~.~a~~~~s ~~~~i~al I~ve~t~~~ ~,~~~~tl~~ ~~~~~ ~~ct~®~ 311/312 PflLI~'~ ~~i~~ Them are two ccmmunit~,~ right-to-know sections that require facilities to inform certain state and local entities about the presence and amounts of hazardous chemicals they keep on site: Section 311 and 312. Section 3i1 requires facilities that must prepare or have available material data safety sheets (MSDSi under Occupa- tional SafetT,~ and l~iealth Administration (OSHA) regulations to submit either copies of their 1~ISDSs or a list of chemicals for which an MSDS is available at the facility to: The local emergency planning committee. ®The state emergency response commission. ~ The local fire department. Because OShA defines a hazardous chemical as one that causes physical and/or health hazard, and because there are so many such chemicals in use today, there is no complete list of hazardous chemicals available. Under Section 311, any updates to MSDSs or lists of the documents are due within 90 days after the owner/operator of a facility is first required to prepare or have available an MSDS for a specific hazardous chemical under OSHA regulations. Also, if there is significant new information on an MSDS that was submit- ted previously, a revised MSDS must be submitted. EPA encourages facilities to submit lists of chenucals rather than MS~Ss. If you submit a list of chemicals, an MSDS for any chemical on the list must be submitted to the local planning committee upon the local planning committee's request. If you submit a list of chemicals rather than individual MSDSs: Include the chemical name or common name of the chemical and any hazardous component as provided on the MSDS. ~ Group the chemicals on the list according to-the five hazard categories defined by EPA (See p. 541:1001). The five categories were consolidated from the 23 physical and health hazard categories established under OSHA regulations. (See p. 531:4001 for the OSHA Hazard Communication Standard). Facilities that must submit MSDSs or lists of the documents to state and lccal groups under Section 311 also are required to submit chemical inventory information on those substances annually to the same groups under Section 312. Full text of the final EPA inventory reporting rule governing Section 311 and 312 requirements begins on p. 541:2511. A,~~~.IG~~'1®~ OF P~Ll~Y Who Must Report The OSHA Hazard Communication Standard ap- plies to all employers in both the manufacturing and non-manufacturing sectors. Any facility that is sub- ject to the OSHA standard also may be required to submit MSDS information under EPCRA Section 311 and chemical inventory information under EPCRA Section 312 if certain conditions are met. When EPCRA was enacied, only facilities within Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes 20-39 were required to comply withEPCRA Section 311. OSHA expanded coverage to all employers in a final rule issued August 24, 1987. Under the 1987 expansion, OSHA set staggered compliancy dates for manufacturers, non-manufac- 5-26-93 turers and the construction industry. In a final rule issued on July 26, 1990, EPA eliminated the stag- gered reporting and established a uniform reporting date for all industrial sectors required to submit re- ports under Sections 311 and 312. Therefore, Oct. 17, 1990, was the effective date for all industry groups to file material safety data sheets or chemical lists required under Section 311 with state and local agencies. March 1, 1991, is the effec- tive date for all industry segments to file chemical inventory reports (Tier I or Tier II) required under Section 312. Federal facilities were required to comply with EPCRA Sections 311/312 under a presidential order signed Aug. 3, 1993. Material safety data sheets are Copyright n 1993 hy'rhe Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. 0-3?1i9-931-1/93/$0+$1.00 Attachment 1 Page 3 3~ .~ _~-~' ~:.. ~. •,~, 541:2502 HOTiFICATION, REPORTI~iG, A1~D RECORDkEEPI~-G required to be submitted to state and Local agencies . by Aug. 3, 1994. The firsi year of compliance with EPCRA Section• 312 is 1994 with the reports due by March 1, 1995. Threshold Ileveis for Reporting EPCR.~ empowers the EPA administrator to set threshold quantities-for hazardous chemicals below which a facility would be exempt from Section 311's iY1SDS reporting requirements. Thresholds for reporting and iYISDS purposes are the same in sections 311 and 312. EPA had imposed aphase-in of the threshold lim- its for Section 311 MSDS submissions and Tier I inventory reports (see below) under Section 312. In the first and second years, a threshold of 10,000 pounds was used. In the third year the threshold was to have dropped to a permanent level of zero. How- ever, EPA's final rule 'kept the 10,000 pound thresh- old reporting level intact. The final rule became effec- tive on July 26, 1990. For chemicals on the list of extremely hazardous substances in Section 302 of the act, EPA said the reporting threshold is either 500 pounds or the threshold planning quantity listed for the substance, whichever is lower. NOTE.• The thresholds do not apply to requests for information made by the local planning committees. They can ask for information an any substances for which an 1VISDS is necessary regardless of quantities of those substances that a facility might ~ have on hand. ~.:~ Exempt Substances Regulations issued by OSHA and by EPA under EPCRA exempt some chemicals from reporting. The combined list of exemptions and exceptions follows: ®Any food or food additive, drug or cosmetic regu- lated by the Food and Drug administration. • Any substance to the extent it is used for person- al, family or household purposes, or is present in the same form and concentration as a product packaged for distribution and use by the general public: The term "form" refers to the packaging rather than the physical characteristics of the product. • Any substance to the extent it is used in a re- search laboratory or a hospital or other medical fa- cility under the direct supervision of a technically- qualified person. • Any substance to the°extent it is used~in routine agricultural operations or is a fertilizer held for sale by a retailer to the ultimate customer.. • Any hazardous waste as defined by the Solid Waste Disposal Act. " . • Tobacco or tobacco products. • Wood or wood products. ® Articles which are manufactured items. Such ar- ticles must meet athree-part test: they are formed to ~?~ No. 72. a specific shape or design during manufacture; they; have end use functions dependent in whole or in part upon the shape or design in end.use; and the~r do not release, or otherwise result in e:~posure to 'r~azardous chemicals under normal. conditions of use. t~Iigtures For mixtures of hazardous chemicals, you can sub- mit an MSDS for, or identify cn a list, each element or compound in the mixture vYhich is a hazardous chemical Or, you can submit an 1~ISDS for, or identi- fy on a list, the mixture itself. Under EPA regula- tions, if the mixture is reported as a single entity on an MSDS list, the hazardous components. do not have to be reported. If the element or compound option is selected, and is contained in more than one mixture, cnly one MSDS or listing is necessary. - NGTE: Whichever option is selected far, reporting mixtures under Section 311 also must be followed for Section 31~ inventory reporting "where practicable," according to EPA. Consistency in reporting may not always be possible; for example, the percentage of hazardous components, in a mixture may not be known. Section 312 Inventory R.eporti~sg The owner or operator of a facility required to submit an MSDS or list of chemicals under Section 311 also is subject to the provisions of Section, 312. Under Section 312, the owners/operators are re- quire>i to submit an emergency and hazardous chem- ical inventory form to the same three entities that received the MSDS or lists: the state emergency re- sponse commission, the local emergency planning committee, and' the local fire department. There are two reporting "tiers" under Section 312. According to EPA, states may require the submission .of only Tier II information or other state developed forms, provided all federal chemical inventory reporting re- quirements are met. Reporting EHSs €3n Tier Reports Determination of the need to report on EHSs must be based on the total amount of the EHS in all forms present at the facility. Section 312 requires that com- panies with mixtures containing EHSs must ago e- gate each substance, whether it is present as a mix- ture component or in its pure form. Aggregation of non-EHS hazardous chemicals is 'not. required. If a business has an EHS quantity that exceeds its appli- cable threshold (500 pounds or the threshold plan- ning quantity, whichever is lower)~notification is re- quired. Once the necessity of reporting has been estab- lished, the company has two choices in how it re- ports. The facility may either report the EHS sepa- rately as a component of one or several mixtures, or Right-To-Hnow Planning Gnide 0-&7179-931-1/93/$0+$1.00 Attachrn~nt 1 Page 4 so ,. { \_~ l j ,~ ., I Flo. ?2 HAA .DOE'S CzEI`~1IC_aZ I~iEiTTORY REPORTIi~1G ITN~i ER SECTiO~I 311/312 `~1:?~,03 ma~~ ept to report the EPIS by reporting the mix- tures. For example, if a company has five different mix- tures each containing 100 pounds of methyl mercap- tan (an EI'S) it may repor± either 500 pounds of methyl mercaptan (reporting by cernponer_t) or it may report the live mi°~tures separately. 'Pier i~ deporting Facilities that meet the threshold requirements must submit Tier I forms or comparable forms that each state may have developed to use in Lieu of the federal forms. Tier I contains aggregate information for each applicable hazard category including: • An estimate (in ~ anges) of the maximum amount of chemicals for each category present at the facility at any time during the preceding calendar year. s An estimate (in ranges) of the average daily amount of chemicals ~in each category. 9 The general location within the facility of the hazardous chemicals in each category. The form containing Tier I information (CPA's final Tier I form appears beginning nn p. 541:2551) must be submitted beginning March 1, 1988, and annually thereafter. This form will contain data pertaining to the preceding calendar year. On July 26, 1990, EPA modified the reporting form by changing the range codes used to report the maxi- mum amount of the chemical on-site to be consistent with those used for Section 313 reporting. The change to the range codes was not noted in the text of the Federal Ilegisier notice. Ties ~I ~e~®rting Tier II information 3naist be submitted only in re- sponse to a request from the local committee, the state commission, or the fire department with juris- diction over the facility. Tier II information is chem- ical-specific and more detailed with respect to loca- tion and manner of storage than the Tier I informa- tion. Tier II information that must be provided upon request includes: • The chemical name or the common name as indi- cated on the MSDS. ® An estimate (in ranges) of the maximum amount of the chemical present at any time during the pre- cedir_g calendar year. . ®A brief description of the manner of storage of the chiemica~. ® The location of the chemical at the facility. :4n indication of whether the o~-ner elects to withhold location information from disclosure to the public. Any person can ask the stag emergency response commission or the local emergency° planning com- mitteefor Tier II information from a specific faciiitrY relating to the preceding calendar year. If the information is in the possession of the state commission or the local committee, it must be pro- vided to the requestor. If the information is not in the possession of the state commission or the local committee that re- ceived the request, either of those entities must re- quest Tier II information from the facility concern- ing. chemicals stored in excess of 10,000 pounds at any time during the preceding calendar year. To obtain Tier II information on other chemicals at the facility, the requestor must submit a general statement explaining why the information is needed. The local emergency planning committee or state emergency response commission will evaluate the re- quest and decide whether to seek the information from the facility: ,If either of these panels asks for the information, you must provide it or risk penal- ties (see p. 551:4001 for a discussion of penalties). N©TE: All Tier II information obtained by a state commission ar a local committee is available to the public, including the person who requested the infor- mation. However, if the owner ar operator of a facil- ity requests it, location information an specific chem- icals will be withheld from public disclosure. EPA's final Tier ~I Earns appears beginning ®n p. 541:2575. Additi®nal Stata and Local ~,esguirement§ States and localities, under their own laws and ordinances, may require facility owners to submit information that is supplemental to the Section 311 and 312 requirements. EPCRA preserves their au- thority to do so. However, the form and content of any MSDS required from a facility owner or opera- tor under state or local law must be identical inform and content to the MSDS required under Section 311. For either MSDS or inventory reporting under Sec- tion 312, a state or local community may require the submission of additional sheets attached to the MSDS or inventory forms. EPA said the final inven- tory forms are to be considered uniform formats for reporting, but that state or local governments can include additional data requirements as they deem necessary. 8-26-93 Copyright ~ 1993 by'I~e Bureau of National Fairs, Inc. V 0-57179-931-L93/SO+S1.00 Attachment 1 Page 5 c .; - , ~ 1 _ ' . . ~~ 1 36 -Fee Schedule Information Attachment 2 Hazardous Materials ~ ~ . . E°A List of Extremely Hazardous Substances , Source: ~ :. Bureau of National Affairs ,~ . ^. -~ :s;~``± ~ E~~ 'RE~1Ei.Y-H;~~R~7®l3S $U~ST~~C;CS CAS CHEMICAL NAME TPQ -'`. CAS CHEMICAL NAME TPQ -. _..:..';; ~POUl~1DS`` # POUNDS 75-86.5 ACETONE CYANOHYDRIN _ 1,000• ~' 00141-88-2 DICROTOPHOS tOC 752-30-3 ACETONE TH10S@AICAABAZIDE ~ - 1,000,+... OtaBa-53-5 DIEPOXYBLfTANE `500 107-02-8 ACROLEIN 500 ':: ` ' 0087449-3 CiETHYLCNLOROPHOSPHATE 500 , 00079-08-1 ACAYLAMiDE _ 1,000+'.' , 000 7 7-83-8 gG(TOXIN 700 + 00107-t3-1 ACAYLONiTAILE ~ 10,000: 02238-075 DIGLYCIDYL ETNEA 1,000 00814-88~ ACRYLYL CHLORIDE tGO.:.. 20830-755 CiGOXIN t0 + 00 1 1 1-89-3 ADIPCNiTAILE 7000:. . OOtt5-26-4 pIMEFOX SCO 00115.08-0 ALDlG1R8 700'• .' 00 060. 5 1-5 CIMETHOATE 500 C03C9-CO-2 ALDRiN S00 + = 06923-22-4 3-{D(MEiFtOXY PHOSPHINYLOXY)•N- CC107-185 ALLYL ALCOHGL - ],000. ': ' METHYL-C,S CACTCN- AM(OE 00107-tt-9 ALLYLfV.1INE 500 '" (MONCCAOTOFHOS) tC 20859-73-8 ALUMINUM PHOSPHIDE 500 00075-78.5 DfMETHYLDfCHLOROSILANE 500 00054-g2-6 PMINOPTEAIN SCO + Ca057-ta7 DfMETFfYLHYDRAZINE t.oc0 00078-53-5 AMiTON 500' :' OOC49-98-9 DIMETHYL-p-PHENYLENEDIAMINE t0 + 03T4-97-2 AMffCN OXALATE 100 +" 02524-03-0 C4METHYL 0788441-7 AMMONIA, ANHYDROUS 500 ,: PHOSFHOACCHLORICOTHIOATE 500 00300-82-9 AMPHEi•AMINE 7.000. 00077.78.1 DIMETHYL SULFATE 500 00062-53-3 ANILINE 7.7'00 C0644-6d-a DIMETILAN S00 00088.05-7 ANILINE, 2,4,8-TRRAETHYL 500 00534.52-t a,S•DiNITRO-0-CRESOL t0 + 07783-70-2 ANTIMONY PENTAFLUCRIDE S00 0008&85-7 CiNOSEB 700 01397.84-0 ANTiA1YCINA 7,000 * 0;420-07.7 DINOTERB 500+ 00086-38-4 ANTU 500 * 00078-34-2 ~ DtCXATHION 500 Ot303-28-2 ARSENIC PENTOXIDE 700 + 00 08 2-88-8 DiPHACINONE 70 + 01327.53-3 ARSENOUS OXIDE 700 00752-16-9 CIPHOSPHORAMIDE.OCTAMETHYL• 700 07784.34-1 ARSENOUS TAICHLORIDE 500 00298-Oa-a C{SULFOTON 500 07784-d2-1 AAS3NE IQO 005 7 4 73-8 DfTH1AZAMINE IODIDE `_00 + 02842-71-9 AZINPHOS-El}{YL 700+ 0050 7-53-7 pITH1061URET 700+ 00085.50-0 AZINPHOS-METHYL 70 + 0037Ga2-7 EMETINE. DIHYCRCCHLORIOE t + 00098-87-3 BENZALCHLOAIDE S00 OOti5-29-7 ENDOSULFAN t0+ 00098-78-8 BENZENAMINE,3-(TRIFLUOR(XUETHYL} 500 02778-Oa•3 ENDOTHION 500 OC100-14-7 BENZENE,1-(CNLOROMETHYL)-a-NITRO- 500 + 00072.20 ENDAIN 500 0009&OS-5 BENZENEAASONIC ACID 10 + 00 7 06-89-8 EPICHLOROHYDFiIN 7.000 03615-21-2 BENZIMIDAZOLE, 4,5-DICHLORO-2- 02100.60.5 EPN tOC + (TRIFLUORGMAETHYL} S00 + 00050.74-6 ERGOCALCIFEAOL 7,000 00098-07-7 BENZOTRICHLOAIDE (BE.'•QOIC TRICNLORIDE) 700 00379.79-3 ERGOTAMINE TARTRATE 500 + 00100-44-7 BENZYL CHLORIDE 500 Ot 622.32;8 E7HANESULFONYL CHLORIDE. 2•CHLORO- 500 CO740-29-4 BENZYLCYNAIDE 500 70700-87-t ETHANOL, 7.2-DICHLORO-ACETATE 7,000 15277-47.7 BICYCLO(2,2,1)HEPTANE-2-CAABONITAILE, S- CO563-12.2 ETHION 7.000 CHLORO-8((((METHYLAMINO)CAABONYL) - - 73194-ae-4 ETHOPROPHOS 7.000 OXY)IMINO},(1S-{t-aiptta,2-bete,4-alpha, 00538-07.8 ETHYLBIS((2-CHLOROET7{`(L)AMINE 500 5-alpha,BE)} 500 + 00707-i5-3 ETHYLENEDIAMINE 70.000 OOt t t-44-4 BIS(2CHLOROETHYL)ETFiEA 70,000 00371.62-0 ETHYLENE FLUOROHYDRIN t0 00542-88-1 &S(CNLOROMETHYL)ETHER 700 00757-56-4 ETHYLENEIMiNE 500 0053407-6 BIS(CNLORCMETHYL) KETONE ~ t0 + 00075-27.8 ETHYLENE OXIDE 1,000 04044-85-9 B(TOSCANATE 500 + 'J0542.90-5 ETHYLTHIOCYANATE 10.000 10294-34-5 BORON TRICHLORIOE SCO 2222 4 9 2-6 FENAMIPHOS t0 + - 07637-07-2 BORON TAiFLUORIDE 500 OOt 15.90-3 FENSULFOTHION 500 353-42-4 BORONTRIFLUORIDECOMPOUND 04307.50-2 FLUENETIL 700 WITH METHYL ETHER (1:1) r,000 07782-at-a FLUORINE 500 772-56-7 BAOMADIOLONE - :. 00 + COSaO-79.7 FLUOROACETAMIDE (1087) 700 + .07725.95.8 BROMINE 500 001 x4-49-0 FLUOROACET[C ACID 10 + 01305.19-0 CADMIUM OXIDE `:700 ? 00359-06-8 FLUOROACETYL CHLORIDE t0 .02223-93-0 CAfkAfttM STEARATE : . 7',000 +: 00057.21-8 FLUOROURACiL 500 + 07778-44-1 CALCIUM ARSENATE ' SC0 ~ 00944-22-9 FONOFOS 500 00055-25-7 • CANTHARIDIN 100 * ~ 00050-00-0 FORMALDEHYDE 500 00051-83.2 CARBACHOL CHLORIDE ':500 ± ~ OOt07-16-4 FORMALDEHYDE CYANOHYDRIN 7,000 26419-73~ CARflAMlCAC70,METHYL-O-(((2,4-CIMEi•F{Yl.-1, 23422-53-9- .. FORMETANATEHYDROCHLORIDE 500+ 3-DfTHIOLAN-2-YLYviETHYLENE)AMINO)- : 100'+- .: 02540.82.7' FORMOTHION too 01563-66-2 CARBOFUAAN ~ - " ° t0 + 7 7702-5 7-7' FORMPARANATE 700 *. 00075-15.0 ., CARBON DISULFIDE ~ io;o0o :. 21548.32-3 FOSTHIETAN - Sao 00785.19 CAABOPHENOTHiON : !500 ; 03878-t9-t- FUBEAIDAZOLE too + . 00057-749 .CHLORDANE ` - 1:000 00110.00-9 :. FURAN 500 _ 00470.80-8 CHLORFENViNFOS 500 13450.90-3 GALLILM TRiCHLOAfDE '~ 500 + ' 07782-50-5 "CHLORINE (Not Muriatic Aad w Bleact`) too 00077-47-4 HEXACHLORCCYCLOPENTADIENE . -.. 700 24934-et-6 CHLORMEPHOS - - . sC0 Oa835-11=4 HEYAMEINYLENEDIAMINE, N,N'•DIBt1TYL :`: 500 -. - - 00989-81-5 . .:-'; C!-ILQRMEQUATCtiLORtDE ' ` = " tCO + --' 00302.07-2 HYORAZtNE' .. ~. 7.000 = 00079.71-e. . ' CNLOROACETiCACSD ' 1co + = : 00074-905 :'HYDROCYAMCACID .700 00107-073' CHLOROETHANOL , -:' ; ,. -" EGO 07647-Or•0 r HYDROGEN CHLORIOE (GAS ONLY) , 500 - .. 00627.11-2 . CliLOROETHYLCHLOROFORMATE - '7,000 ~ 07664-39.3 ~ - HYDRCGEN.FLUORIDE too 00555-77-1 TRIS(2-CHLOROE7H1'L)AMiNE _ _ ' 7G0 ' 07722.84-t : ' HYDROGEN PEAOX]DE (CONC. >52451 •I'. 7.000 - 00067-68.3 :.: CHLOROFORM .~ r; io,oeo ,-:::07783-07-5 '.- -"HYDROGENSELENIDE:- ,.-.' .: ."'. t0 00107.30-2` :::-CHLORCMETHYL METHYL ETHER' 'too ".:'07783-06-0 . ,'HYDROGEN SULFIDE :- ~ 500 031-35-8 :: CHLOROPHACiNONE :': - -:iCC + :` .`.00123.31-9 : HYDROOUINONE =': 500 ~' ::' .:. 01982-47-4 ."CHLOROXURON - :. S~;o + " _ 73083-405 `IRON: PENTACAR80NYL tdC 21923.23-9 ',' CHLORTHIOPHOS - `.500 00297-78-9 s ISOBENZAN: ' -. 700 + 1 002 5 73-7; . ;CHROMECCHLORIDE -:- __ t + '00078-82~J ISOBUTYRONfTRILE `. ', 7.000..: ' ;. 10210-88-?: :' COBALTCJIRBON'(L t0 + `00102-36-3 :`JSOCYANICACID,.. - . - 82207-7&5 COBALT,((2,2'{i,2-ETi-IANEDIYLEIS: - " 3 4-DICHLOROPHENYL ESTER :` SCO + - ITRILCMETHYUDYNE)) - - 00485T-~ ISOCRIN 700 - ~: _ OS{6-FL 'WROPHENCLATG)) 00055.97-a ' ISOFLUORPHATE s ta0 (2-}.N,M O O'} - tC0 + 04098-Zt -3 iSOPHORONE DIISOCYANATE . 100 - 004-86~ COLCHK:7NE 10 + 00108-Z;F ISOPROPYLCHLOROFOFMAic 7.000 00058-T21 COI1MAPtiCJS _ -100 OOt19-38 7 iSOPROPYUvtETHYLPYRAZOCYI ' :`05838.29.3 COUMATETRALYL 500 ~' DIMETHYLCARBAMATE 500 .. ~. 0009548-70ATH0-CRESOL , 5.000 +- 00078-97 T ~ .., ' LACrONiTRILE ,.000 .. ... 00535-89-7 `CRIMIDIFJE '.100'+.~ 27809-90-5 ; LEPTOPFiOS SJC 00123-73-9 E-CROTONALDEHYDE : i,ooo co54t-25-3 „ > LEwnStTE t0 04770-30-0 CSiOTONALI~HYGE 7.000 .. ;0005&29 9 . :...UNOANE 7.000+. ' ;: 00x6-68.3 4CYANCGEN BROMIGE 500 + 07580-67-8 'LITHIUM HYCRIDE tOC - . - OOx&78.5 = ::':CYANCGEN IODIDE 7,000 + 00 7 09-77-3: ; . MALONONITR(LE y0 ~.. , . 0253528-2 "CYANOPHOS ; ;•. 1,000 72706.13 3 MANGANESE- TRICAABONYL 00875/4-9 ;'CYANURICF7UORIDE `:100 ~ METHYLCYCLOPENTADIENYL 7oC _ 00088.81-9 ~: CYCLOHEX7MlDE :'~-. ~ •,. ~ .' ~ ~ 100 + . 00950-t0-7:: ,~ MEPHOSFOLAN ~ ~ 5•-'a 0010&91-8 , :: CYCLOHEXYLAMINE _ 70,000 07600.27-7 MERCURIC ACETATE ~:0 - 17702-41-9 .:: DECABCAAtQE(14) 500 ~ 07087-9a-1 MERCURIC CHLORIDE `~: 5.48-0 19.88-8 D>='A/ETON - - /ETON-S-).iTHYL YJC ~ ~C ~ _. 27908.53.2 .,, MERCURIC OXIDE 70076.95-6 MET}UICAOLEIN OIACETAT' ~ ~ ~' ` 3 7 0311-34-8 ' pA11FCR -• -: X00 +, .. -00760.93-0 METHACRYLIC ANHYDRIDE ~ 19287-4.5-T - ' pEORANE .. 700 00726•@8-7_ , METHACRYLONITAILE 00710.57.8 TAAN$-1;4-DICtiLORCBUTENE ~ 500 C092o-a8-'": i~ETHACAYLO'rLCHLOfaCf 100 0014&74.8 `: pCHIOflCMETHYLPHENYLSILANE , , `:f 7,000 • -' "' ., 06082.73-T pC?0.CflVOS 7.000 _ . ,~ eti - Attachment 2 Page 1 -1' • ;-, ~_ ,.f CAS CHE,Y9ICAL i~lAdiiE _. -.., : _ . _ .~-~. <..,. ~ _;..._ ,:: ;_ _ :.. TPQ - _• . .POUNDS .-'.: -:- : ,_:_:~ .; .CAS... ;.:#_ ~:-::.. CHEtvI ICAL NAME -~... TPQ POUNDS 3067430-7 METHACRYLOYLOXYETHYL - OOtST-50.8 POTASSIUM CYANIDE 100 ' 150CYANATE 100 00„QG61-5 POTASSIUM SILVER CYANIDE 5pp 10285-92~ .. MEIl-IAMIDOPHOS - -•. .. ....:..100'* 0253h37-0 PRCMECAAB - gyp.. 0455&25.8 METHANESULFONYL FLUORIDE 7,000 OOt06-96-7 PROPARGYL BROMIDE ; p 00950-37-8 METHIDATHION 500+- 00057.57.8 beta-PROPIOLACTONE. SOp 02032-85-7 METHIOCARB 500 + OOt07-72-0 PROPIONITAILE - ~0 18752-77-5 METHCMYL 500 + 00547.76-7 PROPIONITRItE, 3-CHLORO- 1,000 ' 00151-38-2 METH,OXYETHYLMERCUAICACETATE 500 + 00070.69-9 PROPIOPHENONE.aAMINO tCO. 00074-83-9 METHYL BROMIDE 7,000 ~t09-6t-5 PAOPYL CHLOROFORMATE - 500 ' OCCBC-d3 ? METHYL 2-CHLOROACRYLATE 500 0p07i56.9 PROPYLENE OXIDE 70,000 00079-22-t METHYL CHLOROFOF4~IATE SCO 0o07S55-8 PROPYLENEIMENE 70.000 00080-34-4 METHYL HYCRAZINE 500. 02275.78-5 PROTHOATE 700 = 0482483-8 METHYL ISOCYANATE 500 ~Jt29-~C-0 PYRENE 7,000 = 00558-81<3 METHYLISOTHICCYANATc SCO C4tap-76-7 PYRIDINE.2-METHYL-SVINYL 500 0007483-1 METHYL MERCAPTAN 500 00504245 PYRIDINE.a-AMINO 500 - 00502-39~ METHYLMEPCURIC DICYANAMIDE 500 + Ot 72433-o PYRIDINE,a-NITRO-,t•OXICE 5CA + 03735-23-7 METHYL PHENKAPTON SCO 53558-2St PYRIM(NIL 700 ~ ' 00876-97-i METHYLPHOSPONICDICHLORIDE 700 74767-t&t SALCOMINE 500- 00556-84-9 . ,METHYL THIOCYANATE 10,000 00707-44.8 SARIN t0 00075-79~ METHYLTRICtiLOR0.SILANE SCO 07783-00-8 SELENOUS ACID 7,000 + 00079-8d-d METHYL VINYL KETONE s0 07797•_3.3 SELENIUMOX`!CHLORIDE 500 Ot129-41-5 ).1ETOLCARB too* o056:r4t-7 SEMICARBAZIDEHYDROCNLORIDE 7.000- 07788-34-7 MEVINPHOS 500 03037-72-7 SILANE. (a-AMINO BUTYL) , 0031518-4 MEXACARBATE S00 + ~ DIETHOXYlAETHYL- '•.OOC 0005C-0'I-7 MITC;'v1YCIN C ~0 + 07637-89-2 SODIUM ARSENATE 7,000 - C8923-22~ MONOCROTOPHOS t0 + 0778415-5 SODIUM AASENITE 500 - 02763-981 MUSCIMOL ~ 1C.GC0 25628-22-8 SODIUM AZIOE (Na(N3)) - SCC OOSOS60-2 MUSTARD GAS 500 COt246S2. SODIUM CACODYLATE tCO - ' 13463-39.3 NICKEL CARBONYL t Cot a3-33-9 SODIUM CYANIDE (Na(CN)} tOC 00054 7 1-5 NICOTINE 700 OOC62-748 SODIUM FLUOROACETATE to - • 0006530-5 NICOTINE SULFATE 700+ 79470-Ot-0 SODIUM SELENATE toC • 07697-37-2 N17RIC AC10 7.000 ?0702.18-8 SODIUM SELENITE 700 - 10102-43-9 NITRIC OXIDE - 700 10102-20.2 SODIUM TELLURITE ', ~ 500 - 00098-953 NITFIO$ENZENE 70,000 00900-95-8 STANNANE. ACETOXYTRIPHENYL 500 - 01722-80-7 NITROCYCLOHEJCANE 500 00057.249 STRYCHNINE 700 - - 10102-44-0 NITROGEN DIOXIDE 700 00060-47.3 STRYCHNINE.SULFATE 700 -. 00051-75-2 NITROGEN MUSTARD t0 03689-245 SULFOTEP 500 00082-75-9 N-NITROSODIMETHYLAMINE 7,000. 0355357•? SULFOXIDE, 3=CNLUROPROPYL OCTYL • SCo 00997-42-4 NORBORMIDE 700+ 07as6-09-5 SULFUR DIOXIDE ~ 500 FMN-82-147 ORGANORHODiL;IV1 COMPLEX i0 * 07783-s0-0 SULFUR TEiRAFLUORIDE toe 00830-80-4 OUABAIN 100+ 07446-17-9 SULFUR TRIOXIDE tOC 23135-22-0 OXAMYL 100+ 0766493-9 SULFURIC ACID 7,000 00078-71-7 OXETANE,3,3-&S(CHLORCMETHYL} 500 00077-8t-6 TABULA t0 02497-07-6 OXYDISULFOTON 500 ~ 07783.84-a TELLURIUM HEXAFLUORIDE toC 10028-15-6 OZONE ~ ~ ~ ~ 700 00707.433 TEPP ~ 700 01970.42-5 PARAQVAT t0 + 1 307 7-79-9 TERBUFOS 700 0207450-2 PARAQUATMETHOSULFATE t0+ 00078.042 TETRAETHYLLEAD tOC 00058-38-2 PARATHION 100 W597-648 TETRAETHYLTIN tC0 00296.00-0 PARATHION-METHYL t0o+ o007S7a-t TETAAMETHYLLEAD ?Oo 12002-03.8' PARIS GREEN 500+ 00504.148 TETAANITROMETHANE ~ 500 1962422-7' PENTABORANE 500 70037-59.7 7HALUUMSULFATE tOC' 02570-28-5. PENTADECYLAMINE 700+ 06533-73-9 THALLOUS CARBONATE 700 - 00079-21-0 • . PEAACETIC ACID - Sp0 07797.72-0 •THALLOUS CHLORIDE :OC - 00594423 PEACHLORCMETHYLMERCAPTAN '. 500 02757-18.8 THALLOUS MALONATE tDC , . 00108-95-2 _ PHENOL ~ 500+ ~ 07an6-18-6 THALLOUS SULFATE tCO - 04478-68-0~ _ PHENOL,2,2'-THIOBIS 02237.57-a THIOCARBAZIDE 7.000 - (4~HLORO.6-METHYL-) 700+ _ 39795-18.4 7HIOFANOX too - 00064C0~ PHENOL.3-(1-METHYLETHYL) ~ 0024 7-9 7-2 Tr(ION,4ZIN 50^ - . -METHYLCARBAMATE - 500 + 00108.98.5 THIOPHENOL 5oC 00058.36.6. PHENOARSAZINE,10;10'-OXYDI-; 500 * . .. 0007379-6 THIOSEMICAABAZIDE '•0= - ' ' 00696-28~ PHENYL DICHLOROARSINE 500.:... 0534482-t THIOUREA, (2-CHLOAOPHENYL)- tCC - 00059-88-t: PHENYLHYDRA7JNE - ~ 0061478-8 . THIOUREA, (2•METHYLPHENYL)- Sc0 HYOROCHLOAIDE 1,000+ ,. 07550-aS0 : TITANIUMTE7RACHLORIDE to`= . 00062-38-4Y . PHENYLMERCURY ACETATE - - 500 + 00534-849 TOLUENE 2,4-0IISOCYANATE • _ 500 ' 0209 7-7 8-0'.-:: - PHENYLSILATPANE - 700 +..- ~.•:~ 00097.08 7 ' TOLUENE 2,6-DIISOCYANATE 7C~ 00103-65 5'`=`: PHENYLTHIOUREA ' too + 08007,•35.2 TOXAPHENE ~ ' ~ - • 00298-02-2; PHORATE :".: ;':: r ;~. ?; 10. _•;. 07031.47-6 : TAIAMtPHOS _ ;'- - _. . :500 -., .. 0410414 7-S. . .PHOSACETRA <`.:: ; -__-. - - 700 * 2a0tZ~s7-6' , _: - . -:.TRIAZOFOS _ -.SOr 00947-02-4 `- PHO.SFOLAN - - ioo ` _ 00077`02 8 '.TRICHLOROACETYL0HLORIDE ` ,5~`~ .- 00075-44-5 ".PHOSGENE to `07558.254 :TAICHCORO(CHLOROMETHYL),SILAN ='7 00732-11-6 =. .PHOSMET _ t0 - Q713Z-8S5 ~:TRICHLOAO(OICHLOROPHENYL)SIL4NE -50r` 1 31 71-21-6:> PHOSPHAMIDON .CO ~ 0077521 9 `"TRICHLOAOETHYLSILANE - - -5 0 07803-51 7 " PHOSPHINE ''~ r •-~ 4.0- ' r 00327-98-0 'TRICHLORONATE' - --•0~ " 02685.307 . PHOSPHONOTHlOICACID,METHYL,O- ` .00098-73-5 'TRICHLOROPHENYLSiLANE ~ ;50 :- (4-NITROPHENOL)o-PHENYLESTER ~co 00998-30-1 TRIETHOXYSILANE~-;_ `_ -~ .50782-88 9 ~ PHOSPHONOTHIOIC'AGD; METHYLz;S-(2 -' -' -;0007577 4 '- TRIMETNYLCHLOROS~LANE <=. 1;000 - ,, {BIS(t-METHYL ETHYL~INO) ' ' `' " : - 00824-tt 3 . TRIMETHYLOLPROPANE PHOSPHITE 10'' _„: . ;. O-ETHYL ESTER `• .: tG0 = ~ 07066.457 TAIMETHYLTIN CHLORIDE ;~ ; .`-0" -:, 02703.13 1 C _ . ~ PHOSPHONOTHK)IC ACID METHYL=A .- - _ _;:' : 00639.58-7 ` :':1Ti1PHENYLTIN CHLORIDE __ . . ..;;`. ,;:. - - 5`C -: ; . • . - ` ETHYLO-4(MEfFiYLTHIO).' ; --02001.-95.8 ' - : VAUNOMYCIN 7,000 - , , ` '' ~ PHENYL)E57EA = = ~~o 0737462 t VANADIUM PENTOXIDt;: ?~ ' - , '' - - 03254-835:' PHOSPHORIC ACID,DIMETHYL4 - '0070&OS4 'VINYL ACETATE MONOMER T.00_• (METHYLTHIO)PHENYL ESTER wo 00081-81 2 =WARFARIN .:' 50. = 02587 90-8 PHOSPHOROTHIOIC AGO,.O - 00729.06.6 'WARFARIN SODIUM - ~ tom" :.O-DIMETHYL S _ 28347-73.9 !CfLYENE DICHLORIDE t0 " (2~rtETNYL THIO) ETHYL ESTEa 5G0 - 58270.08.9 ZINC, DICHLORO(4,4-OIMETHYL-5 0772314-0 :.PHOSPHORUS '': - 700 ((((MEi'1-fl'LAMINO)CARBONYL)OXINO) 7002587 3 'PHOSPHORUS OXYCHLORIDE ,' 500- ,_, :. ;:: PENTANENITRILE)-.(T-d) •~r 10026.73-8 `: PHOSPHORUS PENTACHLORIDE _op 0:374847 ?ZINC PHOSPHIDE -`=% 0777 9-7 2-2 .• • .:' PHOSPHOROUS 7RICHLORIDE S '.000 .. - . 00057-47-8~- 5:.PHYSOSTIGMINE: _'. -' - too `: " . 00057-84-7 ; .`; PHYSOSTIGMINE,.SALICYLATE(ta) ' 700 + ~ ~ - ~~ ' 00124-87-8' " PICAOTOXIN ~'; 500 + 00110-89-4 ;:: PIPERIDINE 1.OG0 ~ - ' 235-41-1 _'..PIAlM1F05-ETHYL _ 7,000 r , 1012450-2": -'!POTASSIUMARSENt7E _ ~ 500 + :' , - _ +On the EPA List many of the Threshold Planning Quantity ~TFC} ~tstinos N it li d i T 'i ls a e " '~ ha•re ,wo numbers seca~a7ed oy a.slas:~ ~:;~- "' size c` cuss _-a-~ vt7h a article owdered `orrt and - it in I n thes e mater a are indicat d by tale piussig . nt y ne he qu n . + apa es 4 . p p y . 100 microns; or is handled in solution or molteri to rm; or has a NFFA rating fo r •eaCivity of 2, 3, or a. Otherwise tre ~nresrotd F'anninc ~c;a~'c' ~s ` 10,000. This applies only to the requiremei7t for acutely hazardous materi • als registration, the material is siiil required to he repcrted c> ar: annual inventory at the TPQ or 500 pounds whichever is less. TPQ =Reportable Net Weight of substance in pounds. Attachm.~nt 2 Pag e 2 „~ . `.1 -.;~` 1 Fee Schedule Information Attachment 3 Table 1 Hazardous Materials Reporting Ranges Source: FEMA/EPA National Response Team Planning Guidance • ~~ . 39 ~' ~ 1 ~( J ' ' L: e'S .~~' ?Sa:iS ' -x ' . cr aac^ par. ,icai ycu ; ~avs listed, rack a3 the p'rysicai a,:~ i'8a1~ t ~.a7~.'d C x8s ';.ct a Gy.~ i ~ ~as8 ~a~.?S.'~. C3ia- g~as era da7rad':r, »C Cr- 37G.3. Trs t4vc heait~h haz- e,;; catascras ar:d thn_s r~rfsicai i^.z`ard ~taccres era a C..';3:.:id~C. ~^.? ~i''..3 23 ha_=sd Cat yT°3 d~8d n ~;9 Cv .~ ~aL~v Cv"a:,LSCai.~.IZ J~al±''~.d-3'~, Zg Ct:S iyir.i2~u. ,, v~~~" i~Yi~.ilYt A,~,iti::~~ 3 .. ~cr sac-, i;azarc;:s C:iar'.icai, asWnata ui3 ~aai23i 3.^cL"7.a'•rBSarit a', yCL'r ~cC;u~j Cri a7ty Sir:~Ia +ayf~.,?- e,g 4:a rapcr-,;r;g ;,ar:'cd. 2. F:~ d u s zppraprata rar;Ss value cede xs Tabia i. ~. ~'3r taa3 rzrs8 vane a3 :;.a ?r1a.:;r-LT,2 A~-i~a-c.~;t. i 3bi;3 I ~'s~rCFsTING ~A,~iGi=S ti2rg8 `Nalgztt nz.^y2 it7 resx:ds ~fcRia rv^ 1 C 00 G 98 01 100 999 , c2 i,oao s,99s 03 10,000 99,999 04 100,000 998,999 Ox 1,000,OCO 9,899,989 Oo 10;OCQ,000 48,999.995 , 07 x0,000,000 ~ '89,988,898 0$ 100,x00,000 499,999,999 09 500,000,000 899,999,999 10 1 btiiicn hlghar than 1 b~cn ~, ;~j i=X.4PNPL;=: Ycu received one lava shipmern of a solvent enirturs last year. The shiprrterrt filled year b,000- ga>2cn storage tank. You know that the saivartt captains 10% hanzape, which is a hazardous chap-,ical. You ftgura that 10% ct 5.000 galtcps is 500 gaJsons. You else ictcw that the dertsiiy of hamarte Is 7.29 pounds par galiorv, sc you multiply 500 by 7.29 to gat a weight of 3,645 pounas. Then you Icok at Table I and find that the Tanga vacua 02 oai•rasponds to 3,645. You erstar 02 as fire tti4axrrum Amount. . {If you era using the fcm~ as a worksheet far campiating a Tiar Gns farm, ycu should write 3,645 In the shaded area.) 40 Attac)iz;le_nt a' AVM-r.~Gc tC.'+,tLY A,i~CLit~T 1. For each rte`s.>dcus c~arrical. ss:ir.?a.a the a~=ra-a W9lyc~,t in .,^.C::rCdS'.,`'at'?Fa3 ~ ?Scr :'~Ci.: i :..:u~~ :..:- Ing the yeas. TQ C'S u.13, iitai aSI dcii'y 'N2S5':3 a-d d: t'.d3 y'y ~;g nu,::aa~ u`, dcyS t;;a C.-+3rr;1C'c2 ~fa5 Lr~S2rit C.-: u:a seta. 2. F.nd u e approcriata rar;ga vau:a »z Ta:.ia I_ ... ~ ar u:1S r,~-."Cj8 ~131fi9 -:S '~,3 AY°_rc^y~ '.ia:i~ r'~':C::.~'c. ihs 5; 000-4,ailc, ~ sri~„-art ~ scivflrt ycu ~- caivsd Iasi year was gr?duaiiy ::sad :~ and ccrr,viatary gcra Ir; 3i5 days. The sun ~; t.}s daisy veitz,.a levels in the tank is 929,250 gatTcrs. Ey cs~idirg 829,250 gal?ens by 315 days cr,-site, ycu caiculata an aiaraga daily ar-ct:~ cf 2,950 gaiicns. . Ycu already kraw that the solvent captains 10% barszena, wi';Sch is a hazardcus ci;amical. 51res 10'S of 2,,950 Is 295, ycu 5y,sa tt:at ycu had ar: average cf 295 gallons et barzane. Ycu also 3c~ow that the density cf benzene Is 7.29 pounds per gallon, so you muitioiy 295 by 7.29 to gat a weight cf 2,10 pounds. Than you Icok at 'i"able I and f;rd that the range vah:e Q2 con•apands to 2,150. Yctt enter 02 as the A.varaga DaAy Amount: {It you era using the-form as a worksheet for campieting a Tier Qna farm, ycu should write 2,150 in. iha shaded area.)- NUIkiBEr'i OF DAYS Ofd-StT~ Enter the number of days that the hazardous ci;amIcal was found cn-sits. ~'-iiVi.4%NA0.%/Wi/w % N-'i... N Yi.v~ .iav %~i:v. ~.w. <~ EXAi4iPLE: g The salvern campesed of 10% benzene was ppresent far 315 days at your facility. Enter 315 '<> ~# kt the space pravlded. >-;.: ./N~~w:G.iiW...vi:•i}u~iiir«v'ii:~'rv+i:::v'~:v~!••~•:v,•irii~~~lri +~%iliw N~+'.v'. ieinLVi:4:ri4riµ~i:C STOFiAGi: CODES AiVD STORAGE LOCAT101VS List aA non-corit"idarrtlal chamlcal Iccatfons in this column, along with storage types/conditions assaciatad with Bach Iccaticn. Storage Codes: Jndfcata the types and conditions of storage present. a. Look a2 Table II. For each location, find the approprlata storage type{s). Enter the car- raspcndirg ~da(s) !n front cf the parantha- sas. b. Look at Table III. Far each storage type, find the temperature and prassura ccncs- ticns. Enter the appucabia prassura coda ire • the first scaca within the parentheses. Ent=_r the app{icabia temperatsua coda In the las< space within the parentheses. 3 Page 1 ~~~ . NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS `~ REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12/99 Regular Item #: 7 Estimated Time: Page Number: Department: Fire Services Presenter: P. Kouwe Contact: P. Kouwe SUBJECT: Relocation of Fire Station 91 (Federal Point VFD) BRIEF SUMMARY: ~,;~~;~t~,~ Fr ~;~~f Fire Station #91 is located on Dow Road in Carolina Beach and~is~ow,ned and operated by the Federal Point Volunteer Fire Department, Inc. Several factors make it logical and advantageous to relocate this station to an area just north of Snow's Cut Bridge. This station seines an area from the southern tip of the county to a line near Inlet Acres Drive. Very litffl~e of~tfie developed/buildable area is actually located south of Snow's Cut where the station is. Proposed annexation by Carolina Beach will greatly reduce the developed areas protected by this station south of Snow's Cut. At the same time significant new development is continuing in the area north-of Snow's Cut. In addition, an area known as Ocean Forest Lakes is classified as an "Unprotected Class 10" insurance rating due to being further than five miles from either the Federal Point Station #91 or the Myrtle Grove Station #31. Relocating the station north of Snow's Cut and south of Burnett Road improve services to the "Unprotected Class" area north of Snow's Cut and place the station strategically inside its most developed area. The move would lower response times to the vast majority of the citizens in the station's response district. An opportunity exists for the current Station #91 to be sold by Federal Point VFD to the Town of Carolina Beach to be used as a fire station for The Town. Federal Point VFD, Inc., is willing to use the sale proceeds with funding from New Hanover County Fire Service District to build a new station on a suitable site yet to be determined. New Hanover County would own the new facility. Carolina Beach is willing to allow Federal Point to continue to use the old facility for nearly a year and a half while a new station is built, and is further willing to pay for the old station up front in order to make the funds available for the new station. The cost of the new station with purchase of property, is approximately $950,000. As much as 25% of this amount will be covered by the sale of the old station (negotiations are still in progress between the Town and Federal Point VFD). The remaining cost of the new station would have to come from the Fire Service District Tax. Federal Point VFD has agreed not to sell the current facility unless the County Commissioners express support for the project. To sell the current facility without a firm commitment for its replacement would be unwise. Both Federal Point VFD and the Town of Carolina Beach await the Board's decision. The Fire Commission voted to fully support the proposal. The Fire Commissioner recommends that the County Commissioners commit to move forward with the project stating that it provides a positive solution that will benefit the citizens of the southern area of the County, the Federal Point Fire Department, and the Town of Carolina Beach. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Approve in concept, the relocation of Federal Point Fire Station #91 as a project to be funded through the Fire Service District Tax and the sale proceeds of the Federal Point VFD station. Authorize staff to move forward with a property search and locating a design professional. A Capital Project Ordinance, contracts, and budget amendments will be presented to the Board at the appropriate time. The Board's commitment to this plan will be communicated to Carolina Beach, Federal Point VFD, and the Fire Commissioners. FUNDING SOURCE: 41 Fire Service District Tax (multi-year financed project) ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: , LEGAL: N1A FINANCE: BUDGET: HUMAN RESOURCES: NIA COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Approve in concpet and authorize staff to develop details of project. "- COMMISSIONERS ACTIONSICOMMENTS: ;' \ COUNTY CQMMI~SIONER~ APPROVED O REJECTED D REMOVED Cl POSTPONED ^ , . ~ HE6~,Rp ^ DATE ~_-7_((Z~-~1-Q ~_;.~.,~ .. , 42 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12/99 Regular Item #: 8.1 Estimated Time: Page Number: Department: County Manager Presenter: Wanda Copley Contact: Wanda Copley, County Attorney, Frank Pinkston, MIPG SUBJECT: Public Hearing on Mason Inlet Relocation Project BRIEF SUMMARY: On June 21, 1999, the Board of Commissioners adopted a preliminary assessment resolution providing for a beach erosion control project to relocate Mason's Inlet approximately 3000 ft. north of its present location, and to use the excavated sand to close the existing inlet and to renourish the beaches of Figure Eight Island. G.S. 153A-195 requires that the Board conduct a public hearing to hear all interested persons with respect to any matter covered by the preliminary assessment resolution. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: FUNDING SOURCE: ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: LEGAL: FINANCE: Approve BUDGET: NIA HUMAN RESOURCES: NIA COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIOI` Conduct public hearing and adopt final assessment resolution COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS: COUNTY COMMI~S~N~ APPROVED G REJECTED ^ REMOVED ^ ;~~ POSTPONED ^ { HEARD ~~ ^ FINAL ASSESSMENT RESOLUTION MASON INLET RELOCATION PROJECT WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners of .the County of New Hanover has determined that it may be in the best interest of the County to sponsor a beach erosion control project ,and that in order to construct such project it would be necessary to assess all of the' cost thereof upon the real property benefitted thereby; WHEREAS, a public hearing ~on all matters covered by this Resolution was held at 6:30 p.m. on the 12th day of~ July, 1999 at Courtroom 317, New Hanover County Judicial Building, 316 Princess Street, Wilmington,. NC. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the County~of~New.Hanover, North Carolina, that:, 1. It is intended that a beach erosion control project be constructed by relocation of Mason Inlet.. to a. point approximately 3,000 feet •north of its present location. The sand excavated from the newly dredged channel will be used to close the existing inlet and to provide ,beach nourishment to the beaches of Figure Eight Island. A more detailed project description is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. 2. One hundred percent of the net cost of the project shall be assessed against the benefitted properties. 3. The basis for the assessment against' the benefitted properties on Figure Eight Island and the benefitted properties on Wrightsville Beach differ due to the differing nature of the benefits of the project on each side of Mason Inlet. The total cost allocated to the benefitted properties north of. the inlet will be $5.50 per net cubic yard of sand placed on the Figure Eight Island ocean beach. The balance of the project cost will be allocated to benefitted properties lying south of Mason Inlet. 4. It is the intention of the Board of Commissioners to assess each lot or parcel of land according to the benefit conferred upon it by the project. Wrgh~t~svi'lle Beach assessment basis. The benefitted properties ori~' Wrightsville Beach are those properties on the tax asse'~ssment~~r'oll attached hereto as Exhibit "B". The basis for~thre~ltas"s'essment will be the value of the land without improvements:".as shown on the tax records of the Countyj. Benefit zones are established in accordance with 44 G. S . 15.3A-186.(~c,) based on the distance of the benefitted m ,.~,t:, land from =Mason Inlet and other relevant factors. Each ~ condominium as a whole and each remaining individual parcel will be a separate benefit zone. The benefit zones and the rate of assessment for each zone are set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Each condominium unit will be assessed separately based on the unit owners share of land value as shown on the tax records of the County. Current values are shown on attachments to Exhibit "B". Figure Eight Island 'assessment basis. All of the residential lots on Figure Eight Island are considered benefitted properties. The lots will be assessed on a combination of two bases. The ocean front lots from Lot 182 Beach Road South through 4 Inlet Hook (198 lots) will be assessed based on the frontage abutting the shoreline at an equal rate per foot of frontage as shown on the recorded subdivision maps or the recorded deeds if no recorded map exists. The ocean front lots will be assessed 52.040 of the total Figure Eight allocation. The remaining 365 lots on Figure Eight Island will be assessed on the basis of the value of the land without improvements as shown on the. County tax records at an equal rate per dollar of valuation. The 365 lots will be assessed 47.96% of the total Figure Eight allocation. 5. The assessments herein provided for shall be payable in cash, or if any property owner shall so elect, he shall have the option of paying the assessment in three equal annual installments, said installments to bear interest at the rate of 7o per annum. This day of 1999. NEW~HANOVER COUNTY (SEAL ) By: William A. Caster, Chairman Board of Commissioners ATTEST: Clerk to the Board • 45 2 EXHIBIT "A" TO PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT RESOLUTION Mason's Inlet Relocation A project will be initiated to relocate the inlet approximately 3,000 feet north of its present _ location. To accomplish this, a new channel would be excavated; extending the Mason Creek, alignment straight across the sand spit peninsula that has extended southward from the~southern end of Figure Eight Island. This new channel would be~dimensioned to insure equal or greater hydraulic capacity than the existing inlet cross-section in its present location to the south. To be functional and effective, when the "new" inlet is opened, the existing inlet area would be choked off or "plugged" to direct all tidal flows through the newly created, inlet. Mason Creek (which is shoaled and essentially closed) will be dredged in order to enhance the hydraulic flow characteristics throughout the ICCWW-Middle Sound estuarine area. It should be noted here that within the past few years, not only Mason Creek but almost all of the connecting tidal creeks in the estuary have experienced significant shoaling, adversely affecting overall watercirculation, covering wetland habitat and living biological resources, interfering with navigation and recreational use of the estuary. Shoaled areas behind ttie proposed new inlet chan`n;el will be dredged periodically, and function as a sediment or sand trap to prevent/minimize the future siltation of MasonCreek. As material is excavated from locations described above, portions of it will be temporarily stockpiled at the south end of the sand spit, and on high ground near the north end of the Shell Island Resort properties and North Lumina Avenue. If additional storage area is required, additional sand will be stored on a portion of the wide natural beach in front of the resort property. When the above described work is completed and overall weather (~ conditions are considered to be optimum, the temporary stockpiled sand materials will be ~/ pushed into the existing (old) inlet during low tide conditions to stop all flows through the inlet so that all tidal functioning will be forced through the new inlet. When normal closure of the inlet has been accomplished, the fill section will be further built up and widened. Closure will be accomplished byutilizing a rapid mechanical sand moving effort. Sufficient equipment will be employed to bridge the inlet span in as little time as possible. Therefore, every effort will be made to close the inlet quickly. At the same time that the "closure" operations begin, the ocean end plug of the new inlet channel across the sand spit will be excavated and tidal flows will 6e initiated through this new channel. This old inlet "plug" will be constructed to be substantial. enough to withstand tidal flows (until they are redirected) and/or normal sea wave actions that might reach the seaward toe of the fill during the closure operation. This old inlet sand barrier will extend entirely across the old inlet area from its southernmost end (Shell Island bluff area) northward to a point to intersect the Figure 8 Island dune features. It is expected that this newly dredged channel will quickly adjust and "shallow-up" through natural processes until it reaches an equilibrium state approximating the dimension of the old inlet. The existing ebb tide delta at the seaward end of the present inlet will slowly be forced southward by natural littoral drift forces until it "welds" to the existing Shell Island 46 beach area. 99164aMIReloc051899 All channel and shoal excavation proposed in the project will be accomplished by hydraulic pipeline dredge. It is anticipated that all work on high ground will be accomplished by bulldozers and/or front end bucket loaders. The new inlet position will be located within a 1,000' wide easement through land,.which is above mean high water. This easement across the spit on the southern end of the Figure Eight Island will be an area designated for inlet relocation and inlet maintenance to preserve the hydraulic flows and depth desired for. coastal marsh flushing and recreational navigation. Materials removed from the inlet and sediment basin during maintenance will be utilized for future beach renourishment as required by either Figure Eight Island or Wrightsville Beach. During inlet maintenance, materials will be dredged from a cross section approximating the initial channel cut in a position within the easement opposite the direction of inlet migration. No filling or structure's are proposed along either side of the relocated inlet. • • 47 99164aMIReloc051899 .. EXHIBIT "B" TO PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT RESOLUTION (Page 1 of 2) ~ • ~~ ~ ~ • Cou~: 1 ~' ~ i '~ ~ :~k ~ :A,;fltce[[D N.um,,, r o ett(e$ Lac RO-5218-002-001-0 a ce 'ss s e ® i ,~` - _m na, .:,r_PP~~Y~e_C-t ed t Q E Town of Wri htsville Bch .. to e"s"~for ~~ I~. $ ass g e•Be d,- Se _.4 _ - - - Govemment 1353 cia 2153 C . I - o~$ - n ~? n ~ 0 0 le Beach .o e .t~C~o t 3 Qta land,' ; a e 9 9 100 000 500 783 $3 P .opertt st~to o sG~snt•of c 0( os 1.51% 77.89% `. es--wit ... -. ., _ a d4 asses - .. $42,496 $2,197,665 2 RO-5218-002-002-0 E Shell Island Resort ommer HoteU 9774 691 , , 000 $100 0.34% 59,459 3 RO-5218-002-003-0 E Town of Wri htsville Beach Govemment 9675 761 , 994 $574 1.61% 545,370 4 RO-5218-002-023-0 E B ant, Frederick Private Individual 75 8792' 761 , 998 5224 0.63% 517,754 5 RO-5218-002-005-0 E Andrews, Michael Private Individual l ) ( 9567 836 , 994 $574 1.33% 537,660 6 7 RO-5218-002-022-0 RC-5218-002-006-0 E E Holman, La North She11 Island Developmen Private Individua Commercial 8655'(74) 9520 836 910 , 5224,998 994 $574 0.52% 1.11% 514,737 531,456 8 RO-5218-002-020-0 E Sla le, Gene Private Individual 70 27' 910 , 998 5224 0.44% 512,309 9 RO-5218-002-007-0 E Sla le, Gene Private Individual ) ( 85 8483+7488 980 , 994 $599 0.95% 526,908 10 R0.5218-002-019-0 E Miles, David Private Individual al di id I 7488'(89) 980 , 0.00% 50 11 RO-5218-002-008-0 E Miles, David u v n Private l 8345 1069 995 5459 0.59°k $16,63E~m 12 RO-5218-002-018-0 E Gam ,Norman Private Individua i l 7338' 83) 1069 , 998 $179 0.23% $6,51, 13 R0.5218-002-009-0 E Gam ,Norman dua Private Indiv ( 7288 1152 , 994 5574 0.60°~ 516,901 14 R0.5218-002-017-0 E Kempf, Donald Private Individual idual di I 7251 1235 , 995 5459 0.39% 510,946 15 R0.521 B-002-016-0 E Neukranz, Don v n Private 98 6370' 1235 , 998 5179 0.15% 54.283 16 RO-5218-002-010-0 E Kane, Robert Private Individual l ) ( 7114 1321 , 994 5574 0.39% 510,994 17 RO-5218-002-015-0 E WpronoN, Robert Private Individua 75 213' 1321 , 998 5224 0.15% 54.302 18 RO-5218-002-011-0 E Swe er, David Private Individual l ( ) 6 056 1410 , 994 5574 0.41% 511,624 19 RO-5218-002-014-0 E Godwin, Jud Private Individua i l 6 120) 5183' 1510 , 999 $124 0.08% 52,253 20 RO-5218-002-013-0 E Godwin, James dua Private Indiv l ( 120 5138' 1510 , 999 $124 0.08% 52.253 21 RO-5218-002-012-0 E Godwin, James Private Individua ) ( # 1630 , 00% 0 50 22 Access Strip/Easement Govemment No 5927 1640 968 749 53 . 1.43% 23 RO-5806-001-002-0 E Parmele Association Condominiums 4821 1830 , , 976 724 $2 0.66% 24 RO-5806-001-001-2 E First Washin ton Corp Condominiums 2559 2030 , , 224 950 $6 0.83% 25 R0.5806-001-001-4 E First Washin ton Corp Condominiums 2350 , , 913 914 $8 46% 0 26 RO-5806-001-001-1 E First Washin ton Corp Condominiums 1301 9011 2860 , , 968 059 $3 . 0.07% 27 RO-5805-003-073-0 E First Washin ton core Condominiums 9011 5927 1640 , , 775 674 $24 3.45% 597, 23-27 RO-5805-003-073-0 E Wri htsville Dunes Condominiums - 8847 3070 , , 399 5200 0.00% g9i 28 29 RO-5805-001-002-0 RO-5809-002-044-0 E E Town of Wri htsville Beach Dunerid e Resort Govemment Condominiums 5259 3155 , $26,479,732 998 0.12% 53,436 57 30 RO-5809-002-044-0 E Town of Wri htsville Beach Govemment 1900 4155 5190, 92.98% 52,623,382 009 33 562 8 Totals: , , 48 ~ • EXHIBIT "B" TO PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT RESOLUTION (Page 2 of 2) a r ' . ' - 's ss e ~ -e a $ t@ ' . SS ~ ages orp S @ fS o . g - I S ~ ~ @ Beac ~ro, ei~ti O @ a{OS t0 O ':•~r~i ~ , es~+vith K ~. CtF,I' ~ " z. - ~- x. ~ ,~ a ~~~ 4 ~, i~ r c "~, ~ ~ ~ ..~ Coun Parcet~{D,~um ~ ._ ~a, . ... :. ,rte. ,~QP~ Vp r'g . - - n. , s~_ -- - ~,. ~ pQ. , ~ "'j ` __um-_e .~?~ ell ~ r .~ a 'Bas ~~ n e Sri ~ $; . 9~9 ' _ o E $ ,, .. .L' ed'on` ~,, ssass.ment - - - 31 RO-5218-001-032-0 W Town of Wri htsville, Beach Govemment l 8381 0 8903 415 $507 0.01% 3.69°,6 994 5599 5183 5104,185 3Z RO-5218-001-030-0 W Haile , Je Private Individua , - 33 RO-5218-001-001-0 W North Shell Island Developmen Private Individual l di id 3460 635 7840 760 5888 997 $299 0.00% 0.82°~ 590 523,145 34 35 RO-5218-001-029-0 RO-5218-001-028-0 W W Thompson, Jennifer Barrett, Charles v ua Private In Private Individual l 7702 6664 855 945 , 5299,997 997 $299 0.65% 0.52°k 518,366 514,666 36 37 38 39 40 41 RO-5218-001-027-0 RO-5218-a01-026-0 RO-5218-001-025-0 RO-5218-001-024-0 RO-5218-001-003-0 RO-5218-001-002-0 W W W W W W Marbarden Co Rupak, Ved Steadman,Gil Clifton, Lawrence Gam ,Norman Town of Wri htsville Beach Private Individua Private Individual Private Individual Private Individual Private Individual Govemment 6526 5478 5329 4362 4246 3460 1035 1125 1215 i30fi 1411 1451 , 5299,997 5239,998 5299.997 $149,999 $10,000 0.42% 0.27°/, 0.26% 0.10% 0.01% 0.00°fo 511,711 57,481 57,458 S2.919 5162 50 42 43 44 RO-5805-002-010-0 RO-5805-002-009--0 W W Rallis, Michael Bakalio, Geor e Private Individual Private Individual id l di 853 9773 9614 1951 2091 2191 5299,997 5299,997 997 5299 0.06% 0.04% 0.04% 51,669 51,266 51,018 45 46 RO-5805-002-008-0 RO-5805-002-007-0 W W Busb ,Julian Wood , John K ua v Private In Private Individual l 8565 8427 2281 2381 , 3299,997 997 5299 0.03% ~ 0.02°k 5818 5654 47 48 RO-5805-002-006-0 RO-5805-002-005-0 W W Jup , C nthia Farris, John Private Individua Private Individual al i 7398 7350 2476 2571 , 5299,997 997 5299 0.02°,6 02°k 0 5525 5425 49 R0-5805-002-004-0 W Berke, Robert du Private Indiv l 7212 2661 , 997 5299 . 01% 0 5346 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 RO-5805-002-003-0 RO-5805-002-002-0 RO-5805-002-001-0 RO-5805-001-001-0 RO-5805-001-001-0 RO-5805-001-001-0 RO-5805-001-001-0 RO-5805-001-001-0 R0-5805'001-001-0 R0-5805-001-001-0 RO-5809-004-001-1 W W W W W W W W W W W Hill, Joel Rodwell, Ro Dickson, Susan Amos, Ba DG Ente rises DG Ente rises Strickland, Christopher Gibson, Ronald DG Enterprises Town of Wri htsville Beach Cord rass Ba HOA Private Individua Private Individual Private Individual Private Individual Private Individual Private Individual Private Individual Private Individual Private Individual Govemment Condominiums ' 6184 fi027 5021 4975 1689 363 214 9135 9077 6897 2749 2839 2934 3014 312$ 3728 3849 3964 4026 4126 , 5299,997 $299,997 5274,997 5199,998 $1,298 $299,997 5299,997 520,000 $10,000 52,265,643 . 0.01°~ 0.01°k 0.01% 0.00°,6 0.00°k 0.00% 0.00°~ 0.00°k 0.00% 0.00% 5282 .5228 5171 599 SO 529 522 51 50 586 59,934,257 7.02% 31.98,005 Totals: 100.00% 52,821,387 58,873,271 I - 570,882,609 K:`98-769Yrrb ditnpet 81 a99 96769 49 Shell Island ' - - ~'~Total Estimated ~ ' - Assessmentfor' a Shell laland Resort Shell Island Resort - ~ ~ t Percent of Total Estimated Count Parcel l0 `RIN Unit'# . ..Land Values' - Assesment 'Assessment _ ' ' 1 ,. ' 805218-002-002-001 2153 ' . ~, . 112 ~S21,000 • ~ ,.. 0' S6% " . 512; f 97.96 . • i_. ,.. t 2 80521&002-002-002 2153 °.t13 '• ~ ".521,000` '- 0.56% - :512,197.96 ~ ~- ~. 3 ~ 805218-002-002-003 • ; 2153- . 114 t- ,521,000` • :0.56%.,, 512,197.96 '" ~~ ~ ~ { ~ ~ , ,, 4 ,~ 805218-002-002=004" ;2153 ~ ~ 115 ~ 'r 521,000 ~- `: 0.56% : ~ Si2,t97.96 ' ~ ' .. -_ .~ ~ ` ~ 5 -„ 805218-002-002-005• 2153 116 . ~ 521,000 '' : _ 0.56°~ ~ St2,197.96 - ' ,. - 6 805218-002-002-006 2153; 1..17:'' ~ ,- ~,• 521,000; :_ 0:56%, ' ;~ 512,197.96 ; . ' 7 805218-002-002-007 2153 i t8 521,000 0.56% ` 512,197.96. • ~ ' ` ' 8 805218-002-002-008 ~-2153 119 ' •521,000 0.56°,6 •512,197.96 ~ 9 R052t8-002-0OZ-049 2153 ..t20' , S2t,000 , ` 0.56%' : 512,197.96 , . ~ • ` ' . ^ 10 ` 805218-002-002-010 2153 201 ' ' ` 521,350 0.56% 512,401:25 ' f1 805218-002-b02-011 2153 202 521,350' ~ •'0.56% ~ '512,401.25 .. -~.. :12 •„ • 805218-002-002-012 2153 203 ° " 521,350 ;. 0.56% - - 512,40125 I 13 ` 805218-002-002-013 2153 204 521,350 .~ - ~ .: 0:56% `512,401.25 '. .' „ 14 - 805218-002-002-014 2153 205 521',350 - • ,0:56°~6 512,401°.25 ' _ _ • : - • 15 R052t8-002-002-015 2153. 206 `--- 521„350,.. '• •0.56°r6 --- 512,401,.25 16 805218-002-002-0.1'6 21,53 ~~ 207 ~ . 521;350 ~' 0.56% ~ 512,401.2& , 17. 805218-002-002-017 21'53 208 521,350 , .0.56°r6 - ~- 512,401.25 ,. _ + 18. 805218-002-002-018 2153 •209 521,350' ~ .0.56% " 512,401.25. ~ ~ ~ ' ... .19 . 80521&002-002-019 .. 21.53 -- 210 `- 521;;350 ~ 0.56% ~ • - 512,401.25 ' 20., , 805218-002-002-020 2153 211 ~ 521,350 ' .. 0.56°~ ~ 512,401.25 . ' . " ; ., . 21 ~R05218-002-002-021 2153 -212 521,350 '.. _ `0.56% - - 512,401.25 _ ' '22 805218-002-002-022. 21'53 213 521,350 ~ ; •, "" 0.56°~ 512,401:25 - ' 23 805218-002-002-023 21:53 214 521,350 , ., . , ~ ;;0.56°,G 512,401.25 ' 24. 805218-002-002-024 2153 ~ 215 :'• 521,350 0.56°~6 512;401.25 . ~. '' 25 - '805218,002-002-025 2153 216 ~ 521,350 ' 0.56% 512,401:25 ~. , 26 ,.805218-002-002-026 2153 217 - 321,350 '" 0.56% 512,401:25. - - - _ ' E,. 27 805218-002-002-027 2f53 218 i 521,350 - ' 0.56% ` 512,401:25 - . ` 28 805218,002-002-028 2153.,. 219 - 521,350 0.56°~ 512,401,.25 ~. ~ ~ - i 29. 805218;002-002-029 21'53 220: 52.1,350 "~ 0.56% 512;401.25' - - ' •30 80521.8-002-002-030 2153. 301 521,700 0.57°,6 "31:2;604.55 - ~' 31 805218-002-002-031.., 2153 302 521,700 ~ ~ 0.57°~O 512,604.55 - • 32 805218-002-002-032 .. ..21:53, 303 ~ .. x 521,700 .:0.57°k 512,604.55 t -- 4 - 33 ~-R052t8-002-002-033 .21'53 304 ~ _ 521,700 0.57°~6 512,604.55 - ,. , 34 • 805218-002-002-034 .2153 305 $21,700 ~ .0.57% ' 312,604.55. , I ~ 35 ; . - 805218-002-002-035 - 2153 306 521,700 0.57% -512;604.55 - .. • 36 805218-002-002-036 2153,.. _307 521,700 0.57°~- 512,604.55 ; : • . ' 37 ~ 805218-002-002-037 2153. ..308 521,700 0.57% - 512;604.55 ' ~ 38 ~ •805218-002-002-038 .2153. 309 ~ 521,700 ~ ~ :_0.57% ~ ~ Sf2,60d.55 ~'- •-39 - 805218-002-002-039 21b3 310 521•,700 0.57°~ ~ 512,604:55 • - ~ » 40~. ~ 805218-002-002-040 .. 2153 311 ~ . 521,700 0.57% 512,604.55 '~~` '~ 41 805218-002-002-041 2153 312 521,700 ' 0.57°~6 ' .~ .512;604,55 - ' 42. 805218-002-002-0.42 2153 313 521,700 0.57°~6 512;604.55 43 805218-002-002-043 2153 .314 -»,321,700 „_ _ 0.57°~ S12;60d.55 44 ,' 805218-002-002-044.. 2153 ._315 521.,700 0.57% 512,604.55 :. - - 45 ' ~ - 805218-002-002-045.. '2153 316 _ 521,700 0.57°.6 •' 512,604.55 ' " - - - 46 805218-002-002-446 ..2153 - 317 521,700 0.57°~U 512;604.55 - -' 47 - 805218-002-002-042 " 2153 .318 521,700 0.57% 512;604.55 - --" ' 48 805218-002-002-048'° 2153 319 521,700• 0.57°,6 512,604:55 ' 49 805218-002-002-049. .2153. 320.._. - 521,700 0.57% - 512,604.55 - - 50 . 805218-002-002-050- .2153 401 522,050 0:58% 512,807:85 ' 51 805218-002-002-051 2153 402 522,050 0.58°.6 ` 512,807.85 ' ~ - 52 805218-002-002-052 2153 403 522,050 0.58% 512,807.85 53 805218-002-002-053 2153 404 522,050 0.58% 512,807.85 54 805218-002-002-054 2153 405 522,050 0.58% 212,807:85 50 805218-002-002-055 2153 406 522,050 0.58% 512,807.85 Shell Island ' .Percent of Total . Estimated Count Parcel ID PIN Unit ~ Land Values Assesment Assessment 56 805218-002-002-056 2153. 407 522,050 0.58°,6 512,807.85 57 805218-002-002-057 2153 408 522,050 0.58°~6 512,807.85. , 58 805218-002-002-058 2153 409 $22,050 0.58°,6 512,807.85 59 805218-002-002-059 .2153 410 $22,050 0.58% 512,807.85 60 805218-002-002-060 2153 411 522,050 0.58% S12,807.85 , 61 805218-002-002-061 2153 412 522,050 0.58°~6 • 512,807.85 62 805218-002-002-062 2153 413 522,050 0.58°,6 $12,807.85 63 805218-002-002-063 2153 414 522,050 0.58% S12,807.85 _ 64 805218-002-002-064 2153 415 522,050 0.58% 512,807.85 65 805218-002-002-065 , 2153 .416 $22,050 0.58% $12,807.85 66 805218-002-002-066 2153 417 $22,050 0.58% $12,807.85 67 805218-002-002-067 2153 ,418 522,050 0.58°h $12,807.85 68 805218-002-002-068 2153 ~ 419 $22,050 0.58% S12,807.85 • 69 805218-002-002-069 2153., 420 522,050 0.58% 512,807.85 ' 70 805218-002-002-070 2153 501 522,050 0.58°,6 512,807.85 71 805218-002-002-071 2153 502 522,050 0.58°~ 512,807.85 72 805218-002-002-072 2153 503 522,050 0.58% 512,807.85 ' 73 805218-002-002-073 2153 504 522,050 0.58% 512,807.85 74 805218-002-002-0T4 2153. 505 522,050 0.58°~i $12,807.85 . 75 805218-002-002-075 2153 506 522,050 0.58°,6 512,807.85 76 805218-002-002-076 2153 507 522,050 0.58% 512,807.85. 77 805218-002-002-077 2153 508 522,050 .0.58°,6. $12,807.85 78 805218-002-002-078 2153 509 S22,050 0.58% ~ $12,807.85 79 805218--002-002-079 ` 2153 510 522,050 0.58°,6 512,807.85 80 805218-002-002-080 .2153 511 522,050 0:58% ~ 512,807.85 84 ~ . 805218-002-002-081 2153 512 522,050 0.58°~6 512,807.85 82 805218-002-002-082 2153 513 522,050 0.58°,6 512,807.85 83 805218-002-002-083 2153 514 522,050 0.58°~ 512,807.85 84 805218-002-002-084 2153 515 522,050 0.58°,G 512,807.85 85 805218-002-002-085 2153 .516 522,050 0.58°~ 512,807.85 86 805218-002-002-086 2153 517 522,050 0.58% 512,807.85 87 805218-002-002-087 2153 518 .522;050 0.58°~ 512,807.85 88 805218-002-002-088 2153 519 522,050 0.58°~ 512,807.85 89 805218-002-002-089 2153 520 522,050 0.58°~G 512,807.85 90 805218-002-002-090 2153 601 522,400 0.59% 513,011.15 91 • 805218-002-002-091 2153 602 522,400 0.59°,6 513,011.15 92 805218-002-002-092 2153 603 522,400 0.59°,b 513,011.15 93 R052i8-002-002-093 2153 604 522,400 0.59% 513,011.15 94 805218-002-002-094 2153 605 522,400 0.59°~ $13,011.15 95 805218-002-002-095 2153 606 522,400 0.59% 513,011.15 96 805218-002-002-096 2153 607 $22,400 0.59°r6 513,011.15 97 805218-002-002-097 2153 608 522,400 0.59°,6 513,011.15 ~ . 98 805218-002-002-098 2153 609 522,400 0.59°~6 513,011.15 ' 99 805218-002-002-099 2153 -610 522,400 0.59% 513,011.15 0 100 805218-002-002-100 2153 611 522,400 ,.0.59% 513,011.15 101 805218-002-002-101' 2153 612 522,400 0.59°~ 513,011.15 102 805218-002-002-102 2153 , 61.3 .522,400 , 0.59°,6 $13,011.15 103 805218-002-002-103 2153 614 $22,400 0.59°~ 513,011.15 104 805218-002-002-104 2153 615 522,400 0.59°,6 513,011.15 105 805218-002-002-105 2153 616 $22,400 0.59°,6 $13,011.15 , 106 805218-002-002-106 ,2153 617 522,400 0.59°~, 513,011.15 407 805218-002-002-107 2153 ' 618 ~ 522,400 0.59°~ 513,011.15 108 805218-002-002-108 2153 619 522,400 0.59°~6 513,011.15 •~ 109 805218-002-002-109 2153 620 522,400. 0.59°,6 513,011.15 110 805218-002-002-110 2153 701 522,400 0.59°~ 513,011.15 111 805218-002-002-111 2153 702 522,400 0.59°~ 513,011.15 1.12 805218-002-002-112 2153 703 522,400 0.59% 513,011.15 1'13 , 805218-002-002-113 2153 704 $22,400 0.59°,6 513,011.15 114 115 805218-002-002-114 805218-002-002-115 2153 2153 705 706 $22,400 $22,400 0.53% 0.59%' 513,011.15 513,011.15 116 805218-002-002-116 2153 707 $22,400 0.59% 513,011.15 Shell Island Percent of Total Estimated Count Parcel ID PIN Unit ~ Land Values Assesment Assessment 117 R05218-002-002-117 2153 708 522,400 0.59% 513,011:,.15 118 R05218-002-002-118 .2153 709 522,400 '; 0.59% 513,011.15 119 R05218-002-002-119 2153 710 522,400 ` ' 0.59% 513,011.15 120 R05218-002-002-120 .2153 ~ 711 522,400 0.59% 513,01'1.15 ' 121 R05218-002-002-121 2153 ~ 712 522,400 0.59%, 513,011.15 ~' 122 R05218-002-002-122 2153 ~' 713 522,400 ;. 0.59% S13,OtL15 .. 123 R05218-002-002-123 2153 714 522,400 0.59% 513,011.15 124 R05218-002-002-124 2153 ~ .715 522,400 0.59% 513,01115 ~t . , 125 R05218-002-002-125 2153 ~ 716 522,400 0.59% 513,01,1.15 126 R05218-002-002-126 2153 717 522,400 ~ ~ 0:59% 513,011.15 127 R05218-002-002-127 ,2153 718 ,•.522,400 0.59% 513,01'1:15 128 R05218-002-002-128 2153 719 _ :522,400 0.59% 513,01'1.15 ' ' 129 R05218-002-002-129 2153 .720 522,400 ` 0.59% ~ 513,011.15 130 R05218-002-002-130 2153 801 522,750 0.60% 513,214:45 131 R05218-002-002-131 2153 802 '522,750 ., 0.60% 513,214:45 132 R05218-002-002-132 2.153 803 522,750 0.60% 513,214.45 133 R05218-002-002-133 :2153 .804 322,750 '0.60% 513,214.45 ` 134 R05218-002-002-134 12153 805 ;522,750 0.60% 513,214.45 135 R05218-002-00?-135 .2153' 806 .522,750 0.60% .:, 513,214.45 , 136 R05218-002-002-136 , 2153 ~ 807 ,..522,750 0.60% 513,214,45 137 R05218-002-002-.137 ?153. 808 522,750 0.60% 513,214.45 138 R05218-002-002-138 _ ; 2153 809 522,750 0.60% 513,214.45 ' 139 R05218-002-002-139 ~ 2153 810. ~ 522,750 ~ ~ 0.60% 513,214.45 140 R05218-002-002-140 2153 .811 .522,750 0.60% ~ 513,214.45 141 R05218-002-002-141 21.53 812 .522,750 0.60% 513,214.45 ' 142 R05218-002-002-t42 2153 - 813 522,750 0.60°:6 513,214.45 143 R05218-002-002-143 2153. 814 ~ 522,750 0.60% 513,214.45 144 R05218-002-002-144 2153 815 522,750 0.60% 513,214.45 ~ ' 145 R05218-002-002-145 2153 ` .816 522,750 0.60% 513,214.45 146 R05218-002-002-146 2153 817 522,750 0.60% 513,214.45 147 R05218-002-002-147 2153 818 522,750 0.60% 513,?14.45 148 R05218-002-00?-148 -2153 819 ~ ,522,750 0.60% .513,214.45 149 R05218-002-002-149 2153 820 S2?,750 0':60°,6 ' 513,214.45 150 R05218-002-002-150 ?153'. `901 525,025 0.66% 514,535.90 , 151 R05218-002-002-151 .2153 902 525,025 0..66% 514,535.90 ' " 152 R05218-002-002-152 2153 . • 903 525,025 0.66°,6 514,535.90 153 R05218-002-002-153 2153 904 525,025 0.66% 514,535.90 154 R05218-002-002-154 2153 905 .525,025 0.66% 514,535.90 , 155 R05218-002-002-155 2153 906 525,025 0.66% .514,535.90 156 R05218-002-002-156 2153 907 525,025 0.66% ~ 514,535.90 157 R05218-002-002-157 2153 908 525,025 0.66°.6 514,535.90 158 R05218-002-002-158 ?153 .909 525,025 0.6&% 514,535.90 159 R05218-00?-002-159 2153 910 525,025 O:6fi% :514,535.90 160 R05218-002-002-160 2153. ~ 911 525,025 0.66% 514,535,90 ' 161 R05218-002-002-161 ?153. 912 525,025 0.66°~6 514,535.9,0 ~ - 162 R05218-002-002-162 2153, .913 ;25,025 0.6&% 514,535.90 ` 163 R05216-002-002-163 2153 ~. ~ 914 525,025 0.66°~6 514,535.90 ' 164 R05218-002-002-164 2153 ' ..915 525,025 ~ 0.66% 514,535.90 ' 165 R05218-002-002-165 .2153 ~ 916 525,025 0.66% 514,535.90 -. ' 166 R05218-002-002-166 2153 ~ 917 525,025 0.6&% 514,535..90 , 167 R05218-002-002-167 ..2153 918 525,025 0.66% 514,535.90 168 R05218-002-00?-168 2153 919 ~ 525,025 ~ 0.66% 514,535.90 ' i 169 R05218-002-002-169 2153 920 525,025 Y.~ 0.66,°,6 514,535.90 - Land Values Sum $3,783,500 32,197,665.00 " Wrightsville Dunea Count Parcel fD PIN Unit# 1 805805-003-061-000 1301 1A 2 805805-003-062-000 1301 1 B 3 805805-003-063-000 1301 1 C 4 805805-003-064-000 1301 1 D 5 805805-003-065-000 1301 2A 6 805805-003-066-000 1301 26 7 805805-003-067-000 1301 2C 8 805805-003-068-000 1301 2D 9 805805-003-069-000 1301 3A 10 R05805-003-07Q-000 1301 3B 11 805805-003-071-000. 1301 3C 12 805805-003-072-000 i 301 3D 13 805805-003-074-000 9011 1A • 14 805805-003-075-000 9011 1 B i 5 805805-003-076-000 901 i 1 C 16 805805-003-077-000 9011 1 D 17 805805-003-078-000 9011 2A 18 805805-003-079-000 901.1 2B LL t9. 805805-003-080-000 9011 2C 20 805805-003-081-000 9011 2D 21 805805-003-082-000 ' 9011.. 3A , 22 805805-003-083-000 9011 3B 23 805805-003-084-000 9011 3C 24 805805-003-085-000 9011 3D 25 805806-001-001-001 1301 C1 - 26 805806-001-001-002 1301 C2 27 805806-001-001-003 1301 C3 •. ~ _' 28 805806-001-001-004 1301 G4 29 805806-001-001-005 1301 C5 30 805806-001-001-006 1301 C6 31 805806-001-001-007 1301 C7 32 805806-001-001-008 1301 C8 33 805806-001-001-009 f301 C9 34 805806-001-001-010 1301 C10 35 805806-001-001-011 1301 C11 36 805806-001-001-012 1301 C12 37 805806-001-001-013 1301 C13 38 805806-001-001-014 1301 D1 39 805806-001-001-015 1301 02 . 40 _ 805806-001-001-016 1301 D3 41 805806-001-001-017 1301 D4 42 805806-001-001-018 1301 D5 43 805806-001-001-019 1301 D6 44 805806-001-001-020 1301 ~ 07 45 805806-001-001-021 1301 D8 • 46 805806--001-001-022 1301 D9 -47 805806-001-001-023 1301 D10 48 805806-001-001-024 1301 D11 49 805806-001-001-025 1301 D12 50 805806-001-001-026 1301 D13 - 51 805806-001-001-027 4821 1 A 52 805806-001-001-028 4821 1B Wrightsville Total Estimated Assessment For Wrightsville Dunes Percent of Total Estimated Land Values Assesment• . Assessment Bldg $254,997 1.03% $1,002.79 $ $254,997 1.03% $1,002.79 B 5254,997 1.03°~ $1,002.79 B $254,997 1.03% $1,002.79 B $254,997 1.03% $1,002.79 B $254,997 •1.03% $1,002.79 B - $254,997 1.03% $1,002.79. B $254,99T 1.03% $1,002.79 B $274;997 1.11% $1,081.44 B , $274,997 1.11% $1,081.44 B $274,997 1.11% $1,081.44 B $274, 997 1.11 % $1,081.44 B $234,998 0.95%. $924.14 A $234,998 0.95%. $924.14 A $234,998 0.95% $924.14 A $234,998 0:95°~ $924.14 A $254;997 1.03% $1,002.79 A $254,997 1.03% ,' $1,002.79 A $254,997 1.03°k $1,002.79 A $254,997 1.03% $1,002.79 A $274,997 1.11°~6 $1,081.44 A $274,997 1.11% $1,081.44 A $274,997 1.11%. ~ $1,081.44 A $274,99T 1.11% $1,081.44 A $224,998 0.91 °~ $884.82 C $224,998 0.91% $884.82 C $224,998 0.91 % .. $884.82 C . 5224,998 0.91 % $884.82 C $224,998 0.91 % $884.82. C $224,998 0.91% $884.82 C $224,998: 0.91% $884.82 C $224,998 0.91 % $884.82 C $224,998 0.91 % $884.82 G 5224,998 0.91% $884.82. C $224,998 0.91 % $884.82 C $224,998 0.91 % 5884.82 C $224,998 0.91 % 5884.82 C $224,998 0.91 % $884.82 D $224,998 0.91 % $884.82 D $224,998 0.91% $884.82 D • $224,998 0.91°r6 $884.82 D $224,998 0.91 % $884.82 6. . $224,998 0.91% $884.82 D $224,998 ~ 0.91% $884.82 D $224,998 0.91 % $884.82 D $224,998 0.91% $884.82 D $224,998 0.91% $884.82 D $224,998 0.91 % $884.82 D $224,998 0.91 % $884.82 D $224,998 0.91% $884.82 D 5224,998 0.91% $884.82 G $224,998 0.91 % $884.82 G 53 Wrightsville Percent of Total Estimated Count Parcel ID PIN Unit # Land Values Assesment~ Assessment Bldg 53 805806-001-001-029 4821 1C $224,998 0.91% 5884.82 G 54 805806-001-001-030 4821 1D $224,998 0.91% $884.82 G 55 805806-001-001-031 4821 1E $224,998 '." 0.91°,6 $884.82 G 56 805806-001-001-032 4821 ' 28 $224-,998 0.91°k $884.82 G .. • 57 805806-001-001-033 4821 2C $224,998 0.91°~ $884.82 G 58 805806-001-001-034 4821• 2D $224,998 0.91°k $884.82 G 59 805806-001-001-035 ° 4821 3A $224,998 0:91°k `. $884.82 G 60 805806-001-001-036 4821 36 $224,998 0.91°k 58.84.82 G 61 805806-001-001-037 4821 3C $224,998 0.91°k ~ 5884:82 G ~ " . , 62 805806-001-001-038 - 4821 3D $249,998 1.01% 5983.13 G . . 63 805806-001-001-039 2559= 1A $249,998 1.01%. $983.13 F , ! { =~. 64 805806-001-001-040 2559 1B $249,998 1.01% 5983.13 , ', F ~ . 65 805806-001-001-041 2559 iC $249,998 1.01% 5983.13 F 66 805806-001-001-042 2559 1D• $249,998 1.01% Sg83.13. F , 67 805806-001-001-043 2559 ' 2A $249;998 1.01%' ; 5983.13 F • • 68 805806-001-001-044 2559 28 $224,998 0.91% $884.82. F - 69 805806-001-001-045 2559 2C ~ ' $249,998 1.01% 5983.13 F 70 805806-001-001-046 2559 2D $249,998 1..01% $983.13 - F • 71 805806-001-001-047 2559 3A' $249;998 1.0186' $983.13. F • 72 805806-001-001-(}48 2559 38 $249,998 1.01%; ~'" 5983.13 , F 73 805806-001-001-049 2559 3C " $249;998 1.01% - $983.13. " • F 74 805806-001-001-050 2559 3D 5249,998 1.01% • ~ 5983.13 F 75 805806-001-001-051 2559 3E $249;998 1.01%a " , 5983.13 F _ _ 76 805806-001-001-052 2559 1 A ' $249,998 1.01 %~ $983.13 E • . 77 805806-001-001-053 2559 ` 16 5249,998 1.01%. 5983.13 E . , 78 805806-001-001-054 2559 1 C $249,998 1 A 1 % 5983.13: E ~ " • 79 805806-001-001-055 2559 1D $249,998 1:01% • .. $983.13 " E , 80 805806-001-001-056 2559 2A $249,998 1.01% 5983.13 ~ E ,• - - 81 805806-001-001-057 " 2559 26 $249,998 1.01% 5983.13 E - , 82 805806-001-001-058 2559 2C $249;998 ' 1.01% 5983.13 - E ... 83 805806--001-001-059 2559 2D $249;998 1.01% " , $983.13;. E , ., • 84 805806-001-001-060 2559 3A $249;998 1.01% 5983.13.- E , 85 805806-001-001-061 2559 3B $249,998 1:0.1% .., 5983.13 E 86 805806-001-001-062 2559 3C 5249,998 1.01.% $983.13 E 87 805806-001-001-063 2559 30 - $249,998 1.01°~ $983.13, ~ E ~". 88 805806-001-002-001 5927 1A $199,998 0.81% $786.50• H . 89 805806-0(}1-002-002 5927 1B $199,998 0:81% 5786.50 • , • H ,, ;, 90 805806-001-002-003 5927 ~ 1C $199,998 0.81'% 5786.50 - H 91 805806-001-002-004 5927 1D $199,998 0.81%' •. $786.50 H - - 92 805806-001-002-005 ~ 5927 1E $199,998 0.81°i6~ $786.50:. h. H • 93 805806-001-002-006 5927 1 F $249;998 1.01% 5983.13 ; H • , 94 805806-001-002-007 5927 28' $249;998 1.01% $983.13. •" H 95 805806-001-002-008 5927 2C $249;998 1.01 % , . • 5983.13 ~ H • , , 96 805806-001-002-009 5927 " 2D 5249,998 1.01'%- ", 5983.13 H 97 805806-001-002-010 5927 2E $249,998 1:01% 5983.13 ~ H • 98 805806-001-002-011 5927 3A ~ $249,998- 1:01°~ 5983.13. H 99 805806-001-002-012 ~ 5927 ~ 38 $249,998 1.01% 5983.13 H' •, _ , 100 805806-001-002-013 5927 •3C $249,998 1.0'1%" . • 5983.13 H 101 805806-001-002-014 5927 3D $249;998 1.01% $983.13. H ' 102 805806-001-002-015 5927 3E 5249,998 1.01% $983.13 H , 103 R05B06-001-002-016 5927 - - ' 3F $249,998 1:01%• $983.13 -, H • • Land Values Sum •.; - $24,749;774 597,330.00 ~~ 54 ~ Dune Ridge Total Estimated Assessment For Dune Ridge Rason', Dune Ridge Resort Percent of Totai Estimated Count Parcet ID PIN Unit ~ Land Values Assesment Assessment 1 RO-5805-003-001.000 5259 2101 5199,998 0.76% 525.95 2 R0.5805-003-002-000 5259 2102 5199,998 0.76% . 525.95 3 RO-5805-003-003-000 5259 2103 5199,998 0.76% 525.95 4 RO-5805-003-044-000 5259 2104 S199,99$ 0.76% 525.95 5 RO-5805-003-005-000 5259 2105 5199,998 0.76% 525.95 6 RO-5805-003-006-000 5259 .2106 5199,998 0.76% 525.95 7 RO-5805-003-007-000 5259 2107 5199,998 0.76°~6. 525.95 8 RO-5805-003-008-000 5259 2108 5199,898 0.76% 525.95 9 RO-5805-003-009-000 5259 2109 5199,998 0.76% 525.95 10 RO-5805-003-014-000 5259 2110 5199,998 0.76% 525.95 - 11 RO-5805-003-011-000 5259 2111 5199,998 0.76% x25.95 12 RO-5805-003-012-000 5259 2112 5199,998 0.76% 525.95 13 RO-5805-003-013-000 5259 2201 5229,998 0.87% 529.84 14 RO-5805-003-014-000 5259 2202 5229,998 0.87% 529.84 15 RO-5805-003-015-000 5259 2203 5229,998 0.87% 529.84 16 RO-5805-003-016-000 5259 2204 5229,998 0.87% 529.84 17 RO-5805-003-017-000 5259 2205 5229,998 0.87% 529.84 18 RO-5805-003-018-000 5259 2206 5229,998 0.87% 529.84 19 RO-5805-003-019-000 5259 2207 5229,998 0.87% 529.84 20 RO-5805-003-020-000 5259 2208 5229,998 0.87°~6 ~ 529.84 ' 21 RO-5805-003-021-000 5259 2209 5229,998 0.87°~6 529.84 22 RO-5805-003-022-000 5259 2210 5229,998 0.87°~ 529.84 23 RO-5805-003-023-000 5259 2211 5229,998 0.87°~ 529.84 24 RO-5805-003-024-000 5259 2212 5229,998 0.87°~6 529.84 25' 26 RO-5805-003-025-000 RO-5805-003-026-000 5259 5259 2301 2302 5259,997 5259,997 0.98% 0.98% 533.74 533.74 27 RO-5805-003-027-000 5259 2303 5259,997 0.98% 533.74 28 RO-5805-003-028-000 5259 2344 5259,997 0.98% X33.74 29 RO-5805-003-029-000 5259 2305 5259,997 0.98% 533.74 30 R0.5805-003-030-000 5259 2306 5259,997 0.98°,6 533.74 31 RO-5805-003-031-000 5259 2307 5259,997 0.98°~ 533.74 32 RO-5805-003-032-000 5259 2308 5259,997 0.98% 533.74 33 RO-5805-003-033-000 5259 2309 5259,997 0.98% 533.74 34 R0.5805-003-034-000 5259 2310 5259,997 0.98°,6 533.74 35 RO-5805-003-035-000 5259 2311 5259,997 0.98°~ 533.74 36 R0.5805-003-036-000 5259 2312 5259,997 0.98% 533.74 37 RO-5805-003-037-000 5259 2401 5279,997 1.06% 536.33 38 RO-5805-003-038-000 5259 2402 5279,997 1.06°,6 536.33 39 RO-5805-003-039-000 5259 2403 5279,997 1.06% 536.33 40 RO-5805-003-040-000 5259 2404 5279,997 1.06°~ 536.33 41 RO-5805-003-041-000 5259 2405 S279,997 1.06% ~ 536.33 42 RO-5805-003-042-000 5259 2406 5279,997. 1.06% 536.33 43 R0.5805-003-043-000 5259 2407 5279,997 1.06% 536.33 44 R0.5805-003-044-000 5259 2408 5279,997 1.06% S36.33 45 RO-5805-003-045-000 5259 2409 5279,997 1.06°~ 536.33 46 RO-5805-003-046-000 5259 2410 5279,997 1.06% 536.33 47 RO-5805-003-047-000 5259 2411 5279,997 1.06°~ 536.33 48 RO-5805-003-048-000 5259 2412 5279,997 1.06°~ 536.33 49 RO-5805-003-049-000 5259 3101 5199,998 0.76% 525.95 50 R0.5805-003-050-000 5259 3102 5199,998 0.76°,G 525.95 51 RO-5805-003-051-000 5259 3103 5199,998 0.76% 525.95 52 RO-5805-003-052-000 5259 3104 5199,998 0.76°~ 525.95 53 R0.5805-003-053-000 5259 3201 $249,998 0.94% X2.44 54 RO-5805-003-054-000 5259 3202 5249,998 0.34°,6 532.44 55 RO-5805-003-055-000 5259 3203 5249,998 0.94% 532.44 55 Dune Ridge Percent of Total Estimated Count Parxl ID PIN Unit # Land Values Assesment ~ assessment 56 RO-5805-003-056-000 5259 3204 5249,998 0.94% 532.44 57 RO-5805-003-057-000 5259 3301 5349,997 1.32% 545.42 58 RO-5805-003-058-000 5259 3302' 5349,997 1.32% 545.42 59 RO-5805-003-059-000 5259 3303 5349,997 1.3296 545.42 60 RO-5805-003-060-000 5259 3304 5349,997 1.32% 545:42 61 RO-5809-002-044-003 5259 1101 5199,998 0.76% 525.95 62 RO-5809-002-044-004 5259 1102 5199,998 0.76% 525.95 63 RO-5809-002-04d-005 5259 1103 5199,998 0.76% 525.95 64 RO-5809-002-044-006 5259 1104 5199;998 0.76% 525.95 65 RO-5809-002-04d-007 5259 1105 5199,998 0.76% 525.95 ' 66 RO-5809-002-044-008 5259 1106 Si99;998 0.76% 525.95 • 67 RO-5809-002-044-009 5259 1107 5199,998 0.76% 525.95 "•• 68 RO-5809-002-044-010 5259 1108 5199,998 0.76% ~ 525.95 69 RO-5809-002-044-011 5259 1109 5199,998 0.76% 525.95 70 RO-5809-002-044-012 5259 1110 5199,998 0.76% 525.95 71 RO-5809-002-044013 5259 1111 5199,998 0.76% 525.95 72 RO-5809-002-044-014 5259 •'1112 5199,998 0.76% 525.95 73 RO-5809-002-044-015 5259 1212 5229,998 0.87% 529.84 74 RO-5809-002-044-016 5259 1211 5229,998 0.87% 529.84 75 RO-5809-002-044-017 5259 1210 5229,998 0.87% 529.84 76 RO-5809-002-044-018 5259 1209 5229,998 0.87% 529.84 77 RO-5809-002-044-019 5259 1208 5229,998 0.87% , 529.84 78 RO-5809-002-044-020 5259 1207 5229,998 0.87% 529.84 79 RO-5809-002-044-021 5259 1206 59,998 0.87% ~ 529.84 80 RO-5809-002-044-022 5259 •1205. 5229,998 0.87% 529,84 81 RO-5809-002-044-023 5259 1204 5229,998 0.87% 529.84 82 RO-5809-002-044-024 5259 1203 5229,998 0.87% 529.84 83 RO-5809-002-044-025 5259 1202 5229,998 0.87% 529.84 84 RO-5809-002-044-026 5259 1201 5229,998 0.87% 529.84 85 RO-5809-002-044-027 5259 1301 5259,997 0.98% 533:74 86 RO-5809-002-044-028 5259 ,1302 5259,997 0.98% 533.74 87 RO-5809-002-044-029 5259 1303 5259,997 0.98% 533.74 88 RO-5809-002-t}44-030 5259 1304 5259,997 0.98% 533.74 89' RO-5809-002-044-031 5259 1305 5259,997 0.98% 533.74 90 RO-5809-002-044-032 5259 1306 5259,997 0.98% 533:74 91 RO-5809-002-044-033 5259 1307 5259;997 0.98% 533.74 92 RO-5809-002-044-034 5259 1308 5259;997 0.98% 533.74 93 RO-5809-002-044-035 5259 1309 5259,997 0.98% •. 533.74 94 RO-5809-002-044-036 5259 1310 5259,997 0.98% 533.74 95 RO-5809-002-4t4-037 5259 1341 5259,997 0.98% 533.74 96 RO-5809-002-044-038 5259 1312 5259,997 0.98% 533.74 97 RO-5809-002-Od4-039 5259 1412 5279;997 1.06% 536.33 98 RO-5809-002-044-040 5259 1411 5279;997 1.06%. 536.33 • 99 RO-5809-002-044041 5259 1410 5279,997 1.06°,6 536.33 100 RO-5809-002-044-042 5259 1409 5279,997 1.06% 536.33 . 101 RO-5809-002-044-043 5259 1408 5279;997 1.06°~ 536.33 102 RO-5809-002-044-044 5259 1407 5279,997 1.06% 236.33 103 RO-5809-002-044-045. 5259 1406 5279,997 1.06°~ - 536.33 104 RO-5809-002-044-046 5259 1405 5279,997 1.06% 536.33 105 RO-5809-002-044047 5259 •1404 5279,997 1.06% 536.33 106 RO-5809-002-044-048 5259 1403 5279,997 1.06% 536.33 107 RO-5809-002-044049 5259 1402 5279,997 1.06°,6 536.33 108 RO-5809-002-044-050 5259 1401 5279,997 1.06°,6 536.33 • Land Values Sum , 526,479,732 ~ • • 53,436.00 56 Cordgnaaa Total Estimated Assessment Fa Cord9raaa Cordgrau Percent of Tatal Tentative Count Parcel 10 PIN Unit S Land Veluea Assesment Assessment 1 805809-004-001-000 8897 2307-A 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.78 2 805809-004-002-000 6897 2307-B 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.78 3 805809-004-003-000 6897 2307-C 5199,998.00 1.84% 51.41 4 805809-004-004-000 6897 2307-E 5199,998.00 1.84% 51.41 5 805809-004-005-000 6897 2J07-D 5249,998.00 2.05% 21.78 6 805809-004-006-000 8897 2307-F 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.78 7 805809-004-007-000 8897 2309-A 5249,998.00 2.05% 31.78 8 805809-004-008-000 6897 2309-B 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.76 9 805809-004-009-000 6897 2309-C 5199,998.00 1.84% 51.41 10 R05804-004-01Q-000 8897 2309-0 5199,998.00 1.84% 51.41 11 805809-004-011-000 8897 2309-E 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.78 12 805808-004-012-000 6897 2309-F 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.76 ' 13 805809-004-013-000 8897 2311-A 5149,999.00 1.23% 51.08 14 805809-004-014-000 8897 2311-B 5149,999.00 1.23% 51.06 '. 15 805809-004-015-000 6897 2311-C 5149,999.00 1.23% 57.08 18 805809-004-018-000 6897 2311-D 5149,999.00 1.23% 51,08 17 805809-004-017-000 6897 2311-E 5149,999.00 1.23% 51.08 18 805809-004-018-000 8897 2311-F 5149,999.00 1.23% 51.06 19 805809-004-019-000 6897 2319-A 5149,999.00 1.23% 51.06 20 805809-004-020-000 6897 2319-B 5149,999.00 1.23% 51.08 21 805809-004-021-000 6897 2319-C 5149,999.00 1.23% 57.08 22 805809-004-022-000 6897 2319-D 5149,999.00 1.23% 51.08 23 805809-004-023-000 6897 2319-E 5149,999.00 1.23% 51.06 24 805809-004-024-000 8897 2319-F 2149,999.00 1.23% 51.06 25 805809-004-025-000 ~ 8897 2303-A 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.78 28 805809-044-026-000 6897 2303-8 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.78 27 805809-004-027-000 8897 2303-C 5199,998.00 1.64% 51.41 28 805809-004-026-000 6897 2303-D 5199,998.00 1.64% 51.41 29, 805809-004-029-000 6897 2303-E 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.78 30 805809-004-030.000 6897 2303-F 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.76 31 805809-004-031-000 6897 2305-A 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.78 32 805809-004-032-000 8897 2305-8 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.76 33 805809-004-033-000 8897 2305-C 5199,998.00 1.64% 51.41 34 805809-004-034-000 6897 2305-D 5199,998.00 1.64% 51.41 35 805809-004-035-000 6897 2305-E 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.76 36 805809-004-036000 6897 2305-F 3249,998.00 2.05% 51.76 ~ 37 805809-004-037-000 6897 2315-A 5149,999.00 1.2~% 51.06 38 805809-004-038-000 8897 2315-8 5149,949.00 1.23% 21.06 39 805809-004-039-000 6897 2315-C 5149,999.00 1.23% 51.06 40 805809-004-040-000 6897 2315-D 5149,999.00 1.23% 51.06 41 805809-004-041-000 6897 2315-E 5149,999.00 1.23% 51.06 42 805809-004-042-000 8897 2315-F 5149,999.00 1.23% 51.06 43 805809-004-043-000 6897 2317-A 5199,998.00 7.64% 51.47 , 44 805809-004-044-000 6897 2317-B 5199,998.00 7.64% 51.41 45 805809-004-045-000 6897 2317-C 2149,999.00 1.23% 57.06 46 805809-004-046-000 6897 2317-0 5149,999.00 1.23% 51,06 47 805809-004-047-000 8897 2317-E 5199,998.00 1.64% 51.41 48 805809-Q04-048-000 6897 2317-F 5199,998.00 1.64% 51.41 49 805809-004-049-000 6897 213-A 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.76 50 805809-004-050-000 8897 2313-8 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.78 51 805809-004-051-000 6897 2313-C 5199,998.00 1.64% 51.41 52 805809-004-052-000 6897 2313-0 5199,998.00 1.64% 51.41 53 805809-004-053-000 8897 2313-E 5199,998.00 1.84% 57.41 -, 54 805809-004-054-000 6897 2313-F 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.76 55 805809-Q04-055-000 6897 2301-A 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.76 58 805809-004-058-000 6897 2301-B 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.76 57 805809-004-057-000 6897 2301-C 5249,998.00 2.05% 21.76 58 805809-004-058-000 6897 2301-D 5799,998.00 1.84% 51.41 59 805809-004-059-000 8897 2301-E 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.76 80 805809-004-080-000 8897 2301-F 5249,998.00 2.05% 51.76 Land Values Sum 512,199,900.00 586.00 i 57 ,. { Thls page Intentlvnally left blank} 58 ~% • NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12/99 Regular Item #: 8.2 Estimated Time: Page Number: Department: Engineering Presenter: Greg Thompson Contact: Greg Thompson SUBJECT: Consideration of Capital Project Ordinance for Mason Inlet Relocation Project and Approval of Contract #99-0359 -ATM for Engineering and Consulting Services for the Mason Inlet Relocation Project and Authorize County Manager to Sign Contract Upon Satisfactory Negotiations. BRIEF SUMMARY: The Commissioners are requested to adopt the Project Ordinance to establish the budget for the engineering phase of the Mason Inlet Relocation project. On June 7, 1999, the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners voted to award the engineering contract to Applied Technology Management (ATM) for the design and construction of the Mason Inlet Relocation Project contingent upon Board approval of the final assessment resolution. The cost of the engineering services are under negotiation. The funding for the project will come from the Room Occupancy Tax fund balance. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Recommend adoption of the Capital Project Ordinance; request authorization for the Chairman to sign the ordinance; request approval of associated budget amendment #2000-02; .recommend approval of Contract #99-0359 upon the satisfactory negotiation of the terms of the contract between ATM and New Hanover County authorize County Manager.to execute contract. Assuming•that the Board approves the contract, we would .need to move quickly to execute the contract. FUNDING SOURCE: Room Occupancy Tax Fund ATTACHMENTS: . ,,~` ~:w -„~ Draft Contract ba2000-2.wp Cpmason.w REVIEWED BY: LEGAL: Approve FINANCE: Approve BUDGET: Approve HUMAN RESOURCES: N/A COUNTY MANAGER'S C MENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Recommend approv COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS: rCQUNN COMMtSS NE~i APPROVED • REJECTED O REMOVED D ppgTFQNED D 5 9 H>~~ ®ag ~lI PROJECT ORDINANCE MASON ~INI,ET CAPITAL, PROJECT BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board o~f Commissioners of Ne,w Hanover. County: 1. New Hanover County(County) is engaged in the relocation of Mason Inlet. - 2. County desires to authorize and budget for said project, in a project ordinance adopted pursuant to North Carolina General Statute $159-13.2, such ordinance to authorize all appropriations necessary for the completion of said project. NOW, THEREFORE, WITNES~SETH'THAT: 1. This project ordinance is adopted pursuant to North Carolina General Statute $159-13.2'. 2. The project undertaken pursuant'to this ordinance is the Relocation of Mason Inlet Capital Project, which project is herewith authorized. .:~~ 3. The revenue that will finance said project is: ' Transfer from ROTS Fund 5605,000 Total 5605,000 4. The following appropriations necessary for the project are. herewith made from the revenue listed above: • Capital Project Expense $605,000 ' wg~~U~ ~ Total $ 605 , 000 ~ ~31b~~~A 60 ®. ~~~~~ ~.. ~~.s.~~ .t 5. This project ordinance shall be entered in the minutes of the Board of Commissioners of New Hanover County. Within five days hereof, copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the finance and budget offices in New Hanover County, and with the Clerk to the Board of Commissioners of New Hanover County. Adopted this ~ day of 1999. ' Clerk to the Board William A. Caster, Chairman Board of-County Commissioners • • 61 CRAFT NORTH CAROLINA NEW.HANOVER COUNTY New Hanover County Contract # 99 - 0359 AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMEI\TT, made and entered into this day of 1999, by and between NEW HANO~ER C®UNTY, a body political and corporate of the State of North Carolina, hereinafter referred to as "County", and hereinafter referred to as "Engineer"; for services described below to be rendered for the following Project: Design, permitting, bid, engineering required during construction, and perform post-construction services required for the relocation of IVlason's Inlet for New Hanover County, and perform the project defined in the attached Scope of Services, marked Exhibit "A", all of which is incorporated herein by reference and made of the within contract. The County and Engineer hereby agree as follows: ARTICLE I THE ENGINEER'S BASIC DUTIES TO COUNTY 1.1 By executing this Agreement, Engineer represents to County that Engineer is professionally qualified to act as the Engineer for this Project. Engineer further represents to County that Engineer will maintain all necessary licenses, permits or other authorizations necessary to act as Engineer for this Project until Engineer's remaining duties hereunder have been satisfied. Engineer assumes full responsibility to County for the negligent acts and intentional torts and omissions of its consultants or others employed or retained by Engineer in connection with this Project. 1.2 Execution of this Agreement by Engineer constitutes a representation that Engineer has become generally familiar with the Project and the terms and conditions under which the 62 ~% New )Flanover County Contract # 99 - 0359 Project is to be implemented. 1.2.1 Contractor shall commence work to be performed under this contract upon execution of this contract, and the term shall be as listed in the attached Project Schedule. 1.4 Design and Permitting 1.4.1 The Engineer Scope of Services .shall be described as Exhibit "A". Based on the schematic design documents and any adjustments authorized by County, desired. schedule or Project budget, Engineer shall prepare and submit to County for review, detailed design documents consisting of drawings and other documents to fix and describe the size and character of the Project. 1.4.2 Engineer shall furnish as many copies of drawings, sketches, forms and reports as appropriate and necessary for County's use. 1.4.3 Engineer shall prepare and submit application and supporting documents.for any-and all necessary permits, and appear before any agencies as part of said application process. 1.5 Construction Documents ~ ` 1.5.1 Upon the County's authorization, Engineer shall prepare construction documents consisting of drawings and specifications setting forth in detail the requirements for construction of the Project. Such construction documents shall be reasonably accurate, coordinated and' adequate for construction and shall be in conformity and comply with applicable law, codes and regulations. Products specified for use shall be readily available unless written authorization to the contrary is given by County. 1.5.2 Engineer shall furnish County with two (2) copies of all completed drawings, specifications, reports, estimates, and contract documents and a set of reproducible mylars. 1.6.1 bidding and Award Engineer following County's approval of the construction documents and of the latest ~ ~ 63 New Hano~.er County Contract # 99 - 4359 preliminary estimate of construction cost, shall assist County in obtaining bids of negotiated proposals and assist in awarding and preparing contracts for construction. ;. 1.6.2 Engineer shall issue bid documents to bidders and maintain a record of prospective bidders to whom Bidding Documents have been issued, attend pre-bid conferences and receive and process deposits for Bidding Documents. Engineer shall furnish bid documents as~necessary. 1.6.3 Engineer shall. issue addenda as appropriate to interpret, clarify or expand the Bidding Documents. 1.6.4. Engineer shall .consult with and advise County as to the acceptability of subcontractors, suppliers and other persons and organizations proposed by the .prime contractor(s) (herein called "Contractor(s)") for those portions of the work as to which such acceptability is required by the Bidding Documents. , 1:6.5- Engineer shall consult with County concerning and determine the ~ acceptability of . substitute materials and equipment proposed by contractor(s) when substitution prior to the award of contracts is allowed by the Bidding Documents. . 1.6:6 Engineer shall assist County in evaluating bids or proposals. ~~ 1.6.7 Engineer shall perform additional ~w.ork as :described herein, and required by. work. . authorizations. 1.7 Construction Administration 1.7.1 Engineer shall provide administration of the construction contract as set forth below and shall perform those duties and discharge those responsibilities .set forth herein and ~in the . Agreement between .County and Contractor hereinafter, .referred to as the '.'Construction Contract". ~~ 1.7.2 Upon receipt, Engineer shall carefully review and examine the Contractor's Schedule of Values; together with any supporting documentation or data which the County or 64 New Hanover County Contract # 99 - 0359 Engineer may require from the Contractor. The purpose of such review and examination will be to protect County from an unbalanced Schedule of Values which allocates greater value to certain elements of the work than is indicated by such supporting documentation or data or, than is reasonable under the circumstances. If the Schedule of Values is not found to be .appropriate, or if the supporting documentation or data is deemed to be inadequate, and unless County directs the Engineer to the contrary in writing, the Schedule of Values .shall be returned to the Contractor for revision or supporting documentation or data. After making such examination, if the Schedule of Values is found to be appropriate as submitted, or if necessary, as revised, Engineer shall sign the Schedule of Values thereby indicating its informed belief that the Schedule of Values constitutes a reasonable, balanced basis for payment of the Contract Price to the Contractor. Engineer shall not sign such Schedule of Values in the absence of such belief unless directed to do so in writing, by County. 1.7.3 Engineer shall carefully review the work of the Contractor whenever and wherever appropriate. `The purpose of such inspections will be to determine the quality, quantity and progress of the work in comparison with the requirements of the Construction Contract. In making such inspections, Engineer shall exercise care to protect County from defects or deficiencies in the work, from unexcused delays in the schedule and from overpayment to the Contractor. Following each such inspection the Engineer shall submit a written report of such inspection, together with any appropriate comments or recommendations, to County. 1.7.4 Engineer shall at all times have access to the work wherever it is located. 1.7.5 Engineer shall determine. amounts owed to the Contractor based upon observations of the work as required herein, evaluations of the Contractor's rate of progress in light of the remaining Contract Time and upon evaluations of the Contractor's applications for payment, and shall issue certificates for payment to .County in such amounts. • ~ 65 New Hanover County Contract # 99 - 0359 1.7.6 The issuance of a certificate for payment shall constitute a representation by the Engineer to County that Engineer has made a review'of the work as provided herein and to the best of the knowledge, information and informed belief of Engineer, that the work has progressed to the level indicated, that the quality of the work meets or exceeds the requirements of the Construction Contract, and that, the Contractor is entitled to payment of the amount certified. 1.7.7 Engineer shall render written or graphic interpretations necessary for -the proper execution or progress of the work with reasonable promptness on request of the Contractor. 1.7.8 Engineer shall reject work which does not conform to the contract documents unless directed by County, in writing, not to do so. Whenever, in the Engineer's opinion, it is necessary or advisable, Engineer shallrequire special inspection or testing of the work in accordance with the provisions of the Construction Contract whether or not such-work is fabricated, installed or completed. 1.7.9 Engineer shall review and approve, or;take other appropriate action upon, the Contractor's submittal such as Shop Drawings, Product Data and Samples. Approval by the Engineer of the Contractor's submittal shall constitute the Engineer's representation to County that such submittal is in conformance with the Construction Contract. Such action shall be taken with reasonable promptness so as to cause no delay to the Contractor or the Project. 1.7.10 Engineer shall review, and advise County concerning, proposals and requests for Change Orders from the Contractor. Engineer shall prepare ~ Change Orders for County's approval and execution in accordance with the Construction Contract, and shall have authority to order with the consent of the County, by Field Order, minor-changes in'the work not involving an adjustment in the Contract Price or an extension ofthe-Contract Time. 1.7.11 Engineer shall conduct a review to determine the date of~Substantial Completion and the date of final Completion, .shall receive' and forward to County for the County's review 66 • written warranties and related documents required by the construction contract and assembled by New Hanover County Contract # 99 - 0359 the Contractor, and shall, when appropriate, issue a final Certificate for Payment. 1.7..12 Engineer shall, without additional compensation, promptly correct any errors, omissions, deficiencies or conflicts in Engineer's work product. 1.7.13 Engineer shall indemnify and hold New Hanover County, County, their agents and. employees, harmless against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, or other liability, including ,attorney fees, on account of personal injuries or death or on account of property. damages arising out of or relating to the work to be performed by Engineer hereunder, resulting from the negligence of or willful act or omission of Engineer, his agents, employees acid subcontractors. 1.8 Additional Services Any additional services will be negotiated with the Engineer to be paid on the basis of the attached herein (see Exhibit "A"), or as otherwise agreed upon through Change Order. 2.1 ARTICLE III BASIS OF COMPENSATION County shall pay Engineer a sum not to exceed (~ ). ARTICLE IV PAYMENTS TO THE ENGINEER 3.1 Engineer's Invoices 3.1.1 On or before the 10th day of .each month, unless otherwise agreed in writing by Engineer and County, Engineer shall submit an invoice to County requesting payment for services properly rendered. Engineer's invoice shall describe with reasonable particularity each service rendered, and the date thereof. • E 67 l0tew B[anover County Contract # 99 - €139 3.1.2 If payment is requested for services rendered by Engineer, the invoice shall additionally reflect the. allocations as provided in Article III and shall state the percentage of completion as to each such allocation. The invoice .shall bear the signature of Engineer, which signature shall constitute Engineer`s representation to. County that the services indicated in the invoice have progressed to the level indicated, have been: properly and timely performed as required herein, that the reimbursable expenses included in the invoice have been••reasonably~ incurred, that all obligations of Engineer covered by prior invoices have been paid in full, and that; ' to the best of Engineer's knowledge, information and informed belief, the amount requested is currently due. and owing, there being no reason known to Engineer that payment of any portion thereof should be withheld. Submission of Engineer's invoice for final payment and reimbursement shall further constitute Engineer's representation to County that, upon receipt from County of. the amount invoiced, all obligations of Engineer to others, including its consultants, . incurred in connection with the Project, will be paid in full. , _' _ 3.2 'Time for Payment . 3.2.1 County shall make payment to Engineer of all sums properly invoiced as provided in Payments to Engineer paragraph, within thirty (3 d) days of County's receipt thereof. 3.3 Owner's Right to Withhold Payment 3.3.1 In the event that County becomes- credibly informed that any representations of Engineer, are wholly or partially inaccurate, County may withhold payment of sums then or in the future otherwise due to Engineer until the inaccuracy, and the cause thereof, is corrected to County's reasonable satisfaction, 3.4 Reimbursable Expenses 3.4.1 Reimbursable, Expenses shall mean: expenses ircurred by Engineer and Engineer's consultants in the interest of the Project, as follows: 68 New Hanover County Contract # 99 - 0359 3.4.2 Reasonable expenses of: transportation in connection with the Project; long- distance communications; cost of reproduction, postage and handling of drawings, specifications and other documents; renderings, models and mock-ups requested by County; additional insurance coverage or limits, including professional liability insurance, requested by County in excess of that specified in Paragraph 7.1.2 of this Agreement. 3.4.3 Expenses shall be reimbursed to the Engineer at a rate of 1.1 times' the actual expense. 3.1 Engineer's Records 3.1.1 Documentation accurately reflecting the time expended by Engineer and his personnel and records of Reimbursable Expenses shall be maintained by Engineer and shall be available to County for review and copying upon request. 4.1.2 The Engineer shall maintain books, records, documents and other evidence directly pertinent to the work under this Contract in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and practices. The County, or any of their duly authorized representatives shall have access to any books, documents, papers, records and other evidence which relates directly to the Project for the purpose of examination, audit, excerpts and transcriptions. 4.1.3 Records described above shall be maintained and made available during the performance under this Contract and for a period of three years after the County makes final payment and all other pending matters are closed. ARTICLE VI TERMINATION 5.1 Termination for Cause 5.1.1 This agreement may be terminated by either party upon seven (7) days written notice to the other should such other party fail substantially to perform in accordance with its ~ F 69 New Ilanover County Contract # 99 - 0359 material terms, through no fault of the party initiating the termination. 5.2 Termination by County Without Cause ,, . 5.2.1 This Agreement may be terminated by County without cause upon seven (7) days' written notice to Engineer. In the event of such atermination without cause, Engineer shall be, compensated for all services performed prior to termination, together with Reimbursable Expenses incurred. In such event, Engineer shall promptly submit to County its invoice for final payment and reimbursement which invoice shall comply with the provisions herein. ARTICLE VII MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 6.1 Insurance. Engineer shall maintain insurance from companies licensed to write business in North Carolina and acceptable to New Hanover County, of the kinds and minimum amounts specified below. 6:1.1 Certificates and. 1lTotice of Cancellation. Before commencing work under this contract, :Engineer shall, furnish County with certificates of all insurance required below. Certificates shall indicate the type, amount, class of. operations covered, .effective date and expiration date of all policies, and shall contain the following statement:... , "The insurance covered by this certificate will not be canceled or materially altered, axce~f after thirty (30} days written notice has been received by County". 6.1.2 Workers Compensation and Employers Liability Insurance. Covering all of the Engineer's employees to be engaged in the work under this contract, providing the required ...f. statutory benefits under North Carolina Workers Compensation Law, and employers liability insurance providing limits at least in the amount of $100,000/500,000/100,000, applicable to claims due to bodily injury by accident or disease. 6.1.3 Commercial General Liability. Including coverage for independent contractor 70 9 New Hanover County Contract # 99 - 0359 operations, contractual liability assumed under the provisions of this contract, products/completed operations liability and broad form property damage liability insurance coverage. Exclusions applicable to explosion, collapse and underground hazards are to be deleted when the work involves these exposures. The policy shall provide liability limits in at least in the amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence, combined single limits, applicable to claims due to bodily injury and/or property damage. New Hanover County shall be named as an additional insured under this policy. 6.1.3 Automobile Liability Insurance. Covering all owned, non-owned and hired vehicles, providing liability limits at least in the amount of $500,000 per occurrence combined single limits applicable to claims due to bodily injury and/or property damage. 6.1.4 Professional Liability Insurance. The Contractor shall take and maintain a Professional Liability Insurance Policy written specifically to cover the project and professional services to be rendered under this contract. This policy shall be written for a minimum policy period of five~(5) years, providing limits of liability at least in the amount of $5,000,000 per claimLpolicy aggregate. New Hanover County shall be added as an additional insured under this policy. 6.2 Independent Contractor 6.2.1 It is mutually understood and agreed that Engineer is an independent contractor and not an agent of County, and as such, Engineer, his or her agents and employees shall not be entitled to any County employment benefits, such as, but not limited to, vacation, sick leave, insurance, worker's compensation, or pension or retirement benefits. 6.3 Nonwaiver of 12ights 6.3.1 It is agreed that County's failure to insist upon the strict performance of any provision of this agreement, or to exercise any right based upon a breach thereof, or the • ~~ 71 New Hanover County Contract # 99 - 0359 acceptance of any performance during such breach, shall not constitute a waiver of any rights under this agreement. However, specific written waivers signed by the authorized County representative shall be binding upon County. 6.4 'Conflict of Interest 6.4.1 No paid employee of the' Countyshall have a personal or financial interest, direct or indirect, as a contracting party or otherwise, in the performance of this .agreement. ~ " 6.5 Subcontracts 6.5.1 Engineer shall utilize no subcontractors for carrying out the sen~ices to be performed under this agreement without 'the written approval of the County. By the execution of this agreement, County grants prior approval to the following subcontractors: 6.6 Further Actions 6.6.1 The parties will make and execute-all further instruments and documents required to carry out the purposes and intent of this agreement.' 6.7 Inclusive Terms 6.7.1 Use of the masculine herein shall include -.the feminine and neuter, and the singular shall include the plural. 6.8 Governing Law 6.8.1 All of the terms and conditions contained herein shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of North Carolina. 6.9 Use and ®wner'ship of Documents ` 6.9.1 The drawings, specifications and other documents or things prepared by Engineer for the Project shall become and be the sole property of County. Engineer shall be permitted to retain copies thereof for its records and for its future professional endeavors. Such drawings, specifications and other documents or things are not intended by Engineer for use on other 72 11 • New Hanover County Contract # 99 - 0359 projects by County or others. Any reuse by County or by third parties without the written approval of Engineer, shall be at the sole risk of County and County shall indemnify and save harmless 'the Engineer from any and all liability, costs, claims, damages, losses -and expenses including attorneys' fees arising out of, or resulting from, such reuse; provided however, that this agreement to indemnify and save harmless shall not apply to any reuse of documents retained by, or through, the Contractor. 6.10 Successors and Assigns 6.10.1 Engineer shall not assign its rights hereunder, excepting its right to payment, nor shall it delegate any of its duties hereunder without the written consent of County. Subject to the provisions of the immediately preceding sentence, County and Engineer, respectively, bind themselves, their successors, assigns and legal representatives to the other party to this Agreement and to the successors, assigns and legal representatives of such other party with respect to all ..covenants of this Agreement. 6.11 No Third-Party. Beneficiaries 6.11.1 Nothing contained herein shall create a contractual relationship with, or any rights in favor of, any third party.. 6,.12 <Entire Agreement 6.1.2.1 This Agreement represents the entire agreement between County and Engineer and supersedes all prior .communications, negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by both County and . Engineer. 6.13 Notices 6.13.1 All notices required hereunder to be sent to either party shall be sent to the following designated addresses, or to such other address or addresses as may hereafter be ! ~ 12 73 Ioteav Hanover Caunty Contract # 99 - 0359 designated by either party by mailing of written notice of such change of address, by Registered Mail; -Return Receipt Requested: ~ ~ - To-County: Greg Thompson, Chief Project Engineer New Hanover County Engineering Department 414 Chestnut St., Room 101 Wilmington, North Carolina 28401 To Engineer: Attention: 6-14 Nan-Discrimination 6.14.1 Engineer will take affirmative action not to discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment or otherwise illegally deny any person participation in or the benefits of . the program which is the subject of this agreement because of race, creed,: color, sex, age, disability or national origin. To the extent applicable; Engineer will comply with all provisions of Executive Or-der No. 11246, the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 (P.L. 88-352) and 1968 (P.L. 90=284}, and all applicable Federal, State and local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations,' including all Federal and State Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) requirements, orders, instructions, designations -and other directives promulgated to prohibit discrimination. Violation of this provision, after notice; shall be a material breach of this agreement and may result, at' County's option, in a terrriination or suspension of this agreement in whole or in part. - 6.15. The County and Engineer both reserve the right to modify the terms and conditions of this Agreement prior to the execution of Change Orders, to this Agreement, provided both parties agree to the modifications. 7. Goal for Participation by Minority Businesses. It . is the policy of the 74 I3 ~_~ New ]Banover County Contract # 99 - 0359 County that minority businesses shall have the maximum opportunity to participate in the performance of contracts financed with public money including contracts awarded pursuant to the requirements of Article 8 of the N.C.G.S. • New Hanover County has adopted a ten percent (10%) verifiable goal for participation by minority businesses in the total value of work required by the terms and conditions of this contract. -~ Engineer covenants and agrees to comply with said policy of the County and the provision of N. C. G: S. Article 8 acid shall follow County guidelines specifying the actions that Engineer must take to ensure a good faith effort in the recruitment and selection of minority businesses for participation in this contract. 8. Incorporation. Exhibit "A" is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals, the day and year first above written and by authority duly given. NEW HANOVER COUNTY [SEAL] ATTEST: Clerk to the Board {CORPORATE SEAL] Allen O'Neal, Manager CONTRACTOR President 14 75 1~1ew Hanover County Contract # 99 - Q359 ATTEST: Secretary ~ . This instrument has been pre- audited in the manner required by the Local Government Budget and Fiscal Control Act. ounty Finance Director Approved as to form: County Attorney ' NORTH CAROLINA NEW HANOVER COUNTY I, a Notary Public of the State and County aforesaid, certify that Lucie F. Harrell personally came before me this day and acknowledged that she is Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners of New Hanover County, and that by authority duly given and as the act of the Board, the foregoing instrument was signed in its name by its Manager, sealed with its official seal and attested by herself as its Clerk. WITNESS my hand and official seal, this day of , 1999. Notary Public My commission expires: 7.6 ~ 15 ~; New Hanover County Contract # 99 - 0359 STATE OF COUNTY OF I, a Notary Public of the State and County aforesaid, certify that ,personally came before me this day and acknowledged that (s)he is Secretary of a North Carolina corporation, and that by authority duly given and as the act of the corporation, the foregoing instrument was signed in its name by rts President; sealed with its official seal and attested~by herself as its Secretary. WITNESS my hand and official seal, this day of , 1999. I~TOtary Public [, My~coinrimission expires: • 16 77 ATTACHMEiVT A Description of Basic Services New Hanover County Coastal Engineering Services Mason Inlet Relocation Project 78 GENERAL In response. to severe erosion and property damage at the northern. end of Wrightsville Beach, the County is proposing an inlet relocation project to protect the properties located south of Mason Inlet. .Professional. services provided by ATM to the COUNTY include design, bid, engineering required during construction, and performance of post-construction services required for the relocation of Mason Inlet. Immediate work will begin to conduct field investigations to develop conceptual design configurations for the relocation project. The primary goal is to design a hydraulic system that provides the most stable channel and inlet configuration and which will be permissible by the State and Federal regulatory agencies. A dredging project to relocate the inlet to a position approximately 3,000 feet north is proposed to provide the best solution to protecting the properties. Project permits will be pursued under state and federal jurisdictions to allow for construction in January 2000. SCHEDULE Meetings with principal representatives of the state and federal regulatory agencies must proceed as soon as possible in order to determine specific concerns of agency representatives. The time frame needed to design, permit, and prepare for construction is as follows: 1. Develop Conceptual Design and Initial Permit Application 2. Meetings with DCM & USCOE on Project Design & Field Data Collection 3. Prepare and Submit Environmental Assessment With Supplemental Data on Permit Application and Drawings 4. Meetings with Agencies Response to Agency Questions 5. Final Agency Review 6, Construction Specifications, Drawings and Bidding (Bid Solicitation) 7. Construction Contract 8. Project Construction July 21, 1999 July 12 -August 30, 1999 August 12 -September 15, 1999 August 2 -October 30, 1999 October 30 -January 1, 2000 November 15, 1999 December 15 -January 1, 2000 January 2, 2000 -May 1, 2000 Applied Technology and Management of No i , I GNVlmason irnet s~-@$A~'t~fl~r`r`~`~ntal & Coastal Engineers, Scientists & Nlana,~ement Consultants 06!25/99 SCOPE OF WORK 1.0 Engineering and Natural Resources Investigations: Data Acquisition, Reduction, and Analysis ATM will proceed to collect all available baseline information and data. This work effort will require an assessment of existing data and information in order to identify information gaps. Specifications for the engineering field investigations will provide for work that is expected to include establishing survey control points on Figure 8 Island, plan view aerial photography, beach and topographic surveys, surveys in support of hydrodynamic model studies, soils testing. and geotechnical information and wetland, shellfish, fiisheries information and mapping at the project area. It is assumed that the County will assist ATM in an investigation of existing submerged land easements and related property ownership instruments in the areas of dredging. ATM will be responsible for upland facilities and utilities mapping at the .north end of Lumina Drive. It will be the responsibility of the County to perform additional core boring testing and to provide aerial photography of the Project site if available photography or existing core borings are deemed insufficient for regulatory agency submittals. A summary of the engineering investigations and site conditions information that will be required to proceed with the Task 2 "Preliminary Engineering Evaluation" phase of the project is summarized below. Reimbursable expenses for the engineering investigations necessary to evaluate existing conditions will include but not be limited to: Deliverables: 1.1 Estuary and Channel Surveys and Beach/Inlet Profile Surveys, 1.2 Aerial Photography (digitally corrected), 1.3 Core Borings and Material Testing (County), and 1.4 Existing Upland Conditions and Facilities (including utilities). 2.0 'Preliminary Engineering Evaluation .The initial phase will involve a review of all previous studies, data, property deeds and other pertinent reports and information. Using the information provided by these sources and the engineering investigations described above, the Preliminary Engineering Evaluation will evaluate alternate design features for the Project. ATM will evaluate alternative channel alignments and cross-sections, methods of construction, construction phasing, transport methods and logistics, ingress/egress routes including bridge/road limitations and conditions, and potential public safety concerns. • Alternate methods of construction will be evaluated in light of timing, dredge area locations, sediment strata, operational, economical, and environmental constraints. Similar evaluations of infill quantities, material source locations, 2 Applied Technology and Management of North Carolina, Inc. GNV/mason inlet sccpa.DOC/062599 06/25/99 ' and beachfill transects will be made. In order to identify and evaluate alternate plans and design features for this project, ATfv1 will need to perform an analysis of the focal coastal processes that effect beach erosion,. longshore transport estimates based on USACOE studies, project construction methods that may be utilized to minimize impacts to nearshore, and biological resources. A general outline describing the work comprising this task and ATM's technical approach-to accomplish the Phase 2 work is provided below. Deliverables: 2.1 Coastal Processes and Natural Resource Mapping, 2.2 Hydrodynamic Analysis of Inlet and Middle Sound area, 2.3 ,Draft Permit Applications and Drawings, , ~2.4 Potential Impacts to Utilities, Roads, and Bridges, - 2.5 Develop Recommended Project Plans, and Designs, 2.6 Cost Estimates for Alternative Plans and Designs; and 2.7 County Review, Meetings, and Local Coordination. 3.0 Thirty Percent (30%} Design Phase ATM will proceed with Project drawings providing sufficient details in order to describe the design features of the recommended Project. Representative cross-sections. will be .developed at a minimum, spacing of 500 feet and locations of potential concerns, such as existing utilities, will be identified. These plans shall provide sufficient detail to identify: project site locations and existing site geometry;. typical section views with-the. proposed project improvements; soil 'borings and grain size distribution curves; haul routes and staging areas; mitigation areas; .and, existing utilities. Additionally, a base map will be developed detailing the locations of the existing Rights-of- Way and Easement Survey. Working with Land Management Group, ATM ~ will locate all .natural resources, using GPS positioning based on the 1983 state plane coordinate system, within the project area and prepare resource characterization plan maps The recommended design as formulated in the Preliminary Engineering Evaluation- and as approved by the County, will be further detailed and "refined in the plans and drawings as required by this task. A general outline ' of the sub-tasks for Phase~3 of the Project is detailed below. :Responsibility . 3.1 Develop Project- Design Features, 3.2 .Prepare Typical Section(s), Plans, and .Cost Estimates, .3.3 Meetings with Regulatory Agencies, 3.4 Final Permit Applications Submitted , 3.5 Prepare Reports (Environmental Assessment Report •~and Hydrodynamic Modeling Report) with computations and supporting testing data, and 8 0 3.5 Field Walk of Project Area with County Representatives.. . „ , 3 Applied Technology and Management of North Carolina, lnc. - GNV/mason inlet scope.DOC/062599 06/25/99 4.0 Sixty Percent (60%) Design Phase . This phase will further refine and develop the design components of the Project including: plan and profile geometries with notes and typical section views; mitigation plan and section views; erosion/turbidity and sedimentation control plan; site plan and profiles; natural resource and characterization plan maps, preliminary utilities relocation/adjustment plans, structures plan views, section views, and notes; and, right-of-way and easement maps. This work will proceed concurrently with Task 5 "Acquisition of Regulatory Permits" and reflects additional design details necessary to design and bid the Project. An evaluation of alternate project design configuratins for inlet and channel design will be performed during the simulations of the hydrodynamic modeling to formulating a final recommended project design for submission of permit applications to the State. In accordance with the description of services provided in Attachment B "Environmental Assessment Report", ATM and LMG will prepare and submit a report describing the hydrodnamic conditions and hydraulic changes to the Mason Inlet and estuarine system. Changes will be discussed in terms of tidal exchange (tidal prism), direction and magnitude of flow, currents and the resulting impacts on salinity within the Middle Sound area. ATM will prepare design calculations for the drainage plan and, additionally, further refine the estimates of Project cost. A summary outline of work to be .performed is provided below. Deliverables 4.1 Revise Detailed'Plans and Drawings, 4.2 Prepare Existing ROW and Easement Survey, 4.3 Participate in Presentation and Meetings with County, 4.4 Participate in Meetings with Each Regulatory Agency, and 5.0, Acquisition of Regulatory Agency Permits ATM will aggressively pursue all permits and approvals required for the Project. ATM will schedule meetings with all agencies responsible for permit review and comments to determine information sought by these agencies for the Environmental Assessment document. ATM will schedule meetings at "agency offices, as necessary, to ensure timely review of the applications. Upon :receipt of the agencies request for supplemental information, ATM will prepare a draft response for submission to the agency within seven (7) days. Frequent telephone discussions with agency staff will be used to track the review process, solicit and respond to questions from the agencies, prod agency staff and minimize the duration of the review. A similar procedure has been used successfully by ATM on other Projects. Required permitting agencies may include: i New Hanover County Department of Engineering, $ 1 4 Applied Technology and Management of North Carolina, Inc. GNV/mason inlet scope.DOCl062599 C6/25/99 • State of North Carolina (DEHNR), Division of Coastal .Management (DCM), AEC General Permit, • State of North Carolina (DEHNR) Division of Water Quality .Permit (DWQ) Section 401 Water Quality Certification, • State of North Carolina,. Department of Administration, State Property Office (easements for.dredge areas), • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE), and • North Carolina DEHNR, Division of Water Resources (DWR) and the U. S. Army Corps of .Engineers (USACOE) Joint Dredge and Fill Permit. ATM will perform work to finalize permit files for agency action, data, and drawings as required for submittal by the County to the local and state agencies having. jurisdiction over the Project and utilities companies. Modifications to the drawings will be prepared as required by the County to expedite. the permit review .process. A general description of the work requirements forthis phase of the work is provided below. Deliverables: 5.1 Prepare Final Permit Drawings; . 5.2 Coordinate and Provide Supplementary Information to: (a) Division of Coastal Management; (b) US Army, Corps of Engineers, and (c) Other agencies as described above; 5.3 Participate in Meetings with County; and 5.4 Participate in Meetings with Regulatory Agencies. 6.0 Ninety Percent (90°/a) Design Phase ATM will proceed rapidly to prepare a -set of ,construction plans and specification for Project upon receipt of the County's Notice to Proceed. A final construction cost estimate will be submitted to the County with the draft Drawings and Technical Specifications. 'ATM will assist the County in .their review, of all „permit conditions and acquisition of permits including the DCM and USACOE notice to proceed. A legal survey with descriptions and sketches of the construction plans and proposed right-of-way surveys will be submitted to the County for approval. The Phase 6-work is outlined as described below: ~ . Deliverables: ~ ~ , 6.1 Prepare Construction Plans and Specifications, ~ -. 6.2 Participate in Meetings and Presentations with County, 6.3 Coordinate and Acquire Final Construction Permits, 6.4 Prepare Final Specifications and Construction Cost 82 Estimates, and ~ '. 6.5 Prepare Schedule for Construction. ~ Applied Technology and Management of North Carolina,. Inc. GNV/mason inlet scope.DOC1062699 06/25/99 5 r 7.0 One Hundred Percent (100%) Design Phase ATM will complete final Project design and prepare revisions to the Contract Documents to reflect conditions of the final construction permits upon modification by the County (Including a set of photo mylars). The technical specifications and construction costs estimates will be modified to reflect the final Project design and construction requirements. ATM will participate in the pre-bid conference and supply information and materials to the County for the construction plans and specifications addenda. Similarly, ATM- will review the bid tabulation sheets and assist the County in award of the Contract. for Project construction. All design calculations and two sets of final prints and sets of specifications will be signed and sealed for delivery to the County. S.0 Construction Phase Engineering Services The construction phase of Project will begin with the award of the Contract. ATM will prepare for and participate with the County and Contractor in the pre-construction conference in order to address questions regarding the interpretation of the Project plans and specifications. During the construction phase of the Project, ATM will provide a full-time on site engineering representive, serving as the County's representative both at the. construction site .and for the review of all measurements of work performed by the Contractor to determine compliance with the design and permit requirements. He/she will be responsible for rejecting or accepting all shop drawings which the Contractor may be required to submit. Additionally, ATM will prepare all change orders requested by the County or the ATM Engineer-of-Record. The responsibilities for the Engineer's Representative during construction are described in the attached document. ATM shall attend and conduct weekly, progress meetings with the COUNTY and CONTRACTOR during construction. In addition, two meetings are anticipated prior to construction and prior to mobilization to the project site. It is assumed that construction will require 4 months of continuous work. ATM will document all phases of construction with site photography and video documentation of work progress (available to the COUNTY at all times). :ATM will review for accuracy of computation and completeness CONTRACTOR's periodic payment requests and recommend payment to the COUNTY upon satisfactory completion of work of completion segments.. ' Following notification by the CONTRACTOR that construction activities are complete, ATM will notify the COUNTY and conduct a final inspection of the work to determine equipment remaining, work items requiring completion, and all materials for clean-up. A punch-list shall be developed and coordinated with the COUNTY's engineering representative. Prior to approval of final payment to the CONTRACTOP, a final inspection of the beach and dredge areas will be conducted to determine if all work is complete and, upon satisfactory completion recommend final payment to the COUNTY. 83 6 Applied Technology and Management of North Carolina, Inc. GNV/mason inlet scope.DOCl062599 - 06/25/99 9.0 Construction Phase Engineering Services (Additional) During the construction phase of~the Project, as requested by the County, ATM. will furnish expanded geotechnical investigations, analysis and • reports/plans needed as a result of discovery of hazardous waste. .. 84 Applied Technology and Management of North Carolina, Inc.. •~ GNV/mason inlet scope.DOC1062599 06/25/99 f` Draft Work Plan ATTACHMENT B ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT DOCUMENT MASON INLET RELOCATION: ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS 1.0 Purpose and Need for Action Brief discussion of the purpose and need for the Project alternatives and the recommended Project. The overall purpose of the Environmental Assessment is to demonstrate that the Proposed Project represents an environmentally and technically viable long-term management plan for Mason Inlet which will ensure protection of the sand resources along the adjacent beaches of Figure Eight Island and Shell Island and fully consider the impacts on and benefits to the surrounding water quality and affected living biological resources. All significant natural resources located in the coastal waters surrounding the inlet area(s) and, or potentially influenced by implementation of the Proposed Project will be identified, characterized and mapped to delineate the extent of the resources and quantify the potential environmental. effects. Additionally, the existing and proposed alterations to the hydrodynamic regime within and adjacent to Mason Inlet for the proposed Project will be quantified. 7.7 Introduction A discussion of the history of the events preceding the current situation will be provided. This section of the report will document the history bf the inlet, the natural setting and characteristics, the relevant changes that the inlet has caused to the overall system, and the various remedial measures that have been proposed. Provide a brief explanation of the context of the key biological and environmental (i.e., water quality and flushing) issues and the need for the long- range management of Mason Inlet. A description of the action that is contemplated by the Project will be included. • 85 PAGE1 1.2 Need for and Purpose of fhe Proposed Action An explanation as to why this Project is necessary, including a summary of the primary beneficiaries (public, environment, private, etc.), will be given. List the merits of the Project, from highest to lowest. This section will describe 'how the recommended action is best suited to meet the identified need (ultimately the .study should ariswer this .question). List key physical and biological resources and protected and endangered species present in the area. Discussion as to how the Proposed Project is intended to accomplish the need stated above. 7.3 Decision Thaf Must Be Made A statement as to what the federal and state agencies need to decide in their findings. 7.4 /ssues and Concerns An itemizedlisting of the primary issues and concerns expressed by the state and federal agency representatives and members of the public. 7.5 Coordination and Consultation Discuss the efforts taken to include affected and interested parties in the development and review of the EA. Include all efforts made through meetings, public meetings and presentations to interested groups. 2.0 Alternatives Including the Proposed Action A discussion of the design features for the alternative actions, described below, will provide general information of the range of alternatives considered. 2.1 Alternative 1 No Action 2.2 Alternative 2 The Proposed-Action: "Mason Inlet Relocation 2.3 Alternative 3 Close Mason Inlet ~~ 2.4 Alternative 4 Dredge All Areas Except Mason Channel . (connection to the ICWW) ~ ~ ' " 2.5 Comparison of the Alternatives 86 ~ PAGE 2 3.0 Existing Environment The portion of the study will summarize the environmental resources and the aerial extent of impact .anticipated for the recommended Project and the alternatives. This phase of the study will include research to locate all available historical material relative to the topographic and bathymetric, physical data -such as currents and tides, geological and sediments, biological 'environment and .water quality characteristics of Mason's Inlet and the surrounding waters. Additionally, relevant information on the social, aesthetic, and economic implications of the Project will be summarized briefly. Facts pertaining to the land use surrounding the inlet will be discussed. Sources of information will include, but not be limited to, data and studies available through New Hanover County, the City of Wrightsville Beach, State Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources (Division of Coastal Management), North Carolina Sea Grant, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Wilmington District), North Carolina State University and the University of North Carolina at Wilmington. Of primary interest will be previous work related to wave climate, tidal currents, shoreline. changes and sediment budget including inlet .migration information, water quality parameters, biological environment mapping and characteristics (seagrasses, shellfish, fisheries, vegetation and threatened/endangered species} and previous assessments. of the biological resources in the area. This information will be used to identify changes occurring since 1986, by comparison with field data collected as part of the present project. Natural resources located in the coastal environment surrounding the inlet project area will be initially.defined using aerial photography. Ground truthing will be conducted for all submerged and wetland habitats identified from the aerial photography .which are expected to be significantly influenced by the dynamics. of this inlet. Field and site investigations will be conducted in the areas surrounding the inlet. Biologists and scientists with special expertise in wetland resources and marine fisheries will conduct transects and ground truthing to verify and confirm the locations, aerial extent and habitat species for sites identified on the aerial photography. Analyses of samples from these habitats will define the biological resource present and the potential susceptibility to changes in tidal flushing, direct impacts and turbidity impacts from dredging and sand fill placement. Natural resources locations and habitat information will ~f7e mapped. All important environmental 'resources will be identified and incorporated into a series of maps to delineate the extent of the resources and quantify the potential environmental` effects. AutoCAD mapping will allow'-for mapping enlargements to characterize conditions for specific habitats Natural resource information will be transferred onto color maps for application to overlay mapping~'of physiographic and proposed •Project design features. A meeting will be conducted with state and federal agency staff to describe the data collection program and to present the data and information measured and identified during the field investigations. A preliminary assessment of baseline environmental conditions of the study area will be presented. 3.9 Environmental and Natural Resources Data Synthesis, Analysis and Mapping The data resulting from the biological and environrimental field studies will be combined with data available from studies performed over the past 10 years to identify key biological resources and the aerial extent of these environmental resources'. These data will be synthesized to evaluate the environmental. feasibility of the alternatives• listed in Section 2. AutoCAD mapping of the historical and existing condition database with final production of existing and historical locations of significant biological communities and seagrass beds. 3.2 Historical Conditions and Trends of Natural Resources The Project Team will` review historic aerial photography and studies covering Mason Inlet and the surrounding estuarine waters to qualitatively describe ~any~ clear trends in the growth and recession, etc. of the local marine resources including seagrasses, fisheries and wetland habitats. Historic trends based on review of photography will be correlated with majo~~ physical and hydrologic patterns of the inlet to quantitatively assess the environmental factors affecting these resources. • A literature survey of the physical, chemical and biological requirements of these resources will be conducted to further understand the range of environmental' conditions that support these systems. These data will be compared with historic information on the local waterways -and Mason's Inlet and the current physical, hydrological and water quality conditions as defined by Q Q this study. Based on the above information, the historical impacts and trends of these important V V '' PAGE 4 natural. resources in the Mason Inlet study area will be prepared to assess the probable environmental effects of alternative inlet improvements and modifications. 3.3 Physical Environment: Data Synthesis, Analysis, and Mapping The data resulting from the nearshore and inlet field studies will be combined with data available from the previous studies obtained by ATM . and CVO to provide baseline topographic, hydrographic, soils/material characteristics and geological information necessary to evaluate the existing conditioris and hydraulic, characteristics at Mason Inlet. Data synthesis, analysis, and mapping will include sand digitizing of the existing condition data base which will rely on the hydrographic and land surveys performed by the USACOE for the ICCW, Figure 8 Island for the existing beach profiles and the southern 3500 feet of the island for topographic profiles. Core borings and testing data from Century-von Ossen as well as data supplemented by previous studies performed on behalf of Shell Island and Figure 8 Island will be relied upon. In addition to these data. ATM will.perform topographic and hydrographic survey of the estuary tidal flats and channels between the Intracoastal Waterway and the barrier islands for the project area using our DGPS system. The south end of Figure 8 Island will be surveyed by land and boat using our DGPS system for the areas within approximately 500 feet of the mean high water line. These data will result in the production of the following 1 inch = 200 feet maps: (a) Biological resource mapping of the wetlands and vegetation surrounding the afr'ected area; (b) Sediment thickness mapping of the tidal and Mason Creek channel shoals and interior shoal features that will be dredged, i.e. depth of high quality sand; (c) Bathymetric contour mapping across the flood and ebb (optional) tidal shoals; and (d) 3-dimensional beach and nearshore hydrographic contour mapping for the areas of excavation and sand placement at Figure Eight Island, Mason's Inlet and Shell Island areas. . ~ 89 PAGE 5 They information described above will be organized into a brief summary of the parts of the environment that are or may be affected by the Project and Project alternatives.... 3.4 Inlet Relocation Hydrodynamic and Water Quality (also 'see Attachment B-1) Historic Data Collection/Analysis Since 1970 Mason Inlet has migrated from a position approximately 500 feet offset of the. channel to the north to 2,500 feet'~offset to the south. During that period, it has become increasingly choked off due to infilling of material. Water quality data, taken within the intracoastal waterway from. 1970 to the present, should provide the changes which have occurred as a result of the steady closure of the inlet and, .therefore, reduced flushing levels - throughout the system. This data, as' available, will provide the needed information to .. . qualitatively project the expected changes in the water quality within the system upon reopening of the inlet and Mason Creek chanriel. . ATM proposes to analyze this data to quantify the°expected changes .in water quality upon reopening of the inlet: ATM personnel will collected all appropriate hydrodynamic and water quality data and centralize this data within a database. Analyses will then be performed to quantify any changes in critical water quality parameters within the system due to the .inlet closure. Potential analyses may include but not be limited to the following; ® Standard statistical analyses (means, mins, etc.) Statistical trend analyses _ To accomplish this goal, it is necessary that sufficient data be available to perform meaningful statistical analyses and trend analyses. Tide and C~rrrent Data Collection To quantify the hydrodynamics within the system and to quantify the present net flow and flushing conditions, ATM proposes a 30-day data collection of flow, currents and tides. ATM will install five tide gages and five current meters within the inlet and along the intracoastal waterway, as well as perform discharge measurements at critical cross-sections throughout the system. This will quantify the existin tidal and net non-tidal flow distribution throughout the system. It is important to note that our preliminary-research indicates that there is very limited bathymetric data available from standard sources such as NOA/A and' .thereby requires a comprehensive hydrographic study of the inlet's surrounding water bodies. 9 PAGE 6 Hydrodynamic Mode! Development ATM ,personnel will develop a model to simulate tides, currents, and flows within Mason Inlet and the surrounding intracoastal waterway (ICW1/~. This model will allow examination of the alterations to the currents and flushing within the immediate vicinity of Mason Inlet and the intracoastal waterway. The model will only be used for simulation of the impacts of the revised inlet configurations, on tides, currents, and flushing, and will not examine the impacts to water quality (e-toll, nutrients, etc.). The data sets required for the modeling of water quality impacts .and salinity within the system are too extensive for the scope of this work; therefore, these impacts will not be addressed directly by the model. 4.0 Environmental Consequences A discussion of the design features for the alternative actions, described below, will provide general information of the range of alternatives considered in terms of its impact on the resources described in Section 3.0 "Existing Environment'. The environmental features, for each alternative, will follow those described previously including water exchange, water quality, soils, and biological resources in accordance with benefits and disbenefits of each accepted S engineering practice. The physical and biological environments in the vicinity of the proposed project, identified in the Section 3.0 Existing Environment, will allow evaluation of the potential impacts for each alternative on the identified resources within the environment. Both negative and positive. impacts will be evaluated including, but not limited to: burial of seagrass beds, shell fish beds, fisheries, sand quality effects (turbidity), increased quality and quantity of turtle nesting areas, etc. The organization of this section of the report includes .discussion on the following areas of potential impact: changes in land use, estuarine resources, wetlands, public lands, scenic and recreational areas, areas of archeological or historical value, air quality, water resources, groundwater quality, introduction of toxic substances, noise levels, water supply, shellfish/fish habitats, ecology and wildlife of the ocean/inlet zone, eutrophication of receiving waters, cumulative impacts and mitigation measures. ~ 91. PAGE 7 The various entities concerned with the inlet will be identified and the concerns of all interests will be evaluated. Interests will include;- but not be limited to: Figure Eight Island,. Shell Island, Town of Wrightsville Beach, Boaters and Fishermen/women, Environmentalists, Fish and. Wildlife Service, U. S. Army Corps of. Engineers, New Hanover County, State of North Carolina, etc. Attempts will be made early in the study to solicit comments and concerns from representatives of these interests, including permitting agencies, to develop an understanding of their concerns. 5.0 Preparation of Environmental Assessment Report The report will provide all information outlined above and provide a summary of findings, list of point contacts and sources of information. The report will be submitted to the County as a draft. and final report for distribution to federal and state agencies. Listings of Report Preparers and Literature Cited/Consulted will be included. The Report organization will follow State requirements. 92 PAGE 8 MASON INLET AND MIDDLE SOUND CHANNELS HYDRODYNAMIC MODELING OF EXISTING AND NEW INLET SYSTEM B.1 Mason Inlet Hydraulic Characteristics and Hydrodynamic Modeling The hydraulic characteristics of Mason's Inlet will be established using a combination of field data collected during this study, data available from previous studies, and .the WQMAP hydrodynamic model for representing existing and projected post-dredging tidal flows at the inlet surrounding waters. Based on the field data, the numerical model will be calibrated and applied to tidal conditions other than encountered in the field program. This will establish the long-term flushing capability of the inlet and will allow prediction of the effects of dredging the interior inlet tidal shoals and/or relocating the inlet to be quantified. The purpose behind the development of a hydrodynamic model covering Mason inlet and the surrounding waters is to provide a predictive tool which will allow the determination of the expected impacts of implementing various options for the Mason Inlet Relocation Plan. The options include removal of material within the interior inlet shoal, altering the width and location of the inlet, and any other proposed alterations to the physical characteristics of the inlet area. The model will define the changes to the hydrodynamics, flushing, and water quality within the study area given the pre- and post-alteration geometry of the inlet: . For this study, ATM proposes to utilize astate-of-the-art curvilinear long-wave hydrodynamic model (WQMAP). WQMAP is a 2-dimensional (with a 3-dimensional option), depth-averaged model for computing tidal circulation and' storm surge propagation. This model is very similar to the USACOE Coastal Processes Branch Research Division Coastal Modeling System with a few significant improvements. The region of interest has been defined based upon the model boundaries; these boundaries extend seaward of the inlet and inland to the ICWW. In defining the model boundaries, the goal was to avoid placement of boundaries near areas of critical interest; these areas include the mouth of the inlet and the entire interior inlet shoals region. B.2 Tide and Current Measurements Tides inside and outside the inlet, and currents within the inlet cross-section, will ;be measured I continuously fora 1-month period. Tide gages will be installed inside and outside the inlet. The interior gages will be installed within each of the tidal channels within the tidal regime o~3 PAGE 9 1 Mason's Inlet and the outside gage will be a pressure gage mounted on the sea floor sufficiently seaward as to avoid the hydrodynamic influences of the inlet. The current meters (Option 1) will be located near the bottom and at the smallest cross-section of the inlet and interior channels. Complementing those continuous current data will be a "profile" current survey at .multiple locations to determine the volume of flow moving past critical cross-sections from the inlet throat to the interior channels. These two surveys will be: conducted over one spring tidal cycle and one neap tidal cycle. B.3 Model Set-Up and Testing This task consist of preparation of all input files and data for th,e model simulations. These data include the•modei grid, the bathymetry over-the grid, the tidal boundary forcing, and the wind forcing. A.curvilinear grid, which allows for non-orthogonal variable size and shape grids, will be generated for the simulations. The variability in shape and size will allow for a finer grid resolution near the regions of interest (immediately inside and outside of the inlet, and the interior shoal region), Vvith the grid becoming coarser moving away from the inlet. This will reduce the. overall grid requirements while allowing a broad area of the system to be modeled. This will also be useful given the variation in overall scale within the system. The model bathymetry will. be defined from the data sets collected under the alternate tasks (~ described above and: from the supplemental bathymetric data. In regions far from the areas of ~ J interest, where there is not significant dynamic:geometric.changes, NOAH data will be utilized to define the depths. The tidal boundary forcings will be determined from the tidal data couected over the 30-day period from field investigations. The tidal stations have been established such that all .open tidal boundaries have measured .,data; these include the offshore boundary, the constriction near the ICWW,~and the narrow region just. landward of Figure Eight Island. All of the interior stations will be located at significant constrictions to avoid forcing over a wide open water region and to ensure unidirectionality of the currents through the open boundary. . Once the model input files have been created, preliminary runs of the model will be conducted to eliminate any "bugs" within the input files and .to check the results for consistency and reasonableness. The results will not be examined against the data. B.4 Model Calibration Eight data stations located throughout the effected system will collect data over a 30-day data 9`-t collection period will be utilized to calibrate the model. In addition, harmonic analysis of data ~ ~ PAGE 10 collected during the execution of these and. other field studies will. allow general comparison between the results of the 30-day simulations and past measurements within the study area. These comparisons will not be weighted as highly as those collected during the study .period, but will prove useful in evaluating the accuracy at alternate locations. Adjustment of the bottom friction coefficient is the primary parameter to be utilized during the model calibration. The values will be adjusted over the allowable range of values until the best fit between the model results and the data are achieved. Various analysis techniques, such as harmonic analysis, spectral analysis, and statistical error analysis, will be utilized to compare the model with the measured data. Through the use of various techniques, the best overall calibration will be achieved. B.5 Impact Analysis of the Proposed Inlet Modifications (Report Section 4) Once the model has been calibrated, it will be utilized to test the impacts of alternative actions described in Section 2.0 above, as follows: ~ excavation of a new inlet opening with sand placement at the present location of Mason's Inlet (i.e., the Proposed Project) ~ variation in the location of the lnlet with and without excavation of Mason's Creek ~ variation in the width, depth, and spacial location of the inlet ~ complete inlet closure A base run representing existing conditions will be established during the model calibration. Results from the altered simulations will be compared with the base run to determine changes to the overall current patterns and magnitudes; the flushing within the interior, and any potential alterations in the sand transport patterns .due to the tidal currents. The percent changes presented will allow decisions to be made regarding the feasibility and future impacts of the proposed alternatives. A report will be prepared to recommend final design and engineering features for the interior shoal dredging and modifications to the inlet location and dimensions. !~ 95 PAGE 11 ~ry~t/I4 ~ VC1924LCCA~~6 . '~atit ~~'ce ~ ,25,2.2 '~u~ ~, /Ya+t/a ~aca/,L~ca ,2840,2 ',~e~ 990-45,2-0009 ill! ,~~l~,e,', ,~la. ~ 06/ 18/99 - .~sos ~w,~l~ ,~,~~ ~. ~Q1~ ,~ume,. '9~l~na~,e~ton., ./~B 28-008 Cost estimate. for Lii~IG services. in lYlasvn Inset project through EA draft submittal " All work is fo be invoiced at our firm's rate of $70/hour with detailed itemization of time allocation for various tasks. LMG will also invoice for all necessary subcontracting and reimbursement of project-specific expenses. Estimated time is in staff-days which are calculated at 10. hours each at our firm's rate. Field work: Project area resource identification with ATM surveyor 1 Examination of resource conditions and noted changes since 1997 2 Spit area field work for endangered species presence and location 2 Shellfish survey in Mason Creek area ? Subtotal 7 staff days Other work through Draft Environmental Assessment submittal: Past project file review, material extractions and copies 1 Past relevant agency position review 1 Interview of relevant past applicants, representatives, contractors 1 Data search for water .quality, biologic sampling by state, ,universities 2 Data search for on-going tidal creek sampling updates, conclusions, initial discussions related to possible joint pre/post project monitoring 1 96 • • Update of Fussell endangered species report or other source Update of turtle nesting records on neighboring beaches Input from Cleary or others on inlet coastal processes, migration Coordination tivith agencies, pre-application meetings, initial section 7 consultation meeting, etc. ' Project impact consultation with ATM in design and modeling phase _ Coordination on EA topics requiring joint input Coordination on EA visuals, photos, etc. ' Update of all sections required . .Additional endangered species characterization on spit area, section 7, USFWS, NNIF'S input, etc. Mitigation planning relative to desired project Shellfish survey tivrite up Subtotal Total staff-days Total estimated cost: 1 1 2 2 1 1 4 2 2 1 26 staff days J~ X23,100 Estimated cost does not include unlisted tasks or work performed after draft EA submittal. All additional tivork will also be invoiced on an hourly basis. h.~ 0 V1i40~`,@~ ~~~~~~a~ ~~~°~° ,' .:~,, ~ 97 . _. ~ :.~ e NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12/99 ' Budget Amendment DEPARTMENT: Mason Inlet Relocation Capital ProjectlRoom Occupancy Tax Fund BUDGET AMENDMENT #: 2000-02 ADJUSTMENT DEBIT CREDIT ROOM OCCUPANCY TAX FUND Appropriated Fund Balance $605,000 Transfer to Capital Project .~ $605,000 MASON INLET RELOCATION CAPITAL ~ . PROJECT Transfer in from ROTS fund $605,000 Capital Project Expense $605,000 EXPLANATION: To establish budget according to Capital Project Ordinance. APPROVAL STATUS: To be approved by Board Of Commissioners rCOUNN COMChIy~IUNQt~ APPROVEo REJECTED O REMOVED ^ POSTPONED ^ 9 8 HEARD J V : DATE ~ ~:~ I z ~ ~(.~an- NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12/99 Regular Item #: 9.1 Estimated Time: Page Number: Department: Planning .Presenter: Contact: Dexter Hayes , SUBJECT: Public Hearing Item 1: Zoning Text Amendment (A-289,. 3/98, revisited 4199, 5/99, 6199) ' .BRIEF SUMMARY: Request by Staff to clarify the clustering of residential units on lands classified "Conservation" on the Land Classification Map (A-289; 3198; revisited 4/99, 5/99, 6199) ~ ~ . RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: ' Planning Board recommends approval with modifications. FUNDING SOURCE: ATTACHMENTS: . ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW - COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: • , COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONSICOMMENTS: ~ COUNTY COMMISSIONERS . APPROVED ^ REJECTED O . REMOVED - ^ ' POSTPONED C~~ HEARD C/ Ce+~,~c~j ~''ww`' g;~;sN~ . I A-289 3/98; Revisited 3/99 and 6/99; Request. by Staff to °clarfy the Allocation of~Den,sity on Land Classified "Conservation" For Performance Subdivisions. Plannin Board Recommendation: g Following continued discussion of this item at the Planning Board meeting in April and May, the Board approved an alternative proposal at its June 3rd meeting by a 4-2 vote. Some Board members were concerned that the change might encourage additional filling in the floodplains. Solution II. (As approved by the Planning Board on June 3, 1999 @ 7:52 PM) "11.(c.) In an effort to lessen environmental impacts. promote less impervious surface and to preserve more natural areas, residential units may be cluster at a density heater than 2.5 units per acre in areas classified Conservation or Resource Protection, as long as (1) the overall density of the protect does not exceed the limits specified in the respective residential zoning district (2) the overall density of the cluster units does not exceed the total units allowed in the Conservation or. Resource Protection area and (3) the clustering of the allowed units does not create the negative impacts {referred to above) that this section seeks to eliminate. For the purpose of this section, the Conservation Area shall include all lands at or below the 100- year.flood elevation or as they may be more precisely determined in the firture'. Filling to alter the designated Conservation Area is allowed (12providing filling is not prohibited through a state or federal a~ency that has Lurisdiction over the area, (2) providing said fill is confined to non-wetland areas, (3) providing said fill avoids conservation resources as defined by Section 59.4-3 (l and 2) (~ (unless permitted as stated abovel, and (41 providin it avoids other conservation or environmentally sensitive areas that may be more precisely defined in the future.. , ~ ~ ~ , The 100-near flood elevation in addition to andconservation area(s) that may be more precisely defined in the future, must be accurately located by the property owner's Registered Professionals and must appear on the final recorded plat of the area." Note: This wording protects the environment through clustering of units. It only allows units to be clustered in the Conservation Area that are already allowed in that area under current regulations (2.5 per acre) and further provides for a review provision that would only allotiv clustering if clustering does eliminate the negative impacts that spacing units at 2.5 units per acre would create. The wording also allows filling of areas when permitted by CAMA or the Corps of Engineers or tivhen the areas have no environmental significance other than elevations. It further leaves room for "Conservation Area" to be more precisely defined, which should be a goal in the future. 'V~` Planning Staff Summary ~ ~~' Early 1998, the Technic~„al Rev~iew,~Committee TRC) asked staff to review existing development standards relative to allocationy:of~densitybon}land classified "Conservation" and specifically how the Land lan`'addressed the: modification of "these lands by filling. This directive came on the heels of several 1 ~ntial ro'ects alon 'River Road wliere"lthe develo er modified the to o ra h to raise the land of the P J g P p g p Y Conservation boundary to accommodate higher density development. The argument was simply--the boundary was changed so therefore it no longer existed. Staff's initially voiced concern, but the TRC felt hamstrung, noting the vagueness of the standards probably permitted the alteration of the boundary. The TRC rejected a subsequent project (Grand Bay), taking staff's lead that the alteration of the "Conservation" boundary. by filling was not consistent with the Land Use Plan or the Performance Residential requirements. The develo era Baled and the ro~ect was a roved b the u p pp p ~ pp y Co my Commissioners on March 8, 1999. Arising out of that decision was a directive by the Commissioners to. the Staff to craft language to clarify how density. cari be allocated in the Conservation classification and to what extent the natural area and topography can be modified: • Previous discussion about the same questions resulted in the Planning Board holding a public hearing iri March 1998.. In short, public comment suggested the conservation line was too vague, arbitrary and unreliable, especially the 100 year flood line. There was also some sentiment that filling flood plains posed no real threats to the public and therefore. filling was of no real consequence. Staff's initial proposal in 1998 did not preclude filling within the flood plain, but it did specify that ..any f Ming or topographic modification to raise the land above the conservation line would not change the current land classification. That meant the density would be limited to 2.5 units per acre and clustering ,above that maximum was prohibited. Staff contimies to believe the intent of the Land Use Plan on this point would prohibit routine filling of conservation areas for the purpose of establishing higher clusters of dwellings. The Land Use Plan states "conservation areas should be preserved in their natural state. Woodland, grasslands,,and recreation areas `not requiring any~filling' are the most appropriate uses." (Emphasis added). The Plan permits exceptions, such as exceptional development proposals. These are .generally defined as projects that promote harmony with the site's natural features. The Plan goes on the say that residential density in no case should exceed 2.5 units per acre and may be required to be as low as 1.0 unit per acre depending on environmental constraints. With that in mind, several proposal were presented providing. clarification for the purpose of allowing clustering. within the flood plains as well as more precisely defining the location of the conservation areas prior to development taking place. ~, The staff recommendation presented at the June meeting is as follows: 11 ( .) Residential •units shall not be clustered of a density greater than 2.5 units per net tract acre - in areas classified Conservation, Rural or Resource. Protection in the Wilmington-New Hanover Larid-.Use Plan, except under the following circumstances. If a development encompasses Resource Protection or Rural areas, and Conservation areas, then density may exceed 2.5 units per acre in the Resource Protection or Rural area, provided the number of units in the Conservation area is reduced by an equal amount. At no time shall any portion ofthe project classified conservation exceed the ~ ~ 2.5 units/acre limitation, nor shall the overall density of the project exceed the limit specified in the _ respective residential zoning districts. (2/16/87) For the purposes o~this section the conservation area shall include all lands followin, their natural topogra~hv that are at or below the 100yr {food , ~ elevation as shown on~ the Flood Insurance Rate Map and Zrpland of any marsh line t. -~ In support of this amendment , it is important to note that as a rule lower density combin minimal land disturbance in these areas reduces threats to public safety, threats of damaging flood at~d promotes improved environmental quality by retaining greater volumes of vegetation on the tract. ~ I NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION . ~` Meeting. Date: 07/12/99 Regular Item #; 9.2 Estimated-Time: Page Number: ., t Department: Planning Presenter: Contact: Dexter Hayes SUBJECT: . Public Hearing Item 2 -Rezoning (Z=660, 6199) ~ ' BRIEF SUMMARY: Request by Ken Parker for Juanita Farrow and Minnie Vowelf to rezone 8.5~acres located in the 8300 .. block of Market Street, southeast side, to B-2 from B-1 & R-15 (Z-660, 6/99) RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: .The Planning Board recommends denial. PUNDING.90URCE: .. • . r ~ ; , . . ATTACHMENTS: ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ :. ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW • • COUNTYrAIIANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: ~ ` ,,. .•. COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS:. ~ ~ ~ - ~~ _ , ,, _ . _ -':::~ ~ :' . ~. =}COUN~'Y COMMI~SIONE~ : . ~, , . } M .. APPROVED O . _ REJECTED . ~ t ::~:, . , . ., _ ~ REMOVED p.«- w,~ljt . ~ ~ POSTPONED O ., , HEARD .. DATE ~ --1`_I?- ~-~~- 1 O F } .. ., ~ (~~ti~ fed ~ r'ec-~- -~-v ~ ~ Petition Summary Data ` •, Z-660, 6/99 ' y . . ~ . _. . Owner: Ha es & Sandra Corbett r. ,. ~ _. ., Existing Land Use:' Rural ' ,, ZoniriQ I~istorv: Originally Zoried In July, 1971 acid July, 1972 ~ ' Water TyUe: Wells ' Sewer Tyne: County Sewer In Area and Septic Tanks Recreation Area: Ogden Park ~ ' Access and Traffic Volume: 17,400 ADT - 1997 Count (Stephens Church R_ oad At :Market Street) Fire• District: Ogden Volunteer Fire Department 'Watershed. and Water Quality: Pages Creek, SA Aquifer Rechar eg Area: Primary {Part of Castle Hayne and Peedee Aquifers) Conservation/Historic/Archaeolo~g~c Resources: None ' Soils: Leon,'Class III Building Suitability: Some Limitations Due To Wetness-High Water Table 106 ~J n 1 _ ' NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST' FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12!99 .Regular Item.#: 9.3 Estimated Time:. Page Number: Department: Planning' Presenter: . .Contact:- Dexter Hayes - - SUBJECT: Public .Hearing -;Item 3 -Rezoning (Z-661, 6%99) ' BRIEF SUMMARY:. Request. by Ken Parker for Hayes and Sandra Corbett to rezone 8.5 acres located in the 8800 block of Stephen's Church. Road, northwest side, to B-2 from R-15. (Z-660, 6/99 ' RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS:. The Planning. Board recommends denial. FUNDING SOURCE: . ~ . - 4 ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: LEGAL: NIA FINANCE: NIA BUDGET: HUMAN .RESOURCES: N1A COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS: - ~ COUNTY CpMM1~10NF~1 - APPROVED . . REJECTED I~ ' ~ REMOVED L~ ~ . ~~TPONED C~ 1 Q b~E~A~2n , ~ ~~ . 2e - d ~ ~ad-~d -I-~o-~~~ l~cf' REZONING Case: Request: Acreage: ~. i Z-661, 6199; Applicant: Ken Parker; Owners Minnie Vowell & Juanita Farrow R-15 & B-1 to B-2 8.5 Location: Southeast side of Market Street, 300 feet north of Porters Neck Road LAND~CLASS- Resource Protection: Encourages the protection and preservation of important natural, historic, scenic, wildlife and natural resources. Residential .density shouldn't exceed, 2.5 units per acre. Non- residential uses. are permitted provided these ` resources are not impacted. • .. F Planning Board Recommendation (May 6, 1999 Meeting) ~ -~ - - The Planning Board recommended denial (6-0) of the petitioner's applicatiori. The petitioner has appealed. Several land owners adjacent to the applicant's petition were in opposition.; Concerns included off site drainage impacts, the number of different types of uses permitted in a B-2 - District, depth of the commercial zoning request, and its encroachment into nearby lots, security and noise problems, and trash pick-up. Staff Summary: • This case was briefly discussed at the Planning Board Meeting on April 1, 19;99 but vas disqualified/denied due to a property owner- Ms. Moore- (part of the rezoning request) not being supportive of the petition. As displayed on the attached site map of the area, this rezoning request involves additional property owned by Ms. Vowell birt does not iriolude Ms. Ivloore's~property: The applicant seeks to extend the depth of commercial zoning an•additiona1-1100 feet. A portion of the frontage is zoned B-1 to a depth of 200 feet. The balance of the properties are zoned R-15. Such an extension would be a substancial departure from the current zoning pattern for this area. Typically, commercial depths average between 300 to 500 feet. Moreover, the extension would represent a considerable encroachment into several established residential neighborhoods. Single family lots to the south fronting the north side of Porters Neck Road and residential uses to the east in Tibbys Branch would be severely impacted. The adopted 1993 Land Use Plan is specific on the encroachment of commercial and other non- residential uses into established area that are residential. Buffering and setback standards relative to commercial,and residential contiguity provide some relief. However, the proposed zoning still represents`yaE substan a nc o chment, one not easily mitigated by current setback and buffering requirements. ~~~ Q ~~Y`96A the sit~e's4fronta~e is very near an established commercial node anchored by the To its favor, ~~~~~~~~''' '~ O ~orters~Neck Cen ertlto ated~i'n~the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Market Street and t~~~l . Porters Neck Road. rAlso, the.imminent construction of the Wilmington By-pass and interchange Z-661 (cont'd) 2. ,~ just to the north at Futch Creek Road will have substantial impacts on the traffic patterns for the area. The fronf of the property will only have access via a deadend service road which in some ways improves its approval for expanded residential development. ~. ~ At the present tune.it would be hard to justify the rezoning considering the intense land use conflicts that would be created, especially for the lots on Porters Neck Road and in Tibbys Branch. Staff recommends denial. . r 109 - Petition Summary Data - ~;- : ' ", Z-661, 6/99 Owner: Juanita Farrow & Minnie Vowell = " Existing_Land Use: One Residential Structure '~ •' - ~ ' Zoning History: Originally zoned in Jiily, 1971. There have been several expansions to the " - ' ' commercial node to the south since 1991. - = Water Type: Wells Sewer Type: County and Septic Tanks Recreation Area: Ogden Park Access and Traffic Volume: 17,400 ADT - 1997 Count Fire District: Ogden Volunteer Fire Department Watershed and Water Quality: Pages Creek, SA Aquifer Recharge Area: Fringe of Primary Area Conservation/Historic/Archaeologic Resources: None Soils: Primarily Leon and Lynn Haven-Both Are Class III Soils Building Suitabilih~: Some Limitations Due To Wetness-High Water Table ~~o 0 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ' ~ REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12/99- ` Regular~ltem #: 9.4 Estimated Time: Page Number:. Department: Planning Presenter: ` Contact: Dexter.Hayes SUBJECT: Public Hearing Item 4: Rezoning (Z-662, 6199) BRIEF SUMMARY: - Request by David Barefoot for Courtriey Wright to rezone approximately 1.16 acres located in the 7000 block of Carolina Beach Road, west side, to B-2 from R-15. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: The Planning board recommends denial FUNDING SOURCE: ATTACHMENTS: .-ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: .COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS: ` CAUNTY COMMI~ION~S APPROVED C/~ . ; . ' REJECTED ^ . ' REMOVED O POSTPONED .. HEARD IID '~ 1 1 1 REZONING ' ~ ~ ' ' . ~. Case: Z-662, 6/99; Applicant: David Barefoot; Owner: Courtney Wright Request: R-15 to B-1 4. ,. . Acreage: Approximately 1.16 Location: 7000 block of Carolina Beach Road, west side LAND CLASS- Limited Transition: Identifies areas where increased development is r expected to occur. Residential density in Limited Transition areas should be no more than 2.5 units per acre with lower density more desirable. The use of clustering and Planned .. _ Unit Development (PUD) is encouraged for these areas: Planning Board Recommendation (May 6, 1999 Meeting) _ ' ` The Planning Board recommended denial (6-0). The applicant has appealed his request. Several residents from the Hillside subdivision spoke in opposition. Concerns ranged from traffic and potential drainage impacts to the noise generated by "dumpsters" on nearby commercial property fronting Carolina Beach Road. Other people expressed concerns about encroachments. along McQuillan Drive and access to that residential street. There also was some discussion about rezoning the property to O&I, however, no consensus was reached. Staff Summary The adjoining properties surrounding the applicant's request have an interesting zoning history. As noted in the petition summary, the original zoning for this area was adopted in 1'971.' The original zoning included R-10 Residential to the south of the applicant's request and R-15 Residential to the west and north. Both residential districts contain established neighborhoods (Hillside c4c Lehigh Estates) that were developed iri the early 1970's. In the mid 1970's an area of B-1 Light Business was created at the eastern end of Hillside development, fronting Carolina Beach Road. Another commercial district (primarily B-1) exists a quarter of one mile south of the request on the east side of Carolina Beach Road. As noted in the County's adopted 1993 Land Use Plan; property located to the north and south of Hillside Estates has witnessed remarkable residential growth over the past 5 to 8 years. New developments in the area include Old Cape Cod, Lords Creek, Heritage Woods, and a firture school to the north. Casimir Commons, Telfair Forest, and Sedgley Abbey are located to the south. Most of these developments are supported by County sewer or a private system (Fairway Utilitie's)~~~~;~~,~;,,~~ ~~~~~1 Historically speak~ing,~t~ ~o~~ty's creation of a commercial district in the mid 70's adjacerit to several' existing re~sidea~l~l~~u~elopments was probably not a good idea. Additional setbacks and uffers abutting r~esd~en~t~allp~ operty as regulated by the County's Zoning Ordinance lessens 1 ~ hose impacts somewhat f'Ho~w~ever, the continual encroachment into established residential areas is contrar'y~,to, Courty,,polic~'es~~Those impacts can be reduced somewhat if the depth of the Petition Summary Data Z-662, 6/99 Owner: Courtney Wright lEsisting Land Use: Limited Transition Zoning History: Originally zoned in April, 1971. There have been two zoning districts created since 1971-B-1 to the north and R-10 to the south. Water Type: Wells Sewer Type: Septic Tanks Recreation Area: Snows Cut Park Access and Traffic Volume: 2,900 ADT - 1997 Count (Carolina Beach Road At Myrtle Grove Road) Fire District: Myrtle Grove Volunteer Fire Department Watershed and Water Quality: Lords Creek, C(SW) Aquifer Recharge Area: Shallow Water Table Sand Aquifer Conservation/1Historic/Archaeologic Resources: None Soils: Wakulla, Class I Building Suitability: Slight Limitations S 114 0 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ' REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12/99 Regular Item #: 9.5 Estimated Time: Page Number: 'Department: Planning Presenter: ~ ~ - Contact: Dexter Hayes .SUBJECT: Pubfic Hearing Item 5: Rezoning (Z-663, 6199) ~ - BRIEF SUMMARY: -. Request by David Barefoot for Everlena Raper to rezone approximately 1.49 acres located in the 6200 " .block of Carolina Beach Road, west side, from O&I to B-1 RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: The Planning board recommends approval. FUNDING SOURCE: ATTACHMENTS: JTEM'DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: ~~ COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS: , . . . COUNTY COININON~$ , APPROVED ~ . . RE.lECTED p REMOVED O ~ ~ ~ t~~fiPQNED ^ *` ~~~~~ ~ 15 ATE :~;(L_~~~~~ REZONING ~ ~ , ~- Case: Z-663, 6/99; Applicant: David Barefoot; Owner: Everlena Raper Request: O&I to B-1 .. Acreage: 1.2 Location: 6200 Block Carolina Beach Road, West Side Land Class- Limited Transition: Identifies areas where increased developrr~ent is espected`° to occur. Residential density in Limited Transition areas should be no more than 2.5 units per acre with lower density more desirable: The use of clustering and Planned Unit . Development (PUD) is encouraged in these areas. '' Planning Board Recommendation (May 6, 1999 Meeting), No one spoke in opposition to the applicant's request. The Planning Board voted 4-2 recommending approval after hearing comments from the petitioner about the inability to use the property under its present zoning. Staff Summary The property requested by the applicant to be rezoned to B-1 Light Business recently was re- zoned to O&I in 1996. At the present time, one vacant residential structure exists on'ste. Property adjoining the request to the north is R-15 Residential and is a part of the Beau Rivage development established in the mid 80's. West of the applicant's .property, is an older,established development by the name of Monterey Heights zoned R-1'0. South of the request is a sales acid outdoor gas grill operation. This retail activity was created as a result of a Conditional Use (B-1) zoning approved in December, 1994. . As depicted on the site map, there have been several commercial zoning districts created over the past decade north and south of Cathay Road along Carolina Beach Road. A lot of the commercial districts created iri the area have been in anticipation and response to the residential growth and available water & sewer. Developments in the area include Heritage Woods, Laurel Ridge, Beau Rivage and Battleground Park to the north. To the applicant's credit, existing and expanding utility services coupled with residential growth will continue along Carolina Beach Road. However, a large commercial district to the north on the west side of Carolina Beach Road continues to be largely vacant and under utilized. Given the mixture of retail services to the south (Masonboro Commons) at the junction of Golden Road and Carolina BeaclirRoad;`~staff~feels'~hat the best use for the property should remain O&I. The IL ~)i....J.+~s..as.f.., .Y s . intent of the O&I Distriot~~is to pr"ovid'e~a transition between established commercial and residential districts that urrently exist to the south, west & north of the applicant's site. The present zoning.. serves tha~t~~-purpose. Staff recommends denial. . ~~?''` 116 ~ ~=~ .•a . ;~, ~, .. Petition Summa . Bata - . •.. . Z-663, 6/99 Owner: Everlena Raper Existin6 Land Use: Limited Transition Zoning History: Originally zoned. in April, 1971. Several zoning districts have been. created. since-both CD, B-1. in 1994. .Water Tyge: Wells (Community Water In Monterey Heights). Sewer Type: Septic Tank (Cotmty Sewer.In`Monterey Heights) Recreation Area: River Road Park ' .Access and Traffic Volume: 2,300 ADT -1997 Count (Carolina Beach Road At Golden Road) Fire District: Myrtle Grove Voltlriteer Fire Department Watershed and Water Quality: Lords Creek, C(SW) . ~ ' A uifer Rechar e d ~ Area: Shallow Water Table Sand Aquifer Conservation/I-Iistoric/Archaeologic Resources: None - .Soils: Rimini, Class I . Buildin7 Suitability: Slight Limitations 11.7 ~, 118 ? - r " ~ NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07!12199 Regular Item #: 9:6 Estimated Time: Page Number: f Department: Planning Presenter: . Contact: Dexter Hayes SUBJECT: . Public Hearing Item 6: Rezoning - (Z-664, 6/99) BRIEF SUMMARY: Request by Vera Wilson and June Gilbert to rezone 1.57 acres located in the 2600 blocK of Castle Hayne Road, west side, to O&I from R-20. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: The Planning Board recommends approval ~ - FUNDING .SOURCE: ' ATTACHMENTS: ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW ~, COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: l .. COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS: ' A - ~ COUNTY COMMI~SIONs APPROVED ~~ ~- REJECTED '~ '~; . REMOVED .0 ~. ' POSTPONED O ,; ' HEARD -'1~ ~~~1~_ --} . ® ~ DATE ,--.~~t~- .~-- ~ ~ g Y REZONING Case: Request: Acreage: Location: Z-664, 6/99; Applicant c& Otivner: Vera Wilson & June Gilbert ~ ' R-20 to O&I 1:57 2600 Block Castle Hayne Road, West Side Land Class- Resource Protection: Encourages low density residential development not..to~ exceed'to 2.5 units per acre. Non-residential development is permitted provided important ~" . natural resources are not impacted. Planning Board Recommendation (May 6, 1999 Meeting) ~ ~~ ~ ~ ' No opposition was heard at the meeting. The Planning Board recommended approval (6-0) after Bearing comments from. the neighbors supporting the change. One non-conforming use.already exist on part of the property. Staff Summary The applicant's request consists of two parcels of land traversed by Horne Place Drive in the Wrightsboro Community. One of the parcels contains an occupied. residential home and assorted. cemetary monuments for sale. As noted on the site map of the area, a Shopping Center (SC) District created in November, 1991 is adjacent and south of the property. This SC District is located at one of the most active commercial nodes in the Wrightsboro area, that being North ' Kerr Avenue at Castle Hayne Road. Several established residential developments also exist in close proximity to the applicant's property.. Those developments include Horne Place, Wrightsboro Acres, and "Carol C" Mobile Home Park. Wrightsboro Elementary School is also located northeast of the site along with aself- service gas station. All of these land uses are zoned R-20. With the existence of a mixed commercial and residential land use pattern near N. Kerr Avenue and Castle Hayne Road, properties in the general proximity of both of these roads is becoming less and less desirable for residential purposes. Traffic counts taken in 1997 at Castle Hayne Road & Horne Place Drive indicate that over 22,000 vehicular trips per day exist. The applicant''s°reduesthto{rezone~r he~two parcels of land to O&I makes sense for two reasons. First, the land class designation of•Resource Protection permits non-residential development as long as natural resources are;not~wimpacted. O&I permitted uses typically are intented or seen as a transitional zoning dstrictlbetw,een more intensive uses such as B-i or B-2 and residential districts. Second, recent~raffi'c~ counts along Castle Hayne Road are not making conditions any more conduc~~e for residential~ilse~especially along the road frontage and near the N. Kerr venue- Castle Hay e'R"o`a'd~eomrn~`ercial node. In recognition of these known factors, staff 12C~.~ acknowledges the applicant's desire for a zoning change. A more appropriate land use pattern , ') Petition Summary Data ' .. Z-664, 6/99 ~ J Owner: Vera Wilson & June Gilbert Existing Land Use: Resource Protection Zoning History: Originally Zoned In July, 1974-Property Adjacent and To South Was Zoned SC In 1991. Water.Type: Wells Setiver Tyne: Septic Tanks Recreation Area: Cape Fear Optimist Park Access and Traffic Volume: 22,300 ADT - 1997 Count (Horne Place Drive at Castle Hayne Road) Fire District: Wrightsboro Volunteer Fire Department Watershed and Water Quality: Ness Creek, C(SW) Aquifer~Rechar e~ Area: Secondary Conservation/Historic/Archaeologic Resources: None Soils: Onslow, Class II Building Suitability: Moderate Limitations 122. C`~ .NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION , Meeting Date: 07/12/99 ~" Regular Item #: 9.7 Estimated Time: Page Number: Department: Planning Presenter: ~ ' Contact: Dexter Hayes ~ ~ - SUBJECT: - . .Public Hearing Item 7: Rezoning (Z-665, 6199) E BRIEF SUMMARY:- " Request by George Saunders to rezone 2.29 acres located in the 8500 block of Market Street, southeast - - -side, to B-2 from R=15 (Z-665, 6/99) RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: 'The Planning $oard recommends approval. , " fUNDING SOURCE: ATTACHMENTS: ' ITEM DDES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW - COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS: ' APPROVED C,/" .. REJECTED .^ . "R~h~OVEI~ ~ If - ~@~Tf~ONEh ~ bE~RO 0 ® L . ~ .l . i .. -. __ _ REZONING . ~ • Case: Z-655, 6/99; Owner: George Saunders Request: R-15 to B-2 ~ r , Acreage: 2.29 Location: 8500 Block of Market Street, Southeast Side Land Class- Resource Protection: Encourages low density residential development not to exceeed 2.5 units per acre. Non-residential development is permitted provided important, natural resources are not impacted. Planning Board Recommendation (May 6, 1999 Meeting) •, With the exception of the petitioner, no one spoke in favor or~oppostion to the request. With a 6- 0 vote, Planning Board recommended approval after hearing about the SHOD requirements and the rear line restrictions imposed on the property. Staff Summary The owner's petition is in direct response to a building permit request made by the owner for an expansion to his existing antique car center. The area is currently zoned R-15 Residential. As noted in the summary data for this request, zoning for this area was established in l 971. At that time, two commercial zoning districts were created, B-1 and B-2. Several highway business type uses pre-dated the creation of zoning in this area:. Uses included.. a service station which is now a hardware store, a "Mom and Pop" type grocery facility~presently not in~use and the current • antique car lot. Besides the uses mentioned, most of the area between Porters Neck Road and Futch Creek Road along Market Street is residential. ~" According to the County's 1993 adopted Land Use Plan, commercial zoning districts are encouraged at major road intersections. In additon, non-residential develop may also be permitted provided important natural resources are not impacted. A good example would be the existing commercial node at Porters Neck Road and Market Street. At that intersection, a mixture of neighborhood and highway business' exist. These commercial districts were created in the early to mid 90's and contain a major shopping center and service station facility. This property will be directly opposite where the terminus to the Northern Outer Loop will connect with Market Street. Access to the site will be available along a parallel service road. ~Y~~` In order for the owner~,to expand fits antique car center, he has recently purchased`a 100 x1,000 foot stri of land ad'onin~ hisur~rent commercial o eration. While this elon ated stri is p {~ ~~ bra ~ t.~~ .#i~ P g P probably too far from Market Street,. it is contiguous to existing highway business zoning. A' shorter depth would be more appropriate for this limited expansion. Staff recommends 1 ^ ,approval.. LL{. _` .. A ... ~i ', . ` Petition Summary Data . ~. :~ Z-665, 6/99 Owner: George Saunders . Existing Land Use: Resource Protection Zoning History: Originally Zoned In July, 1971 -Water Type: Wells Sewer Type: Septic Tanks' Recreation Area: Ogden Park ' Access. and Traffic Volume: 1.7,400 ADT - 1997 Count (Stephens, Church Road at . Market Street) _ Fire District: Ogden Volunteer Fire Department Watershed and Water Quality: Futch Creek, SA :Aquifer Recharge Area: Shallow Water Table Sand Aquifer . C'onservation/>E-lfistoric/Archaeologic Resources: None Soils: Leon ~ Lynn Haven -Both Class III Soils Building Suitahiity: Some Limits Due To Wetness, Shallow Water Table r~ 126. ' - • ~ NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Da#e: 07/12/99 Regular. Item #: 9.8 Estimated Time: Page Number: Department: Planning Presenter: Contact: Dexter Hayes .~ . SUBJECT: Public Hearing Item 8: Rezoning (Z-666, 6/99) BRIEF SUMMARY: Request by Leo Nowak for Billie Miller to rezone approximately 1.40 acres located ih the 4900 block of Carolina Be"ach Road, east side, to B-2 from R-15. (Z-666, 6/99) RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: The Planning. Board recommends approval ` FUNDING SOURCE: ATTACHMENTS: - ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW • . COUNTYMANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: • COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS: . C~U~ CONIMISS~Q • ~ APPRQVED Cw REJECTED D . ` ~ REMOVED O POSTPONE© CJ ~. , HEARb ~ . DATE ~. "1 I_.~ Z.~~ ~. ~ ~ . REZONING , Case: Z-666, 6/99; Applicant: Leo Nowak; Owner: Billie Miller ~ ,; Request: R-15 to B-2 Acreage: 1.40 Location: 4900 Block Carolina Beach Road, East Side Land Class- Urban Transition: Allows for intensive urban development on lands that have been~or"will be provided with necessary,urbams~rvices. Residential development can A . exceed 2.5 units per acre provided the development shall be serviced by City or County sewer systems and has direct access to a major road.. , ~ .: ~ :, , Planning Board Recommendation (May 6, 1999 Meeting) The Planning Board recommended approval of the applicants' request 6-0. This decision by the. Board was based on the need to "square-up" the existing commercial zoning district boundary and because it was near a median cross-over on Carolina Beach Road. Staff Summary The applicant's request to rezone 1.40 acres to B-2 Highway Business;lies in the strength. of the commercial property adjacent and to the southeast. As depicted on the site map, several properties to the southeast and along both sides of Carolina Beach Road have been rezoned to B- 2Highway Business within the past 5 years. The depth of the commercial district va'r'ies from 300 feet on the west side of the road to over 400 feet on the east side. One sizable high density development approved by the County in 1996 adjoins the existing commercial district east of the applicant's property. Another high density project is located northwest of the applicant's property as well. Several older established developments such as Silver Lake and Holly Ridge exist on the west side of Carolina Beach Road. Water and sewer service is available along Carolina Beach Road making this property more desirable for development. While the petitioner's property does have a major highway corridor and does adjoin an existing commercial district, the existing commercial node established in the mid 90's is already under utilized. An even larger commercial center exists south of the area around Monkey Junction. yam' ~~ Given theYpotential for H~g~h~De~n~ty residential development in and around the subject area and the vacancy rate of existi~g~~om~rnereial property to the south of the applicant's request, staff" believes that the best~use,~for~lthe,property should remain residential based on adopted land use olicies: Also, similar ~resdentra~l~~projects are already being built nearby. Staff recommends 12 ~enial. ~ fil~~~ j.. ' Petition Summary Data ' ." Z-666, 6/99 ' Otivner: Billie Miller ' Existing Land Use: Urban Transition Zoning History: Originally Zoned In April; 1971. B-2 District Created South of Property In 1993 and 1994. Water Tyne:.Community Sewer:Type: County Recreation Area: Arrowhead Park Access and Traffic Volume:- 20;000 ADT - 1997 Count (Carolina Beach Road) Fire District: Myrtle Grove Volunteer Fire Department . Watershed acid Water C~uality: Motts Creek, C(SW) ~' Aquifer Rechar e~ Area: Primary ' Conservation/Historic/Archaeologic Resources:. None Soils: Seagate, Class II; Lynn I-Iaven, Class III Building Suitability: Moderate Limitations ~ ~ ' s ~. .129 130 ~ .- NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION ` Meeting Date:.07/12/99 } Regular Item #: 9.9 Estimated Time; Page Number: Department: Planning Presenter: Contact: Dexter Hayes ` SUBJECT: ` " ~ Pubtic Hearing Item 9: Rezoning BRIEF SUMMARY: Request by Leo Nowak for Robert Downing to rezone 7.4 acres located in the 4800 block of Carolina -Beach Road, east side, to $-2 from R-15. (Z-667,. 6/99) ' RECOMMENDED MOT10N AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: The Planning Board recommends the rezoning of a portion of the petitii ers pp6cation. FUNDING SOURCE: ' , ~ ~ ~ - ATTACHMENTS: ITEM DOES NOT REQU/RE REVIEW ` COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: ' COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS: . - I j I • i .- ~ ~ I - i i COUNTY COMMI~I® APPROVED ® ~ " - REJECTED ~ I ` REMOVED O PQSTPONED O `~ ~~ HEARD p _1_z ~a _. ~ 131 ®ATE ~~..,~...,~,. ~.,..,, . ~actc ~wy~r-~- rQ' lS I REZONING Case: Z-667; Applicant: Leo Nowak;'Owner: Robert Downing ;. Request: R-15 to B-2 Acreage: 7.4 Location: 4800 Block Carolina Beach Road Land Class- Urban Transition: Allows for intensive urban development on lands•that have been or will be provided'witli necessary urban services. Residential development can ' exceed 2.5 units per acre provided the development shall be serviced by City or County sewer systems and has direct access to a major road. _ t Planning Board Recommendation '(May 6, 1999 Meeting). After a lengthy discussion relating to the merits of using the property for higher density residential vs. commercial, the Planning Board recommended that parcels 3, 4, & S depicted on the Planning staff map be rezoned in conjunction with the previous case. The- balance. of the property was recommended by the Board to remain R-15 Residential. The vote was 5'-1 in favor. Staff Summary The applicant's petition is contiguous with the petition discussed from the last item. As noted on the site map, this request is enveloped by a R-15.Residential Zoning District.. Two.high density developments exist in the area, most notably "The Lakes @ Johnson Farm" to the east and to the' north `.`Treetops." Both of these developments were approved by the County several years ago. Several other established subdivisions exist on the west side of Carolina Beach Road- "Silver Lake" and "Silva Terra." To the applicant's favor, the subject property does front on a major highway corridor. Likewise, water and sewer services are also available making the property prime for development. Staff has several concerns relating to the applicant's request. First, the existing commercial node at the intersection of Carolina Beach and Silver Lake Roads (southwest of the applicant's property) contains parcels which have not yet been developed. In addition, the existence of a major commercial node at Monkey Junction still contains vacant parcels for commercial use. Second, the depth of the request of over 600 feet encroaches too far into existing residential lands- typically~ona@erage,.most commercial depth on a major arterial extends between 200 to 300 feet. Thir"distaff coati ues'tto~~be concerned with the striping out of highway frontage from established commercial districts ,This area has several established neighborhoods that would not ~~ ~ ~~~~ be easily mitigated wit ~, setb~acks~and buffers if expansion of the commercial district continues. i ~ adOCe+Sf 1l~ 4 a ., 3~ 1 ~ riven the nature of existing residentially zoned property to the north; east, and west of the rezoning request and.for the reasons"mentioned above and in the previous case, staff feels that the ``) Petition Summary Data ' ~. Z-667, 6/99 Owner: Robert Downing Existing Land Use: Urban Transition Zoning History: Originally Zoned In April, 1971 Water Ty_pe: Wells Sewer Type: County Sewer and Septic Tanks ~- Recreation Area: Arrowhead Park Access and Traffic Volume: 20,000 ADT - 1997 Caunt (Carolina Beach Road) Fire District: Myrtle Grove Volunteer Fire Department Watershed and Water Quality: Motts Creek, C(SW) A uifer Rechar e Area: Primar a g y Conservation/Historic/Archaeologic Resources: None Soils: Seagate, Class II; Lynn Haven, Class III Building Suitability: Moderate Limitations 134 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION ' Meeting Date: 07112199. , - -Regular Item-#: 9.10 Estimated Time: Page Number. - Department: Planning Presenter: ' Contact: Dexter Hayes `:- SUBJECT: Public Hearing Item 10: Special Use Permit (S-442, 6199) ~~ BRIEF SUMMARY: Request by Sherwin Cribb, RLS for Hill/Williams Construciton o build a lot project south of Horne ' Road; west side of Carolina Beach Road. (S-442, 'RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: ~ .' . The Planning Board recommends approval: -. - FUNDING SOURCE: - ATTACHMENTS: ~ - ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW. r ~ . .COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: - COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS: _~ ' ~COUN'tYY COMMISSI- ® ^--~-~ APPROVED G/ REJECTED ^ R€I~EOVED p . - ~ ~ Imo} .. : ~, Residential High Density Project ~ Special Use Permit- Request by Sherwin Cribb, RLS for Hill &'Williams Construction, Inc. For approval of a 32 lot project located on the west side of Carolina Beach Road between Horn Road Road and Silver Lake' Road. (5-442;.6/99) ~. , Planning Board Recommendation (May 6, 1999 Meeting) ~ ' " Several residents close to the residential high density request spoke in opposition. ,Their concerns included traffic,destruction of trees, and off-site drainage impacts. Having agreed to ~ several '' '- suggestions made by staff, the Planning Board recommended approval. Preliminary Staff Findings ~ °~' 1. The Board must find that the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety if located where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and-approved... A. The site will be served by County sewer and community water. B. A "collector" type street (public) will be built to serve the 32_ lots that are proposed. This street will be connected to Carolina Beach Road. - ~{' C. The site is located in the Myrtle Grove VFD District. D. Fire hydrants are proposed for the project. 2. The Board must find that the use meets all required conditions and specifications of the Zoning Ordinance. A. "High Density" development is permitted by special use permit in the R-15 Residential Zoning District. The site is currently zoned R-15. The site is also classified Urban Transition in the 1993 ..,, Land Use Plan. B.The property has direct access to a major thoroughfare- Carolina-Beach Road. , C. Public sewer and community water are available. D. Because the proposed density exceeds 2.5 units per acre, the first 1.5 inches of storm water must be detained on site. E. The required setback from adjacent residential uses is 2.75 times the building height. 3. The Board must find that the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property or that the use is a public necessity. A. A wide variety of housing types are located in the general area- single family, duplexes, and mobile homes. B. The primary use in the area is single family. 4. The Board must find that the location and character of the use if developed according to the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in general conformity with plan of development for New Hanover County. A. There is a widewariety of,housmg~stockTin the area. Several "high density" projects are currently under constructiori on tle east~s~de~ofjCarolina Beach Road to the north and south. The highest concentration of duplexes in~t~he~ re~a~,is dust north of Horn Road on Long Branch Drive. B. Land on the project's eastern bo~u ~dary~is zoned B-2 Highway Business. All other land bordering 3 6 the project is zoned R-15S~1ver~Lake~d~evelopment is located to the south. Platted lots are located - to the north. '~ ~~`:~~'~ . . ;..; ~ ; ~~~:i ' Petition Summary Data 5-442, 6/99 Owner: Hill/Williams Construction Existing`Land Use:. Urban Transition Zoning History: Originally Zoned In April, 1971 " - . Water Type: Community ' Sewer Type: County Recreation Arrea: Arrowhead Park Access and Traffic Volume: 20,000 ADT - 1997 Count (Carolina Beach Road) -Fire District: Myrtle Grove Volunteer Fire Department Watershed and Water Quality: Motts Creek, C(SW) ~ . Aquifer Recharge Area: Primary Conservation/Historic/Archaeologic Resources: None - Soils:. Murville, ,Class III;. Seagate, Class II Building Suitability: Moderate Limitations - r~ 138 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD Of COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12/99 Regular Item.#: 9.11' Estimated. Time:, Page Number:.. ~ _ Department: Planning Presenter: • - Contact: 'Dexter Hayes SUBJECT: Public Hearing Item 11: Rezoning (Z-668, 6/99) BRIEF SUMMARY: :. r ~ •.,~•, Request by Jim MacDonald for Stephen and Annette Kohl to rezone approximately 1.4 acres located in-. } , the 56Q0' block of Carolina Beach Road, west side, to &2`from R-15. {Z-668, 6/99) RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: ~ • ' The Planning Board vote on this rezoning case resulted in a tie at 3-3 . ~. FUNDING.SOURCE ~,, _ ; : _. .. ~ ~ , ATTACHMENTS: ~ .. . ~ . - _ . .. ,, (, . ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW rCVUiv1 ~ l~1Jl~lYilJ7f®hlf.L~T t ... ~• , , ., ~ .... ~ APPROVED C9/ ,r< ' .. REJECTED O; . .. REMOVED • ^• _ _ a y; , . P r • POSTPONED O' •'~ 39 ~ ~'' HEARD D .,! - PATE 1.~-1~~~~~_~ __, --~ .~ ~ Petition Summary Data Z-668, 6/99 Owner: Stephen & Annette Kohl Exisfin~ Land Use: Urban Transition ' ,. Zoning Historv: Originally Zoned Iri April, 1971-Property Adjacent acid South of~Tract Was Zoned B-2 In 1991. Water Type: Wells ' Sewer Type: County Sewer and Septic Tanks Recreation Area: River Road Park Access and Traffic Volume: 20,000 ADT - 1997 Count (Carolina Beach Road) 1 Fire District: Myrtle Grove Volunteer Fire Department Watershed and Water Quality: Motts Creek, C(SW) Aquifer Recharge Area: Primary Conservation/Historic/Archaeologic Resources: None Soils: Lyrin Haven; Class III Building Suitability: Moderate Limitations f~~1 ~; NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION - Meeting Date: 07/12/99 Regular Item #: 10 Estimated Time: Page Number: Department: Governing Body Presenter: Lucie F. Harrell Contact: Lucie F. Harrell SUBJECT: Voting Delegate for the N. C. Association of County Commissioners 92nd Annual Conference to be held in Asheville, North Carolina, on August 19-22. BRIEF SUMMARY; The Board is requested to designate a Commissioner to serve as the official voting delegate for New Hanover County at the Annual Conference. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Designation of Voting Delegate .• FUNDING SOURCE: . ATTACHMENTS: ITEM DOE'S NOT REQUIRE REVIEW COUNTY MANAGER'S COMM TS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Designate Voting Delegate, ; . COMMISSIONERS' ACTIO S/COMMENTS: r~V~ CONIN~I~iCNf~ APPROVED C/ ;;<~ REJECTED D ~f, RE~ttQVED D ~y;f~ R~TPONED D "~ . ,~ HEARD p ~" xr . +} ~YiE ._=~ 1 Z ~1_~~ '~ --.~-=~) ~e. i~ 143 °~SNG~°~~. Memorandum m ~~ N W O Z ~,, ~ ~ North Carolina Association .of County Commissioners o • ~~: y°° °our+n `°~ Mailing Address: P. O. Box 1483, Raleigh, NC 27602-1488 Street Address: Albert Coates Local Government Center, 215 N. Dawson Street, Raleigh, NC 27603 Telephone: 919-715-2893 • Fax: 919-733-1065 • Email: ncacc@ncacc.org Home Page Address: http://www.ncacc:org IMPORTANT Designation of Voting Delegate to Annual Conference Please Place on Your Board Agenda Each Board of County. Commissioners is hereby requested to designate a commissioner or other official as the county's voting delegate. Each voting delegate should complete and sign the following statement: . , = I, ,hereby certify that I am the duly designated voting delegate for County at the .92nd Annual Conference of the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners to be held in Asheville, North Carolina, on August 19-22, 1999. Signed: Title: Article VI, Section 2 of our Constitution provides: "On all questions, including the election of officers, each county represented shall be entitled to one vote, which shall be the majority expression of the delegates of that county. The vote of any county in good standing may be cast by any one of its county commissioners who is present at the time the vote is taken; provided, if no commissioner be present, such vote may be cast by another county official, elected or appointed, who is formally designated by the board of county commissioners. These provisions shall likewise govern district meetings of the Association. A county in good standing is defined as one which has paid the current year's dues." District caucuses for the purpose of nominating district directors shall be held at the Annual Conference for those districts in which the term of the board member expires. These districts are listed on the reverse side of the accompanying memorandum~~ o ~~; ~t,;~n~ ~k ~~~~~~a PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM BY}FRIDAY,~AUGUST 6,1999: ~ [ol ®~~~~,~sil NCACC '' ~ OQJ~A~'~orP. O. Box 1488 1 ~~ ~ Q Raleigh, NC 27602-1488 ~., `--~ -s 'Fax: 919-733-1065 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12/99 Regular Item #: 11 Estimated Time: Page Number: Department: Planning Presenter: Contact: Allen O'Neal SUBJECT: Consideration of Resolution Requesting Elimination of Impact Fees BRIEF SUMMARY: Attached is a resolution requested by Mr. Steve Vosnock concerning elimination of impact fees. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Deny Request FUNDING SOURCE: ATTACHMENTS: ~d:h "r• 712resv.wp. ' ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW Recommend denial of request. D RECD COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS: r~®UIYI i ~®IVIIYIIJ71®IY~ • APPROVED REJECTED O ` REMOVED Cr~ POSTPONED [] O HEARD ~ ~ r RESOLUTION OF THE NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WHEREAS, New Hanover County is receiving sewage for Pender County, it is unlawfiil to impose this fee on new construction prior to sewer hookup, and' ~ ' WHEREAS, New Hanover County does not collect impact fees on ne~v construction in~Pender County prior to sewer hookup, and WHEREAS, if an impact fee is to be levied, it would be upon hookup only, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, to abolish the impact fee on new construction that is designated for sewer use. This the 12th of July, 1999 New Hanover County Board of Commissioners William A. Caster, Chairman Lucie F. Harrell, Clerk to the Board L•. a° l ~q~y~:~V~~~~t " ~ ~_~IY ~(/j'~~''j~fi 14 6 ~ ~~~~~*~ ~~ ~` ? •`~ ~:~~~y -~ NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD.ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12/99 Regular Item #: 12 Estimated Time: Page Number: Department: Governing Body Presenter: Vice-Chairman Greer Contact: Dave Weaver SUBJECT: Consideration of Resolution Supporting Clean NC 2000 BRIEF SUMMARY: Clean NC2000, a recent statewide initiative by Governor Jim Hunt, has been created to clean up the State of North Carolina. Vice-Chairman Greer has been appointed by Governor Hunt to serve on the Clean NC 2000 Committee. The Committee's mission is to clean up the State and, perhaps more importantly, instill a new attitude among citizens not to litter and to clean up unsightly structures and debris on private property. The attached resolution both supports Clean NC 2000 and authorizes identifying a county=wide organization with a local coordinator to work with the State coordinator on this issue. An attached letter from Governor Hunt provides more detail on Clean NC 2000, RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: FUNDING SOURCE. ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: LEGAL: N/A FINANCE: NIA BUDGET: NIA HUMAN RESOURCES: N/A COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Recommend approval of resolution and recommend coordination with Keep America Beautiful. COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS: ~.`~!~°-raL.. • COUNTY COM~flISS1Q APPROVED C~ REJECTED O REMOVED O POSTPONED D a~RD o DATE ~- `~ 111 Z ~ ~ ~~. 147 // ,i RESOLUTION NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WHEREAS, there is a need to improve the appearance of our roadsides by removing litter, collapsing or unsafe structures and other debris that create eyesores and harm the environment; and l WHEREAS, a clean environment impacts economic development, travel and tourism and the quality of life, and - - - WHEREAS, in an effort to get North Carolinians to renew their sense of pride and recommit to keeping our state clean the Governor has announced the Clean NC 2000 initiative; and WHEREAS, the Clean NC 2000 initiative aims to improve the appearance of North Carolina by removing litter and other debris from our roadsides, rivers, lakes and streams; and WHEREAS, Clean NC 2000 aims to educate all citizens about the harmful effects of litter; and WHEREAS, there should be a partnership between the state and counties to clean up the state; 1 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners that it endorses and supports the Clean NC 2000 imitative FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED that New Hanover County will assist in identifying a county- wide organization to identify the needs specific to this county FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED that the county organization will consist of a local coordinator that will work with the statewide coordinator. This the 12th day of July, 1999 William A. Caster, Chairman Lucie F. Harrell; Clerk to the B ard~~ 14~ ~_~ ~~~~~~~~~ l~ 4i~;~ ~ _~......:.. r__._. .._...... r' ~m~ ;----'~ , J tw AATEo q ' ~Y; :~ ;~ '+ e y y STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA - ------ OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR RALEIGH 27603-8001 JAMES B. HUNT JR. GOVERNOR June ~, 1999 Dear County Chair: We live in one of the greatest states in America. We have the finest University system in the country, we are attracting more businesses than ever and we are doing more for children in education than any other state, yet we have a very serious problem-litter. Litter encompasses our rivers, lakes and roadsides. Many of our counties, cities and towns are covered with collapsing buildings and other debris that create eyesores. Not only does this impact the travel and tourism industry and economic development, but - also the quality of life. I know we are doing many things to correct this problem, but we must do much more. We need to renew our sense of pride and recommit ourselves to keeping our great state clean and beautiful. In order to do this, I have launched a Clean . NC 2000 initiative. I want us to work together to clean up this state by the end of the year 2000. As a part of this initiative I have created, by executive order, a Clean NC 2000 Board. I am excited that your president, Robert Greer has agreed to serve on this board. I want us to work together to clean up this state by the end of the year 2000. I want us to instill a sense of pride among North Carolinians in the beauty of the state and a responsibility to keep it that way. We also need to reduce the number of unsightly, unsafe and irreparable structures in North Carolina, as well as educate North Carolinians on the importance of keeping our state litter free. I also want us to recognize and honor the people who contribute to keeping North Carolina clean and green. We can do this together! I hope you will show your commitment to this effort by adopting a resolution to join the Clean NC 2000 initiative and identifying a county committee to help clean up this state by the end of the year 2000. Thank you for what you are already doing and for what I know you will do to support this effort. ~~ 149 ~~ . f~ ,r . . County Chair ' Page 2 June 7, 1999 If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to contact my Clean NC 2000 coordinator, Sondra Davis. She can be reached at (919) 733- 5811. ~ ' ~, My warmest personal regards. . ~ cerely, r '.James B. Hunt Jr. JBHabd . ourit Mana er cc. C y g 150 C` MEETING OF THE WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT COURTROOM 317, NEW HANOVER COUNTY JUDICIAL BUILDING 316 PRINCESS STREET WILMINGTON, NC July 12,1999 6:30 P.M. ITEMS OF BUSINESS 1. NON-AGENDA ITEMS (limit three minutes) 151 2. Approval of Minutes 153 ADJOURN • ~ 151 This page intentivnallyleft blank} 152 C~ NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12/99 Water & Sewer Item #: 2 Estimated Time: Page Number: Department: Governing Body Presenter: Lucie F. Harrell Contact: Lucie F. Harrell • SUBJECT: Water & Sewer District -Approval of Minutes BRIEF SUMMARY: Approve the following sets of minutes: Regular Meeting, June 7, 1999 Regular Meeting, June 21, 1999 RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Approve minutes. FUNDING SOURCE: TTACHMENTS: ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW Approve mi G ME • k REJECTED O `~i REMOVED ^ ~~' POSTPONED ^~'-' 4- HEARD ^ ' ~- MENDATIONS: COUNTY COMiI~S~~N APPROVED r~~ 153 {This page intentionallyleft blank} 4 ~J ~~~~ 154 ~~ ~~~.~,,~~ e. ~-c ::..a~.~w.-,r. Fes-- - CONSENT AGENDA NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS •~ July 12, 1999 ITEMS OF BUSINESS PAGE NO. 1. Approval of Minutes 157 2. Approval of Department of Aging application to Cape Fear Memorial 159 Foundation for grant monies of $21,250 to fund wellness program at Nutrition sites 3. Approval of Retired Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP) Grant for 1999- 2000. 171 4. Approval of Contract for Professional Services with UNCW for Tidal Creek 173 Quality Studies 5. Approval of Community Lead Poisoning/Healthy Home Initiative (CLPP/HHI) 183 mini grant -New Hanover County Health Department Health Homes Initiative 6. Approval of Budget Amendment #2000-01 192 155 ') {This page intentionally left blank} F~ 156 .. ~ NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date:. 07/12/99 Consent Item #: 1 Estimated Time: Page Number: Department: Governing Body Presenter: Lucie F. Harrell Contact: Lucie F. Harrell SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes BRIEF SUMMARY: Approve the following sets of minutes: Budget Work Session, June 8, 1999 Airlie Gardens Work Session, June 10, 1999 Regular Meeting, June 7, 1999 Regular Meeting, June 21, 1999 RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Approve minutes. FUNDING SOURCE: ~- ATTACHMENTS: ITEM DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW COUNTY MANAGE S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Approve minutes. ,,, ONS/COMMENTS: COUNTY COMMI~ION APPROVED ~`~ REJECTED ~ '' REMOVED ~ POSTPONED 0 ~ ~~ 15 7 HEARD ~' ~ `'~~ ®ATE ~~ ~ ~ ~ {This page intentionally left blank} f~i f. . } ~~C~~4~ ~~ ~~- ~ .. ',J NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12/99 , Consent Item #: 2 Estimated Time: Page Number: Department: Aging Presenter: Annette Crumpton Contact: Annette Crumpton SUBJECT: Request approval of Department of Aging application to Cape Fear Memorial Foundation for grant monies of $21,250 to fund wellness program at nutrition sites. BRIEF SUMMARY: The Department of Aging wishes to apply for a grant from Cape Fear Memorial Foundation to implement a comprehensive wellness, exercise and nutrition, program at each of the five nutrition sites The grant monies will cover contract services cost for five instructors to teach two times a week at each site. Health promotion education programs are extremely important to the lives of our elderly. The participants are persons who would not have access to these activities unless provided through the nutrition site programming. Last year a wellness program was funded by Cape Fear Memorial Foundation. The program was so well received that we wish to continue the work. If funded, the grant will run from January 1, 2000 through January 1, 2001. There is no County match required. Total grant request is $21,250. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Recommend Commissioners approve request to submit grant to Cape Fear Memorial Foundation and accept the grant and approve related budget amendment if approved by Cape Fear Memorial Foundation Board. Signature is required on page six of the application. FUNDING SOURCE: Cape Fear Memorial Foundation $21,250 ATTACHMENTS: Grant proposal package REVIEWED BY: LEGAL: FINANCE: BUDGET: Approve HUMAN RESOURCES: NIA COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:. Recommend approval of the application to the Cape Fear Memorial Foundation. COMMISSIONERS.' ACTIONS/COMMENTS: REMOVED D yYy POSTPONED O x= HEARD ~ I ~ ®ATE ~ ~ i~~-~~~ COUNTY COMN115SI01~~ APPROVED C~---- ,~' REJECTED 159 ANNETTE CRUb1PTON Director May 13, 1999 1'~~ ~'i' ~l~l®~~ ~®lJl~l~~ DEPARTMENT~•OF AGING 2222 SOUTH COLLEGE ROAD WII.,MINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403 TELEPHONE (910) 452-6400 Faz (910) 452-6411 Garris A. Garris, President Cape Fear Memorial Foundation 5303 Wrightsville Avenue Wilmington, NC 28403 Dear Mr., Garris: , The Department of Aging wishes to apply for a grant from Cape Fear Memorial Hospital to implement a . new/continuing wellness program at the five (5) congregate nutrition sites. We were fortunate to receive funding in 1998/99 to begiri a wellness program for the 193 elderly.who come for the site activities and noon meal. The results, as you have learned from our one year report, are very positive. If approved; we will build from the successes of this year's work and carry the program to a higher level by using the curriculum of the Strong Seniors Stay Yow1g program. Thank you for your consideration of this grant application. I know the Foundation receives many applications for fimding each year. I believe that a wellness program has a definite impact on the health of it participants. The results bring reduced medical pioblems and reduced health care costs. The Department of Aging is very committed ~in its mission to provide health promotion programs for senior adults. The funds .requested in the attached application outline a proven plan to make a difference in the "lifestyl'e choices" our seniors will make. . Sincerely, (,(~~~r...xz.a~ Amzette Cnmlptor Director ~~-~^~~" ,'~lsi~~'1~vr~'~~".~~`' ,,i'fee, ~'fF~l~,i, 160 ~~~~~r.Aa,~I ~~~~ ~, l.: CAPE FEAR MEMORIAL FOUNDATION GRANT APPLICATION FORM • • • Part I: YOUR ORGANIZATION Name: New Hanover County Department of A~ine Street Adders: 2222 South College Road City, State & Zip Code: Wilmington, NC 28403 ' Name of Key Contact Person: Annette Crompton Title: Director, NHC Department of Aging Telephone ~; 910-452-6400 Fiscal Year End One ear request 1/01/2001 Fax #: 910-452-6411 Federal Tax ID # 566000324 1. Is your organization a nonprofit, tax-exempt organization under IRS Code Section 501 or a governmental unit? If not, you do not qualify for a grant. If your organization is a 501 c (3), please provide a copy of your current IRS tax-exemption letter with your Application. Government unit -New Hanover County 2. Is your organization a private, non-operating foundation? If yes, you do not quality for a grant. N/A 3, Would a grant from Cape Fear memorial Foundation in the amount being requested jeopardize your tax-exempt status? No 4. ~ Will any of these funds be used to pay a nationally affiliated organization? If yes, please explain. No 5. Does your organization now, or does it plan in the future, to engage in any way in the promotion or advancement of political causes? If yes, please explain. No ' 1 ~ 161 CAPE FEAR MEMORIAL FOUNDATION GRANT APPLICATION FORIVI 6. Summarize your organization's background, goals and current programs. Discuss your assets in personnel, services and programs which could be built upon by the Foundation's help. - The Department of Aging acts as Lead Agency for services to older adults, inNew - Hanover County. With this designation by the New Hanover County Commissioners, the programs administered include Senior Center activities, Retired and Senior Volunteer Program, Transportation, Congregate Nutrition and Home Delivered Meals. The department's nussion is to provide programs which offer support to persons over the age of 60 years, to prevent premature institutionalization and enhance quality of life. To accomplish this task there are twelve full time and five part time employees. 7. Describe your organization's structure and attach a list of your officers and directors. The Department of Aging is governed by the New Hanover County Board of Commissions. The Director reports directly to the Deputy County Manager. (Organizational chart attached.) Part II: -PROJECT/PROGRAM (Please quantify whenever possible.) Describe the problem/ need that the program/project will address. ~; Statistics reveal many older adults experience limited physical abilities and malnutrition during their later years. This is especially true among those with multiple health problems, little or no education and restricted incomes. Often the elderly person's total health is negatively. affected as a result of these missing factors. Based on the data collected during the 1998/99 nutrition site wellness program funded by Cape Fear Foundation, and study done on the 193 participants, there is a definite improvement in overall physical and mental health when elderly persons are engaged in a planned exercise/ nutrition program. During the course of the one year program, it became evident that the participants were very lacking in knowledge of today's food products plus needed a great deal of motivation to engage in physical activity. Although there was improvement in their physical abilities, it only a beginning. The proposed program will continue the basic elements of last year's grant, address physical activity and nutrition but take the work to a new level using the Strong Seniors Stay Young program as the framework. 2. Describe the objective of the project/program and indicate how individual lives of.the recipients will be changed and what benefits are expected to result. If funded, the Department, of Aging wishes to take the present Nutrition Site Wellness Program to a new level. We will accomplish this by using the "Strong Seniors Stay Young Program" developed by Carol Loeser. Strong Senior Stay Young (SSSY) won a first place recognition from t Governor's Council for Mature Adults in 1998. This year, the program will receive the 16 nner's Circle Award from the Governor Council for Mature Adults on May 27, 1999. The 2 program is two fold; (1) increase strength and physical abilities (2) provide a common sense, easy to understand, education approach, to healthy eating. In summary, we will introduce the ' ~ participants to ways they. can-use to make lifestyle changes that will affect their overall health. The Strong Seniors Stay Young program will provide (1) educational information on today's food roducts~ how to read food roduct labels how to understand the labels and to choose health ' P y P diets, (2) fitness program of adapted chair and standing exercises using light weights and therabands. (water bottles and soup cans maybe substituted for actual weights) The results of the Strong Seniors .Stay Young program, now in its third year,. are tried and true. Carol Loeser, instructor far. SSSY, has documented lifestyle changes in her long term students. . 3.. Describe the strategies you will develop to.accomplish the objective. , The Department of Aging has seen decided improvement in the physical, social, and mental condition of the nutrition site participants; therefore, we-want to continue, and more importantly, expand the wellness program. The new/improved Strong Seniors Stay Young Program will allow -Carol Loeser to iristruct senior adults and students from UNCW and Cape Fear Community College in the Strong Seniors Stay Young curriculum. These instructors, once trained, will carry the program to eachof the five nutrition sites twice a week. Exercise and nutrition education will address range of movement, balance, strength building, stamina and healthy .eating. Additional activities will include monitoring of participants blood pressure, maintaining a health chart, and recording weight gain or loss on a monthly basis. A planned curriculum is attached. ~- 4. State how, when and who. will conduct an evaluation. to measure how well. your project/program is meeting its objectives. y We will utilize trained students from Cape Fear Community College and UNC Wilmington and senior~adults as instructors for the.program at the nutrition sites. Monthly reports will include activity charts and information on sections of the program that had been coveredduring the month. This information, plus comments from the participants will be included in a 6 months report. 3 1.63 F {. y 5 ... N .~ a ~ ro v V > , `~ », o ~ - ® r o cam' .. c ~ a~ U ~ , w r m ~ _ U y r C ~' N ~ C Q N ~ U ~ ¢ r , C C `~ (~ . ~ ~, ~ ~ > C ^ p ~ U,'~ U ~ K O O ~ (~ ' w tll U V ~ > D) C .~ - N N U d i-. _ ~ ~ ~ ~ C O ~ ~ O O - U ~ ~ ~ ... Q~ y. O. . .. C p ~ ~ V ., c E c 4 m m N c o m ,, 0I N ~ Ip ~ c y ~^ O u~ ~.. fn C v za¢ z ~ C N O7 ~ V _ C Z ~ ,-. N d ~ v N O.~ ~ ~ :C C J N U N . s ®~ • Z o _ ~ ~~~ ~ c " ~ o, Q U v a`~ p .2 w ~. ~ m m m ~ .U O p 164 !? • i~ • i J N I j W H f ~ f i W Q ~ ~ ~ I i ~ ~ I Q ~ I ~ ~ I w ~ ~ I I '; 1 ' i ' i I o i , ~ Q ~ . ~ ~ i to ~ w 0 0 N o ~ .~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ - : , ~1 - ~I I I ~ ~ w i ~ a ~ ~ i ~ _ I ~ ~ ~ , ~ O ¢ w ~ ~ a I z O al ~ ~ I ~ l I I cn I ~ w ~ _ ~ ~- a. p o , W I ~ X v~ ~ v~ ~ vi ~ U vi o vi a cn Z Cn w v~ W Vi ~ vi' Q vi F¢- vi p Z J ~ u w w i- z W w -~ w F- z w ~ ~ F- z w a w F- z w ~ Q f-- z w _ w E- z w ~ _ ~ f- z w _ ~ F- z w = ~ F- z w X w r z w i-- ~ w F- z w cn ~ F-~ Z' w~ I ~-- U J W w ~ ~ Q W Z ~ ~ a. ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ w ] ~ ~ w > ~ ~ a _ = ~ O ~ W w ~ I ~ i ~ ~ Y = = m ~ Cn ^ O O ~ ~ ~ ~ =; ~ 5 m CAPE FEAR MEMORIAL FOUNDATION . GRANT APPLICATION FORM PART III: FINANCIAL INFORMATION ~ . 1. Amount requested from Cape Fear Memorial Foundation. $21,250 for a one year project. 2. Develop a complete project/program budget, including income and expenses, for the period you are requesting funds (see attached format). See attached form. 3. List the names of organizations, both public and private, to which you have applied for support for this specific project/program. Also show the amount requested and the status (pending, approved or disapproved). Organization ' Amount Status None Other Total 166 °1 "1 n 4 CAPE FEAR MEMORIAL FOUNDATION GRANT APPLICATION FORM • 4, Describe how your project will become self-sufficient within three years. The program will develop some sufficiency through use of students and seniors as lead instructors. However, the Department of Aging has learned.that the success of the program depends on the leadership of a motivated professional. Therefore, continuance of the program will always depend on funding. The Department of Aging will look into new grant/funding resources to cover salary of the instructors. 5. If the funds are to be used for construction or equipment acquisition, explain the bidding process. N/A • • 167 5 CAPE FEAR MEMORIAL FOUNDATION GRANT APPLICATION FORM PART IV: REPORTING REQUIREMENTS Do you agree to furnish in a timely manner to Cape. Fear Memorial Foundation periodic progress reports informing the Foundation of~the progress made by your project/program? Yes SUBMITTED BY: Annette Crompton Typed Name of Chief Executive Officer of Requesting Organization ~~~~, l _~ 5"//3 f ~r S Signature Date Director, Department of Atrin~ Title William Caster Name of President/Chair, Board of Directors Signature Date Chairman. I~'HC Board of Commissions Title 168 (~ Part III: Question 2 attachment, Project/Program Financial Information Develop a complete project/program budget, including income and expenses, for the period you are requesting funds: 'Project Budget : ~ From January 2000 to Januarv. 2001 - Expenses (By Category) Income (By sources) Salary: All part time contract service staff for instructors and coordinator positions CFMF Dept/Aging . Adri~inistration/clerical 1,872 Coordinator/Instructor 12,510 (Ms.Loeser) 21,250 r_ Instructors 8,740 (UNCW/Seniors} Salary /training Supplies 5x100. S00 Prinf 5 00 Total $21,250 $21,250 $2,872 - Total Expenses 21,250 Total Income $ 24,1.22 170 ~~ N'EW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12/99 • Consent Item #: 3 Estimated Time: Rage Number: - Department: Aging Presenter: . Contact: Howard Brown/Annette Crumpton . . SUBJECT: . Retired Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP) Grant for 1999-2000. BRIEF SUMMARY: The Department of Aging has been awarded a grant in the amount of $50,431 for fiscal year 1999-2000: .The County's contribution is $42,990 which is budgeted in RSVP's 2000 budget. The grant supports funding for 600 volunteers working in New Hanover County. This is the third year of the three-year grant . • awarded in 97-98. ~ . RECOMMENDED MOT10N AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Recommend acceptance of the grant and request authorization for the County Manger to sign the document: •~ - 'FUNDING SOURCE: '~ Federal $50,431 (already budgeted in RSVP's 2000 budget) County $42,990 .ATTACHMENTS: -. REVIEWED BY: • .LEGAL: N/A FLNANCE: Approve BUDGET: Approve- HUMAN RESOURCES: NIA COUNTY MANAGER'S C MENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: ~ ..Recommend approval. - i COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS/COMMENTS: r --- . ' COUNTY COMi1~1~10 . APPROVED Gar'' ` ~ REJECTED ~ REMOVED ~ °~ ~~ PbSTPONED D a: NEARfJ _ SATE ~~ ~~Z _~~ J/~~~ :. ~. ~ ~ ~ {This page intentionally left blank} ~~r~ I ~~~~ ~~~, fit"d ~~~7~~~~ ~1~~~ 172 ~ ~ ,~~~~~~~ - a~t ~.`. _ ,~l, .~.+ ..._ . `') - . " `NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS - REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting .Date:. 07/12/99 + . _ -:Consent item #: 4 Estimated Time: Page Number: ' Department: Planning 'Presenter:. Patrick Lowe .Contact: Dexter Hayes, Patrick. Lowe ' . SUBJECT: Contract for Professional Services.. with UNCW for Tidal Creek Quality Studies - BRIEF SUMMARY: ~ .This item is for informational purposes. It is a budgeted item for the 1999-2000 fiscal year. The attached contract for services with UNCW provides for the continuation of the water quality studies in .. the major estuarine creeks. The study focuses on developing an understanding of the water quality in the ` _ tidal creeks, identifying sources of pollution, and providing recommendations for .management strategies.. Initiated. in 1993 in response to growing community concerrrover declining water quality in the tidal creeks, .- they are intended to provide objective, scientific data that can be used in the development of the .Land Use ' -~'Plan Update, watershed management plans, and mitigation efforts. The study .has already provided important data that has been used to begin pollution mitigation efforts on Futch and Howe Creeks, and °-which helped lead to the reopening of Futch Creek to shellfishing in 1996. These studies were also .._ instrumental in the County's successful Clean Water Management Grant application for Airlie Gardens and the Tidal Creeks Program. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Approve contract and authorize County Manager to sign. ". FUNDING SOURCE: County $: 60,000 -. Money is in Current Budget: Yes ATTACHMENTS: ` REVIEWED BY: LEGAL: Approve FINANCE: Approve. BUDGET: Approve HUMAN RESOURCES: N/A COUNTY MANAGER`S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: - Recommend approval COMMISSIONERS° AC 10 S/COMMENTS: "coup coM~s~~o AppROVE® - ~ `REJECTED O . R~M01/EI3 0 173. P®STPONED ~ :~ HEARi~ New Hanover County Contract # 00-0008 , '~ . . ~. i ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH IN THE NEW HANOVER COUNTY TIDAL CREEK SYSTEM - ' ~- a proposal to NEW HANOVER COUNTY submitted by ' : ~Dr. Michael A. Mallin and D.r. Ja`mes F. Merritt ' - ~ Center for Marine Science Researeh~ ' .' The•University of North Carolina at,Wilmington ' ~ Wilmington, N.'C. 28403 ' total request.,$60,000. ~ ~. for the period August 1, 1999 -July 31, 2000 "v~!kk4i~us~'~'1 VY~i°V~ ' ~ ~u~L°~~~?{5`3 174 }~~ ~ ,, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a~~ ~~ ~ . Ne~v Hanover County Contract # 00-0001 C • • 2 •' { ~.~ Since 1993, New Hanover County, the Northeast New Hanover Conservancy and the UNCW Center for Marine Science Research have worked together to ..investigate pollution problems, sources, and potential solutions for several tidal creeks iri New Hanover and Pender Counties, including Futch, Pages, Howe, Hewletts and Bradley Creeks. The results of this research collaboration have been published in a series of annual reports describing the results, as well as peer-reviewed publications in scientific journals. We have also presented our results at numerous public forums and scientific meetings. Some of our results have proven to be critical findings regarding land development and aquatic impacts, and are currently being used by the Coastal Resources Commission to help develop rules for wise coastal development. Some of - the. other findings from our program have included determination of pollution "hot spots" in the tidal creeks, an analysis of the sources of nutrients and fecal coliforms into upper. .Futch Creek, a complete before and after analysis of the effect of channel dredging. on the water quality of Futch Creek, an analysis of environmental factors supporting Pfiesteria growth in tidal creeks, distribution of heavy metals pollution in local sediments, analyses of the bivalve community in the tidal creeks, and studies concerning the functions of wet detention ponds as pollutant filters in New Hanover CountY• A major byproduct of this program has been the attraction of outside funding to conduct additional research and management activities. One of the management efforts has been a'manipulatign of the upper areas of Graham Pond.. to attempt to encourage more loss of nitrogen to the atmosphere through denitrification (cooperative project including the North Carolina Extension Service and Natural Resources Coriservation Service). We will maintain selected sampling stations and parameters to analyze. the effectiveness of this mitigation effort, and encourage modification of it if necessary. We have also collaborated with North Carolina State University'on an EPA ~~ .funded study to assessthe pollutant runoff from area golf courses and determine what management .practices alleviate runoff problems: Our Program has also been instrumental in helping the County secure a large Clean Water,Trust Fund grant to help purchase Airlie Gardens and set up a comprehensive effort to improve water quality of ,the entire tidal creek system. Environmental Monitoring Efforts for 1999 2000 We :propose to continue our water quality sampling effort at six stations in Futch Creek (FC-4, FC-6, FC-8, FG13, FC-17 and FOY). Sampling at Pages: Creek will include~Sfations PC-M, PC-BDUS, and PC-BDDS. Sampling at Howe Creek will include HW-FP, HW.GC, and HW-GP. Bradley Creek stations will include BC-76, BC- SB, BC-SBU, BC-NB, BC-NBU, BC-CR and BC-CA. Hewletts Creek stations will include HC-2, N8-GLR, MB-PGR, SB-PGR, and PV-9. In addition, new funding will allow us to .begin an analysis of Whiskey Creek, which has thus far been'unstudi to lack of funds. Dr. Mallin will oversee the. monitoring effort. ~ I New Hanover County Contract # 00-0 3 The normal parameters to be sampled are as follows: Water temperature , ~~ Salinity ~ Chlorophyll a Dissolved oxygen, .. Nitrate . pH - Ammonium " . , Turbidity Orthophosphate Additionally, we will conduct fecal coliform bacterial analysis at three. tidal,. j creeks, 'to :be mutually decided upon by UNCW and the County Planning Office. , Additional Research Efforts ~~ ` ,~ ,. .. .. Despite their use as regulatory standards, we recognize that'there are problems inferring microbial contamination from the fecal coliform standard. Thus,.we plan to also use modern molecular techniques to detectactual pathogenic bacteria in these anthropogenically-contaminated waters. UNC1A/ microbiologist Dr. Ron Sizemore will use a technique called fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). This technique involves using specific oligonucleotide probes that wilt cause bacteria collected from the environment to bind to the probe and then fluoresce. These bacteria do not need to be cultured ,and identification is rapid and potentially very accurate. Dr. S.izemore.is currently using a probe against E. toll in tidal creek water to check for fecal. contamination. In sites with significant fecal coliform contamination, Dr. Sizemore will expand these studies to target bacterial strains most often appearing in' local. cases of hospital confirmed gastroenteritis. ~ - A UNCW fungal ecologist; Dr. David Padgett, will be collaborating with us in an analysis to determine the presence and virulence of a pathogenic fungus, Candida albicans. Infections from this organism have proven fatal in persons with compromised immune systems, such,as AIDS patients, organ transplant°patients, the obese, and-the elderly..Th.is fungal pathogen is known to be associated with sewage inputs; thus, Dr. Padgett will concentrate his efforts o.n our known fecal coliform "hot spots". We hope to determine what environmental factors may be associated with virulent populations of this organism, if such populations are located. In an effort to assess what nutrients (nitrogen or phosphorus) stimulate phytoplankton growth in tidal creeks, Dr: Maliin's lab will perform nutrient limitation bioassays at Howe and Fetch Creeks. These are experiments~in which varying amounts'of N and. Pare added to 1-gallon cubitainers of creek water, incubated over . three days, and tested for algal growth by measuring chlorophyll a on a daily basis. . We will compare upper and bower stations in each creek, during spring and summer. Our efforts will be conducted at Stations HW-FP, HW-G'P, FC-4, and~FC=17. New Hanover County Contract # 00-0008 4 As part of our continuing effort to seek ways to remediate polluted waters in New '~ Hanover County., Dr. Martin Posey's Benthic Ecology Lab will. investigate the effectiveness of oysters in removing particulate and dissolved materials from the water column. While this type of mitigation may not be feasible for large bodies of water, the small tributary creeks with low volume-to-area ratios such as we have nearby may prove to be ideal systems to investigate this technology. This would be a self- sustaining remediation tool, with principal costs realized for installation and testing. The two research questions to be answered are 1) Can oyster reefs significantly improve water quality under local conditions, and 2) Can self-sustaining reefs become established in areas currently not hosting oyster reefs? Our goal is to establish oyster reefs at the mouths of two local tributaries, by moving live oysters from other areas and/or placing spat in the field. Our intent is to test the effectiveness of reefs at clearing the water column by measuring nutrients, chlorophyll., and turbidity upstream and downstream of the reefs on an outgoing tide weekly for 2 months. We can also ,place turbidity meters in the water over night to measure hourly turbidity over a 24 hour cycle. Survivorship of oysters will also be determined to see if the reefs can be setf- sustaining. If we get evidence that this technique is promising; than we plan to use this preliminary data to seek funding for larger-scale mitigation efforts. Dr. Lynn Leonard of the Earth Sciences Department will also participate.in this endeavor. Her objectives will be to: 1) Determine if the implanted oyster reefs significantly reduce total suspended solids (TSS) on the ebb tide, 2) Determine if the oysters alter the percent organic content of TSS on the ebb tide, 3) Determine if the oyster reefs affect the rate of sedimentation and changes in substrate granulometry (these both maybe altered by the production of oyster fecal matter which is larger and more likely to settle than the ambient suspended particles, 4) Assess the effect of the .reefs on local hydrodynamics (flow velocity and turbulence on the reef), and 5) Evaluate the impact of oysters on fecal coliform removal from the creek water. With the latter we can also attempt to associate fecal coliforms with specific TSS properties such as organic aggregates, inorganic clays, etc. Sampling will be conducted during the same period as above, and standard techniques used to assess sediment characteristics. In addition, sediment traps will be placed upstream and downstream of the implanted reefs to aid in assessing sedimentation rates and changes in content. Flows will be measured using an electromagnetic current meter placed on the reef crest. We will also continue our investigations into the efficacy of wet detention ponds as pollutant mitigation devices. Preliminary data from Dr. Larry Cahoon indicated that sediment phosphate levels in sampled wet detention ponds appeared to,level off after several years. This suggests that the ability of stormwater ponds to trap and retain phosphorus is limited and declines after a certain pond age. This means that older ponds may "leak" phosphorus downstream. This is bad, because phosphorus can stimulate the growth of bacteria and also blue-green algae, creating problems for receiving waters downstream of the ponds. Dr. Cahoon will 1) Sample and me ~~ - the sediment phosphorus contents of a larger number of detention ponds in the~r4d~y New Hanover County Contract # 00-0008 . 5 and ~Hewletts 'Creek watersheds; 2)~ Compare these data with pond ages from permit records, 3) Experimentally assess~the ability of sediments from ponds of varying ages to retain additional soluble phosphorus, and 4)~Measure the amount of-phosphorus contained in aquatic vegetation in~samples from stormwater detention ponds. The objective is to determine if older ponds may require periodic remedial action to improve efficiency, and if so, when such maintenance efforts should be taken, and what type of action'would best keep the "ponds functioning properly: Additionally, Dr. Cahoon will continue investigating the effect of stormwater runoff on creek water quality. stormwater runoff is known to be rich in nitrogen and phosphorus, which can 'stimulate algal bloom problems downstream. Silicate is an element required by diatoms, which are a component of healthy estuarine communities. However, preliminary data shows that silicate is low in stormwater runoff. Too much N and P without corresponding inputs of silicate may change the phytoplankton communities from those dominated by diatoms to~ones.containing an overabundance of less desirable species like dinoflagellates. The increase in impervious. surface . coverage due to land development may have led to less silicate'loading, because. silicate comes from groundwater rather than stormwater. surface runoff. Dr. Cahoon plans to collect daily samples from Clear Run, a major tributary of Bradley Creek, and test for silicate, .total nitrogen and total phosphorus: He'will also. use an automated water sample to collect at 3 hour intervals before; during, and after storm events to determined if stormwater does indeed load an overabundance of N and P relative to silicate. If this is the case, stronger measures may be needed to enhance stormwater retention and percolation so as to minimize the impact of nutrient runoff on tidal creek communities.. Products of County -Conservancy -UNCW Collaboration County and Conservancy funding has led to a number of sound science and management products. We are pleased to say that our Four-Year Tidal Creeks Report has made a~considerable impact among regulators, researchers, and concerned citizens: 'A strong set of management-oriented recommendatidns have arisen from the program,. which we hope elected officials will utilize. Another product has been the 3rd Golf and the Environment Symposium, held at UNCW last spring. We also have~three technical manuscripts being published in scientific journals. One is an analysis of the effects of tide on water quality parameters, another details the results of the Futch Creek dredging project, and a third presents an'analysis of how coastal land development determines bacterial pollution in area tidal creeks. Two more manuscripts currently being considered for publication by journal editors concern our findings regarding runoff from golf courses, and what factors lead to microbial pollution of coastal waters. . 178 ~: ~ New Hanover County Contract # 00-0008 6 • The following is a list of publications produced by UNCW that have been funded through this program: Mallin, M.A., K.E. Williams, E.C. Esham and R.P. Lowe. Effect of human development .. on bacteriological water quality in coastal watersheds. Ecological Applications (in press). Mallin, M.A., L.B. Cahoon, R.P. Lowe, J.F. Merritt, R.K. Sizemore grid K.E. Williams. Restoration of shellfishing waters in a tidal creek following limited dredging. Journal of Coastal Research (in press). Mallin, M.A., E.C. Esham, K.E. Williams and J.E. Nearhoof. 1999. Tidal stage variability of fecal coliform and chlorophyll a concentrations in coastal creeks. Marine Pollution Bulletin 38:414-422. Mallin, M.A., L.B. Cahoon, J.J. Manock, J.F. Merritt, M.H. Posey, T.D. Alphin, D.C. :.Parsons and T.L. Wheeler. 1998. Environmental Quality of Wilmington and New Hanover County Watersheds, 9997-9998. CMSR Report 98-03, Center for Marine Science Research, University of North Carolina at Wilmington, Wilmington, N.C. Mallin, M.A. 1998. Land-use practices and fecal coliform pollution of coastal waters. In . Proceedings of the 14th Annual North Carolina Onsite Wastewater Conference, October 27-29, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, N.C. Mallin, M.A. and T.L. Wheeler. 1998. Nutrient and fecal coliform discharge from ~' southeastern North Carolina golf courses. pp 22-25 In Is Golfing Greener? -The Impact of Golf Courses on the Environment. Symposium Proceedings, The University of North Carolina. at Wilmingtonl NC Cooperative Extension Service/ NC Coastal Federation, March 12, 1998. _Mallin, M.A., L.B. Cahoon, J.J. Manock, J.F. Merritt, M.H. Posey, R.K. Sizemore, W.D. Webster and T.D. Alphin. 1998: AFour-Year Environmental Analysis of New Hanover County Tidal Creeks, 9993-1997. CMSR Report No. 98-01. Center for Marine Science Research, University of North Carolina at Wilmington, Wilmington, N.C. Mallin, M.A., L.B. Cahoon, J.J. (Manock, J.F. Merritt, M.H. Posey, R.K. Sizemore, T.D. Alphin, K.E. Williams and E.D. Hubertz. 1996. Water Quality in New Hanover County Tidal Creeks, 9995-9996. Center for Marine Science, Research, University of North Carolina at Wilmington, Wilmington, N.C. Mallin, M.A., L.B. Cahoon, J.J. Manock, J.F. Merritt, M.H. Posey, T.D. Alphin and R.K. Sizemore. 1995. Water Quality in New Hanover County Tidal' Creeks, 1994-1995. Center for Marine Science Research, University of North Carolina at Wilmington, ,Wilmington, N.C. Mallin, M.A., L.B. Cahoon, E.C. Esham, J.J. Manock, J.F. Merritt, M.H. Posey and R.K. Sizemore. 1994. Wafer Quality in New Hanover County Tidal Creeks, 1993-1994. Center for Marine Science Research, University of North Carolina at Wilmington, Wilmington, N.C. • 179 New Hanover County Contract # 00-0008 7 Budget for 1999-2000 Tidal Creeks Environmental Analysis : ~ ' Mallin component Totals Professional salary $26,069 ' Fringe benefits 24% $ 6,257 ~ ' Student salaries $ 5,500 Fringe benefits 9% $ .495 Travel $ 1,500 ' Supplies $ 1,052 Mallin'total ~ $40,873 $40,873 Padgett component Supplies $ .800 $ , 800 Sizemore component ~, Supplies ~ '' $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Posey component ~ • Student salaries $ 2,200 Fringe benefits 9% $ 200 Supplies • $ 1,800 , Posey total $ 4,200 $ 4,200 Cahoon component Studenf tuition remission ~ $ 3,577 - Equipment $ 2,7.50 . ' Supplies $ 2,000 ' Travel $ 100 Cahoon total $ 8,427 . ; $ 8,427 . Leonard component ' Student salaries $ 2,000 • Fringe. benefits 9% $ 180 Supplies $ 1,320 Travel $ 200 Leonard total ~ $ 3,700 $ 3,700 Grand total $60,000 $60,000 180 ~~ j , ' New Hanover County Contract # 00-0003 8 Period of Program: The work covered by this agreement shall begin August 1, 1999 anal shall terminate July 31, 2000. Future phases will be negotiated for respective creeks. on an annual basis. .Duties of UNCW. UNCW shall furnish the. necessary personnel and other support necessary to accomplish objectives of this agreement. All fiscal records shall be `; retained. for a period of 24 months after the termination or completion of this project and ' shall be available to agents of the County. A report summarizing the data collected and . F the conclusions of the project will be submitted to New Hanover county and the Division of Water Quality by October 31, 2000. Fiscal Arrangements. The total costs, including indirect costs, shall not exceed ~_ $60,000 for New Hanover County. UNCW will provide additional funds to cover . remaining costs.- The- County will provide the funds according to a mutually agreed .upon schedule following approval of the agreement. Right to Publish. UNCW reserves the right to publish the results of the study in :.another format. ~ . `.. ~~ . ~~' ii . { . i r , ,~ ,. t d _ . i . ,~ . 181 . '. . ' i i , ' - New Hanover County Contract # 00-0 ENVIRONMENTAL:RESEARCH IN THE NEW HANOVER COUNTY _ ~ TIDAL CREEK SYSTEM a proposal to ~. NEW;AHANOVER COUNTY ^ submitted by Dr. Michael A. Mallin and Dr. James:F. Merritt Center for Marine Science Research . The University~of North Carolina_at Wilmington ~ ,, „ Wiimington,,N,C,.. 28403 total request $60,000 for the period August 1, 1999 -July 31, 2000 , FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT WILMINGTON Michael A. Mallin, Principal Investigator Jame~l ~/lerriti~ ~MSR Director C' ~' ~' I Date. Pamela B. Whitlock, Director of Research Administration Date FOR NEW HANOVER COUNTY Dave Weaver, Assistant County Manager Date `) °1 1 ~zAllari, O'Neal, County Manager Date q.. .. _ _ i : ~~j. - ,. ' _ -. ;. N'EW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS . ' ~ ~ ~ REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION . ' Meeting Date: 07/12/99 • . Consent Item #: 5 Estimated Time: Page Number: Department: Health .Presenter: Janet McCumbee, Director Child Health ' Contact: Janet McCumbee, 343-6559 - ' S U B""1JECT' . COMMUNITY LEAD POiSONfNG/HEALTHY-HOME INITIATIVE (CLPP/HH1) MINIGRANT-New Hanover County Health Department -HEALTHY HOMES INITIATIVE •. BRIEF SUMMARY: On June 2, 1999, the Board of Health approved a grant application to the North Carolina Childhood Lead Poisohing Prevention Program for $16,111 for "HEALTHY HOMES fNITIATIVE" to be provided through . . New Hanover County Health Department. This grant will cover 2 Temporary positions (Environmental . Health Specialist and a .Licensed Practical Nurse) for 20 hours a week for 24 weeks and a small operating budget (see attached grant proposal for budget breakdown). We have already learned that this grant has • been approved for New Hanover and are asking the County Commissioners to approve the acceptance of this grant along with the attached budget amendment. Attached is the grant application which is summarized below: There is a need,in our community to address both lead oisonin use this grant to combine efforts on these two issues w ' g prevention and asthma control. We will Homes (FCCH). North Carolina has approximately 72% o'f women n the worlkforce, caeat ng thle need for . :more quality child care settings. Registered FCCHs do not routinely get environmental assessments by - health department staff. There are.162 registered FCCHs in New Hanover County, caring for 529 children .ages from birth to 12 years: :The goal ofahe program is: ~ " To educate the registered Family Child Care Home providers about asthma. control and lead prevention. Achieving this goal will foster the process by which child care providers will be able to develop their own. resources for managing these particular health issues within therir support network. ' RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Accept grant award and the attached budget amendment #00-0001: r FUNDING SOURCE: • - grant • ATTACHMENTS: yes 7 pages BA00-0001 .w _ ~ ~ ~+~~ ~ ~~'~, _..-..__ -. ..._ . ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ <~ ~ ~~.~~ ~1~ COUIV~Y COMi1lit~yON . .. ITEM!DOES NOT REQUIRE REV/EW . ~" - ~`~~~ s b1~ APPROVED ~ ~ ; , '~ ~ ° ~'s:~t~t~~i`d'~:~~~ REJECTED (~ t. COUNTY ~a~~ REMOVED ® t, ~ V MANAGER'S MENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS POSTPONED ~ ,Recommend. approval HF.A-RD ~ ~~ ?~r Zl~~ ®ATE ,1----- - ~ NEW HANOVER COUNTY. BOARD.OF COMM1SS10NERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION Meeting Date: 07/12/99 . Budget Amendment DEPARTMENT: Health/Child Health BUDGET AMENDMENT #: 00-0001. ."" - ADJUSTMENT ~ DEBIT Lead Poisoning -Healthy Homes CREDIT Initiative Grant $16,111 Temporary Salaries ~ ' ' Departmental Supplies ~ $11,436' "Employee Reimbursements <$4,225 $450 ;.. EXPLANATION: To budget a Lead Poisoning -Health Homes Initiative g n award for temporary salaries, supplies, and in town mileage. APPROVAL STATUS: To be approved by Board Of'Commissioriers .. ~ ~ ' 3 1- .. 1:. ~cOUNnr Co~n~l~l®N C '~,~~,.~~ ~f~t~~~`'?~ APPROVED Cis'' 'REJECTED ^ . i~ ~ ~~~9~~ ~~1~~~ °~'~ ~ 84 ~~ ~~~~~:}~ REMOVED ^ POSTPONED ^ H~R~ ^ l ::s~l~ _. ' .w~ •ii,.~ , Y . ' _,y North Carolina Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program _COMMUNITY LEAD POISONING PREVENTION/ HEALTHY HOME INITIATIVE (CLPPIHHI) ~~ 1999/2000 MINIGRANT APPLICATION ~, . Guidelines and Information t The CLPP/HHI minigrant project has three primary goals: 1) to promote and implement primary prevention strategies to reduce childhood lead poisoning; (e.g., preventive maintenance 2) to establish and implement primary prevention and environ"mental assessment strategies to reduce the incidence of childhood asthma; and 3) to increase local program capacity to participate in state environmental health programs " Make sure your activities are directly related to these goals. Activities that are culturally relevant, practical, innovative, and based on successful theoretical or tested models. are encouraged. " Incorporation of an outreach-element that will enhance your program's effectiveness and collaborations are strongly encouraged. Include a strategy for continuing your project. If your"proposal is one of program enhancement, you _ " may want to propose working.. on a different program element next. Identify others in your community who can help continue your project. ~" Provide a workable evaluation plan for your program. While evaluation can be time consuming; it wild save time in the end through more .refined strategies and more focused program direction, as well as encouraging communication among staff and community. Also, what you learn from your program can help others: grantee activities will be disseminated to all 100 counties to share ideas. ", We will also be asking you to evaluate the state's role. For your timeline, note that this grant :requires amid-year~progress report and an end-of-year evaluation report,-so you should coordinate " your evaluation to this schedule. Applications due: ~ June 1, 1999. Mid-year .progress report: 2/1 /00 ~ . Awards decisions made:, June 30, 1999 finale report due: 8/1/00 . Maximum .award: $20,000 ~ " , Total funds. available $182,000 (estimated) . Information meeting:,. April 29, 1999 185 HEALTHY-HOMES INITIATIVE ~, NEW HANOVER COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT ,. ; 1. State~the critical need facing your community or your childhood lead poisoning prevention - program that your proposal will;ad'dress.~ , There is a need in our community to address b"oth lead"poisoning prevention and asthma control. We would like to use this grant to combine efforts on these issues, while working with registered Family Child Care Homes (FCCH). North Carolina has approximately 72% of women in the workforce, _ ,creating the need for more, quality child "care settings. Registered FCCHs. do,not routinely get environmental assessments by health department staff. There are 162 registered FCCHs.in New Hanover County, caring for "529 children ranging in age from birth'to 12 years... New Hanover County has a need for increased lead screening through private physicians. In our health department, we have steadily increased- our screens over the" past 3 years; CY `97 to 1 425 `98~to.1,853, `99,(through May 11) to'>1,784. We are aware of very little testing in the"local doctor's offices. Our `97 data shows that 32.2% of the target population is being screened. By working with FCCHs; we hope to raise awareness with family child care providers and parents about the need for lead screening, as well as ,involve their private health care providers. Our Lead Program nurses have noted a continued lack of community kriowIedge about lead based vinyl. mini-blinds. We hope that by .providing environmental assessments through this grant and replacing the hazardous mixu-blinds, we will' establish a supportive relationship between registered " homes and health department staff.. New Hanover County is no different from the rest of the state regarding the prevalence of asthma. We have been pleased to be involved-already with the state asthma initiative. One of "our nurses recently participated in the Office.of Public Health Nursing's Asthma Protocol Development Group. We also have" 2 -nurses (Child Care Health Consultants) who ;Have received asthma training sponsored by the Healthy Child Care North Carolina Campaign. Through a phone survey, they have been told that there are over 200 children known to be diagnosed with asthma iri~the child care facilities in our county. We would like to further determine the prevalence of asthma in our community (especially FCCHs) through this. grant. If funded, our.collaboratiori with key community people for the grant period will be extended in the future for other asthma initiatives. Providing environmental assessments for asthma triggers would be a new venture for our staff and hopefully something we could continue to develop as statewide efforts materialize. Three of our Environmental Health Specialists attended the Indoor Air Quality: Asthma and Allergen Control workshop in Raleigh in March. 186. ~ 2. Describe the specific population or program element selected, and why chosen. In order to increase public awareness of how environmental issues im act children's health P , especially regarding lead poisoning and asthma, we would like to target an established and accessible ` population of young children, .those in FCCHs. We feel the combined Lead Poisoning Prevention/HealthyHomelnitiatve can easily provide components of lead poisoning prevention and asthma control with environmental health and nursing involvement. FCCH providers often provide care~for low income families while struggling to keep their businesses afloat: They are often hesitant to invite health department staff - to come to their homes for fear of regulatory issues. -With this grant, we could provide a monetary incentive to improve their child care environment and home with replacement mini-blinds and high efficiency air.filters. This could lead to .along-term relationship with health department staff and promote better care of our children. Our target population would be all children in registered FCCHs (529), their families, their physicians, and theix child care providers: As we work with this population; we hope to establish strong collaborative relationships with local child advocacy groups and healthcare providers serving this population. • 3. Outline the .goals and objectives that guide your proposal. (24 points) ...Goal: . Our goal is to educate the registered Family Child Care Home providers about asthma control and lead prevention. Achieving this goal will foster the process by which child care providers will b~e able to develop their own resources for managing these particular health issues within. their support network. Objectives: ~ . 1. To provide Healthy Home services to 75 of approximately 162 registered FCCHs in New Hanover County. - 2. Facilitate collaborative relationships among child health providers and child care providers to increase the network of resources for New Hanover County children. 3. Educate registered FCCH providers and parents re: the impacts of environment on childhood asthma and lead poisoning and the availability of local health management resources. 4. Identify.. potential lead hazards and asthma triggers in child care areas and make recommendations, as needed, to .lessen the potential impact on the health of children (in registered FCCHs). . 5. Refer any homes and/or. children with identified asthma issues/needs to trained Child Care Nurses Consultants .for follow=up education and to facilitate use of community resources. 6. Collaborate with.children's physicians to discuss grant goals and objectives and. enlist their cooperation to increase the number of children screened for lead in New Hanover County, especially those who are not already screened through Medicaid, Health Choice, WIC, etc. (Increase screening of target population from 32.3% to 40%:) _2_ 187 4. List specific activities in order to achieve your objectives. (15 points) 1. , ~ To establish a cooperative relation'ship with registered •FCCH providers we will: •a. ~ Contact the 162. registered family child care providers by letter and offer education and environmental observations/screens for asthma triggers and-lead Hazards. , . ~~ gib. ~ Schedule home visits with`all who respond to offer~ofprogram services: Home visits are to be conducted. jointly by an environmental health specialist and a nurse. c.,~ Offer a written agreement to 'participants stating the°grant goals. and,°objectives, :collaborative efforts being.made and'referral possibilities: ~ , ,, d: Complete an environmental health history with the child 'care' provider. re: -their . knowledge of asthma and lead issues aril the observations made and review findings during the home visit. Referrals and recommendations will be discussed during review. e. Provide vouchers to purchase high efficiency air filters for heat/air systems as indicated ' by environmental health survey and voucher` s to replace ariy vinyl `mini-blindsthat are found to be lead hazards. - ~ ~ ' 2. Assess the awareness of child-care~providers' knowledge of resources, such as: Family Child Care Association, Asthma Support. Groups (local/national), Lead Poisoning Prevention Program (state/national), and medical providers. 3. - ~.. Environmental Health'' and Nursing "staff will collaborate in providing asthma and lead education by: , ., , . . a. Conducting an assessment of potential lead hazards and asthma triggers. , b. Providing written information regarding asthma and lead. c. -Referring to child care nurses as warranted. ~ ' d. Encouraging use of existing resources available. ' .: -, ... , 4. Ways to identify potential hazards for lead and asthma triggers: t ~ , .. . a. Environmental ~~Health and Nursing staff will complete environmental ,Health histories. _ - ~.. .. b. Environmental Health staff will swab mini-blinds for presence"of lead. c. Environmental Health and Nursing staff will observe child care -area and conduct environmental assessment using a written document to be reviewed with the FCCH . ,,. _. . . providers. d.. Environmental' Health staff will identify the moisture content of floors; walls and =ceiling's; as indicated by history/assessment`using acalibrated moisture-meter. 188 ~ _3- ~ 5. Child Care Nurse Consultants will receive referrals for identified asthma issues: a. Child Care Nurse Consultants will follow-u wi p th home visit for further education regarding asthma for child care providers. b. Child Care Nurse Consultants will follow-up with parents and physicians and referrals will be issued as agreed. c. Child Care Nurse Consultants will follow-up with FCCH providers by making a home visit to provide further- education. d. Child Care Nurse Consultants will follow-up with parents and, if authorized, will report to and/or refer to physicians, as indicated. 5. Describe staffing patterns, responsibilities and qualifications.. Our Healthy Home Grant committee will take responsibility for grant development, monitoring, and evaluation. They are: Public Health Nurse II (Lead Program Coordinator), Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) II (Lead Program), Public Health Nurse III (Child Health Supervisor), Child Health Director, Environmental Health Supervisor, Environmental Health Specialist (EHS) (Lead Program) and Environmental Health Specialist (Child Care). The committee will also expand to include the Child Care Nurse Consultants, and possibly the Project ASSIST health educator insofar as cigarette smoke is an asthma trigger. Staff will be hired temporarily to implement the grant objectives and would include: part-time EHS, part-time LPN, and a few additional hours of clerical support (provided through existing part-time staff). Child Care Nurse Consultants and Lead Program nurses will work closely with the temporary LPN to implement the grant. Environmental health staff will work with the temporary EHS. The temporary nurse and temporary EHS will implement the program jointly, working together daily. 6. Identify actual or proposed collaborators in this project and what resources each will contribute. Enclose a letter of support from each collaborator. The health department will collaborate with NCDHR Child Care Consultants, Bernadette Baker and Vicki Daughtery, who will lend technical advice and referrals. Social Services will work with us on referrals. The Child Advocacy Commission is supplying statistical information, list of registered Family Child Care Homes and technical assistance. The Cape Fear Family Child Care Association will work with us on establishing a relationship with the home care providers. The American Lung Association will collaborate with us on educational materials regarding asthma and their triggers. New Hanover Regional Medical Center will be a provider for educational materials on asthma. We have a verbal commitment from the Dust-free Corporation to supply vouchers for purchasing high efficiency air filters at a discount. We are presently in contact with Target, Home Depot, K Mart and 3M Filtration Products to supply air filters and blinds to the homes. • 189 7. List any other funding sources for this project and plans fo`r additional or future support. Include opportunities to blend and leverage funds, and any in-kind contributions. Outline plans,for. continuation of program initiative or improvement after grant funding period. In-kind contributions include staff time (grant committee listed iri #5), office space arid utilities for temporary staff and free materials from State and.other nonprofit organizations. At this time, we do not have any definite future plans for continuation of funding. Continuation of the educational process developed during this grant will be possible as time and staffing permits. If the project is successful we would be willing to apply for funding through any available source. 8. Describe evaluation plan and timeline for stated objectives. July-August Grant committee to purchase needed supplies; bring the collaborators together to review the project and coordinate efforts; hire new temporary staff and orient and train staff. September Begin implementation process and market program, October EHS and LPN team to make two Family Child Care Home visits per day. November Continue for 6 months. February, . Progress report to, state. March Collaborators meet again to begin wrap-up. April-June Evaluation process begins including follow-up of referrals and recommendations and compiling data. ~ '' ' July Final reports completed: The Healthy Homes Grant Committee will evaluate the project based on objectives: 1. Gather, compile and analyze statistics during and at the end of the project. Stats will include total lead tests, lead tests on children in Family Child Care Homes, private physicians testing members, number of children with diagnosed asthma in child care settings, number of home visits, number of mini-blinds replaced and numbers of filters authorized arid number of referrals made to Child Care Nurse Consultants and other health care providers. 2. Prepare summary of all educational materials used, how received by providers and parents, whether new materials. were developed, effects of nurse interventions for asthma and provider .compliance with environmental recommendations. 3 . ~ Monitor staff and customer satisfaction, adequacy of training, feasibility of project continuation (man hours, cost), usefulness of collaborations for `future lead prevention or asthma control initiatives. 4. Develop,forms (surveys, report forms, records), revise as needed and send in with final report. 190 9. Include a line item budget. and justification. ~~ EXPENSES ~ AMOUNT RE UESTED Q v ,~i~t.,...~ /~ a ~~~U; ~~E ~~ -6- 191 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION • Meeting Date: 07/12/99 Budget Amendment Consent Item #: 6 Estimated Time: Page Number: DEPARTMENT: Parks Capital Project ~ , ,. BUDGET AMENDMENT #: 2000-01 ADJUSTMENT DEBIT _ • ,CREDIT Parks Capita! Project ~ ' Sales Tax Refunds $8,487 3 Interest _ $3,200 ` Other Improvements ; ' ~ $11,687 EXPLANAl'ION: To budget revenues earned, but never budgeted to be used to complete on-going construction projects at Ogden Park, including tennis courts, playgrounds,. picnic facilities, athletic fields, support facilities and landscaping. , APPROVAL STATUS: To be approved by Board Of.Commissioners COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONSICOMMENTS: t 192 APPROVED REJECTED ~ ~~'~ REMOVED p ,, POSTPONED O ~s~; ~ iiEARA ~~sE ~--~ (..~ Z~ a5 c~? e ~. yyy1 ~:'~FI~i~ti ~¢+~_.ria rt}~~ y~V~L~Ja v.:t~•3~ . Y ~R' {n ~'7 ~~ s ,~..~~ r n, n~ :`7~ ~~,ry ~~ '^'~'V 057r~'~ 9~YV~b j, ~~ t ~ 3r ~~s ~~ ~ _y ~ _ ~ `ate