2018-05-31 Agenda Review
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34
AGENDA REVIEW MEETING, MAY 31, 2018 PAGE 128
ASSEMBLY
The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met for Agenda Review on Thursday, May 31, 2018 at
4:00 p.m. in the Harrell Conference Room at the New Hanover County Government Center, 230 Government Center
Drive, Wilmington, North Carolina.
Members present: Chairman Woody White; Vice-Chairman Skip Watkins; Commissioner Jonathan Barfield,
Jr.; Commissioner PatriciaKusek; and Commissioner Rob Zapple.
Staff present: County Manager Chris Coudriet; County Attorney Wanda M. Copley; and Clerk to the Board
Kymberleigh G. Crowell.
Chairman White called the Agenda Review meeting to order and announced that the purpose of the meeting
is to review and discuss the agenda items for the June 4, 2018 Regular Meeting with discussions as noted:
Consent Item 3. Approval of Request from Coastal Horizons for the County to Serve as Applicant
Agency for a Grant with the U.S. Department of Justice.
In response to Board questions, Coastal Horizons
Executive Vice President Karen Chapple stated that they have already been coordinating with Deputy Sheriff Johnson
and Community1, which has been a great resource for them. They already have a program within the jail that they
have been working on together.
Consent Item 4. Approval of the Award of a Bid for the Purchase and Installation of a Scale at the New
Hanover County Landfill.
In response to Board questions regarding having one bidder for the purchase, County
Manager Chris Coudriet stated that he did not know why there was only one bid, but it was evaluated and staff feels
comfortable with this recommendation. He also confirmed that the purchase with only one bid is consistent with what
the statute requires.
Consent Item 7. Approval of April 2018 Tax Collection Reports.
In response to Board questions regarding
if there was a trend in the increase of property tax appeals, Deputy County Manager Avril Pinder stated there is not a
trend. There is typically an increase in appeals during a revaluation year as compared to a non-revaluation year. It is
based on 2017 and staff is still working on the appeals.
Regular Item 10. Public Hearing on the FY 2018-2019 Recommended Budget
. Regarding the ability to
approve the budget at the meeting on Monday, Chairman White stated that it is at the Board’s discretion if it would
th
like to vote to approve it at that time or wait until the June 18 meeting. County Manager Coudriet stated the calendar
has it being considered at the second meeting in June, but there is nothing that requires the Board to wait until June
th
18 to vote and staff will be prepared for the Board’s direction.
Regular Item 11. Public Hearing Text Amendment Request (TA18-01) – Request by Harper Capital,
LLC, to Amend the Table of Permitted Uses, Article VI and Article VII of the Zoning Ordinance Regarding
the Location and Access Requirements of High Density Developments.
In response to Board questions, Planning
and Land Use Director Wayne Clark stated the petitioner does not want to wait for the Unified Development Ordinance
(UDO) process because of projects they would like to move quicker than the 2019 timeline. His understanding is that
staff is obligated by due process to evaluate their request. In response to Board questions regarding maintenance of
keeping the private road up to County standards, Mr. Schuler stated it would be the responsibility of the property
owner of the high density development or the homeowners’ association (HOA).
Regarding concerns of the maintenance, Planning Director Clark stated that there are some frontage roads in
,
the County that don’t meet the requirement for a project because of how it connects to other frontage roadssuch as
Market Street. The way the process was written is a challenge to bring flexibility to the process of maintenance. The
County does not require the same restriction level for commercial developments as higher density projects. The
standard isn’t set by the impact to the roadways, it is set by this one specific use,high density (HD) special use permit
(SUP). The HD SUPs are used for anything from four units an acre up to17 units an acre, so people generally think
of them as being apartment complexes but there are a number of them that average about 10 units per acre. There is
no such restriction onroad access for a shopping center or a single family home neighborhood that may have 500 lots.
This does not answer the question of whether it’s the right thing to do because that would take more time to figure out
in the UDO process. To the applicant’s point, which was not a staff initiated code change, it was not equitable to the
actual impact of the roadway. Forthis code amendment, because these types of developments are HD SUPs, the
amendment doesn’t approve anyone’s project. The request still has to come before the Board for final approval for an
SUP, which also presents a set of challenges because if they bring in the right expertise, it can be difficult for the
Board to deny the request.
Planning Director Clark further stated that from a standpoint of consistency with the plan, there is a stronger
argument on the roadway. If 1,000 homes were built that connects a road to a tiny street cutting through a
neighborhood, staff would have the ability to recommend denial. The main argument to staff from the petitioner was
that it was not fair to have different requirements. A brief discussion was held regarding private road maintenance and
that HOAs should fix the roads. It was noted that where there are neighborhoods that do not have HOAs, the residents
have to pay to bring the road up to NCDOT standards. Sometimes, not all the residents are agreeable to sharing the
costs, then there is a lack of funding and they come to the Board about the issue. Some buyers were not aware that it
is their responsibility to help maintain their private roads. With an HOA, covenants are reviewed by the buyers so that
they are aware of the responsibility of the maintenance. Deputy County Attorney Sharon Huffman stated that going
forward, every new subdivision has to have an HOA. There also has to be a statement in the covenants and therefore
the final plat, that the HOA is responsible for road maintenance or else County staff will not sign off. If a new
subdivision does not have private roads, then maintenance is not necessarily the responsibility of the HOA. Director
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34
AGENDA REVIEW MEETING, MAY 31, 2018 PAGE 129
Clark stated that further into the UDO process there will be discussion about the County having a construction
standards manual, but staff is not at that stage yet.
Regular Item 12. Public Hearing Text Amendment Request (TA18-02) – Request by The Dog Club of
Wilmington to Amend Article V of the Zoning Ordinance to Permit Kennels in the I-2, Heavy Industrial,
Zoning District.
In response to Board questions, Director Clark stated the applicant is unable to wait for the UDO
process due to having a code enforcement violation. The business was inadvertently located in an area not permitted
for this use. As such, staff cannot let the applicant wait for the UDO process.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Chairman White adjourned the meeting at 4:23 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kymberleigh G. Crowell
Clerk to the Board
Please note that the above minutes are not a verbatim of the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners meeting.