Loading...
Agenda 2010 02-01AGENDA NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Assembly Room, New Hanover County Historic Courthouse 24 North Third Street, Room 301 Wilmin ton, NC g JASON R. THOMPSON, CHAIRMAN • JONATHAN BARFIELD, JR., VICE-CHAIRMAN ROBERT G. GREER, COMMISSIONER • WILLIAM A. CASTER, COMMISSIONER • TED DAVIS, JR., COMMISSIONER BRUCE T. SHELL, COUNTY MANAGER • WANDA COPLEY, COUNTY ATTORNEY • SHEILA SCHULT, CLERK TO THE BOARD FEBRUARY 1, 2010 6:00 P.M. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER (Chairman Jason R. Thompson) INVOCATION (The Reverend Mark Powell, St. Andrew's On-the-Sound Episcopal Church) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (Vice-Chairman Jonathan Barfield, Jr.) APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS OF BUSINESS 1. Approval of Minutes 2. Approval of Tax Collection Reports 3. Adoption of Ordinances for Budget Amendments ESTIMATED REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS OF BUSINESS TIMES 6:05 p.m. 4. Consideration of a Resolution of Recognition of Major General Joseph A. McNeil 6:15 p.m. 5. Consideration of a Resolution in Honor of Mrs. Hannah Soloman Block 6:25 p.m. 6. Public Hearing Special Use Permit (5-598,1/10) - Request by Malcom Dean Johnson for Malcom L. and Shirley S. Johnson for a Special Use Permit to Allow a Residential Use Within a B-1 Commercial Zoning District at 2723 Castle Hayne Road 6:45 p.m. 7. Public Hearing Special Use Permit (5-599,1/10) - Request by Withers & Ravenel for Gordon Road Development Partners for a Special Use Permit to Allow for aHigh- Density 23 Single-Family Residential Lot Development on 6.095 Acres at 6469 Gordon Road in a R-15 Residential Zoning District 7:05 p.m. 8. SC-88 (1/10) Road Resolution to Abandon From State Maintenance a Portion of Terminal Road South (SR 2134) 7:20 p.m. 9. Presentation by Consultant of Evaluation Findings and Final Report of Fire Service District Master Plan NON-AGENDA ITEMS (limit three minutes ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS OF BUSINESS 7:50 p.m. 10. Consideration of a Resolution to Protect the Room Occupancy Tax 7:50 p.m. 11. Additional Items County Manager County Commissioners Board of Commissioners Meeting mml~~nln v14./vi/~.vly Clerk to the Board County Attorney 8:00 p.m. 12. ADJOURN Note: Times listed for each item are estimated, and if a preceding item takes less time, the Board will move forward until the agenda is completed. Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION MEETING DATE: February 1, 2010 CONSENT ITEM: 1 DEPARTMENT: Governing Body PRESENTER(S): Chairman Thompson CONTACT(S): Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes BRIEF SUMMARY: Approve minutes from the following meetings: Regular Session meeting held on January 19, 2010 Budget Work Session held on January 19, 2010 RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Approve minutes. COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (only Manager) COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS: Approved 5-0. Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v~.~vi~~.vly 1-0 This page intentionally left blank. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION MEETING DATE: February 1, 2010 CONSENT ITEM: 2 DEPARTMENT: Tax PRESENTER(S): Michelle Harrell, Collector of Revenue CONTACT(S): Michelle Harrell, Collector of Revenue SUBJECT: Approval of Tax Collection Reports BRIEF SUMMARY: Tax collection reports for December 2009 are submitted for approval. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Approve reports. ATTACHMENTS: Collection Reports COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (only Manager) Recommend approval. COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS: Approved 5-0. Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v~.~vi~~.vly 2-0 N O l~ t~ G0 00 N tl1 N tt1 M N h t11 LO i.t'1 m N O N O~ O N 00 t9 mmC11oo0N o0 ~d'mMrn u't mornm~too ~ ~'~cvo~ rn ~ ►ncroo~~n ~ N NQ1LAd' o v . a, ~ moo N m o0 !,t ~ N ~ ~ M N o0 rnoo~+rnr•~ N o0mom m ~ mrn~-m~oooo ~ N moOM~n ~ ~ 0OO~~ o ui d'~im v° ~ v h ri N 00 t~ u'1 h ~ O to u1 u'1 ~ orrorn~► ~ ao ~ ~ t-+hmm o0 ciu~aid~~m ~ r~~~ 00 ~ d' h d' ~ t0 st c u O u'1 d' r-I N h .C e-~ N ~ m N O \ .C t0 O u'1 I~ 00 I~ ~ rl O e-i O rl h Q1 tT O m l0 rl ~ ~d~ o~rn~ ~ ~ ~mNO ~ N N 01 N Ol i U} tlt Ll1 O O d' d' N r-i O Q N N N t!~ t1} i/~ t/} t!~ t/} i/'1~ i/}. ilk 00 l0 m Q1 lfl m N t!I 'd' ~ C1~ lD to N 00 O 00 ~ try O t!} I~ QO 00 ~y ~ t~ tD N oQ o0 O ~ ct ~ ~ tD oo ~ O 0~ o a, ~+rnmoa~+r a~ N ~.ntOt~O h Q. f~ U1 Q1 ~'1 N ~ rl ~ to f~ DO I`~ O 0 0 0 N O tD c-1 rl rl O a ` ~ 01 N tD ~-I d~ u1 a mo~-oor~~~ a o mrmd~ a, _ om rhos _ ~ o 0 ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~i ~ ~ ~ ~i ~i ~ o o, V i ~ 4l 0 GJ p a a ~ h m u'J ~ 01 0 00 ~ m O ~ ~ m o r•momry~ ~ ornoa~~, rn a ~ ri ~ u~ ri ~ r-i o of oo r-i ~i ~ v h m~ N~~ ~--oa o~ rn m tD rI l0 01 l4 N ~t a 00 0 f~ ur'} c ~ ~ ~~-+orn~om~ m ~tooooo 0 c ~o~~orn~o ~a mN~oo h a~ m mrn~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 v r ~ 0 00 ~ ~ a o a~ ~ ~ n~o 7 C ~ ~ ~ N ,fl; ~ v u o ~ o~ ~ °o o~ o L N s m L p m U G ~ ~ ~ C ~ C 0 L ~ ~ C ~ i mQ1~x0~0 ~ ~4-a,90~ ~ ~ 3 Z3 0 0 3 0 ~ X 0 0 3 p ZU cnQQI-uC~u a u~4~Q1-u~ ~ ~ ~~;r ~ ~ M na . r + f ~ ~ Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v~.~vi~~.vly 2 - 1 - 1 ~t~olnulo lnhmoo~l~lo ~ n o0 o a1 ~ ~ oo ~ co o tp d; ~ 00 00 e-I 11'j N M Q1 d' O I.t1 00 N tlf iT h h o0 h h O lD e-I 00 01 00 ~ h ~ m h O M h tD o0 O M cD h N ~ N o0 ~ ~ 00 O ~ ~ 01 N ~ 00 111 N ~ ~t M N ~ ~ ~ ~ rl rl h h 111 N ~ 0 h ~ U t!~ t/~ t1} i/} i/} ~V1. i!} t1'1~ V'F V1~ iJ'~ t/1~ ~tl1. It1 I11 d' t0 01 h e-i h N t0 rl 111 O omoM~o~a mo hu~mM c~ ~ I`~ 'Ct' rl O d' 111 tl1 M ~ N LA l17 Q1 h ~ tp ~ m ~ O d' N N ~ to tD h 41 00 s ~ N~~no rn ~N~ ni > N ~ oNO j L ~ L 0 ~ i/} V1~ iJ1~ i/~ i/} 'V1• i/} i/1• {j} ii}. 'S/1~ ~t/? h m O O M h o0 1r'1 tD h rl tD 00 c'r1 ~ d; 111 ~ M lD h ~ tD h N t11 ct N N M ei N C1 ~ t11 ri tf1 ~-I m h i lD N 00 D 00 00 01 00 n1 h h ~C N t0 to d' 00 N 1!1 N O rrj I'+ 00 00 0 ~ O c-I ~ ~ ` ~ d' N r~ l0 ~ o~ ~ 01 N h a ~o ~DmNn a ~ M M O ~ Q1 c L ~ N ~ .Q a E ~ ~ p Nm~lnmco ~~nmOOOrno1 m L mNm~1~o ~+o~+vllnoct ~ 0 oi~ir:M~rioo hhcicvhmoo ~ ~ tl1 N tT 00 ~ t0 tD 01 d' ri N 00 01 i N D1 Ol tD rl t!7 Ll"1 ,v h O Ol Ci h i-i O ~ ~ ~ h N N d' h ~ ~ ~ N e-I ~ ~ n N 1!1 h h ~ r-I N rl pC W t0 d' e-1 h W C t0 N 0 t~ r` 0 V ~V1~ th t/~ iii tJ} i/}. tl'b ~ i1} il't` tt} 7► t C ~ 00 '0 0 OJ dA O 0J 0 Q1 iv ~ + N N C u s. N ~ m i O D~ 0 L a o o m u ~ ~ C a' ~ C w C ~ L~ 'm E o c a ~ o ~ v zu ~ntaE°-u°Ou° a ~naSQHUO ~ ~ r . . u'bSf 2". ~ SP .t e' kYP' r ,wP, ~ c 4 t~ ~ Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 2-1-2 This page intentionally left blank. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION MEETING DATE: February 1, 2010 CONSENT ITEM: 3 DEPARTMENT: Budget PRESENTER(S): Cam Griffin, Budget Director CONTACT(S): Cam Griffin, Budget Director SUBJECT: Adoption of Ordinances for Budget Amendments BRIEF SUMMARY: The following budget amendments amend the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010. 10-030 -Library 10-145 -Social Services 10-146 -Social Services 10-148 - Sheriff s Office 10-149 -Budget 10-151- Health RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Adoption of the ordinances for the budget amendments listed in the summary above. ATTACHMENTS: B/A 10-030 B/A 10-145 B/A 10-146 B/A 10-148 B/A 10-149 B/A 10-151 COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (only Manager) Recommend approval. COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS: Approved 5-0. Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v~.~vi~~.vly 3-0 AGENDA: February 1, 2010 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2010 BUDGET BY BUDGET AMENDMENT 10-030 BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of New Hanover County, North Carolina, that the following Budget Amendment 10-030 be made to the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010. Section 1: Details of Budget Amendment: Fund: General Fund Department: Library/Partnership For Children Ex enditure: Decrease Increase Libra /Partnershi For Children: Su lies $2,000 Total $2,000 Revenue: Decrease Increase Libra /Partnershi For Children: Grant -State -Smart Start $2,000 Total $2,000 Section 2: Explanation To budget additional funds received from Smart Start to purchase books for the Growing Readers program. Section 3: Documentation of Adoption: This ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of New Hanover County, North Carolina, that the Ordinance for Budget Amendment 10-030, amending the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010, is adopted. Adopted, this day of , 2010. (SEAL) Jason R. Thompson, Chairman ATTEST: Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 3-1-1 AGENDA: February 1, 2010 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2010 BUDGET BY BUDGET AMENDMENT 10-145 BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of New Hanover County, North Carolina, that the following Budget Amendment 10-145 be made to the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010. Section 1: Details of Budget Amendment: Fund: General Fund Department: DSS /Energy Assistance Ex enditure: Decrease Increase DSS I Ener Assistance: Assistance Pa menu $183,382 Total $183,382 Revenue: Decrease Increase DSS /DSS -Administration: DSS Admin 1571 Funds -Fed /State $183,382 Total $183,382 Section 2: Explanation To budget an additional Federal allocation of crisis intervention program (CIP) funds of $183,382 for energy assistance payments. There is no County match required. Section 3: Documentation of Adoption: This ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of New Hanover County, North Carolina, that the Ordinance for Budget Amendment 10-145, amending the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010, is adopted. Adopted, this day of , 2010. (SEAL) Jason R. Thompson, Chairman ATTEST: Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 3-2-1 AGENDA: February 1, 2010 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2010 BUDGET BY BUDGET AMENDMENT 10-146 BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of New Hanover County, North Carolina, that the following Budget Amendment 10-146 be made to the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010. Section 1: Details of Budget Amendment: Fund: General Fund Department: DSS /Client Related Support -CWS Ex enditure: Decrease Increase DSS /Client Related Su ort -CWS: Famil Find Searches $2,000 Total $2,000 Revenue: Decrease Increase DSS /Administration: Duke Endowment Grant $2,000 Total $2,000 Section 2: Explanation To budget an additional allocation of a grant award of $2,000 from the Duke Endowment to fund Family Find information search expenses. No County match is required, and there is no requirement to continue the program when funding ends. Section 3: Documentation of Adoption: This ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of New Hanover County, North Carolina, that the Ordinance for Budget Amendment 10-146, amending the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010, is adopted. Adopted, this day of , 2010. (SEAL) Jason R. Thompson, Chairman ATTEST: Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 3-3-1 AGENDA: February 1, 2010 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2010 BUDGET BY BUDGET AMENDMENT 10-148 BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of New Hanover County, North Carolina, that the following Budget Amendment 10-148 be made to the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010. Section 1: Details of Budget Amendment: Fund: General Fund Department: Sheriff sOffice/Administration/Uniform Patrol Ex enditure: Decrease Increase Sheriff sOffice/Uniform Patrol: Ca ital Outla -Motor Vehicle $50,000 Total $50,000 Revenue: Decrease Increase Sheriff sOffice/Administration: ABC Fees $50,000 Total $50,000 Section 2: Explanation To budget additional ABC revenue for vehicles. Section 3: Documentation of Adoption: This ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of New Hanover County, North Carolina, that the Ordinance for Budget Amendment 10-148, amending the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010, is adopted. Adopted, this day of , 2010. (SEAL) Jason R. Thompson, Chairman ATTEST: Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 3-4-1 AGENDA: February 1, 2010 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2010 BUDGET BY BUDGET AMENDMENT 10-149 BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of New Hanover County, North Carolina, that the following Budget Amendment 10-149 be made to the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010. Section 1: Details of Budget Amendment: Fund: General Fund Department: Courts/Clerk of the Court; Governing Body -County Commissioners Ex enditure: Decrease Increase Courts/Clerk of the Court: Probation and Parole Office Rent: $60,114 Total $60,114 Revenue: Decrease Increase Governin Bod -Count Commissioners: A ro riated Fund Balance $60,114 Total $60,114 Section 2: Explanation This budget amendment increases the rent line item for the Probation and Parole Office by $60,114. Action taken at the last session of the state Legislature requires counties to pay the total rental expense for office space for probation officers and their administration support. This is a new requirement in the state's budget for 2009 - 2011(See Section 19.19, G.S. 15-209). The total annual cost for FY10-11 will be $216,767, an increase of $120,227 over the $96,540 we currently pay. Prior to actions taken at this Board of County Commissioners meeting, the Appropriated Fund balance is $3,655,593. Section 3: Documentation of Adoption: This ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of New Hanover County, North Carolina, that the Ordinance for Budget Amendment 10-149, amending the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010, is adopted. Adopted, this day of , 2010. (SEAL) Jason R. Thompson, Chairman ATTEST: Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 3-5-1 AGENDA: February 1, 2010 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2010 BUDGET BY BUDGET AMENDMENT 10-151 BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of New Hanover County, North Carolina, that the following Budget Amendment 10-151 be made to the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010. Section 1: Details of Budget Amendment: Fund: General Fund Department: Health/Family Strengthening Initiative Ex enditure: Decrease Increase Health/Famil Stren thenin Initiative: Contract Services $46,000 Total $46,000 Revenue: Decrease Increase Health/Famil Stren thenin Initiative: State Grant - NC Division of Public Health $41,000 Administrative Fee 5,000 Total $46,000 Section 2: Explanation To budget a grant award from the NC Division of Public Health, Women's and Children's Health Section, for the Evidence-Based Family Strengthening Initiative. The Health Department will contract with the Child Advocacy and Parenting Place (CAPP) Exchange Club Center who will initiate parenting classes using researched curricula, such as the Strengthening Families Program. Permission to apply for this grant was approved by the County Commissioners at their January 19, 2010, meeting. No County match is required. Section 3: Documentation of Adoption: This ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of New Hanover County, North Carolina, that the Ordinance for Budget Amendment 10-151, amending the annual budget ordinance for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010, is adopted. Adopted, this day of , 2010. (SEAL) Jason R. Thompson, Chairman ATTEST: Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 3-6-1 This page intentionally left blank. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION MEETING DATE: February 1, 2010 REGULAR ITEM: 4 DEPARTMENT: County Manager PRESENTER(S): Vice-Chairman Barfield CONTACT(S): Bruce T. Shell, County Manager SUBJECT: Consideration of a Resolution of Recognition of Major General Joseph A. McNeil BRIEF SUMMARY: On February 1, 1960 Joseph McNeil and three other young men made a choice to seek service at a Woolworth's lunch counter in Greensboro, NC. Their action was a catalyst for the civil rights sit-in movement. Joseph McNeil continued to serve his country in the United States Air Force, retiring in 2001 as a Major General. Today is the fiftieth anniversary of Major General McNeil's courageous action which was instrumental in the civil rights movement. Major General McNeil may not be able to attend the meeting. His cousin, Henry McNeil and his wife, Jean will be happy to receive the resolution on his behalf. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Adopt the resolution and honor Major General McNeil. ATTACHMENTS: Bio Joseph McNeil Resolution COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (only Manager) Recommend approval. COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS: Approved 5-0. Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v~.~vi~~.vly 4-0 • On February 1, 1960, in Greensboro, NC, Joseph McNeil along with three otherfreshmen students (David Richmond, Franklin McCain and Jibril Kazan) started what became known as "the student sit-in movement." The four North Carolina A&T University students began sitting-in at a F.W.1Noolworth's lunch counter and refused to leave until they were served. This simple act became the catalyst for a major social movement and challenged racial segregation throughout the South. It became the corner stone forfollow-on major civil rights legislation. Afterthe sit-ins, Joe McNeil graduated from North Carolina A&T University with a degree in engineering physics in 1963, and was also commissioned as a Second Lieutenant in the USAir Force. He retired from the USAir Force Reserve in February 2001 with the rank of Major General. General McNeil served for over 37 years and was involved in our country's efforts in Vietnam and Desert Storm. He last served as the Mobilization Assistant to the Chief of the Air Force Reserves, and had previously served as an Air Force Wing Commander and Numbered Air Force Commander. He received the Air Force Distinguished Service Medal upon retirement. Major General McNeil also retired (5/31 /2002) from the Senior Executive Service of the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) in Jamaica, NY. McNeil served for over 15 years and was the head of the Flight Standards Division for the Eastern Region of the U.S. He has been recognized with honorary doctorate degrees from North Carolina A&TUniversity - Doctor of Philosophy in Humanities (1991, Greensboro, NC} and St. John's University- Honorary Doctor of Laws (1998, Jamaica, NY). Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v~.~vi~~.vly 4-1-1 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION RECOGNITION OF MAJOR GENERAL JOSEPH A. MCNEIL WHEREAS, Major General Joseph A. McNeil was born and raised in the City of Wilmington in New Hanover County, North Carolina; and WHEREAS, Major General McNeil attended and graduated from Williston High School; and WHEREAS, Major General McNeil pursued his college degree at A&T University in Greensboro, North Carolina graduating with a degree in engineering physics in 1963; and WHEREAS, on February 1, 1960, Major General McNeil and three other students made a choice to seek service at a Woolworth's lunch counter in Greensboro refusing to leave until they were served; and WHEREAS, this simple act became the catalyst for the civil rights sit-in movement; and WHEREAS, Major General McNeil served our country in the United States Air Force for over thirty-seven years, retiring from the United States Air Force Reserves on February 21, 2001, receiving the Air Force Distinguished Service Medal; and WHEREAS, the year 2010 marks the fiftieth anniversary of the Greensboro counter sit-ins, which began his j ourney through history; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners recognizes Major General Joseph A. McNeil for his contribution to New Hanover County, the State of North Carolina, and the United States of America by sacrificially giving of himself to effect positive change for our nation. ADOPTED this the 1St day of February, 2010. NEW HANOVER COUNTY Jason R. Thompson, Chairman ATTEST: Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 4-2-1 This page intentionally left blank. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION MEETING DATE: February 1, 2010 REGULAR ITEM: 5 DEPARTMENT: County Manager PRESENTER(S): Commissioner Davis CONTACT(S): Bruce T. Shell, County Manager SUBJECT: Consideration of a Resolution in Honor of Mrs. Hannah Soloman Block BRIEF SUMMARY: Hannah Soloman Block was a local civic leader for more than four decades, and an inspiration to many in the lower Cape Fear area. She was a friend of the arts, history and culture of New Hanover County. Mrs. Block died November 13, 2009 at the age of 96. She will be long remembered for her spirit of service to others. Her son, Frank Block, will receive the resolution. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Adopt the resolution and present it to Mr. Block. ATTACHMENTS: Hannah Block Resolution COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (only Manager) Recommend approval. COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS: Approved 5-0. Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v~.~vi~~.vly 5-0 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION IN HONOR OF HANNAH SOLOMON BLOCK WHEREAS, Hannah Solomon Block was born June 8, 1913 in Portsmouth, Virginia, daughter of Samuel and Jenny Solomon; and WHEREAS, following a career on various New York City stages married Wilmington businessman Charles Morris Block in 1935, moved to New Hanover County, and became actively involved in countless community causes including the establishment of Wilmington's first USO; and WHEREAS, during the 1940's Hannah Solomon Block served as the first female lifeguard and first female head lifeguard for the Town of Carolina Beach and volunteered for many organizations including the American Red Cross; and WHEREAS, from 1961 until 1963, Hannah Solomon Block was the first woman elected to the Wilmington City Council and served as the city's first female Mayor Pro Tempore; and WHEREAS, throughout many decades, Hannah Solomon Block continued a life of community service, pioneering the city's historic preservation efforts, organizing many talent and beauty pageants, and serving those in uniform all while raising her family; and WHEREAS, Hannah Solomon Block was recipient of many honors including the Order of the Long Leaf Pine from the State of North Carolina. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners does hereby posthumously recognize Hannah Solomon Block as civic leader, humanitarian, preservationist, author, mother, grandmother and great-grandmother and urges all residents to embody her spirit of service to others. ADOPTED this the 1 st day of February, 2010. NEW HANOVER COUNTY Jason R. Thompson, Chairman ATTEST: Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 5-1-1 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION MEETING DATE: February 1, 2010 REGULAR ITEM: 6 DEPARTMENT: Planning PRESENTER(S): Jane Daughtridge, Planning & Zoning Manager; Chris O'Keefe, Planning & Inspections Director CONTACT(S): Jane Daughtridge, Planning & Zoning Manager; Chris O'Keefe, Planning & Inspections Director SUBJECT: Public Hearing Special Use Permit (5-598,1/10) -Request by Malcom Dean Johnson for Malcom L. and Shirley S. Johnson for a Special Use Permit to Allow a Residential Use Within a B-1 Commercial Zoning District at 2723 Castle Hayne Road BRIEF SUMMARY: At its January 7, 2010 meeting, the Planning Board voted unanimously (7-0) to recommend approval of the special use permit based on positive findings of fact as presented. No one spoke in opposition to the item. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: ACTION NEEDED: Use the Script/Worksheet to make findings and 1. Grant the special use; or 2. Add conditions to the special use; or 3. Deny the special use ATTACHMENTS: 5-598 Staff Summary 5-598 Petition Summary 5-598 Site Plan 5-598 Adj Prop Map 5-599 Applicant Materials COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (only Manager) COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS: Approved 5-0. Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v~.~vi~~.vly 6-0 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS February 1, 2010 CASE S-598 (1/10) APPLICANT: Malcolm Dean Johnson for Malcolm L. and Shirley S. Johnson LOCATION: 2723 Castle Hayne Road REQUESTED USE: Residential Apartment over a Beauty Salon in a B-1 Neighborhood Commercial District. PLANNING BOARD ACTION: At its January 7, 2010 meeting, the Planning Board voted unanimously to recommend a royal of the special use permit based on positive findings of fact as presented. No one spoke in opposition to the item. STAFF COMMENTS: Prior to the initial zoning of this area in July of 1974, the structure was a residence, possibly utilized astwo apartments. The propertywas zoned B-1 neighborhood commercial atthattime. Residences were not permitted in commercial districts, so this use was continued as a non- conformity. Mr. Johnson has changed the lower level into a beauty salon, which is a permitted use in a 6-1 zoning district. However, in order to legitimize the separate residential apartment above the salon, a special use permit is needed in accordance with the requirements below. Although the standards included in the ordinance clearly anticipate a more elaborate mixed use project, the proposal for this case brings anon-conforming use into compliance with the spirit and intent of the ordinance to allow residences in commercial districts only as part of a mixed use project. Not all of the standards can be applied to this project. For example, the use is located wholly within an existing structure, so photographs of the structure have been substituted for an architectural elevation. Also, there is only one structure and only two uses, so a walkway from the parking lot to the structure should suffice for sidewalk interconnectivity within the project. REQUIRED STANDARDS: 72-38: Residential Uses within Commercial Districts - A dwelling unit or units may be permitted in the B-1 or B-2 commercial Districts provided: (12/3/01) (1) The dwelling units are part of a mixed use development established to provide innovative opportunities for an integration of diverse but compatible uses into a single development that is unified by distinguishable design features with amenities and walkways to increase pedestrian activity. Such a development shall be in single ownership or unified control of a propertyowners association. Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v~.~vi~~.vly 6-1-1 (2) Uses within the development are restricted to residential and B-1 neighborhood business uses. (3) A conceptual elevation indicating proposed architecture style shall be provided. (4) Sidewalks must be provided throughout the project. (5) Parking locationand quantityshould be shared. (6) Community facilities and/orCommon area shall be provided. (7)Aconceptual lightingplan must be provided. (8) Residential uses are permitted and encouraged in the same building as commercial uses. (9) Density can exceed 2.5 units per acre in Resource Protection Areas if the development is located inside the urban services boundary, provides a minimum of 25% pervious area, and is exceptionally designed. Exceptionally designed projects shall reduce runoff from impervious surfaces through porous paving and/or infiltration devices as well as managing runoff with at least one or more of the following water quality Best Management Practices (ref: NCDENR Best Management Practices Manual for design criteria): bioretention area, filter strip, sand filter, or grassed swales. PRELIMINARY FINDINGS OF FACT: In its review of the request, the Planning Staff made the following preliminary "findings of fact." 1. The Board must find that the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and approved. A. Septic system serves the property. Application for an additional use must be submitted to environmental health to ensure compliance with well and septic regulations for beauty salon. B. Public water supply is provided through CFPUA. C. The property is accessed from Castle Hayne Road, a principal arterial. D. Level of Service (2007) on Castle Hayne Road between North Kerr Avenue and 1- 140 is rated E meaning that traffic volumes are at the design capacity, and traffic experiences some delays. E. Average daily traffic counts along Castle Hayne Road, south of Sheridan Dr. decreased by about 1% between 2008 and 2009. F. A driveway permit is required from NCDOT and application has been made. G. Traffic Impact Analysis is not required because traffic for this use will not reach thethreshold of 100 peak hourtrips. H. Fire Service is available from the Wrightsboro Fire Department. I. The property is not located in a flood hazard area. J. The proposed facility is an existing building recently remodeled forthe proposed purposes. S-598,1/10 Page 2 Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 6-1-2 Staf f Suggestion: Evidence in the record at this time supports a f inding that the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety where proposed. 2. The Board must find that the use meets all required conditions and specifications of the Zoning Ordinance. A. The property is zoned 6-1 Neighborhood Commercial. B. Nine off-street shared parking spaces are provided. Off-street parking requirements for the combined uses include a minimum of 5 parking spaces and landscaping. C. No additional lighting has been proposed forthis site. D. Signage for the commercial use must comply with the zoning ordinance. E. The lot is approximately 36,000 sq. ft. Therefore residential density does not exceed 2.5 units per acre. F. All other local, state and federal requirements must be met, including possible property upgrades to meet building codes and fire safety codes. Staff Suggestion: Evidence in the record at this time supports a finding that the use meets all required conditions and specifications of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The Board must find that the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property orthat the use is a public necessity. A. No evidence has been submitted that this project will decrease property values of residents who live nearby. Staf f Suggestion: The evidence in the record at this time supports a f inding that the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property. 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. A. The 2006 land Use Plan Update identifies this area as Transition. The Transition classification provides for future intensive urban development on lands that have been or will be provided with necessary urban services. B. Policies in the 2006 Land Use Plan encourage mixed use development in appropriate locations and where environmental impacts are minimal. S-598,1/10 Page 3 Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 6-1-3 STAFF COMMENTS: Staff feelsthefindings are positive and supportsthe Planning Board's recommendation. ACTION NEEDED: Use the Script/Worksheet to make findings and 1. Grant the special use or 2. Add conditions to the special use or 3. Denythe special use S-598,1/10 Page 4 Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 6-1-4 Case: 5-598 (1/10) Special Use Permit -Residential use within a commercial zoning district (B-1) Petition Summary Data 2723 Castle Hayne Road Owner/Petitioner: Malcom Dean Johnson for owners Malcom L. and Shirley S. Johnson Existing Land Use: Beauty salon Zonin H.~ istory: Zone l0A (July 1,1974) Land Classification: Transition Water Type: Public water through Cape Fear Public Utility Authority (CFPUA) Sewer TXpe: Septic Recreation Area: Cape Fear Optimist Access & Traffic Volume: Castle Hayne Road (rural principal arterial) with LOSE; ADT on Castle Hayne Road, slightly south of Sheridan Drive, decreased 1 % between 2007 and 2008. Fire District: Wrightsboro Volunteer Fire District Watershed & Water Quality Classification: Ness Creek; C; Sw Aquifer Rechar e.~ Area: Secondary recharge area for Castle Hayne and Pee Dee aquifer where occurring near land surface under water table conditions. Conservation/Historic/Archaeological Resources: none Soils: Onslow loamy fine sand (On) Septic Suitability Moderate limitation; requires moderate modification and maintenance (Class II) Schools: Wrightsboro Elementary Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 6-2-1 i . ~ i • 1 1 I~ _ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ i I } s i 4 r F M~ 1 1 1 . ■ } 1 l 1 1 y 9 . ~ Y ~ ~ ,..5. ■ 1~ 1 L ~ ~ B ommiss eting ~ N L ~ cn N ~ ~ ~ ~~8 a N ~ ~ AA++ ~ J ~ ~ W ~ N N = ~ N J ~ ~WJfALL~ Q a~ ~ 0 d~ N N O ~ 2~~ O O~ Q ~ 2 m m O~ p 0 O 3? O J J J Z~ as v~,7~ 0~~~~~Vm H~ Z Z Z Z N aJ?zzz~~ Z r+rOL o~~=== a W O ~3UoN O ~ aLL~ooo~~ Q \ M v , ~s O ~ _ ~ N M~ N t0 ti O 3N~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ Z ~ W w y~ N J Y ~ ~ ~ C J ,Q ~ ~ , , i ~ LL 1 ~ mu~~a~ ,Q W o aca ~ o Z ~J 0 ~J a~ 0 N ~ o ~ ~ w W ~ Z ~ w O J r N Q Z, ~4 o FERN_~R Q' N Z ~ ~ ~ m ~ W I N N CASTL•E+HAYNE-RD m ~ ~ ~ m ~ o m V V ~ z N ~ ~ •d 0 V 2 ,Z tiJ N s Z 1J W FL=ETCHER CT~ w Q a z a F BERRY~PATCi~ -CT~ Q O ~ OC N a O _ N ~ - ~ - - - ~ p ~ - - W ~ - Q ~J - a - - z ~ _ - - a - - _ ,1:EY RD OAK - Q, ,o ~ z~ ~ _ - B o' s Meeting 6-4 ILLLL... Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 6-5-1 ~1ote: Applients should refer to Article . 7 of the caning Ordinance far additional requirements for specific uses, Thy Planning Department, Manning Board, ndlar Board of Oount~y Commissioners reserve the right to require additional information if needed to assure that the use in its proposed location will be harmonious with the area and in accordance with ~ - the honing Ordinance of the bounty of New Hana~rer. ~RO~~1~l~R~ Applications far peeial Use Permixs ~otber then for single family dwellings oa ind~~idual lots} are ~l~trst referred to the New Hanover County Planning Board for recommendatio~~ to the County Oomrsioners. The Commissioners rnalce final action on the permit application in a quasi judicial pudic hearing. Complete petitions and all supplementary infarmation must be accepted by the planning Department t~~en~y worng days before the Planning .Board nr~eeting to allow ~dequ~te time for processing ar~d advertisement as required by the North Carolina General statutes, Planning >~aard meetings are held on the first Thursday of each ~1lonth at 5;30PNI in the ommiss~ioner's Assembly .Room at the Old County ~ourtliouse, at Third and princess streets, wilmingtan, North Carolina. Applications for single-farr~ily dwellings, including mobile homes, on individual lots must be accepted ~y the Planning Department twenty ~~0~ working days before the regularly scheduled Commissioners meeting. Applications far single-family dwellings an individual lots da not require planning board re~riew. ''ht ~'~u ~t ta~X~~h ~`~r ~ peci~~ Use ~e~m~t Authority to grant a special Use Permit is contained in the honing Ordinance, pursuant to section ~ 1. The honing Ordinance imposes the fallowing General .Requirements on the use requested by the applicant. Under. each requirement, the applicant should explain, with reference to attached plans, whe~•e applicable, Mo~v fhe proposed use satisfies these requirements: ~At~ach additional pages if necessary} general Requirement The BoaY•d mast ~in~l "that tl~e use ~~ill ~~ot 1~atez•lally er~dai~ger tl~e public l~ealtl~ ar safety if located ~v~~ere proposed ar~d developed accordi~~g to the paa~~ as s~b~nitted and appro~red.~' ~ ~ ~ i J~ 1. ~ Fade ~ of 4 SUP 810 Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 6-5-2 a er~era~ Ree~ui~•~ment The $pard must find "that the use ~~eets all re~ul~~d conditio~~~ and specif~~~tions" ofthe ~onin~ Qrdinanc~". enera~ Requirement #3 The Board must end {`that tl~e use will nat substantially lrl~ure the value o~~adjoi~i~~~ or abutting ~xoperty ar tl~~t the use is public necessit}~." ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tir , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ R ~ ~ ~ ~ , r~ ~ er~eral Rec~u~~emeut The Board rr~~st ~n~ "tl~at ~l~c location axed eha~•acte~• a~l~tl~e ~~se iFdeveloped according the flan as s~ubn~itted and app~•o~ed mill be in harmon~r ~~th the area v~hicll it is to be located and in general confonr~ity v~ith the flan o~l` de~relopr~~ent ~o~ ~e~v I~anovex• ou~~tyF" ~ ~ ~ A R~ ~ , Page 3 v~ 4 SUP ~IO~ Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 6-5-3 This page intentionally left blank. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION MEETING DATE: February 1, 2010 REGULAR ITEM: 7 DEPARTMENT: Planning PRESENTER(S): Jane Daughtridge, Planning & Zoning Manager; Chris O'Keefe, Planning & Inspections Director CONTACT(S): Jane Daughtridge, Planning & Zoning Manager; Chris O'Keefe, Planning & Inspectins Director SUBJECT: Public Hearing Special Use Permit (5-599, 1/10) -Request by Withers & Ravenel for Gordon Road Development Partners for a Special Use Permit to Allow for aHigh-Density 23 Single-Family Residential Lot Development on 6.095 Acres at 6469 Gordon Road in a R-15 Residential Zoning District BRIEF SUMMARY: At its January 7, 2010 meeting, the Planning Board voted 4-3 to recommend denial of the conditional rezoning special use permit based on current traffic volumes, which exceed the design capacity of Gordon Road. At the meeting, three adjacent property owners from Farrington Farms expressed concern that the proposal has the potential to exacerbate existing traffic and stormwater problems. Additionally, these adjacent property owners were concerned that the proposed stormwater ponds pose safety concerns if not fenced and would reduce their property value if not buffered sufficiently with natural vegetation. One letter of opposition from an adjacent property owner was also received expressing similar concerns, as well as concern about the developer's use of the drainage easement to satisfy the Open Space requirement in the ordinance. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: ACTION NEEDED: Use the Script/worksheet to make findings and 1. Grant the special use; or 2. Add conditions to the special use; or 3. Deny the special use ATTACHMENTS: 5-599 Staff Summary 5-599 Petition Summary 5-599 Site Plan-rev01-19-10 5-599 Adj Prop Map 5-599 Applicant Materials 5-599 Opposition Letter COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (only Manager) Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v~.~vi~~.vly 7-0 COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS: A motion to approve with the recommended conditions and the additional condition that the remaining 8 units (beyond 15) are not allowed unless NCDOT completes the road widening project on Gordon Road was approved 3-2, Commissioners Greer and Davis dissenting. Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v~.~vi~~.vly 7-0 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FEBRUARY 1, 2010 CASE S-599 (1/10) APPLICANT: Gordon Road Development Partners, L.L.C. via Withers & Ravenel LOCATION: 6469 Gordon Road Division REQUESTED USE: High Density Residential Development (23single-family lots) on 6.095 acres PLANNING BOARD ACTION: At its January 7, 2010 meeting, the Planning Board voted 4-3 to recommend denial of the item based on current traffic volumes, which exceed the design capacity of Gordon Road. At the meeting, three adjacent property owners from Farrington Farms expressed concern that the proposal has the potential to exacerbate existing traffic and stormwater problems. Additionally, these adjacent property owners were concerned that the proposed stormwater ponds pose safety concerns if not fenced and would reduce their property value if not buffered sufficiently with natural vegetation. PRELIMINARY FINDINGS OF FACT: In its review of the request, the Planning Staff made the following preliminary "findings of fact." 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. A. The subject property is located within the Ogden Fire District. B. Existing water and sewer services are currently available to the site from the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority public mains. C. Waterand sewercapacityiscurrentlypendingapproval. D. The subject property is not located in a special flood hazard area. E. There are approximately .25 acres of jurisdictional wetlands on the site, which will be designated as a perpetual conservation easement. F. Traffic level of service on Gordon Road, an urban minor arterial, is F, meaningtraffic counts exceed the capacity of the roadway. G. A Traffic Impact Analysis was not required for this project because traffic generation is below the 100 peak hour trip threshold. The 23 single family lots would generate approximately 40 combined peak hour trips. H. The property is partially located in the airport conical zone but the residential building height in R-15 is limited to 35 feet and so the airport height zones will not be relevant. i. The applicant is proposing a minimum 5' high security fence around the sides and back of the stormwater pond adjacent to the Farrington Farms subdivision. S-599,1/10 Page 1 Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v~.~vi~~.vly 7-1-1 Staff Suggestion: Evidence in the record at this time supports a finding that the use may materially endanger the public health or safety where proposed, based on the traffic volumes exceeding the capacity of the roadway. 2. The Board must find that the use meets all required conditions and specifications of the zoning ordinance. A. The site is located in an R-15 Residential Zoning District. High-density development pup to 10.2 units per net acres may be allowed by Special Use Permit undercertain conditions in an R-15 Residential District. B. The maximum number of units permitted on 6.095 acres in an R-15 High-density development is 62 units under optimum conditions. The applicant proposes 23 units. The physical and environmental characteristics of this parcel would not accommodate more than 23 lots when the requisite development standards are applied. C. The site presently has only one access point from Gordon Road. Additional access is planned through two road stubs to adjacent properties for future inter-connectivity. D. The 2006 CAMA Land Use Plan classifies the area as Urban, which allows for intensive development or redevelopment where urban services are available. At the time of this writing, no letter of commitment has been provided for water and sewer capacity. This proposal represents both infill and redevelopment. E. Stormwater detention ponds have been planned for the site and must be permitted in accordance with the standards of the county ordinance. Low-impact development techniques and materialswill be utilized. F. Underground storm drainage is required for R-15 high-density developments. The developer states that they will meet State and County requirements. G. Total impervious surface is proposed at 39.4%. The ordinance allows up to 40%of the gross site. H. Total open space areas meet the minimum 17.5% requirement of the ordinance for high- densitydevelopments with detached single-family lots, not less than 6,000 square feet. The applicant is proposing an open space area totaling 18% of the base site. i. Improved recreational space meets the minimum 7.5% requirement of the ordinance. The applicant proposes a combination of active and passive recreation space totaling 12% of the base site. J. Preliminary site plan indicates the required minimum 25' building setback from the perimeter boundary and minimum 10' building setback between detached single-family dwellings. Additional setbacks may be required based on the formula for high density setbacks adjacent to existing detached residential development. K. Although not required by the ordinance, a 10' bufferyard consisting of existing vegetation has been proposed along the property line of the Farrington Farms subdivision. Staff Suggestion: Evidence in the record at this time supports a finding that the use meets all required conditions and specifications of the Zoning Ordinance. S-599,1/10 Page 2 Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 7-1-2 3. The Board must find that the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property orthat the use is a public necessity. A. No evidence has been presented at the time of this writing that the proposed use will injure the value of adjoining or abutting property values. Staf f Suggestion: The evidence in the record at this time supports a f finding that the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property. 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 conformitywith the plan of development for New Hanover County. A. The 2006 Joint land Use Plan encourages higher density development to be located in urban areas where public services are already in place. B. The proposed development is similar in character and nature to surrounding performance residential developments alongGordon Road. Other Information: The TRC reviewed and approved the preliminary site plan on December 9, 2009 with the following technicalcondfitions: 1. Anew unduplicated development name will need to be issued for the project. Two unduplicated street names will also need to be issued for the road stubs. The Hansbrough name isacceptable eitheras a streetordevelopmentname. 2. The two road stubs within the project will be platted and improved to the property line prior to final plat approval to prevent any misunderstanding from adjoining land owners. 3. Since Gordon Road Division is ahigh-density project, a special use permit will be required. If the special use permit is not granted by the Board of County Commissioners the site plan will become invalid. 4. With this project being a private development, no gates or obstructions will be allowedthat mayinhibitemergencydelivery. 5. Regulated and significant trees will need to be retained in accordance with the County's Zoning Ordinance. Several telephone inquiries have been received in regard to this project. The callers mentioned a desire for a buffer between the stormwater pond and the adjacent residential neighborhood to the east; fencing around the stormwater ponds; and concerns for the possible traffic impacts on a section of Gordon Road that is already overburdened. In response to buffering and fencing concerns, the applicant modified the site plan to include a S-599,1/10 Page 3 Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 7-1-3 minimum 5' high security fence around the back and sides of the stormwater pond adjacent to Farrington Farms and a 10' bufferyard of existing vegetation extending from the security fence tothe propertyline. STAFF COMMENTS: Staff feelsthatthe preliminaryfindings are generally positivewith the exception of the negative finding on Gordon Road's traffic volume exceeding the capacity of the roadway. There are future plans for widening of Gordon Road between Interstate 40 and Wood Sorrell Road. The widened roadway will include two travel lanes and atwo-way left-turn lane. The MPO reports that these improvements will still leave the level of Service over capacity at Level F. ACTION NEEDED: Use the Script/Worksheet to make findings and 1. Grant the special use or 2. Add conditions to the special use or 3. Denythe special use S-599,1/10 Page 4 Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 7-1-4 Case: 5-599 (1/10) Special Use Permit -High-density residential development for 23-single-family lots on 6.095 acres in an R-15 zoning district Petition Summary Data 6469 Gordon Road Owner/Petitioner: Gordon Road Development Partners, L.L.C. Existing Land Use: Single-family homes and mobile homes Zonin H.~ istory: July7,1972 (Area 8B) Land Classification: Urban Water Type: Public water through Cape Fear Public Utility Authority (CFPUA) Sewer TXpe: Public sewer through Cape Fear Public Utility Authority (CFPUA) Recreation Area: Ogden Park Access & Traffic Volume: Gordon Road (urban minor arterial) with LOS FF; ADT on Gordon Road between Cape Harbor Drive and Market Street increased 5% between 2008 and 2009; ADT on Harris Road increased 1 % between 2008 and 2009. Fire District: Ogden Fire Department (OFD) Watershed & Water Quality Classification: Smith Creek; C; Sw 303(d) Aquifer Rechar e.~ Area: Primary recharge area of principal aquifer (combined Castle Hayne and Peedee aquifers -confined artesian) Conservation/Historic/Archaeological Resources: none Soils: Seagate fine sand (Se); Murville fine sand (Mu); Leon sand (Le) Sebtic Suitability Moderate limitations requiring moderate modification and maintenance in Class II (Seagate fine sand) to severe limitations requiring extensive modification and intensive maintenance in Class III (Murville fine sand and Leon sand). Schools: Blair Elementary School Other: Subj ect property is partially located in an airport conical zone with elevation 3 87' Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 7-2-1 11107j2U2M121SJ~lIrIM'MASM Zf86"J:'oNasua~~~ ~ ~[~g~' JN'uQynU~I.U ~ ~ Q p ~ ~ ~ ~d ~ d ~ z a" bg E b~SZ-95Z-Ol6~xu~ LLZfi-9SZ-0l6 ~lai ~a ~uauado ana ~~sua - ao a~ ~~~uiwi a~ ~ 0~ p~o~ uapaa~ ~-9Z99 ~ ~ : r EobBZeui~ae~yuoh'ual3ww~Fhy'E~ta»n5`anuayljeamuawuto~0ltrt ~v~( ~ g b. S ~ eu~~oie~ qUo~ j A1uno~ aanoucH n~~N ! diysuMO,~ i3aweW ~ ~ ` Ev ~ ~ ~ V- s~ox~nans i saaHwd~~ ~ sa~arai~N~ ayyo~ s~au~ed~~au~do~anap a I p ~~N3/1b'~[ 5~13H11M _ p2~~]ll~pa~~ uo~s~ni❑ p~o~ uop~o~ 69~b9 ~ g ~ ^ _ ~ r ~~mw~allaY,~ c ~ ~ o ~ •re !N1^~ Ra1,iL1 w 4. Z~~~1 ~'r~ Qx 8 b T g3 a ~ ~ ~ M ~O~ , u 6 N ry ~E$ qer. r~ w ) T ~ ~ ~ I~ 4P .p ~ 0 r~ l ~ X z ~c 9 a ~ $6" Iwrn'a' Imp b ~ ~ ~ Z ~ n ~ e ~ ~°S a `f a N ~ a a~ ~a~ 1 m~ ~ g~; Il ~j~ apl~ ~C~S EJ ~.m N ~ m ~t' ~ •S ~ ' W ~ ~ ~•l 4 ] r ~ i r ' i j ~ cum F9~ , ~ t~~a3 ~fllr'I r/-`,M4g,/~ ~ ~ R" l i m m yyy r gS~gM1 i i 4 r ! ~ _ e~ y ~w~,`~/'~ ~ ~ ~ ! 2~~/~1}0 ' `a`il °9 ,9`,6,9 A~ / -~np ~ ~ ° _a u ti:°~.' ~ ~ ~ f P~~ p ~ iJ'^SS~.~ ' ~ ~ '2 T ~ ~ a / ~f ~ 4' m ~ ~ N i i w A ^ 4 ~3 ~ s' 1.J.. l 01` ~Q ! 4 , r~y~ ~:rw ~ '~~j v~~ ~3`n . ` r , % ` ~ ]1 -E ~ `e ,r ` - / G.m.C.. °d4 d d o ~ yyy ~ I4¢~ ~ ~ µ ~ ~l G~ r, '~I ~o`'~ €4L~1 n` r r / * r I ~:yw G K gti~w m~ °1 ~g N` Qj j)~"• ~,a ~Y ~y ~`I • `e~ 8 ("wy'"u ~ ~ry`r( •°yri ~ a`~'~ a ~ 8~~8 x M tl ~ r / 4~`/~ 4'~ ~ e,hT ~•E IP Y 0 Spy .9 S' O $ 1~ ~ ~'1 °p G ro 9 lfj, / m,, ~ . ,y, a g G1~b ~N$~ a~ N a ' x~~~E psv"ak ~ ~ F I s 1 a: a 9 $ ~8~~ C~ ,s,~ok I t• ~~~5 It' 4 il';~, ~ [ e68 / 4,~ ~ f ~6 ~ ~ '^jr r ' I~ m"'~ `~'"gg~d s ~I }~S Lr .f .a ~N ~ r ~ I a ~ I I ° ,yn m i/ d ~by ,N _.`~",r~-G E~~ S a / /WAG C ~ nn~ q5,°,i Nm~° ~ BLg~ E-N" ~r L I ~G ~9'~ V rY ~ a 'Y•0. ~ ~~FR ~~jfl l{I J ?n1Y 4Jf~a~ ~(Y: u U ~l Itl aYA _ ~ C~1 IO\\/ [ ~ 55}}Pm ~~J IMM ~C.r~ I Iy 5' 4 P~~O~ . V~ E ^ i ,D ~ Q ~ ~6 C e ~.S I ]n0B ~ uC~ ~ °O~N~ V ~N~ 6 ~FI i\; I r` ~ ~ / 0 ~ a o wJ~.~ ~ ^+a4 0 ~ur C ~m7 s f ~r , r ~p ~ o m~ h ~ o. . i J r r v .r / 4/ O F D w w ~ E o a -5 ~1 r ,""u° G E ° ~ / f k / ~ I Z -gyp N ~ ~ ~ J/- Sr' ^ ~ u • ~ . M.. $ ~ E t'~~ ~~61 nk~ .mjn~/ ~ r `7 `Al~~, 1~1yy~ r~ ~3: ~ ~~3 ..f5 J ~ ~ /^:r,~ :.s V~ S~ .5~3~ .C J fi ~B din . ~ ~ ggel y ~a N tt / 'r 4~ r"' ~u, 1 ~~i..~ u,~Q s ~ ~.fi u~ro~ ~ ~~y Ga 8~.~ e ~ i ! i I i~ ~ y c y." F« ~'VY~ a° I r ~ rr l i 1. cd~e iA y! p Y °7 G3 kk ~ G o~ o y 9 ° b l; ~ (Y.' f ; '}~;1. , ~ a _ c ~~S E B9, ~ ~:~g:[ B~ ~ ~d Bak °~9 .,?~,6 ~6€ f r c~-~'~ d > Z :xtl ~k~`a 48ea~b °P R~ ~s ~o ~ 8 : r:1µ L $I~ ~+C .~H ~g'~°~ L 4 8~ ~ vfr ® ~ bi ~ ~ ::L .i~ ` o V, ' ~ ~3 ~ ~L ~ ~ ~ ~m w u~ FNw . ~ _ Y~' ° 1&~k~'uL ~yffi ~ ~ 6 ~ n d 'rl a~ ~ r'' ,rl~~"`~, / f' ~ e? `ti ti a ~z' p~ g"~~ 4S ~~IE1~ ~~Y 5 k? 4 5 .C ~j ~ a Q ~ C 9~ L Y fi~ ~ Y g ~ ~Sg tP'~1 i!opo- > dp'~ a`s ~~`da~ u"i'3 m~~Y Qo ~~k'~ ~B€ ~u ey q L~ q g p Q_ n m ! ! ~ ~ 5 s ~j v t y o fi,~ ~ ~g ~ p ~ o~ 6 a 3 ° g - P, ~ ° ~ S yy t~ 6 C ~ i ~8 ~ Q NOL i~ E5 ~ ~V ~k~k ~a~~ u r w` ~ ~5 w9 hU .~ti'Ar~1 g,~a£ ~ It ~ ~ ~ v u i N ~e i.., _ ni ?i ~ _ h dl f N J r ~ lT ~ 1',*` W, !A °~L.~[ /lt ~ yuo ~V ~ p u^ 4 ~ p ~ ~ a„ t ° ~ ~ m tt ryry ~ .o ~,e , ~ • •ti, - u ~ , ~ ~ Jr S ,~~~rS~~` y I $ ` ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ nffl8„ any .a R a ~ 4 [9 M 9ba ~ ~r CI ~4Y ~ y'» Z !i(~~~ 8~! T ~ Yp ti ° G~ °«Y tp~ L~L~~ u J 9 yQ G a i ` itt. Ift1 , + ; Y,J ;H 3 u~ ~Y y L« 0a~ ~ 9'~ iV' ~ 4 n 0. ed / ~Ld I Q1~. S4 D 0 ~ U h o B~e ~n ~~v z ° ~ ~8~ k ~ _~ramv \~1~ry~a a,. ~ ~ ~ a a $r L 0 0~ J s ~ ' E 1 B~ ~ b& ~ a ~ h ~ Spa" u •t y~ :t 4 , a~ lf1 E~ ~ ~~M ~ Y ~ ~ ~ s~ Aye t ~ ~ n N tt iz nor°S~ i oM 1~ ~~\~1~9 ~ a.j E e ~ L ~6.5p i a,r 3p Lg~ Y~ 4~~~ ~~'raT, a , ~,`y \ C \i ~ ~ + ~S~ 3~5 •M .~98 ~ •0.s i ~~'g ` w r * ` ~ ~Fa ~ Gigg` ~g^,g ~ ~ .~9 ~~yys ~~a ~ ~x.'; 9 31, u 3t1 ~ Fad ~8n ~ >«i'~ ~ ~i~ €08 oA N ;~sl` ,'I ,,r"~'}~ +a ~~nn 1 ~ ~ o li _ N A 4 N J ~ m M m K~ ; ~J~ qa r , G •tti ` S; y {t i a ~ ~ti ~```w ~ ~~E~~ 4+ ° 4Ui ~ It's o`i• o ° Om i 9 d i 'p ` ~ ~ at $ . P u o BC in ] Muni ~GY ~ ~ P a >v - X q6 3 ~ t t ,'r ~n~]L j V~ C°~p ~44 9yyJ ~U 4 a {9~.[ ~'VA G = try 9 t V v~f 0~ g~ 6a`x~~ R~n~ p L~~2 ~L y n ~~1 4p ~ ~ o^~,~ ]1*~ _ :+:~r` LSD aLL '2 ~b~ a'~ (~.~,c$ fi ~ ~Y a V1 a6 ~ r'i i•3 ~ i k ~ e. g rY~p 3 ~ ~ N ~o ~ dy+ 'SyBu 9~ ~$§LCL b~~t~V ~t~~ h ~r =.~a.4F~ S~y'p ~PI~ .'„~~~1' / Y~~ g~ ~N3 VS ~ (wnY ~~L wE~ iv`~Q aF~ rv76 ~Ai((4 A ~ s~ ZV~6 ~ y°' Kb VC'Q +,I'~ %.•i~~ BVF ~M ~L.~S~ ~~~y ~k~i ~4•~ ~~ol ~ U"L~ pigg ~0 r~rl, KS'- °a '.4 ~ ~ ° ~'yEE+a a ~ ~p«'" S._ Y~ np$'a_ ~ - 0 C" 9 6" as s u~` iN 3 tlj °n °5 b~«« ?N"' g ~'"n ~ as ~ e' ~p NJ(x r. rFm S' ~L ~$c Y v. §wg a.?¢~~ a~s,6= a~s X08 1ya35~9 yv ~s= ~ a~ 6~N ~~+q' ~~^Y 'c~~~•~ ~:p6a nr ~m~ ~ ~ ~ v I1~ z d~~ ~ o e ° ~tl ~ o ~ -a~° t ~ €~~9~ a .gas a ~ff~a 3a~ ~ tl a o tau 9f P~`zm i X b~x" ~ g3$ a.§~.e~°$~ ~~S•8 $b-~ ~ ~ ~ ~r~ ~j F '.~8 m u Fu~° °L $39° b~' ~5~ ~ '~«ti~ " ~ e~' ~ji,~ tt gg _ a °k i~ auk ~3 ~5~ao _°ke ah'a3.s YgS ~;8~~ r~~E IR'k p~~ a~ Y~Y ~ _ rv •i 4 Yi d r ~ ~ o _ n i~~<ii Board of Commissioners Meeting 02/01/2010 7-3-1 N 1 c m ~ N ~ fl. 1 rn c ~ ~ •C Q c V U N J ~ N IL ~ a z JZ cJ~ a Z~ W W J } 0 ~ a J W N ' z U H J J = _ y a~ J •°'~az o~ Wz~ ~J~ a a o g~aiu~ Qz~ oo~ o ° o LN z~~~ ~o~~~J~F Haag N-I-NO~d3O d ~ ~ ZY~~m~p~oamHa~~~~Q~Ou~u~~ y ~ p ~ Q 3 m W a a~ z a z z N ~ w~ o~°~ m~ a ~6 ~ p p J v p v m o~ 0~-~ ~ z ~ O a a m 7 ro- ~?~~~~~J°~~~a~ooozzy ~ ~~~~aJJoc~z~ aLL~~~oN-~aa~ d G~ aNUlt7zzJ~z° ~ z~zNg~O~~Q p~a°i~~~ oZ>}00~~~~a~zzz~°mJmo~~~~ •-moo= ~ a` asQQ agog ooa~ ocla==- \ ~ •N ~ 0 ~ Q ~ m O O LLl LL] ~ IL IL t~ S ~ J J ~ ~ ~ ~ fA H r a L ~ p U J~ ~ - r N M~ ~A t0 h o0 Q1 O r N M~ IA t0 h CO 01 O r N M y r r r r r r r r r r N N N N ~~d~~V! ~ ~ 010 fC L ~ C ,V d •v ~ ~ = C ~ y a ~ v+ fn2NJQa o r NN1 L~f. OGDEN'PARK`DR _ 0 _ -~V FARRINGTON=FARMS~D 4R ~F { 1 a J ~ J ~Q li Q 0 0~ o ~d 0 ~ ~~V M N O ~y/~~ r T r ~ ~ T ~ r 1 N r /~1 n/ M M Y. r ~ ~ r ~ : . lC~ y~~ A O r 1 r N N N r `~OS~ c°v `~~b . y00~ 'Q~ ,OJ J~ f'~ ~~N ~!p: Q~ ~ .bp ~ .a~~~i ~s>>r Nb ti ~ ,0 N0~ ~V ~ SS~~ ~ ~ 2 J a ~~b '1 i~d h V N>~ _ . o hQ by ~ o ~ 00 ,a~ ~b °0 . ~ ~ ~o ~p0 oy .Nb~p~ 0~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ~ Q M td,af Commission etin 02/O'/2010 4-1 Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 7-5-1 4 ~~i~ A~pplic~tians for Special lase Perrr~its bother then for single family dwellings on individual lots} are first referred to the New Hanover bounty Pian~~ing Board far recat~r~nendatian to the Jaunty arr»~issio~7ers. The ~a~~nrr~issianers Ynal~e final action on the permit application in a quasi j~~dicial public haring. ~or~~plete petitions and all supple~r~entary infor~r~atian must be accepted by the Planning Depa~~tr~nent tr~enty X20} ~vo~~i~n days be~Fore tl~e Planning Board rrieeting to allow adequate time for processing and advertisement as requi~•ed by the North Carolina general statutes. Planning >aard meetings are held on the first Thursday afeach ~~anth at :~OP~I in the Co~nY~issior~er's Asset~nbly Room at the ~Id Jaunty ~aurthouse, at Third and Princess Streets, wilr~.ington, North Carolina, Applications t`ar single-fa.rrrily dwellings, including rnabile Karnes, an individual lots must lac accepted by the Planning l)epartrrrent twenty ~20~ working days hefare the regularly scheduled ornmisianers trreetir~g. applications For sil~le~famiIy dwellings on individual lots da not require planning board review w~~~ 'you ut ~t~~~sh A p~ci~ LJ PermY~ Authority to grant a special Use Permit is contained in the ~~ning ordinance, pursuant to section 7l .The caning ordinance imposes the fallowing General .Requirements an the use requested by the applicant. Under each requi~•ernel~t, the appiicant sl~auld explain, with reference to attached plans, where applicable, haw the proposed rase satisfies these require~~nel~ts: Attach additional pages if necessary general Requirent~nt #1 The Board must find "that the use ur~ll root r~ater~ally endanger tl~e pubtic health or safety ifioeated where proposed and developed according to tl~e plan as submitted and appro~ed.~' 1. Property i served by the Ogden Fire Department 2. Access is to pardon Road, a public right-of-way classified as an "urban minor arterial" street. 3. Project will connect to ~PU~ public water ~ sanitary sewer mains. 4. Stormwater manaer~ent will be provided in conformance with i1IH~o & N DENR requirements. . General ~equine~nent The Board must find "that the use meets all required conditions and speclf~oatians" of the caning ~rdinan~ce", 1. Site plan has been prepared in accordance vuitb all regulations, reviewed by the various departments ~ agencies, and granted j`preliminary" approval by the TRC. . Detailed engineering design must be completed & approved, and all necessary issued prior to the onset of construction, Page~oF~ [~P I ~ I~7 Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 7-5-2 i general requirement #3 The Boa~•d must find "ti~at tl~e use will not substantially injure the value at'adjoir~ing or abutting prope~~ty or that the use is . a public necessity." ~ . Tl~e proposed sinEe~famiiy subdivision lot style of development is consistent with much of the existing neighborhoods in the Gordon load vicinity. There is no evidence, based upon recent ta~c vaEuatior~s that similar deveEopments have had any adverse effect on properties adjacent to them. general requirement The Board must end "that the location and character ofthe use if developed accordi~~ to the play ~bmitted end approved will be in harmony witl✓, the area. in wh.i~h it is to be located and in general conforrnity with the plan o~ development for New >;~anover County." The oO LAMA land use plan identifies the site as being in an "Urban" classification. The purpose is to provide for continued intensive development when services are avaiiable~ The policies for growth and deveEopment encourage safe and affordable housing to be available to every citizen. A special Use hermit for a moderate-density residential development allows fir flexibility in the subdivision layout and would be consistent with the concept of transitioning uses between traffic corridors such a Gordan load and other established neighborhoods in the general vicinity. The honing ~rdi~aance in same 'rnstances also imposes additional spec~ic requirements an the use requested by the applicant. The applicant should he prepared to dem~anstrate that the proposed use would catnply with each specific requirement found in section 7~, additional restrictions impaled on certain special uses has applicable. ~e1he should also demonstrate that the land would he used in a manner consistent with the plans and policies of dew ~[anovcr Jaunty, The Board of Cammissianers tray impale additional conditions anal restrictiatis that they deem appropriate prior to the issuing of the pccial Use Permit, l certify that this application is complete and that all afthe information presented in this application is accurate to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. Cigna re of~Peti~ioner ar~~lor ~raperty O~r~er ~ ~ ~rYnt Dame Page ~ ~ 3 U~' l 1 I07 Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 7-5-3 Praject Narrative for High-density Development at ~4~g cordon Road The subject tract encompasses acres in the New Hanover County zoning jurisdiction, and is coned R-~. It is bordered by ~ mobile hone community, a "perforrr~~nce" residential subdivision and a farm I retail establishrr~ent for fruits produce, The CAIUI~ land classification i "Urban." The purpose of this classification is to provide for continued intensive development and redevelopment of existing urban areas, par~icularlywhere urban services are already in plane. Higher density residentiai development is an acceptable lend use. Access to the developmentwould be from cordon Road, public right-of-way classified as an "urban rr~inor arterial" street. Road stubs to adjacent properties are being provided on the plan far future inter-connectivity. It i intended for the interior streets to be privately r~aintained by horneawr~er' association, but open to public access. Any required impravements farsafety will be addressed in a d~~veway permitthatwill need to be issued by NCD~T. cordon Road operates as a najortraffiic corridor between the iriCet Street ~ 1111ilitary Cutoff Road can~rnercial node and Interstate Highway 40 I N. College Rand interchange. lnfill ofthe tract presents an excellent opportunity to create an efficient, sustainable, and quality development where services already exist, The development would consist of a total of twenty~three singleMfrrrily borne lots, very consistent with much of the "performance" development that has occurred in the Cordon Road vicinity overthe past years. llllinimur lot size is ~g00 square feet, ar~d construction of three-bedroom residences i assumed. Recreation areas for both active and passive activities are provided. Clearing limits will be restricted to the proposed road rights-of-way and necessary utility easements, There are no impacts proposed to the wetland area at the rear ofthe site, or along the drainage ditch traversing the tract. Public water and sanitary sewerser-vicewill be provldedframthe Cape FearPublic Utility Authority system, existing mains are adjacent to the project boundaries forextension. Vvater mains for domestic use and fire protection throughout the project will b looped foradequate pressure. The project i a rnjordevelopr~ent and will disturb more than one acre of land. The requirements of both Now Hanover County, far stormwater management, and N ~~NR, for water quality control, will therefore apply. The site is in theSn~rith Creek watershed which then drains into the Cape Fear River. The proposed design is to treat and detain the runoff in ponds. The total impervious surl•aces will be less than ~~~1~. The Technical Review Con~rrr~ittee has recommended that low~impact design techniques and materials be used to the maximum extent in the site ir~provernents, v1~e believe that the development proposal, site plan and ac~Cnowiedged conditions combine to satisfy the requirements of a special use perrr~itfor high-density development, and that the project will be an asset to the community as ~ whole. Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 7-5-4 Diu ~tri~ e, ~n~ From: David Carson ~~.carsanbiltmark~comJ dent; Thursday, January ~ ~ ~ ;5 AM `o: Daughtridge, Jane ub~ect: ~ecial Use Permit Iterr7 ~ ~onigh~ , ~i ~ai7e, Thank you for speaking ~vith one yesterday rega~din proposed development aff cordon load undei consideration bar e ~'lann.in hoard tonight. ~ ~v be unalale to attend the meeting, but Y ~vanted to pass along my comments to ~rau to share as ap~~opriate. . I am the owner lot 7D ~n Farrington Faxtns, the property closest to tl~e starrr~~vat~r ponds aid ditch area off Bucl~hurst aunt. I am positive toward the proposed. plan general, and I believe it is an i~nproven~ent to its cu~~ent u.se. .o~veve.r, ~ am concerned that tl~e developer's use of the pu~~lic drainage ease~~aent {the ditch} to sa~sf~~ tine open Space requ.~•e~ent ~ra~x~ t%e a~rdin.ance, and. e use of the wetlands area. to a~.s£~T the Passive Recreation could be in~.proved to be more ~ line ~~ith the spirit and intent o.f these requirements even though ~ understand zt .may qualif~~ technically, ,long those lines, ~ a~~. cancer~.ed that the tees along the southern portion of the nordlern pond {het~veen my lot, lot 9 a~~d the proposed Iocat~on of the stof~vater pond will be rerr~oved complete~.y to a.llo~v the pond to lie away from n1y p~`ap~r~ line. ~ und.erstand there is no buffer re~ui~:en~ent of even a mi~vmal distance, liven the small nat~ue of the proposed lots and tl~e sn~.a~l lots in the rarrington Farms develapa.ent, an additional 15 foot of reserved ve etative ~r natural buffer in this area {from e ditch nort~~~vard to the proposed lot ~7 buuffer} seen~.s like an appropriate and reasonable condit~.on for consideration bar the Plan.nuag Board. neighbors, fir. and ~lrs. Banks {a~ lot ~9}, also feel this is an appropriate request aid would add to the harmony of where so~~.e of our t~va neighborhoods came together. ~~dd~~onally i~7 this area, ~ ~vauld request {along with dlr. and fir. Baf~ks ~vho will attend the meeting drat a fence be i~~stalled from the ditch. to the ~ro~osed lot ~ 71~ to prevent the inclination of chi~.d~:e~~ to use this area to pass through yard and the ditch and storm~vater pond area to ~~r to access our neighbor}hood and Ogden. l'ar. 'leis area currently experiences Borne "cut through" foot traffic, and ~ am concerned n~.are children usg it with the pa.nds nearb~~ 4vould be a safet~~ hazard. Perhaps a G' shadawl~o~ stele Fence in this area 5' in fio~~ e prapert~~ line would help the situa~an, Thank you main, and if nay schedule changes anal 1 atn able to attend tonight ~ shah ~y to da sa. Sincerely, David arson {deal Sound dentures LLB} ~►at ~8~0 Buckl~urst aunt Farrington Farms !~~:4b4G11~3i413~15~5630~1~~ Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 7-6-1 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION MEETING DATE: February 1, 2010 REGULAR ITEM: $ DEPARTMENT: Planning PRESENTER(S): Sam Burgess, Principal Development Planner; Chris O'Keefe, Planning & Inspections Director CONTACT(S): Sam Burgess, Principal Development Planner; Chris O'Keefe, Planning & Inspections Director SUBJECT: SC-88 (1/10) Road Resolution to Abandon From State Maintenance a Portion of Terminal Road South (SR 2134) BRIEF SUMMARY: A request has been received from NCDOT and Terminal Road Property, LLC to abandon a portion of Terminal Road South just east of HWY 421 North and south of the CSX Railroad tracks. A road resolution to abandon a state maintained road must be adopted by the Board of County Commissioners prior to the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) considering the request to abandon the road. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Adopt the resolution. ATTACHMENTS: SC-88 Staff Summary SC-88 - SR-3 Petition SC-88 Base Map SC-88 DOT Letter SC-88 Resolution COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (only Manager) COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS: Adopted the resolution 5-0. Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v~.~vi~~.vly 8-0 RESOLUTION OF ROAD ABANDONMENT SC-88,12/09 Request: Abandon from State Maintenance a Portion of Terminal Road South (SR 2134) Petitioner: Terminal Road Property, LLC Location: North of Parsley Street (Holmes Bridge)/US Highway 421 North Intersection, East side General Information Terminal Road Property, LCC has petitioned the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) to abandon State maintenance of a portion of Terminal Road South (SR 2134). In accordance with NCGS 136-63, NCDOT requires that the Board of County Commissioners consider adopting a Road Resolution prior to considering abandonment of any State maintained road. The portion of Terminal Road South proposed to be abandoned from State maintenance is approximately 1,343' North from the intersection of Parsley Street and US Highway 421 North, East side of US Highway 421 North. The segment of road to be abandoned is approximately 277' in length and contains a 100' right-of-way. A site map depicting the road area is attached. Staff Observations As shown on the attached site map, four (4) adjacent parcels exist nearby. Presently, approximately two industrial uses exist away from the road near the Cape Fear River. Terminal Road South does not physically connect with Terminal Road North due to the CSX rail way and is basically a quiet enclave that does not attract vehicular traffic. Along the road exist a variety of discarded debris ranging from bags of trash to old furniture and bed accessories. A~ency Comments Opportunitywasprovided forthe Cape Fear Public Utility Authority (CFPUA), County Engineering, County Fire Services, and the Wilmington Metropolitan Planning Organization (WMPO) to comment on the proposed State road maintenance abandonment. Their comments include: A) CFPUA: Usually, we get a recorded utility easement over an abandoned ROW. Our office does not have any facilities in this area at this time. B) County Fire: Our office is okay with the road being abandoned from State maintenance. C) WMPO: Our office is concerned that placing a gate on this road may limit the effectiveness of the loop for emergency access and evacuation. With large parcels of land located nearby, it is preferable to have more than one point of ingress and egress. If this road were abandoned, the illegal dumping that exists will just occur elsewhere. We do not support any abandonment that would impact operations of the adjacent rail line by obstructing access to the tracks for maintenance or creating a situation where vehicles must stop on or near the right-of-way to open or close a gate. We would request comment from CSX. Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 8-1-1 D) County Engineering: Removal of the Terminal Road from State maintenance for the purpose of gating off access is not an issue at this time based on its current use. However, we should reserve the right to require the road to be returned to public in the future once development occurs. This will provide another guaranteed emergency exit in the event that it is needed to ensure safety of current and future residents. This would satisfy the current request to stop dumping and illegal access and allow future flexibility depending on the land use. E) County Emergency Services: Our office has no objections to the request to abandon a portion of Terminal Road South. Petitioner Comments Terminal Road Properties, lLC indicates that their property is a haven for discarding trash since the road is rarely used by vehicular traffic. To minimize the risk of dumping, the petitioner is interested in having the State abandon the road from their State Road Maintenance System and place a gate at the southern entrance to their property. Planning Staff Recommendation Terminal Road South (SR 2134) has existed for at least the past 25 years. Since that period of time, industrial development near the area has been limited due to potential environmental impacts and lack of public water and sewer. If the road resolution is adopted, the road would remain legally open. The road designation would change from public to private use with the petitioner being responsible for the maintenance of the road and erecting a gate. Acknowledging the present uncertainty of future development for the area, staff recommends that the Road Resolution to abandon a portion of Terminal Road be adopted and sent to NCDOT for their consideration. Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 8-1-2 Nr~~ a~oEna ~~ar~m~~fi of `~rr~pat#~~o~ ~~~r~~~n of Wi~hwa~ J~~r~~1a~r~~r~ ~~~i~n oun of CIE ~~R ~~t~~i~n req~e~ a~ar~don~nt a~ ~aad~ Raid 4 €rom the ~Er~t~~~~~ A I X277 8 ~G Un~C ~~n~C~~ ~C'.IC~~ ~~U~~ OVVn~r ~'GaC~d~ ~a~ err N~r~avar,_W` a~n~~ do ~~~~~y r~q~e~ t~~ ~~ri~an a~ N~h~ra~s t~~ D~~~r~~n~ of T~~n~~rt~rfi~n to ~~r~~~n ~~e ~o~d fi~~m tf~~ ~a~~ ~En~n~d ysten~ dame Ad~~~s ~F ~ 4 Board of Commissioners Meeting v14./vi/~.vly 8-2-1 6TH•ST N 5TH pVE•N Z Z LL Q F JEL-WA~E ~R N ~ Ov ~ ~ m y 3 v k. 0 ~ yQ r ~ N u'J V ~ ~ ~ N a o- - a in~E 7 0 Q .p ~j ~ L ~ ~ M Q Q ~ Q N N-a21-1b'NIW?J31 S'a~l'lb'NIW2131 N-~Zti JIMH-Sfl N-~Zti Jl•MH-Sfl m 4. 0 k V ~ ~ ~ = U J J ~ a~ _ z N a O LL ~ 0 N ~ Sao ❑ L ~ J J ~~3 =QD ~ ~Z ZU ~ o o~g~~ ~o~ ~ ~a~n?cnz 07 oac ~ a~?wxw= Q *''IO.E C O Q~J~++J \ ~0` ~ ~J O ~ W~W~~ N L°' ~ ~ a~u~~u~z LL ~r L~ r ~ J ~ N M~ N ~ N ~ ~ J 3 ~ ~ ~ d t~ a~am o. Q' v 6.0-- a L Board of Commissioners Meeting Q o Q a o 02/01/2010 8-3-1 ZI a~~' ~ir~~ ~ 1~£RNQR SSCR~'rARY Jr~uar ~ , ~v~ Hanover ount~ fiord a~~sia~er ~ ~vernr~r~~ tenter ~r~v~~, u~~e ~ ~ i~rr~in~fivn, N 4~ u~je~ ou~~ for ~ ~~o~c~n~er~t ~f ~ ~art~~o R ~ ~er~~r~a~ od ~u~h ~~~v~~on ~ ~ ~~ar s~ ~hult, T~~s ~ ~~rv~arr~~~g ~ r~u~st ~~r b~~~~~~nent ~ a~~~ ~"err~~~a~ far dour revao r~~ ~~r~~r ~r~ acc~r~~r~~e with ~ - Aber tha ~~~r~' ~~nsi~era~~on, pie~~ ~urn~~ ~h~ ~~~e f~ cu~rot c~ur~~y re~~ut~~r~ ~r d~r~~a~ a~ ~et~t~~n. ~e~er tie attaohed yap yr d~ai~ 1 P~~ase c~n~a Jor~ ~~r ~urth~r a~tar~e at ~rr~ere~}r, R Ar~tn~r~y ~ i~r~o~ ~n~rn~er i~ A~~a~~m~n~s ~~a~~anr~~nt ~et~t~ar~, mp c ~ ~~row~iov~r ~~over ~~~~y ~'~ani~ 3~l(~ 1?~~~i~n ~n~', l~~~r~i~~t~n, N t; 1`~~ ~1(~) 2~I X65 ~'ax ~'~l~)}~~l-~~5~ Board of Commissioners Meeting m m~ n o n 8-4-1 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION TO ABANDON A PORTION OF TERMINAL ROAD SOUTH (SR 2134 -East Side of US Highway 421 North} WHEREAS, pursuant to NCGS 136-63, a petition has been filed requesting the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners to adopt a resolution abandoning from State maintenance a portion of Terminal Road South (SR 2134}, a North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) State Maintained Road located approximately 1,343 feet north of the intersection of Parsley Street/Highway 133 and US Highway 421 North, east side. Said portion of road is approximately 277 feet in length and contains a 100 foot right-of way as depicted on the attached exhibit; and WHEREAS, it is the opinion of the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners that the 277 foot segment of Terminal Road South, if abandoned from State maintenance, would not be contrary to the public interest provided the owner(s) of real property fronting along the segment shall privately maintain the right-of way for emergency access to the adj acent railway. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners requests that the North Carolina Board of Transportation consider abandoning State maintenance of a portion of Terminal Road South (SR 2134) in favor of private maintenance of that segment, as petitioned before the Board. ADOPTED this the 1St day of February, 2010. NE~U HANOVER COUNTY Jason R. Thompson, Chairman Attest: Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 8-5-1 This page intentionally left blank. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION MEETING DATE: February 1, 2010 REGULAR ITEM: 9 DEPARTMENT: Fire Services PRESENTER(S): Kent Greene, Emergency Services Consulting International (ESCI) CONTACT(S): Donnie Hall, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Presentation by Consultant of Evaluation Findings and Final Report of Fire Service District Master Plan BRIEF SUMMARY: In March 2009, the Board of County Commissioners entered into a contract with Emergency Services Consulting International for the development of a Fire Protection Master Plan and Cooperative Effort Feasibility Study. The study included an evaluation of current conditions, projected future system demands, future delivery system models, and identifies cooperative opportunities between the agencies providing fire protection services for the unincorporated areas of New Hanover County. This Master Plan, in summary, is intended to become a guidance document for the Fire Service District for the next 20 years. The initial phase of the report focused on the baseline assessment of where we are as a fire protection system as a whole. This was accomplished by using data collected from site visits and information retrieved from our records management systems to compare to industry standards and best practices. This information established a `snap shot' of current conditions for the fire service in the County. Fire protection risk and service demands were analyzed to help us anticipate future work loads and its impact on the communities we serve. With this information in hand, models of service delivery were devised to help prepare the district for the future. Staffing levels, apparatus assignments, and response targets were combined to develop the best strategies for improvement and efficiency. Short, mid-term, and long range strategies were used to help identify future obligations of the County to continue to provide the best possible service. As this project nears completion, the consultant is required to conduct a formal presentation to the Board of County Commissioners that includes a summary of the report, primary findings, and critical recommendations. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: Accept the Master Plan. ATTACHMENTS: Master Plan Summary COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (only Manager) Accept the plan and direct County Manager to evaluate and bring recommendation back to the Board. Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v~.~vi~~.vly 9-0 COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS: Accepted the plan and directed the County Manager to evaluate and bring recommendations back to the Board by a vote of 5-0. Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v~.~vi~~.vly 9-0 New Hanover County Board of Commissioners Condensed Report Summary This Regional Fire Protection Master Plan is offered in response to a request by the New Hanover County, North Carolina Board of County Commissioners. The purpose of this study was to review and analyze current deployment and practices of fire department resources within unincorporated New Hanover County, and to assess future needs specific to resource deployment and staffing based on development throughout the area. The fire protection services are provided throughout the County by New Hanover County Fire Services (a County agency}, Castle Hayne Volunteer Fire and Rescue, Federal Point Volunteer Fire Department, Myrtle Grove Volunteer Fire Department, and Wrightsboro Volunteer Fire and Rescue. Each agency was evaluated individually during the course of this study as well as in aggregate form. Each report section provides the reader with general information about that element, as well as specific observations and analysis of any significant issues or conditions that are pertinent to the topic discussed. Observations are supported by data collected during the information gathering process, through analysis of the collected data, and from the collective emergency services experience of ESCI. Finally, specific findings and conclusions are included to resolve identified issues and to take advantage of any opportunities that may exist. To that end, ESCI developed three strategies that are considered viable for future deployment of resources, independent of any further cooperative effort between New Hanover County and the remaining four volunteer fire departments. • Strategy A: Current Deployment Modified Performance Measure • Strategy B: Additional Stations in North & South Side Areas • Strategy C: Tiered Response Time In regards to enhanced cooperative efforts, there are four basic strategies are available, beginning with a do-nothing approach and ending with complete unification of the fire departments into New Hanover County Fire Services. A description of the four methodologies is found below: • Autonomy -Continuing as separate organizations Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v~.~vi~~.vly 9-1-1 New Hanover County, NC -Regional Fire Protection Master Plan • Functional Consolidation -Coming together in a functional manner such as through combined training to improve efficiency and reduce redundancy between the organizations. • Operational Consolidation -Coming together to form a single organizational structure while preserving individual and separate governing bodies. • Legal Unification -Dissolution of one or more of the existing organizations in favor of forming a new consolidated agency. Considering the foregoing, it is safe to say that New Hanover County may choose to execute one or more strategies in order to put a more integrated regional fire protection program into operation. ESCI intends for each option to serve as a tool for policy makers to compare present conditions with the financial and operational outcome of the options. The following options were presented for consideration. Partnering Strategy Objective(s) Consolidate fire and rescue entities into a single operational unit. Provide increased fire and A: Consolidation of All NHC Fire emergency service efficiency in the areas served by Departments New Hanover County Fire Services, Castle Hayne VFR, Federal Point VFD, Myrtle Grove VFD, and Wrightsboro VFR. Consolidate New Hanover County Fire Services, B: Consolidation of Castle Castle Hayne VFR, and Wrightsboro VFR into a Ha ne VFR Wri htsboro VFR single operational unit, eitherthrough the y g establishment of a new Fire Protection District. and New Hanover County Fire Provide increased fire and emer enc service Services g y efficiency in the areas served by NHCFS, CHVFR, and WVFR. C: Consolidation of M rtle Grove Consolidate NHCFS, MGVFD, and FPVFD into a y single operational unit, through the establishment of VFD, Federal Point VFD, and anew Fire Protection District. Provide increased fire New Hanover County Fire and emer enc service efficienc in the areas Services g y y served b NHCFS, MGVFD, and FPVFD. 2 E~ergcp Seri~i~e.~ ~~~.g . Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 9-1-2 New Hanover County, NC -Regional Fire Protection Master Plan Partnering Strategy Objective(s) Enhance the NHCFS Support Services Division that promotes improved operational readiness and that achieves procurement efficiencies by eliminating duplication in the acquisition and distribution of D: Enhance the NHCFS Su ort supplies. Create a uniform set of standards for pp apparatus, small equipment, PPE (personal and Logistics Services Division rotective a ui ment emer enc su lies and p q P g Y pP ISIIT services. Develop a joint preventive maintenance and repair service program for physical assets, apparatus, small equipment, and ISIIT systems. E: Enhance the Regional Fire Provide forthe cost-effective, regional dissemination Safety Education Coalition of public fire safety education. F: Develop a Regional Juvenile Provide an effective means for intervening in Fire Setter Intervention Network ~uvenile-set/caused fires G: Create a Unified Provide afire-service-related occupational and Occupational Medicine Program health program. H: Create a Unified Wellness Provide a wellness and fitness program that and Fitness Pro ram promotes the improved health and well-being of g personnel in all divisions, at all ranks. I: Create a Standardized Provide consistent, standardized training Regional Training Manual procedures. J: Develo an Annual Re Tonal Provide standardized and consistent training. p g Provide a well trained emergency workforce. Provide Training Plan Ion -term vision and direction fortrainin delive . K: Consolidate Training into a Eliminate duplicated efforts in training fire Regional Training Division department emergency responders. L: Develop Uniform Pre-Incident Provide a system of shared operational plans for use Plans Burin emer encies and non-emer ent incidents. Based on the preceding information and based on ESCI's collective experience with other projects of similar character and scope, certain conclusions can be drawn regarding the fire departments serving New Hanover County and the opportunities for collaboration. • The fire departments serving New Hanover County are interdependent -The fire departments have historically planned and functioned in an autonomous fashion. Now, internal and external forces encourage a more widespread policy of mutual interdependence. The trend is likely to continue as the community continues to develop, the cost of providing emergency services escalates, and the availability of volunteers continues to decline. cp Services ~si~tstig . 3 ~ Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 9-1-3 New Hanover County, NC -Regional Fire Protection Master Plan • The fire departments value customer service -During the work leading to this report, each of the fire departments consistently demonstrated a focus toward serving those who live, work, and play in their service area. • The fire departments meet the public's service expectation -While not empirically verifiable, there is a general impression across New Hanover County that the fire departments generally do a good job of satisfying the service expectations of the public within the limits of geography, transportation, and funding. There remains, however, a general misunderstanding by a majority of citizens how the fire protection system in New Hanover County operates. • Volunteers play a critical role in the provision of fire protection to New Hanover County -Volunteer firefighters are a critical part of communities and fire departments. Each of the departments maintains a roster of committed volunteer firefighters. The need for volunteerfirefighters in any of the existing fire departments will not be eliminated by any of the partnership opportunities detailed in this report. Rather, the intent of many of these options is to administratively support and strengthen the volunteer program throughout the region. • Other organizations should be considered in any partnership initiatives - Organizations outside of the current fire departments participating in this work should be considered when developing a partnership plan. In addition, all of the region's fire departments should maintain and use automatic aid protocols among themselves in daily operations. Such practices reduce the reflex time required to react to serious emergencies and maximize the value of available resources. • New Hanover County is geographically diverse and unique -The geography of New Hanover County includes a variety of waterways, open land, lowlands, coastline, and developing areas. All add to the allure of the region as an increasingly desirable place to live or visit. However, such features also include the expectation of the hazards of wildfire, floods, and severe weather. Individually, none of the fire departments have the resources to mitigate such disastrous events alone. • New Hanover County is politically diverse -The highly varied demography of the County influences where and how people choose to live. Consequently, the various areas gain their political identity from the people who live in and who participate in the 4 E~ergcp Seri~i~e.~ ~~~.g . Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 9-1-4 New Hanover County, NC -Regional Fire Protection Master Plan governance of that area. It is no surprise therefore, that the culture and politics within individual communities are as different as the topography. • Policymakers should work with the fire departments to develop a plan to implement partnership opportunities -Fire department administrators, elected officials, and county staff should create a foundation for partnership programs; but, without a strong message of commitment from policymakers, progress on valuable initiatives will eventually falter. Policymakers need to adopt a plan to move ahead with aligning the processes, services, and operations of the fire departments wherever possible. • Many opportunities exist to save cost -The ability to reduce duplication and/or increase efficiency exists for each fire department. Such opportunities include savings as a result of standardized specifications for fire equipment, the creation of a regional fire training system, and other unified programs. • Operational consolidation of the fire departments into a single special organization is FEASIBLE -Merging the fire protection programs within New Hanover County through the authority granted by North Carolina Statute would provide a coordinated regional approach to planning, administration, funding, and operations. The result would be a more sustainable system with shared funding and shared resources that are matched to the needs of the participating communities with a resulting reduction in redundancy, overlap and wasteful spending. • All other cooperative opportunities are FEASIBLE -Without exception, all identified collaborative functional strategies included in this report are feasible. ESCI in noway intends to suggest that the fire departments within New Hanover County are not already operating at a high level. In fact, we are pleased to report that all available evidence shows that the fire departments consistently provide excellent service to the citizens of the protected communities. However, in keeping with the notion of continuous improvement wherein an unending loop of performance, measurement, and evaluation leads to system enhancements that would otherwise be impossible, we offer recommendations to assist the fire companies to implement the collaborative strategies that will best benefit the public. The success of adopting and implementing change, improvement, or cooperative opportunities, depends on many things. In ESCI's experience with hundreds of department evaluations, leadership is the single factor that most frequently determines success. Nearly always, a key cp Services ~si~tstig . 5 ~ Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 9-1-5 New Hanover County, NC -Regional Fire Protection Master Plan staff, councilor, or board member champions the concept, garnering the support of the various affected groups (political, member, and community}. In addition, good leadership fosters an organizational culture receptive to planning, calculated risk taking, and flexibility. The manner in which leaders promote a trusting relationship between all groups and aid two-way communication between the groups is essential. The fire departments within New Hanover County have incrementally moved from a volunteer fire protection system supplemented by career staff to a career system supplemented by volunteers. This fact is understood by the remaining four volunteer fire departments. Cooperative efforts through training, apparatus purchase, standardization of policies and procedures, and equipment have served as the beginnings of a fully integrated and consolidated department. As these cooperative efforts have continued, the system has become more and more integrated. The next logical step is to bring the organization together under one administrative and operational authority with a clear chain of command, ownership, and sense of belonging for all involved. With this in mind, the departments of New Hanover County should promptly and systematically implement as many of the feasible cooperative opportunities as are possible. It is important that the group exercise proper management of the process, but at the same time it is also important not to get bogged down by bureaucracy. Long-term success of many of the initiatives may depend on short-term evidence of improvement and benefit. Consequently, the establishment of a steering committee is recommended to assure that the process moves forward without delay. • Utilize the Board of Fire Commissioners to plan and manage the implementation of feasible collaborative opportunities. ESCI recommends that the Board of Commissioners use the current Board of Fire Commissioners, comprised of elected officials, fire agency representatives, and other affected parties from each agency to oversee implementation of future collaborative efforts. The group should assume responsibility for prioritizing and determining the sequential order for implementation of all feasible collaborative opportunities. The oversight board should have the authority and accountability to initiate all opportunities within established budgetary and governance limitations. 6 E~ergcp Seri~i~e.~ ~~~.g . Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 9-1-6 New Hanover County, NC -Regional Fire Protection Master Plan The ESCI project team began collecting information concerning the fire protection systems for New Hanover County in April 2009. The team members recognize that the report contains an extremely large quantity of information, and ESCI would like to thank the staff and members of each agency for their tireless efforts in bringing this project to fruition. ESCI would also like to thank the various individuals and external organizations for their input, opinions, and candid conversations throughout this process. We sincerely hope that the information contained in this extensive report is utilized to its fullest extent and that the emergency services provided to the citizens of New Hanover County are improved by its implementation. cp Services ~si~tstig . 7 ~ Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v14./vi/~.vly 9-1-7 This page intentionally left blank. NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION MEETING DATE: February 1, 2010 ADDITIONAL ITEMS ITEM: 10 DEPARTMENT: Governing Body PRESENTER(S): Commissioner Robert G. Greer CONTACT(S): Bruce T. Shell SUBJECT: Consideration of a Resolution to Protect the Room Occupancy Tax BRIEF SUMMARY: Commissioner Greer brought the attached resolution forward for consideration. RECOMMENDED MOTION AND REQUESTED ACTIONS: ATTACHMENTS: Resolution COUNTY MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: (only Manager) COMMISSIONERS' ACTIONS: Adopted the resolution 5-0 and instructed staff to send to legislative delegation February 2, 2010. Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v~.~vi~~.vly 10-0 NEW HANOVER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION TO PROTECT THE ROOM OCCUPANCY TAX WHEREAS, the room occupancy tax funds beach renourishment, tourism, and the Convention Center in New Hanover County; and WHEREAS, sales tax in New Hanover County funds County operations, including education, public safety, and human service programs; and WHEREAS, State and local governments are experiencing their worst fiscal crisis since the depression; and WHEREAS, in FY08-09, $7.4 million was collected in Room Occupancy Tax in New Hanover County; and WHEREAS, reduction in revenue due to reducing or eliminating online travel companies tax on rooms would impact the ability of local governments to fund services; and WHEREAS, reducing or eliminating online travel companies' taxes would provide them an unfair competitive advantage by providing them preferential tax treatment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the New Hanover County Board of Commissioners strongly opposes any action which impact local governments' ability to levy taxes on rooms that are marketed through online travel companies. ADOPTED this the 1St day of February, 2010. NEW HANOVER COUNTY Jason R. Thompson, Chairman ATTEST: Sheila L. Schult, Clerk to the Board Board of Commissioners Meeting mm~~~n~n v~.~vi~~.vly 1 ~ - 1 - 1