Loading...
2018-08-20 Regular Meeting NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, AUGUST 20, 2018 PAGE 176 ASSEMBLY The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met in Regular Session on Monday, August 20, 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 Reverend Kelly Stanley, Southside Baptist Church, provided the invocation and Commissioner Jonathan Barfield, Jr. 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: Vice-Chairman Watkins MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield, to approve the items on the Consent Agenda as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Vice-Chairman Watkins recognized Jackson Fullerton and stated that Mr. Fullerton was attending the meeting to earn his citizenship badge. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Minutes – Governing Body The Commissioners approved the minutes of the Agenda Review Meeting of July 5, 2018 and the Regular Meeting of July 9, 2018. Adoption of State Road Resolution – Governing Body The Commissioners adopted the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) State Road Resolution in support of adding the following roads to the state system:  Julia Drive, Dragons Eye Court, Garrett Lea Parke, Onyx Court, Swiss Stone Court, and Valley Lane located within the Sycamore Grove Subdivision in New Hanover County (Division File No: 1225-N) A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLI, Page 13.1. Approval of Shire Lane Culvert Replacement and Adoption of Budget Amendment 19-010 - Engineering The Commissioners approved the Shire Lane culvert replacement in an amount not to exceed $300,000 and adopted budget amendment 19-010. This cost will include replacing the culvert with an engineered box culvert, headwalls, and catch basins. The project will require engineering, geotechnical investigation and surveying, demolition, construction, relocation of underground electric and telecommunication utilities, and an additional amount to be utilized if necessary to conduct additional geotechnical investigation and remediation. The need and extent of geotechnical work will not be known until the road is opened up during construction as the source of the sink hole has not been identified. A copy of the budget amendment is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLI, Page 13.2. Adoption of Resolution for Donation of Used Clothing to United Way - Finance The Commissioners adopted a resolution for the donation of used clothing to United Way. The County has numerous items of clothing once worn by its former Inspections Department that are no longer suitable for its use. The department which is now known as Building Safety, is currently being provided uniforms from UNIFIRST, the County's current uniform rental company. The clothing will be donated to United Way for distribution outside the area/outside the United States. North Carolina General Statute 160A-279 permits the donation of real or personal property to an entity carrying out a public purpose that the County is authorized to engage in. A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLI, Page 13.3. Approval of Three Donations for Accession into the Museum’s Permanent Collection – Museum The Commissioners approved a list of three items to be accessioned into the Cape Fear Museum’s permanent collection. The objects were approved by the Museum Advisory Board at its July 18, 2018 meeting and a list of the items is available for review at the Cape Fear Museum. Acceptance of AmerisourceBergen Grant Award of 2,000 Drug Deactivation Resources and Adoption of Budget Amendment 19-003 – Senior Resource Center NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, AUGUST 20, 2018 PAGE 177 The Commissioners accepted the grant award from AmerisourceBergen Foundation for the Municipal Support Grant Program and adopted budget amendment 19-003. Through the program, 2,000 drug deactivation units will be donated to the Senior Resource Center to be distributed to citizens. The drug deactivation resources will be provided to homebound residents who are unable to access medication drop off locations, at opioid education outreach events, and other Health and Human Services departments and programs that work with at-risk populations. This is not cash a grant, however, a budget amendment is necessary to properly account for the contribution to the County. The Senior Resource Center (SRC) learned about the grant opportunity late July 2018 and the application was due July 31, 2018. The SRC received award notice on August 8, 2018. A copy of the budget amendment is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLI, Page 13.4. Adoption of Resolution for the Acceptance of Equipment from Cape Fear Community College (CFCC) and Saving Animals During Disaster to New Hanover County Sheriff’s Office and Budget Amendment 19-008 – Sheriff’s Office The Commissioners adopted the resolution to accept the equipment donated to the New Hanover County Sheriff’s Office (NHCSO) from CFCC and the organization, Saving Animals During Disaster and budget amendment 19-008. CFCC has equipment with a fair market value of $35,945 that has been approved by their board for transfer to NHCSO. This equipment consists of radios, pistols, and vehicles to be used by those officers assigned to CFCC as school security officers. The donation from Saving Animals During Disaster of a fully functional and equipped enclosed trailer has a fair market value of approximately $27,000. The trailer is equipped with numerous enclosures for transporting animals, medical supplies, and other items needed to care for animals. The organization's only stipulation is that the trailer must always be used for animal related services. A copy of the resolution and the budget amendment are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and are contained in Exhibit Book XLI, Page 13.5. Approval of June 2018 Tax Collection Reports – Tax The Commissioners approved the Tax Collection Reports of New Hanover County, New Hanover County Fire District, and New Hanover County Debt Service as of June 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 are contained in Exhibit Book XLI, Page 13.6. Approval of New Hanover County Board of Education Applications for North Carolina Education Lottery Funds for FY19 Capital Projects – Finance The Commissioners approved the New Hanover County Board of Education applications for North Carolina Education Lottery Funds for FY19 Capital Projects. Capital construction needs were identified and considered in the FY18-19 capital budget process. The capital budget was approved by the Board of Education on May 1, 2018, and the County Commissioners on June 4, 2018. The budget includes projects to be funded through the Public School Building Capital Fund, North Carolina Education Lottery. Applications for the following projects are presented for consideration: 1.$1,333,500 - Sea-Tech High School Phase II Renovations 2.$265,000 - Alderman Elementary Phase I HVAC Replacement 3.$170,000 - Sunset Park Elementary Ceiling Tile Replacement 4.$35,640 - NHHS George West Building Underground Cabling 5.$120,000 - Electrical Upgrades at Various School Campuses 6.$140,000 – Lighting Upgrades at Various School Campuses 7.$350,000 – Wrightsboro Elementary Heat Pump Replacement 8.$110,000 - Veterans Park Boiler Replacement 9.$216,000 - Painting at Various School Campuses Total Project Applications: $2,740,140 Adoption of Budget Amendments – Finance The Commissioners approved the following budget amendments which amend the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2019: Various Departments 19-007, 19-009:  BA 19-007: At June 30, 2018, there were outstanding purchase orders associated with contracts that New Hanover County had entered into with various suppliers. In order to account for the payments, the enclosed roll over budget amendment will appropriate funds in the amount of $2,888,791 for the open purchase orders.  BA 19-009: New Hanover County receives multiple grants that do not correspond with the fiscal year, meaning the expiration dates are not June 30. For this reason, this budget amendment is being presented for adoption to rollover unexpended grant expenditures from FY 18 to FY 19. Grant revenues NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, AUGUST 20, 2018 PAGE 178 will also be increased; therefore, there is no change to appropriated fund balance. The grant rollover for the General Fund is $289,198 and Fire Services Fund is $30,000. This is an administrative action taken each fiscal year. Copies of the budget amendments are hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and are contained in Exhibit Book XLI, Page 13.7. REGULAR ITEMS OF BUSINESS ADOPTION OF PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING SEPTEMBER 2018 AS PROSTATE CANCER AWARENESS MONTH Chairman White announced that the Wilmington Prostate Cancer Support Group (WPCSG) has requested the Board declare September 2018 as Prostate Cancer Awareness Month and invited WPCSG Director Carl Byrd to make remarks. Reverend Carl A. Byrd, Sr., WPCSG Board Director, and Rex Buford, WPCSG member, expressed appreciation to the Board for its support by recognizing September 2018 as Prostate Cancer Awareness Month. The WPCSG’s parent organization, Us TOO International, is a supporter of the research and funding for prostate cancer. Chairman White thanked Reverend Byrd and stated this is an important issue, one which is supported by all, and commended the WPCSG for continuing to raise awareness. Commissioner Barfield expressed appreciation to the WPCSG for its work to bring awareness to the community on this issue. His father and brother are prostate cancer survivors. It’s important to encourage all men to get an annual check. Hearing no further discussion, Chairman White asked for direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Zapple MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield, to adopt the proclamation declaring September 2018 as Prostate Cancer Awareness Month in New Hanover County. 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 13.8. ADOPTION OF PROCLAMATION FOR ELDERHAUS RECOGNIZING SEPTEMBER 2018 AS PROGRAMS OF ALL- INCLUSIVE CARE FOR THE ELDERLY (PACE) MONTH Chairman White announced that Elderhaus has requested the Board declare September 2018 as PACE Month in New Hanover County and invited Elderhaus Executive Director Adam Hyatt to make remarks. Director Hyatt thanked the Board for its consideration of the proclamation and stated that Elderhaus has been in Wilmington for 35 years. PACE has been a program in North Carolina for 10 years and the Wilmington site was the first site brought into North Carolina. Governor Cooper also has approved September as PACE month in North Carolina. Hearing no further discussion, Chairman White highlighted portions of the proclamation and asked the Board for direction. Motion: Commissioner Kusek MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield, to adopt the proclamation declaring September 2018 as PACE Month in New Hanover County. 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 13.9. PRESENTATION OF SERVICE AWARDS AND INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEES County Manager Coudriet recognized the following employee receiving a retirement award: Renee Peglow, Information Technology, retiring with thirty years of service Chairman White presented a retirement award to Ms. Peglow and the Commissioners expressed appreciation and thanked her for her years of dedicated service. County Manager Coudriet requested the following employees to step forward to receive service awards: Five Years: Geessien Brinkman, Information Technology Bonita Carr, Legal Paul Dowe, Information Technology Jerrel S. Metts, Parks and Gardens Ten Years: Kevin Caison, Property Management Anabela Diaz, Finance NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, AUGUST 20, 2018 PAGE 179 Angela Gray, Health Melissa Jackson, Social Services Damon Jones, Property Management Julie Kornegay, Health Crystal Lind, Sheriff Ashley Vernon, Health Twenty Years: Brian Bocnuk, Social Services Twenty-Five Years: Octavia Spiers, Social Services Thirty Years: Lawanda Granger, Social Services Loretta Murphy, Social Services Chairman White presented a service award to each person and the Commissioners expressed appreciation and thanked each one for their years of dedicated service. County Manager Coudriet requested the following new employees to stand and be introduced: Kevin Baldwin, Information Technology George Colby, Social Services Betsy Corbett, Veteran Services Caroline Dawkins, Elections Joseph Eason, Social Services Jessica Fink, Health Ny’Niesha Freeman, Social Services Sheryl Kelly, Finance Mary Matthews, Social Services Joshua Miker, Sheriff Julia Quisenberry, Social Services Jadee Ragland, Social Services Angela Robinson, Social Services Brion Smith, Community Justice Services Sophia Smith, Sheriff Alan Tiller, Sheriff Gretchen Zuncich, Health The Commissioners welcomed the employees to County Government and wished them success in their new positions. APPROVAL OF THE 2017 ANNUAL TAX SETTLEMENT Tax Administrator Allison Snell presented the 2017 Annual Tax Settlement report stating that for the New Hanover County General Fund the adjusted total levy is $172,766,598 with a total uncollected balance of $1,225,890. For debt service the adjusted total levy was $21,920,097 with an uncollected balance of $158,122. Both of these came in at 99.28 percent collection rate. Over the past five years, continual growth has been seen in the collection rate. th The Fire District had an adjusted levy of $10,152,299 with an uncollected balance as of June 30 of $75,170. This resulted in a 99.26% collection rate. The New Hanover County general and debt service funds have also seen an increase over the past five years. In comparison with the top ten counties in the state, New Hanover County ranked sixth place in 2016 and is still holding sixth place in 2017. Ms. Snell stated she thinks this speaks volumes for what tax collection offices are doing across the state. She is very proud of her team, they have worked hard this year, there are a lot of good things upcoming for this next year, and there is an expectation to see continual growth. Commissioner Zapple thanked Ms. Snell for the report. He thanked the citizens of New Hanover County, as well as Ms. Snell and her staff for their efforts. Having an average of 99.28% with the general fund at 99.56% is phenomenal and he thanked Ms. Snell and her team for doing a great job. Chairman White stated if he is calculating correctly, this is approximately a five percent increase over the last five years and 98.6% to 99.28% represents approximately $1.65 million. That is approximately half a penny of services that the County provides that is solely based on more efficiency, better work, improvement, and innovation in the tax department. He expressed appreciation to Ms. Snell for the hard work. Hearing no further discussion, Chairman White asked for direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Kusek MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple, to approve the 2017 Annual Tax Settlement. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the report is available for review in the Tax Department. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, AUGUST 20, 2018 PAGE 180 ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION FOR DETERMINATION OF COST FOR MASON INLET RELOCATION AND MAINTENANCE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AND APPROVAL OF PUBLIC HEARING ON THE SAID ASSESSMENT SCHEDULED FOR THE BOARD’S OCTOBER 1, 2018 MEETING Chief Financial Officer Lisa Wurtzbacher stated that approximately every five years the County assesses benefited property owners for the cost of ongoing maintenance of Mason Inlet. It is time to assess property owners for the costs incurred since the last assessment to now. The last assessment was May 2013. She presented the following overview:  History of Mason Inlet:  Inlet first relocated in 2002  Annual monitoring and ongoing maintenance  Room Occupancy Tax (ROT) funds are used and subsequently reimbursed from the Special Assessment District  Previous Assessments:  1st Assessment (2002): $6,740,932  2nd Assessment (2008): $2,817,524  3rd Assessment (2013): $3,758,458  Determination of 2018 Assessment Costs:  Figure Eight Island $ 2,678,720  Wrightsville Beach $ 623,258 TOTAL ASSESSMENT $ 3,301,978  Sand Placement Cost for Figure Eight Island:  Final Placed Sand: 487,040 cubic yards at $5.50/cubic yard totals to $2,678,720  Maintenance Cost for North Wrightsville Beach:  Administration/Legal: $ 9,333  Engineering/Surveying: 390,390  Natural Resource Mgmt: 127,002  Mason Inlet Dredging: 1,442,013  Grant Proceeds: (911,494)  Designated ROT Funds: (433,986)  Total $ 623,258  Assessment Timeline:  August 29, 2018:  Publish notice of Public Hearing on preliminary assessment roll  Mail preliminary assessment roll notice – 1st class  Clerk maintains roll for public inspection  October 1, 2018 - Public Hearing / Confirm assessment roll  October 21, 2018 - Publish notice of confirmation of final assessment roll and mail assessments Ms. Wurtzbacher concluded her presentation stating that the County Commissioners are asked to approve the Determination of Costs as required by General Statute 153A-193 and to establish a public hearing. Subsequent to the Determination of Costs, staff will mail preliminary assessments to all affected property owners as well as a notice of public hearing. She noted the agenda packet reflects that the public hearing be held on September 17, 2018, but if the Board prefers to hear it on October 1, 2018 either meeting will work. Commissioner Barfield stated for the people who are here and the people who have moved here since 1999, they may not be aware of this, but a picture in the presentation showed Shell Island prior to the inlet being relocated. It encroached almost to the corner of Shell Island and he remembers seeing how swift the current and how deep the water was at Shell Island. It would have been a shame for Shell Island Resort to fall into the water. He is thankful the County at that time stepped in to provide resources and relief to make sure that that did not happen. Now we're seeing the sand is being pumped to Figure 8 Island, which is providing a great resource for them and at the end of the day not costing the taxpayers’ resources, it's costing those that actually benefit from it and is saving significant structures on the north end of Wrightsville Beach. Hearing no further discussion, Chairman White requested direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple, to adopt the resolution determining the cost for the Mason Inlet relocation and maintenance special assessment and approving the public hearing to be set for the Board’s October 1, 2018 meeting as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XLI, Page 13.10. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL TO SUBMIT A JOINT APPLICATION WITH THE CITY OF WILMINGTON TO THE EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG) PROGRAM FOR 2018 FUNDING FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Chairman White announced that the JAG program provides states and local governments with funding necessary to support law enforcement, prosecution prevention and education programs, community corrections, NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, AUGUST 20, 2018 PAGE 181 drug treatment and enforcement, crime victim and witness initiatives, and planning, evaluation and technology improvement programs. Chairman White opened the public hearing and reported no one signed up to speak in favor or in opposition to the matter. He invited Chief Deputy Ken Sarvis to make his presentation. Chief Deputy Ken Sarvis stated that this a grant that the New Hanover County Sheriff’s Office applies for each year with the City of Wilmington. It is a joint allocation in order to receive the grant. The New Hanover County portion of the funding would be used to purchase equipment for the New Hanover County Sheriff’s Office SAFE Unit, including wireless microphones for use on patrol, a speed awareness trailer to replace the current speed awareness trailer that is over twelve years old, and to purchase equipment for the Emergency Response Team including sights and shields. Chairman White thanked Chief Deputy Sarvis for his comments. He stated that New Hanover County and the City of Wilmington are certified as disparate agencies; therefore, the 2018 JAG grant funding in the amount of $90,638 is eligible as a joint allocation of $45,319 to each agency. The New Hanover County portion of the funding would be used to purchase equipment for the New Hanover County Sheriff’s Office SAFE Unit, including wireless microphones for use on patrol, and a speed awareness trailer to replace the current speed awareness trailer that is over twelve years old; and to purchase equipment for the Emergency Response Team including sights and shields. There is no local match requirement. Hearing no further discussion, Chairman White closed the public hearing and requested direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Kusek MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Zapple, to authorize the Sheriff's Office to submit a joint application with the City of Wilmington to the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant, and authorize the County Manager to execute the required County/City Memorandum of Understanding as required by the grant application. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Chairman White directed staff to execute a Memorandum of Understanding between New Hanover County and the City of Wilmington. A copy of the Memorandum of Understanding is available in the legal department. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY PARAMOUNTE ENGINEERING, INC. ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, ESTON C. BRINKLEY, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 18.1 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE 8900 BLOCK OF STEPHENS CHURCH ROAD FROM R-15, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, TO R-10, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (Z18-07) Chairman White opened the public hearing and requested staff to make the presentation. Current Planning and Zoning Supervisor Ben Andrea presented the request by Paramounte Engineering, Inc., on behalf of the property owner, Eston C. Brinkley, to rezone 18.1 acres of land located at the 8900 block of Stephens Church Road off of northern Market Street/US Highway 17, from R-15 to R-10. This is in the northern end of the county near the Pender County line. All around the property on that side of Market Street is R-15 zoning. There is a CUD B-2 to the north that is developed as a self-storage facility. Across Market Street is a CUD B-1 that has been approved for a medical and retail office park but has not yet been developed. To the north of that is an O&I conditional zoning district that is partially developed including the New Hanover Regional Medical Center north campus. The property has a 45-foot wide panhandle that has direct access to Stephens Church Road and then the site opens up. It is mostly cleared of vegetation except for an area on the northern end of the parcel which has been identified as 404 wetlands. The parcel is not within any Special Flood Hazard Area or Natural Heritage Areas. Low density single family residential abuts the property to the southeast and a few of the homes have historical significance. To the west is all virtually undeveloped. As 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 R-10 district based on the Table of Permitted Uses in the Zoning Ordinance. As both the R-15 and R-10 districts are residential districts, the uses permitted within them are mostly similar with only slight variations. The primary difference between the districts is that the R-10 district allows for smaller lots and higher density. For conventional lots in R-15, the minimum size is 15,000 square feet, and in R-10 it is 10,000 square feet. Under performance residential criteria, there are no minimum lot sizes, but there are density limits. Up to 2.5 dwelling units/acre is allowed in R-15, while 3.3 dwelling units/acre is permitted in the R-10 zoning district. For the subject parcel which is about 18 acres, 45 lots could be achieved under the existing R-15 zoning, and 15 more could be obtained for a total of 60 lots in R-10 under performance residential criteria. Although not part of this request, a preliminary plan for the same property under the existing R-15 zoning was able to achieve 42 lots along with a little over two acres of open space. The plan was approved by the Technical Review Committee (TRC) last August and is still valid. Traffic impacts from any development of the site will be analyzed when a specific development is proposed, and any use that trips the County’s 100 peak hour trip threshold will require a full Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). For single family residential, peak hour trips are about equal to the number of units, so even with the 60 units possible under the proposed R-10 zoning, that is not enough to trip the TIA threshold. However, the NC Department of NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, AUGUST 20, 2018 PAGE 182 Transportation (NCDOT) may still require some improvements as it reviews the driveway permit request. Market Street in this area is currently operating at a volume to capacity ratio of 75 percent, which equates to a level of service of D, which is an acceptable level of service. Within a one-mile radius of the subject site, four TIAs have been approved and one is currently under review, and a full breakdown of required improvements is included in the staff summary. There is an existing driveway that serves the property. It would need to be upgraded as necessary to meet the County’s minimum growth standards for subdivisions. The subject property is located in an area near the Porters Neck growth node that the 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan classifies 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. Staff finds that the densities allowed in the R-10 zoning district are in keeping with those recommended for Community Mixed Use areas and this could be an appropriate transition to the development intensity envisioned for this area. As such, staff recommends approval of the rezoning request. The Planning Board considered this application at their July 12, 2018 meeting. At the meeting, one member from the public spoke in response to the request, citing concerns about how development of the subject site may impact stormwater runoff in the area. The Board recommended approval (6-0) of the application with no suggested conditions because this is a general map amendment and not a conditional rezoning, finding that it is: 1.Consistent with the purposes and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because it provides for infill residential development compatible with the existing pattern of the area and aligns with the density recommendation for the Community Mixed Use place type. 2.Reasonable and in the public interest because the proposal would establish an R-10 zoning district in an area where public water and sewer is available. Chairman White thanked Mr. Andrea for his presentation and invited the petitioner to make remarks. Jeremy Blair, Principal Engineer with Paramounte Engineering, Inc., on behalf of the property owner, Eston C. Brinkley, stated that he would be reserving a portion of the time to address the stormwater aspect as it relates to the site. He introduced Clay Matthews, Assistant Planner with Paramounte Engineering, Inc., and explained that Mr. Matthews would be providing a brief overview of the project. Mr. Matthews stated that he is the planner for this project. This is a request for a general rezoning to R-10 from an existing R-15. The uses allowed within an R-10 are very similar to an R-15. Some of those uses are nurseries, primary and secondary schools, churches, single family attached and detached. There are existing residences surrounding the property and Mr. Brinkley intends to support the growth in the area with residential development. However, not many projects in the area offer a good moderate density property, which is the intent of this proposal. As mentioned by staff, the property is allowed 3.3 dwelling units per acre. That level of density will help produce some different product types in terms of lot size. A smaller unit can be done if that is what Mr. Brinkley decides the project will require. Again, this proposal gives additional housing options to support the nearby growth node at Porter’s Neck. Since most of that growth has been commercial, there needs to be places for people who live there with access to jobs, shopping, and recreation. Rezoning to this R-10 designation would help that. Additionally, R-10 is required to have water and sewer services of which both are available. Water is available on the northbound side of Market Street and sewer is available on the southbound side. Mr. Blair stated that during the Planning Board meeting, a resident brought up an existing ditch system that's on the property, specifically a part of the system that runs behind those existing residential lots that front Stephens Church Road. Paramounte staff has evaluated those ditches and the overall drainage in the area. Ultimately those ditches date back to the early 90s based on the aerial photography and other reference data they have been able to locate. The specific ditch is three or four feet deep and it's all contained on the subject parcel being requested to be rezoned. Any plan for development will include stormwater design that would meet state and county regulations and would improve the drainage on the site to the extent possible. None of the ditches shown in the photos during staff’s presentation are jurisdictional in terms of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, so they can be cleaned out and graded and generally improved on the site. In response to Board questions, Mr. Matthews stated that all the roads are going to be private. The subject parcel road is currently a private road, but it has to be built to NCDOT standards. He reconfirmed that it would be brought to NCDOT standards if there was ever a desire to turn it over to NCDOT. Regarding area schools being over capacity, Mr. Andrea stated he could pull the figures from when the plan was approved last year, but generally they are always a touch over capacity. He could not confirm the percentage of the 60 units that would house families. Chairman White announced that no one else had signed up to speak in favor or in opposition and closed the public hearing. He then opened the floor for Board discussion. Regarding being able to obtain assurances the road would be brought up to NCDOT standards, Mr. Andrea stated the Board can be assured that the construction of the road itself as far as how the gravel and the pavement on top of that is constructed would be built to NCDOT standards. Where there cannot be assurance is that the road NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, AUGUST 20, 2018 PAGE 183 would be constructed to other NCDOT standards such as stormwater requirements, ditches, etc. The County minimum standards are different from minimum NCDOT standards in that regard. The developer does have an option under the County’s subdivision regulations to build a road that meets the County's minimum subdivision standards, however that would remain private because it wouldn't be built to the specifications to be able to turn it over to NCDOT in the future. In response to Board questions, Mr. Andrea stated a condition could not be placed on the request that would force the developer to build the road to NCDOT standards as this request is not a conditional rezoning. Regarding ownership, the road is actually part of this subject parcel so it is owned by Eston Brinkley. It is dedicated as an access easement to service the few lots in the picture shown during the presentation. The road would have to be dedicated as a right of way, whether public or private, depending on how Mr. Brinkley wishes to develop it. Regarding if the road would be dedicated in a deed to the property owners along that street, Mr. Andrea stated because there is an existing access easement, he would say the property owner has an obligation to ensure that the other property owners that benefit from that existing property easement will continue to benefit from the easement in the future. It couldn’t remain just as a portion of the property; it would have to be dedicated as right of way. Regarding if access to the road could ever be closed, Mr. Andrea stated there is an opportunity for them to put up a gate, but if someone has the legal right to use that access easement now, he would say they would have continuing legal right to use the road in the future. There are three lots served solely from the easement. The other lots are actually from frontage on Stephens Church Road, so they may not have rights to the easement because they are not required to. They have access to a NCDOT maintained road, but the three shown in the presentation are served from that easement. Regarding if the petitioner had any way to offer information now what the price point would be in approximate value for the 45 lots without the rezoning request, developed by-right, as compared to any difference in value of 60 lots, Mr. Blair stated that they do not have any information to share with regard to the financial viability in either case. He does not know the overall tax value of the parcel. Regarding prior issues with private roads and maintenance, ownership of roads, and whether or not this will come back to the County in 10 or 15 years based on the proposal, Mr. Andrea stated probably not. The issues seen right now as a county with these private roads are the lack of maintenance over the years. In his opinion, there are more safeguards in place that are going to cut down on the instances on those types of situations with the way the covenants are written and with HOAs in place. This is true even when built to county standards, not state standards, because they are still an entity that is setup to maintain the road even though it’s not maintained by NCDOT. In response to Board questions regarding adding a stormwater plan to go in conjunction with the roads so there would be NCDOT standard roads that could then be turned over to NCDOT, Mr. Blair stated he would certainly say there is an opportunity for the developer to develop the road in accordance with NCDOT standards. There are no guarantees today whether or not NCDOT would even take over a road like that. There has been and they are seeing a trend in folks pursuing private roads in subdivisions like this or residential developments. However, he would agree with Mr. Andrea that there's a lot more stringent requirements for long-term maintenance that would come along with that. He would say any plan from his firm that included a roadway would provide adequate drainage to meet minimum design standards for what would be considered good engineering practice. Whether or not NCDOT would ultimately review them in Raleigh from their hydraulics unit and take those roads over, he cannot say. He would certainly feel comfortable with the level of drainage that would come out of any design that his firm would put forward. Regarding the preliminary site plan that shows 42 homes, this proposal being for 60 homes and how the additional 18 homes will be accommodated, Mr. Blair stated given the nature of the straight rezoning he cannot specifically say how the plan is going to accommodate it. He thinks it’s fairly intuitive to say that given the constraints of the site with wetlands space requirements and other things that meet the code, it's unlikely they are going to achieve a maximum density. The preliminary plan being shown is for 42 homes, but could be 45, so going to 60 homes is not likely a guarantee. In response to Board questions, Mr. Andrea confirmed that once the subdivision is built with the County’s new subdivision regulations, the subdivision will be responsible for that road coming in as well with its annual or monthly dues. He reconfirmed it will be maintained. Mr. Andrea also noted that the assessed value of the property, overall, is $101,100. Based on Mr. Andrea’s responses, Commissioner Barfield stated he was fine with this. 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. Commissioner Zapple stated the infrastructure deeply troubles him and by this, he is referring to the school system. He is hopeful the planning department will bring forward more information including the schools in the area in the future. He knows the Board of Education is moving ahead with redistricting which he is hopeful will address these situations, but by permitting these kinds of developments here, we pay for it in many different ways. If there are overcrowded schools in this area here it's really troubling. He would appreciate it if in the future that information is included as part of the development package so the Board can consider it as part of the decision making process. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, AUGUST 20, 2018 PAGE 184 Chairman White stated as a word of advice to the development community that the absence of information is also persuasive. If he were bringing forth a rezoning request, he would want to anticipate questions. In light of what is seen, in all of these planning items, some of the common themes you will continue to hear are traffic impact analysis regardless of the 100 trips per day requirement, there's nothing prohibiting voluntarily doing that other than cost, which is something to consider. We also continue to hear about road maintenance and so forth and if the subdivision requirements are going to maintain that, make that clear. Also, we talk a lot about affordable housing and while we are continuing to try to remain consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, somebody has a piece of property worth $101,000 that they want to sell for single family homes, he would wager that they are selling them for a small amount of money and building modest homes on them. He does not know that for sure, there's nothing in the ordinance or the staff requirement to bring that evidence forward. But to him these are persuasive things as to whether property should or should not be rezoned in the future. So for those watching and those people that come before them often, more information is better at least as it pertains to the decision he has to make for his one vote and he would imagine it's the same for the other four commissioners. He further stated as far as the schools, Commissioner Zapple raises a point we all struggle with. Our schools are projecting the population to be flat over the next six years and they are going to be redistricting to address some of the overcrowding in some schools. Some schools are under-crowded, so that's less of an issue today than it used to be, but it's still an issue. Again, in a small county like ours the days of “straight rezonings” as far as he can see are not as easy as shooting layups any more. You need to pass the ball around, get information, and share it so the Board can do its job and deliberate and make sure it's in the best interest of community overall before being asked to vote on things. He plans to support the motion because he’s inferring from what he heard was enough evidence to satisfy the points that he raised as it relates to the concerns that he has. Hearing no further discussion, 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 6, 1971, is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book I, Section 5, Page 79. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY DESIGN SOLUTIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS, FRED A. AND DORIS H. WHITMAN, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 16.8 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED IN THE 500 BLOCK OF BOUNTIFUL LANE FROM R-20, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, TO (CZD) R-10, CONDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT A PERFORMANCE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (Z18-09) Chairman White opened the public hearing and requested staff to make the presentation. Current Planner Brad Schuler presented the request by Design Solutions, on behalf of the property owners, Fred A. and Doris H. Whitman, to rezone approximately 16.8 acres of land located in the 500 block of Bountiful Lane from R-20 to (CZD) R-10 in order to construct a performance residential development consisting of 55 townhome units. The property is located in an area of Wrightsboro that consists mostly of the R-20 zoning district. However, the properties to the north along Oakley Circle are zoned R-15 and the properties within the Walnut Hills Subdivision are zoned R-10. The subject property is mostly wooded and currently contains a single-family dwelling. The proposed development clusters the townhomes on the eastern side of the property and as a result, there will be over 10 acres of open space. The applicant intends to preserve the trees located within most of the open space. In addition, a 20-foot buffer is required along all property lines abutting residential lots. As currently zoned, R-20, the property would be allowed up to 32 dwelling units under the performance residential standards which is 1.9 dwelling units/acres. Under the proposed Conditional R-10 district the property would be permitted a maximum density of 3.3 dwelling units per acre, which equates to a maximum of 55 dwelling units. The applicant has provided trip generation estimates for the proposed development. The proposed development is expected to generate less than 30 trips during the peak hours. Traffic impacts will be reviewed by NCDOT through the driveway permitting process. There has been one Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) approved for another project within the area. The Riverside development is currently under construction and will make improvements to the intersection at Castle Hayne Road and N. Kerr Avenue. There is also one project within the area that is included within the State Transportation Improvement Program. Project U-5863 will widen Castle Hayne Road from I-140 to Division Drive. Construction of that project is expected to begin in 2023. Lastly, there is another NCDOT project that is not included in the STIP, however NCDOT will be installing a traffic signal at the intersection of Oakley Road and Castle Hayne Road. That project is expected to be completed within approximately one year from now. The 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan classifies the subject property as General Residential. This place type promotes lower-density housing and associated civic and commercial services. Typically, housing is single-family or duplexes. Commercial uses should be limited to strategically located office and retail spaces, while recreation and school facilities are encouraged throughout. The ideal density for this place type ranges from one to six dwelling units per acre. In addition, the goals of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan include providing a mixture of housing types and preserving open space, natural areas, and environmental resources. The proposed conditional R-10 rezoning is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan because it provides residential development compatible with the adjacent neighborhoods, is with the density range recommended for General Residential, and protects the site’s environmental resources by clustering structures and infrastructure. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, AUGUST 20, 2018 PAGE 185 The Planning Board considered this application at their July 12, 2018 meeting and recommended approval (6-0) finding that the application is: 1.Consistent with the purposes and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because it provides for infill residential development that is compatible with the existing pattern of the area, while protecting environmental resources by clustering structures and infrastructure. 2.Reasonable and in the public interest because the project will provide increased amounts of open space which promotes the protection of the natural environment and wildlife habitats. Chairman White thanked Mr. Schuler for his presentation and invited the petitioner to make remarks. Cindee Wolf of Design Solutions, representing the property owners Fred A. and Doris H. Whitman, stated the construction of the I-140 interchange just less than one-mile north from the Oakley intersection on Castle Hayne Road has definitely made this section of the county more attractive to housing opportunities. Adding a modest increase for density is not uncommon. This is basically 24 units which is less than a 42 percent increase. An additional improvement, as Mr. Schuler pointed out, would be the traffic signal making it safe for vehicular circulation at that point. The one-year timeline NCDOT has would coincide very well with it being about one year for a project like this to just get started and certainly the signal would be installed prior to any occupancy of units with a permitting timeline. Development by performance standards allows clustering of housing units, thereby maximizing the preservation of natural areas and more environmental sensitive features, and this request is definitely an example of that. The boundaries of this development are on the high side for the topography around our county. There are two creeks that sort of run at the perimeters of what is being proposed as the development, thereby this project only covers roughly 50 percent of the entire site and there is only a 20 percent overall surface coverage for this project. Sidewalks are created throughout. There would be common maintenance and any project like this would have a homeowner’s association or management so the landscaping for it would have the same criteria as a commercial project to provide shading, visual interest, and aesthetic quality to the entire project. The product that her client has in mind is a one story unit with two bedrooms, which is consistent with this area of the County and other housing. It would be considered more of a modest and affordable type housing product that really is lacking in this part of the County. There's a lot of single family homes but they are on large lots and this gives it the opportunity along with the increased density of making this product more affordable. During the Planning Board meeting, concerns arose regarding the buffers and setbacks along the boundary on the Oakley Road side of the parcel. There are two buildings that are the closest and in this particular case, her client has a building on the square so it's a little deceptive of how close it gets to the actual property line. The closest they are at that point with that unit is 31 feet. The building then goes to 33 feet, 36 feet and 61 feet, so she and her client feel there is a more than adequate setback for a one story building to other one story properties. Regardless of that, because these units are attached there is the buffer requirement along that entire side of the boundary in the form of a 20-foot buffer yard. Within that buffer yard, retention of existing vegetation is mandated so all the vegetation within the 20-feet has to be maintained. Subsequent to that, if it is not sufficient to provide the 100 percent visual opacity visual standard then there is a requirement to supplement with additional plants. There was some concern that the plants they would put in there would then grow over the boundary and that's actually controlled by choice of the plants. Different plants have different spreads and depending on which plants are used is what the spacing is. She and her client are confident they can build an adequate buffer between existing vegetation and supplemented and still stay on the subject property. The concern was the encroachment of vegetation would have to be maintained by someone else. As stated earlier, any project like this has a maintenance, a homeowners’ association, or a maintenance management entity so if there were any issues that would be of encroachment of vegetation onto adjacent properties, that is certainly something that could be enforced and laid upon that homeowners’ association to take care of. She and her client believe that this conditional district is consistent, reasonable and in the public interest because the Comprehensive Plan does designate the area of the project as general residential, which promotes fostering sustainable growth through sensible infill where adequate services are available. They already have the water and sewer, the road is set up, and there is an improvement of a traffic signal coming to ensure more safety. The slightly increased density improves the form and function of an underused site and it's a good economic development for the tax base. Using the performance standards also protects the site's environmental resources by clustering the buildings and preserving the natural area. Ms. Wolf concluded her presentation stating that one of the developers would like to say a few words. Michael Rokoski, of CH-Bountiful and the developer of this project, stated that he wanted to address a couple of points. There is one condition he thinks that needs to be added to the request that has never been arbitrarily added. In the community meeting, he overtly committed that these would have a maximum of two bedrooms. They are willing to overtly commit to 110 bedrooms. It would also generate less trips. He made that promise and he does not believe the planning department added that as a condition of their approval, but his NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, AUGUST 20, 2018 PAGE 186 company fully supports overtly adding that these are capped at two bedroom units. This product type will generally have a lower impact on schools. In looking at the TIA analysis relative to trip generation, townhomes generate less trips per day than single family homes. His firm tried to have approximately 20 percent coverage on the overall site; meetings were held with Gary McSmith at the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority (CFPUA) and Fire Services. The fire hydrant calculations were updated to ensure when the project does go forward so they can meet the public safety standards and other related items. He is present to answer any questions and will be as specific as possible in his responses. In response to Board questions, Mr. Rokoski stated that the decision has not been made if the units will be rentals or for sale. They might be a combination of both. A homeowners’ association (HOA) would certainly be formed should the units be for sale and units would be required to be funded. It would address all the requirements, such as the landscaping buffer that would need to be maintained by the HOA. Typically, the developer funds the HOA from the front end to ensure it is solvent from the moment of sale. Commissioner Barfield stated that the units are really outside of individuals that may be renting their homes in that quadrant of the County. He does not know of any apartment complexes or any mass rental units which concerns him. Mr. Rokoski stated that the units will be single story, which is a condition that he committed to, so certainly that would include making a motion that they are no more than a certain height so you don't get an apartment complex type feel and each unit is capped at two bedrooms. Commissioner Barfield stated that the height is not his concern. His concern is rentals in that quadrant of the County, whether they are one story or two stories doesn't really matter to him, but just knowing that and recognizing Castle Hayne is a part of our County that is probably going to grow the most. It is the least developed, and as water and sewer gets expanded to that part of the County, it's going to grow. We have the ability to help guide that growth somewhat and understand that part of the County and those neighborhoods, and his concern is what the impacts will be with rentals versus homes that have been for sale. Mr. Rokoski stated he was unsure if the County code has a differentiation. Commissioner Barfield stated that is something he has to deal with. Commissioner Zapple thanked Ms. Wolf for her design and sensitivity to the site. It is clear a lot of positive thinking went into it. He asked if the use of the Merestone address referred to the developer or is just a type. Mr. Rokoski explained that it was used as a product type, an example of a single story, two bedrooms, two bath townhome. You would have the ability if you wanted to Google it to see what this will look like so it was included it in the package. Regarding if the road will be a private road, Ms. Wolf stated that this in particular case there is not a road. As a townhome subdivision, what will be purchased or owned is every postage stamp of the footprint of each of these units. The other is a private drive and it has “on drive” parking so it is a parking lot, it is not a street. The parking lot would be considered a common area owned by the owners of the units. HOAs have requirements and reserves to take care of those types of things. That’s all part of the lending criteria as well as asset management. Regarding if there is a plan to carry off stormwater from all the sites, Ms. Wolf stated absolutely. It will have to meet both the state and county criteria for water quality and water attenuation. They are showing the stormwater pond at the low part of the site and part of the reason for that location is that the overflow can go to either of the natural ditches lead to the river. If you look at the details of the contours and everything, the project is at the top of a knoll and everything else goes downhill so the water will go down to the pond and its natural outlet would then be to the river. It is not upstream of any concerns or of any other homes. This is in some sense is a very difficult site, but in other senses what they have done with it fits very well. Commissioner Zapple stated that he agrees with Ms. Wolf’s comments. He does support the conditions of capping it at two bedrooms and one story. Regarding if apartment complexes have HOAs, Mr. Schuler stated it would be under single ownership in an apartment complex because you are renting out of the units. If it was condos, they would have to set up some type of property owners association for maintenance responsibilities of the common area that would be created. Commissioner Barfield stated he wants to make sure the terms are not confused with the conversation. Mr. Schuler confirmed at his request that if the units are for sale there is an HOA and they would maintain the roads; if the units are not for sale then the owner of the property would maintain the roads. Mr. Rokoski stated if you create an HOA for the for sale products, you have reserve accounts. Lenders require reserve accounts for rent products as well, so they literally take a portion of that and put it in reserve accounts typically as part of the lending for a rental complex. So the same mechanism exists to ensure financial viability. Typically lending guidelines will mandatorily make you create a reserve account for the parking lot resurface, it's not called a HOA or dues account, it's called a reserve account regardless of whether it's a common ownership type of structure. There are mechanisms in place to provide safeguards. Regarding the 16.8 acres being maxed out based on this plan, Mr. Schuler confirmed that nothing else would be allowed to be built there. Chairman White stated that the Board received emails from residents asking if the project could be adjusted a bit to use more of the preservation area to allow for more of a buffer. Even though the ordinance doesn’t require more buffer, he asked Ms. Wolf if it could be done, was there a decision not to do that and to put it right on the border of the buffer for a reason. Ms. Wolf responded that it is not on the border of the NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, AUGUST 20, 2018 PAGE 187 buffer. It is squeezed between the top bank of the ditches on two sides and the property boundary on the other side. It is as compact as she could make it based upon the topographic features. Chairman White asked as it relates to rental products if there was a way to know in advance how the units will be sold and if there is a lawful condition that could be placed should the Board make that decision for the applicant. Mr. Schuler stated it is his understanding the Board could not dictate ownership of a developmental proposal. He confirmed that using a condition on the number of bedrooms could be used as a moderating effect. In response to Board questions, Ms. Wolf confirmed that 63 percent of the property will be left open for either recreational or open space. Surface coverage is only about 20 percent. Everything beyond what needs to be cleared for these footprints will be left natural with the exception of some selective under-brushing, so everything along the ditches will be left in perpetuity for the purpose of creating the natural screening and the environmental sensitivity. Relative to the math of the number of bedrooms, Mr. Rokoski stated right now if the site is developed under current zoning and they built 32 larger four-bedroom homes, they can build 128 bedrooms. The conditional district being requested is they will build 110 bedrooms so that is about 18 less than 128 bedrooms. This was part of the concern of the cluster with the schools, the traffic, and the environmental sensitivity. Regarding a majority of the trees not remaining if the project was done based on by-right, Mr. Rokoski confirmed that yes the green would go away when doubling the footprints of the houses, adding big two-car garages and multiple stories. It would not be the environmentally sensitive development that they are trying to do. Chairman White announced that no one signed up to speak in favor and one person signed up to speak in in opposition. He invited Linda Worrell to step forward and make remarks. Linda Worrell, a resident of Oakley Road, spoke in opposition to the request citing that this project impacts her more than anyone else. Her property is a large portion of Oakley Road and 18 of the units will be backed up to her property line. She has been told about the 20-foot buffer, which is the County’s ordinance. Her understanding from one of the previous meetings is Ms. Wolf said some of them would be as close as 25-feet off the line and also that they were proposing to do the evergreens for the trees and staggering the three rows. With the 20-feet now in some areas, there's not anything on it now except where stuff has grown over. She is okay with the subdivision. She is also concerned to hear about the rentals as she understood during the first meeting it was going to be strictly sale. Again, her concern is they will not be installing a fence and she is asking that the Board include a condition to increase the setback to at least 30-feet. Otherwise she is fine with the project. In response to Board questions, Ms. Worrell showed on the map used during the presentation where her properties are along Oakley Road. She confirmed she has three lots on Oakley Road and two more lots in the back. She also confirmed that on two lots are mobile homes and she collects rent from those residents. Chairman White thanked Ms. Worrell for attending and stated that at this time if the petitioner desires to do so they could provide rebuttal remarks within the five-minute time frame. In rebuttal, Mr. Rokoski stated that if you are discussing 12-foot decks and you are under the impression they can go beyond that footprint, they include the patio area with the closest being 31-feet. There is a 20-foot buffer but the closest will be at 31-feet the way this plan is designed. Again, this is based on topography and stormwater flow. Some topography was done to ensure when they laid this out and when looking at stormwater that they aren't shooting darts and then you get on site and it has to be different. There is an exhibit in the packet that shows the county requirements of three rows of plantings staggering and the opacity. They are certainly happy to meet with Ms. Worrell as they are making those planting decisions to work with her on those closer points. Hearing no further discussion, Chairman White closed the public hearing and opened the floor to Board discussion. Motion: Commissioner Zapple 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 two conditions: 1.Capping the height of buildings to one story 2.Two bedrooms is the maximum allowed per unit 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 10A OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED JULY 1, 1974, is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book II, Section 10A, Page 41. BREAK: Chairman White called a break from 5:42 p.m. to 5:53 p.m. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, AUGUST 20, 2018 PAGE 188 PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A REZONING REQUEST BY DESIGN SOLUTIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, JAMES STEELE WILLIAMS, III, TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY FIVE ACRES OF LAND LOCATED IN THE 4300 BLOCK OF CASTLE HAYNE ROAD FROM R-20, RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, TO (CZD) B-2 CONDITIONAL HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT, IN ORDER TO DEVELOP A LANDSCAPING BUSINESS (Z18-10) Chairman White opened the public hearing and requested staff to make the presentation. Current Planner Brad Schuler presented the request by Design Solutions, on behalf of the property owner, James Steele Williams, III, to rezone approximately five acres of land located in the 4300 block of Castle Hayne Road from R-20 to (CZD) B-2 in order to develop a landscape contracting business. The property is located in an area of Castle Hayne that has a mixture of zoning districts. In addition to the R-20 district, there is also industrial, office, commercial, and agricultural zoning in the area. The property itself consists of five acres of land, and currently contains a single family dwelling. There is a proposal to convert the existing single-family dwelling on the property to be an office building for the business. In addition to the office, the business will provide a staging area for employees prior to leaving for off- site jobs. No retail activities are proposed on the site. The rear portion of the property, approximately 500 feet in length, will remain undisturbed and preserve the existing vegetation. The applicant has provided trip generation estimates for the proposed development. The proposed development is expected to generate about 40 trips during the peak hours. Traffic impacts will be reviewed by NCDOT through the driveway permitting process. There is also one project within the area that is included within the State Transportation Improvement Program. Project U-5863 will widen Castle Hayne Road south of I-140. Construction of that project is expected to begin in 2023. The 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan classifies the subject property as Community Mixed Use and Employment Center. Community Mixed Use 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. Employment Center serves as employment and production hubs, where office and light industrial uses are predominant. Centers can include residential, civic, and recreational uses, and commercial uses designed to serve the needs of the employment center are appropriate. The proposed landscaping business office is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan because it is a low-intensity commercial use that provides employment opportunities and is appropriately located off a major road in a transitional area between high intensity nodes. The Planning Board considered this application at their July 12, 2018 meeting and recommended approval (6-0) finding that the application is: 1.Consistent with the purposes and intent of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan because the proposed landscaping business is a low-density commercial use that provides employment opportunities and is appropriately located off a major road in a transitional area between high intensity nodes. 2.Reasonable and in the public interest because the proposed development will support business success while limiting impacts to the surrounding residential area by preserving existing vegetation. Conditions: 1.All existing vegetation located within required buffer yards must be preserved and supplemented as necessary in order to provide a fully opaque screen. 2.Any outdoor storage areas shall be screened from the view of Castle Hayne Road. Chairman White thanked Mr. Schuler for his presentation and invited the petitioner to make remarks. Cindee Wolf of Design Solutions, on behalf of the property owner, James Steele Williams, III, stated that Sweetwater Landscapes is a very successful business in the Triangle area and wants to locate a branch office down here. Certainly our goals for a vibrant economy encourage efforts to attract our own businesses. This site is about a mile north from the I-140 interchange of Castle Hayne Road. The assets of this are that the residential character stays the same, this is strictly a situation where the hours of operation aren't really hours of operation because 25 to 30 employees arrive each day and leave in the eight to ten company trucks for off-site job assignments. They pick up their materials elsewhere, they take them to the job site so there's no plans for equipment storage, for material storage, or anything like that. She and her clients believe it's a win-win situation and rather than renting space somewhere else, her client has chosen to purchase property, invest in our community, and locate another successful branch of his business here. In response to Board questions about truck maintenance being allowed on the property, Ms. Wolf stated it is not something that contractors in a B-2 District are usually limited to. Her client takes his trucks to Ted’s Auto like everyone else and they do not have an on-site mechanic, garage, or facilities. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, AUGUST 20, 2018 PAGE 189 Regarding if there are plans to have large piles of composting material on the site as a result of their business, Ms. Wolf stated that again, they get their materials and take them to the site. If they are removing materials from the job site, they take it to the landfill. Chairman White announced that no one else had signed up to speak in favor or in opposition and closed the public hearing. He asked for direction from the Board on the request. 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 conditions as recommended by the Planning Board: 1.All existing vegetation located within required buffer yards must be preserved and supplemented as necessary in order to provide a fully opaque screen. 2.Any outdoor storage areas shall be screened from the view of Castle Hayne Road. 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 CASTLE HAYNE OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED JULY 1, 1985, is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book II, Castle Hayne, Page 29. PUBLIC HEARING AND APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST BY MILESTONE COMMUNICATIONS, ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, NEW HANOVER COUNTY, FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER ON AN APPROXIMATELY 200-ACRE PARCEL LOCATED OFF OF HALYBURTON MEMORIAL PARKWAY (S18-03) Chairman White opened the public hearing and announced that the special use process requires a quasi- judicial hearing; therefore, the Clerk to the Board must swear in any person wishing to testify. He requested all persons who signed in to speak or who want to present testimony to step forward to be sworn in. The following persons were sworn in: Ben Andrea Leslie Chaney Wayne Clark Donna Girardot Ken Vafier Scott Holmes Jonathan Yates David Goldsmith Chairman White further stated that a presentation will be heard from staff and then the applicant group and the opponents group will each be allowed fifteen minutes for presentations and an additional five minutes, if necessary, for rebuttal. He then asked Current Planning and Zoning Supervisor Ben Andrea to start the presentation. Current Planning and Zoning Supervisor Ben Andrea presented the request by Milestone Communications, on behalf of the property owner, New Hanover County, for a Special Use Permit (SUP) to develop a 140-foot tall, monopole style telecommunications tower in Veterans Park, a public park owned and operated by New Hanover County. The property is a nearly 200-acre parcel located in the southern half of the county. Last December, he and Parks and Gardens Assistant Director Andy Johnson met with David Goldsmith from Milestone and walked the park looking for a suitable site. This is the best site found and is the most compatible with the park layout, meets ordinance requirements, is about halfway between the southern parking lot, and the ball field complex in Veterans Park. Veterans Park is a public park facility that has amenities for active recreation. Adjacent to the park to the west are three public schools, Murray Middle, Ashley High, and Anderson Elementary. There is also a Cape Fear Public Utility Authority (CFPUA) water tower on the site which is 162-feet off the ground. Again, the tower being proposed is 140-feet, which is shorter than the existing water tower. The water tower is at capacity and no additional antennas can be added to it. The property itself is zoned R-15, telecommunication towers are allowed by SUP in R-15. Surrounding properties are all R-15 and mostly single family residential. There's an active runway at Pilots Ridge Subdivision located just north to the site which is not a problem for the tower. The 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan classifies the subject property as General Residential. This place type focuses on lower density housing and associated civic and commercial services. Typically, housing is single- family or duplexes. Commercial uses should be limited to strategically located office and retail spaces, while recreation and school facilities are encouraged throughout. The tower is designed to accommodate up to five carriers. Some of the documents in the applicant’s materials refer to a 146-foot tower height. The tower itself is 140- feet tall and when installed, the top antenna array is about six-feet above the tower. The tower and ground equipment would be in a 75-foot lease area in an existing vegetated area. Access to the site would be from an access easement from Halyburton Parkway over the existing driveway and parking lot to NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, AUGUST 20, 2018 PAGE 190 the equipment compound. The other three sides of the equipment compound would have a 25-foot wide vegetated buffer; vegetation would consist of as much existing vegetation as possible and supplemented with more plants to reach the required 100% opacity. The lease areas would be for ground equipment that would support the equipment on the tower and those would be leased by the individual carriers as they are located on the tower. Traffic Impact Analyses are required to be completed for proposals that will generate more than 100 peak hour trips in either the AM or PM peak hours. This project will have virtually no impact on traffic on the nearby road network. As this is a SUP application, the Board must find that the application meets the four required conclusions supported by findings of fact that are based on substantial and competent evidence: 1) 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; 2) The use meets all required conditions and specifications of the Zoning Ordinance; 3) The use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property or that the use is a public necessity; and 4) 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 the plan of development for New Hanover County. The staff summary has draft findings of fact to support each of the conclusions. The applicant’s team did a balloon test. The test is where a balloon is flown up as tall as the tower would be and superimposed on photos to show the height of the tower as compared to the area. For this test, the tower basically blends into the existing features of the area. The Planning Board considered this application at their June 7, 2018 meeting. No one from the public spoke in favor of, or in opposition to, the application. The Planning Board voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the request, citing the preliminary findings of fact provided by staff, with no conditions. Chairman White thanked Mr. Andrea for his presentation and invited the petitioner to make comments. Scott Holmes with Murchison, Taylor and Gibson introduced Jonathan Yates with Hellman, Yates, and Tisdale who would be making the petitioner presentation. Mr. Yates stated that he would be remiss, very remiss, if he didn't reach out to the many folks in this good county that helped us get to this point today. David Goldsmith with Milestone is here today and this is something his office worked on for a long time. Verizon has an absolute need, they have a deficit in that area that they are trying to cover, but the County stepped up and paved the way. He expressed appreciation to the park staff and everyone that worked to get this location selected. He also thanked in particular Mr. Andrea. Mr. Andrea has been wonderful to work with throughout the process. Even though he’s done this before, he sometimes asks stupid questions and Mr. Andrea never laughs at him over the phone, he is always very kind. In a nutshell, the County has a 200-acre property consisting of the park and the three schools. This is an absolutely ideal location for Verizon. The design is for a facility of 140-feet, monopole staff, which was designed for Verizon, four other carriers, and also space for New Hanover County if they need it as well. We are supposed to be height away from residential property. In this case we are able to do a lot better than that thanks to this property being 421.6 feet away. Everything worked out beautifully. Mr. Yates again thanked the County because there is no textbook on tower sites, but this site would be the ideal one. From a regulatory stand point, it's been reviewed and approved by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), it's been reviewed and approved by North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (NCSHPO), and there are no problems anywhere. Mr. Yates stated that he really just wanted to take this brief time to thank Mr. Andrea, thank the County, and that he and Mr. Goldsmith are here for any questions about this proposal. Chairman White thanked Mr. Yates for his presentation, announced that no one else had signed up to speak in favor or in opposition, and closed the public hearing. He then opened the floor for Board discussion. Hearing no discussion, Chairman White requested direction from the Board. Motion: Vice-Chairman Watkins MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Barfield, to approve, as the Board finds this application for a Special Use Permit meets the four required conclusions based on the findings of fact included in the staff summary. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of an order granting a Special Use Permit and listing the findings of facts is contained in SUP Book IV, Page 73. COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS Appointment to the Cape Fear Museum Advisory Board Chairman White reported that three vacancies exist on the Cape Fear Museum Advisory Board with four applications available for consideration. Chairman White nominated Kevin Maurer, Mike Maurer, and Florence J. Warren for appointment. Commissioner Barfield seconded the nominations. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, AUGUST 20, 2018 PAGE 191 Hearing no further nominations, Chairman White called for a vote on the nominations on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to appoint Kevin Maurer and Florence J. Warren to the Cape Fear Museum Advisory Board to serve three-year terms with the terms to expire June 30, 2021 and appoint Mike Maurer to serve the unexpired term with the term to expire June 30, 2019. Appointments to the New Hanover County Inspections Department Advisory Council Chairman White reported that four vacancies exist on the New Hanover County Inspections Department Advisory Council with one applicant eligible for reappointment and five additional applications available for consideration. Vice-Chairman Watkins nominated Walter P. Avery, Stephen Beacham, Anthony T. Dombroski, III, and Randall Siegel for reappointment. Hearing no further nominations, Chairman White called for a vote on the nominations on the floor. Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to reappoint Walter P. Avery, Stephen Beacham, Anthony T. Dombroski, III, and Randall Siegel to the New Hanover County Inspections Department Advisory Council to serve three-year terms with the terms to expire July 31, 2021. Appointments to the New Hanover County Library Advisory Board Chairman White reported that four vacancies exist on the New Hanover County Library Advisory Board with three applicants eligible for reappointment and four additional applications available for consideration. Commissioner Zapple nominated Jan Brewington, Denise Chadurjian, and Amy Damutz for reappointment, and Patricia Lawler for appointment. Commissioner Barfield nominated Ida Smith for appointment. Hearing no further nominations, Chairman White called for the votes as follows: Jan Brewington, Denise Chadurjian, and Amy Damutz received five votes for reappointment from Chairman White, Vice-Chairman Watkins, Commissioner Barfield, Commissioner Kusek, and Commissioner Zapple. Patricia Lawler received two votes for appointment from Vice-Chairman Watkins and Commissioner Zapple. Ida Smith received three votes for appointment from Chairman White, Commissioner Barfield, and Commissioner Kusek. Vote Results: The Board voted UNANIMOUSLY to reappoint Jan Brewington, Denise Chadurjian, and Amy Damutz and voted in the majority to appoint Ida Smith to the New Hanover County Library Advisory Board to serve three- year terms with the terms to expire August 31, 2021. PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Chairman White announced that no one signed up to speak under public comment. ADDITIONAL ITEMS OF BUSINESS Commissioner Barfield requested to make a passionate plea to the community as there have been too many deaths of young boys and girls to gun violence. The most recent incident being his son’s friend who is around 24 or 25-year-old who was killed on Thursday. The cycle seems to repeat itself over and over in our community. He is praying for a day when gun violence will cease. We can lift the family up in our prayers. As so much hard work has been done on the north side to end youth violence, it would be good to eradicate that throughout the entire community. Seeing a 25-year-old being laid to rest is a tragedy in its own right. Again, he asked that we keep our community in prayer as we face these terrible things. Commissioner Zapple stated that he attended the Planning Board special workshop on the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). The workshop was designed specifically for the Planning Board and was an excellent presentation for an issue that is so complex and has tied up many resources. It was a large amount of time for the public and he is thrilled about the organization that is now developed in trying to describe the process. He strongly encouraged community members, many of which have shown up at these board meetings over different issues, to please participate. He was disappointed to see only a dozen people show up for such a controversial issue. He thanked the entire planning staff for their work. th Commissioner Zapple further stated that he attended the August 14 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) community meeting in Fayetteville and provide comments concerning per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) chemical compounds in our water. He was delighted that the EPA chose to come down to our state to take public comments and pleased to see the turnout from across the state to address the need to have regulatory relief for our surface and ground waters. The EPA is taking testimony on this matter to try to get some handle on it from the federal level. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 34 REGULAR MEETING, AUGUST 20, 2018 PAGE 192 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chairman White adjourned the meeting at 6:16 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.