Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-03-13 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