Loading...
2004-02-02 Regular Meeting NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 894 ASSEMBLY The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met in Regular Session on Monday, February 2, 2004, at 5:30 p.m. in the Assembly Room of the New Hanover County Courthouse, 24 North Third Street, Wilmington, North Carolina. Members present were: Chairman Robert G. Greer; Vice-Chairman Julia Boseman; Commissioner William A. Caster; Commissioner Ted Davis, Jr.; Commissioner Nancy H. Pritchett; County Manager, Allen ONeal; County = Attorney, Wanda M. Copley; and Clerk to the Board, Lucie F. Harrell. Chairman Greer called the meeting to order and welcomed everyone present. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Reverend Steven E. Hein, Pastor at St. Andrews Covenant Presbyterian Church, gave the invocation. Commissioner Caster led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA Chairman Greer asked if any member of the Board would like to discuss or remove an item from the Consent Agenda. Vice-Chairman Boseman requested to be recused from voting on Consent Agenda Item 3 because of a personal conflict. Motion: Commissioner Caster MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Pritchett, to recuse Vice-Chairman Boseman from voting on Item 3 on the Consent Agenda Item. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED 4 TO 0. After hearing no further comments, Chairman Greer called for a motion to approve the items on the Consent Agenda with removal of Item 3. Motion: Commissioner Caster MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Boseman, to remove Item 3 for a separate vote and approve the remaining items on the Consent Agenda as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSENT AGENDA Adoption of Resolution Requesting the N. C. Department of Transportation to Add Hilliard Court in Marymount at Marsh Oaks Subdivision to the State Highway System The Commissioners adopted a resolution requesting the N. C. Department of Transportation to add Hilliard Court in Marymount at Marsh Oaks Subdivision to the State Highway System. A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XXVIII, Page 24.1. Acceptance of FEMA Fire Act Grant in the Amount of $480,500 for Fire Services and Approval of Associated Budget Amendment # 04-0141 The Commissioners accepted Fire Act funding from FEMA for Fire Services to replace the self-contained breathing apparatuses (air packs), and approved the associated Budget Amendment. The grant will allow the upgrade of aged equipment and the ability to better meet current National Fire Protection Association Standards for fire fighter safety and accountability. The Countys match for the $480,500 grant is $144,150, which is available in = the departments budget. = Budget Amendment # 04-0141-Fire Services Adjustment Debit Credit FEMA Fire Act $336,350 Administrative Reserve$144,150 Capital Outlay - Equipment$ 9,500 Fire Expense$403,000 Motor Vehicle Purchase$ 65,000 Computer Expenses$ 3,000 Explanation: To budget FEMA grant funds. Approval of Budget Amendment # 04-0132-Juvenile Crime Prevention Council The Commissioners approved the following budget amendment: Budget Amendment #04-0132-Juvenile Crime Prevention Council AdjustmentDebitCredit Juvenile Justice State Funds$4,454 Miscellaneous$4,454 Explanation: To budget State Juvenile Crime Prevention Council funds for administrative funding. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 895 Approval of Budget Amendment # 04-0133-Various The Commissioners approved the following budget amendment: Budget Amendment #04-0133-Various Adjustment Debit Credit General Fund: Transfer In$1,742,498 Principal $ 885,800 Interest $ 826,950 Installment Debt $ 29,748 Public School Fund: Principal $340,799 Interest $934,589 Transfer to General Fund $1,275,388 Water and Sewer District: Interest $247,003 Installment Debt$ 22,997 Principal $ 270,000 Environmental Management Fund: Interest on Bonded Debt $467,110 Transfer to General Fund$ 467,110 Explanation: To adjust debt service between funds as a result of refunding of 2003 General Obligation Bonds. Approval of Budget Amendment # 04-0137- Department of Social Services The Commissioners approved the following budget amendment: Budget Amendment #04-0137-Social Services AdjustmentDebitCredit Share the Care Contributions$10,000 Share the Care Day Care Services$10,000 Explanation: Received additional local contributions from the partnership for day care services. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEM 3 - SETTLEMENT OF THE BILLY EARL, BEAU RIVAGE PLANTATION, INC., ET AL VS. NEW HANOVER COUNTY, ET AL, CASE NO. 03 CVS 3589 Commissioner Caster stated that if each member of the Board was satisfied with the final document, he would make a motion to approve the settlement agreement. Chairman Greer asked if any member of the Board would like to comment. Hearing no comments, Chairman Greer called for a motion to approve settlement agreement. Motion: Commissioner Caster MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Pritchett, to approve a settlement agreement of the Billy Earl, Beau Rivage Plantation, Inc., et al vs. New Hanover County et al, Case No. 03 CVS3589 in accordance with action taken during the Closed Session held by the Board of County Commissioners on January 20, 2004. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED 4 to 0. Vice-Chairman Boseman had been recused from voting on this matter by the Board of County Commissioners. A copy of the settlement agreement is on file in the Legal Department. ADOPTION OF PROCLAMATION DECLARING FEBRUARY 2004 AS HUMAN RELATIONS MONTH Chairman Greer read the proclamation into the record declaring February 2004 as Human Relations Month and requested a motion to approve the proclamation. Motion: Commissioner Pritchett MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Boseman, to adopt the proclamation Human Relations Month declaring February 2004 as in New Hanover County. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. City Council Member Leitha Hankins, Chairperson of the Human Relations Commission, expressed appreciation for adopting the proclamation and stated it is hoped that these words would perpetuate human relations among all people. She advised that the Interfaith Festival was held yesterday and was quite successful and stated that Human Relations School Day would be held tomorrow featuring the youth of our community. The Human Relations Awards Banquet will be held on February 28, 2004 to recognize citizens who have promoted Human Relations. She urged all citizens to promote human relations in the community for twelve months out of the year. Mr. Carl Byrd, Sr., Director of Human Relations, announced that the guest speaker for Human Relations Awards Ceremony will be N. C Attorney General Roy Cooper. He advised that Attorney General Cooper led the effort against predatory lending with North Carolina being the first state in the nation to fight against these types of loans being practiced across the country. He invited all citizens to attend the Awards Banquet to be held on February 28, 2004, 7:00 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 896 p.m. in the Warwick Center, University of North Carolina at Wilmington. On behalf of the Board, Chairman Greer presented the proclamation to Director Byrd and Chairperson Lethia Hankins and he expressed appreciation to them for services provided to our community by the Human Relations Commission. In closing, Director Byrd advised that his son, Carl Byrd, Jr., was improving after being in a serious automobile accident. He expressed appreciation, on behalf of his family, for the many prayers that have been received from members of the Board, Administrative Staff, and employees of New Hanover County. A copy of the resolution is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XXVIII, Page 24.2 SECOND READING OF AMBULANCE SERVICE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT SUBMITTED BY COASTLINE CARE, INC. Attorney Gary Shipman, representing Coastline Care, Inc., reported that an application for a franchise was submitted by Coastline Care, Inc. based upon the perception of a need for non-emergency ambulance transport services in New Hanover County. A survey was conducted and it confirmed there was a need, which was made a part of the record at the first reading of the franchise ordinance held on January 20, 2004. The survey indicated that out of 60 participants responding to the survey, 60% believed there was a need for non-emergency ambulance transport services in New Hanover County and 74% believed that those needs were not presently being served by New Hanover Regional Medical Center. He requested the Board to adopt the franchise ordinance. Chairman Greer asked if any member of the Board would like to comment. Hearing no comments, Chairman Greer called for a motion. Motion: Vice-Chairman Boseman MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Caster, to grant an ambulance service franchise to Coastline Care, Inc. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the franchise agreement is on file in the County Attorneys Office = CONSIDERATION OF REVISION TO LOCAL EMERGENCY PLANNING COMMITTEE (LEPC) BY- LAWS AND APPOINTMENT OF A COMMISSIONER TO SERVE ON THE COMMITTEE Director of Emergency Management Warren Lee reported that the Federal Superfund Amendments and Re-authorization Act ( SARA), require all local governments to establish and operate a Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC), to address storage, transportation and response to hazardous chemical events. As required by law, The New Hanover County Department of Emergency Management has supported the LEPC since 1986. The LEPC is composed of representatives from all sectors of the community including industry, business, responders, citizens, environmental groups, state and local officials, and the media. The goal of the LEPC is to insure coordination, communication, and cooperation in preparing and responding to hazardous chemical events. The LEPCs By-Laws were last revised in 1998. The current revisions primarily reflect changes in the standing = committees of the LEPC . The LEPC also requests that the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners appoint one of its members to serve in an "elected official" position on the LEPC. Chairman Greer asked if any member of the Board would like to comment. Hearing no comments, he called a motion. Motion: Vice-Chairman Boseman MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Caster, to approve revisions to the Local Emergency Planning Committee By-Laws as recommended by the Emergency Management Director. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Chairman Greer asked if any member of the Board would like to serve on the Local Emergency Planning Committee. Consensus: After discussion of the elected official not having to attend every meeting, it was the consensus of the Board to appoint Chairman Greer to serve as the elected official on the Local Emergency Planning Committee. A copy of the revisions to the Local Emergency Planning Committee By-Laws are on file in the New Hanover County Emergency Management Department. DISCUSSION OF TIME SCHEDULE FOR ITEMS ON THE REGULAR AGENDA After noting that the Board was ahead of the time scheduled for next item on the Regular Agenda, Chairman Greer expressed concern for not being able to move forward with the first Public Hearing because it was scheduled at 6:00 p.m. He requested the Planning Director to use language in the advertisement for zoning cases to state that the time listed for each agenda item is estimated and in the event that a preceding item takes less time, the Board of County Commissioners will move forward with the next item. Planning Director Hayes responded that he would be glad to include this verbiage in the next advertisement for zoning cases. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF UPDATE OF THE CAMA LAND USE PLAN NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 897 Planning Director Dexter Hayes reported that New Hanover County and the City of Wilmington are scheduled to update the jointly prepared CAMA Land Use Plan. A Citizen Participation Plan (CPP) has been compiled which will be used to guide City and County Staff through the overall process. The CPP fulfills requirements set forth in 15A NCAC 7L .0506 by designating a lead planning group and defining the methods to be used for reporting information and gathering public input. The public participation will probably begin in early spring or early summer. The CAMA guidelines require that the Citizen Participation Plan be adopted by the local governing board. The City Council has already adopted the plan. In closing, Planning Director Hayes requested the Board to approve the update of the CAMA Land Use Plan. Chairman Greer asked if the beach communities were involved in the process. Planning Director Hayes advised that each beach community has its own Land Use Plan. Discussion was held on conducting a Public Opinion Survey. Planning Director Hayes advised that Staff is working with some professors at UNCW to conduct a survey locally to identify the opinions of the registered voters in New Hanover County regarding major issues relating to growth and development. Some of the same questions have been asked every five years and the major issues have been transportation, water quality and environmental issues. The survey provides a good basis to receive information from the public. Further discussion was held on the appointment of the Advisory Panel. Planning Director Hayes explained that the Advisory Panel would be comprised of eight (8) members. The City Council, City Planning Commission, Board of County Commissioners and County Planning Board will each appoint two members, one of which may be a sitting member of the appointing body, and at least one of which should be a member of the public at large to represent diverse interests. Commissioner Caster advised that he had served on the previous Advisory Panel and stated that he would like to serve on this panel. Commissioner Pritchett advised that she would also be interested serving on the Advisory Panel to provide some diversity. Planning Director Hayes noted that appointments did not need to be made until late spring or early summer. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Greer called for a motion. Motion: Commissioner Caster MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Pritchett, to adopt the Citizen Participation Plan defining the Countys role in disseminating and collecting public information in the CAMA Land Use Plan = Update. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Chairman Greer advised that two Commissioners have expressed an interest in serving on the Advisory Panel and asked if the Board would like to address this issue. After discussion, the Board agreed to wait to make the appointment at a later date. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST FROM STROUD ENGINEERING FOR THE PALM BEACH DEVELOPMENT GROUP TO OBTAIN A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A TWO- STORY, 18 UNIT HIGH DENSITY PROJECT IN AN R-15 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT LOCATED AT 1050 DUNHILL LANE BEHIND THE AMERIHOST INN & SUITES AT MONKEY JUNCTION (S-513, 01/04) Chairman Greer opened the Public Hearing and announced that the special use process requires a quasi- judicial hearing; therefore, any person wishing to testify must be sworn in by the Clerk to the Board. He requested all persons who signed in or want to present testimony to step forward to be sworn in. The following persons were sworn in: Dexter Hayes, Planning Director Jay Hutchings Cindee Wolf James H. Fentress, Jr. Chairman Greer requested Planning Director Hayes to make the Staff presentation. Planning Director Hayes presented a map and pictures of the site with surrounding commercial and residential uses including the Amerihost Inn property. He reported at the Planning Board meeting held on January 1, 2004, the applicant, Ms. Cindee Wolf, reviewed the site plan and explained that the proposed project now incorporates a two-story building instead of a three-story building with only one access point from Carolina Beach Road. Some residents from the nearby Brewster Place Subdivision commented and said they preferred the revised plan to the previous plan; however, they still had concerns about the swimming pool and the plant material along Chilmark Court. Ms. Wolf presented a conceptual landscape plan and the Planning Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval. 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: NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 898 A.The subject property is located within the Myrtle Grove Volunteer Fire District. B.The site will be served by City water and County Sewer. C.Access to the site is from Carolina Beach Road which is classified by the New Hanover County Thoroughfare Classification Plan as an arterial road. 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 site is located in an R-15 Residential Zoning District. High Density Development is permitted by Special Use Permit in the R-15 District. B.A site plan which meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance has been submitted and reviewed. C.The County Engineering Department has indicated that the existing detention pond shown on the plan has sufficient capacity to meet the Countys Stormwater Regulations. Stormwater = requirements and water and sewer will be further reviewed when construction plans are submitted. D.All required landscaping and buffering can be accommodated. 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 subject property is zoned R-15 Residential and is adjacent to an existing commercial district occupied by the Amerihost Inn. B.High Density development is permitted within the R-15 District provided the land is classified developed or urban transition and there is access to a major or minor arterial. The subject property is classified developed and access is provided from Carolina Beach Road. C.The nearby Brewster Place Subdivision is zoned R-10 Residential with a density of 3.3 dwelling units per acre. D.The required landscaping and buffering is sufficient to protect the Brewster Place residents. E.No evidence has been presented that the proposed use will injure the value of adjoining or abutting property values. F.The subject property is a transitional property between higher intensity commercial uses and the medium density R-10 Brewster Place Subdivision. 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 site is classified as developed by the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and is within the urban growth boundaries. The purpose of the developed class is to provide for continued intensive development and redevelopment of existing urban areas. Urban services are already in place or scheduled within the immediate future. B. Housing policies in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan state that: The County and City shall A continue to support and enhance a broad range of affordable housing programs and increase affordable rental housing. @ Planning Director Hayes presented the following issues: 1.) NCDOT Driveway permits are required. One existing driveway on the Service Road shall be closed. The three parking spaces along the new entrance shall be removed. Additional roadway improvements may be required when the adjacent property to the south is developed. 2.) Staff continues to recommend a secondary access on Dunhill Lane, which was provided with the three-story building, and a smaller footprint on the site. Chairman Greer asked if Staffs concerns had been addressed. = Planning Director Hayes responded that it would be nice to have a secondary access for emergency vehicles; however, with only 18 units, the single driveway will be sufficient. The property can be accessed from Carolina Beach Road and the shared drive with Amerihost Inn. Commissioner Davis asked if the request was consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Planning Director Hayes responded that the request was consistent with the Land Use Plan. Commissioner Pritchett asked if Fire Services was satisfied that a prompt response could be made if a fire occurred. Planning Director Hayes responded that after contacting Fire Services, it was felt that the access would be sufficient to respond to a fire incident. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Greer asked if the petitioner would like to present testimony. Ms. Cindee Wolf, representing the Palm Beach Development Group, spoke on appearing before the Board of County Commissioners on December 2, 2003 and stated there was some concern by neighbors about construction of a three-story building. At this meeting, the neighbors indicated they would be pleased with a two-story building, but the developer was not sure that he could commit to a two-story building and still preserve the density. In the past two months, meetings have been held with the neighbors and discussion has been held with the NCDOT to eliminate the access on Dunhill Lane, and an agreement has been reached to work out the details on the Amerihost Inn driveway that had previously been dedicated to be closed. The site plan has been revised with the same 18 units with elimination of two of the 2-bedroom units in favor of two 1-bedroom units. The developer has done everything possible to address the concerns of the neighbors. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 899 Ms. Wolf referenced the landscaping and stated that a 6-foot high solid wood fence would be erected along the boundary with landscaping, including a 6-foot solid wood fence along one boundary of the pool. Chairman Greer asked if the concerns of the neighbors had been addressed. Ms. Wolf advised that she felt the issues of concern had been addressed. In closing, Ms. Wolf advised that the developer concurs with the finding of facts presented by the Planning Director, and she offered to answer questions. Commissioner Davis complimented Ms. Wolf and developer for the effort made to work with the neighbors to address issues of concern. He asked if the concerns about the swimming pool and plant material along Chilmark Court had been addressed. Ms. Wolf advised that a 6-foot high buffer would be provided to serve as a screen for the pond. The pond may not be as beautifully maintained as desired at this time, but when the developer constructs the building, the pond should be better maintained in order for the apartments to be rented. There is street yard landscaping along the entire boundary of Dunhill Lane with a 50% visual screening. This access will also provide a means for emergency vehicles to access the building. The fence has been extended across the front of the pool to provide visual screening and noise during summer months. Mr. Jay Hutchings, representing the Palm Beach Development Group, spoke on Ms. Wolf accurately explaining issues and he expressed appreciation to the Board of County Commissioners for their time and effort given to hear his request. Chairman Greer advised that since no one had signed up to speak in opposition, he would close the Public Hearing. Chairman Greer asked if any member of the Board would like to comment. Hearing no comments, Chairman Greer requested direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Caster MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Boseman, to approve a Special Use Permit for the Palm Beach Development Group to construct a two-story, 18 unit high density project in an R-15 Residential District located at 1050 Dunhill Lane behind the Amerihost Inn at Monkey Junction based upon the evidence and findings of fact concluding that: (1) the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety if located where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and approved; (2) the use meets all required conditions and specifications of the Zoning Ordinance; (3) the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining property or abutting property or that the use is a public necessity; and (4) the location and character of the use if developed according to the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in general conformity with the plan of development for New Hanover County. 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 22.1 ACTION DEFERRED ON A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST FROM ESTHER LEE FOR LANDOWNER CHARLES FOY TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 3.09 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE 7700 BLOCK OF MARKET STREET NORTH OF MERCER MARINE AND SOUTH OF THE WAHOO WILLYS RESTAURANT FROM R-15 RESIDENTIAL TO B-2 HIGHWAY BUSINESS = (Z-771, 01/04) Chairman Greer opened the Public Hearing and requested Planning Director Hayes to make the Staff presentation. Director Dexter Hayes presented a map and slides of the 3.09 acre tract surrounded on three sides by existing commercial zoning with a small piece of property on the north side zoned R-15 Residential. He advised that the request is to rezone the parcel located in the 7700 block of Market Street from R-15 Residential to B-2 Highway Business. The subject property is a long narrow parcel approximately 120 feet wide by approximately 1,130 feet long. Approximately half of the northern boundary is adjacent to an existing B-2 District established in 1984. The southern boundary is also adjacent to an existing B-2 Highway Business District established in 1997. The front part of the parcel is adjacent to a B-2 District established later in 1997. This area was zoned B-2 Business in anticipation of future commercial development. The property is classified as Resource Protection because it drains into the headwaters of the Pages Creek area; therefore, there are environmental concerns about the impact of stormwater. Any development on the property should be exceptionally designed. Planning Director Hayes advised that with this being a transitional area of wetlands and Class IV soils along the back 800 feet of the property, it would be better to leave the land undisturbed to provide additional buffering and protection for residential property to the north. Staff recommended that the B-2 Zoning District should extend to the SHOD Boundary or no further than the district line to the north. Prior to Ms. Esther Lee presenting her rezoning request to the Planning Board, Staff explained to the Planning Board that the petitioner was not the property owner and stated that she did not represent Mr. Charles Foy, the property owner. At the Planning Board meeting held on January 8, 2004, Ms. Lee, an adjacent property owner to the north, presented the request to the Planning Board and no one spoke in opposition. After some discussion about the effect of NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 900 the rezoning on the subject property and adjacent properties, a motion was made to deny the request which failed by a vote of 2 to 5. Following further discussion, a substitute motion was made to recommend approval of the rezoning to the depth of the zoning district line to the north and passed by a vote of 5 to 2. Discussion followed on the petitioner not being the property owner. Planning Director Hayes explained that very seldom does an adjacent property owner request a zoning change for an abutting property; however, with surrounding commercial uses around the subject property, the front of the property should be rezoned to B-2 Business. He advised that Mr. Charles Foy was notified by mail and Senior Planner Baird Stewart discussed the proposed rezoning with Mr. Foy by telephone in Bronx, New York. Mr. Foy did inform Mr. Stewart that no one was representing him, but he did not commit on whether he did or did not want the property rezoned. Commissioner Pritchett asked if Mr. Foy was informed that the property would be rezone B-2 Business to the SHOD boundary line with the back portion remaining residential. Planning Director Hayes responded that this information was not communicated to Mr. Foy because this was discussed later during the Planning Board meeting. He also noted that the property does not have an established access to Market Street. The property currently has a cart way or prescriptive use access to Market Street. In the next zoning case to be heard tonight, the adjacent property owner will be required to design a plan that would provide access from the subject property to Market Street. Commissioner Pritchett asked if the request for the rezoning was largely due to setbacks. Planning Director Hayes responded that Ms. Esther Lee would be able to answer this question. Chairman Greer advised that Ms. Esther Lee, the petitioner, had signed up to speak, and he requested her to step forward and present her remarks. Ms. Esther Lee, the owner of property located at 7770 Market Street, which joins the property that is being requested to be rezoned, stated that the property is bound on the north, south and west by commercial uses. The property is has no road frontage and it can only be used for a single-family dwelling. Due to the narrow width and length of the property, wetlands, and Class IV soils in the rear of the site, the land is not suitable for any type of residential development. It is felt that a single-family dwelling would not be the most logical use of the property. The property is currently vacant and after conversations with the owner, Mr. Charles Foy, he has insinuated that he has no plans for any imminent use of the property. Ms. Lee stated as an adjacent property owner with a growing business, she felt that she is being unfairly impacted by the business and residential zoning regulations. The purpose for requesting the property be rezoned is to allow the highest and best use of the land. Rezoning the property to B-2 Business will not have an adverse impact on the value or status of Mr. Foys property, but it will increase its value and flexibility for future development. = Ms. Lee advised that it was difficult to deal with zoning dividing a single parcel of land. She stated that the proposed rezoning would be consistent with the boundary of the adjacent lot and the property should be rezoned as recommended by the Planning Board. Mr. Kenneth Shanklin, an attorney representing Ms. Esther Lee, recalled that when he was a member of the Planning Board, he remembered rezoning the tracts of land to B-2 Business in1997. At that time the Planning Board tried to address gaps of zoning between tracts. Many of those tracts were rezoned to provide the right zoning for the entire area in the future. He requested the Board to consider rezoning the entire strip to B-2 Business from R-15 Residential because this lot should not remain residentially zoned. In closing, Attorney Shanklin advised that under Section 111-1 of the Zoning Ordinance, the rezoning can be initiated by any member of the Planning Board, Zoning Board of Adjustment, or any one or more interested parties. This regulation would clearly allow Ms. Lee to submit the petition to rezone the property. Mr. John Lare, a partner in development of the property to the south of the subject property, advised that he would benefit by rezoning this land to B-2 Business because there is plan to develop this parcel. An offer has been made to Mr. Charles Foy to use the access across his property through an easement. The side yard buffer zone would be helpful in developing the property. If Mr. Foys property is not rezoned, his company will lose several = apartment units. He also noted that water and sewer would cross the easement which would assist Mr. Foy to better use his property. In closing, Mr. Lare requested the Board to consider rezoning the property owned by Mr. Foy. Vice-Chairman Boseman asked Mr. Lare if he had made an offer to purchase the land from Mr. Foy. Mr. Lare responded that numerous letters and calls had been made to Mr. Foy about purchasing the land. The company hired a private detective to find Mr. Foy and when he was located in New York, Mr. Foy stated that he was not interested in doing anything with the land. Mr. Foy also noted that he would contact the company if he planned to develop the property. A letter was also forwarded to Mr. Foy about the proposed rezoning and an offer made to purchase the property, but no response was received. Vice-Chairman Boseman commented on the length and narrow width of the property and asked Planning Director Hayes if Mr. Foys property is rezoned B-2 Business, whether it could be used for any type of commercial = development. Planning Director Hayes responded that if the property is rezoned B-2 Business with the back 800 feet NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 901 remaining residential, Mr. Foy could construct a 5,000 to 6,000 square foot building on the site. If the property remains residentially zoned, the land cannot be developed until access is provided to the site. Commissioner Caster spoke on having an uncomfortable feeling about the owner not being the person requesting the rezoning and stated after hearing discussion at the Agenda Review Meeting on Thursday and discussion tonight, he felt it would be better to rezone the property to B-2 Business as recommended by the Planning Board. Commissioner Pritchett spoke on being uncomfortable with rezoning the property until there is some documentation showing that Mr. Foy is aware of the proposed rezoning. Planning Director Hayes advised that Mr. Foy was notified several times about the rezoning and the Planning Staff did speak to him. By law, the Planning Staff is required to notify the property owner about the rezoning and this has been done. Commissioner Davis spoke on understanding the points made by the various speakers about the need to rezone the property, but stated that ownership is sacred. He advised that it would be difficult for him to support rezoning a piece of property when the request was not made by the property owner. Chairman Greer advised that rezoning the property to B-2 Business would be the most logical zoning for the property because it is surrounded by commercial uses. Since Mr. Foy has not said the property should not be rezoned, the Zoning Ordinance does allow for the property to be rezoned by another interested party. Commissioner Pritchett stated in all due respect to efforts made by the Planning Staff and Mr. Lare, there is no way to know if the person contacted and found by the detective was Mr. Foy. Mr. Lare responded that an overnight letter was mailed to Mr. Foy in December and he was notified of the rezoning. When talking to Mr. Foy on the phone, he said that he had no interest in developing the site and that he had contacted his relatives about the rezoning. If the property is not rezoned, Mr. Foy will have no access to his property. The taxes have been paid and the tax bill is forwarded to the same address in Bronx, New York. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Greer closed the Public Hearing. Motion: After commenting on feeling uncomfortable about the notification process, Commissioner Pritchett MOVED to defer action until some documentation is received from Mr. Foy saying that he was not opposed to rezoning the property. Commissioner Davis asked if the petition is denied whether the applicant would have to wait a period of time before resubmitting the petition. Planning Director Hayes responded that the applicant would have to wait twelve months. Substitute Motion: Chairman Greer MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Caster, to approve the request submitted by Esther Lee to rezone approximately 3.09 acres of property located in the 7700 block of Market Street to the depth of the zoning district line to the north as recommended by the Planning Board. Vice-Chairman Boseman expressed concern for not hearing from Mr. Foy and stated that she could not vote on the substitute motion. She suggested deferring action. Attorney Kenneth Shanklin spoke on understanding the concerns by the Board and requested the Board to defer action for a month to allow him time to notify Mr. Foy by certified mail with a return receipt requested and forward a package by federal express to his house to be sure that he receives notification. Chairman Greer withdrew his motion. Commissioner Pritchett also withdrew her motion. Consensus: It was the consensus of the Board to defer action on the rezoning petition until the March 8, 2004 meeting. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST BY DESIGN SOLUTIONS FOR OGDEN TWELVE, LLC TO OBTAIN A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS AND RESIDENTIAL USES IN AN EXISTING B-2 HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT LOCATED AT 7720 MARKET STREET ON THE EAST SIDE OF MARKET STREET ADJACENT AND NORTH OF MERCER MARINE (S-511, 01/04) Chairman Greer opened the Public Hearing and announced that the special use process requires a quasi- judicial hearing; therefore, any person wishing to testify must be sworn in by the Clerk to the Board. He requested all persons who signed in to speak or who want to present testimony to step forward to be sworn in. The following persons were sworn in: Dexter Hayes, Planning Director John Lare Kenneth Shanklin Cindee Wolf John A. Kuske, III, P. E. Lonnie A. Williams, Jr. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 902 Chairman Greer requested Planning Director Dexter Hayes to make the Staff presentation. Planning Director Dexter Hayes showed a map and slides of the site and surrounding properties and reported that the Special Use Permit is being requested for a neighborhood business residential use. The property is located in the Bayshore area on Market Street across from Alexander Road. The commercial uses will be on the front of the property with residential uses in the back of the property. There are wetlands with a small tributary and free flowing stream that discharges drainage from the western side of Market Street that eventually empties into Pages Creek. He reported that since this is a mixed use project, a Special Use Permit is required. At the Planning Board meeting held on January 8, 2004, Ms. Cindee Wolf from Design Solutions presented the request and reviewed the site plan. Mr. Lonnie Williams, Jr., an attorney representing an adjacent commercial property owner, spoke in opposition to the proposed project, stating that residential uses in this intensive commercial district were not in harmony with the area. Attorney Williams also expressed concern for the buffer requirements affecting his clients ability to redevelop their property. Attorney Williams requested that the burden = for the buffering between commercial and residential be applied to the subject property and not to his clients = property. The Planning Board discussed the potential buffering issues and building setbacks with regard to all of the surrounding properties. Ultimately the Planning Board voted 5-1 to recommend approval with the following five conditions: 1) A 20 foot buffer in accordance with the buffering standards of Section 67 of the Zoning ordinance shall be provided along the southern property line which shall satisfy any potential buffering requirements that could result from redevelopment on the Howell tract to the south. 2) The developer shall make all improvements recommended in the traffic impact analysis. 3) Every effort should be made to preserve regulated trees. Transplanting of smaller onsite trees should be considered to fulfill some of the landscaping requirements. 4) The Department of Fire Services has requested onsite installation of six (6) fire hydrants or sureties guaranteeing their installation. 5) Access shall be provided through the property to the Foy tract to the north. Planning Director Hayes presented the following findings of facts: 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 of fact: A. The subject property is located within the Ogden Volunteer Fire District. B. Proposed access to the site is from Market Street (US 17), which is classified as an arterial road. C. Connection to County water and sewer is proposed. Water and Sewer construction plans will be required. 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 B-2 Highway Business. Neighborhood Commercial uses are permitted within the B-2 District, and Residential uses are permitted by Special Use Permit in the B-2 District. B. Commercial uses shall be limited to those uses permitted by right in the B-1 Neighborhood Business District. The B-2 uses would be lost and limited to B-1 uses. C. Setbacks for the first 500 feet of the project are subject to the Special Highway Overlay District requirements. A site plan meeting the setback and buffer requirements of the Ordinance has been submitted. Additional setbacks and buffering may be required if the adjacent rezoning request to the north is not successful. D. There are 156 proposed residential units. The overall commercial square footage proposed is 21,600 square feet. E. A traffic impact analysis has been submitted and reviewed for the project. F. Stormwater management will be handled through a combination of underground infiltration and a pond. Detailed plans will be reviewed by The County Engineering Department during the Construction Plan phase. G. The swamp forest area on the southeast portion of the property is entirely preserved and a Conservation Overlay District setback has been shown on the site plan. H. There are a host of regulated and significant trees onsite. The project is subject to landscaping and tree protection requirements of Section 67 of the Zoning Ordinance. I. Signage for the project is subject to the Special Highway Overlay District requirements. 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 buffer strips shown on the site plan meet the minimum requirements of the Ordinance, however, stormwater management ponds are not permitted within the buffer area. B. The adjacent property to the north is vacant. The large property to the east is occupied by one dwelling unit. The property to the south is occupied by two different commercial businesses. C. No evidence has been presented to show that the proposed project will negatively affect adjoining property values. 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 for New Hanover County based upon the following findings: A. The site is classified as Resource Protection by the New Hanover County Comprehensive Land Use NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 903 Plan and is within the urban growth boundaries. The purpose of the Resource Protection class is to provide for the preservation and protection of important natural, historic, scenic, wildlife and recreational resources. B. The property was rezoned from residential to highway business in 1997. C. Housing policies in the Wilmington-New Hanover County Comprehensive Land Use Plan state that The County and City shall continue to support and enhance a broad range of affordable A housing programs and increase affordable rental housing. @ Planning Director Hayes reported that NCDOT also expressed the following concerns which were included in the Planning Boards recommendation: = 1) Due to the volume of traffic generated, this will be forwarded to Congestion Management in Raleigh for review upon submission for a driveway permit. 2) Provide stub outs for inter-connectivity to adjacent parcels. 3) Install directional crossover/left-over to restrict exiting left turns. 4) Based on the projected volumes, this development will probably require a traffic signal warrant analysis. 5) The US 17 corridor is being studied for access management improvements. Any driveway permit application will also be reviewed by the Regional Traffic Engineer. Although full movement or entering left turns are permitted now, this may be restricted in the future Commissioner Davis asked if the proposed project was consistent with the Land Use Plan. Planning Director Hayes responded that the use was consistent with the Land Use Plan. Chairman Greer referenced Item 2(a) and 2(b) under Staffs preliminary findings and noted that 2(a) refers = to B-2 Highway Business zoning and 2(b) refers to B-1 Neighborhood Business zoning. He asked if B-2 or B-1 zoning is being requested. Planning Director Hayes explained that B-2 zoning is being requested; however, since this is a mixed use project and residential uses are being added within the B-2 District, the uses are downgraded to only B-1 neighborhood uses. Chairman Greer requested Ms. Cindee Wolf to step forward to testify on behalf of the petitioner. Ms. Cindee Wolf, representing the petitioner, advised that since Mr. Foys property was not rezoned a slight = modification would have to be made to the site plan. Ms. Wolf reported that the proposed property is already rezoned B-2, which means it could be developed for a used car lot with a high degree of impervious surfaces. The developer is taking advantage of an ordinance amendment that was adopted in the past year to allow some residential uses within a business district under certain circumstances. Since the B-2 property lies in the Resource Protection Classification, the owners have proposed a combination of residential and lower impact commercial or office type uses in a master plan for the tract as an alternative to the high impact uses permitted in the B-2 Highway District. The integration of residential uses in a business district is permitted if it can be a unified design. The developers have provided an attractive facility that will take advantage of the road corridor exposure and transitions back to lower density residential properties to the back and to Bayshore Estates. Access for the development will be from Market Street as required by the NCDOT. The commercial section of the project incorporates three one and two story buildings with convenient parking and walkways. The apartment complexes consist of nine three story buildings housing two bedroom, two bath residential units. An amenity area has been incorporated with a clubhouse, pool, and a gazebo in the common area. The entire development will have similar design and appearance which will be controlled by architectural standards and restrictive covenants enforced by the owners or an owners association if the commercial space becomes condominiums. The association would be comprised of representatives from the apartment complex or management authority and the owners of the commercial space. The project has access to the Countys public water system and sewer system, and preliminary engineering = for stormwater management indicates that the sites sandy soils make it a prime candidate for natural infiltration. = This is a means of preserving the water quality as required by both the State and the County. Additional provisions to minimize the density of the development could include the use of filter strips and bio-retention. A series of underground basins will be installed under the pavement of the parking areas with stormwater discharged to the basins where it will filter naturally into the sandy ground. This process serves as an overall method to recharge the area groundwater and keep the integrity of the wetland pockets to the rear of the property. All Zoning Ordinance requirements have been met or exceeded regarding setbacks, bufferyards and the amount of internal landscape features in and around the buildings. If Mr. Foys property remains R-15 Residential, = half of the number of units in Building #1 will be relocated or eliminated. A presentation was made before the Zoning Board of Adjustment to allow for modification of a bufferyard along the Foy property, which was successful. The Zoning Ordinance requires that the bufferyard distance be half the distance of the setback. In the proposed project, it would serve no purpose to provide a 45-foot setback from a vacant parcel. As an alternative, the developer will provide a six-foot solid wood fence along the Foy property boundary with landscaping to be consistent with100% visual capacity. A majority of the 12-acre tract is wooded and all existing vegetation will be retained in the large buffer areas NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 904 provided to the east of the property. Areas of swamp forest have been identified and an additional buffering has been added to protect the swamp forest. Interior landscaping will be met as required by the Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Wolf advised that she would like to address the opposition received from Attorney Lonnie Williams, Jr. She noted that the property to the south is zoned B-2 and stated that under normal circumstances, there would be no requirements for distance or visual buffering between the two B-2 uses. However, the Landscape Ordinance now requires that buffering be provided, not only between commercial and residential districts, but also between a commercial and residential use regardless of the zoning district. The attorney for the adjacent property to the south will argue that the residential development will create a hardship on the property owners future development, = because a buffer will be required between the two uses. This is true, but the developer has incorporated in the plan a 20-foot bufferyard along his property line to protect the residents living in the apartment complex and this addresses the concerns of the adjacent property owner to the south. The property lines shown on the tax map presented by the Planning Director are misleading because the property line does not run down the boundary of the drainage way. The drainage way has been identified as a Swamp Forest and there is a required setback. If the property owner to south develops his land, there will be no problem with meeting the bufferyard requirements and there is sufficient land to separate the uses. In summary, Ms. Wolf advised that the proposed development will not create a high amount of impervious surfaces and the project will be a combination of low density business and a high density residential complex, which is needed in the northern end of the County. The location and character of Three Oaks Apartments & Commercial Center will comply with zoning district regulations and will be in harmony with the area. She offered to answer questions. Chairman Greer asked if this zoning could be approved since the Board deferred action on the request to rezone the Foy property. Planning Director Hayes explained that building setbacks and buffering would have to comply with the adjoining zoning of the Foy property, whether residential or commercial, when construction begins on the project. This process occurs through the Zoning Enforcement Office when a permit is issued for construction of the complex. Commissioner Pritchett referenced the number of handicapped parking spaces reserved for Buildings 8 and 9 and asked if speciality apartments would be provided for handicapped persons. Ms. Wolf responded that ADA Code requires 10% of all units be reserved for handicap parking. The parking spaces can be spread out or clustered. Chairman Greer asked Ms. Wolf if the petitioner agreed to the five conditions of the Planning Board. Ms. Wolf responded that the petitioner concurred with the conditions recommended by the Planning Board. Mr. John Lare, the petitioner and developer, advised that when planning for the project, an effort was made to protect the sensitive area of this property and avoid covering 75% of the site. Three story buildings were designed. The setbacks have been costly and the project has been redesigned to protect the trees with only a small number being removed. He also noted that it took approximately a year to acquire County sewer to the site and stated with the soils on the site, septic tanks could be used, but it was felt it would be better to provide sewer to the entire area. County water from the opposite side of Market Street will be used by the project which will allow other businesses to connect to the system. The infiltration system has been expensive and will prevent any discharge from going into the headwaters of Pages Creek. The project was designed to be an attractive one that would not injure adjoining neighbors. Larger buffers were provided and the proposed project will be in harmony with the area. Attorney Kenneth Shanklin advised that the proposed project does comply to the four general requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and stated all ordinance regulations have been met, the public safety will be protected, the use will not injure adjoining properties, and the character of the use will be in harmony with the area. He requested the Board to grant the Special Use Permit to allow the project to be constructed because it is a better use for the property and this project will benefit the entire area with some beautiful trees saved. Mr. Lonnie Williams, Jr., the attorney representing Robert and Lillian Howell owners of the B-2 zoned property adjacent to apartment complex, reported that the Howells are opposed to the project for the following reasons: 1. The density of the proposed project will create 156 residential units which will only increase the number of vehicles and people using adjacent commercial uses. This increased traffic will negatively impact all persons in the immediate area as well as the residents who will live in the apartment complex. 2. The developer contends that placing a residential apartment complex on the property will be good for the area. The Howells own and operate a business that is adjacent to the proposed residential apartment complex. B-2 zoning permits fairly intensive commercial uses; therefore, to place a residential apartment complex with buildings adjoining the Howells property and a nearby marina will create a considerable = amount of noise that will not be well received by residents living in the apartments. The presence of these residents should be considered by the Commissioners when deciding if the project is a compatible use. Attorney Williams reported that after a conversation with Senior Planner Baird Stewart before a Planning Board meeting, Mr. Stewart pointed out that Section 67.4 of the Zoning Ordinance appears to create some requirements for buffer strips between any residential use and a B-2 zone. The Howells main objection is to an = apartment complex being a compatible use and to the fact that their commercial use predated the application for the Special Use Permit to construct an apartment complex. The Howells are requesting that the applicant be required as a written condition of the NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 905 Special Use Permit to provide the buffer required under Section 67.4 or any other buffer requirement and to specify in writing the nature of the buffer. The Howells are also requesting the applicant to determine the distance between the back wall of the apartment buildings and the edge of the buffer, the total distance between the property line and the back wall of the building, and whether these distances comply with the various fire and safety codes that are already in place. In closing, Attorney Williams requested the public record to clearly reflect that the buffer strip is part of the Special Use Permit and that a recorded plat and/or legal document be filed in the Register of Deeds Office to show the buffer strip as part of the proposed project. Commissioner Pritchett referenced the stream running along the residential buffer shown by Ms. Wolf and asked if this would create the necessary buffer. Attorney Williams responded that the Howells are not planning to anything with the property at the current time; however, they want to protect their rights to develop the property in the future. Chairman Greer requested Planning Director Hayes to address the concerns made by Attorney Williams. He asked if the Howell property will be restricted in any way, if the proposed project is approved. Planning Director Hayes explained that since both properties are already zoned B-2, any permitted commercial use request would not require setbacks or buffering requirements. However, in this case, a residential use is being added to the commercial property to the north of the Howells property which requires a buffering = requirement because of a residential use adjacent to a commercial use. Attorney Williams has noted that the Howells do not want any buffering requirement to be imposed on their property. The first recommendation by the Planning Board, which reads as follows, has been added as a condition of the Special Use Permit to require the applicant to absorb the buffering requirement on his property. A 20-foot buffer in accordance with the buffering standards of Section 67 of the Zoning Ordinance shall be provided along the southern property line which shall satisfy any potential buffering requirements that could result from redevelopment on the Howell tract to the south. Chairman Greer noted that if the Board adds this condition to the Special Use Permit, there will be no restrictions on the property owned by the Howells regardless of when the property is developed. Attorney Shanklin advised that the petitioner had agreed to implement all recommendations by the Planning Board and stated that the condition just read has been included in the site plan. The petitioner has no intent to place a burden on the Howells for the buffering requirement. Any Special Use Permit can include specific conditions which are required to be met before the project can be constructed. Chairman Greer asked Attorney Shanklin if the applicant agrees to the conditions and findings of fact presented by the Planning Staff. Attorney Shanklin agreed with the five conditions of the Planning Board and findings of fact. Chairman Greer asked Attorney Williams if the conditions placed on the Special Use Permit satisfy the concerns of his clients. Attorney Williams responded that the conditions do satisfy the concerns of Mr. and Mrs. Howell. He asked if the petitioner would be willing to reflect the location and existence of the buffer area on a recorded plat of the project so it will be on record. He also asked if the Special Use Permit will require any specifics about the nature of the buffer or specifics about the distance between the edge of the buffer and the back walls of the apartments building. He noted that Ms. Wolf had alluded to the fact that the buffer on the north side would be a six-foot wooden fence with several rows of plantings and asked if the same buffer would be placed adjacent to the Howell property to the south. Chairman Greer requested Ms. Wolf to address this issue. Ms. Wolf explained that the buffering requirement could be met in several different ways. In this case, the developer is providing a 20-foot bufferyard as the setback. The buildings could have been set up to the property line but the petitioner felt the buildings should be setback 20 feet from the property line. There is no plan to install a fence on the south side because it is felt that the existing natural vegetation and supplementary plantings will provide a sufficient bufferyard. The Zoning Enforcement Office will require a 100% visual capacity landscape screen in the 20-foot bufferyard to a height of six feet that must be maintained. In further discussion of whether a fence should be installed, Planning Director Hayes advised that after walking the site, he felt installing a fence would more destructive than allowing the dense natural vegetation to remain in its natural state. Commissioner Pritchett asked if a condition could be placed in the Special Use Permit to say that if the vegetation density dies or is removed, the developer will be required to install a fence. Planning Director Hayes responded that existing regulations require the bufferyard to be replaced if the vegetation should die or be destroyed. The buffer replacement can be a combination of screening and plantings or three rows of vegetation. Chairman Greer asked Attorney Williams if the condition regarding the vegetation buffer would satisfy his clients. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 906 Attorney Williams responded that he would personally prefer a map recorded at the Register of Deeds Office; however, the bufferyard being part of the Special Use Permit would be satisfactory. Commissioner Davis asked if a map had ever been recorded at the Register of Deeds Office in other zoning cases. Planning Director Hayes advised that only easements are recorded and the conditions in the Special Use Permit remain with the land unless amended by the Board of County Commissioners. Chairman Greer closed the Public Hearing and asked if any member of the Board would like to comment. Commissioner Davis asked if Building #1 will be cut in half or eliminated if the Foy property remains residentially zoned. Ms. Wolf explained that Building #1 would be reduced by six units if the Foy property remains residentially zoned; however, the units could be relocated in the second floor of one of the commercial buildings if so desired by the developer. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Greer called for a motion. Motion: Commissioner Caster MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Boseman, to approve the request by Design Solutions for Ogden Twelve, LLC to grant a Special Use Permit to construct a 156 unit apartment complex and 21,600 square feet of commercial space within an existing B-2 Highway Business District at 7720 Market Street subject to the five conditions recommended by the Planning Board and modification of Building #1 to the meet the required setbacks if the Foy property is not rezoned based upon the evidence and findings of fact concluding that: (1) the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety if located where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and approved; (2) the use meets all required conditions and specifications of the Zoning Ordinance; (3) the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining property or abutting property or that the use is a public necessity; and (4) the location and character of the use if developed according to the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in general conformity with the plan of development for New Hanover County. 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 22.2. BREAK Chairman Greer called for break from 8:02 p.m. until 8:15 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST BY DAVID SNEEDEN FOR JAMES LANIER, JR., TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 1.83 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 212PORTERS NECK ROAD FROM R-15 RESIDENTIAL TO B-1 NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS (Z-772, 01/04) Chairman Greer opened the Public Hearing and requested Planning Director Hayes to make the Staff the presentation. Planning Director Hayes presented a map showing the property and surrounding commercial and residential uses. He reported that the petitioner presented a rezoning request to expand a commercial district at the corner of Porters Neck Road and Market Street. This area is the terminus of the 17 By-Pass with improvements to be made at the intersection. Turning lanes will be added and a median constructed in the middle of Porters Neck Road to control left turns and crossovers near the intersection. The petitioner is requesting a rezoning of 1.83 acres of property from R-15 Residential to B-1 Neighborhood Business. The subject property is located to the east of a larger B-1 District established in 1995 and expanded slightly in 2002. The expansion of the B-1 District in 2002 abuts the southeast corner of the subject property. Most of the adjacent B-1 District is currently under construction for a new grocery store and retail center. This corner contains approximately 9 acres and has over 1,000 feet of frontage on Market Street and 500 feet of frontage on Porters Neck Road. The subject property lies just outside the Special Highway Overlay District, which requires additional building and parking setbacks from Market Street. Planning Director Hayes reported that the applicant presented his request at the Planning Board meeting held on January 8, 2004. No one spoke in support or opposition. The Planning Board generally agreed with the Staffs recommendation to establish limits for the commercial zoning along Porters Neck Road. However, several = members supported the petitioners proposal. Ultimately the Planning Board voted 6-0 to recommend extending the = B-1 Commercial District through the subject property from west to east and rezone the remaining area O&I Office and Institutional. This would establish the boundary of the commercial district at the existing depth along Market Street. Upon review of the zoning measurements for the adjacent B-1 Zoning District, the Planning Board proposal would rezone the northwestern 80.05 feet of the property B-1 with the remaining southeastern 54.66 feet of the property being zoned O&I. Commissioner Davis asked if the purpose of the O&I was to serve as a transitional use between commercial and residential uses. Planning Director Hayes agreed and stated this was reason that Staff recommended the O&I District to separate the commercial and residential uses. The proposed zoning is consistent with the Land Use Plan. Commissioner Caster asked if the lines are extended as recommended by the Planning Board, whether there would be sufficient land to use the property. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 907 Planning Director Hayes responded that the petitioner will respond to this issue. He stated that adding the additional 80 feet will allow the petitioner to develop the property as desired. Chairman Greer requested Mr. David Sneeden, representing the petitioner, to step forward to speak. Mr. David Sneeden, representing the petitioner James Lanier, reported that the company was in the process of developing a 55,000 square foot Harris Teeter Grocery Store with 20,000 square feet of adjacent retail space at the end of the B-1 District between this site and the Market Street. The property is a long narrow strip of land approximately 135 feet wide by 600 feet deep. This will be a two-story mixed use building that will have a restaurant on the first floor and office space on the second floor. With the height of the building at 24 feet and the required setback, only the western most portion of the site is buildable. The extension of the existing B-1 through the middle of the site will allow that B-1 to run a uniform depth to Market Street at 600 feet. The O & I District on the eastern half of the site will provide a buffer and draw a line for further encroachment of B-1 zoning down Porters Neck Road. The Planning Board recommended that the site be split with the eastern half being zoned O &I and the western half zoned B-1 because the restaurant on the first floor would not be permitted in the O &I District. The initial desire was to incorporate the land into the site to relocate the driveway. The existing driveway permitted by the NCDOT, which is not under construction, lies approximately 450 feet from Market Street. Due to the on-going NCDOT project to four lane Porters Neck Road adding turn lanes and changing the signalization at the intersection, it was felt that the driveway should be shifted as far east as possible from the stop light, which was what NCDOT recommended at the time the driveway permit was approved. The proposed rezoning will allow the driveway to be relocated another 100 feet east, conform to current NCDOT regulations, improve the traffic flow in and out of the site, and improve traffic at the intersection. Rezoning the land will also allow the footprint of the proposed building to be adjusted to preserve two oak trees on the site with the driveway being moved. In closing, Mr. Sneeden advised that the property was no longer suitable for residential purposes and stated that he had contacted five of the six adjacent property owners and received no objection to the proposed rezoning. He requested the Board to approve the proposed rezoning as recommended by the Planning Board. Commissioner Pritchett spoke on hearing objections from residents of Porters Neck regarding placing a restaurant in the proposed project and stated that the residents do not have a problem with the offices being located in the building. She asked if the lot is split, whether the B-1 section would only be used to augment the already approved area or for additional business uses. Mr. Sneeden responded that the petitioner can develop the site as originally planned including the restaurant; however, rezoning the proposed property will allow the building to be relocated to save two oak trees and shift the driveway further east to facilitate the flow of traffic. Chairman Greer asked if anyone from the audience would like to speak in favor or in opposition to the proposed rezoning. Hearing no comments, Chairman Greer closed the Public Hearing and requested direction from the Board. Commissioner Caster stated that the recommendation from the Planning Board will allow for better access to the site and improve traffic at the intersection. Motion: Commissioner Caster MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Boseman, to approve rezoning approximately 1.83 acres of property located at 212 Porters Neck Road by extending the B-1 Commercial District through the property from west to east and to rezone the remaining property to O&I Office and Institutional as recommended by the Planning Board. Commissioner Pritchett stated that she would prefer no additional development on the site; however, if the site can be developed without the rezoning, it would be better rezone the property. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF ZONING AREA 5 IN NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED July 6, 1971, is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book I, Section 5, Page 48. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER REQUEST BY DESIGN SOLUTIONS FOR DMWGP, LLC TO RE- AUTHORIZE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A 60 UNIT PERSONAL CARE FACILITY IN AN R-15 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT LOCATED IN THE 7200 BLOCK OF DARDEN ROAD (S-473, 11/00) Chairman Greer opened the Public Hearing and announced that the special use process requires a quasi- judicial hearing; therefore, any person wishing to testify must be sworn in by the Clerk to the Board. He requested all persons who signed in to speak or who want to present testimony to step forward to be sworn in. The following persons were sworn in: Dexter Hayes, Planning Director Cindee Wolfe Chairman Greer requested Planning Director Hayes to present the Staff presentation. Planning Director Hayes presented a map showing the site and surrounding uses and stated that the petitioner NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 908 is requesting re-authorization of a Special Use Permit granted by the Board of New Hanover County Commissioners in December 2000 for a 60 unit Personal Care Facility. The project is intended to provide affordable living for people age 55 and older. In November 2000, the petitioner requested 120 units on 10 acres of property with access from both Middle Sound Loop Road and Darden Road. Based on concerns from neighbors about density, runoff, and traffic, the Planning Board voted 4-1 to recommend denial. The petitioner then presented a revised site plan with 60 units and access only to Darden Road. The Board of Commissioners voted 5-0 to approve the amended Special Use Permit Planning Director Hayes reported that Cindee Wolf, representing DMWGP, LLC, presented the site plan and reviewed the status of the project at the Planning Board meeting held on January 8, 2004. Several nearby residents spoke in opposition. The primary concerns presented in opposition to the request were traffic, density, and stormwater runoff. In an effort to address these concerns, Ms. Wolf explained that stormwater management had been designed to accommodate the runoff, and stated the facility was intended to provide affordable living for people age 55 and older. Based on similar projects that DMWGP, LLC has developed, the traffic generation is minimal. The Planning Board voted 6-0 to recommend approval. Planning Director Hayes reported that the following findings of fact were approved at the Public Hearing held on December 4, 2000, to grant a Special Use Permit to DMWGP, LLC for Parcel R04410-001-012-000 located at 225 Middle Sound Loop Road: 1.The County Commissioners FIND AS A FACT that all of the specific requirements set forth in Section 72- 27 of the County Zoning Ordinance WILL be satisfied if the property is developed in accordance with the plans submitted to the County Commissioners. 2.It is the County Commissioners CONCLUSION that the proposed use DOES satisfy the first general = requirement listed in the Ordinance; namely 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. In support of this conclusion, the Commissioners make the following FINDINGS OF FACT: A.The site is located within the Ogden Volunteer Fire District. B.The petitioner is proposing a connection to City water and County sewer. C.The site has direct access to Darden Road. 3.It is the County Commissioners CONCLUSION that the proposed use DOES satisfy the second general = requirement listed in the Ordinance; namely that the use meets all required conditions and specifications. In support of this conclusion, the Commissioners make the following FINDINGS OF FACT: A. With the exception of the eastern portion of the site which is zoned R-20 Residential, the subject property is primarily located in the R-15 Residential zoning district. Personal Care facilities are permitted by Special Use Permit in both the R-15 and the R-20 zoning districts. B.The proposed site plan meets the additional restrictions imposed on Nursing & Personal Care Facilities. C.All other conditions of the ordinance can be met. 4.It is the County Commissioners CONCLUSION that the proposed use DOES satisfy the third general = requirement listed in the Ordinance; namely that the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property, or that the use is a public necessity. In support of this conclusion, the Commissioners make the following FINDINGS OF FACT: A. Other nursing and personal care facilities are located in residential districts throughout New Hanover County. B. Some of the adjacent properties are vacant. C.No evidence has been presented that indicates that this facility would injure the value of adjoining properties. 5.It is the County Commissioners CONCLUSION that the proposed use does SATISFY the fourth general = requirement listed in the Ordinance; namely 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 for New Hanover County. In support of this conclusion, the Commissioners make the following FINDINGS OF FACT: A. The 1999 Land Classification Plan identifies this area as Resource Protection. Residential densities greater than 2.5 units per acre shall not be permitted. B. The City and County should ensure an adequate supply of housing for people with special needs, the elderly and the disabled. C. The subject parcel is approximately 6.7 acres. Under performance residential criteria, the site could accommodate approximately 17 units. 6.Therefore, because the County Commissioners conclude that all of the general and specific conditions precedent to the issuance of a SPECIAL USE PERMIT have been satisfied, IT IS ORDERED that the application for the issuance of a SPECIAL USE PERMIT BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions: A. That the applicant shall fully comply with all of the specific requirements stated in the Ordinance for the proposed use, as well as any additional conditions hereinafter stated. B. If any of the conditions imposed by this Special Use Permit shall be held invalid beyond the authority of this Board of County Commissioners by a court of competent jurisdiction, then this permit shall become void and of no effect. C. Other: All other applicable federal, state and local laws. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 909 Chairman Greer asked if the petitioner would like to speak. Ms. Cindee Wolf spoke on being involved with this project from the beginning and stated that the apartment complex will be occupied by persons age 55 and up, and it will not be operated as personal care facility. The attached plan has been updated and has the same number of units and same building. All landscape standards have been incorporated into the plan. In closing, Ms. Wolf advised that the petitioner misunderstood the amount of time between funding the project and starting it; therefore, he is requesting the Board to re-authorize the Special Use Permit. She offered to answer questions. Chairman Greer asked if the plan meet the stormwater regulations. Ms. Wolf advised that the plan had been revised to comply to the new stormwater requirements. Commissioner Pritchett asked if only one parking space is provided for each unit. Ms. Wolf responded that parking spaces comply to the regulations and stated that the residents will be older citizens and will not have more than one car. There is no parking for Staff since this is not a personal care facility. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Greer closed the Public Hearing. He requested direction from the Board. Chairman Greer asked if Staff had any reason to believe that the Special Use Permit should not be granted. Planning Director Hayes responded that Staff was comfortable with granting the Special Use Permit for the proposed facility. Chairman Greer advised that since no one had signed in to present testimony in opposition to the proposed project, he would close the Public Hearing. Chairman Greer requested direction from the Board. Motion: Commissioner Caster MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Boseman, to approve the request by Design Solutions for DMWGP, LLC to re-authorize a Special Use Permit for a 60 unit Personal Care Facility in an R-15 Residential Zoning District located in the 7200 block of Darden Road based upon the evidence and findings of fact concluding that: (1) the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety if located where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and approved; (2) the use meets all required conditions and specifications of the Zoning Ordinance; (3) the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining property or abutting property or that the use is a public necessity; and (4) the location and character of the use if developed according to the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in general conformity with the plan of development for New Hanover County. 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 22.3. CONSIDERATION OF 800 MHz RADIO SYSTEM FOR SOUTHERN END OF COUNTY Assistant County Manager Dave Weaver reported that Staff has been researching the possibility of utilizing the U. S. Coast Guard River Road Loran Station for the County's 800 MHz Radio System to provide adequate radio coverage to the southern part of the County, particularly to Carolina Beach and Kure Beach. Based on some preliminary testing and the Coast Guard's cooperation, Staff believes that this option may be feasible. The criteria which establishes the information needed for application to the USCG for the request is very specific and will require testing and analysis that is outside the expertise of County staff. The Commissioners are being requested to authorize Staff to seek qualification packages from qualified engineering firms to conduct the testing required to see if there will be any interference between signals and to perform structural testing of the tower to be sure the tower is capable of handling the equipment that will be placed on the tower. Once qualification packages are received, Staff will review the proposals and make a recommendation to the Board including the appropriate budget amendment to set up the project. Chairman Greer asked if any member of the Board would like to comment. Commissioner Davis asked if the packages would include a cost figure for the study and necessary testing. Project Engineer Greg Thompson responded that once an engineering firm is selected to perform the required study and testing, a fee will be negotiated with that company. Commissioner Davis asked if the Board would make the final decision on the firm selected and the cost involved. County Manager ONeal responded that Commissioners will have to approve the firm selected and the = negotiated price. Commissioner Davis advised that he was not in favor of hiring a consultant because the employees hired by the County have expertise in their fields and are paid good salaries and benefits for performing their jobs. However, after giving this particular item a great deal of thought, this a complex project that will require professional engineers. He stressed the importance of addressing the communication problem to protect the firemen, law enforcement officers, NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 910 and emergency agencies throughout the entire County. After hearing no further comments, Chairman Greer called for a motion. Motion: Commissioner Caster MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Boseman, to authorize Staff to proceed with a a request for qualifications from engineering firms to conduct the study and necessary testing required to see if the USCG Loran Tower is suitable to provide coverage to the southern end of the County and request Staff to present a recommendation to the Board at a future meeting. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION TO REFUND 1996 AND 2000 SERIES GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS Finance Director Bruce Shell reported that calculations on the refunding (refinancing) of 1996 and 2000 series general obligation bonds indicate the County can save approximately $1.9 million over the life of the debt including the cost of reissuing the bonds and attorney fees. He requested the Board to adopt the bond order and resolution authorizing the refunding of the bonds. Chairman Greer advised that the Board needs to introduce a bond order. The bond order as introduced will be presented to the Board for final approval during a Public Hearing scheduled for the February 16, 2004 meeting. The Board also needs to consider a resolution to set the Public Hearing for the bond order and authorize the necessary public notice and filings. These actions are in connection with the debt refunding of 1996 and the 2000 Series of General Obligation Bonds. Chairman Greer called for a motion to introduce the bond order as presented to the Board. Motion: Commissioner Pritchett, MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Caster, to introduce the bond order. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Chairman Greer advised that the Board is now required to take action on a resolution that calls for a Public Hearing and the filing of the debt statement in connection with the debt refunding of 1996 and 2000 Series of General Obligation Bonds. He read the resolution and called for a motion to adopt the resolution. Motion: Commissioner Pritchett MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Boseman, to adopt the resolution to approve the BOND ORDER ENTITLED BOND ORDER AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $57,000,000 A GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER and set the date of @ the Public Hearing for February 16, 2004. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the resolution of the bond order and resolution is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XXVIII, Page 24.3. Commissioner Pritchett congratulated Finance Director Shell for bringing this item to the attention of the Board and stated that Mr. Shell had saved a great of money for the County by refunding bonds at a lower interest rate. Chairman Greer agreed with the statement by Commissioner Pritchett and expressed appreciation to Finance Director Shell for consistently trying to save money for New Hanover County. MEETING RECESSED TO HOLD A REGULAR MEETING OF THE NEW HANOVER COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT Chairman Greer convened from Regular Session at 8:05 p.m. to hold a meeting of the New Hanover County Water and Sewer District. Chairman Greer reconvened to Regular Session at 8:21 p.m. NON-AGENDA ITEMS Chairman Greer announced that time had been reserved to allow anyone in the audience to present public an item that was not listed on the Regular Agenda. He requested all persons speaking to limit their remarks to three minutes. . No items were presented ADDITIONAL ITEMS - COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Additional Items Presented Commissioner Caster The following items were presented by Commissioner Caster: Commissioner Caster spoke on being a member of the Long Range Planning Committee for Cape Fear $ Community College and stated that it was amazing the amount of growth and new activities occurring at the College. He noted that one major issue is the proposed Multi-Modal Center and stated after seeing Mayor Broadhurst, he requested the Mayor to work with the Community College by keeping them involved so plans can be made to address this issue. Commissioner Caster advised that he chaired his first meeting of the Tourism Development Authority $ (TDA) last week and stated that another meeting would held in March. He advised that Mayor Broadhurst is now a member of the TDA and Mr. Jeff Corbett was appointed to serve as the Chamber of Commerce representative. Commissioner Caster advised that he and Chairman Greer attended the Convention Center Briefing at City $ Hall and stated that the consultant presented the briefing and presented two sites for the Convention Center. The City will now be responsible for selecting one of the sites. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 911 •Commissioner Caster commented on issues at the north end of Carolina Beach and he requested Assistant County Manager Dave Weaver to place this item on an agenda in the near future so this item can be discussed by the Commissioners. •Commissioner Caster advised that the Tidal Creek Advisory Board will hold its next meeting on Friday. He noted that Mr. Dave Thomas, a contractor who is a member of the Tidal Creek Advisory Board, has made a recommendation to give awards to builders and contractors who do the right thing when developing property. He advised that the Advisory Board will be considering this recommendation at the next meeting. •Commissioner Caster also advised that a vacancy needed to be filled on the Tidal Creek Advisory Board to represent the N. C. Clean Water Trust Fund. He reported that Mr. Nick Garrett has been appointed by Governor Easley to fill the position and stated it will be beneficial for a person from New Hanover County to serve on the Advisory Board. Items from Vice-Chairman Boseman Commissioner Boseman asked County Manager ONeal if a meeting had been scheduled with the City to = discuss drainage, merging departments and consolidation. County Manager ONeal responded that he and Assistant County Manager Weaver met with City Manager = Sterling Cheatham about working with the City on drainage. He advised that a memorandum is being prepared to inform the Board about the outcome of this discussion. Chairman Greer reported that he had a meeting scheduled with Mayor Broadhurst this week and stated that he would discuss consolidation and merging departments with the Mayor and report back to the Board. Items Presented by Commissioner Pritchett The following items were presented by Commissioner Pritchett: •Commissioner Pritchett advised that it was heartwarming to read to the children at Howell Preschool on Pajama Day. The children were dressed in their pajamas and everyone enjoyed the event. •Commissioner Pritchett advised that the Chocolate Fantasy held at the Senior Center last Saturday was A@ successful and raised money for the Senior Center. She noted she was requested to judge the booths and stated everyone enjoyed the event. She encouraged the Commissioners to attend next year. •Commissioner Pritchett referenced the last issue of the newsletter from WASTEC and stated that the incinerator has been operating over1,500 days since the last lost time accident. This is quite an accomplishment, particularly when these employees do not work in a safe environment. She complimented the employees for this outstanding record and for the effort made to prevent accidents that result in lost time. Consideration of Resolution in Support of Proposed Southern Bridge to be a Toll Facility Commissioner Pritchett advised that Mr. Lanny Wilson, the Districts representative on the North Carolina = Board of Transportation has requested the Board of County Commissioners to adopt a resolution requesting the N. C. Turnpike Authority to consider building a new southern bridge across the Cape Fear River as a toll facility. She advised that a toll bridge was being requested because the group was told that the bridge would be built five to six years earlier. She requested the Board to consider adopting the resolution. Commission Davis stated that he would prefer to place the resolution on the next agenda so he would have time to read the document. Commissioner Pritchett noted that the N. C. Turnpike Authority would meet at the end of the month, which is before the next meeting. She stressed the importance of adopting the resolution to show the Countys support. = Chairman Greer noted that the resolution was discussed at the Thursday Agenda Review Meeting, which Mr. Davis could not attend, and stated that Commissioner Pritchett was told to present the resolution as an additional item since time is of the essence. Commissioner Caster stated that he would rather for the resolution to be placed on the agenda; however, with the need for a southern bridge, he would consider the resolution. Commissioner Pritchett read the resolution and requested the Board to adopt the document. Motion: Commissioner Pritchett MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Caster, to adopt the resolution as read. 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 XXVIII, Page 24.4. ADDITIONAL ITEMS - COUNTY MANAGER County Manager ONeal reminded the Board that the Sixth Annual Conference for Partners for Economic = Inclusion will held on February 3, 2004, at 8:30 a.m. at the Coast Line Convention Center. He encouraged the members of the Board to attend. CLOSED SESSION Chairman Greer announced that the Board needs to convene to Closed Session to consider a personnel matter pursuant N.C.G.S. 143.318.11(a)(6). Motion: Commissioner Pritchett MOVED, SECONDED by Chairman Greer, to convene to Closed Session. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSBOOK 29 REGULAR MEETING, FEBRUARY 2, 2004PAGE 912 Chairman Greer convened to Closed Session at 9:45 p.m. Chairman Greer reconvened to Closed Session at 10:05 p.m. and reported that no action was taken in the Closed Session. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Greer called for a motion to adjourn. Motion: Commissioner Caster MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Pritchett, to adjourn. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Chairman Greer adjourned the meeting at 10:07 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lucie F. Harrell Clerk to the Board