2000-03-13 Regular Meeting
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 817
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
ASSEMBLY
The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met in Regular Session on Monday,
March 13, 2000, at 6:30 p.m. in the Assembly Room of the New Hanover County Courthouse, 24
North Third Street, Wilmington, North Carolina.
Members present were Commissioner Buzz Birzenieks; Commissioner Ted Davis, Jr;
Commissioner Charles R. Howell; Vice-Chairman Robert G. Greer; Chairman William A. Caster;
County Manager, Allen O’Neal; County Attorney, Wanda M. Copley; and Clerk to the Board, Lucie
F. Harrell.
Chairman Caster called the meeting to order and welcomed everyone present.
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Deputy County Manager, Andrew J. Atkinson, gave the invocation.
Commissioner Ted Davis led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
NON-AGENDA ITEMS
Chairman Caster announced that time had been reserved to allow the public to present an item
that was not listed on the Regular Agenda or comment on an item that was listed on the Consent
Agenda. He requested all persons speaking to limit their remarks to three minutes.
PRESENTATION OF PLAQUE TO MEREDITH SWAIN IN RECOGNITION OF BEING
SELECTED AS “HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT VOLUNTEER” IN THE FIFTH ANNUAL
PRUDENTIAL SPIRIT OF COMMUNITY AWARDS AND WINNING AN HORATIO
ALGER ASSOCIATION SCHOLARSHIP AWARD FOR VOLUNTEER SERVICES
Chairman Caster, on behalf of the Board, presented a plaque to Miss Meredith Swain in
recognition of her being selected as “High School Student Volunteer” in the Fifth Annual Prudential
Spirit of Community Awards and for winning an Horatio Alger Association Scholarship Award for
Volunteer Services. He also noted that last summer Miss Swain suffered a tennis injury, and while
recovering she developed a brochure in Spanish to inform people about what safety and public health
actions should be taken after a hurricane strikes. She worked with high school teachers to translate
the brochure into Spanish and when the project was completed, Miss Swain delivered the brochures
to all 66 central and eastern North Carolina counties declared disaster areas by President Clinton after
Hurricane Floyd. Many letters from Hispanic groups were written to local and state officials,
including Governor Hunt, expressing appreciation to Miss Swain for providing the Hispanic
community with an informative and helpful brochure.
Ms. Swain expressed appreciation to the Board for this recognition and stated it was an honor
to be recognized by the leaders of the community. She noted that many young people in the
community do want to volunteer to help others, but they need leaders such as the County
Commissioners to guide and show them the importance of their volunteer efforts.
ADOPTION OF PROCLAMATION DECLARING THE MONTH OF MARCH 2000 AS RED
CROSS MONTH IN NEW HANOVER COUNTY
Chairman Caster read and requested the Board to adopt a proclamation declaring the month
of March 2000 as “Red Cross Month” in New Hanover County.
Motion:
Commissioner Birzenieks MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Davis, to adopt a
“Red Cross Month”
proclamation declaring the month of March 2000 as in New Hanover County.
Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
On behalf of the Board, Chairman Caster presented the proclamation to Mr. Dean Dimke,
Executive Director of the Cape Fear Chapter of the American Red Cross, and he expressed
appreciation to this organization for the services rendered to the community, particularly during
hurricane events.
A copy of the proclamation is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is contained
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 818
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
in Exhibit Book XXVI, Page 4.
Complaint Regarding the Animal Control Appeal Process
Mr. Gene Price, a resident of northeastern New Hanover County, reported on an incident that
occurred with his pet, and he expressed concern for the appeals process through the Animal Control
Division. The current policy requires payment of a fee in order to appeal a case, but the pet owner
is denied the right to review the complaint to determine if a rebuttal should be prepared, or if the case
should be appealed. He requested the Board to review the appeals policy and change the ordinance
to allow the pet owner to review the complaint in an appeal case.
Vice-Chairman Greer, the Commissioners’ representative on the Board of Health, expressed
appreciation to Mr. Price for bringing this matter to the attention of the County Commissioners, and
he volunteered to discuss this issue with the Board of Health at the next meeting.
APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA
Vice-Chairman Greer requested moving Consent Agenda Item 11 to the Water and Sewer
District agenda.
Chairman Caster announced that Staff has requested removal of Consent Agenda Item 10.
Motion:
Commissioner Birzenieks MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Greer to move
Consent Agenda Item 11 to the Water and Sewer District Agenda, remove Consent Agenda Item
10, and approve the remaining items on the agenda as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
CONSENT AGENDA
Approval of Minutes
The Commissioners approved the following sets of minutes as presented by the Clerk to the
Board:
Regular MeetingFebruary 21, 2000
Budget RetreatFebruary 11 & 12, 2000
Authorization for the Development of a Master Plan for the Preservation and Improvement
of Historic Airlie Gardens
The Commissioners approved the development of a Master Plan for Historic Airlie Gardens
by Synthesis Architects at a fee not to exceed $85,333 plus an appropriate contingency. The
Chairman was authorized to execute the necessary contract documents.
The scope of work is to include the following items: (1) master planning and research; (2)
garden plant materials research; (3) programming; ( 4) the development and presentation of three
preliminary Master Plan options; and (5) the development and presentation of a final Master Plan.
These services are to be provided to the County for a fee not to exceed $85,333 plus an appropriate
contingency. Funding in the amount of $102,400 for the Master Plan is available in the current Airlie
Capital Project.
Authorization for Staff to Submit Criminal Justice Partnership Program Continuation Grant
The Commissioners authorized Staff to submit the continuation grant for the Criminal Justice
Partnership Program for $155,836 to fund the Pretrial Release Program and the Day Sentencing
Center.
The Chairman was authorized to execute the grant documents, if approved and to authorize
the budget amendment as part of the FY 2000-2001 budget. No County match is required.
Approval to Waive Tip Fee for Clean NC 2000 and the Great American Clean-up in
Conjunction with Azalea Pride Community Clean-up Effort
The Commissioners approved waiver of the tip fee for the Keep America Beautiful “Azalea
Pride Community Cleanup” in combination with Clean NC 2000 and the Great American Clean-up
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 819
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
event. Cleanup day is scheduled for Saturday April 1, 2000.
Approval of Policies and Regulations Governing Use of the Historic New Hanover County
Courthouse Assembly Room
The Commissioners approved a basic policy for use of the Assembly Room of the Historic
New Hanover County Courthouse with a fee structure to be submitted at a later date.
A copy of the policy is on file in the County Manager’s Office
Approval of New Hanover County Health Department Fee Policy Revision-Conversion to
th
Current Procedure Terminology (CPT) and International Classification of Diseases, 9
Revision (ICD9) Codes
The Commissioners approved the Health Department fee policy revision-conversion to
th
Current Procedure Terminology (CPT) and International Classification of Diseases, 9 Revision
(ICD9) codes as recommended by the Board of Health. This revision is necessitated by a change in
billing Medicaid for clinical and support services provided by local health departments to become
effective July 1, 2000. At this time neither increases nor decreases in revenues are being projected
from this change in billing for services.
Authorization for Submitting A Grant Application for the Women/Infants/Children (WIC)
Outreach Project
The Commissioners authorized the Health Department to submit a grant application to N.
C. Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Public Health, in the amount of $5,590
to request funding for Women/Infants/Children (WIC) to recover the participants lost as a result of
Hurricane Floyd.
Acceptance of EEOC Grant FY99-00, HUD Grant Increase,and Approval of Budget
Amendment #00-0118
The Commissioners accepted the EEOC Grant in the amount of $25,000 awarded to the
Human Relations Department and approved the associated budget amendment to reflect the actual
amount of the grant and the additional HUD funding to be used for expenses related to testing criteria
required under the Fair Housing Program.
#00-0118-Human Relations-EEOC/HUD
Adjustment Debit Credit
Human Relations - EEOC:
Training and Travel $ 1,000
Human Relations Grant EEOC$ 1,000
Human Relations-HUD:
Human Relations Grant HUD $13,400
Contracted Services $13,400
Explanation:
To reduce the FY 1999-2000 EEOC grant from $26,000 budgeted to the actual award
of $25,000 and to increase revenue and expense budgets to the actual amount of the FY 2000 HUD
grant award in the amount of $40,000 instead of the $27,000 budgeted.
Approval of Property Exchange Involving a Portion of Summers Rest Road Bike Path
The Commissioners authorized County staff to finalize the land exchange involving a portion
of Summers Rest Road Bike Path pursuant to N.C.G.S.160A-271. Fifteen property owners with lots
adjacent to the Summers Rest Road Bike Path requested the County to convey them the small parcels
between their yards and the fence, for a total of about 0.7 acres. In exchange, Landfall Associates
has agreed to convey approximately 2.25 acres to the County. The Parks Department agrees with
the exchange because it will help to better facilitate maintenance. Landfall Associates will bear all
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 820
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
cost of preparing and recording surveys and deeds. The County will convey its interests by non-
warranty deed.
Adoption of Resolution to Approve Exchange of Motorcycles for the Sheriff’s Department and
Approval of Associated Budget Amendments #00-0126 and #2000-25 to Record Transaction
The Commissioners adopted a resolution and associated budget amendments approving the
exchange of the six existing 1998 Harley-Davidson motorcycles owned by New Hanover County for
six new 2000 Harley Davidson motorcycles through an exchange procedure pursuant to N.C.G.S.
160A-271. Due to the age and use of current motorcycles, the Sheriff feels the exchange is beneficial.
Staff has followed the required procedures in the General Statutes including a public
advertisement notifying the public of this item.
A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is contained in
Exhibit Book XXVI, Page 4.
BUDGET AMENDMENT #00-0126-Sheriff’s Department
Adjustment DebitCredit
Sheriff/Administration:
Sale of Fixed Assets$13,335
Motor Vehicle Purchases$13,335
Explanation:
To increase the Sheriff/Administration budget for trade-in allowance of one Harley
Davidson motorcycle in conjunction with proposed exchange of six motorcycles.
BUDGET AMENDMENT #2000-25Federal Forfeited Property
-
Adjustment DebitCredit
Federal Forfeited Property$66,675
Capital Project Expense$66,675
Approval of Budget Amendment#2000-22 Federal Forfeited Property Capital Projects
The Commissioners approved the following budget amendment:
AdjustmentDebitCredit
Federal Forfeited Property $4,619
Capital Project Expense$4,619
Explanation:
To increase the budget for additional funds received February 18, 2000. Federal
Forfeited Property funds are budgeted as received and must be used for law enforcement activities
as deemed necessary by the Sheriff.
Approval of Budget Amendment #2000-23 Controlled Substance Tax Capital Project
The Commissioners approved the following budget amendment:
AdjustmentDebitCredit
Controlled Substance Tax$1,055
Capital Project Expense$1,055
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 821
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
Explanation:
To increase the budget for additional revenue received February 18, 2000. Controlled
Substance Tax funds are budgeted as received and must be used for law enforcement activities as
deemed necessary by the Sheriff.
Approval of Budget Amendment #00-0124 Social Services Administration/Child Day
Care/CP&L Intervention Program/Crisis Intervention Program
The Commissioners approved the following budget amendment:
Adjustment Debit Credit
Social Services Administration:
Administrative Grants$ 112,671
Office of Day Care$1,402,381
Child Day Care:
Day Care Services$1,402,381
CP&L Intervention Program:
Assistance Payments$ 12,671
Crisis Intervention Program:
Assistance Payments$ 100,000
Explanation:
To budget additional State/Federal funds received for Child Day Care (State subsidy)
Services, additional State funds for the CP&L Intervention Program, and additional Federal funds for
the Crisis Intervention Program.
Approval of Budget Amendment #00-0125 Health/Administration/Epidemiology/TB/Maternity
Care Coordinator/Family Planning/Child Health Service Coordinator/Maternal Health
The Commissioners approved the following budget amendment:
AdjustmentDebitCredit
Health/Epidemiology/TB/Maternity Care Coordinator/
Family Planning/Child Health Service Coordinator
Epidemiology:
Title XIX Fee Maximization $ 7,613
TB:
Title XIX Fee Maximization $ 1,601
Maternity Care Coordinator:
Title XIX Fee Maximization $102,156
Family Planning:
Title XIX Fee Maximization $ 11,840
Child Health Service Coordinator:
Title XIX Fee Maximization $ 51,380
Health/Administration/Epidemiology/
Child Health Service Coordinator/Maternal Health/Family Planning:
Administration:
Departmental Supplies$17,210
Training & Travel$ 4,500
Other Improvements$16,000
Capital Outlay - Equipment$38,000
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 822
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
Budget Amendment #00-0125 Health/Administration/Epidemiology/TB/Maternity Care
Coordinator/Family Planning/Child Health Service Coordinator/Maternal Health (Cont.)
DebitCredit
Epidemiology:
Departmental Supplies$ 5,000
Capital Outlay Equipment$15,000
Child Health Service Coordinator:
Title XIX Fees$51,380
Contracted Services$19,000
Maternal Health:
Contracted Services$ 1,000
Family Planning:
Departmental Supplies$ 7,500
Explanation:
To budget Medicaid Cost Settlement in the amount of $174,590 received for revenue
earned October 1997 - September 1998 as follows: $51,380 - Child Health Services Coordinator
to offset a projected shortfall in current year Title XIX revenue; $17,210 - computer related expenses;
$4,500 - AS400 training; $16,000 - medical records renovation; $38,000 - computer equipment;
$15,000 - generator; $19,000 - Contracted Services ($5,000 - additional interpreter services, $4,000
- Clerical Temporary for medical records move and consolidation of files, $10,000 - medical records
bar-coding transition); $5,000 - epidemiology vaccines; $1,000 - Maternal Health contracted services
for transportation; and $7,500 - Family Planning drugs.
Approval of Budget Amendment #00-0127 Office of Juvenile Justice
The Commissioners approved the following budget amendment:
AdjustmentDebit Credit
Office of Juvenile Justice:
Office of Juvenile Justice (State)$5,000
Training and Travel$5,000
Explanation:
To budget funds received for administrative costs.
Approval of Budget Amendment #00-0128 Social Services/Hurricane Floyd Relief
The Commissioners approved the following budget amendment
AdjustmentDebitCredit
Hurricane Floyd Relief:
Floyd Recovery Housing Assistance $822,437
Maintenance & Repair - Homeowner Repairs $822,437
Explanation:
To budget additional State funds from the Small Business Administration Program.
No County match is required.
Approval of Reimbursement to Wrightsville Beach for Beach Erosion Repair from the Room
Occupancy Tax Fund
The Commissioners approved the recommendation from the Ports, Waterway and Beach
Commission to reimburse the Town of Wrightsville Beach $128,250, equal to 95% of the total beach
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 823
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
erosion repair costs from Hurricane Floyd.
RECOGNITION OF GE ELFUN SOCIETY DONATION TO CASTLE HAYNE PARK
LANDSCAPING
Mr. Jack Bragg, reported that the GE ELFUN Society was founded in 1928 by General
Electric leaders and was used as a vehicle for financial investment and fraternal activities. In the
1980s the ELFUN Society’s focus changed to volunteerism with its main purpose being to serve the
communities in which General Electric employees work and live. There are 35,000 members
worldwide.
Mr. Bragg stated that the GE ELFUN Society is pleased to present New Hanover County
with a check in the amount of $5,000 to assist with acquiring plants for landscaping Phase I of the
Castle Hayne Park and providing the volunteers necessary to set out the plants when they have been
purchased.
Chairman Caster, on behalf of the Board, accept the check from the GE ELFUN Society and
expressed appreciation to Mr. Bragg and the General Electric Plant for this contribution to New
Hanover County.
PRESENTATION OF OUTSTANDING COUNTY PROGRAM AWARD FROM NORTH
CAROLINA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Mr. Matt Shaw, a representative of the North Carolina Association of County
Commissioners, presented an Outstanding County Program Award to New Hanover County for its
submission of the program entitled “Functional Consolidation of County Fire Services”. This award
is in response to the County’s effort to deal with problems that have plagued county fire services
across the State in terms of accountability and assurance of equal fire protection services to county
citizens. They praised our establishment of a Fire Service District tax in 1985 and the establishment
of a Department of Fire Services in 1986. They noted the negotiation of agreements with Volunteer
Fire Departments that have allowed Volunteer Firefighters to work side by side with County Fire
Service employees in consolidated teams. And they praised the hiring of a consultant firm that
suggested functional consolidation whereby each Volunteer Fire Department can retain its individual
identity and a certain amount of autonomy but cooperates with others in a consolidated effort. The
overall results have been the development of a consolidated operating guidelines and development
of a single system-wide fire service strategic plan. Under this system, the overall fire service has
improved, the response time has improved, and accountability has been improved through a more
consistent administration, budgeting, and cooperative planning.
Mr. Shaw stated that on behalf of the N. C. Association of County Commissioners, he would
like to congratulate New Hanover County and its firefighters for their excellence of service to the
citizens. He presented a Certificate of Appreciation to Mr. Donnie Hall, Acting Fire Services
Administration.
Mr. Donnie Hall expressed appreciation to the Board of County Commissioners, County
Administrative Staff, and the Volunteer Firefighters for support of the department. He said the
Volunteer Fire Departments have stood behind the Fire Service Department through all the changes
and they have worked to accomplish the goals that have been achieved by the department.
Chairman Caster, on behalf of the Board, congratulated the Department of Fire Services and
Volunteer Fire Departments for receiving this outstanding recognition in the provision of fire services.
APPROVAL OF CERTIFICATE OF NEED APPLICATION FOR MRI UNIT AT NEW
HANOVER REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER
Dr. Bill Atkinson, President/CEO of New Hanover Regional Medical Center reported that
on March 15, 2000, the New Hanover Regional Medical Center will submit an application to the
Certificate of Need Section to acquire a magnetic resonance imaging scanner (MRI) with open
architecture at an estimated cost of $1,300,000, which will be included in the operating budget of the
Medical Center. A need does exist for the purchase of a fourth MRI to expand the availability
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 824
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
of services provided to the community and surrounding areas.
Patients requiring special needs have to travel considerable distance to have scans performed
by an open architecture MRI. The open architectural magnets allow closer monitoring of patients
with a higher and more acute level of illness, better monitoring of pediatric patients, and imaging of
patients with orthopedic problems. There are some procedures that are unconventional in nature and
can only be performed in an open architecture magnet.
From a regulatory point of view, the Sate Medical Facilities Plan has identified the need for
one additional MRI unit in Southeastern North Carolina. The Medical Center Board of Trustees
authorized filing a Certificate of Need application and the Medical Center is seeking support of this
project by the Board of County Commissioners.
In closing, Dr. Atkinson informed the Board that about 180 days are required for a routine
review and stated if there is an appeal, another 12 months could be required. At a minimum, the
process requires at least 6 months. The State criteria does not require approval by a Board of County
Commissioners, but the Medical Center would like support of the Board for this project. He
requested the Board to write a letter of support for the Certificate of Need.
Commissioner Birzenieks asked Dr. Atkinson if the equipment would make money.
Dr. Atkinson responded that enough revenue should be earned to pay for the MRI unit within
three years. Also, a tremendous amount of support has been received from doctors.
Motion:
Commissioner Birzenieks MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Greer to authorize
Chairman Caster to sign a letter to certify the application filed by the Medical Center to the
Certificate of Need Section of the North Carolina Division of Facilities Services for the acquisition
of a magnetic resonance imaging scanner (MRI) for New Hanover Regional Medical Center in the
2001 budget.
CONSIDERATION OF RECOMMENDATION ON PROVISIONS OF CHILD SOCIAL
SERVICES FOR FY2000-01
Director of Social Services, Wayne Morris, reported at the March 3, 2000 annual budget
retreat, the Board of Social Services reviewed the Child Support Program recognizing the current
contract will expire on June 30, 2000. Under the terms of the contract, the County must notify
Corrvantis, Inc. by May 1, 2000, if the contract is to be continued or terminated. The Board of Social
Services has suggested offering Corrvantis, Inc. a six months extension through December 31, 2000,
and authorizing Staff to move forward with developing a Request for Proposals (RFP) to seek bids
for operation of the program. Two other companies are in the business and may be interested in
operating the Child Support Program for New Hanover County.
Commissioner Davis referenced the six performance goals established by the current contract
and he asked if it was true that Corrvantis, Inc. has not met four of the goals.
Director Morris responded that it was too early to say the four goals had not been met;
however, based on January data, it is doubtful the company will meet four of the six goals before the
contract expires.
Commissioner Davis asked why the County should wait six months before submitting a
Request for Proposals.
Director Morris explained that after discussing this matter with Amy Aiken, the Purchasing
Agent, it will take at least three months to go through the RFP process, which exceeds the May 1
deadline, and another two months will be needed for an orderly transition if the program has to be
administered by the Department of Social Services.
Commissioner Birzenieks asked if Corrivants, Inc. would be able to bid.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 825
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
Director Morris said that Corrivants, Inc. would be able to bid according to State statutes.
Chairman Caster asked if the Department of Social Services could submit a proposal for
administering the program.
County Manager O’Neal responded that this procedure was used by the County when
submitting proposals for garage maintenance services.
Commissioner Davis asked if the Department of Social Services can operate the Child Support
Program and save the County $74,000 annually.
Director Morris explained that after using informal estimates from Corrvantis, Inc., it appears
that $74,000 can be saved annually for operation of the program.
Motion:
Vice-Chairman Greer MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Birzenieks to offer
Corrvantis, Inc., the opportunity to extend the current contract until December 31, 2000, and
authorize Staff to develop a Request for Proposals from all qualified providers including the
Department of Social Services. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED BY A 4 TO 1 VOTE.
Commissioner Davis stated, for the record, he could not vote to extend the contract for
Corrvantis, Inc., and he requested Director Morris to inform the Board of Social Services that this
action was not intended to be critical of their recommendation.
PUBLIC HEARING ON OPEN SPACE BOND REFERENDUM TO ADOPT BOND ORDER
AND SET REFERENDUM DATE
Chairman Caster explained that the Public Hearing was being held to consider adopting the
Open Space and Parks Bond Order. He advised that an oversight committee would be appointed
after the bond issue is approved to work as a team to identify and recommend to the Board of County
Commissioners properties that would be available for purchase. He encouraged all persons attending
the meeting to forward any suggestions to the Commissioners so these ideas can be reviewed by the
oversight committee once appointments have been made.
County Attorney Copley reported that the Bond Order authorizing the issuance of
$45,000,000 open space, park and recreation bonds of the County of New Hanover was introduced
on February 21, 2000, and published in a qualified newspaper before March 7, 2000, with notice that
the Board would hold a Public Hearing on March 13, 2000. The County’s Finance Officer has filed
in the Clerk’s office a statement of debt complying with the provisions of the Local Government
Bond Act and such statement shows the net indebtedness of the County to be 2.09% of the assessed
valuation of property in the County subject to taxation.
County Attorney Copley requested a motion from the Board to hold the Public Hearing on
the Bond order, request public comment, and then move to close the Public Hearing.
Motion:
Commissioner Birzenieks MOVED to proceed to hold a Public Hearing on the Bond Order.
The motion was seconded by Vice-Chairman Greer and unanimously adopted.
At 7:30 p.m., Chairman Caster announced that the Board would hear anyone who wishes to
be heard on the questions of the validity of the Bond Order and the advisability of issuing the bonds.
Dr. James Leutze, Chancellor of the University of North Carolina at Wilmington, expressed
appreciation to the Board of County Commissioners for presenting this issue to the voters. He said
that after being involved with the Chamber of Commerce Growth and Planning Committee, the
acquisition of open space was a key issue in preserving the quality of life in New Hanover County.
Passage of a bond issue to allow the County to acquire open space is an ideal way to acquire both
passive and open space as well as active recreational uses. The quality of life and natural beauty of
this area is a major factor in attracting people to the area, especially professional individuals at the
University of North Carolina at Wilmington. He urged all citizens to vote and support the open space
and parks bond referendum to be held on May 2, 2000.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 826
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
Commissioner Birzenieks asked Chancellor Leutze if he agreed with the referendum date of
May 2, 2000.
Chancellor Leutze agreed with the referendum date and stated the University was in favor of
the bond issue.
Mr. Bill Rudisill, Co-Chairman of the Committee to Sustain Our Quality of Life in
Wilmington, North Carolina, complimented the County Commissioners for their vision and leadership
in presenting an open and parks bond referendum on the ballot in May. Open space helps the entire
community by lessening the impact of urbanization while maintaining the environmental aspects and
quality of life for all citizens.
Mr. Rudisill said as President of the Wilmington Hammerhead Professional Soccer
Organization, it is apparent that more athletic fields and recreational facilities are badly needed in
New Hanover County. Various athletic groups and associations will support the bond issue and New
Hanover County should be proud of the diversity of athletic groups that contribute to the quality of
life in New Hanover County. From a business perspective, the preservation of open space has
measurable economic benefits. It increases tourism and outdoor recreation, which are two industries
that maintain our economy and should be protected. He advised that the Committee to Sustain Our
Quality of Life was committed and dedicated to educating the public about the merits of the
referendum over the next six weeks to be sure the bond issue is approved by the voters.
Commissioner Birzenieks asked Mr. Rudisill if he agreed with the referendum date of May
2, 2000.
Mr. Rudisill responded that he agreed with the referendum date and stressed the importance
of moving forward with acquiring open space.
Mr. Bill Maus, Co-Chairman of the Community to Sustain Our Quality of Life, spoke on the
open space and parks bond referendum being an opportunity for the people in New Hanover County
to take a positive step toward preserving the quality of life. He said as a realtor who sells and
develops commercial real estate, the message is to purchase open space while it can be purchased
because to delay this issue will provide fewer choices in the future at a more costly price. There are
many individuals and companies inside and outside the area who are interested in acquiring land for
residential, commercial, and industrial development. New Hanover County is for sale, and if the
citizens want to better control how the land left will developed and used, the bond issue should be
approved to preserve open space for future generations. Many citizens will be opposed to using tax
dollars for the acquisition of open space. This is an investment in a physical asset that will appreciate
over time and remain there for 100 plus years as opposed to current tax dollars that are used to cover
present expense items that seem to disappear over time. The question to consider is what will the
cost to be to us and our children if open space is not acquired. This is an investment that will provide
returns for future generations.
Commissioner Birzenieks asked Mr. Maus if he agreed with the referendum date of May 2,
2000.
Mr. Maus agreed with the date and said that time was of the essence.
Mr. Curtis Wright, a member of Council of Neighborhood Associations and the Chamber
Commerce Infrastructure Committee, reported that the open space bond referendum was of great
importance to the community, and he presented the history of the proposed bond issue.
In December 1991, the Board of County Commissioners accepted and completed a voter
survey. This survey showed that 78.2% of persons surveyed were in favor of preserving open space.
The survey also showed that 83.9% of persons surveyed felt that developers should be required to
help pay the costs of new facilities needed because of growth, and specifically referenced parks.
Between 1986 and 1989, an impact fee was imposed on new development for park improvements;
however, these fees were removed later by a previous Board of County Commissioners. After the
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 827
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
1991 survey, no impact fees were re-instated as requested by the public in the survey. Approximately
33% of all development in New Hanover County has taken place in the last 10 years, and no impact
fees on development for parks and recreation were collected.
In January 1999, the Board of County Commissioners began the process for planning a bond
referendum for open space. At that time, Ms. Camilla M. Herlevich stated, on behalf of the Parks
Foundation, that she wanted to be sure there would be adequate time to properly educate the public.
In October 1999, a voter survey at the cost of $40,000 in public funds was completed regarding the
acquisition of open space and other issues. The consultant hired to perform the survey recommended
initiating the education and communication process five to six months prior to the bond referendum
date. One question asked in the survey was, what must an open space bond package contain to gain
your support. The first response was to provide specific details on the bond issue, itemize expenses,
show the timing of expenses, list specific locations, show no waste, and guarantee the bond proceeds
will be used as promised. The second response was not to increase taxes, the third was to lower the
amount of the bond issue if possible, and the fourth response was to show the need for more
information. These responses equaled 60% of persons surveyed.
Mr. Wright stated that when the last bond issue was presented for schools, the Chamber of
Commerce requested the Council of Neighborhood Associations to support the referendum. A
pamphlet was presented informing the public about how the bond proceeds would be spent with
charts, graphs, and maps outlining the details of the bond issue. This bond referendum was successful
because time had been taken to properly inform the public.
Mr. Wright said that voters will accept a bond referendum as a way to raise large sums of
money for government projects; however, the public prefers other methods such as impact fees, user
fees, sales tax, increased government efficiencies, and even lotteries. Unfortunately, the bond issue
before the Board has reached a critical stage without following the process recommended by the
consultant and public in order to gain support for the open space bond issue. The survey also shows
a growing lack of confidence in the ability of local government to do what is best for the voters. The
proposed bond issue is significant enough to undermine all future bond referendums for schools and
other government projects.
In concluding the presentation, Mr. Wright said that he feels the open space bond referendum
is being presented under a failed process without a specific plan which has caused confusion among
the members of the Board of County Commissioners, environmental groups, park user groups, and
the public as a whole. The confusion has been created by not informing everyone about how the bond
proceeds will be spent.
Mr. Wright urged the Board to delay the open space bond referendum until the November
7, 2000 election. This would allow enough time to appoint an oversight committee comprised of a
broad range of people within the entire community and charge this group with developing a plan to
educate the public about the bond issue to build public confidence. Mr. Wright said this process will
assure a successful bond referendum.
Commissioner Davis asked Mr. Wright if he attended any meetings of the focus groups
appointed for the bond referendum.
Mr. Wright responded that he was not asked to any attend any meetings of the focus groups
because he was not on the list of persons contacted in the random survey.
Mr. Herbert Harris, representing the Community Action Group, advised that this group was
in favor of the open space and parks bond issue. The City and County are in need of parks and
playgrounds for the youth living in both jurisdictions. In east Wilmington, Maids Park is totally
neglected by the City, County, and State. The black community is interested the bond issue, but they
are concerned about not being involved in the bond process. In order to be sure the bond referendum
is approved, more information must be presented to the community. Many minorities see the bond
issue as another tax, and many people will not see this bond issue as a long-term benefit. Time is
needed to develop an education process so all voters will be thoroughly informed about the proposed
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 828
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
bond issue. The entire community must become involved and know the details of the bond issue.
In concluding his presentation, Mr. Harris requested the Board to delay the bond referendum
until the November election and to use this time to involve the entire community by thoroughly
educating the public about the benefits that will be received with passage of the bond issue.
Ms. Sue Bulluck, representing the Citizens for a Better Duck Haven, reported that
approximately nine neighborhoods surround the Duck Haven Golf Course, which represents a
significant number of individuals interested in the passage of the bond referendum. Many calls have
been received about how the bond proceeds will be used. Rumors are also circulating about the use
of the bond proceeds to purchase land in the Sea Breeze area. She requested the Board to take time
to educate the public and delay the referendum until November.
Chairman Caster stressed the importance of everyone understanding that many groups have
requested use of bond proceeds for projects, such as the Sea Breeze project, the Duck Haven Golf
Course project, and soccer groups. No decision has been made by the Board on how the bond
proceeds will be used. An oversight committee will be appointed, and a process will be followed for
recommendations to be presented to the Board of County Commissioners for the acquisition of open
space.
Ms. Tracy Skrabal, an environmentalist and soccer mon, said the public’s desire to preserve
public open space was a recurring theme during the lengthy community growth planning process and
the 2-year land use planning process. Those desires have been translated into written goals and
policies in the Land Use Plan that was adopted in September. Under the issues highlighted in this
plan, it is stated that loss of open space and farmland to development has resulted in a strong
community desire to preserve remaining areas of public use, green ways, bike paths, hiking paths, and
conservation areas. The need to acquire open space is discussed when a large tract of land is
proposed for development and the citizens lament the loss of another farm or forest. The maritime
forest area and riparian buffers must be preserved because these areas are not protected by the State,
Corps of Engineers, or EPA. These areas are converted to some other land use on a daily basis in
this and other counties. Everyone understands the economic and environmental values of preserving
these areas, but the reality is that under the short-term perspective of the highest and best use,
economics show that these areas will be converted to other land uses unless they are identified and
protected by some financial incentive. These are the facts, and the open space bond is one way to
change this current trend.
In closing, Ms. Skrabal requested everyone to forget their differences and consider what
acquiring open space will do for future generations.
Commissioner Davis asked Ms. Skrabal if she supported the May date for the bond
referendum.
Ms. Skrabal responded that she had been working out of New Hanover County and was not
closely involved with the public regarding this issue. She advised that Mr. Wright and Mr. Harris
made some good points, but she could not speak on how the public feels about the issue.
Ms. Ruth Nienhuis, representing Citizens Protecting Resources, reported that members of this
group recognize the need to preserve and purchase some of the remaining and rapidly disappearing
natural areas of New Hanover County for the present and future generations. For the past ten years,
citizens have expressed a desire to purchase open space. At this point, it is imperative for the voting
public to understand the bond issue so it will either stand or fall on its own merits. To accomplish
this goal, the recommendation of the survey should be followed. The public must be educated. The
Board was urged to delay the bond referendum date until November in order to provide time for the
public to hold open dialogue with the public officials. This process will provide the needed time to
give the open space bond issue its best shot.
Ms. Camilla M. Herlevich, Director of the N. C. Coastal Land Trust, reported that the Board
of Directors has met and is ready to work with the County in identifying natural areas of open space.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 829
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
When money is raised through a bond issue to acquire open space, the tax rate will increase; however,
open space lands do not involve the costs associated with constructing schools, providing sewer lines
and other services to those facilities. On a net annual basis, the tax increase associated with acquiring
open space is more than offset through the recruitment new businesses that are attracted to our area
because of the qualify of life and preservation of natural areas.
Ms. Herlevich referenced the comments made about delaying the bond referendum and stated
that some groups who have supported school bond referenda are firmly behind the open space bond
referendum. There is a mechanism in place to educate the public and various organizations are ready
to move forward with the process.
In closing, Ms. Herlevich stressed the importance of everyone understanding that when a
decision is made to acquire open space, the land cannot be identified by placing circles on maps
because this is private property that can be sold to someone else. These land acquisitions will have
to be negotiated away from the public eye to keep the purchase price within reason.
Commissioner Birzenieks asked Ms. Herlevich if she was in favor of the May referendum
date.
Ms. Herlevich responded that she was not a politician; however, some of the questions cannot
be answered in November or a year from now. She said to appoint a broad based advisory committee
is an excellent way to begin the process.
Mr. Jim Medlin, a member of the Council of Neighborhood Associations, expressed
appreciation to the members of the Board who have attended neighborhood meetings as well as
various meetings of civic organizations to make presentations on the open space bond issue in an
effort to educate the public. He requested the Board to continue making presentations throughout
the community.
Mr. Tom Mason, a owner of two businesses in New Hanover County, advised that not
creating the oversight committee prior to open space bond referendum is a major fault. As a former
Assistant Director of a State Economic Development group under two governors, his experience has
been that the committee should be appointed prior to the bond referendum. If this process is not
followed, the bond referendum will fail. The Board should delay the bond referendum until the
November election so the voice of the people can be heard before voting on this issue.
Mr. Andy Woods reported on the species of plants, animals, and insects that live in New
Hanover County and stated that undisturbed natural heritage areas must be protected. To delay the
referendum to November could cause many of these areas to be purchased for private purposes. This
is a savings account that will save plants and habitats for future generations.
Reverend John Fredlaw, representing concerned citizens of New Hanover County and the City
of Wilmington, requested the Board to hold the open space bond referendum in November to allow
time for educating the public. The minority community has not been consulted in this consideration,
and it appears that meetings have been held in various neighborhoods, but none have been held in the
minority areas.
Chairman Caster expressed appreciation to Reverend Fredlaw for his concerns and stated that
the Commissioners have been invited to attend the meetings held in various communities. He
requested Reverend Fredlaw to invite the Commissioners to make presentations in minority
communities, and they will glad to accept the invitations.
Chairman Caster requested a motion to close the Public Hearing.
Motion:
Commissioner Birzenieks MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Greer to close the
Public Hearing. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Chairman Caster requested a motion for the Board to adopt without change and direct the
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 830
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
Clerk to publish as prescribed by the Local Government Bond Act the bond order entitled, “BOND
ORDER AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $45,00,000 OPEN SPACE, PARK AND
RECREATION BONDS OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER” introduced at the meeting of
the Board of Commissioners held on February 21, 2000.
Motion:
Commissioner Birzenieks MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Davis to adopt the
bond order authorizing the issuance of $45,000,000 open space, park, and recreation bonds as
requested by the Chairman. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Chairman Caster requested the Board to adopt the following resolution:
WHEREAS,
the Board has adopted the bond order hereinafter described authorizing the
issuance of $45,000,000 open space, park and recreation bonds, and that bond order and the
indebtedness to be incurred by the issuance of those bonds and the tax to be levied for the payment
of those bonds should be submitted to the voters of the County of New Hanover for their approval
or disapproval in order to comply with the Constitution and laws of North Carolina;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE BOARD AS FOLLOWS:
(A)The questions whether the qualified voters of the County of New Hanover shall approve or
disapprove (1) the indebtedness to be incurred by the issuance of the bonds of the County
authorized by that bond order, which indebtedness shall be secured by a pledge of the
County’s faith and credit; (2) the levy of a tax for the payment therefor, and (3) that bond
order, shall be submitted to the qualified voters of the County at an election to be held in the
County on May 2, 2000.
(B)The Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to publish a notice of that election.
Motion:
Vice-Chairman Greer MOVED to adopt the resolution as read by for submitting the bond
order to the registered voters of New Hanover County on May 2, 2000. The MOTION WAS
SECONDED by Commissioner Birzenieks. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is contained in
Exhibit Book XXVI, Page 4.
County Attorney Copley explained that North Carolina General Statutes dictate the form and
format of how a bond referendum is presented on the ballot. The ballot must be in question form with
a yes or no answer. Percentages of how the money will be allocated or the impact on the tax rate
cannot be printed on the ballot. These issues must be addressed through the educational process.
She offered to provide a copy of the statutes to any interested persons.
Chairman Greer expressed appreciation to the persons who spoke, and he requested everyone
to support the bond referendum on May 2, 2000. He advised that a team was in place to begin
educating the public, and he requested persons or groups interested in hearing a bond presentation
to contact Mr. Howard Loving with the Chamber of Commerce to schedule a date.
BREAK
Chairman Caster called a break from 8:00 p.m. until 8:18 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING ON INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT GRANT FOR CORNING, INC.
PROJECT
County Manager O’Neal reported the purpose of the Public Hearing is to discuss an industrial
investment for Corning, Inc., Project.
Mr. Scott Satterfield, Executive Director of the Committee of 100, reported that he was
proud to announce that Corning, Inc. was planning another expansion, and he introduced Mr. Bob
Hoover, Plant Manager, to comment on the expansion.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 831
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
Mr. Bob Hoover, Plant Manager, expressed appreciation to the Board of County
Commissioners for their commitment given to sustain the economic base in New Hanover County
and stated that Corning, Inc. was pleased about the $100,000,000 expansion of the local plant. He
said that the company will continue to be a top notch corporate citizens.
Chairman Caster requested a motion to open the Public Hearing.
Motion:
Commissioner Birzenieks MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Howell to open the
Public Hearing. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Chairman Caster opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone from the public would like
to comment.
No comments were received.
Chairman Caster requested a motion to close the Public Hearing.
Motion:
Commissioner Birzenieks MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Davis to close the
Public Hearing. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Chairman Caster closed the Public Hearing.
APPROVAL OF AN INCENTIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN NEW HANOVER COUNTY
AND CORNING, INC.
Mr. Scott Satterfield reported that he was pleased to recommend an industrial investment
grant to Corning, Inc. for expansion of its manufacturing facility in New Hanover County. This
expansion represents an additional investment of more than $100,000,000 to the community by
Corning, Inc. with 70 additional well-paying jobs for the area. Prior to this new investment, Corning,
Inc. has invested over $500,000,000 in the facility located in New Hanover County. Within the last
three years, Corning, Inc. has paid nearly $7,000,000 in property taxes and more than 1,700 people
are employed at the facility. The project has met all threshold requirements set forth by New Hanover
County’s industrial investment policy. He requested the Board to consider approving the incentive
agreement as presented and noted that the Wilmington City Council had already approved the
agreement under the same terms and conditions.
Mr. Bob Hoover, on behalf of the plant and its 1,700 employees, expressed his appreciation
to the Board of County Commissioners for allowing New Hanover County to participate in the
incentive agreement. He advised that once the expansion is complete, the economic benefits will be
realized by all residents living in New Hanover County.
Commissioner Davis requested an explanation of how the $450,000 grant per year for five
years will be used by Corning, Inc.
Mr. Satterfield responded that the grant will be used to assist with defraying expenses for the
expansion. Funds will be used for site preparation, permitting costs, and training of new employees.
Also, the expanded facility will increase the tax base.
Commissioner Davis expressed appreciation to Corning, Inc. for the numerous expansions
that have provided good paying jobs to the area.
Chairman Caster called for a motion to approve the incentive agreement with Corning, Inc.
Motion:
Vice-Chairman Greer MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Birzenieks to approve the
incentive agreement as presented with Corning, Inc. whereby New Hanover County shall pay grants
to Corning, Inc., in the amount of $450,000 per year for five years, and in return Corning Inc., shall
provide 70 jobs within 3 years from the occupancy date of which at least 60 jobs shall be
technical/production positions and at least 10 jobs shall be salaried professional positions. The
Chairman was authorized to execute the agreement. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 832
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
UNANIMOUSLY.
Vice-Chairman Greer expressed appreciation to Corning, Inc. for their contributions to the
community, and he expressed appreciation to Mr. Satterfield for his excellent job in working out an
agreement of this type.
A copy of the agreement is on file in the Legal Department
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST FROM STAN BULLOCK AND CHIP
HICKS TO APPROVE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A YOUTH SOCCER
FACILITY TO BE LOCATED AT 6101 MURRAYVILLE ROAD (S-452, 01/00)
Chairman Caster opened the Public Hearing and announced that the special use process
requires a quasi-judicial hearing; therefore, any persons wishing to testify must step forward to be
sworn in by the Clerk to the Board.
The following persons were sworn in:
Dexter Hayes
Al Pastore
Cody Arnoux
Margaret Olsen
Chip Hicks
Stan Bullock
Planning Director Dexter Hayes reported at the Planning Board Meeting held on February 3,
2000, several neighbors voiced concern about the access through their neighborhood, the setback of
the fields and parking, and the potential noise and lighting from the facility.
The Planning Board voted to approve the request with four conditions:
(1)Provide a buffer along the parking area and along field “A”.
(2)The buffer should be at least 25 feet and have three rows of vegetation as described in the
New Hanover County Zoning Ordinance.
(3) Directional lighting should only be permitted for field “B”. Lighting must be turned off by
7:00 p.m.
(4)There should be no spectator bleachers, PA system or street parking permitted.
Planning Director Hayes entered the following findings into the record:
1. The Board must find that the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety
if located where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and approved
based upon the following findings:
A. The site is served by an individual well and septic tank.
B.The site is located in the Wrightsboro Volunteer Fire Department District.
C. Access to and from the site is proposed on Five Acre Road, which is a residential road and
is not classified as an arterial road by the New Hanover County Thoroughfare Classification
.
Plan
2. The Board must find that the use meets all required conditions and specifications of the
Zoning Ordinance based upon the following findings:
A.The subject property is zoned R-15. A Membership Sports and Recreation Club is permitted
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 833
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
by Special Use Permit in all residential zones, subject to the dimensional requirements of the
district.
B.A site plan has been submitted which meets all the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The Board must find that the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or
abutting property or that the use is a public necessity based upon the following findings:
A.The surrounding land use is residential and the surrounding zoning is R-15.
B. The primary access to the site is through a residential neighborhood.
C.Parking for the site is directly adjacent to the residential neighborhood but appears to be
adequately screened.
4. The Board must find that the location and character of the use if developed according to
the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be
located and in general conformity with the plan of development of New Hanover County based
upon the following findings:
A.The applicant has begun some clearing for the parking area and field improvements have been
completed.
B.The fields are substantially screened from nearby residents.
Commissioner Davis asked if the conditions recommended by the Planning Board met the
concerns of the residents.
Planning Director Hayes responded that a majority of the concerns were addressed at the
Planning Board meeting and the use does comply with the Land Use Plan. The adjoining property
owners were concerned about the scope and size of the facility, parking, lighting, and noise.
Chairman Caster asked if anyone from the public would like to comment.
Mr. Al Pastore said that some of the soccer players were present and would like to comment.
Mr. Coty Arnoux introduced the players on the soccer team and said on behalf the players he
was requesting the Board of County Commissioners to approve the Special Use Permit for use of Ms.
Olsen’s property as private soccer fields.
Ms. Margaret Olsen, speaking on behalf of her mother, who has been a resident of Murrayville
Road for 73 years, said the family was interested in keeping this private property as open green space.
The soccer program is a wonderful program for boys, and the neighborhood has been enhanced by
clearing the lot and improving this property on Murrayville Road.
Mr. Al Pastore said that Ms. Olsen’s mother was 100 years old. She is very much in favor
of the property being used as a private soccer field. The youth are in need of a practice facility and
the shortage of land has made it difficult to find fields. This will not be a public facility opened for
general use, and supervision will always be present when the soccer team is using the facility. The
lights were requested because of the need to practice in the winter when it is dark. The practice hours
will be from 5:00 p.m. until 7:00 p.m. An existing shed will be remodeled to store equipment and
portable toilets will be placed on the site.
Commissioners Davis asked Mr. Pastore if he agreed with the four conditions recommended
by the Planning Board.
Mr. Pastore responded that he would comply to the conditions recommended by the Planning
Board.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 834
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
Chairman Caster asked Mr. Pastore if he agreed with the findings presented by the Planning
Director.
Mr. Pastore concurred with the findings as presented.
Chairman Caster asked if anyone from the public would like to comment.
Mr. Chip Hicks commented on the need for this soccer field and he requested the Board to
approve the Special Use Permit. He expressed appreciation to the Olsen family for allowing their 7
acres to be developed into a soccer field.
Chairman Caster closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Davis asked if the buffer condition should be changed if the owners do not
want the vegetation.
Vice-Chairman Greer stated the purpose of the buffer was to protect the neighbors; however,
if the buffer is not needed, there is no reason to plant the row of trees.
Planning Director Hayes explained that vegetation was present and it could be stipulated in
the Special Use Permit that the buffer would be planted at the request of adjacent residents.
Motion:
Vice-Chairman Greer MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Davis, to approve the
Special Use Permit to locate a Youth Soccer Facility at 6101 Murrayville Road subject to a buffer
being planted at the request of adjacent residents and subject to recommendations of the Planning
Board based upon the evidence and findings of fact concluding that the use will not materially
endanger the public health or safety if located where proposed and developed according to the plan
as submitted and approved; the use meets all required conditions and specifications of the Zoning
Ordinance; the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining property or abutting property
or that the use is a public necessity; and 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. Upon vote, the
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
A copy of the Special Use Permit is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is
contained in SUP Book III, Page 5.
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST BY GILES OLEANDER, LLC TO
REZONE 0.81 ACRES LOCATED AT 108 GILES AVENUE, BETWEEN PARK AVENUE
AND OLEANDER DRIVE, FROM R-15 RESIDENTIAL TO CD (O&I) CONDITIONAL
USE OFFICE AND INSTITUTION (Z-687, 10/99)
Chairman Caster opened the Public Hearing and announced that the conditional use zoning
requires a quasi-judicial hearing; therefore, any persons wishing to testify must be sworn in by the
Clerk to the Board.
The following persons were sworn in:
Dexter Hayes
Cindee Wolf
Harry Stovall, III
Planning Director Dexter Hayes reported that the petitioner was requesting to expand an
existing O&I Office and Institution Zoning District located adjacent to 108 Giles Avenue between
Park Avenue and Oleander Drive from R-15 Residential to Conditional Use Office and Institution.
The Planning Board voted 4 to 2 to approve the request. There was concern about commercial
encroachment into an existing residential neighborhood and setting a precedent for future rezoning
proposals. Other site plan concerns include the additional access off Giles Avenue and the impact
of the proposed expansion on Parcels 6, 7, and 8.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 835
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
The Planning Board recommended several conditions to the site plan:
1.The roof line must remain consistent in the front and back.
2.The utilities (heating & air) be hidden from Giles Avenue.
Planning Director Hayes reported that based on the growing need for services along Oleander
Drive, the petitioner’s request appears to be quite simple. According to the petitioner, access to the
site will be from Oleander Drive through property owned by LLC. Staff is concerned that despite
the recent conditional use rezoning approval at Park and Greenville Avenues and the property’s
classification as developed on the County’s Updated Land Use Plan, the proposed petition does
encroach into a residential neighborhood.
Development of this site for professional offices would undermine the residential character
that has existed for many years in this Seagate neighborhood. Commercial impacts such as noise,
additional traffic, lighting and drainage may be difficult to mitigate if the property is rezoned.
Additional pressures would also be placed on properties across the street to change their residential
zoning if this petition is approved.
Based on the above information, the Planning Staff recommends that the property remain
zoned R-15 Residential.
Planning Director Hayes entered the following findings into the record:
1. The Board must find that the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety
if located where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and approved
based upon the following findings:
A.Public water and sewer service will be provided.
B.The site will have direct access off Oleander Drive with secondary access off Giles Avenue.
C.The site is served by the Seagate Volunteer Fire Department
D.According to the applicant, the property does not lie within the 100 year flood zone.
2. The Board must find that the use meets all required conditions and specifications of the
Zoning Ordinance based upon the following findings:
A.One 8000 square foot building will exist on site.
B.Front, side and rear yard setbacks and buffer yards from the structure will be dictated by the
height of the building.
C.Adequate parking is provided with 25 spaces shown on the site plan; 20 are required.
3. The Board must find that the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or
abutting property or that the use is a public necessity based upon the following findings:
A.Proper landscaping, setbacks, and buffer yards should mitigate impacts to adjoining residential
property.
B.Other similar type land uses (commercial and professional) exist nearby on Oleander Drive.
4. The Board must find that the location and character of the use if developed according to
the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be
located and in general conformity with the plan of development of New Hanover County based
upon the following findings:
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 836
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
A.The 1999 Land Classification Plan identifies this area as Developed. Densities greater than
2.5 units per lot per acre may be permitted.
B.As noted, other similar land uses such as commercial and professional offices exist nearby on
Oleander Drive.
Commissioner Davis asked if the request would be consistent with the Land Use Plan.
Planning Director Hayes responded that the use is consistent with the commercial corridor
established on Oleander Drive; however, Staff is concerned about the amount of commercial
encroachment into the existing residential neighborhood on Giles Avenue. The use does satisfy the
requirements of the County in terms of access.
Commissioner Davis asked if there was objection at the Planning Board from the neighbors.
Director Hayes responded that he did not recall anyone speaking against the request at the
Planning Board meeting.
Commissioner Birzenieks asked what Staff recommended.
Planning Director Hayes responded that Staff recommended designing the plan to prohibit
access on Giles Avenue.
Chairman Caster stated that he felt it would be safer to provide access off Giles Avenue
instead of Oleander Drive.
Planning Director Hayes responded that allowing access off Giles Avenue did have some
benefits.
Chairman Caster asked if the petitioner would like to speak.
Mr. Harry Stovall, III, the petitioner, assured the Board that having an access from Giles
Avenue would be safer. The majority of the Planning Board felt the Giles access should be included
in the plan.
Chairman Caster asked Mr. Stovall if he agreed with the findings as presented by the Planning
Director.
Mr. Stovall concurred with the findings of fact.
Ms. Cindee Wolf offered to answer any questions regarding the access, and she requested the
Board to approve the Conditional Use Office and Institution zoning as recommended by the Planning
Board.
There being no other comments, Chairman Caster closed the Public Hearing.
Chairman Caster called for a motion.
Motion:
Vice-Chairman Greer MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Birzenieks , to rezone 0.81
of an acre located at 108 Giles Avenue between Park Avenue and Oleander Drive from R-15
Residential Zoning to CD Office & Institution and to approve issuance of a Special use Permit subject
to the conditions recommended by the Planning Department based upon the evidence presented and
findings of fact concluding that the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety if
located where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and approved; the use
meets all required conditions and specifications of the Zoning Ordinance; the use will not substantially
injure the value of adjoining property or abutting property or that the use is a public necessity; and
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
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 837
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
with the plan of development for New Hanover County. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE
ZONING MAP OF ZONING AREA NO. 6 OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CARLINA
ADOPTED August 18, 1971, is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is contained in
Zoning Book I, Section 6, Page 75.
A copy of the Special Use Permit is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is
contained in SUP Book III, Page 5.
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST BY EARL AND DENISE LEE TO
REZONE 1.47 ACRES LOCATED IN THE 8200 BLOCK OF MARKET STREET FROM
R-15 RESIDENTIAL TO B-2 HIGHWAY BUSINESS. (Z-692, 02/00)
Chairman Caster opened the Public Hearing.
Planning Director Dexter Hayes reported that based on Staff’s recommendation, the petitioner
modified the rezoning request from B-2 Highway Business to B-1 Neighborhood Business. Several
neighbors voiced concern about design controls on the project but were not necessarily opposed to
rezoning. The Planning Board voted unanimously to approve the rezoning from R-15 to B-1.
Based on the proximity to the existing shopping center and the planned US 17 interchange,
Staff recommends that the property be rezoned B-1 neighborhood business. The B-1 classification
would provide a better transition into the surrounding residential area while still allowing for
commercial shopping facilities. Considering the existing boundaries of the commercial node at this
intersection staff also suggests that the adjacent parcel #4 be rezoned to B-1 neighborhood business.
Commissioner Davis asked Planning Director Hayes if the rezoning was consistent with the
Land Use Plan.
Planning Director Hayes responded the proposed zoning is consistent with the Land Use Plan.
Chairman Caster asked if anyone present would like to speak in opposition.
No comments were received.
Chairman Caster closed the Public Hearing.
Motion:
Commissioner Birzenieks MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Greer to rezone 1.47
acres located in the 8200 block of Market Street behind the Porters Neck Shopping Center from R-15
Residential to B-1 Neighborhood Business. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE
ZONING MAP OF ZONING AREA NO. 5 OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
ADOPTED December 15, 1969, is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is contained in
Zoning Book I, Section 5, Page 42.
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST BY JOSEPH PRIEST TO REZONE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5801 TULIP DRIVE FROM R-15 RESIDENTIAL TO B-2
HIGHWAY BUSINESS (Z-691, 01/00)
Chairman Caster opened the Public Hearing.
Planning Director Hayes reported with very little discussion the Planning Board unanimously
denied the request at the February 3, 2000 meeting because the New Hanover County Zoning
Ordinance requires commercial tracts of land to have direct access to a major artery. As noted on
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 838
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
th
the site map, the property is located on the corner of 58 Street and Tulip Drive adjacent to a well
established neighborhood. Unless direct access can be obtained by the petitioner from Oleander
Drive, the zoning does not comply to the ordinance.
Planning Director Hayes advised that unfortunately Mr. Priest did not receive notification that
the meeting was postponed, but he was called and did not attend the meeting. No one present at the
Planning Board meeting spoke in opposition to the request.
Further discussion was held on the access to Oleander Drive. Planning Director Hayes
explained that half of the property is already commercially zoned; therefore, this would be a non-
conforming residential use until an agreement could be reached with property owners to the rear
when it is annexed by the City of Wilmington. The property cannot be used without modifying the
access.
Commissioner Davis asked if access is obtained to the property, would the rezoning be
consistent with the Land Use Plan.
Director Hayes responded that if direct access can be obtained to Oleander Drive, the
rezoning would be consistent with the Land Use Plan. The primary concern at the Planning Board
meeting was that no one was present to speak.
Chairman Caster asked if the petitioner would like to speak.
Mr. Joseph Priest, the petitioner, advised that the purpose of the request was to rezone the
property to the boundary lines. He said it was impossible to use the property with split zoning on the
site.
Commissioner Davis asked Mr. Priest if he could obtain access to Oleander Drive.
Mr. Priest responded that he may be able to get access, but he did not own the property that
adjoins Oleander Drive. The property owner is willing to sell the property, but both properties would
need to be combined to develop the property at some point in time.
Discussion was held on the fact that Mr. Priest did not receive notification of the meeting
being postponed. Mr. Priest said that he never received the notice sent out by the Planning
Department. When he called on Monday morning, he was informed the Planning Board meeting had
been held on the previous Thursday. He also said that Mr. Charles Hulin, an adjacent property owner
on Tulip Drive, did not receive the notice.
Commissioner Howell asked Mr. Priest if any of the adjacent neighbors were opposed to
rezoning the property.
Mr. Priest responded that discussion has been held with the neighbors and they are not
opposed to the rezoning.
Chairman Caster asked if anyone from the public would like to comment.
No comments were received.
Chairman Caster closed the Public Hearing.
Vice-Chairman Greer noted that he felt the Planning Board denied the request because no one
was present at the Planning Board meeting. He asked Planning Director Hayes if granting the
rezoning would be inappropriate.
Planning Director Hayes responded that the Zoning Ordinance will govern the use of the
property. He also said that half of the property is already a non-conforming use. He also said the
zoning boundaries should correspond with the property to be consistent with the Land Use Plan.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 839
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
Chairman Caster closed the Public Hearing and called for a motion.
Motion:
Vice-Chairman Greer MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Howell, to approve the
petitioner’s request to rezone .41 of an acre located in the 5800 block of Tulip Drive to B-2 Highway
Business from R-15 Residential as requested by the petitioner. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE
ZONING MAP OF ZONING AREA NO. 6 OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
ADOPTED August 18, 1971, is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is contained in
Zoning Book I, Section 6, Page 75.
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO LIMIT THE
SIZE OF DRUG STORES PERMITTED IN THE O&I OFFICE AND INSTITUTION
DISTRICTS (A-301, 01/00)
Chairman Caster opened the Public Hearing.
Planning Director Dexter Hayes reported that in response to the recent trend in Chain Drug
Store development, the proposed text amendment was being requested to limit the size of these
facilities. The current trend in the drug store industry is the super store with a typical footprint
ranging from 10,500 to 15,000 square feet. This type of large retail business in the O&I District is
contrary to the intention of the district as a transition zone between commercial use and residential
use. After a few questions from Staff about comparable stores and discussion about the
neighborhood drug stores, the Planning Board recommended approval of the text amendment to
establish a “Neighborhood Drug Store” use with a restriction of 4,000 square feet in the O&I Office
and Institution District.
Chairman Caster asked if anyone from the public would like to comment.
No comments were received.
Chairman Caster closed the Public Hearing.
Motion:
Commissioner Davis MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Howell, to approve the
text amendment to limit the size of drug stores permitted in O&I Office and Institution Districts.
Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH
CAROLINA AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY
ADOPTED October 6, 1969, is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is contained in
Exhibit Book XXVI, Page 4.
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER STREET ADDRESS ASSIGNMENTS
Chairman Caster opened the Public Hearing.
Planning Director, Dexter Hayes, reported that the Planning Department is responsible for
the assignment of street numbers in the unincorporated area of New Hanover County. Beginning in
1984, the County initiated a process to eliminate rural route box numbers and to change or reassign
street addresses to create a consistent street numbering pattern. This pattern is based on a
comprehensive grid system. Under the system, house numbers generally increase in range as one
leaves the City. Once the numbers are assigned, they are used by E-911 and other service delivery
agencies.
Prince George Avenue, Sandy Lane and Teresa Drive contain a mixture of housing numbering
originally assigned by the Postal Service. On several streets the numbers are not in sequence. Odd
and even numbers are located on the same side of the road, and there is no flexibility between
properties to create additional numbering assignments in the future when the property is divided.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 840
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
The reassignment of house numbers on these streets will improve service delivery for the
residences along each road. Emergency E-911 has endorsed this request. Based on the County’s
addressing policies, Staff recommends approval of the reassignment of street addresses on the roads.
Chairman Caster asked if anyone from the public would like to speak.
No comments were received.
Chairman Caster closed the Public Hearing.
Motion:
Commissioner Birzenieks MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Howell, to approve
reassignment of house numbers on Prince George Avenue, Sandy Lane, and Teresa Drive as
recommended by the Planning Staff. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
APPEAL OF 1999 REAL ESTATE VALUE BY FRED G. HATHAWAY
Tax Administrator Bob Glasgow reported that Mr. Fred G. Hathaway, a resident of 7543
Masonboro Sound Road, was present to appeal the value of three properties that he owns along the
waterway. The Appraisal Office has been working with Mr. Hathaway over the past six months to
resolve this issue, but no agreement has been reached.
Tax Administrator Glasgow advised that in 1996, Mr. Hathaway purchased 2.8 acres of
property at a price of $875,000. In 1997, the property was subdivided into 5 lots. The lots being
appealed are Lots 1, 2, and 3. Lots 1 and 2 face the waterway and can be used to access the
waterway during high tide. Lot 1 is a vacant lot with a value of $499,995. Lot 2 has a value of
$599,995 with a spec house built in 1999. During construction of the house, Mr. Hathaway provided
cost data showing that $100,000 was needed to fill the lot because it was so low. For this reason,
the Tax Department has agreed to reduce the value of both lots by $100,000 each. Lot 3 is Mr.
Hathaway’s residence which is located behind Lot 2. Mr. Hathaway does not dispute the value of
the residence and garage apartment used as his office. The Tax Department has valued this lot at
$279,750. This lot sits higher than the two lots in front of his residence with an unobstructured of
the waterway. The Tax Department does not believe there should be any change in value for Lot 3.
Mr. Hathaway believes that Lots 1 and 2 should be priced similarly to one at Dal Keith which
is valued at $250,000. The Tax Department believes there is one similarity between the property at
Dal Keith and Lots 1 and 2, which is a view of the waterway, although Dal Keith does not have a
panoramic or unobstructed view of the waterway. The Dal Keith Subdivision has a 1,300 foot pier
over marsh to access the water. Mr. Hathaway can access the water from Lots 1 and 2 at high tide.
In closing, Tax Administrator Glasgow stated that Mr. Hathaway will present his argument
for a reduced value, and Mr. Larry Bolick, the Appraisal Supervisor, and Mr. Jeff Clemmons, the
Appraiser for the Masonboro Sound area will provide any information needed about the property
values.
Mr. Fred Hathaway, a local builder, reported on moving his construction business from
Raleigh to Wilmington in 1996, and said due to hurricanes he had been delayed a year. He informed
the Board that when he subdivided the property, discussion was held with the Planning Department
to see how the property could be used. He expressed concern for the Dal Keith lots on the same
body of water being valued at less than half of his lots when these lots are larger and wider with
access to deep water through a community pier at low or high tide. From Lots 1 and 2, only a john
boat can be used at high tide.
Mr. Hathaway said he could not argue about the view from his lots being better than the Dal
Keith lots because you can look across to Masonboro Island; however, the deep water access for the
Dal Keith lots more than offsets the view from his lots. The lack of water accessability has been a
major problem with selling the spec house. When inquiring about construction of a pier to the
waterway, he was informed this would not be possible because there is an island between his lots and
the Intracostal Waterway. Also, Lot 3, his personal residence, is behind Lots 1 and 2, but this
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 841
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
lot is valued higher than the waterfront lots at Dal Keith. The neighbor on the left of his lot owns
4 acres and his property is assessed for $200,000 more than his one-half acre on one of two
waterfront lots. The neighbor to the right has 3 acres and the property is assessed for $79,000 more
than one of his half-acre lots. There is a vacant piece of property further away from Wrightsville
Beach comprised of 3 acres that is assessed the same as one of his half-acre lots. This property is
wider and has trees on the three acres. Further down Masonboro Sound Road, there is another home
on 2.75 acres assessed $699,264, which is the same as his half-acre lot.
In concluding his remarks, Mr. Hathaway said his spec house is so over assessed that he has
not been able to sell it even though the price is based mainly on construction cost with a far lower
price on the lot. The realtor feels the house cannot be sold because the lot does not have water
access. He requested the Board to consider valuing the house at a price that is comparable to his
neighbors.
Vice-Chairman Greer requested Mr. Glasgow to explain why Mr. Hathaway’s neighbors lots
are valued higher than his lot.
Tax Administrator Glasgow responded when valuing acreage, there is a factor used to reduce
property by the number of acres. This reduces the actual value of the land. However, in Mr.
Hathaway’s situation, he has a lot that can be developed, which has a set price based on similar lots,
not by acres. When Mr. Hathaway subdivided the 2.8 acres into individual lots, the assessment
changed to the established lot value.
Mr. Larry Bolick, Appraisal Supervisor, commented on the acreage tracts referenced by Mr.
Hathaway and the lots on the waterway, and stated there is a difference in value of lots and acreage.
Mr. Bolick said the buildable parcels going north up the Intracoastal Waterway, referenced by Mr.
Hathaway, are valued at $599,000 per lot.
Commissioner Howell asked Mr. Hathaway if he understood the difference between assessing
acreage versus lots that can be developed.
Mr. Hathaway said that he did understand, but the figures do not add up because there are
3 acres for $600,000 and his one-half acre lot is worth $600,000. The assessed value at the
Courthouse shows 3 acres of land on the waterfront at $600,000 with twice the waterfront footage
and one buildable lot. To value his one-half acre buildable lot at $600,000 does not make sense.
Commissioner Davis explained to Mr. Hathaway that if the 3 acres of land just referenced had
been subdivided, the individual lots would be assessed at a much higher price.
Mr. Hathaway said this was true because in 1996 his 2.8 acres were valued at $400,000 and
now after subdividing the property, the land is valued at more than $2,000,000.
Commissioner Howell asked Mr. Hathaway what improvements have been made to the
property.
Mr. Hathaway responded that the acreage was subdivided and a pier was constructed on the
property that has been replaced three times due to hurricanes. He also said that he purchased a 30
foot easement common drive, which he has paved. Water is provided to the lots by the Dobo Water
System and sewer will be provided by the County. Taps have been placed on the spec lot and his
residence. There are no plans to build on the Lot 1 because it serves as the family’s front yard.
Commissioner Howell asked Mr. Hathaway what the assessed value was for the waterfront
Lot 2 with the spec house located on the site.
Mr. Hathaway responded that the land value is at $600,000 with the spec house valued at
$325,000.
Mr. Glasgow explained that the total value of Lot 2 is $926,485 for the house and land less
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 842
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
the $100,000. He also said that discussion was held on combining the two waterfront lots to receive
a reduced value, but this was not agreeable with Mr. Hathaway.
Mr. Hathaway responded that this was correct; however, he felt with the proposed annexation
by the City, the lots should not be combined. He said the reason for the impasse is that he does not
believe the lots are worth more than the Dal Keith lots. Marketing figures also substantiate that the
lots are valued too high.
Commissioner Howell asked if the spec house was now on the market.
Mr. Hathaway responded that the house is not officially on the market because of Hurricane
Floyd. It was felt the market would be substantially less than the asking price. A third bay is being
added to the garage to hopefully appeal to a few more people. The house will be placed back on the
market.
Tax Administrator Glasgow showed pictures of the Dal Keith property with a 1,300 foot pier
to the water over marshland. Pictures were also presented of Mr. Hathaway’s’s property and the
waterfront lots on high and low tides.
Chairman Caster requested the recommendation of the Tax Department.
Tax Administrator Glasgow responded that the Tax Department recommends reducing Lots
1 and 2 by $100,000 each for an appraisal of Lot 1 at $399,995 and Lot 2 at $499,994. Lot 3, now
referenced as Lot 5) is appraised at $249,750.
Motion:
Vice-Chairman Greer MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Birzenieks, to uphold the
recommendation of the Tax Department and value Lot 1 at $399,995, Lot 2 at $499,994, and Lot
3 to $249,750. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
UPDATE ON OPERATION OF NEW HANOVER TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
Assistant County Manager, Patricia Melvin, reported that the purpose of the New Hanover
Transportation Services System is to enhance the quality of life for County residents by providing
access to transportation services primarily in the unincorporated county.
As a community transportation system, it is the responsibility of the County to provide cost-
effective services accessible to the various populations of the community for transporting clients to
medical appointments, nutrition sites, employment opportunities, educational programs, shopping
and some social recreation events.
The major accomplishments of the transportation system were as follows:
1.Services were made available to an increased number of people within the community by
being able to obtain some supplemental funding for the system. A new program was
implemented called “New Hanover County Gets to Work” as an addition to the work related
transportation program. The Special Demonstration Grant in the amount of $50,000 made
it possible to provide services for persons who are employed and are not eligible for
transitional or cash assistance from the Department of Social Services. It is hoped that more
grants will be available to assist with carrying people back and forth to work.
2.Hours of operation were extended to better accommodate the disabled population through
an Easter Seals Grant. Also, funding was available to provide general public services to the
Castle Hayne area.
3.The GIS project was presented to New Hanover County by the State of North Carolina in
August. This is a project to provide assistance in more efficiently routing services to the
public. The number of participating agencies climbed from 16 to 21 representing a 31%
increase.
4.Discussion is being held with the Wilmington Transit Authority for the need to provide a
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 843
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
one-stop system for transportation in New Hanover County and the possibility of combining
and/or co-locating services for the City of Wilmington and entire County.
Funding from agencies and grants cover approximately 65-70% for operation of the
transportation system. In 1999-2000, the N. C. Department of Transportation has agreed to replace
aged vehicles that have more than 120,000 miles, which means that 5 vans will be replaced in 1999-
2000.
Currently, there are 23 vans in the system with a majority of them equipped with lifts. With
an increasing number of wheel chair bound clients, it is imperative for the vans to have lifts. The total
number of passengers transported during the past year was 103,144 for a total of 674,493 miles. The
average fully allocated cost per mile was $1.38 and the contractor was paid $1.15 per mile for the
average cost per trip of $5.79.
The types of trips provided are as follows with a majority paid by grant funds. The County
pays 5% of the Medicaid trips through the Department of Social Services.
Elderly trips 2,777
Disabled trips 4,021
Work First Trips 1,214
Work Related Trips 7,757
Medicaid Trips50,330
Trips for other agencies37,045
Figures were presented on the total revenues received in FY 1998-1999:
Federal Government$499,100
State Government 195,177
Local Government 173,248
Other Agencies 84,174
Donations/Fares 7,120
Total revenues for FY 1998-1999 $928,819
The following revenue and expense percentages were presented for FY 1998-1999:
Federal Funds52.1%
State Funds20.4%
Local Funds18.1%
Other Agencies 8.8%
Donations 0.7%
Services Provided55.0%
Administration33.7%
Vans11.3%
The budget for the upcoming year is predicted to be $974,860 with funds to be expended as
done in the previous year.
In concluding the report, Assistant County Manager Melvin reported the following items will
have to be addressed in the upcoming year.
1.Progressive Transportation, Inc., the private contractor for operation of the system, has
requested an increase in the management fee from $4,000 per month to $4,400 per month to
become effective January 1, 2000. This request has been denied because of their level of
performance. A set of performance measures has been developed and Progressive
Transportation, Inc. will be evaluated on their level of services on June 30, 2000. If the
performance of the company has substantially improved, the Board of County Commissioners
will be requested to approve the $4,400 management fee. The Department of Transportation
has been requested to fund the entire cost of the management fee during
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 844
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
the next budget year on behalf of the New Hanover County Transportation Services System.
No response has been received as of this date.
2.The transportation development plan is now called the Community Transportation Strategic
Plan. Both the Wilmington Transit Authority and the New Hanover County Transportation
Services System are in the process of updating their plans.
3.The N. C. Department of Transportation has made an offer to purchase the ABC building
at 1020 North Third Street where the New Hanover County Transportation Services System
is located on the Smith Creek Parkway site. A search will be made to relocate the
Transportation Services Systems; however, no new location will be purchased until a
complete study has been performed on how the Wilmington Transit Authority and the New
Hanover County Transportation Services System can be combined. It is hoped that some
facility can be rented or some county-owned structure used for this interim period, which
should not be for a long period of time.
Chairman Caster said that he was encouraged about the possibility of combining the
Wilmington Transit Authority and the New Hanover County Transportation Services System. He
requested Assistant County Manager Melvin and the Transportation Board of Directors to continue
to work on combining these systems.
Consensus:
It was the consensus of the Board to authorize Staff to move forward with the actions
presented and requested by Assistant County Manager Melvin.
BREAK
Chairman Caster called a break at 10:10 p.m. until 10:25 p.m.
CONSIDERATION OF CONTRACT #99-0197 WITH SHARPE ARCHITECTURE FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
PROJECT
Project Engineer, Greg Thompson, requested the Board to authorize a change order to the
contract with Sharpe Architecture to begin development of design documents for Alternative 6(A)
as identified in the contract. The Wilmington City Council has voted to approve the zoning variance
for the Judicial Building Expansion subject to the County providing 300 additional parking spaces
for the expanded building. Staff would also like for the Board to consider appointing representatives
of the Library Advisory Board and the Friends of the Library to the project review committee.
Deputy County Manager Atkinson explained that the proposed parking deck will provide
over 700 parking spaces. It appears that the City of Wilmington may be interested in adding some
additional parking spaces. Staff would like an opportunity to discuss this matter with the City and
work toward making this an aesthetically pleasing parking structure.
Discussion was held on what type of City participation was being discussed. County Manager
O’Neal explained that a great deal of discussion has not been held with the City Staff; however, it is
felt that the City is interested paying a portion for additional parking spaces. With the parking
requirement for the Judicial Expansion Project, there is a need to move forward with this project so
the new expansion can be occupied.
Discussion was held on the ownership of the parking deck if the City contributes to the
project. County Manager O’Neal advised that parking spaces can be leased or rented to the City, but
not enough discussion has occurred to know the specifics and details of the City’s participation.
Commissioner Birzenieks spoke in favor of a joint activity, but stated in the future there could
be a problem with joint City/County ownership unless the two governments are consolidated.
A lengthy discussion was held on where off-site parking would be provided during the
construction of the new administration building and parking deck. Project Engineer Thompson
explained that under Alternative 6(A), the parking deck next to the Library will be constructed first,
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 845
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
which will allow for normal operations to occur at the Library and provide ample parking for the
Judicial Building expansion.
Vice-Chairman Greer asked where patrons of the Library will park when the parking deck is
being constructed.
Project Engineer Thompson responded that the Azalea Inn property could be used during the
construction period; however, no one has been contacted until authorization is given by the Board
to move forward with the project.
Vice-Chairman Greer spoke on the need to replace the Annex Building and to construct a
parking deck to provide spaces for the Judicial Building Expansion project and stated that he was not
sure it was necessary to replace the New Hanover County Administration Building. He said that he
would not support demolishing the Administration Building and replacing it with a park. He
expressed concern for not having a detailed plan of how these structures can be built without knowing
about where parking spaces will be located during construction.
Deputy County Manager Atkinson explained that authorization has to be received from the
Board of County Commissioners to proceed with the entire plan before Staff can move forward with
finding interim parking and working out other details.
County Manager O’Neal requested the Board to approve Alternative 6(A) and authorize
Staff to begin negotiations with Sharpe Architecture for an amendment to provide design services.
Commissioner Davis requested an explanation of how this project can be funded without
having to increase the property tax rate.
County Manager O’Neal responded that the tax rate will have to be increased for expansion
of the Judicial Building and parking deck to accommodate the expansion. With the number of on-
going projects, the tax rate will have to be increased.
Further discussion was held on the cost of Alternative 6(A). Deputy County Manager
Atkinson responded that the estimated cost of the project is $17,250,000, which does not include the
architect fees or furniture.
Chairman Caster asked if an alternative could be prepared to show the cost of renovating the
County Administration Building and downsizing the building on the Library site.
Vice-Chairman Greer said that he did not feel the County was in the position to afford the
proposed project. He also recommended that consideration be given to moving many of the services
in the Annex Building, such as the Inspection Department, to a site with adequate parking that is not
located in the downtown area. He questioned whether it was worth disposing of the existing Library
parking spaces valued at approximately $1,000,000 to build new structure and parking deck on the
site, which will require renting or leasing parking spaces for Library employees and patrons. He
asked if construction of a building out of the downtown area would be less expensive.
County Manager O’Neal responded that with discussion of consolidation and formulation of
a City/County Unified Development Ordinance, it will be beneficial for all administrative offices to
be within walking distance. This will provide a better service to the public.
Deputy County Manager Atkinson said when discussing the scope of work with Sharpe
Architecture, an option was presented for moving some services out of the downtown area, and the
Board decided to remove this concept as an option.
Vice-Chairman Greer explained that discussion was held on moving the entire County
government from the downtown area, not just some of the services. He said, in his opinion, the
Inspections and Engineering Departments do not need to be in the downtown area and stated when
the Annex Building is demolished, the parking deck could be constructed on this piece of property.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 846
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
BellSouth is willing to sell the adjacent property if some parking spaces are reserved.
County Manager O’Neal advised that BellSouth has been approached numerous times about
purchasing more property in the BellSouth Building located at the corner Fourth and Princess Streets,
but these attempts have not been successful.
Project Engineer Thompson reminded the Board that the Annex Building site is located in the
Historic District, which will entail additional restrictions on a parking deck.
Motion:
After commenting on the need to move forward, Commissioner Birzenieks MOVED to
accept Alternative 6(A) and authorize Staff to begin negotiating a change order and defining a scope
of services.
Vice-Chairman Greer suggested holding discussion with the City to consider the possibility
of purchasing the Azalea Inn property to jointly construct a parking deck.
Deputy County Manager Atkinson pointed out that New Hanover County will need at least
600 parking spaces which will be a majority of the parking spaces on the Library site. He said if a
larger parking deck is needed to accommodate the City’s needs, the structure would be too large for
the Library site.
Substitute Motion:
After commenting on being approached by concerned citizens about increasing
taxes, Chairman Caster made a SUBSTITUTE MOTION to authorize Staff to move ahead with the
parking deck, direct Staff to provide an estimated cost for renovating the existing County
Administration Building, and consider moving offices in the Annex Building to an off-site location
or construct a smaller building next to the parking deck on the Library site.
SECONDED THE SUBSTITUTE
Commissioner Birzenieks withdrew his motion and
MOTION.
Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED BY a 3 to 2 vote as follows:
Voting Aye:Commissioner Birzenieks
Commissioner Davis
Chairman Caster
Voting Nay:Commissioner Howell
Vice-Chairman Greer
Commissioner Howell advised that he felt Alternative 6(A) would be the cheapest option in
the long term and stated he could not vote for the motion. He said that money could be saved by
constructing one large building and not demolishing the existing County Administration Building,
which would save $1,400,000.
Vice-Chairman Greer expressed concern for disturbing the Library site before a detailed plan
has been presented.
After discussion of being totally confused, Commissioner Davis requested the Clerk to the
SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED
Board to change his vote to a “no vote”. The by a 2 to 3 vote
AS FOLLOWS:
Voting Aye:Commissioner Birzenieks
Chairman Caster
Voting Nay:Commissioner Davis
Commissioner Howell
Vice-Chairman Greer
County Manager O’Neal suggested holding a Work Session to review the work and
alternatives that have been prepared.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 847
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
No further action was taken.
CONSIDERATION OF AWARDING BIDS FOR THE THREE CAPITAL PROJECTS AT
THE WASTEC FACILITY
Plant Manager, John Hubbard, reported that after negotiating with the engineer to reduce the
cost, the $112,000 will pay engineering services for the three projects. The most critical upgrades
that must be completed by November 19, 2000, are the constant emissions monitoring system and
installation of an activated carbon injection system.
Commissioner Davis asked if the Board should decide whether to close the WASTEC Facility
before spending this amount of money on the facility.
Plant Manager Hubbard informed the Board that morale at the WASTEC Facility had reached
a critical point, and he urged the Board to make a decision as soon as possible so the employees will
know what is going to happen.
After discussion of the need to have more time to discuss the remaining issues on the agenda,
the Board generally agreed to continue the meeting to another date.
CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO PARKS ORDINANCES AND ADOPTION OF
POLICIES
General discussion was held on the action taken by the Parks Advisory Board. Parks Director
Neil Lewis, reported that Item 5 should be changed to 50 feet instead of 100 feet and stated that
Paragraphs 2, 3, 5, 6, and would become Item 9.
Vice-Chairman Greer expressed concern for having a County Ordinance that clearly says dogs
cannot run loose in New Hanover County and dogs must be under the supervision and voice control
of their owners. Currently, many pet owners carry their dogs to the park to allow them to run freely
and problems have been created with dogs going to the bathroom on the ballfields. Vice-Chairman
Greer said before adopting the proposed ordinance, there should be designated areas where pet
owners can allow their dog to run.
Parks Director Lewis advised that he was in the process of trying to set up pet exercise areas
with rules and regulations; however, more time was needed to work out the logistics with the Legal
Department on the liabilities that could be incurred.
Motion:
Vice-Chairman Greer said to save time, he would MOVE to approve the changes with the
exception of the dog amendment. Once this amendment has been prepared for establishing designated
exercise areas, this amendment will be presented to the Board for approval. Commissioner Howell
SECONDED THE MOTION. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED by a 4 to 0 vote.
Commissioner Birzenieks had left the meeting because he was not feeling well.
A copy of the revised ordinance is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained
in Exhibit Book XXVI, Page 4.
This ordinance will be codified into the New Hanover County Code.
ADOPTION OF U.S. CENSUS 2000 PROCLAMATION
Public Information Officer, Mark Boyer, requested the Board to approve a proclamation
encouraging New Hanover County citizens to help start the new century with an accurate and
complete statistical portrait of the community by participating in Census 2000. Elected leaders
nationwide have joined the US Census Bureau in the “How America Knows What America Needs”
campaign. This effort is to motivate communities to participate in Census 2000. Many segments of
the community were undercounted in 1990, mainly the elderly, children and minorities; and since
many programs are funded on the basis of census numbers, it is important to increase census response
rates in New Hanover County.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 848
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
Motion:
Vice-Chairman Greer MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Howell, to adopt the U.
S. Census 2000 Proclamation. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED by a 4 to 0 vote.
Commissioner Birzenieks was absent.
A copy of the proclamation is hereby incorporated as part of the minutes and is contained in
Exhibit Book XXVI, Page 4.
ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION AWARDING BID #00-0264 TO WATSON ELECTRICAL
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR INSTALLING GENERATOR ELECTRICAL
TRANSFER SWITCHES
Director of Emergency Management, Dan Summers, reported that the generator project
consists of furnishing labor and materials for installation of manual electrical transfer switches at New
Hanover County Schools that are used as shelters during emergencies. He requested the Board to
award the contract to Watson Electrical Construction Company.
Motion:
Commissioner Howell MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Greer, to adopt a
resolution awarding the bid to Watson Electrical Construction Company, the lowest responsible
bidder, in the amount of $276,526 to install generator electrical transfer switches for the Central
Office Freezer, Johnson Elementary School, Trask Middle School as part of the base bid, with Eaton
Elementary School and Noble Middle School as added alternates, and add a specification package
to include an electrical transfer switch for the Cape Fear Museum. Upon vote, the MOTION
CARRIED 4 to 0.
Commissioner Birzenieks was absent.
A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is contained in
Exhibit Book XXVI, Page 4.
MEETING CONVENED FROM REGULAR SESSION TO HOLD A MEETING OF THE
NEW HANOVER COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT
Chairman Caster convened from Regular Session at 11:49 p.m.
Chairman Caster reconvened to Regular Session at 12:06 a.m.
CONTINUANCE OF REGULAR MEETING TO WEDNESDAY, MARCH 15, 2000
After discussion of the need to have more time to discuss the remaining items on the agenda,
Chairman Caster requested a motion to continue this meeting until Wednesday, March 15, 2000.
Motion:
Commissioner Howell MOVED, SECONDED by Chairman Caster, to continue the
meeting until Wednesday, March 15, 2000, at 7:30 p.m. in the Coast Line Convention Center to
discuss the following items: (1) Item 11, Sharpe Architecture Contract for Library Site; (2) Item 12,
Hiring of Project Expediter for New Jail Facility; (3) Item 13, Three Capital Projects for the
WASTEC Facility and (4) additional items. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED by a 4 to 0 vote.
Commissioner Birzenieks was absent.
MEETING CONTINUED UNTIL MARCH 15, 2000
Chairman Caster recessed the meeting at 12:15 a.m. to reconvene on Wednesday, March 15,
2000, at 7:30 p.m. in the Coast Line Convention Center.
Respectfully submitted,
Lucie F. Harrell
Clerk to the Board
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 849
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
MINUTES OF CONTINUED MEETING OF MARCH 13, 2000
Chairman Caster reconvened the continued meeting of March 13, 2000, at 7:30 p.m. on
Wednesday, March 15, 2000, in the Coast Line Convention Center.
Members present were: Commissioner Buzz Birzenieks; Commissioner Ted Davis, Jr.;
Commissioner Charles R. Howell; Vice-Chairman Robert G. Greer ; Chairman William A. Caster;
County Manager, Allen O’Neal; County Attorney, Wanda M. Copley; and Clerk to the Board,
Lucie F. Harrell.
Chairman Caster called the meeting to order and requested the Board to begin the continued
meeting with discussion of Item 11 on the Regular Agenda of March 13, 2000.
AWARD OF CONTRACT WITH SHARP ARCHITECTURE FOR NEW HANOVER
COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING PROJECT #99-0197
County Manager O’Neal commented on the contract with Sharpe Architecture and reported
that primary discussion at the meeting on Monday focused on the need to construct a parking deck
to provide the required parking spaces for the Judicial Building Expansion Project and the need to
move the employees from the existing Annex Administration Building that is no longer considered
a sound structure. He advised that since Monday, the Deputy County Manager and architects with
Sharpe Architecture have met and developed some figures and options. He requested Deputy County
Manager Atkinson to present the options.
Deputy County Manager Atkinson commented on trying to respond to the information
requested on Monday night and presented a chart reflecting Alternative 6(A) and Alternative 6(A)(1).
The following figures were presented:
6(A) 6(A)(1)
New Parking Deck Construction 6(A) - 588 spaces $5,888,938 $5,450,000
6(A)(1) 545 spaces
Existing Administrative Building(Demolition) $1,411,620 $ 917,000 (Renovation)
Administrative Annex Building - Demolition $ 201,065 $ 201,065
LEC Renovation/Demolition (Partial)$ 543,900 $ 543,900
rd
Existing Bell South 3 Floor Renovation$ 418,824 $ 478,824
New Administration Building on Library Site$8,786,033 $4,546,224
Contingencies @ 10% $ 1,725,038 $ 1,213,701
Architect Fees @ 8% $ 1,380,030 $ 1,068,057
TOTAL $20,355,448 $14,418,771
Deputy County Manager Atkinson explained that a review was made of the minimal number
of parking spaces needed which reduced the number of spaces from 588 spaces to 545 spaces at a
cost savings of $438,938. This reduced parking spaces were calculated as follows:
Library Spaces for Employees and Patrons (30 more spaces) 139
Judicial Building Expansion 300
New Annex Administration Building116
Total545
If an agreement can be reached with the City, additional spaces could be added because there
are 132 spaces on each level. The 545 parking space deck will be five levels, but from the street it
will appear to be four levels because the first level will be almost underground.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 850
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
The cost of demolishing or performing extensive renovations to the existing County
Administration Building located at 320 Chestnut Street was $1,411,620 as reflected in 6(A). After
reviewing the renovations that could be performed to extend the life of this 60 year old building, it
was decided to replace the windows, clean the HVAC system, and fix the external part of the building
at a cost of $917,000, which represents a cost savings of $494,620 between 6(A) and 6(A)(1). The
rd
Information Technology Department would be moved to the 3 floor of the BellSouth Building,
which will provide an additional 13,000 square feet to accommodate future growth of the
departments located in the County Administration Building. The existing Annex Building would be
demolished with removal of any hazardous waste at a cost of $201,065, which remains the same
under Alternative 6(A) and 6(A)(1).
The Law Enforcement Center (LEC) partial renovation cost of $543,900 remains the same
under Alternative 6(A) and 6(A)(1). This renovated space will house the Emergency Management
Department, Emergency Operations Center, Joint Information Center, backup 911 System, Civil
Division of the Sheriff’s Department, and 80 holding cells to house prisoners waiting for court
appearances.
rd
The Information Technology will be moved to the existing space in the 3 floor of the
BellSouth Building. This move will require air-conditioning systems, computer decking, and a
backup generator to protect the computer equipment at a cost of $478,824. The $60,000 increase
is to cover the cost of purchasing a generator.
The cost of a new 34,704 square foot Annex Building on the Library site will be $4,546,224
compared to a new Administration Building to house all county departments at a cost of $8,786,033.
This represents a savings of $4,239,809.
Deputy County Manager Atkinson reported that projected figures and debt service were
presented at the Budget Retreat on the project cost of Alternative 6(A), which includes a new County
Administration Building to house all county departments. The figures presented were $20,000,000
for the capital project and a debt service of $1,730,500 beginning with FY 2002-2003. Under
Alternative 6(A)(1) with a smaller Annex Building at a cost $14,500,000, the debt service will be
$1,250,000, which represents a cost savings of $480,000 per year on debt service.
General discussion was held on the use of the site when the existing Annex Building is
demolished. Deputy County Manager Atkinson responded that 20 off-street parking spaces would
be provided on the site. Fees could be charged for use of the spaces or these spaces could be used
by State employees of the Judicial System. The $201,065 figure presented under both alternatives
includes demolition of the Annex Building and converting the site into parking spaces.
Commissioner Davis commented on the percentage of architect fees and asked if over
$1,000,000 was reasonable.
Deputy County Manager Atkinson responded that 8% was the going-rate, particularly when
renovation work is included in the project. Sharpe Architecture is comfortable with the 8% fee.
Further discussion was held on where employees and Library patrons will park during
construction of the project. Deputy County Manager Atkinson presented a map showing the Azalea
Inn site and the property across the street as well as the vacant lot owned by Dr. Bert Williams on
Grace Street. The site owned by Dr. Williams has more parking spaces than the existing parking lot
at the Library. All of the proposed sites are within walking distance to the Library. These sites would
be leased for a short period of time.
Vice-Chairman Greer asked Deputy County Manager Atkinson if he felt comfortable with
Alternative 6(A)(1).
Deputy County Manager Atkinson responded that he was comfortable with the plan; however,
the HVAC system in County Administration Building is a drawback to this alternative because this
system cannot be totally replaced. Due to a bad roof and hurricanes, the building has leaked many
times which has created the build up of mildew and mold. A professional cleaner will
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 851
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
be hired to clean the ducts and radiators to help resolve this problem.
Project Engineer, Greg Thompson, explained that the proposed renovations at a cost of
$917,000 for the County Administration Building will provide a temporary upgrade to the structure
to prolong the life of the building for 10 years. In order to increase the life of the County
Administration Building, the structure will have to be gutted with the basic infrastructure overhauled,
such as plumbing, HVAC , ADA requirements, etc.
Discussion followed on the value and number of square feet in the County Administration
Building. Project Engineer Thompson reported that the County Administration Building was
comprised of 44,000 square feet and stated the value of the building for commercial purposes would
not be great because of inadequate parking.
Vice-Chairman Greer asked if it would be wise to sell the County Administration Building and
use that money for construction of one County Administration Building to house all county
departments.
Deputy County Manager Atkinson responded that a 60 year old building will have to be
completely renovated and brought up to ADA specifications with adequate parking spaces, which will
decrease the value of the building.
County Manager O’Neal advised that he was comfortable with Alternative 6(A)(1) but due
to the quick turn around time in preparing the figures, he would recommend for the Board to support
this alternative and authorize Staff to review the figures before finally approving this option.
Deputy County Manager Atkinson suggested allowing Sharpe Architecture to review
Alternative 6(A)(1) to be sure the figures are correct so the cost will not increase.
Further discussion was held on the cost differences between Alternative 6(A) and 6(A)(1).
County Manager O’Neal explained that Alternative 6(A)(1) will satisfy immediate needs for a limited
period without any expansion opportunities for the future. Over a 20-year period of time, Alternative
6(A) will be more economical.
Commissioner Davis expressed concern for the number of on-going capital projects and stated
he does not want to find out later that the tax rate will have to be increased.
County Manager O’Neal explained that in order to complete these capital projects, the tax
rate will have to be increased unless some other sources of revenue are developed.
Consensus:
It was the consensus of the Board to direct Staff to review the figures presented in
Alternative 6(A)(1), check with an appraiser about the market value of the County Administration
Building, and present a recommendation on March 27, 2000.
APPROVAL TO HIRE A PROJECT EXPEDITER FOR JAIL FACILITY PURSUANT TO
N.C.G.S. 143-128(E)
County Attorney Copley reported that North Carolina General Statute 143-128(e) allows
public bodies to assign responsibility for expediting work on a project to a person, firm or contractor.
The project expediter’s responsibilities include preparation of the project schedule and making
recommendations to the County whether payment to a contractor should be approved. While this
would be the first time a project expediter has been used by the County, this method has been
approved by the State Building Commission for state projects and has been used by Mecklenburg
County on some projects, including a jail facility. The Board must specify in the bid documents that
a project expediter will be used. The project will still be bid as both a single prime and multi-prime
contract under the four subdivisions or branches of work (HVAC, plumbing, electrical and general)
as required by the public bidding laws.
County Manager O’Neal reported that Staff had conducted research on the use of a project
expediter for the Jail Facility Project. The following information was presented.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 852
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
1.The 2% of project cost that has been discussed as a fee for the services of a project expediter
is a base fee. This has been confirmed by Freeman-White, Carter Global & Associates, and
Mecklenburg County. (Mecklenburg County has used a project expediter company by the
name of Thompson-Turner. All of the above would advise that fees generally range between
6% to 8%.)
2.Freeman-White has indicated that a project expediter will cut off about 9 months of
construction time. At the rate of $100,000 to $150,000 per month to take prisoners out of
the County, the cost savings for a project expediter could save from $900,000 to $1,350,000.
However, at a 7% fee the cost for a project expediter could be as much as $2,800,000.
County Manager O’Neal requested direction from the Board on whether to proceed with
obtaining a project expediter, and if so, decide on whether to use a Request for Qualification, which
would not include a fee, or a Request for Proposals, which could include a fee proposal for interested
parties.
Commissioner Howell advised that saving 9 months in construction time will save a
considerable amount of money. If Staff is willing to spend time working with the project expediter
in selecting more economical materials and more stringent bidding proposals, additional money will
be saved. This may require hiring more employees for the Engineering Department.
County Manager O’Neal noted that more Staff would be needed, but the process described
will involve more contracts which will require more work and time.
Commissioner Birzenieks spoke on the Jail Capital Project being an ideal project for an
expediter because County dollars are being spent each day for housing prisoners in facilities located
in other counties and states. It is imperative to complete this project, and he suggested moving with
hiring a project expediter.
Vice-Chairman Greer stressed the importance of hiring a project expediter that is familiar with
constructing jails because of the constant changes in jail technology. He also spoke in favor of hiring
a firm from North Carolina or locally if at all possible, and stated this process will provide an
opportunity for small businesses to become involved with a large project.
Commissioner Davis advised that when the Board first discussed the concept of hiring a
project expediter, he was sold on the idea because approximately $900,000 would be saved by
completing the project 9 months earlier. He expressed concern for not knowing that a 2% fee would
be paid to the project expediter. This fee amounts to $600,000 not including expenses which could
be more than the money saved by completing the contract at an earlier date. He strongly objected
to not being informed about the fee that would be charged by a project expediter. Other issues that
will have to be addressed are as follows: (1) will a Request for Qualification (RFQ) or a Request for
Proposals (RFP) be used when letting the bid; (2) will a fee percentage of the total capital project be
used in the bid proposal, or will a bid be submitted with the lowest bidder receiving the contract; and
(3) will expenses be clearly defined in the bid proposal. If the Board is not careful in preparing the
bid proposal, the project expediter could cost more than the dollars saved.
Vice-Chairman Greer said that Commissioner Davis’ concerns are valid; however, local
governments are under bidding procedures as outlined in the North Carolina General Statutes. When
submitting a RFQ or RFP, the County does not have an idea of the fee that will be charged.
Commissioner Davis stated that he understood the bidding process and said he was not in
favor of using an RFQ or RFP in hiring an expediter. He said the taxpayers have a right to know
what the project expediter will charge, and the Board can select the lowest responsible bidder that
is qualified to perform the job.
Deputy County Manager Atkinson advised that a section can be included in the bid package
that will show how money will be saved by the project expediter.
Chairman Caster commented on discussing the concept of a project expediter with two
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 853
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
qualified businessmen in construction and stated that one suggested not hiring an expediter and the
other felt that an expediter should be hired. This concept has become a trend throughout the country
for projects of $1,000,000 or more.
Discussion followed on using a single prime and multi-prime contract. County Attorney
Copley explained that under a multi-prime contract there would be a greater need for a project
expediter because of the numerous trade contracts that would be involved in the construction process;
however, there is a role for an expediter under the single prime contract which is to ensure the project
is completed within the specified time frame.
Commissioner Davis stressed the importance of everyone understanding that if a project
expediter is hired and the job is not satisfactorily performed, the County cannot hold the expediter
responsible because that person is an employee of the County. A general contractor who oversees
the subcontractors can be held responsible for seeing that the work is completed as specified in the
contract.
County Manager O’Neal agreed with Commissioner Davis and stated that the project
expediter should be a separate contract, not a part of the contracts with the architect or general
contractor. He also noted that project expediters have not been used that much in North Carolina.
County Attorney Copley explained that the bid documents must reflect if a project expediter
is going to be used for a project. If the Board decides to use an RFQ or RFP, the firm can be
required to define the role of a project expediter if a single prime contract is awarded. This method
would allow the Board to determine if the money spent to employ the services of a project expediter
would be worthwhile under a single prime contact.
Discussion followed on how the bid documents would be prepared. County Attorney Copley
advised that the bids would clearly specify that a project expediter would be part of the team. The
Board should submit an RFQ or RFP for a project expediter.
Project Engineer Thompson explained that a project expediter would be hired before the bid
package is prepared for the general contractor. The expediter would be involved with the primary
design phase of the project.
Commissioner Davis noted that the Board will have to decide if a RFQ or RFP will be used
to hire the project expediter. He informed the Board that he would not vote to hire a project
expediter unless a RFP is used to clearly define the scope of services and amount of money to be paid
to the expediter.
After discussion of the need to protect the County, Vice-Chairman Greer asked if a bid could
be prepared to use a combined RFQ/RFP document so the County can be sure the firm is experienced
with jail construction.
Project Engineer Thompson responded that Staff could prepare a combined RFQ/RFP
document.
Commissioner Davis asked if this means that a separate contract will be used for hiring the
project expediter under a combined RFQ and RFP that will reflect the qualifications and fee charged.
He also asked if a clause can be included in the document to reflect the amount of money that will
be saved by the project expediter and the expenses that will be incurred.
Deputy County Manager Atkinson responded that it will be difficult to specifically state in the
bid how much money will be saved on the contracts; however if the expediter performs a good job,
money will be saved for the County.
Motion:
Vice-Chairman Greer MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Howell, to hire a project
expediter as a separate contract under a combination of a RFQ and RFP which will require the firm
to have expertise in jail construction and submit the fee to be charged. Upon vote, the MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 854
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
Vice-Chairman Greer asked whether in order to save time, the five County Commissioners
should sit as a review committee to decide on the proposals received.
Deputy County Manager Atkinson responded that all meetings would have to be advertised
and opened to the public.
Chairman Caster expressed concern for some companies not wanting to submit bids in an
open session.
County Manager O’Neal stated that the normal procedure is to establish a review committee
comprised of two County Commissioners and Staff to review the proposals.
After further discussion, the Board agreed to decide on the composition of the review
committee at a later date.
County Manager O’Neal advised that the documents would be prepared and presented to the
Board on March 27, 2000.
BREAK
Chairman Caster called a break from 8:50 p.m. until 9:10 p.m.
AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH AWARDING CONTRACTS TO JACOBS
ENGINEERING, INC. TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THREE CAPITAL
PROJECTS AT THE WASTEC FACILITY
County Manager O’Neal requested the Board to consider awarding a contract to Jacobs
Engineering, Inc. in the amount of $112,000 to perform engineering services for three capital projects
that need to be completed in order to comply with EPA emission guidelines. The projects include
replacement of the Electrostatic Precipitators on Boilers #1 and #2 with baghouses, upgrade of the
constant emissions monitoring system (CEMS)and installation of an activated carbon injection system
on Boiler #3. The total cost of the capital projects is estimated at $1,500,000.
Commissioner Birzenieks commented on having to leave the meeting on Monday night, and
he asked if the Board was being requested to award the engineering contract for the three upgrades
and stated that he was not prepared to vote on whether to close the WASTEC Facility.
Vice-Chairman Greer advised that in order for the WASTEC Facility to be in compliance with
EPA regulations, the work should be completed by November. The question before the Board is
whether this amount of money should be spent if WASTEC is to be closed. Vice-Chairman Greer
stated after serving on the Solid Waste Advisory Committee for a number of years and studying the
issue, he felt incineration was too costly and the facility should be closed He stressed the importance
of everyone understanding that the employees and Administrative Staff at the WASTEC Facility have
performed an exceptional job in operating the facility; however incineration is not cost-effective.
Motion:
Vice-Chairman Greer MOVED to close the WASTEC Facility between now and November
19, 2000. NO SECOND WAS RECEIVED AND THE MOTION FAILED.
Discussion was held on the recommendation of the Solid Waste Advisory Committee. Vice-
Chairman Greer advised that the recommendation was to allow the WASTEC Facility to remain open
and to adopt the Charleston plan. Under this plan, a fee would be charged for disposal of solid waste
on the tax bill. Each individual will be responsible for contracting with a private hauler to collect
garbage.
Commissioner Davis commented on the Charleston plan and stated it would be logical for the
County to establish a county-wide trash collection system through contracting with private haulers
to provide yard waste pickup and recycling. This plan would save space in the Landfill and prevent
the costly process of closing and constructing new landfill cells.
Motion:
Commissioner Davis MOVED, SECONDED by Chairman Caster, to allow the WASTEC
NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOOK 27
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2000 AND PAGE 855
CONTINUED MEETING HELD ON MARCH 15, 2000
Facility to remain open and to adopt the Charleston plan as recommended by the Solid Waste
Advisory Committee.
Commissioner Howell said that he was not ready to support the Charleston Plan or to close
the WASTEC Facility. Incineration is costly, he said, but it appears that citizens are willing to pay
for what they feel is a more environmentally safe method of disposal.
Chairman Caster advised that the Board could award the contracts as recommended by the
Environmental Management Department and then allow time to fully study the Charleston plan.
Director Church, requested the Board to consider awarding the contracts so the WASTEC
Facility will be in compliance by November 19, 2000. He also requested the Board to take time to
review and study the Charleston plan because many issues have to be addressed before moving
forward with this plan.
A lengthy discussion was held on a user fee system. Director church explained that a user fee
does not have to be tied to a specific disposal system. The user fee system will control the amount
of trash received and insure that trash is coming from New Hanover County.
Amended Motion:AMENDED HIS MOTION,
Commissioner Davis to allow the WASTEC
Facility to remain open, award the contract to Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. in an amount not to
exceed $112,000 to perform engineering services for the three capital improvement projects at the
WASTEC Facility, authorize the Chairman to execute the necessary contracts, and direct Staff to
check into a user-fee based system.
Further discussion was held on preserving space in the New Hanover County Landfill.
Director Church advised that after four hurricanes, they have learned it is not possible to burn wet
trash. The best method is to contract with the Sampson County Landfill and a local waste hauler to
allow WASTEC to operate as a transfer station. In the past, waste was re-loaded onto trucks and
sent to the Sampson County Landfill. The key issue is that waste was carried out of the County
under the control of the Environmental Management Department. If trash collection is not under the
control of the County, haulers can carry the trash out of the county and revenues will be reduced.
AMENDED MOTION. MOTION
Chairman Caster called for a vote on the Upon vote, the
CARRIED
by a 4 to 1 vote.
Vice-Chairman Greer voted in opposition.
Director Church expressed appreciation to the Board for the decision rendered and he thanked
the employees at the Environmental Management Department for the outstanding work they perform.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Caster called for a motion to adjourn.
Motion
: Commissioner Howell MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Greer, to adjourn. Upon
vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Chairman Caster adjourned the meeting at 9:31 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lucie F. Harrell
Clerk to the Board