Stokesdale, North Carolina
|
Stokesdale, North Carolina
|
|
TOWN OF STOKESDALE PO Box 465 STOKESDALE, NORTH CAROLINA
The regular meeting of the Stokesdale Town Council was held in the Town Hall at 8416 US Highway 158 on Thursday, May 17, 2007.
Mayor Randle L. Jones called the meeting to order at 7:30 PM. The following members of Council were present: Mayor Randle L. Jones, Mayor Pro Tem John W. Flynt, Mickie Halbrook, Bobby Richardson and Powell Shelton.
Others present included: Deputy Steve Christman, Guilford County Sheriff’s Department; Les Eger and Trevor Nuttall, Guilford County Planning Department; William B. Trevorrow, Legal Counsel; and Carolyn Joyner, Town Clerk/Finance Officer.
After the Pledge of Allegiance, Council considered the proposed agenda. The Clerk noted that the minutes were not available for approval. Mr. Flynt made a motion to approve the agenda as presented. Ms. Halbrook seconded the motion. All Council members voted aye and the agenda was adopted.
Mayor Jones recognized two former Council members, Mr. Anthony Vaughn and Mr. James Attaway, who were present at the meeting.
New Business: Report from Guilford County Sheriff’s Department: Deputy Christman reported one residential burglary, one theft from a residence, a shoplifting at the Bi-Rite, and five assaults with two of them resulting in two felony arrests with all of the assaults being made by acquaintances. There were four drug arrests with two of them involved service of a search warrant at a house on NC 68.
Planning: PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Adoption of the FIS (Flood Insurance Study), associated FIRMs (Flood Insurance Rate Maps) for Guilford County, and amendments to the following sections of the Town of Stokesdale Development Ordinance: Sections: 1-3.14 (Flood Damage Prev. Purpose) 2-1.6 (Flood Damage Prev. Definitions) 3-3.5 (Floodplain Development Permit) 3-8.4 (Cert. of Floor Elev. /Flood proof.) 7-5.1 – 7-5.7 (Flood Damage Prev.) 9-4.9 (Flood Hazard Appeals) 9-5.3(Flood Hazard Adm. Duties) On December 18, 2006, a final determination was made by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) on the FIS and associated FIRMs for Guilford County. The FIS and FIRMs will become effective on June 18, 2007, which coincides with the deadline for the Town of Stokesdale to adopt revised floodplain management measures as a condition of continued (community) eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
No one came forward to speak for or against the proposed text amendments. Mayor Jones closed the public hearing.
Mr. Eger said that the flood maps for the entire state are being updated. Stokesdale and Guilford County participates in the flood insurance program. The changes must be made to satisfy the National Flood Insurance and FEMA rules to protect people that have homes in flood prone areas and the Town would not be eligible to participate in these programs which could affect rates for citizens within the Town. The first part is the adoption of the maps that FEMA has updated which are now available in a digital format. The text amendments are necessary in order to comply with the FEMA requirements. Mr. Trevorrow noted that it is an attempt by the State to get some uniformity for the enforcement of the flood insurance program. Mr. Flynt made a motion to adopt the maps and text amendments. Mr. Shelton seconded the motion. All Council members voted aye and the FIS, FIRMS, and the text amendments were adopted. A copy of the text amendments are hereby incorporated into and made a part of the minutes of the meeting. Book 9 Page 1491 2. TEXT AMENDMENT CASE #2-07. Amendments to the Town of Stokesdale Development Ordinance to reflect the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II regulations which were recently approved by the State of North Carolina. The following text amendments to the Development Ordinance are being proposed: (1) Amend Article 3-12.4(G) to reflect rewording of the approval requirement for water supply regulation amendments that are outdated to the current state policy. (2) Amend Article 7-1.5, Stormwater Management/ Watershed Development Plan; and, Article 7-1.6, Improvements, to add “Deed Restriction-Restrictive Covenant” requirement for NPDES Phase II per State of North Carolina Model Ordinance and Session Law 2006-246; renumber and specific text from Session Law 2006-246 for post-construction Best Management Practice (BMP); and, to add BMP Operation and Maintenance Agreement requirement per the State Model Ordinance. (3) Amend Article 7-2 and Article 7-3, including but not limited to: Table 7-2-1, NPDES Performance Standards; Table 7-2-2, GWA Performance Standards; Subsection 7-2(D), Runoff Control; and (4) Amend Article 7-2.3, Watershed Critical Areas (WCA) (5) Add Article 9-6.4 to reflect establishment/ authority of the “Stormwater Administrator” per Phase II Model Ordinance and replace “Enforcement Officer” with “Stormwater Administrator,” or “designee,” throughout the Definitions (Article 2-1.2) and Environmental Section (Article VII) of the Ordinance. (6) Amend Article 7-1 including but not limited to Article 7-1.2 to define requirements for a Stormwater Map per Session Law 2006-246; and, to reflect that this map will be kept on file by the Stormwater Administrator and updated to show the geographic location of all water quality devices.
Mr. Eger said that the State has made these changes mandatory and it applies to all land, not just watershed areas, within the county and state. This would not change the current watershed that is designated in the Town. It will open other areas within the Town that the State wants regulated for watershed, drainage, and pollution discharge from any sites. Some of it is already occurring with projects within the Town. The county has a watershed administrator that would work with the Town to meet the requirements. If the County does not function as the administrator for this, then it would go to the State and they have two representatives for this part of the State. Cases could take up to 10 months or more before they are reviewed. Mr. Nuttall added that these changes are consistent with rest of the jurisdictions that the County serves. When the Country approached the State for approval to administrator the program, one of the requirements was that a unified ordinance should be in place throughout the County.
No comments were made for or against the proposed text amendments. Mayor Jones closed the public hearing.
Mr. Eger noted that the changes need to be approved before July 1. Mr. Nuttall said that if it was not approved, then the Town would have to work with the State. Mr. Eger pointed out that the Town could determine the effective date of the changes.
Mr. Shelton asked who would be available to answer questions and provide more information about the changes. Mr. Eger recommended talking with Warren Simmons, watershed engineer. Mr. Flynt noted that Shea Bolick, watershed engineer, was going to come out to the meeting, but he had to attend the County Commissioner’s meeting. Mr. Shelton made a motion to adopt text amendment Case #2-07, NPDES amendments. Mr. Flynt asked to amend the motion with an effective date of July 1, 2007. Mr. Shelton agreed and Mr. Flynt seconded the motion. All Council members voted aye and the text amendments were adopted. A copy of the text amendments are hereby incorporated into and made a part of the minutes of the meeting.
REZONING CASE #07-02-STPL-01008: AG to CU-RS-30. Located west of OAK LEVEL CHURCH ROAD (SR 2045) and north of SELF ROAD (SR 2044) in Oak Ridge Township. Being Guilford County Tax Map 6-379, Block 1175, Parcel 6, approximately 29.75 acres. Owned by Rodney W. Wilson. Dan River Watershed.
Mr. Eger noted that conditions were applied to the property. The request is for zoning to permit a major single family residential subdivision with the following conditions:
USES: Single family detached dwellings, subdivision – major residential and common recreational facilities which are permitted in the RS districts. CONDITIONS: 1. Density is not to exceed one dwelling unit per acre. 2. Minimum lot size of 40,000 square feet.
Book 9 Page 1492
Mr. Eger indicated that the Planning Board heard the case earlier in the month and they recommended approval with a 4 to 3 vote. At that time, the developer added a condition that he would connect to Town water or establish a community well system.
The surrounding land uses are primarily of low density, single family residential areas. The Northwest Area Plan of 1998 and the Stokesdale Land Use Plan recommends rural residential. The staff has continued with the recommendation that was offered several months ago on the property. It was a recommended for approval with the conditions provided. The request meets the general intent of Stokesdale Land Use Plan and Northwest Area Plans for this area.
Ms. Joyner noted that the vote for the Planning Board vote was 4 to 2 since one member was absent.
Mayor Jones indicated that each side would have 20 minutes to address Council and there will be approximately 5 minutes for rebuttal. Those speaking in favor of the matter were as follows:
Phil Wilson, 707 Simpson Street, Greensboro, noted that it is their intent to use municipal water unless there is some logistical reason that he could not tap onto municipal water, but he did not want to limit it to municipal water. Mr. Wilson says that he intends to use municipal water on the adjacent property that was previously rezoned by Town Council. He noted that in a previous request for a PDR zoning on the site, two items discussed were lot sizes and that septic ought to be contained on the lots without offsite septic areas being used. He addressed these issues by changing the request to RS-30 with a 40,000 square foot minimum size to accommodate for onsite septic on the lots. The layout is similar to the previous request with a reduced lot count. The trails will be extending onto the property. One lot is shown with 39,933 square feet and it will be adjusted to 40,000 square feet. He feels that by combining this property with the adjacent property, it will allow them to connect to paved roads
Gerald Helfry, owner of property to the east of the subject, said that he felt that the more homes that you build, the more the tax base, and the better the water system, police force, and the roads. He felt that if you don’t have growth, you stagnate and he would recommend approval.
Cathy Demis, 6951 Tuscona Trace, Summerfield, indicated that she was in favor of the community. She indicated that she knows Mr. Wilson as a builder and has worked with him in three prior communities. She said that he builds beautiful aesthetically pleasing products which make it easier for her to sell the homes. Everything is handled in a professional manner and he always addresses any concerns that come up.
Those speaking in opposition to the matter:
Bernadine Prevette, 562 Mt. Zion Church Road, noted that at the January 18, 2007 Town Council meeting, Mr. Rodney Wilson said that he had compared deeds and that he was satisfied of the road frontage discussed in a land dispute. Only half of that statement was true. We compared deeds, but the dispute was not satisfied. I have some problems with the developer, Mr. Wilson, as published in the local paper, of his disregard to the local ordinances and they may hold him to be responsible at later date. She questioned the 40,000 square feet requirement. She quoted him as saying that “the houses would be even closer to the stream and so the plan would be less environmentally sound.” She asked if 40,000 square feet lots in RS-40 will have the same issues in RS-30. She noted that the original deed and the plat presented, calls for 29.75 + or – acres. She had talked with the NCDOT, about the proposed amount of road frontage. She noted that when the road is paved, there will be approximately 17% to 22 % loss of acreage due to the roads. So there appears to be no loss of acreage when the Oak Level was paved. She felt that the property has no road frontage and even 40 years ago, a road would have varied the acreage.
Rebuttal from those in favor:
Phil Wilson said that he was completely unaware of anything published that is negative about his development history and would challenge them to present it. As to the proximity of the stream, he had instructed Chuck Truby, the land planner, to keep the road alignment the same when changing from the PDR to the RS-30 for. In an effort to keep the houses as far away from the stream as possible, some lots were widened and some were lost in order to keep the same road alignment so there
Book 9 Page 1493 would be no loss of the integrity of the subdivision from an environmental standpoint. He said he knew of only one or two incidents where they had any issues whatsoever and they were completely controlled and taken care of immediately.
The matter was with Council. Mr. Flynt addressed the issue of RS-30 versus RS-40 by saying that the biggest difference is the size of the lots and RS-30 requires 100 feet of paved road frontage or width at the building line. RS-40 requires 150 feet of paved road frontage. This case has taken the RS-30 which has a smaller building frontage but the lot size is larger with 40,000 square feet with 100 feet of road frontage. He asked Ms. Prevette’s comment that she had talked with NCDOT about .17 tenths of an acre and whether she talking about the alignment of Oak Level was widened or the roads that are being proposed. Ms. Prevette indicated that she was talking about the widening of Oak Level. Mr. Flynt said that he had no way of knowing about that issue. Mr. Flynt asked if the maps that were presented as a part of the case package were binding. Mr. Eger indicated that that they were only for showing the general alignment of the roads and where connections are going and there will be 24 lots. Mr. Flynt asked if planning staff had any issues with the width-depth ratio. Mr. Eger indicated that they did not. One lot has 400 feet depth but there is no request for a width depth waiver. There is some common space.
Mr. Shelton inquired about the additional condition that was added. Mr. Eger indicated that it was for connection to the public water system or the establishment of a community water system. This means there would not be any individual wells on lots.
Mr. Shelton asked about the 100 foot lot width. Mr. Eger noted that there were a number of similar lots in Weatherstone where there was a RS-30 Conditional Use rezoning with the condition that the minimum lot size would be 40,000 square feet. Mr. Eger clarified that any lot can go down to 50 feet wide but it helps with the RS-30 zoning which offers the flexibility of placing the structure on the lot so that it does not have to be 150 feet wide where the house sits and the entire lot may not have to graded out or it may not be close to drainage ways.
Mr. Shelton made a motion to approve the request. Mr. Richardson seconded the motion. Mr. Trevorrow clarified that the additional condition was a part of the motion. Council voted 3 to 2 to approve the rezoning.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Jones Nay Halbrook Aye Flynt Nay Richardson Aye__ Shelton Aye___
REZONING CASE #07-04-STPL-02594: RS-40 to PD-R. Located on the north side of PRINCE EDWARD ROAD (SR 2036) approximately 1,250 feet west of NC HIGHWAY 68 NORTH in Oak Ridge Township. Being Guilford County Tax Map 1-60, Block 1112, Part of Parcel 6; and, Block 1113, Parcel 29, approximately 58 acres. Owned by White Family Trust.
Subdivision PD-R Sketch; Case #STPL-02595: White Family Trust Property: Located at 8316 Prince Edward Road in Oak Ridge Township and consist of 58 lots and road dedication for a total of approximately 71 acres. Being Guilford County Tax Map 1-60, Block 1112, Parcel 6; and, Block 1113, Parcel 29. Zoned RS-40.
Mr. Eger indicated that he would like to present the sketch map first in order that Council could see the general layout of the zoning district that they would like to establish and then present the rezoning case. Decisions when made would be based on the map and the general layout design and then Council would approve or deny the rezoning request.
Mr. Eger said that the zoning sketch map, created by Fleming Engineering, shows 71 acres with 44 single family and 14 multi-family townhouse units that will be for sale. The back portion of the property, less a 13 acre parcel, will be left as common area and the possible location for the future alignment of the US Hwy 158 bypass should NCDOT ever build it. Two points of access are shown off of Prince Edward Road. Items required to be shown on the PDR sketch map are the signs, which cannot be higher than 6 feet and setbacks for the 30 feet from the sides and 20 feet from the rear for the single family, and multi family would be 20 feet for the front and the sides. There could be clusters of two that would be adjoining with a maximum of 14 units. The overall density will be one dwelling unit per acre and there is 19 acres in common space including the bypass. There are stub roads to the adjoining Carraway property should it ever be developed which would provide connectivity. The PDR sketch map shows the cells where development will occur. Book 9 Page 1494
Mr. Flynt asked for a clarification about the number of residences in the multi-family area. Mr. Eger indicated that it would be 14 units which could be 7 units of two adjoining units. Mr. Flynt asked about the 100 foot access easement. Mr. Eger indicated that it was shown across the common area and would provide access to parcels that may otherwise be landlocked. Mr. Flynt asked about the location of the proposed bypass. Mr. Eger said that NCDOT will make the final determination of an exact location for the bypass. He noted that no homes are shown on the plat in that area and it is common area. Mr. Eger noted that the Planning Board recommended approval of the sketch map. The map meets the requirements for a zoning sketch map. Mr. Eger indicated that the zoning request is for Planned Development Residential Distinct with access on Prince Edward Road. The request is to rezone approximately 58 acres to permit the development of a major residential subdivision with 44 single-family homes and 14 multi-family units. The request is for RS-40 to PD-R. The surrounding land use are single family residential and to the west of it is some agricultural but the property owner may be trying to develop that site. The Stokesdale Land Use Plan recommends residential and the Northwest Area Plan recommends rural residential at the existing densities in the area. Transportation impacts are approximately 580 trips per day.
Staff recommends approval. The proposed densities for this property are at one dwelling unit per acre, which meets the intent of the Stokesdale Land Use Plan for this area. The Planning Board recommended the approval of the map with a 5 to 1 vote. The rezoning received a tie vote which goes forward as a recommendation of denial. The Ordinance requires this regarding a tie vote.
Those speaking in favor of the case:
Craig Fleming, 700 Carnegie Place, Greensboro, showed Council a color version of the map to clarify what is being requested. The single family area is about 30 acres. The multi-family is a small area that is surrounded by single family on the sides and front with common space to the rear and along side of the existing pond. He felt that there is a need and desire for different types of housing and lifestyles. The multi family units will be duplex units which will be one building with two residences that are attached in the middle. They will be for sale and will not be rental units. There will be 19.15 acres of common area which will be one third of the area that is to be rezoned and is 13 times the amount of common area required by the Ordinance. The common areas will be owned and maintained by the Homeowners Association and the pond is a central feature. The topography is steep in one area and contains many large hardwood trees which he feels that it would be good to preserve it in its existing condition. The Stokesdale Land Use Plan suggests that environmental features should be protected and preserved. He handed out some photographs of previous projects that he had created which were similar to the request. There were photos of Pepperidge and Ridge Crest. He noted that there are two points of access to the project from Prince Edward Road. One will align with Pilot View Drive. These will be points of connectivity. Preliminary soil evaluations indicate that the soils will suitable and should support 58 units. The Health Department has the final determination. He indicated that they intend to tie onto the Town water system which should total 58 additional customers at build out. He estimated that 360 to 480 gallons a day of water usage for $14,500 would be paid to the Town for water taps and the water bills should be about $35,000 per year in water revenue for the Town. Mr. Fleming indicated that a conceptual sign is shown and it will meet the sign ordinance requirements.
Anthony Vaughn, 116 S. Market Street, Madison, advocated the use of the PDR district saying that it is a good tool to design residential property and to fit projects on the land and while protecting environmentally sensitive areas. There are steep slopes that run to Kings Creek and these types of areas would be better with unified control rather than individual ownership of the environmentally sensitive area. He had spoken with an appraiser who said that the values are good for this type of development and there is a market for this type of development.
Francis Disney, 5696 Wolf ridge Court, Oak Ridge said that he felt that this design is a good alternative to RS-40 and be able to preserve open space. Multi-family is a good product and they are a good alternative to a large home with a large yard.
Those speaking in opposition to the request:
Scott Lawrence, 8400 West Falls Lane, indicated that he was a member of the Planning Board but he did not serve on this case since he was an adjoining property owner. He said that he was in favor of a variety of types of residential units. He voiced concerns over the lack of a minimum lot size which could go as low as 5,000 square foot lot. He did not feel that small lots are consistent with the Vision Statement of the Land Use Plan for maintaining the rural character of the Town. He Book 9 Page 1495 also expressed concerns about the lack of open space on Prince Edward Road. In order to be a rural community and to be consistent with the Vision Statement, you would want open space near the road to maintain continuity of rural land and not have residences with all of the open space to the rear. He said that on an earlier proposal, the 158 bypass was projected to go through the middle of the property. He had attended meetings that were held to gather public opinion about the road alignment and was told that one of the primary considerations was the impact of a road on environmentally sensitive areas and avoid areas with steep slopes, streams, and significant natural areas. This project shows the bypass at the rear of the property next to the stream that feeds into Kings Creek. He did not feel that a road could be built at this location without impacting the water quality of the stream.
Elizabeth McDaniel, 7799 Pilot View Drive, said she felt that the land that will remain in open space is not developable land. They are putting all of the houses on the front of the property to capitalize on their investment. The density, when the roads and lake are taken out, will be about one house to one half acre. She expressed concerns that the areas would be too small for septic fields.
Kent McDaniel, 7799 Pilot View Drive, said that he felt that the lake acreage should be taken out of the equation in determining the density of the homes. He expressed concerns that while two entrances on Prince Edward sounded wonderful, the problem would be accessing NC 68. No one except the residents will enjoy the common area. There was no condition saying how the area would be developed. There could be seventeen units in one building. He suggested that the common area should be placed at the front where more can enjoy it. It has been zoned from AG to RS-40 it should be developed it that way.
Jason Shamo, 8348 Prince Edward Road, felt that duplex/town homes would plummet the surrounding property values. It would be crowding a lot of houses into one small area. He felt that neighbors would prefer RS-40 with nice homes on reasonable sized lots. He expressed concerns over increased traffic.
Terry Shamo, 8348 Prince Edward Road, agreed with Jason’s comments. He felt that it should be left as RS-40.
Brian Cunningham, 8308 Prince Edward Road, lives to the east of the proposed development. He agreed with the previous speakers and said they were trying to cram too many houses on too small an area. He did not feel that it is a good fit for the neighborhood.
Elizabeth McDaniel commented that there are no conditions attached to the rezoning.
Five minute rebuttal for those in favor:
Craig Fleming, asked Mr. Eger about an amendment that was made to the sketch map at the Planning Board meeting to clarify the multi-family issue. Ms. Joyner read the motion made at the Planning Board meeting as follows: “to recommend approval of the sketch plan with the condition that the multi-family area is for duplex units only.” Mr. Fleming said that he would like for this to move forward as a condition of the rezoning. Mr. Trevorrow said that the sketch plan was presented to show how each pod would be developed. Mr. Eger said that a unified development plan would then be submitted for consideration which would show exactly how the buildings would be placed and the lot sizes and it would be recorded with the zoning sketch map. Mr. Eger clarified that duplexes are twin homes and a restriction has been placed on them so they will be twin homes. In the Ordinance, twin homes/duplexes are not considered as multi-family houses. It is in the definitions and they are considered single family housing. The PDR creates a zoning district and is does not have conditions. Mr. Flynt said that having it shown on the sketch map is the only way to have it recorded Mr. Trevorrow said that it is a self imposed restriction.
Mr. Fleming said that NCDOT does not have the bypass as anything other than a vague line on a map and there are no exact locations and no projected dates. It seems a shame to get too caught up in it.
Gene Purtam, 2204 Carlyle Road, Greensboro said that the property was owned by the White Family Trust now and was once owned by Red White, who was his neighbor and he put the property in a trust to his wife. When she died it went to his four sons, of which one lives in Costa Rica, one in Greensboro, one in Abington, Virginia and one lives in California. Mr. White Book 9 Page 1496 used it as a retreat. He noted that he lived on Friendly Avenue forty years ago and they were planning to build Painter Boulevard. He felt that many in the room would be dead before any bypass is built. He said that he can understand how people don’t want the property to be developed, but times change and no one wants it as a retreat now.
Rebuttal from the Opposition: Jason Shamo, said that they were not asking to leave it as it is, they were asking for RS-40 with houses and not for it to stay just a retreat with one house. He asked if the rehearing could take place when a completed sketch plan would be available with the number and the size of the units. Mr. Trevorrow indicated that the sketch map was a part of the rezoning. He noted that none of the people lived here and he liked the original plan much better.
Terry Shamo said that he did not understand how duplexes could be considered as single family homes. Traffic issues will be accessing NC 68 and not accessing Prince Edward. He noted that all of those speaking in favor of the rezoning were from Greensboro or Oak Ridge.
Mr. Eger noted that multi-family is three or more units in one building. The request is for duplexes or twin homes. The Ordinance lists single family which is one living unit within one structure. Twin Homes/duplexes are two homes within one structure and then there are multi-family units which are three or more dwellings within one unit. This request will be limited to two homes per unit.
Mr. Flynt asked for the typical lot size in Pepperidge. Mr. Fleming indicated that the minimum lot size range from about 12,000 to 14,000 square feet with most lots being 20,000 square feet and above. Overall density is one unit per acre. Ridge Crest has larger lots with some being over 1 acre. He said that there are individual septic fields for each house. Most of the lots have on site initial and most have repair area also.
Mr. Flynt asked about access to the common area. Mr. Eger indicated that they would have to show access with a minimum width of 20 feet on the Unified Development Plan when it was presented.
Mr. Flynt said that initially he was an advocate of PDR districts but after having seen some of them, he was not sure that they fit the character of the Town. 20,00 square feet lots work and are marketable and may be large to people from other areas but they are too small and septic tank failure on small lots. He said that he would like to see some multi-family in Stokesdale.
Ms. Halbrook voiced concerns over larger houses on small lots with the houses being close to the streets.
Mr. Shelton said that he agreed with the lot sizes and he was familiar with the area. He felt that it would be a crowed area with this much on the small area.
Mr. Eger said that the Planning board had a tie vote which was a recommendation of denial.
Mayor Jones made a motion to approve the rezoning. Mr. Flynt seconded the motion. Council voted 0 to 5 to approve the rezoning. ROLL CALL VOTE: Jones Nay Halbrook Nay Flynt Nay Richardson Nay_ Shelton Nay___
There was a five minute recess at this point.
Consider a request for a refund of planning fees: Roger Duggins, 1415 Vixen Court, Kernersville, read a letter from the Kernersville R/C Club President Keith Farris requesting a refund of the planning fees for the Special Use Permit. A copy of the letter is hereby incorporated into and made a part of the minutes of the meeting. Mr. Duggins noted that the club had incurred expenses also since they had hired an architect to draw plans. Mayor Jones asked what steps had the County taken to prepare the planning case. Mr. Nuttall was unsure whether it was presented to TRC but he indicated that staff would have spent time in reviewing the file. Mr. Flynt noted that Council did not want to set precedence by refunding fees. The applicants had not anticipated the controversy that had arisen. The Planning Board heard the case and the applicant Book 9 Page 1497 withdrew it before it came to Council. Mr. Flynt made a motion to refund $500.00 of the total fee paid of $1,750 to the RC Club saying that this was an exception and not the rule. He said that it was extenuating circumstances that are not found in generally found in rezoning cases. The withdrawal occurred at an early stage of the process and before a final decision was made and it was more of a community type situation. Mayor Jones seconded the motion. All Council members voted aye and the motion was approved.
Unfinished Business: Town Water System Issues: Mr. Nuttall asked for a map showing the location of the Town water lines. He needed the map since the Ordinance requires a connection if requests are made that are a certain distance from the water lines. The Clerk indicated that she would get a copy of a map for him.
New water system operator: Mr. Trevorrow is working on getting a contract in place so that a 60 day notice can be given to MLP. Mr. Trevorrow asked when Council would like to give notice. Mayor Jones indicated that once the new contract is in place and until then, MLP would continue to be the operator.
Extension of the water lines on NC 68: Mr. Flynt noted that rumors are continuing regarding Oak Ridge trying to obtain water. He noted that last year, Mr. Marziano had agreed to provide information on an extension for the Town. Down NC 68. Mayor Jones suggested that Mr. Flynt should make direct contact with Mr. Marziano and to set a deadline of the next meeting date to have the information. Mr. Flynt agreed to make contact with Marziano & Minier and give them a deadline of next month meeting date on receiving the information.
Watershed Allocation: Update from Previous meeting: Mr. Flynt noted that Mr. Simmons would like to meet with Council and discuss the various alternatives. Mr. Flynt made a motion to invite Warren Simmons, Guilford County Watershed Engineer, to attend the next meeting to discuss the 10/70 rule and its implications with Council. Mayor Jones seconded the motion. All Council members voted and the motion was approved.
Update: Interlocal Agreement for Enforcement of Local Post-Construction Stormwater Management Ordinance: The Clerk noted that Council had approved the agreement with the County at the previous meeting with the stipulation that the amount of fees that the County will charge the Town be included in the agreement. Mr. Simmons and Mr. Niles have suggested that the contract with Guilford County for planning services be amended to include the fees rather than including it in the agreement that must be submitted to Raleigh. Mayor Jones made a motion to send the agreement to the County as it is and the fees will be negotiated as a part of the current contract. Mr. Richardson seconded the motion. All Council members voted aye and the motion carried.
Committee and Board Reports: Stokesdale Parks & Recreation Board Report: Mr. Eisel was not able to attend the meeting but he had provided a written report which the Clerk had distributed to Council members. Vicki White-Lawrence, a Board member was present and could answer Council’s questions, if any.
Land Use Plan Review Committee: Mr. Flynt reported that the Committee was meeting twice a month and hoped to have a draft of a revised Land Use Plan to the Planning Board by the July meeting.
Stokesdale Youth Football League: Request for the use of Town Hall for meetings: Mr. Homol requested the use of Town Hall on the fourth Monday of each month for the SYFA to hold their evening meetings of their Board of Directors. He noted that the group was a non-profit corporation serving the children of the area. Mr. Clay Walker, administrator at Oak Level Academy, indicated that 30 children had registered to play Youth Football and only five more were needed to complete a third team. Mayor Jones made a motion to approve the request and to set up the appropriate security. Mr. Flynt seconded the motion. All Council members voted aye and the motion was approved.
Finance Report: April, 2007: The Finance Officer reported that assets increased slightly in the month of April. General Fund checking transactions included a payment of $270 for the maintenance agreement for the copier and a payment of
Book 9 Page 1498 $23.85 to Hostway Corporation for the domain name registration for Town Website. The architectural firm of Stewart-Cooper-Newell was paid $3,077.87 on the schematic design of the Town Hall/Park facility. Accounts Payable included an invoice for $2,345.84 from the News & Record for advertising for public hearings that were held in April and May and an invoice for $167.40 for hosting fees for the Town website. The General Fund Savings account shows one deposit of $1,180.40 from Time Warner cable fees. Changes in the laws have reduced the amount of income. In June or July, the Town should receive a payment from the State for a portion of the fees.
General Fund Certificate of Deposit #35 matured, Interest in the amount of $7,844.23 was paid at maturity and the certificate was reinvested at about 5%. Two Water Enterprise Certificates of Deposit matured in April. They earned a total of $3,975.39 and were also reinvested.
Water Enterprise Checking account transactions included payment to the City of Winston-Salem for water in the amount of $4,197.13; and payment to Yates Construction Company of $5,265.57 for installation of meters. Accounts Payable includes invoices from Yates Construction Company for the installation of a new tap and the installation of meters as well as an invoice for lawn services.
Presentation of the 2007-2008 Budget & Budget Message - Finance Officer: Ms Joyner pointed out the main items in the budget. The Clerk noted that the Development Ordinance needs to be updated due to the number o f text amendments that have occurred. Municode may be an option for Council to consider. Mr. Flynt asked if the budget included a cost of living/merit pay increase for the Town Clerk. Mr. Shelton said that Council will need to consider that before the budget is approved. Mayor Jones noted that the Town was one of the first towns to incorporate and Stokesdale is the only Town that has not levied a tax. The Town has not received sales and use tax funds for about five years now but the Town continues to provide water service, law enforcement, and supports the Parks and the Schools and staff has been kept at minimum. A copy of the Budget Message is hereby incorporated into and made a part of the minutes of the meeting.
Set Date for Budget Hearing: Mayor Jones made a motion to set the date for the public hearing on the budget for the next Council meeting on June 21, 2007. Mr. Richardson seconded the motion. All Council members present voted aye and the public hearing was scheduled.
Mr. Flynt noted that there has been a change of ownership of the car lot at the intersection of NC 68 and US Hwy 158. He expressed concerns that the automobiles may be located in the road right of way. Mr. Nuttall said that he would have someone to check. Mr. Flynt also inquired about the U-Haul trucks that are being parked on the premises of the mini storage warehouses. Mr. Nuttall said that he would check with zoning investigation on this problem.
Legislative Action: There was no legislative action coming before Council. Mayor Jones indicated that he has spoken with public officials including legislators about the Jordan Lake rules. The Clerk indicated that the letters had not been mailed.
Other Business: Set meeting dates for public meetings for discussing the Town Park Project and obtaining comments on the project. Mayor Jones suggested that the public meetings would be for discussion on the park portion of the property only and would not include comments on the construction of Town Hall since they will be two separate projects. The Clerk had contacted the architects to see for possible dates but had not received a reply from them.
Mr. Flynt noted that there has been a change of ownership of the car lot at the intersection of NC 68 and US Hwy 158. He expressed concerns that the automobiles may be located in the road right of way and asked if the site plan could be checked. Mr. Nuttall said that he would have someone to check. Mr. Flynt also inquired about the u-Haul trucks that are being parked on the premises of the mini storage warehouses on US Hwy 158. Mr. Nuttall said that he would check with zoning investigation on this issue.
ANNOUNCEMENTS: Mayor Jones read the announcements listed on the agenda. The Clerk noted that the Planning Board meeting may be cancelled due to lack of cases. The Clerk also noted that the line-up for the Summerfield Founders Day Parade will start at 8:30 rather that 9:00 am. Book 9 Page 1499
Comments from the Floor: Mr. Shammo thanked Council for the good job they are doing.
Comments from Council: There were no further comments from Council.
Adjournment: Mayor Jones made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Richardson seconded the motion. The meeting adjourned at 10:12 pm.
_________________________________________ Carolyn L. Joyner, Town Clerk
Approved:
_________________________________________ Randle L. Jones, Mayor
APPROVED BY COUNCIL: July 19, 2007 Official Copies of the Town Council minutes are available at Town Hall for a nominal copy fee.
|
|
Last Updated: Thursday November 13, 2008 E-mail the Webmaster with questions or comments about this Web site. Copyright©2008 Town of Stokesdale, North Carolina
|