The URL can be used to link to this page

2018-05-07 Regular Meeting NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 7, 2018 PAGE 101 ASSEMBLY The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met in Regular Session on Monday, May 7, 2018, at 4:00 p.m. in the Assembly Room of the New Hanover County Courthouse, 24 North Third Street, Wilmington, North Carolina. Members present: Chairman Woody White; Vice-Chairman Skip Watkins; Commissioner Jonathan Barfield, Jr.; Commissioner Patricia Kusek; and Commissioner Rob Zapple. Staff present: County Manager Chris Coudriet; County Attorney Wanda M. Copley; and Clerk to the Board Kymberleigh G. Crowell. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Pastor Shawn Blackwelder, St. Paul’s United Methodist Church, provided the invocation and Commissioner Zapple led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA Chairman White requested a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Motion : Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Watkins, to approve the items on the Consent Agenda as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Minutes – Governing Body The Commissioners approved the minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 16, 2018. Approval to Change the Schedule of the Board of Commissioners Meeting in July 2018 – Governing Body The Commissioners approved changing the meeting schedule in July. Agenda Review will now be held on Thursday, July 5, 2018 at 4:00 p.m. instead of Thursday, July 19, 2018 at 4:00 p.m. and the Regular Meeting will now be held on July 9, 2018 at 4:00 p.m. instead of July 23, 2018 at 4:00 p.m. Adoption of State Road Resolutions – Governing Body The Commissioners adopted the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) State Road Resolutions in support of adding the following roads to the state system:  East Lake Emerald Drive and Castleboro Court located within the Weaver Woods at Lake Emerald Subdivision in New Hanover County (Division File No: 1255-N).  Still Pine Drive, Everette Court, and Honeydew Lane located within The Lakes at Johnson Farms Subdivision in New Hanover County (Division File No: 1256-N).  Ervin’s Place Drive located within the Ervin’s Place subdivision in New Hanover County (Division File No: 1258-N). Copies of the resolutions are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLI, Page 8.1. Adoption of a Resolution Supporting the Naming of the Cape Fear River Bridge on I-140 in Honor of Louis Bobby Brown – County Manager The Commissioners adopted a resolution supporting the naming of the Cape Fear River Bridge on I-140 in honor of Louis Bobby Brown. The Town of Navassa adopted a resolution on February 5, 2018 requesting the Wilmington Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (Wilmington MPO) to recommend to the North Carolina Department of Transportation that the Cape Fear River bridge on I-140 in Navassa be named in honor of Louis Bobby Brown. A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLI, Page 8.2. Adoption of Lupus Awareness Month Proclamation – Governing Body The Commissioners adopted a proclamation recognizing May 2018 as Lupus Awareness Month. A copy of the proclamation is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLI, Page 8.3. Adoption of Building Safety Month Proclamation – Building Safety The Commissioners adopted a proclamation recognizing May 2018 as Building Safety Month. "Building Codes Save Lives" is the theme for Building Safety Month 2018 and encourages all Americans to raise awareness of the importance of building safe and resilient construction, fire prevention, disaster mitigation, and new technologies in the construction industry. A copy of the proclamation is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLI, Page 8.4. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 7, 2018 PAGE 102 Adoption of a Resolution to Dispose of Surplus Property According to Procedures Outlined in North Carolina General Statutes Chapter 160A, Article 12 – Finance The Commissioners adopted a resolution to dispose of surplus property according to procedures outlined in North Carolina General Statutes (NCGS) Chapter 160A, Article 12. Non-profit organizations will have the opportunity to inspect and purchase the property prior to being sold by auction. Afterwards, all remaining property will be disposed of according to the procedures prescribed in Chapter 160A-270(c) which authorizes the disposal of personal property electronically using an existing private or public electronic auction service. A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLI, Page 8.5. Approval to Submit a 2018 Port Security Grant Application to the Federal Emergency Management Agency – Sheriff The Commissioners approved the submittal of a 2018 Port Security Grant application to the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The Port Security Grant is used to fund equipment for enforcement activity related to the Port of Wilmington and the waterways surrounding New Hanover County. The requests include K-9 equipment, night vision monoculars, dive equipment and trailer, training, boat motor and truck for marine unit. The New Hanover County Sheriff's Office will be able to expand the capabilities of the Emergency Response Team to respond to maritime emergencies and tactical operations. The grant amount is $245,786 with a 25% match. Match funds will be paid using Federal Forfeited Property funds set aside for FY18/19. Approval of March 2018 Tax Collection Reports – Tax Department The Commissioners approved the Tax Collection Reports of New Hanover County, New Hanover County Fire District, and New Hanover County Debt Service as of March 2018. NCGS 105-350 requires the Tax Collector to submit a report showing the amount of taxes collected. Copies of the Tax Collection Reports are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLI, Page 8.6. Approval of 2017-2018 Board of Education Budget Amendment #6 – Strategy and Budget The Commissioners approved the 2017-2018 Board of Education Budget Amendment #6 as follows: On April 3, 2018, the New Hanover County Board of Education approved 2017-2018 Budget Amendment #6, which: 1) Increased classroom teachers' salary budget by $126,637 and made various miscellaneous budget transfers in the General Fund (Current Expense); and 2) Transferred $300,000 from the Bond Fund's contingency line item to the Myrtle Grove renovation project to address costs for the replacement of electrical switchgear, replacement of a kitchen hood exhaust system, and sealing the concrete floor slab prior to installation of new vinyl composition tile flooring. REGULAR ITEMS OF BUSINESS ADOPTION OF PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING ELDER ABUSE AWARENESS MONTH Chairman White reported that the Cape Fear Elder Abuse Prevention Network has requested the Board adopt a proclamation recognizing the period of time between Mother’s Day, May 13 and Father’s Day, June 17, 2018 as Elder Abuse Awareness Month in New Hanover County. Vice-Chairman Watkins read the proclamation into the record. Chairman White asked for direction from the Board. Motion : Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Kusek, to adopt the proclamation declaring the period of time between Mother’s Day, May 13 and Father’s Day, June 17, 2018 as Elder Abuse Awareness Month in New Hanover County. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. On behalf of the Cape Fear Elder Abuse Prevention Network, Marianna Stacy accepted the proclamation and talked about the importance of bringing awareness of elder abuse and the network’s goal of educating the public on the indicators of elder abuse in order to stop it. The network was formed in 2006 and under the direction of Jane Jones, Director of the Area Agency on Aging, the volunteers have been able to do great work for many years. To commemorate Elder Abuse Awareness Month, the Cape Fear Elder Abuse Prevention Network will be hosting a series of tree planting events in each county. Senior Resource Center Social Worker Jeff Lee, who is also chair of the Tree Planting Committee, stated that the New Hanover County commemorative tree planting event will take place at the Senior Resource Center on May 30, 2018 at 9:30 a.m. and invited the Commissioners to attend. A copy of the proclamation is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLI, Page 8.7. ADOPTION OF PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING NATIONAL PRESERVATION MONTH Chairman White reported that May is National Preservation Month. Preservation month is a nationally recognized event, sponsored annually with the National Trust for Historic Preservation, honoring and promoting NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 7, 2018 PAGE 103 historic preservation across the country. He invited Executive Director of the Historic Wilmington Foundation Beth Rutledge to make remarks. Ms. Rutledge stated that for more than 50 years, Historic Wilmington Foundation has been preserving and promoting the irreplaceable in Wilmington and Lower Cape Fear. There is no place like Wilmington and that's due in large part because of our community that believes so strongly in our history. There are eight historic districts here, which is almost unheard of in a city this size. She expressed appreciation to the Board for considering the proclamation. Commissioner Kusek read the proclamation into the record. Chairman White asked for direction from the Board. Motion: Vice-Chairman Watkins MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple, to adopt the proclamation recognizing May as National Preservation Month. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the proclamation is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLI, Page 8.8. ADOPTION OF PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING FOSTER CARE AWARENESS MONTH Chairman White reported that the New Hanover County Department of Social Services (DSS) has requested the Board adopt a proclamation recognizing May as Foster Care Awareness Month. Commissioner Barfield stated that DSS plays a role in many facets of our community and receives numerous recommendations to investigate elder abuse on a monthly basis as well as child abuse. It is amazing the great work the social workers do at DSS to serve our community. There are a tremendous number of children in our community with DSS. More and more children are also being brought into DSS due to the opioid epidemic. He encouraged people to contact our local DSS agency and become a foster parent or foster grandparent. He read the proclamation into the record and moved for adoption. Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple, to adopt the proclamation recognizing May as Foster Care Awareness Month. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Social Services Director Michelle Winstead and Social Services Assistant Director Wanda Marino accepted the proclamation and thanked the Board for its support. They invited the Board to attend the DSS celebration of foster th parents on Saturday, May 12 at 11:00 a.m. at the Fort Fisher Aquarium. DSS could not do what they do in their jobs without the support of the Board, the County, law enforcement, and without the judges such as Judge Corpening. A copy of the proclamation is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLI, Page 8.9. APPROVAL OF THE JUVENILE CRIME PREVENTION COUNCIL FUNDING RECOMMENDATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018-2019 Judge J. H. Corpening, II, Chairman of the New Hanover County Juvenile Crime Prevention Council (JCPC), reported that the JCPC voted unanimously to recommend allocation of $433,344 in State JCPC funding for fiscal year 2018-19 with the priorities of Psychological Services, Community Services/Restitution, Teen Court, Home-Based Family Services, and Parent Skill Building Programs as follows:  JCPC Administration: $11,543  Youth Empowerment Services: $348,004  Teen Court: $47,025  Systematic Training for Effective Parenting (STEP): $26,772 There is a twenty percent match that is required and most of that comes from in-kind funding and some cash match with Teen Court. This results in the total local match being approximately twenty-four percent and the total JCPC budget with all these factors included is $570,579. At the request of the Board, Judge Corpening explained the primary goal of funding for JCPC is to provide dispositional alternatives for Teen Court, which is our kids under age 16 who are in trouble. What JCPC has accomplished with this funding in New Hanover County is extraordinary. JCPC has been able to provide a large amount of funding to Youth Empowerment Services (YES), which houses the juvenile psychological services and the community service and restitution program. Prior to YES picking up the community service and restitution funding a few years ago, community service was never able to be offered as a dispositional alternative in delinquent court ever in his career as a lawyer and then a judge. It just was not available. Psychological services that are located in-house enables them to walk a child out of a courtroom or out of a court counselor's office into a psychologist’s office for emergency risk assessment. The funding allows the ability to do the more in-depth evaluations needed to ensure their needs are being met. It also allows the ability to offer sex offender specific evaluations which are sometimes very essential and are not typically funded outside of our world. Teen Court has been operating in New Hanover County for more than a dozen years. It is an incredibly successful program offering an almost peer mediation approach to kids who get in trouble with minor offenses. It is a great program for not only the kids who are in trouble to come to be judged by their peers, but also for the peers who do the judging and who volunteer. From his perspective, this is a win-win. Last year and this year, JCPC has been NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 7, 2018 PAGE 104 able to pick up the parenting class offered through the STEP program that's housed at Coastal Horizons, meeting one more need in our county. From his perspective, this is a very effective use of this funding. The ability he has to put these services in place is the envy of his colleagues all over the state. Some of his colleagues in other counties, such as Orange County, have visited to look at what we do and are moving towards following this model. Chairman White thanked Judge Corpening for the presentation and asked for direction from the Board on the Fiscal Year 2018-2019 Juvenile Crime Prevention Council’s Funding recommendation. Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple, to approve the Fiscal Year 2018-2019 Juvenile Crime Prevention Council’s Funding recommendation. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PRESENTATION OF FISCAL YEAR 2018-19 RECOMMENDED BUDGET AND FISCAL YEAR 2019-23 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN County Manager Coudriet presented the Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-19 Recommended Budget and FY 2019-23 Capital Improvement Plan for New Hanover County (NHC) highlighting the following:  Recommended Budget Framework:  Priorities set by the Board:  New policy investments  Maintenance of prior policy choices  Revenue parameters set by the Board:  Minimize taxes and fees  Structurally balanced in future fiscal years  Advances the five-year strategic plan (New Hanover County Strategic Plan 2018-2023)  Major Funds Spending Recommendations:  General fund: $332.5 million  Environmental fund: $23.5 million  Fire District: $15.4 million  All funds: $392.1 million  General Fund Revenues:  Tax Base: $34.217 billion:  Ad valorem rate of 55.5 cents per $100 of value:  1.5 cents reduction  Debt service fund: 6.47 cents per $100 of value  General fund 49.03 cents per $100 of value  Sales Tax Assumptions:  6.5 percent topline growth  Historical Tax Base:  FY 13-14: $29.71 billion  FY 14-15: $29.75 billion  FY 15-16: $30.20 billion  FY 16-17: $30.82 billion  FY 17-18 (Revaluation Year) Budgeted: $33.37 billion  FY 18-19 Recommended: $34.22 billion  General Fund Sales Tax:  FY 13-14: $53 million  FY 14-15: $58 million  FY 15-16: $61.5 million  FY 16-17: $65.1 million  FY 17-18 Budgeted: $70.2 million  FY 18-19 Recommended: $76.5 million  Historical Tax Rates:  FY 13-14 General Fund Tax Rate: 55.40 cents  FY 14-15 General Fund Tax Rate: 55.40 cents  FY 15-16 General Fund Tax Rate: 55.40 cents; Debt Service Fund Tax Rate: 2.00 cents  FY 16-17 General Fund Tax Rate: 55.40 cents; Debt Service Fund Tax Rate: 6.90 cents  FY 17-18 (Revaluation Year) General Fund Tax Rate: 50.53 cents; Debt Service Fund Tax Rate: 6.47 cents; Revenue Neutral Rate: 58.38 cents  FY 18-19 Recommended General Fund Tax Rate: 49.03 cents; Debt Service Fund Tax Rate: 6.47 cents  $7.3 million Appropriated Fund Balance:  One-time money for one-time expenses  $4.3 million pre-funded via capital reserve  Leaves unassigned fund balance of 20 percent  New Hanover County Schools:  Current Expense: $2,800 per student (shared with charter schools) = $78.3 million  Capital: $3.696 million NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 7, 2018 PAGE 105  Pre-K: $487,422 (year 2 of 3)  Debt service: $26.2 million  Total direct: $108.2 million  Historical Total School Funding Comparison (including operating, capital, and debt service):  FY 13-14: $86.7 million  FY 14-15: $91.5 million  FY 15-16: $93.1 million  FY 16-17: $96.8 million  FY 17-18 Budgeted: $100.3 million  FY 18-19 Recommended: $108.2 million  Historical School Average Daily Membership (ADM) Comparison:  FY 13-14: 26,051  FY 14-15: 26,784  FY 15-16: 26,986  FY 16-17: 27,402  FY 17-18 Budgeted: 27,571  FY 18-19 Recommended: 27,966  Cape Fear Community College:  Operating: $10.9 million  Capital: none recommended  Debt service: $15.5 million  Total direct: $26.4 million  Public Health and Safety:  School safety and health:  Five additional school resource officers (SROs)  One additional school detective  Three additional school-based mental health therapists  Two additional school-based health nurses  Funding to address opioid crisis:  Continues $265,000 for LINC treatment and diversion program (men and women)  Recommends $315,360 for TIDES (evidence based program to treat pregnant women addicted to substances)  Debt service payment for construction of Healing Place facility  Quality assurance/quality control specialist in Emergency 911  Licensed clinical supervisor in Community Justice Services  Public health dietician focused on obesity and diabetes prevention and reduction  $100,000 for a federal prosecutor in the District Attorney’s Office (year 1 of 2)  th Includes $1.4 million for renovation or rebuild design of the juvenile justice building on 4 Street  Economic Development:  $255,000 toward Project Grace phase 2  $100,000 toward Blue Clay Road phase 2  $430,000 (WBD, WDI, SEDC, Film Commission, Battleship, Fort Fisher, Cucalorus, Arts Council, Southeastern Partnership, FTZ)  $100,000 in performance-based incentive payments  50/50 cost share for a workforce housing position within the City of Wilmington  Capital investments:  $250,000 toward Wrightsville Beach pier area improvements  $100,000 CFPTA (WAVE) match for compressed natural gas buses  $675,373 toward multi-use path along Market Street  Other:  Outside Agency Committee:  $618,754 available for appropriation  23 programs representing 19 agencies  Storm Water Management:  $140,000 for identified drainage projects  $130,000 for phase 2 storm water utility study  $20,000 for best management practices  Capital Planning:  Five-year Capital Improvement Plan:  $16.6 million for general fund and environmental management projects  $2.1 million funded via general fund revenues  Capital Outlay and Information Technology:  $9.6 million for capital outlay and other technology  $3.2 million funded via loan proceeds  $2.5 million funded via general fund revenues  Environmental Management:  $48 per ton tip fee NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 7, 2018 PAGE 106  Tip fee meets the following:  Funds operating obligations  Funds closure and post closure reserves  Funds $11.4 million of Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) and $1.9 million of capital outlay  Environmental Management Tipping Fee:  FY 13-14: $59  FY 14-15: $55  FY 15-16: $52  FY 16-17: $50  FY 17-18: $48  FY 18-19 Recommended: $48  Fire Service District:  7.75 cents per $100 of value  $525,000 to Cape Fear Public Utility Authority (CFPUA) for US 421 fire suppression  Capital enhancements:  $625,000 engine replacement funded by loan proceeds  $118,125 for fire hydrant installation  Personnel:  Strategic Positions Recommended:  School health and safety:  Six Sheriff’s Office (Five SROs, One School Detective)  Five Health (Two School Nurses, Three School Mental Health LCSW)  One Community Justice Services (Clinical Supervisor)  General health and safety:  One Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) specialist in E-911  One obesity and diabetes dietician in health  Education and workforce:  Four library positions:  Adequate staffing at the Pine Valley branch  Equal hours of service at the Pleasure Island branch  2 percent market adjustment  1.5 percent merit pool based on prior year performance  $2.5 million salary lag  Medical plan:  No increase in medical expenses to employees or county  Addition of high deductible health plan (HDHP) as an option  Introduction of health savings accounts for HDHP subscribers  FY 2018-2019 Recommended Budget in Summary:  Meets the Board’s stated strategic priorities of health and safety, economic development, and public education  Fully funds prior obligations and policy commitments  Minimizes taxes and fees by lowering the property tax and maintaining the tip fee and fire tax at current rates  Invests in our workforce  Plans for the long term financial health of the County  How we got here:  Clear and consistent Board direction  Departments informed and committed to the Board’s strategic plan  Really good, smart, dedicated public staff that are committed to public service County Manager Coudriet requested that Non-County Agency Funding Committee member Elizabeth DeBiasi present the information on Committee’s recommendations. Ms. DeBiasi provided the following overview of the Non-County Agency Funding Committee process and recommendations:  Non-County Agency Funding Committee:  Committee Members: Damien Buchanan; Elizabeth DeBiasi; Fred Gainey; Neal Lewis; Bruce Mason; Randy Reeves; and Shannon Winslow  Process and Recommendations:  Committee received 41 applications. One was referred the County Manager for consideration under the Economic Development Non-County Agency process. Remaining 40 were thoroughly reviewed and vetted throughout the process.  Review Process:  Individually Read/Review Applications  Review County 2018-2023 Strategic Plan/ Goals, Budget, Services, and Gaps  Establish Criteria for Evaluation  Pose and Review Committee Questions/Agency Answers  Finalize Quantitative Scoring Rubric  Listen to Agency Program Impact Stories/ Outcome Stories NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 7, 2018 PAGE 107  Individual Scoring; Aggregated Scores  Discussion and Allocation Decisions  Evaluation:  Programs scored individually by committee members and aggregated  Discussion about areas of difference in scoring and key drivers  Objective Rating Instrument / Rubric:  11 pre-identified criteria, each criterion scored on a four-point scale, and equally weighted with a max score of 44:  Alignment with New Hanover County strategy and goals  Is the request aligned with agency mission (Does it make sense for them to do this?)  Does the request align with agency capability (Does the agency have experience with the program and/or the delivery model?)  Degree of unmet need for services (How big is the problem and how many are not currently being served?)  Collaborative efforts associated with program/service (How effectively does the program work with others? Is it “go it alone”?)  Demonstrated impact of program – outcome  Impact of program – multiplier effect?  Dependency on New Hanover County funding (What will the impact be to the program and/or organization if they do not receive New Hanover County funding? Would the program or agency go away?)  Degree of duplication (Do other agencies perform this service? Do those agencies do it better than the applicant?)  Degree augments or fills a New Hanover County gap in service  Ability to leverage New Hanover County funding (Is there a potential to receive matching funds? How much and how certain is the match)?  Subjective Rating:  Overall rating that allows committee to capture other attributes not easily quantifiable or that may not be broadly applicable  Scored on a four-point scale (max score: four)  Fund This:  Salaries for staff providing services to clients / patients / participants, etc.  Supplies, equipment, contract services, and other materials for staff to deliver programs  Organizations that deliver a program or service  Not That:  Administrative salaries / administrative overhead  Marketing $ or capital expenditures (land, buildings, etc.)  Intermediaries / pass through organizations (receive $ and then redistribute it to other organizations)  Funding Recommendations:  23 programs, representing 19 individual agencies recommended for funding:  Values: 1) At least 1 program or service funded in every service or programmatic area and 2) Top scoring programs recommended for 100% of their request NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 7, 2018 PAGE 108  Tier 2 programs ≤$5,000 funded at 100%; > $5,000 funded at 95% of request  Tier 3 programs ≤ $5,000 funded at 100%; > $5,000 funded at 90% of request  Specific Agency Notes:  LINC request was outsized (very large) relative to any other request. It was funded at 50% of the request.  Elderhaus was funded at 75% of the request  NourishNC received the balance of the remaining money up to the allocable amount  Recommended to move to Vendor Status:  Seven programs totaling $234,834:  Cape Fear Literacy Council  Carousel Center – Child Advocacy Center  Coastal Horizons – Rape Crisis Center and Open House Youth Shelter  Domestic Violence Shelter – Shelter Services  LINC – Transitional Housing  Vantage Point, Inc. – Teen Court  Programs identified as:  Critical/necessary to community (e.g. Literacy Council and LINC)  Provide service that is mandated by State/Federal or statutory requirements (TANF recipients with domestic violence issues required to be referred to Domestic Violence Shelter)  Provides a service that assists the County (foster care placement for teens - Coastal Horizons Open House Youth Shelter), fills a gap (victim assistance – Rape Crisis Center or diversion for teens – Vantage Point Teen Court), or assists in the treatment of and prosecution of crimes against children (forensic medical exams, etc. - Carousel Center Child Advocacy Center)  JCPC provides majority of funding; JCPC budget and County match approved by Board of County Commissioners (Vantage Point – Teen Court)  Next Steps:  Survey non-county agencies regarding process; incorporate feedback into FY20 process  Modify non-county agency application based on key learnings  Direct county staff to develop and implement training for modified application  Set due dates and work schedule / calendar for FY20 process County Manager Coudriet stated that copies of the FY18-19 Recommended Budget in detail/line item format have been delivered to the County Commissioners Office. The presentations from this meeting, including the budget in detail, will be available online as well as in the Clerk to the Board’s office for anyone in the community to inspect. County Manager Coudriet concluded his presentation stating that the next steps as recommended by staff are to have the public hearing on Monday, June 4, 2018 and the adoption of the budget on Monday, June 18, 2018. Chairman White thanked County Manager Coudriet for the presentation and opened the floor to Board discussion. In response to Board questions, County Manager Coudriet stated that when it was first implemented the additional quarter-cent sales tax brought in approximately $6 million. In the next fiscal year, it will generate between $8 million and $9 million. Commissioner Barfield stated that is almost three pennies on our tax rate. It is important to know that during the time that was passed there was a lot of conversation around investing in our quality of life initiatives, our parks, gardens, and libraries. It is great to see the significant investment in all of our parks and there is a need for more work at Veteran’s Park. Regarding the County’s partnerships such as with the New Hanover County School System (NHCS), he thinks it is important to tell our story in terms of the number of additional positions the County is funding beyond what the state mandates, as well as the Teaching Fellows program, and the County gets the debt while they get the buildings. The School Board gets all the press in terms of giving scholarships, but those dollars are coming from the New Hanover County Commissioners as well as the taxpayers here. He asked County Manager Coudriet to expand on the information he presented about the County’s partnerships such as with NHCS. County Manager Coudriet stated that the Board is making significant investments in each of the parks. There are approximately 4,000 employees in the NHCS and the County funds 698 of those positions. If not for the recommended $2,800 per student this year, there would effectively be about 700 fewer people directly teaching and/or supporting NHCS. Within that 698 are 215 certified teachers, 97 certified instructional support staff, 41 school administrators (Principals/Assistant Principals), 42 central office administrators, 50 non-certified instructional support, and 253 other support for custodian and maintenance. The County paying for and building the facilities, including the staff to support those facilities, is effectively borne out by county government as well, so 253 of those 698 positions are in direct support of the system itself. In addition to the direct funding of $108 million, there are other things found in the general fund budget year over year that are also in direct support of the k-12 system, but they are currently part of the County budget. The five SROs proposed, and the majority of the approximately 38 SROs currently in place, are actually borne in the County budget via support for the Sheriff's department. The 35 school health nurses and the 13 but hopefully 16 mental health therapists are all costs that are borne directly by the County. The County also provides approximately $600,000 to support NHCS field maintenance and grounds keeping that are borne within the County Parks department. There is a significant contribution, more than the $108 million, on the order of multiple millions above that that the County is NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 7, 2018 PAGE 109 providing in support of the k-12 system in our community. The teachers also receive a supplement. As a result of the County’s increase several years ago when the per pupil funding went to approximately $2,660, NHCS was able to increase the supplement to eight percent and gave a targeted supplement of 15 percent to teachers that teach in an identified number of schools in our community. They have and are continuing to convert that to a fixed dollar amount, but all of that supplemental support in terms of compensation is borne exclusively through the County’s current year contribution of $2,700 per student. Commissioner Barfield thanked the members of the Non-County Agency Funding Committee for their work. To his fellow Commissioners, Commissioner Barfield stated that as he listened to Ms. DeBiasi, she stated that the committee members referred to themselves as citizens and community members. To him it's important as we move forward with a committee like this to make sure there is diversity on the committee with people from every community representing and participating. He noted several of the non-county agencies not funded serve the African American community in a large way. It is important that the elected officials have a feel for the entire community. His job and daily goal is to represent every citizen, whether rich or poor, black or white, republican or democrat. He thinks it’s important for this committee as well to familiarize themselves with these agencies so they have a good understanding of what they do and what their impact is. A lot of us attend quite a few fundraisers and donate money to these different causes, but we also see day-to-day what they do in our community. Absent of that, you will ask questions because you just don't know. As he shares with County staff, you can't tell someone what you don't know. He thinks it's important and incumbent upon all of us to be invested in our entire community. While he appreciates the people serving on this committee, he definitely believes there is a need to have diversity on committees like this. There are many diverse groups coming in and speaking to many different needs. Having another voice on committees like this would have definitely lend that support. He is speaking from experience being a person of color serving on many boards where he is the only person of color on a board, but he is able to give a different perspective which many people haven't thought of in the past and it helps the conversation flow a whole lot better. Looking at what this committee has done, it has done the Yeoman's job in tremendous effort by coming up with graphs and rubrics and charts, and they really did a lot of work. He thanked the committee members again for the great work they have done. Commissioner Kusek thanked the Non-County Agency Funding Committee members for all their hard work. She understands there was a lot of hours and meetings and a lot of coming to consensus. The Board thinks this was a great job. County Manager Coudriet confirmed for Commissioner Kusek that the vendor status starts next fiscal year. As an example, the LINC funding is in the Board’s budget this year as part of the continuation budget so that amount of money that was in the outside agency funds last year remained, which is how there were $619,000 available. So the same amount for outside agencies in the current year was made available for the proposed year. A brief discussion was held about the approximately $15 million in the NHCS fund balance. Regarding if the fund balance will be used, Chief Strategy and Budget Officer Beth Schrader stated that NHCS is using a portion of it, but she does not know the exact number. The estimated fund balance will be used to cover some of the priority one requests that are unable to be funded via some of the capital. That use will take the NHCS fund balance percentage of its total budget down to approximately 6.1 percent, possibly lower. She will confirm it with NHCS and provide the Board the information. County Manager Coudriet stated that the percentage is against the NHCS entire budget, which is equivalent, he would suggest, to the County’s $332 million general fund budget. 100 percent of the $15 million or $13 million is accrued through the local support that the County has provided and the six percent is of the entire budget for NHCS, not six percent of the County’s contributions. In response to Board questions, there is no state regulation that requires NHCS to have a fund balance. This is what NHCS feels comfortable with and the policy is one of NHCS’ choosing and the percentage as well. There are some school systems, he would suggest, that may not have a fund balance policy while others have a percentage or a fixed dollar amount. Commissioner Zapple thanked the Non-County Funding Agency Committee members for their hard work. He knows there were some hiccups, but the committee has already identified some of the gaps to be addressed going forward and also made adjustments along the way. He asked for more information on why ACCESS of Wilmington was the only organization funded under the arts and cultural category. While they do very good work, there are many other arts and cultural organizations that also applied for funding. Ms. DeBiasi stated that not many applications in the arts and recreation were submitted and ACCESS of Wilmington is actually considered only recreation. While developing the evaluation criteria the committee members determined there were some things they did not feel comfortable as citizens and county members actually funding, one of which was a marketing plan. Other things would include administrative overhead and, without her notes, she thinks capital expenditures as well. An application was received from ACCESS of Wilmington, Cucalorus, and one other organization. Cucalorus was pulled over to economic development by the County Manager. That was something the committee felt it could not measure. They are looking at this as investors and could not measure the impact of a marketing plan, so those are soft dollars they did not feel comfortable funding. There was another which was a pass through. Basically, an arts agency asked for money to fund a pass through where money would come through them and they would grant it out. Again, the committee felt that was not measurable, not that it wasn't worthwhile, but it was not something the committee wanted to put in its criteria that it would be willing to fund at this point. The top priority criteria, and most importantly, is the committee reviewed how closely aligned the committee NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 7, 2018 PAGE 110 requests were with the strategic plan. The arts and cultural applications did not hit the strategic plan as closely as applications for recreation, education, economic development, and public health and safety. Regarding arts experience on the committee, Ms. DeBiasi stated she can only speak for herself, she is an avid fan. There is definitely experience on the recreation side. The concern about experience in the arts could go to the diversity point. The members did not create the committee. She does think it is food for thought in that consideration should be not only diversity of race, color, religion, but also experience. All of the members have major nonprofit experience as well as business leadership experience. Many lessons were learned working through this process this year and things will be adjusted to make the process easier next year. Commissioner Zapple stated that the committee did a wonderful job. His interest is in how some things came out in the data. He knows this process took a lot of hours and was sometimes frustrating as well in trying to create the criteria after already having the applications in hand. He knows various items will be addressed next year. Chairman White thanked the committee members for their work and presenting the recommendations. It is exactly what the committee was directed to do by this Board, primarily by Commissioner Kusek's vision and determination to seeing it through, particularly aligning it with the strategic plan because otherwise there's no reason to have one. On behalf of the Board, he thanked County Manager Coudriet and staff for the budget presentation. It is in keeping with the directive he and staff were given by this Board and the Board appreciates that on behalf of the thth citizens. The Board looks forward to the public hearing on June 4 and voting on the budget on June 18. BREAK: Chairman White called a break at 5:34 p.m. to 5:43 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING REZONING REQUEST BY DESIGN SOLUTIONS, ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, FUTCH CREEK PROPERTIES LLC, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY EIGHT ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE 8700 BLOCK OF MARKET STREET FROM B-1, BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND R-15, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, TO (CZD) R-7, CONDITIONAL MEDIUM DENSITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT A PERFORMANCE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (Z18-01) Chairman White opened the public hearing and requested staff to make the presentation. Current Planner Brad Schuler presented the request submitted by Design Solutions, on behalf of the property owners, Futch Creek Properties, LLC, to rezone approximately eight acres of land located at the 8700 block of Market Street from B-1, Business District, and R-15, Residential District, to (CZD) R-7, Conditional Medium Density Development District, in order to construct a performance residential development. The proposal of 48 units on the subject property equates to a density of six dwelling units per acre. The development is within a parent parcel consisting of approximately 8.75 acres. The residual three-quarter acres, located at the western corner of the parent parcel, is not included in this application and will remain zoned B-1. Directly east of the property is a single-family residential subdivision. To the south is commercially zoned land, most of which is undeveloped, however there is a hardware store located directly south of the property. Plantation Landing Drive currently runs through the property, connecting the adjacent residential subdivision to “Old” Market Street. There is also an existing stormwater pond on the property, which was permitted and installed in 2004 with the construction of the street. The development will install sidewalks on both sides of the street and provide a street stub to the adjoining undeveloped property to the south. Also, the existing stormwater pond on the property will be utilized and improved as necessary to serve the development. If this rezoning is approved, the development must still be reviewed by the County’s Technical Review Committee (TRC) to ensure it complies with all of the technical standards of applicable regulations. Furthermore, stormwater plans must be submitted to and reviewed by the Engineering Department prior to construction of the project. In regards to traffic, Old Market Street/Futch Creek Road sees approximately 1,900-2,000 trips per day which calculates to a Level of Service (LOS) of B. The adjacent portion of Highway 17 is currently operating at a LOS of D. The portion on Market Street south of this site and in the Porter’s Neck area operates at a LOS of E. The applicant has provided trip generation numbers for the proposed development showing that the proposed development is projected to generate 21 trips during the AM peak hours and 26 trips during the PM peak hours. Those numbers illustrate that the proposal is not expected to generate more than 100 peak hour trips and therefore, according to Section 55.3 of the Zoning Ordinance, a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was not required to be completed. Traffic impacts will be reviewed by NCDOT during the driveway permitting process. However, it is typical that commercial land uses generate more traffic than residential developments and as such the proposed project would likely result in less vehicle trips than if the site was developed as currently zoned. There have been three TIAs approved in the Scotts Hill area. There is one NCDOT project planned for the area. Project 44238 is a proposal to realign the existing exit ramp from I-140 to Market Street and also to expand the existing exit ramps to and from Highway 17. This project however is currently unfunded. The New Hanover County/City of Wilmington Greenway Plan recommends that a greenway network be installed in the surrounding area, including a portion of Old Market Street. The 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan classifies the subject property as Community Mixed Use. This Place Type promotes small-scale, compact, mixed use development patterns that serve all modes of travel and acts as an attractor for county residents and visitors. Types of appropriate uses include office, retail, mixed use, recreational, commercial, institutional, and multi-family and single-family residential. Overall, the proposed project is generally NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 7, 2018 PAGE 111 consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as it provides housing at densities consistent with what is encouraged in this place type and can serve to transition between the higher intensity uses intended for this place type and existing residential neighborhoods. The Planning Board considered this application at their March 1, 2018 meeting. The Planning Board recommended approval (4-0) finding that the application is: 1. Consistent with the purposes and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because the proposal provides housing at densities consistent with what is encouraged in the surrounding area. 2. Reasonable and in the public interest because the proposed development will provide an additional housing type to the area and serve as a transition between higher intensity uses and existing residential neighborhoods. Condition: 1. A 20-foot-wide easement shall be dedicated to the County along Market Street for the purposes of installing a future pedestrian facility in accordance with the New Hanover County/City of Wilmington Comprehensive Greenway Plan. Staff recommends approval of the application as stated in the Planning Board’s action. The applicant has agreed to the condition that would require an easement be dedicated to the County for the purposes of installing a future multi-use path in accordance with the Greenway Plan. Chairman White invited the petitioner to make comments. Cindee Wolf of Design Solutions, representing the property owner, Futch Creek Properties, LLC, stated that the existing business overlay district for this tract is not as practical for commercial center development as this section of Market Street has become a service road for the main highway corridor. Since Plantation Landing Road has become a primary access for single family residential neighborhoods beyond the tract, Futch Creek Properties felt sensitivity was needed to introduce a more appropriate use. As with the other neighborhoods, the proposed project uses the performance residential subdivision regulations, where the maximum allowable density is calculated based on the tract area, and then a particular housing type, in this case attached townhomes, is developed. The proposed project includes 48 homes all with garages and parking pads for at least two vehicles. Because of the narrow land depths to either side of Plantation on the entrance, units 1 to 8 and 43 to 48 have had frontage added and have extra-deep driveways. Sidewalks will be installed along all the streets, both the main Plantation Landing which does not have sidewalks and then the stub that will go to the south for future expansion. A tree survey was completed and the landscape designer closely reviewed the planting requirements, where the existing vegetation will be maintained, and where buffers are required along borders with existing single family homes. There are other areas that will be landscaped for aesthetic purposes, for shade purposes, and there will be street trees required along both of the main streets then obviously foundation plantings across all the buildings. In regards to the parking pads, the units that have frontage on Plantation Landing are all a minimum of 34 feet deep so they will not impede or traverse over the sidewalks and the other units are at least 24 feet deep. In regards to traffic, this request is a downzoning and represents a reduction of potential traffic impact. Surface coverage and overall density of development is totally different. As an example and in her experience, this acreage could support at a conservative estimated 65,000 square feet of gross floor area of office space. In working through the trip generation modules, the difference between a 65,000 square foot office park and 48 dwelling units is 133 AM peak trips and 152 PM peak trips and 21 AM peak trips and 25 PM peak trips, respectively. She understands that some residents in the area have concerns about stormwater. The pond has an existing stormwater permit. It was permitted for an infiltration basin and the soils have an excellent infiltration rate of 14 inches per hour. As this parcel was envisioned for a commercial project when the stormwater permit was designed and approved, the allowance is for 75 percent impervious surfaces over this land. This development, as residential, is proposed at less than the maximum coverage of an R-7 development and that is only 50 percent. The site plan included in this request has an estimate of about 44 or 45 percent. Again, this is a downsizing of this whole development. The existing pond probably is due for some maintenance and perhaps even restoration to the original design capacity. However, before construction can begin on this project both the state and county permits, which are in place, would still need to be updated and reviewed for re-approval. The Townhomes at Plantation Landing is consistent, reasonable, and in the public interest because the Comprehensive Plan does designate it as an area within a Community Mixed Use place type which promotes fostering sustainable growth through sensible infill where adequate services are already available. There will be a dedication of an existing access easement, which is all Plantation Landing Drive is over this piece of property, as a permanent right of way, through the installation of sidewalks to both sides with connection to an existing walk, which is one of the items discussed. The agreement is to fill-in where this proposed development’s sidewalks would have ended and the other sidewalk begins. There is also agreement to install traffic calming measures at the crosswalks, which would help with safety and the upgrade of the stormwater pond. An attached unit development is an acceptable transition use and project improvements will enhance the neighborhood gateway through these infrastructure and streetscape improvements and slightly increased density, as well as improve the form and function of an underutilized site. It maximizes land use efficiency and is certainly good for economic development. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 7, 2018 PAGE 112 Chairman White stated that no one signed up to speak in opposition of the request and asked that all those who signed up to speak in favor of the request to give their comments. John Carapella, resident of Plantation Landing Drive, spoke in favor of the request stating that he is speaking on behalf of his wife and himself as residents and owners within Plantation Landing. He is also the Homeowners Association President, but is not allowed to speak for the board or for the community. The interactions with Mr. Trask and Ms. Wolfe has been very positive. The community had a lot of questions, a lot of issues that were brought up in the community meetings, and all issues were able to be addressed with Mr. Trask and Ms. Wolf. Mr. Carapella stated he feels this is the best use of the land. There is vehement opposition to any commercial aspect going on the property. As long as all the stormwater commitments and all the studies are done and there are positive outcomes, he is positive that this is a good situation for the community. Chairman White closed the Public Hearing and opened the floor to Board discussion. In response to Board questions, Ms. Wolf stated that no on-street parking would be allowed. As a result of meetings with the TRC and Fire Services, no gate will be allowed. The width of the street would not allow any on- street parking. Guest and overflow parking is scattered throughout the site. Also, units 1 through 8 and 43 to 48 have extra deep parking pads, so there is the possibility of being able to park four cars on those pads. The traffic calming design will be speed humps not bumps. There is a specific design Fire Services will accept that do not damage the trucks and they can maintain their speeds. Regarding questions about the traffic impacts being mainly due to a U-turn on Highway 17 to get into and out of town from the area, Ms. Wolf stated that this was specifically the design for when Highway 17 was redeveloped. It is a consistent design through Brunswick County and a lot of our communities now. It is an 800-foot intersection which gives more than adequate time and both turns are signalized. If you come out of what some people call Futch Creek Road, it's actually the Market Street Service Road, you do have the ability to make that turn out at certain times. When you do, you have 800 feet to get over in the left lane and again, you have a signal at the other end. This project is adding a minimal amount of traffic. Ms. Wolf also stated that she spoke with the school system about the bussing. The school bus stops change on a regular basis. It is all based upon where the student lives and whether they are riding or not. There is a sixteenth of a mile periphery students will walk to the stop. Regardless, if there was a stop at Plantation and Market Street then this project by doing the infrastructure improvements, such as installing sidewalks along both sides of the road, are making things safer. In response to further Board question about the U-turn capacity on Highway 17, Amy Kimes with the Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Organization (WMPO), stated that the U-turn is based on traffic, so the storage links are based on the amount of traffic. This road had a master plan before it was built and was based on traffic forecasting. The forecasting that had the B in it would have been larger, so it grows it for 20 years. She has not looked at it closed enough to determine if it could be extended in the future if it is an issue. There may be an opportunity to expand that turn lane, but the turn lane lengths are based on the opposing traffic and the storage times. There is also the opportunity to retime the signals as the amount of traffic on the legs change to make that signal more effective. If there is an existing NCDOT driveway permit for Plantation Road, the issue would come up at that time. NCDOT would look in the driveway manual, there's a graph that tells you what to do for what length right turn lane, left turn lane, etc. In response to Board questions, Ms. Wolf stated that there would have been an existing driveway permit back in 2004. She thinks when the engineer goes through the permitting process he will have to revisit that because of the length of time that it has been. Again, this portion of Plantation Road is currently just an access easement. Since there will be an actual dedication of a right of way, although nothing is going to change as far as that, it would probably warrant for NCDOT to re-look at it. As pointed out by Mr. Schuler, the LOS is a B on the Futch Creek/Market Street service road. She does not see where the small of amount of trips from this project would warrant a review by NCDOT during the driveway permitting process to look at the U-turn on Highway 17. Ms. Kimes stated that the small amount of trips from this project would not trip any of the warrants to require NCDOT to make something of their own. For example, a right turn lane is typically at 28 trips. That would assume all trips are coming in and making a right turn into the site for NCDOT to warrant a right turn lane. Coming in if it's less than 4,000 average daily trips (ADT), legislatively NCDOT cannot require a road way improvement, so based on the ADT and legislative requirements for NCDOT, they would not be able to require an improvement on the street. In the review of this project as it pertains to Highway 17, the small amount of traffic, the percentage being such a small percentage of the daily traffic, she does not think that NCDOT would require improvement unless there is an existing safety concern. NCDOT could look at it, but again she thinks it would probably be a signal timing issue more than lengthening the storage. Signal tweaking would probably be the County’s best option. Regarding the Planning Board’s discussion about the use and access of the adjacent commercial portion of the property, Planning Board member Ted Shipley stated that right on the road there is a smaller portion of land zoned B-1. The Planning Board cannot ask the applicant what will be done with that land, but can in theory ask what would happen if it was developed and how it would impact traffic. Discussion was held about some of the issues discussed tonight with regard to stacking on the new road and particularly the units that would be closest to Old Market Street perhaps not being able to back out of the driveway if there was a commercial use there. The corner piece of land is currently zoned B-1 and further down the road there was a B-2, so in theory development could occur over time that NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 7, 2018 PAGE 113 would add significantly more traffic in that area. However, the Planning Board’s decision was 4-0 as this would be a less intensive use and a good transition to R-15 and away from the B-1 and B-2. In response to additional Board questions, Mr. Shipley stated that a process similar to this process would occur if the there was a B-1 use that would use up the larger portion. There's a very significant amount of land there and there's a private road that goes through that B-1 area. There would be a TIA completed as to the development of that whole site. As the request relates to the opposition speakers during the Planning Board meeting, Ms. Wolf and her engineer answered the questions with respect to the stormwater issues. As to home values, the Planning Board often hears that, but usually that’s entirely speculative. It is undeveloped, then it becomes brand new townhomes without an expert presenting material evidence and there is really nothing the Planning Board can consider there except just to hypothesize. The main discussion centered around traffic safety. The school bus uses just one portion of the road and the sidewalks eventually helped the Planning Board decide that safety was not as much a concern, also with the traffic and the speed humps, he thinks helped assuage that. Again, the discussion really focused on the turn onto Old Market Street and was really the primary heart of the discussion. Hearing no further discussion, Chairman White requested direction from the Board. Motion: Vice-Chairman Watkins MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Kusek, to approve, affirming the Planning Board’s statements that the application is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and is reasonable and in the public interest, with the condition recommended by the Planning Board. Chairman White stated that it’s important to note after a few minutes’ worth of questions that would infer otherwise, he thinks this is a downzoning and improves traffic flow. Doing nothing and not granting this adds traffic. This makes traffic better. Chairman White asked for a vote on the motion on the floor. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA 5 OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED JULY 1, 1971, is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book I, Section 5, Page 78. PUBLIC HEARING REZONING REQUEST BY DESIGN SOLUTIONS, ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, THELMA A. MOORE, TO REZONE 1.1 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 7640 MARKET STREET FROM R-15, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, TO B-2, HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT (Z18-04) Chairman White opened the public hearing and requested staff to make the presentation. Current Planning and Zoning Supervisor Ben Andrea presented the request by Design Solutions, on behalf of the property owner, Thelma A. Moore, to rezone 1.1 acres of land located at 7640 Market Street from R-15, Residential District, to B-2, Highway Business District. Because this is a general map amendment and not a conditional rezoning, uses that would be allowed on the property are those allowed by right or by Special Use Permit in the B-2 district based on the Table of Permitted Uses in the Zoning Ordinance. The subject property is located at 7640 Market Street, just a bit north of Bayshore Drive and consists of 1.1 acres. It is mostly undeveloped, but currently has a single family residence on it that was constructed in 1960. To staff’s knowledge there are no conservation resources or wetlands on the property. There are a mixture of land uses surrounding the parcel including a car dealership, small engine repair, boat repair, contractor offices, and also a telecommunications tower. There is single family residential to the south along Lost Tree Road in Bayshore Estates, which shares the property line for about 50 feet. The parcel to the southwest is undeveloped. Zoning was applied to the area in 1971, including the 6.51-acre B-2 district that surrounded the subject property. The subject property was zoned R-15 along with the majority of the other land in the area. In the late 80s the B-2 district was expanded to the north by another 11 acres through a few rezonings to bring the district size up to 17.5 acres and 12 parcels. Other zoning in the area includes O&I across Market Street and the conditional B-1 district at Market Street and Greenview Drive that was recently approved by this Board for the AAA car care center. The request is to expand the existing B-2 district by 1.1 acres. The purpose of the B-2, Highway Business District is to provide for the proper grouping and development of roadside business uses which will best accommodate the needs of the motoring public and businesses demanding high volume traffic. There have been a number of TIAs completed within a 1-mile radius of the subject site. Construction for State Transportation Improvement Plan Project (STIP) U-4902D is expected to begin next year. That project will install a center median along Market Street along with a sidewalk on the western side of Market Street and a multi- use path along the eastern part of Market Street. The goal of the project is to facilitate improvements to Market Street in order to help traffic flow through this corridor. Currently, Market Street is operating right at a LOS of F with the volume to capacity ratio just above 1. Traffic impacts from development of the site will be analyzed at the time a development is proposed. Any use that exceeds 100 AM or PM peak hour trips will be required to have an approved TIA prior to development. Even if a TIA is not required, improvements may be required when any proposed use is reviewed by NCDOT during the driveway permitting process. Generally speaking, the uses allowed in B-2 are bigger trip generators than uses allowed in the existing R-15 zoning. As it relates to the subject parcel, the Market Street project calls for a southbound U-turn with a bulb-out near the project. The area along the bulb-out will be controlled access, so there will not be an opportunity for a new driveway to access the subject property or the adjacent Bayshore NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 7, 2018 PAGE 114 Estates Inc. parcel. The plans show the existing curb cut that serves as access to the subject property will go away with that project. In the southeast direction, the abutting single family residential lot shares a property line for about 50 feet. The existing vegetation would need to be supplemented to meet the Zoning Ordinance buffer requirement of 100% opacity using vegetation, vegetation with fencing, or vegetation with a berm. This rezoning would add 50 feet of B-2 adjacent to the developed R-15 lots. The subject parcel is undeveloped even though it is zoned R-15. If the subject parcel is recombined with the Balkcum parcel, the western setback would not apply anymore because there would no longer be a property line there. The buffer required along the southern property line that is adjacent to R-15 zoning would have to be a minimum of 20’ wide. Buffers would not be required along the three sides of the property that abut the existing B-2 zoning. The Zoning Ordinance requires that all lights must be shielded in a manner so that light from the fixture does not directly radiate into adjacent property. The 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan classifies the subject property as Community Mixed Use. This Place Type focuses on small-scale, compact, mixed use development patterns that serve all modes of travel and act as an attractor for county residents and visitors. Types of appropriate uses include office, retail, mixed use, recreational, commercial, institutional, and multi-family and single-family residential. The requested B-2 zoning district would allow for the types of lower-intensity commercial services appropriate for a transitional Community Mixed Use area. Staff concludes that the proposed B-2 rezoning is generally consistent with this place type because it allows the types of services for nearby residents recommended in the Comprehensive Plan. Although the applicant currently plans to use this property to extend the existing auto sales use, the range of commercial uses permitted in the B-2 zoning district are appropriate on the subject property due to its location off a major arterial in a transitional area between major intersections and higher density Urban Mixed Use areas. Development regulations would require landscaping buffers along residential properties, visually separating and mitigating effects for the adjacent neighborhood. The Planning Board considered this application at their April 5, 2018 meeting. At the meeting, four members from the public spoke in opposition to the request, citing various concerns about noise, lighting, safety, and reduction in property values. The Board recommended approval (5-2) of the application, finding that it is: 1. Consistent with the purposes and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because the commercial uses permitted in the B-2 zoning district are appropriate on the subject property due to its location off a major arterial in a transitional area between major intersections and higher density Urban Mixed Use areas. 2. Reasonable and in the public interest because the rezoning provides a reasonable extension to an existing B-2 zoning district while protecting adjacent residential areas through Zoning Ordinance site design requirements for any use proposed in the district. Mr. Andrea concluded his presentation stating that staff recommends approval. No conditions can be added to the rezoning because this is a general map amendment request and not a conditional rezoning request. Chairman White invited the petitioner to make comments. Cindee Wolf of Design Solutions, representing the property owner, Thelma A. Moore, and also speaking on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Balkcum stated that the subject property has had development around it and has no immediate frontage on the road. Ms. Moore has dealt with her access being over a private easement through an auto sales lot. As such the property is not attractive for sale as a home any longer, nor would it be considered appropriate for residential development of additional housing. The minimum 30-foot setback, which is a side yard setback based upon building height for the B-2 district, is for an 11-foot-high building. There is also a drainage pattern that is running through the site. Any stormwater management would have the drainage staying away from the residential lots that are to the south. Mr. Balkcum is losing part of his property due to the Market Street project and hence, the ability to store as much inventory as he has is why he is interested in the subject property. He will be awarded with two driveways which is beyond the point where the controlled access ends. Although there is a list of business uses that would work if this was zoned B-2, the reality is there will not be a commercial center sitting behind and accessing through this auto sales lot. She and her clients believe in this particular case any type of development that goes on there, if it warranted a TIA it would have to do it, but as an acre piece of property, even if added to the auto sales as it is, would go through a full County review and any mitigating circumstances would be reviewed at that point. The Community Mixed Use place type suggests B-2 is appropriate in this place type. It is felt this would be an infill and substantially better efficiency of the land use, it would be reasonable because the lands are not attractive for residential use based on proximity to the other commercial uses. Chairman White stated that no one signed up to speak in favor of the request and asked that all those who signed up to speak in opposition to the request to give their comments. William Bass, resident of Lost Tree Road, spoke in opposition stating that he built his house at 7701 Lost Tree Road in 1993 and moved in in 1994. In looking at the line that runs directly behind his house, past Ms. Moore’s property and through to Balkcum Auto Sales, basically there are lights on the corner that shine down so brightly that it is almost like a street at nighttime. He referenced the Planning Board’s discussion about if there was an effect and he feels there is. There have been issues with break-ins and the burglar alarm going off at the Balkcum lot. When the Sheriff’s department arrives on the scene they basically run down the road past Ms. Moore’s property, across the open NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 7, 2018 PAGE 115 yards and stop in his backyard. In three instances since he has lived there, he has taken the Sheriff’s Department back to get people who were hiding behind the barn behind his house. When Mr. Bass moved into his home in 1994, he kept a buffer zone between his property and the property located at 7622 Lost Tree Road and vice-versa. During that time unless he saw the owner of the 7622 property somewhere, they never heard or knew what was going on in that whole area. Sometime later the 7622 property owner had to lease the building on his land and did so to a landscaping company. The landscaping company cleared the property and dumped refuse they were taking out of other properties from their landscape business which built up basically like a snake pit. There was an issue with snakes coming in the yards and another neighbor decided to sell his house because of the issue and also complained to the County. Although the landscaping company cleaned up the property, it never put back what it took out as far as the buffer zone. He has seen this occur all the way up the street, past Ms. Moore’s property. He knows the value of this property has got to be commercial and is sure if he was the Balkcums, he would want it himself. Unfortunately, it is residential and he thinks there has been too much residential converted to commercial property. He does not want to see it and is strongly opposed to it. He understands the value of it, but from what he understands it's only valuable to Mr. Balkcum. He sees the subject property and the parcel that is directly behind him that has an over one-hundred-foot cell phone tower on it, is costing him over $100,000 in property value on his home. He has two appraisals before the area was cleared and another after the clearing was complete, which will prove how much the value fell. Rather than sell his house, he spent $10,000 installing a fence to block what was directly behind him. He can currently see from the back of his house the lights from the auto sales lot and can see the driveway that comes down past Ms. Moore’s property. Mr. Bass concluded his comments stating that he requests the Board deny this request. He does not think it is right that the Board is affecting this many people and their property values. One neighbor who spoke at the Planning Board meeting is considering selling his home at a loss because of the commercial development. Again, he does not feel it is right. He thanked the Board for the opportunity to speak. Chairman White closed the Public Hearing and opened the floor for Board discussion. He stated that he cannot support this request and does not intend to vote for it. Ms. Wolf requested the opportunity to speak in rebuttal to Mr. Bass’ comments. Chairman White apologized, reopened the Public Hearing and asked Ms. Wolf to make her rebuttal remarks. In rebuttal, Ms. Wolf stated that if this tract is rezoned all new construction would be required to upgrade to the current regulations. In regards to the clearing that has occurred, there is a utility easement that runs along the boundary back to and into the Bayshore community. If development were to occur on this tract a bufferyard, if it is not available right now, it would have to be supplemented and have to be created within that 30-foot setback and all of the other regulations. The common boundary between this tract and the residential homes is 50 feet. This is all ahead of and surrounded by other commercial development. Ms. Moore lives there now and has adapted. However, Ms. Wolf and Ms. Moore truly believe that this is not a residential parcel of land and the development of it would not impact those adjacent residential properties because there are regulations in place that would protect that. In rebuttal, Mr. Bass that stated regarding Ms. Wolf’s comments about the runoff on the property, originally the runoff was not there. On Ms. Moore’s property there was a zone that stopped about two-thirds down her property. Two neighbors sold property that would turn out and run onto Lost Creek Drive. Because of that the residents now have water problems they are stuck with due to the developer across the street needing a sewer access into that piece of property. The developer got it by offering a large sum of money. Again, commercial development is killing some of the subdivisions. Chairman White closed the Public Hearing and opened the floor for Board discussion. In response to Board questions, Ms. Wolf stated regarding a plan for what is being proposed on the property is only the expansion of Mr. Balkcum’s car lot. There is no site plan at this point. There was discussion about bringing this forward as a conditional use. She and her clients, with staff support, felt that it was not necessary to go through all of those motions ahead of time for Mr. Balkcum to spend that money until he knew he had a valid site to develop and expand on. Requesting a B-2 rezoning will not really make it wide open when consideration is given that there are conditions in place with setbacks, lighting controls, and landscaping that would protect the concerns of that adjacency of 50 feet. In response to additional Board questions, Ms. Wolf stated that there is no entrance/access point to the property other than the entrance via Mr. Balkcum’s sales lot. Commissioner Barfield stated that in looking at this one parcel that is surrounded by B-2, in his opinion it is almost rendering that property useless without changing the zoning. As the access is going through an alley behind the car dealership, he would not anticipate someone wanting to buy that property to build a home or to improve a home in that area. He would make the motion to recommend approval of the application as it is 1) consistent with the purposes and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because the commercial uses permitted in the B-2 zoning district are appropriate on the subject property due to its location off a major arterial in a transitional area between major intersections and higher density Urban Mixed Use areas and 2) reasonable and in the public interest because the rezoning provides a reasonable extension to an existing B-2 zoning district while protecting adjacent residential areas NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 7, 2018 PAGE 116 through Zoning Ordinance site design requirements for any use proposed in the district. He thinks staff will be able to mitigate anything negative that would happen to any adjacent residential property owners in the future, but in looking at a parcel of land that's an acre that's pretty much just sitting there, it really is of no value other than to be extended and incorporated into the rest of the B-2 area. Hearing no further discussion, Chairman White asked the petitioner whether to continue the application to a future meeting or to proceed with the Board deciding whether to approve or deny the application. Ms. Wolf requested the Board to proceed with the decision. Chairman White requested direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Watkins, to approve as the Board finds that this request for a zoning map amendment of 1.1 acres from R-15, Residential District, to a B-2, Highway Business District, as described is 1) consistent with the purposes and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because the commercial uses permitted in the B-2 zoning district are appropriate on the subject property due to its location off a major arterial in a transitional area between major intersections and higher density Urban Mixed Use areas and 2) reasonable and in the public interest because the rezoning provides a reasonable extension to an existing B-2 zoning district while protecting adjacent residential areas through Zoning Ordinance site design requirements for any use proposed in the district. Chairman White stated that when there's a conditional use and a special use permit before the Board, the Board often, almost without exception, has no choice but to approve it. Whether the traffic is bad, everyone knows what is happening up there, year after year after year of approval, approval, approval, because of the zoning. The law does not really allow the Board to do otherwise, unfortunately. The Board has gone over this repeatedly for the five years he has been on this Board and it’s frustrating at times. Speaking only for himself, when there is an opportunity for a rezone it is the complete prerogative of this Board to accept or deny it. And denying this, and if the Board had opportunities to deny other rezones, other parts of that corridor, it would slow down traffic until the infrastructure catches up. He does not blame Mr. Balkcum for wanting to expand his car dealership and understands it. The Board’s job is to think larger than that and to the extent the Board can affect it over time, project by project to try to mitigate the impacts up there that have not been mitigated for decades. For that reason, he will vote against the request. Chairman White called for a vote on the motion on the floor. Upon vote, the MOTION PASSED 3 – 2. Chairman White and Commissioner Zapple voted in opposition. A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF AREA 3 OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED July 6, 1971, is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book I, Section 3, Page 17. PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Chairman White announced that one person signed up to speak under public comment. Mr. John Babb, resident of Brascote Lane in the Georgetowne subdivision, stated that many county departments should be recognized more for the hard work they do. He would like to take great pride in recognizing one particular County department, the Engineering department. His community was suffering and is suffering from some long standing storm drainage problems. The department representatives came in to discuss some of the residents’ concerns and also some mandated items they have to do in our communities. Mr. Babb had contacted the department on behalf of the homeowners’ association to discover how to help them as well as how they could help the residents. He was very impressed with the professionalism, the courtesy and the interest shown by the department, the Engineering department in whole and particularly one member of that department who came out and visited with the residents. The representatives supplied maps, extensive information, drawings, numerous on site visits to really help the community move forward with what it needed to do in conjunction with what the department was planning on doing. He was very much impressed, the whole community was, by the robust actions to mitigate the barriers that they chose to break down so the citizens could understand more clearly what they were doing, why they were doing it, how they needed to do it, and what the community could do to better facilitate the process. He appreciates the opportunity to come before the Board to say job well done, Engineering department. Chairman White thanked Mr. Babb for sharing his experience with the Board. ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS OF BUSINESS Vice-Chairman Watkins stated that this week our community lost a great servant, Mr. Herb Fisher. He asked everyone to keep Ms. Sylvia Fisher and their family in their prayers. Commissioner Barfield expressed appreciation to the Greater Wilmington Chamber of Commerce and the 2018 Leadership Wilmington class for this year’s Work on Wilmington. They really enhance the quality of life for a lot of individuals in Wilmington by the work they do. He attended the reception for the participants and it was really great to see that many people. Over a thousand people volunteered that Saturday to do projects in our community. We have a great community of volunteers here and he commends all those folks that did just that. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, MAY 7, 2018 PAGE 117 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chairman White adjourned the meeting at 6:46 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kymberleigh G. Crowell Clerk to the Board Please note that the above minutes are not a verbatim record of the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners meeting. The entire proceedings are available for review and checkout at all New Hanover County Libraries and online at www.nhcgov.com.