Loading...
1991-09-03 Regular Meeting ,., MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING, SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 Page 605 ASSEMBLY The New Hanover County Board of Commissioners met in Regular Session on Tuesday, September 3, 1991, at 6:30 o'clock P.M. in the Assembly Room of the New Hanover Courthouse, 24 North Third Street, Wilmington, North Carolina. . Members present were: Robert G. Greer; William H. Jr.; Chairman Fred Retchin; Attorney, Robert W. Pope; Harrell. commissioners Jonathan Barfield, Sr.; Sutton; Vice-Chairman E. L. Mathews, County Manager, Allen O'Neal; County and Clerk to the Board, Lucie F. Chairman Retchin called the meeting to order and welcomed all persons present. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Clerk to the Board, Lucie F. Harrell, gave the ~nvocation. Vice-Chairman Mathews led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. NON-AGENDA ITEMS Chairman Retchin asked if anyone from the general public would like to comment on an item listed on the Consent Agenda or present an item not listed on the Regular Agenda. No comments or items were presented. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA . Motion: Commissioner Greer MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Mathews to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Minutes The Commissioners approved the minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 19, 1991, as presented. Ratification of Reappointment of Charles Grissom as Extra-territorial Jurisdiction Member of the Carolina Beach Planning and Zoning commission The Commissioners ratified the reappointment of Charles Grissom to serve as the extra-territorial jurisdiction member of the Carolina Beach Planning and Zoning commission. ADOPTION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING SEPTEMBER 28, 1991, AS "NATIONAL HUNTING AND FISHING DAY" IN NEW HANOVER COUNTY The Commissioners adopted a proclamation designating September 28, 1991, as National Hunting and Fishing Day" in New Hanover County. A copy of the proclamation is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XIX, Page 16. . Authorization to File a Grant Application to the N. C. Department of cultural Resources, Division of the State Library The Commissioners authorized filing of a grant application by the New Hanover County Library to the North Carolina State Aid Program. Estimated revenue is $135,124. The Chairman was authorized to execute the grant application. Acceptance of Addi tional Vector Control Grant Funds from the Corps of Engineers and Approval of Budget Amendment #92-0036 The Commissioners accepted additional Vector Control funds in the amount of $8,600 received from the U. S. Corps of Engineers to be used to purchase computer equipment and fund a temporary clerical employee to input data obtained from the Corps' related mosquito surveillance. The Commissioners, also, approved the following Budget Amendment to budget the additional ~ ( I ~ MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING, SEPTEMBER 3,- 1991 Page 606 funds recei ved from the County's agreement with the Corps of Engineers for the County-operated Mosquito Control Program at the Corps' dredge disposal islands: 92-0036 Health Department/Vector Debit Credit Health Department/Vector Federal Grant $8,600 Contracted Services Departmental Supplies Capital Outlay - Equipment $4,090 $ 631 $3,879 () Approval of Contract #92-0142 with the N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources under the Coastal Planning and Management Grant Program The Commissioners approved a contract with the N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources under the Coastal Planning and Management Grant Program (CAMA) in the amount of $9,281 for the Land Use Plan Update, Phase II and authorized the Chairman to execute the necessary contract documents. The Commissioners approved the following Budget Amendment to budget additional CAMA funds which are to be used to fund a telephone survey: 92-0040 Planning Department Debit Credit Planninq Department State Grant $2,781 CAMA Flow Through Contracted Services Printing Expense $1,031 $1,000 $ 750 () Approval of Budget Amendment #92-0037 - Health Department The Commissioners approved the following Budget Amendment: 92-0037 Health Department/TB Debit Credit Health Department/TB Health Fees $5,700 Contract Services $5,700 Purpose: To budget additional funds in the TB program to cover the increased cost of physician services. The additional revenue will be generated by an increase in the program's fee schedule. REQUEST FOR ENDORSEMENT OF A RESOURCE CONSERVATION DEVELOPMENT PROJECT FOR THE CAPE FEAR REGION Mr. C. Wilson Spencer, District conservationist, presented details and the following advantages of establishing a Resource Conservation and Development District (RC&D) for Region "0", the Cape Fear Region: 1. Improve land and water resources for agricultural, municipal, industrial, recreation, transportation, and wildlife uses. () 2. Achieve better land use: protect prime farmland and convert poorly suited cropland to grassland, woodland, wildlife habitat, or recreation use. 3. Carry out RC&D planned activities such as erosion and sedimentation control, flood prevention, farm irrigation, land drainage, fish and wildlife hab- itat improvement, and water quality management. 4. Improve and expand recreation facilities; pre- serve and promote historical and scenic sites. ;. ~ ,., r$1 ~~1J$:~1: <" . " ~ '~. .,~ -'"' MINUTES O:B REGULAR MEETING, SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 Page 607 ~ ~.. . 5. Encourage existing industries to expand and new ones to locate in the RC&D district which will create jobs; encourage industries to process and use products of the area. 6. Improve, build, or bring in needed community facilities such as hospitals, schools, sewage treatment plants, solid-waste disposal systems, water systems, and roads. . 7. Encourage training and retaining programs to broaden job skills. 8. Provide soil, water, and related information to agencies who guide resource management. This helps these agencies to plan for farming, ranching, recreation, wildlife, housing, industry, and transportation. 9. Reduce pollution of air, water, and soil. . Mr. Spencer stated the Conservation District Boards of Supervisors have endorsed the proposed project for the Cape Fear Region and the Boards of County Commissioners from Columbus, Pender, and Brunswick have endorsed the project. Information has been received that the U. S. Secretary of Agriculture will appropriate funding of 20 RC&D districts with one project to be located in the State of North Carolina. It is felt that the Cape Fear Region has an exceptionally good opportunity of being selected as the district for North Carolina since the existing districts are more centrally located throughout the State. Mr. Spencer requested the Board to endorse the RC&D district in order to process the application to the U. S. Secretary of Agriculture by October 1, 1991. If endorsed by the Commissioners, authorization should be approved for execution of the application by the Chairman and appointment of a member to serve on the Council. If the project is funded, the Soil & Conservation Service will open an office in the 4-county region (Columbus, Brunswick, New Hanover and Pender counties) with employment of a coordinator and secretary. The coordinator will work with the RC&D Council to develop a plan and establish project measures. The Council will be composed of a County Commissioner from each county, a member of the Soil & Water Conservation District from each county, and at-large members from planning departments. Federal funds will be available for critical area treatment such as flood prevention, erosion and soil control, land drainage, water-based fish and wildlife, etc. with the Council adopting the projects and seeking other funds to implement the projects. The Council will be established as a non-profit agency and will be eligible to receive loans from the Farmers Home Administration and other united States Department of Agriculture agencies. . Mr. Spencer stated the County will not absorb any cost for endorsement of the project; however, when the office is opened, funding will be needed in the amount of $300-$400 per year for postage and telephone expenses. He respectfully requested the commissioners to endorse the project. Chairman Retchin asked if the new office could become a part of the Council of Governments (COG). Mr. Spencer stated the Council of Governments has assisted with preparation of the application, and he feels this type of arrangement could be considered by COG. commissioner Sutton inquired as to whether the rules and regulations will be established by the council, or are there existing rules? Mr. Spencer stated the plan, rules, and regulations will be prepared by the council working with the United States Department of Agriculture agencies. ~ MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING, SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 .page 608 ,."~ Motion: Commissioner Sutton MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Mathews to endorse the project to establish a Resource Conservation and Development District in Region 0, consisting of Brunswick County, Columbus County, New Hanover County, and Pender County, as requested by Mr. Spencer. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADOPTION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING SEPTEMBER 17, "CITIZENSHIP DAY" AND THE WEEK OF SEPTEMBER 17-23, "CONSTITUTION WEEK" IN NEW HANOVER COUNTY 1991, 1991, AS AS Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Sutton to adopt a proclamation designating September 17, 1991, as ncitizenship Day" and the week of September 17-23, 1991, as nConstitution Weekn in New Hanover County. () A copy of the proclamation is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XIX, Page 16. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO EXECUTE A QUITCLAIM DEED (CONTRACT #92-0141) TO TAX FORECLOSED PROPERTIES OWNED JOINTLY BY THE CITY OF WILMINGTON AND NEW HANOVER COUNTY County Manager 0' Neal stated the city of Wilmington has recommended approval of conveying the County's interest in Tax Parcel No. R05409-009-013.000 and Tax Parcel No. R05413-022-022.000 to Cape Fear Habitat for Humanity. The sites will be used for two houses to be constructed by volunteers of the agency as well as by the families who will reside in the homes. Motion: After discussion, Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Mathews to authorize the County to execute' a Quitclaim Deed to the' tax-foreclosed properties, R05409-009-013.000 and R05413-022-022.000, in order to convey interest to Cape Fear Habitat for Humanity. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. () A copy of the contract is on file in the Legal Department. MEETING CONVENED FROM REGULAR SESSION TO HOLD A MEETING OF THE NEW HANOVER COUNTY WATER & SEWER DISTRICT Motion: Chairman Retchin MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Mathews to convene from Regular Session to hold a meeting of the New Hanover County Water & Sewer District. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Chairman Retchin convened from Regular Session at 6:50 o'clock P.M. Motion: Vice-Chairman Mathews MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Sutton to reconvene to Regular Session. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Chairman Retchin reconvened to Regular Session at 7:02 o'clock P.M. AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH CONDEMNATION OF TAX PARCELS 3600005006000 AND 3600005006001 FOR ACQUISITION OF EASEMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE SEWER LINE () Motion: Upon the recommendation of the District Board of Commissioners of the New Hanover County Water & Sewer District, commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Mathews to authorize the County Engineer to proceed with condemnation proceedings to acquire a fifteen foot easement along the edge of Tax Parcels #3600005006000 and #360000500060001 for construction of the sewer line along Market Street. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ~ ( ~ ~ MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING, SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 Page 609 ADDITIONAL ITEMS - COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Additional Items to be Placed at the End of the Agenda Vice-Chairman Mathews recommended scheduling additional items at the end of the agenda as done in the past. He expressed concern for the general public being inconvenienced by having to wait until additional items have been completed before beginning Public Hearings. . County Manager O'Neal stated normally there are enough items to schedule the time from 6:30 P.M. until 7:30 P.M. when Public Hearings are to begin; however if the Board wishes to discuss additional items at the end of the meeting, he will be glad to prepare the agenda accordingly beginning with the meeting of October 7, 1991. APPROVAL OF LEASE AGREEMENT (CONTRACT #92-0156) WITH MOTOROLA FOR LEASING OF DISPATCH SYSTEM AND INCOMING SYSTEM FOR THE 911 CENTER Deputy County Manager, Mary Gornto, stated as discussed in the Special Meeting of August 26, 1991, Staff has recommended leasing of new equipment for relocation of the 911 Center during the jail expansion. After review of existing equipment, it is doubtful that the existing equipment can tolerate the move. The relocation of the current equipment will cost $55,000 versus the additional cost of leasing new equipment during FY 1991-92 at $47,971. The following cost figures were presented: MOTOROLA Dispatch System Incoming System '. TOTAL SYSTEM $ 36,074 $ 21,561 $ 57,635 $ 27,670 $ 85,305 Total Lease Installation (Southern Bell, Wilmington Communications & Motorola SOUTHERN BELL Lines (on-going) and equipment rental TOTAL COSTS Budgeted Fiscal Year 1991-92 $ 70,612 $155,917 $108,000 $ 47,917 Additional Costs as a Result of the Move Addi tional bids were received to lease the incoming and dispatch system separately as follows: SOUTHERN BELL BID: Incoming System Installation Total Bid $ 30,752 $ 33,755 $ 64,507 WILMINGTON COMMUNICATIONS Dispatch System Installation Total Bid BID: $ $ $ 38,706 3,600 41,306 TOTAL SYSTEM $105,813 . Deputy County Manager Gornto presented the proposed lease with Motorola with the following addendum: Schedule A: (All radio dispatch equipment) This schedule will be impacted by decisions made by the Radio Task Force; therefore, a termination clause for the lease of the equipment .has been included in Section 8.5 of the lease agreement. Schedule B: (Incoming call equipment, and control unit) This remains as a lease arrangement. The vendor change is due solely to a substantial cost savings. There are no current or anticipated changes which would impact this equipment. ~ ( ~ MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING, SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 Page 6.10 ~. Schedule C: (Automatic Number identification and Automatic Location Information Monitors) Future plans to acquire a Computer Aided Dispatch system could impact this equipment; therefore, a termination clause is included in section 8.5 of the lease agreement. Terms: The term of the lease is five years. Deputy County Manager Gornto requested approval of the proposed lease with Motorola. () Motion: Chairman Retchin commented on the need for new equipment in order to provide the 911 service to the community and stated since the cost of moving the old equipment is no more than the cost of leasing new equipment during the fiscal year, he would MOVE, to approve the lease agreement as recommended by staff. The MOTION WAS SECONDED by Commissioner Sutton. The floor was opened for further discussion. commissioner Barfield, stated for the record, he cannot approve the lease agreement because he feels the bid package was prepared too quickly to allow ample time for all firms to bid on the proposal. Chairman Retchin called for a vote on the motion. vote, the MOTION CARRIED AS FOLLOWS: Upon Voting Aye: Commissioner Greer commissioner Sutton Vice-Chairman Mathews Chairman Retchin Voting Nay: Commissioner Barfield commissioner Greer commented on continued increases being incurred with the expansion of the jail as well as with other proj ects and urged the County Commissioners to closely monitor the impact of these expenses on the FY 1992-93 budget. () ACCEPTANCE OF SECTION 18 GRANT FUNDS FOR THE TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Assistant to the County Manager, Pat Melvin, stated in March, 1991, the County applied for section 18 funding to provide transportation services to the elderly and handicapped populations. Notification has been received from the State that the General Assembly appropriated $2,000,000 for elderly and handicapped transportation assistance and $300,000 to provide transportation services for medicaid eligible pregnant women and children for FY 1991-92. The funding represents 100% funding from the federal and state governments with no local match required. New Hanover County's share of these funds is as follows: (1) $29,295 for the Elderly and Handicapped Transportation Assistance Program; and (2) $4,218 for the Medicaid Transportation Assistance Program for a total of $33,513. The Medicaid Transportation Assistance Program is new to Transportation Services; however, after discussion with the Department of Social Services and Health Department, they have agreed to assist with referrals of medicaid eligible pregnant women and children. Staff recommends acceptance of the grant application in the amount of $)3,513; authorization to spend State funds rolled over from fiscal years 1989, 1990, and 1991 in the amount of $33,316 along with one-half of the 1991-92 appropriation for a total of $48,260 to be spent in providing transportation services to the elderly and handicapped populations and medicaid eligible pregnant women and children by December, 1991, as required by the State. This will leave a total of $14,647 to be expended for the provision of the same services. n , ~^ Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Sutton to accept the grant funds in the amount of $33,513; authorize the Chairman to execute the grant agreement; and expend funds in the amount of $48,260 for the Elderly and Handicapped _,1.'.',:; ~,,,, "-.,,, ': .., MINlJT.ES OF REGULAR .MEETING, SEPTEMBER 3, -1991 Page 611 :..:~~.~~1' :: ~.'~, ".l I Assistance Program and Medicaid Transportation Assistance Program as recommended by the Assistant to the County Manager. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. DENIAL OF FUNDING CONTRIBUTION TO CABARRUS COUNTY PROPERTY TAX CASE . County Attorney received from the N. stated the questions are as follows: Pope commented on the amicus. brief just C. Association of County Commissioners and to be considered and answered by the courts 1. Does a private consultant that is retained for auditing services violate public policy even though the County entered into such a contract under the authority of the State's General Statutes? 2. Must a discovery made by a County Tax Assessor be set aside because of a contract with a private consultant retained for auditing ad valorem taxes? . Country Attorney Pope stated the majority of the counties throughout the State do not have auditors on staff, nor does the State of North Carolina have auditors available to render assistance to counties; therefore, approximately four years ago, counties were offered an opportunity to retain independent tax auditors for business/personal property on a contingent fee basis. Twenty-seven counties contracted with private firms. Based on these auditors recommendations, over two billion dollars in business/personal property has been discovered and approximately eighteen million dollars in back taxes has been recovered by the counties in North Carolina. The beneficiaries of the audit programs are the counties remaining taxpayers who have legally and correctly listed their taxes. The North Carolina Association of County Commissioners and the North Carolina League of Municipalities have joined in the preparation of the amicus brief feeling that this case will likely determine the legality of a number of contingent fee contracts in North Carolina and directly affect the ability of local governments to see that "all" taxpayers bear their lawful and fair share of the tax burden. Two other points of interest are as follows: 1. When taxable property is not listed fully and accurately, the county tax rate tends to increase and taxpayers that have listed their property taxes accurately are unjustly forced to pay higher rates. 2. Unfortunately, many taxpayers in North Carolina have not and do not list their business/personal property taxes fully and accurately, and because of this failure the need of audits have arisen. Records indicate that over 1/3 of the businesses in the State fail to list their business/personal taxes accurately. 3 . The Property Tax Commission exceeded its authority in rendering a decision on this matter since the General Assembly and the State Courts are the bodies who have the authority to declare the pUb- lic policy of the State, not the Property Tax Com- mission. In this case, the General Assembly has seen fit to grant counties and tax assessors auth- ority to hire auditors without restricting the basis on which auditors may be hired, and if the General Assembly had intended to ban contingent fee contracts for auditors, the Legislature would have done so ,by Statute. . County Attorney Pope stated the amicus brief must be filed with the Court of Appeal by Friday, September 6, 1991, and the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners has requested support of this effort by all counties whether they do or do not contribute financially. ~ ( I l [ r l f ( '~ MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING, SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 Page 612 . . ',; County Manager O'Neal stated the financial contribution outlined by the N. C. Association of County Commissioners is based upon the following formula: (1) counties already participating on a contingent contract fee basis with an auditing firm are requested to contribute on a 2 1/2 cents per capita basis; and (2) counties without a contingent contract with an auditing firm are requested to contribute on a 1 1/2 cents per capita basis; therefore, New Hanover County's share would be at 1 1/2 cents per capita for a financial contribution of $1,804. commissioner Greer expressed concern for joining in a legal battle to decide on this issue, particularly when firms are hired on a contingency basis, and stated he is opposed to contributing or supporting this cause. He stated the aUditing process should be performed in-house even if new County employees have to be hired to perform this service. () Chairman Retchin stressed the importance of all persons listing and paying taxes fairly and stated the ability to find deficiencies in tax listings will save other taxpayers money. Vice-Chairman Mathews expressed concern for Tax Management Associates, Inc. contacting local businesses by phone instead of courtesy letters being mailed from the Tax Administrator in advance of the audit. County M~nager O'Neal stated this issue has been discussed with the Tax Administrator and courtesy letters are now being forwarded. Commissioner Sutton objected to the contingency fee contract for services rendered and stated he does not object to hiring an outside firm since he believes everyone should accurately list and pay their fair share of taxes. Chairman Retchin requested direction from the financially assisting the N. C. Association Commissioners in pursuing this matter. Board in of County () County Attorney Pope stated the County's present contract with Tax Management, Inc., though not a contingent fee contract, is being challenged by some business taxpayers in the State. Consensus: After further discussion of a financial contribution, it was the consensus of the Board not to contribute financially to this cause. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REQUEST TO REZONE PROPERTY AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF U. S. HIGHWAY 17 (MARKET STREET) AND PORTERS NECK ROAD TO B-1 BUSINESS FROM R-15 RESIDENTIAL Chairman Retchin opened the Public Hearing. Planning Director, Dexter Hayes, stated the Planning Commission discussed at length the effect of existing zoning requirements on the tract and agreed that the site could be developed more efficiently if the commercial zoning district was expanded. After a 4-3 vote to approve the B-2 rezoning request, the opponents pointed out the undesirable uses that are permitted under B-2, and the Planning Commission made a new motion to rezone the property to B-1 Business which provided for more neighborhood oriented services. () Chairman Retchin asked if anyone present would like to speak in favor of the proposed rezoning request. The following person commented: Attorney David G. Sneeden, representing the petitioner, R. Glenn Lea and William J. Batuyios, stated the recommended modification of the rezoning by the Planning Commission is acceptable to the petitioners. He commented on the increased growth in this area with a need for neighborhood oriented services, and stressed the importance of granting the petitioners the ability to develop the site which has been severely impacted by SHOD regulations and the presence of a 100 foot CP&L right-of-way. ".f -4 ",,4"\. ",{ ,;*;f.l. t~ ~- '1,;1;: .., MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING, SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 Page 613 , ,'t'l'!~! .~ ~~. > Chairman Retchin asked if anyone present would like to speak in opposition to the proposed rezoning request. No one commented. Chairman Retchin closed the Public Hearing. . Motion: After discussion, Vice-Chairman Mathews MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Sutton to approve the recommendation of the Planning Commission for rezoning the property at the southeast corner of U. S. Highway 17 and Porters Neck Road to B-1 Business from R-15 Residential. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of "AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF ZONING AREA NO. 5 OF NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, ADOPTED JULY 6, 1971, is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is contained in Zoning Book I, section 5, Page 22. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ISSUANCE OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A FAMILY CEMETERY ON THE WEST SIDE OF CAROLINA BEACH ROAD, SOUTH OF MYRTLE GROVE ROAD (S-335) Attorney Andrew Waters, representing the petitioner, Mr. William Bordeaux, stated he had just recently been retained by the family and would like to request a continuance of the Public Hearing in order to have ample time to prepare and present the findings. Attorney William J. Boney, Jr., representing the residents of the area, requested that the Public Hearing not be continued. Chairman Retchin requested direction from the Board. . Consensus: After discussion of the Public Hearing being advertised and the number of persons present, it was the consensus of the Board to hold the Public Hearing as scheduled. BREAK Chairman Retchin convened from Regular Session for a break from 8:10 o'clock P.M. until 8:25 o'clock P.M. Chairman Retchin opened the Public Hearing and stated the special use process requires a quasi-judicial hearing; therefore, persons wishing to testify must be sworn by the Clerk to the Board. The following person was sworn in. Ms. Alvenia Mims Planning Director Hayes stated the Planning Commission after carefully considering the facts concluded a cemetery was an inappropriate use for the property and recommended denial of the request for issuance of a Special Use Permit. The Planning Commission also felt that access to the site was inadequate and that future development in the area could become difficult if the cemetery was developed but later abandoned. . The following Staff findings were presented: General Requirement #1: The proposed use will not materially endanger the public health or safety based upon the following findings: 1. The proposed use will not require the provision of water and sewer services; however, such services could be impacted. 2. The site is located within the Myrtle Grove Volunteer Fire Department District. 3. Currently, access to the site is along a private, unimproved driveway. This driveway is part of a designated access easement which was awarded through a court decision. ~ MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING, SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 Page 614 -'J General Requirement #2: The proposed use meets all required conditions and specifications of the Zoning Ordinance based upon the following findings: / 1. The Zoning Ordinance simply references the state Health Department for guidance; however, no guidelines at the state Health Agency have been designated to regulate the use. Also, the local Health Department has no regulations governing this use. 2. The state statutes are generally "silent" regarding family cemetery operations; however, through the North Carolina Cemetery Act, the state does provide for the licensing and regulation of commercial grade cemetery operations. The state's only reference to private cemeteries is the provision to allow qualified persons to enter a private property to maintain or visit a private grave, either by consent of the property owner or by court petition. () General Requirement #3: The proposed 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: 1. Land uses in the area consist of scattered single-family residential uses, a mobile home park, and utility services. The site is immediately adjacent to vacant wooded acreage tracts. General Requirement #4: The location and character of the proposed 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 finding: 1. As noted, the area has a variety of housing types and other uses, although there are no other cemetery uses nearby. 2. There is a single grave recently placed on the property. () Chairman Retchin asked if anyone from the general public would like to speak in favor of granting the Special Use Permit: The following person commented: Attorney Andrew Waters, representing the peti tioner, commented on the findings presented by Staff and stated the proposed use does comply to the four general requirements. He stated the cemetery will not materially endanger the public health or safety since no water and sewer services will be required. Also, the use will not injure the value of adjoining or abutting property since mobile homes and a variety of dwellings are already located in the area. The location of the cemetery site will not virtually impact surrounding properties and the proposed use is in harmony with the area. Attorney Waters stated the petitioner will be clearly designate and record the access to the site as improve the access road to a minimum of four (4) inch least 12 feet wide. Also, the petitioner is willing to the cemetery with a chain link fence with no signage. glad to well as marl at enclose Attorney Waters also commented on the Planning Commission assuming that the petitioners are going to abandon the cemetery in the future and stated a good faith effort has been made by the petitioners in retaining an attorney and agreeing to comply to the conditions as presented in Staff's findings. He requested the Commissioners to grant the Special Use Permit. () Chairman Retchin asked if anyone from the general public would like to speak in opposition to issuance of the special Use Permit. The following person commented: ~ Ms. Alvenia Mims, a niece of an adjacent property owner, expressed concern for the public health and safety of the area and stated with inadequate access, traffic would become hazardous through the crossing of backyards and homesites when funeral . . . .~, ~ti'ih ....1 ~;~; .., t '. MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING, SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 Page 615 ~:'!"~ ;-i- ~ services are held. Also, concern was expressed for the decomposition of bodies and the impact on surrounding water wells. Pictures of the grave site were presented and concern was expressed for the devaluation of surrounding properties. Ms. Mims requested the Board to deny issuance of the Special Use Permit. Attorney William J. Boney, Jr., representing residents of the neighborhood, commented on the 12-15 foot access easement ordered by the court to Mr. Bordeaux and stated this order does not provide ownership interest; therefore, the access road cannot be used for a business use. He also commented on the visual sight of the vault exposed above the ground, and the shock to surrounding neighbors when they realized a body had been buried on this site. He expressed concern for the lack of State regulations governing private or family cemeteries and stated issuance of a Special Permit for this purpose will certainly devalue adjoining properties as well as endanger public safety by the creation of traffic on a small access road. He requested the Board to uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission and deny issuance of the Special Use Permit for a family cemetery. commissioner Sutton commented on the court order with the right of egress and ingress and inquired as to whether Mr. Bordeaux has the right to improve the road since he does not own the road? Attorney Boney stated, in his opinion, Mr. Bordeaux does not have the right to improve the road. commissioner Sutton requested Attorney Waters to express his opinion on whether Mr. Bordeaux has the right to improve the road. Attorney Waters stated the property owner would have to agree to improve the road. He also commented on that fact that the petitioner is not desiring to develop a commercial cemetery and stated he would like to clearly establish the fact that the proposed use is for establishing a family cemetery. Chairman Retchin closed the Public Hearing. Motion: After discussion of the negative impact of a family cemetery on a small parcel of land in a residential neighborhood, Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Greer to deny issuance of a Special Use Permit based upon the evidence and findings concluding the following general requirements were not met: (A) The proposed use does not satisfy the second general requirement based on the following findings: (1) the access road on the site plan could not be improved as illustrated; (2) the number of graves and subsequent funeral operations conducted on the site is excessive; (3) the site's limited access over backyards and home-sites would create hardships on neighboring properties; (B) The proposed use does not satisfy the third general requirement based upon the following findings: (1) The proposed cemetery would devalue adjoining residential properties because the cemeteries presence would reduce the attractiveness of the area for continued residential use; (C) The proposed use does not satisfy the fourth general requirement based upon the following findings: (1) The development of a cemetery with the burial of family members outside the general neighborhood and communi ty would not be compatible or harmonious with the area. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the Order denying issuance of the Special Use Permi t is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is contained in sUP Book I, Page 46. Chairman Retchin commented on the manner in which the vault had been placed above ground and expressed concern for no state or local regulations pertaining to private or family cemeteries. Consensus: After further disc~ssion, it was the consensus of the Board to request Commissioner Greer to discuss the possibility of establishing regulations with the Board of Health. ~ ( I I I ! ~ MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING, SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 Page 616 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER CLOSING A PORTION OF ARCHDALE ROAD LOCATED IN BRICKSTONE ESTATES SUBDIVISION IN HARNETT TOWNSHIP (SC-54) Chairman Retchin opened the Public Hearing. Planning Director, Dexter Hayes, stated after review of the proposed road closing, this portion of Archdale Road will not "landlock" or preclude road access; however, the County Engineer recommends that a 30 foot utility easement (15 feet on each side of the centerline) be reserved for sewer, water and drainage purposes. o Chairman Retchin asked if anyone present would like to speak in favor of or in opposition to the proposed road closing. The following person commented: Mr. R. Howryla, the petitioner and property owner on Archdale Road, requested approval of the road closing in order to avoid connecting the proposed McCormick Subdivision to Brickstone Subdivision through an extension of Archdale Road. Chairman Retchin closed the Public Hearing. Motion: Vice-Chairman Mathews MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Sutton to approve an ordinance closing a portion of Archdale Road in Brickstone Subdivision as requested by the petitioner. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A copy of the ordinance is hereby incorporated as a part of the minutes and is contained in Exhibit Book XIX, Page 16. REPORT ON MARINA REGULATIONS IN NEW HANOVER COUNTY Planning Director, Dexter Hayes, presented a report outlining possible courses of action for additional regulations for marina development at the local level. The following local regulatory options were presented: Alternative I - Follow "Status Quo" This approach would leave the State mostly responsible for the permitting process, although the County would continue to be involved in local review for commercial marinas only as now mandated by the Zoning Ordinance. An example of existing local review is the Special Use Permit review of commercial marinas desiring to locate in specified residential districts and for commercial marinas with floating structures. o Alternative 2: A simple pro-active option would be to require all marina developments as defined by the Zoning Ordinance, to obtain a Special Use Permit. This action would require changing community boating facilities to a Special Use Permit from a use by right and possibly establishing general review criteria. This would provide discretionary local control. A sample of the needed text changes for Alternative 2 are as as follows: Community Boating Facility R-15 S B-1 S RA S PD R-20S S S R-20 S R-10 S Add: 72-37 Community Boating Facilitv permitted in the pD' R-20S, R-20, Districts provided: These R-25, facilities may be R-10, RA and B-1 o 1. It can be demonstrated that no adverse impacts will occur which negatively affect water quality, primary nursery areas, shellfish grounds, and ~onservation resources if not contiguous with a residential development. 2. Off-street parking will be provided at a ratio of one space per boat slip. \r' :f;, .~ i ';' , ;~, :;fF',!: '~, ; 'i:, :' ,f,,1. (' '~. ~ >IV ~ MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING, SEPTEMBER 3" 1991 Page 617 ;~)~~:1t~ 3. The number of boat slips may not exceed the number of residential lots or dwelling units within the associated residential development. 4. The right for use of the facility must be conferred by an easement appurtenant to the residential project it is intended to serve. . 5. Commercial activities, including but not limited to the sale of gasoline, oil, marine supplies and food stuffs shall be strictly prohibited. Revise: 72-31 Commercial Marina, add: 5. It can be demonstrated that the siting of the facility will not negatively affect water quality, primary nursery areas, shellfish grounds, and conservation resources. Revise: 72-31.5 Commercial Marina with Floating structures, add: 11. It can be demonstrated that the siting of the facility will not negatively affect water quality, primary nursery areas, shellfish grounds, and conservation resources. Alternative 3: Another option would be to revive a package of marina regulations presented to the Planning Commission in 1988,. The specifics of these recommendations are outlined below: . Amend: 23-62 Community Boating Facility a Private non-profit boating facility, including a dock, dry storage, pler, boat ramp, channels, and/or basin, and all associated features, the use of which is intended to serve five (5) or more residences or residential lots. The right to use the facility must be conferred by an easement appurtenant to the residence or residential lot it is intended to serve. No floating structures or commercial activities of any kind shall be allowed within the confines of the facility. Amend: 23-63 Marina - Any dock, pier, boat ramp, channels, and/or basin and all associated structures, other than a community boating facility or residential private pier, providing permanent or temporary harboring or storing boats. Marine sales of boats, fuel, engines, food or accessory equipment, may be associated with a marina. Amend: 72-31 Marinas and Community community boating facilities districts, provided that: Boating Facilities may be permitted Marinas and in all zoning 1. Dredging shall be performed for marinas and community boating facilities only for the following purposes: . a. To establish upland basin sites above mean high water line. b. To establish ingress and egress channels. The provision of land areas suitable to accommodate disposal needs of dredged materials for future maintenance dredging shall be required. 2. A marina or community boating facility may occur in any Primary Nursery Area provided the water depth from mean low water is greater than four feet. No dredging shall be allowed in Primary Nursery Areas for marinas or community boating facilities except for ingress and egress channels. The designation of an area as a Primary Nursery Area shall be determined by the N. C. Division of Marine Fisheries. ~ ( I \ I , i I [ I , ( I i l MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING, SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 Page 618 .;e~ 3. Marinas, with the exception of boat ramps, dry storage facilities, and wet slips that accommodate boats no" longer than 25 feet, shall not be located within the following distances of shellfish that are propagating and surviving in a biologically suitable habitat, as determined by the N. C. Division of Marine Fisheries. No. of Boats in Marina "Closed Marina" "Open Marina" 0-10 10-25 26-50 50-75 76-100 100 boats boats boats boats boats boats 100 feet 20 feet 275 feet 325 feet 400 feet Add'l 50 ft. for each add'l 25 boats 50 feet 199 feet 150 feet 170 feet 200 feet Add'l 25 ft. for each add'l 25 boats o "Closed marinas" are defined as those constructed in canals, small basins, small tributaries, or other areas with significantly restricted tidal flow. "Open marinas" are those constructed in areas where tidal currents have not been impeded significantly by natural or man-made barriers. The entrance canal to "closed marinas" with more than 50 slips cannot be within 100 feet of shellfish that are propagating and surviving in a biologically suitable manner. 4. The basins and channels of marinas and community boating facilities shall met the following design characteristics in order to promote adequate water circulation: a. The basin and channel depths shall gradually increase toward open water and shall not be deeper than the water to which they connect. o b. When possible, two openings shall be provided at opposite ends of the basin to establish flow through circulation. c. The basin shall be round or oval shaped. d. The sides of basins and channels shall be sloping and stabilized with either rip-rap or vegetation. e. Adverse waters access boating effects shall be to deep facility. on navigation and public use of minimized while allowing adequate waters from the marina or community f. Open water marinas and community boating facilities shall not be enclosed within breakwaters that signi- ficantly reduce circulation of water. 5. Marinas and community boating facilities shall post notices prohibiting the discharge of any waste from boat heads and explaining the availability of local pump-out services. 6. Boat maintenance areas shall be allowed only in marinas. These areas must be designed so that all scraping, sand- blasting, and painting will be done over dry land with adequate containment devices to prevent runoff or discharge of waste materials into adjacent waters. () 7. All marinas that accommodate boats longer than 25 ft. shall provide permanent pump-out facilities with a sewage disposal system approved by the County Health Department. All waste- water piping shall be constructed in compliance to the N. C. state Plumbing Code. 8. All marinas shall provide a minimum of one (1) off-street parking space per wet boat slip and per two (2) dry storage slips. t". ;: " ;1.. ~l'" ~,t; ~ .., MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING, SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 Page 619 J-~' t $ ., . 9. All marinas shall provide a buffer in compliance with section 67 along all property lines abutting residential districts. 10. Night lighting shall be contained on the site for marinas located in or adjacent to any residential district. 11. A site plan shall be submitted for all marinas and community boating facilities for review and approval by the County Commissioners. Amend: 72-31. 5 Marinas with Floating Structures - A marina with floating structures may be permitted in any zoning district, provided: 1. Floating structures......... 10. .........New Hanover County Zoning Ordinance. Amend: 50-2 Tabulation of Permitted Uses by adding Marina and Community Boating Facility as Special Uses in all zoning districts. . Director Hayes stated the report was presented to the Planning Commission and after a lengthy discussion concerning existing local regulations, as well as State permitting procedures, it was determined that no changes were needed at the local level. The Planning commission pointed out that the State review process is very thorough, and despite allegations of inconsistencies in those regulations and the fact that the regulations are under constant evolution, there was not enough justification to add another layer of review. However, the Planning Commission did recommended re-evaluating local regulations every year since the State's regulations are constantly being amended. Motion: After, discussion of the State review process and the fact that regulations are constantly changing for permitting boating and marina facilities, Chairman Retchin MOVED, SECONDED by Vice-Chairman Mathews to accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission, which is to allow the local marina regulations to remain unchanged, but to request the Planning Commission to closely monitor future amendments to the State regulations and review the County's regulations within the next 8-12 months. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Chairman Retchin, on behalf of the Board, expressed appreciation to the Planning Staff and Planning Commission for an excellent report. ADDITIONAL ITEMS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS . Announcement of Meeting wi th Chairmen and County Managers of Pender, Brunswick, Columbus, and New Hanover County to Discuss Jointly Addressing the Solid Waste Issue Chairman Retchin announced a meeting with the Chairmen and County Managers of Brunswick, Columbus, New Hanover, and Pender counties will meet at 2:30 P.M. in the Wilmington Hilton on Wednesday, September 4, 1991, to discuss the possibility of handling solid waste on a regional basis. He invited the Commissioners to attend. Discussion of Code of Ethics for County Commissioners Vice-Chairman Mathews presented a sample Code of Ethics and stated at the N. C. Association of County Commissioners Conference, the Commissioners were urged to request their respective Boards to adopt a Code of Ethics. After further discussion, it was agreed for the Board to review the document and discuss this item at a later date. ~ ( MINUT,ES OF REGULAR MEETING, .SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 Page 62.0 t.~. ..)c..;.. .lj"..t Discussion of Regulations Governing Overgrown Property commissioner Sutton commented on the Chairman's recent memorandum pertaining to the possibility of amending the County's ordinance to address overgrown property situations and stated this type of regulation would be more difficult to enforce in the County than in the City, especially on woodlands where the ordinance would require that grass be cut to a certain height along the public right-of-way or within 100 feet of a structure. He stated if an amendment is to be considered, the wording-should be changed to address all type of lots in the unincorporated areas of the County. Chairman Retchin stated the language can be changed to amend the nuisance ordinance, which would probably be more appropriate. He requested the County Manager to further investigate this matter. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Commissioner Barfield MOVED, SECONDED by Commissioner Greer to adjourn. Upon vote, the MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Chairman Retchin adjourned the meeting at 9:29 o'clock P.M. Respectfully submitted, ~d~ Lucie F. Harrell Clerk to the Board ~ () () ()