December 3, 2007 - 6:00 PM - County Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes (Rezoning)

10 512 Meeting of the Johnston County Board of Commissioners December 3 , 2007 6 00 pm The Johnston County Board of Commissioners met in regular session Monday , December 3 , 2007 at 6 00 pm in the Commissioners Meeting Room , Johnston County Courthouse Annex , Smithfield , North Carolina The following members were present Present Cookie Pope , Chairman , Wade M Stewart , Vice Chairman , Allen L Mims , Jr , Jeffrey P Carver , W Ray Woodall , DeVan Barbour , and Tony Braswell Absent None Also Present Rick J Hester , County Manager , Paula G Woodard , Clerk to the Board , J Mark Payne , County Attorney , and Deva C Holt , Deputy Clerk Chairman Cookie Pope called the meeting to order at 6 00 pm and the following business was transacted 1 Public Comments A Citizen Concern – Thompson Rd , Webb Mill Rd , and NC Hwy 96 near Four Oaks Kimberly Riley - 827 Thompson Road , Four Oaks , addressed the Board regarding concerns for the area surrounding Thompson Road , Webb Mill Road , and NC Hwy 96 near Four Oaks Ms Riley informed the Board she has been in contact with the County’s Planning , Building Inspections , as well as Environmental Health Departments in an effort to help clean up this area in which she lives Ms Riley expressed concerns regarding mobile home ordinances , correct and timely disposal of trash by residents , construction of out - buildings , homes sharing electricity and septic systems , removal of dilapidated structures , unlicensed vehicles and the need for continued visible patrol of law enforcement around the area Ms Riley stated while she is in contact with the County staff , she wanted to make sure the Board was aware of her concerns County Manager Rick Hester stated he would follow up with Ms Riley 2 Public Hearings – Rezoning Cases and Special Use Permit Requests Advertised – In The Smithfield Herald – November 20 and November 27 , 2007 Certified letters were mailed to adjoining property owners on November 21 , 2007 Notices were posted at the locations on October 2 , 2007 for Cases 07 - 31 ; 07 - 32 ; 07 - 34 ; 07 - 35 ; 07 - 36 ; 07 - 37 ; 07 - 38 The Chairman opened the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 31 Case 07 - 31 Petition to rezone approximately 25 acres which fronts both Cleveland Road SR 1010 and Cornwallis Road SR 1525 in Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB Tax ID 06E03199C Applicant Son - Lan Development Owner Rouse and Esther Mae Coats Planning Director Berry Gray stated this was a petition to rezone approximately 25 acres which fronts both Cleveland Road SR 1010 and Cornwallis Road SR 1525 in the Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB Mr Gray informed the Board that in August 2006 , property located just west of the site was rezoned to straight General Business and further noted zoning classifications of straight General Business located north of the intersection as well as one directly to the south Mr Gray stated there is a mix of Agricultural Residential and General Business in the vicinity Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr noted the Planning Board had asked to see a Traffic Impact Analysis and inquired as to when the analysis would be required for a straight rezoning Commissioner Mims also asked if the Department of Transportation would take an analysis into consideration if the DOT already had plans in place to address traffic improvements Mr Gray responded the Traffic Impact Analysis would be required for a straight rezoning to General Business once the site plan is submitted for the in - house review Mr Gray noted once a proposed development projects to have 100 vehicles per day per peak hour or more , or a total of 1,000 vehicles per day , a Traffic Impact Analysis would be required He commented that typically a development on a tract as large as 25 acres would require the Traffic Impact Analysis regardless of any special use requirements Mr Gray stated the Department of Transportation would review the Traffic Impact Analysis , and would possibly make the analysisPage513 December 3 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued a requirement , depending on the size of the project Mr Gray indicated staff would work with the DOT to resolve conflicts between a Traffic Impact Analysis and any plans the DOT may have for the area Commissioner Wade M Stewart noted the surrounding zoning classifications of straight General Business and pointed out that the Planning Board had voted to recommend denial of the rezoning case and based their decision on staff’s recommendation of denial Commissioner Stewart further noted the staff recommendation was based on recent Board decisions of denial for straight General Business Commissioner Stewart inquired if staff , in recommending denial , was taking their lead from previous decisions by the Board Mr Gray reported staff did look at the consistency of the past year’s Board decisions and noted straight General Business had been shied away from and a special use district encouraged Mr Gray also stated staff took into consideration that Cleveland Elementary School was located directly across the street and staff felt there could be possible concerns for undefined uses across from the school area In response to a question from Commissioner Jeffrey P Carver , Mr Gray confirmed that staff would have recommended approval if the request had been General Business – Special Use District and noted staff has always encouraged General Business – Special Use District Commissioner Carver stated the Board has been requesting special use district classifications more recently ; therefore , he understood why staff had recommended the denial Lanny Clifton of Son - Lan Development , the applicant , 2701 Polenta Road , asked if he could answer any questions the Board had regarding DOT requirements Mr Clifton submitted to the Board a letter dated December 3 , 2007 from Mr Tim Little , PE , District Engineer with the DOT , outlining preliminary comments regarding road improvements for the proposed development Mr Clifton stated based on conversations with Mr Little regarding road improvements , Son - Lan had purchased property , formerly known as the Langdon Land , directly west of the proposed site in order to obtain the minimum 1,000 feet required west of the intersection with SR 1010 and SR 1525 to accommodate a traffic signal and additional improvements such as a turn lane and deceleration lane Mr Clifton noted Mr Little informed him that if a larger development is proposed for the site , then more traffic improvements may be required Chairman Cookie Pope commented and Mr Clifton agreed that when one developer pays for road improvements , it enhances the other side of the road for future developers Mr Clifton pointed out a subdivision that joins the property ; however , stated there is a natural buffer of trees in between the residential area and the proposed development that Son - Lan would leave in place Commissioner Stewart inquired as to what Son - Lan was planning for property northwest of the proposed site Mr Clifton stated Son - Lan plans to convert the front of the property northwest of the proposed site into a residential development Commissioner Stewart commented that if Son - Lan proposed to construct houses adjacent to the General Business development then obviously Son - Lan would not want to build something that would be unacceptable to the public Mr Clifton agreed that anything developed by Son - Lan at this location under General Business would be acceptable by the surrounding public and stated some of the possible uses being considered would be a Dollar General store or possibly a convenience store Mr Clifton stated it is the intent of Son - Lan to improve the area and if the development goes as planned , they would also be required to install a traffic signal Commissioner Carver stated it appeared that Son - Lan has three separate sizable tracts of land proposed for development and noted a master plan for the entire acreage would have been helpful and easier to understand from a conceptual basis Mr Clifton responded Son - Lan had previously purchased the Langdon Land and rezoned it to General Business before they had been able to agree with Ms Esther Coats on the sale of her property Mr Clifton stated Son - Lan had purchased and rezoned the Langdon Land first because the Coats property would not have been suitable for development without the Langdon Land to aid with traffic improvements Mr Clifton informed the Board that Ms Coats plans to move into the residential development Son - Lan will be constructing At the inquiry of Commissioner Stewart , Mr Clifton stated significant road improvements will be required and Son - Lan will pay for the improvements along with the traffic signal Page514 December 3 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued Commissioner Stewart asked Mr Clifton if Son - Lan pays for the road improvements , would they be able to receive some type of compensation from other groups who may develop property on the opposite side of the road that benefit from the road improvements Mr Clifton reported he believes that if other groups develop property on the opposite side of the road and benefit from the road improvements , then those parties should have to pay their prorated share Mr Clifton stated he felt this policy should also apply to projects paid for by the DOT and noted if developers have to pay a prorated share to the DOT , then that money could be put into a fund to be used for more road improvements in the future Commissioner Stewart asked Mr Clifton to comment why he felt straight General Business was needed versus General Business – Special Use District Mr Clifton reported the property , under straight General Business , could be sold to a user without having to come back before the Board of Commissioners to get approval on a specific use , as long as the use is acceptable under the General Business category Mr Clifton stated if there is a use allowed under the straight General Business classification , then he felt the Board of Commissioners should remove that use as being acceptable Commissioner Stewart stated he understood from Mr Clifton that the issue is more of a timeline concern in that it takes more time if a potential buyer has to come back before the Board of Commissioners to get approval for a specific use and in the meantime , Son - Lan could possibly lose the prospect Mr Clifton agreed with Commissioner Stewart and stated as an example of how Son - Lan plans to improve the area , they are requiring the Dollar General that will be constructed on the corner to have brick on the front and both sides , noting normally Dollar General facilities usually are metal buildings Commissioner Tony Braswell asked Mr Clifton what were his plans in the long term for a General Business rezoning Mr Clifton reported Son - Lan would like to develop a grocery store with a possible drugstore , convenience store , or perhaps a daycare facility in the hopes of providing conveniences for the citizens to help decrease traffic congestion Mr Gray reported the Planning Board recommended denial of Case 07 - 31 from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB There being no further comments , the Chairman recessed the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 31 Decision on Rezoning Case 07 - 31 Case 07 - 31 Petition to rezone approximately 25 acres which fronts both Cleveland Road SR 1010 and Cornwallis Road SR 1525 in Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB Tax ID 06E03199C Applicant Son - Lan Development Owner Rouse and Esther Mae Coats Commissioner Wade M Stewart moved the Board approve rezoning case 07 - 31 , to rezone approximately 25 acres which fronts both Cleveland Road SR 1010 and Cornwallis Road SR 1525 in Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB Commissioner W Ray Woodall seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote The Chairman reopened the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 32 Case 07 - 32 Petition to rezone a 124 acre tract located on the southwest intersection of Cleveland Road SR 1010 and Cornwallis Road SR 1525 in Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB Tax ID 06E03199E Applicant Son - Lan Development Owner Rouse and Esther Mae Coats Planning Director Berry Gray stated this was a petition to rezone a 124 acre tract located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Cleveland Road SR 1010 and Cornwallis Road SR 1525 in the Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB Mr Gray noted the property was located adjacent to the previous rezoning case 07 - 31 Page515 December 3 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued Lanny Clifton of Son - Lan Development , the applicant , 2701 Polenta Road , stated the property would be included as part of the previous rezoning case 07 - 31 Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr noted on the previous case 07 - 31 , Mr Clifton reported Son - Lan would leave the existing tree - line as a buffer in between the commercial development and the residential subdivision and asked Mr Clifton to verify if this was correct Mr Clifton shared with the Board pictures illustrating the existing row of trees , noting their location in relation to the property lines Mr Clifton stated Son - Lan would leave the entire row of trees , which is approximately 20 feet in length , in place as a buffer Mr Clifton reported most of the trees were located on the Coats property Commissioner Mims inquired from staff if any additional buffers would be required in between General Business and the residential section Mr Gray reported in between the commercial and residential sections , a Class B buffer would be required ; however , staff would take into consideration the natural vegetation Mr Gray cautioned additional landscaping may be required to achieve a Class B buffer Mr Clifton stated Son - Lan would comply with staff requirements Mr Gray reported the Planning Board recommended denial of Case 07 - 32 from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB There being no further comments , the Chairman recessed the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 32 Decision on Rezoning Case 07 - 32 Case 07 - 32 Petition to rezone a 124 acre tract located on the southwest intersection of Cleveland Road SR 1010 and Cornwallis Road SR 1525 in Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB Tax ID 06E03199E Applicant Son - Lan Development Owner Rouse and Esther Mae Coats Commissioner DeVan Barbour moved the Board approve rezoning case 07 - 32 , to rezone a 124 acre tract located on the southwest intersection of Cleveland Road SR 1010 and Cornwallis Road SR 1525 in Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB Commissioner W Ray Woodall seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote The Chairman reopened the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 34 Case 07 - 34 Petition to rezone 115 acres of an 1801 acre tract from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business – Special Use District GB - SUD located on NC 42 West , which is approximately ¼ of a mile from the intersection with Cleveland Road SR 1010 in Cleveland Township Tax ID 06D01009 Applicant George Venters Owners Paul J Johnson and Mary Gail J Partin Planning Director Berry Gray stated this was a petition to rezone 115 acres of an 1801 acre tract from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business – Special Use District GB - SUD located on NC 42 West , which is approximately one forth of a mile from the intersection with Cleveland Road SR 1010 in Cleveland Township Mr Gray noted a special use application was associated with the request to allow for general retail , an office , restaurant , bank , or service establishment Mr Gray pointed out the initial leaseholder planned for the property is an Advance Auto Parts Store Mr Gray reported some of the surrounding zonings to the east include General Business , Interstate Highway District , and property to the west is zoned Agricultural Residential Applicant George Venters , 709 Yarmouth Road , Raleigh , stated his firm would be purchasing the property with the intent to construct an Advance Auto Parts store Mr Venters noted property across the street as well as property to the northeast is currently zoned General Business and he is working with DOT District Engineer Tim Little to address any road widening issues Mr Venters indicated the location of the proposed driveway would mirror the driveway of the Cleveland Draft House directly across the street , and according to Mr Little , the DOT is requesting the proposed driveway to become the main access off of NC Hwy 42 Mr Venters stated his firm would construct a stubout to allow surrounding users access to NC Hwy 42 PagePage pageNumber5516 December 3 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued Mr Gray reported the Planning Board recommended approval of Case 07 - 34 from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business – Special Use District There being no further comments , the Chairman recessed the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 34 Decision on Rezoning Case 07 - 34 Case 07 - 34 Petition to rezone 115 acres of an 1801 acre tract from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business – Special Use District GB - SUD located on NC 42 West , which is approximately ¼ of a mile from the intersection with Cleveland Road SR 1010 in Cleveland Township Tax ID 06D01009 Applicant George Venters Owners Paul J Johnson and Mary Gail J Partin Commissioner W Ray Woodall moved the Board approve rezoning case 07 - 34 , to rezone 115 acres of an 1801 acre tract from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business – Special Use District GB - SUD located on NC 42 West , which is approximately ¼ of a mile from the intersection with Cleveland Road SR 1010 in Cleveland Township Commissioner Tony Braswell seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote The Chairman opened the Special Use Hearing for Case 07 - 34 Case 07 - 34 Application to allow for general retail , office , restaurant , bank , or service establishment Applicant George Venters Owners Paul J Johnson and Mary Gail J Partin Those wishing to speak on Special Use Case 07 - 34 were sworn in by the Clerk to the Board Planning Director Berry Gray introduced the special use case and stated the request is to allow for general retail , an office , restaurant , bank , or service establishment Mr Gray introduced the following summary of evidence into the record A pre - application consultation was held with the applicant for Case 07 - 34 on August 31 , 2007 At that time , the applicant was informed of the following • If approved , applicant must provide to the Planning Office a Site Plan for their review and approval • Applicant must comply with the requirement of the Johnston County Land Development Code regarding landscaping , buffering and fence or any additional requirements as approved by this Board • Applicant will be notified in writing of the Board’s decision • If denied , no application can be accepted for the same use affecting the same property for a period of twelve 12 months and that their right of appeal to the Superior Court must be exercised within thirty 30 days of the receipt of notice of denial by the Board of County Commissioners • Applicant’s Special Use Permit will expire at the end of twenty - four 24 months if it is not used as permitted within the time period • When necessary , staff informed the applicant of further Planning and Zoning Department requirements and the requirements of other departments such as soil erosion and sedimentation requirements , Health Department regulations , stormwater and public utility requirements • Subsequent to the pre - application consultation , all required notices were mailed to property owners within 500 feet The property was posted and notices of public hearings were advertised in accordance with the requirements of the North Carolina General Statutes On October 16 , 2007 , the Johnston County Planning Board held a public hearing regarding Special Use Case 07 - 34 and made the following recommendations Upon a motion by Mr Gathers , seconded by Mr Edwards , carried by a vote of 7 - 0 , with Mr Schulz abstaining , the Planning Board voted , at its October 16 , 2007 meeting , to recommend approval of the Special Use Permit request , Case 07 - 34 , based on and subject to the following findings of fact and special conditions Finding of Facts for the Special Use Permit 1 That the use or development is located , designed , and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health , safety , and general welfare ; Applicant The site is designed utilizing NCDOT’s requirements for ingress egress for safety The site is located in an area of commercial development and fits the county’s plan for development Staff Applicant has had numerous meetings with DOT’s district engineer to provide the needed and most safe means of traffic flow and improvements Site is located in an existing commercialized area in close proximity to the general business zoning district s 2 That the use or development appears to comply with all required use and intensity regulations of Articles II & IV of the Johnston County Land Development Code and the applicable specific standards in section 14 - 257 and with all applicable regulations ;PagePage pageNumber6517 December 3 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued Applicant The design has been prepared per the county’s land development code and the final construction plans will meet all applicable codes Staff Subject property has general business directly to the northeast and southeast of its zoning lines The general business special use district appears to match the existing intensity of uses All requirements of county agencies and board conditions will be complied with and required at the detailed site plan review process Requested land uses such as general retail , office , restaurant , bank , and service establishments all correspond with the intent and permitted uses within the general business zoning district 3 That the use or development is located , designed , and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property , or that the use or development is a public necessity ; Applicant The location is directly across from a commercial development and it is the owner’s intent to have the remaining portions of the property developed as commercial sites Staff Landscape buffering and other special use requirements and conditions are required between differing zoning and intensity of uses This is a measure meant to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous properties 4 That the use or development conforms with general plans for the physical development of the County’s Planning jurisdiction , the Design Manual , or other development policies as adopted by the Board of Commissioners Applicant This site is located in an area of continuing commercial development along the NC Hwy 42 corridor and is keeping with other developments Staff The proposed development will conform to all land development codes and requirements as imposed by the boards Special Use Conditions 1 The Special Use Permit shall expire with the violation of any Special Use Condition 2 Signage must comply with the sign code and obtain proper permits 3 Must install a Class B Buffer 3 large trees , 4 small trees , and 6 shrubs every 100 linear feet along the street and any differing internal zoning property lines 4 Must prove water usage will be less than 500 gallons per day , or site will be required to extend and tap onto county sewer 5 Hours of operation Monday - Saturday 7 30am - 10pm , Sunday 9am - 10pm 6 Must comply with all NCDOT traffic improvements 7 Submission of a detailed site plan for review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Department Staff Mr Gray listed and reviewed the special use conditions with the Board , noting the Class B buffer requirement , hours of operation , water usage condition , that the applicant must comply with DOT traffic improvements , and the requirement for the submission of a detailed site plan Applicant George Venters , 709 Yarmouth Road , Raleigh , stated an Advance Auto Parts store would be the primary leaseholder ; however , he was asking for the additional uses of an office , restaurant , bank , or service establishment incase they would be needed for the future Commissioner Jeffrey P Carver inquired if Advance Auto was agreeable to the hours of operation proposed in the special use conditions Mr Venters reported Advance Auto would like to have had more flexibility in the hours of operation ; however , they were agreeable to the hours the Planning Board recommended Mr Gray reported based on the findings of fact with the special use conditions , the Planning Board recommended approval of the special use application for case 07 - 34 to allow for general retail , an office , restaurant , bank , or service establishment There being no further comments , the Chairman closed the Special Use Hearing for Case 07 - 34 Decision on Special Use Case 07 - 34 Case 07 - 34 Application to allow for general retail , office , restaurant , bank , or service establishment Applicant George Venters Owners Paul J Johnson and Mary Gail J Partin Based on the following findings of fact and the special use conditions , Commissioner W Ray Woodall moved the Board authorize the Planning Department to issue a special use permit to Applicant George Venters to allow for general retail , an office , restaurant , bank , or service establishment located on 115 acres of an 1801 acre tract on NC 42 West , which is approximately ¼ of a mile from the intersection with Cleveland Road SR 1010 in Cleveland Township Commissioner DeVan Barbour seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote Finding of Facts for the Special Use Permit 1 That the use or development is located , designed , and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health , safety , and general welfare ;PagePage pageNumber7518 December 3 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued The site is designed utilizing NCDOT’s requirements for ingress egress for safety The site is located in an area of commercial development and fits the county’s plan for development Applicant has had numerous meetings with DOT’s district engineer to provide the needed and most safe means of traffic flow and improvements Site is located in an existing commercialized area in close proximity to the general business zoning district s 2 That the use or development appears to comply with all required use and intensity regulations of Articles II & IV of the Johnston County Land Development Code and the applicable specific standards in section 14 - 257 and with all applicable regulations ; The design has been prepared per the county’s land development code and the final construction plans will meet all applicable codes Subject property has general business directly to the northeast and southeast of its zoning lines The general business special use district appears to match the existing intensity of uses All requirements of county agencies and board conditions will be complied with and required at the detailed site plan review process Requested land uses such as general retail , office , restaurant , bank , and service establishments all correspond with the intent and permitted uses within the general business zoning district 3 That the use or development is located , designed , and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property , or that the use or development is a public necessity ; The location is directly across from a commercial development and it is the owner’s intent to have the remaining portions of the property developed as commercial sites Landscape buffering and other special use requirements and conditions are required between differing zoning and intensity of uses This is a measure meant to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous properties 4 That the use or development conforms with general plans for the physical development of the County’s Planning jurisdiction , the Design Manual , or other development policies as adopted by the Board of Commissioners This site is located in an area of continuing commercial development along the NC Hwy 42 corridor and is keeping with other developments The proposed development will conform to all land development codes and requirements as imposed by the boards Special Use Conditions 1 The Special Use Permit shall expire with the violation of any Special Use Condition 2 Signage must comply with the sign code and obtain proper permits 3 Must install a Class B Buffer 3 large trees , 4 small trees , and 6 shrubs every 100 linear feet along the street and any differing internal zoning property lines 4 Must prove water usage will be less than 500 gallons per day , or site will be required to extend and tap onto county sewer 5 Hours of operation Monday - Saturday 7 30am - 10pm , Sunday 9am - 10pm 6 Must comply with all NCDOT traffic improvements 7 Submission of a detailed site plan for review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Department Staff The Chairman reopened the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 35 Case 07 - 35 Petition to rezone 078 acres of a 23 acre tract located at 51 Montford Drive , at its intersection with NC 50 North in Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to Office Institutional O I Tax ID 06D02003B Owner Chadbourne Homeowners Association , Inc Applicant Reid Stephenson , Secretary to the Chadbourne Homeowners Association , Inc Planning Director Berry Gray stated this was a petition to rezone 078 acres of a 23 acre tract located at 51 Montford Drive , at its intersection with NC 50 North in Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to Office Institutional O I Mr Gray reported the property is owned by the Chadbourne Homeowners Association Mr Gray noted Office Institutional is the most restrictive of the commercial classifications and only allows for professional type offices Mr Gray stated the facility is located at the entrance of Chadbourne surrounded by the existing recreational facilities for the development The facility has already been remodeled to conform to commercial building code and since parking exists , there would be little required change to the site plan for access Mr Gray indicated according to the Homeowners Association , the building has never been fully utilized by the subdivision ; therefore , the Homeowners Association would like to rent the facility out to earn funds for the Association Joe Boyd , 114 Willowcroft Court , President of Chadbourne Homeowners Association , the applicant , asked the Board to consider rezoning the property and if there were any questions Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr pointed out that the Homeowners Association was requesting a commercial use and noted he suggested at the Planning Board meeting that the Association amend its restrictive covenants to allow such a use Commissioner Mims asked if the covenants had been amended Mr Boyd stated the Homeowners Association would go through the process of amending the covenants He informed the Board that the Homeowners Association held a special meeting of the homeowners who were all notified by mail of the meeting and discussed the issue Mr Boyd stated the homeowners , by an overwhelming majority , chose to request the rezoning to Office Institutional PagePage pageNumber8519 December 3 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued Commissioner Mims questioned the County approving the rezoning for a use that is restricted in the subdivision’s covenants County Attorney Mark Payne stated the County does not enforce restrictive covenants Mr Payne noted the County has faced similar situations in rezonings regarding access issues ; however , it was not a deciding factor in granting the rezoning The County has granted the rezoning ; however , stated it is the applicant’s responsibility to make sure the request is legally allowed Mr Payne reported if the proposed use is restricted by the covenants , then it is the applicant’s responsibility to amend the covenants In response to questions from Commissioner Mims , Mr Payne stated the only way the Board could ensure that the restrictive covenants are amended and are being followed in connection with the rezoning , would be to require a special use application and attached special conditions Commissioner Mims noted he is not against what the Chadbourne Homeowners Association is trying to do ; however , he wanted to make sure the legal aspects would be addressed by the Homeowners Association Mike Lusk , 133 Brighton Drive , Chadbourne Subdivision , stated he purchased his home in Chadbourne less than one year ago and noted the location of his residence on the zoning map Mr Lusk stated the facility was a clubhouse when he purchased his home and if the rezoning is approved , he expressed concern over what type of uses could be allowed in the building Mr Lusk stated there are a number of permitted uses under Office Institutional that could possibly affect a potential resale and he was opposed to the rezoning At the inquiry of Commissioner Wade M Stewart , Mr Lusk verified he was the individual that wrote the opposition letter submitted at the Planning Board meeting Mr Lusk reported he would have been at the meeting to speak ; however , was traveling at the time Mr Gray reported the Planning Board recommended approval of Case 07 - 35 from Agricultural Residential AR to Office Institutional O I There being no further comments , the Chairman recessed the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 35 Further Discussion by the Board for Case 07 - 35 Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr inquired from Homeowners Association President Joe Boyd if he could provide documentation of the overwhelming majority vote of approval at the Homeowners Association meeting for the request Mr Boyd stated the minutes from that meeting could be used as the documentation as well as witnesses who were in attendance at the meeting Commissioner Jeffrey P Carver inquired as to how many residents voted for approval Mr Boyd reported there were no dissenting votes at the meeting In response to a question by Commissioner Mims , Mr Boyd reported not everyone in the Homeowners Association was present at the meeting ; however , it was the largest turnout he has seen , since he has been a resident in the subdivision , with approximately 50 people in attendance He noted the residents were each sent a letter advising them of the agenda topics to be discussed Commissioner Wade M Stewart stated he expected the County Attorney to ensure that the Board is covered on the legal aspects of the request noting the Board had not seen any documentation from the Homeowners Association stating they voted to request the rezoning Commissioner Carver noted he felt the restrictive covenants issue was between the Homeowners Association and the residents of Chadbourne County Attorney Mark Payne stated the restrictive covenants could be amended ; however , it was the responsibility of the Homeowners Association to ensure the covenants are amended and not the Board of Commissioners At the inquiry of Commissioner Tony Braswell , Mr Boyd stated the Association viewed the rezoning as an opportunity to offset significant costs associated with maintaining the appearance of the neighborhood andPagePage pageNumber9520 December 3 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued noted the facility has not been used as a clubhouse in several months Mr Boyd stated it was unfortunate that Mr Lusk had been unable to attend the Homeowners Association meeting ; however , it was a fact that the residents present at the meeting voted to request the rezoning Mr Payne reiterated the Board’s mandate was to review the rezoning request and determine if it is appropriate , and it is the responsibility of the Homeowners Association to make sure the use is acceptable under the covenants Commissioner Mims stated the Board is also supposed to be mindful of issues such as health , safety , and the wellbeing of the County’s citizens and he would have preferred the Homeowners Association to have already amended their covenants and provided more documentation on the vote by the Association Decision on Rezoning Case 07 - 35 Case 07 - 35 Petition to rezone 078 acres of a 23 acre tract located at 51 Montford Drive , at its intersection with NC 50 North in Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to Office Institutional O I Tax ID 06D02003B Owner Chadbourne Homeowners Association , Inc Applicant Reid Stephenson , Secretary to the Chadbourne Homeowners Association , Inc Commissioner Tony Braswell moved the Board approve rezoning case 07 - 35 , to rezone 078 acres of a 23 acre tract located at 51 Montford Drive , at its intersection with NC 50 North in Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to Office Institutional O I Commissioner Jeffrey P Carver seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote The Chairman reopened the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 36 Case 07 - 36 Petition to rezone approximately 4 acres of a 1509 acre tract located on Cleveland Rd SR 1010 , approximately ½ mile from I - 40 in the Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to Community Business CB Tax ID 06E02019B Owner Cleveland Road 8969 Limited Partnership Applicant Arbutina Properties , LLC Planning Director Berry Gray stated this was a petition to rezone approximately 4 acres of a 1509 acre tract located on Cleveland Rd SR 1010 , approximately one - half mile from I - 40 in the Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to Community Business CB Mr Gray noted this was a straight rezoning request to Community Business Mr Gray pointed out the surrounding uses and noted the property is adjacent to Westview Elementary School and the athletic fields in between the proposed development and the school would help to serve as a buffer Merle Hall , Southwind Surveying , 201 Glen Road , Garner , on behalf of the applicant , stated the request was for a straight Community Business classification and all Department of Transportation recommendations would be followed Mr Hall indicated the applicant was requesting Community Business in that the odd shape of the lot would be difficult to development as residential and was perhaps more suited to Community Business Mr Gray reported the Planning Board recommended approval of Case 07 - 36 from Agricultural Residential AR to Community Business CB There being no further comments , the Chairman recessed the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 36 Decision on Rezoning Case 07 - 36 Case 07 - 36 Petition to rezone approximately 4 acres of a 1509 acre tract located on Cleveland Rd SR 1010 , approximately ½ mile from I - 40 in the Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to Community Business CB Tax ID 06E02019B Owner Cleveland Road 8969 Limited Partnership Applicant Arbutina Properties , LLC Commissioner W Ray Woodall moved the Board approve rezoning case 07 - 36 , to rezone approximately 4 acres of a 1509 acre tract located on Cleveland Rd SR 1010 , approximately ½ mile from I - 40 in the Cleveland Township from Agricultural Residential AR to Community Business CB Commissioner DeVan Barbour seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote The Chairman reopened the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 37 Page0521 December 3 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued Case 07 - 37 Petition to rezone 391 acres located at the northwest corner of the intersection of NC 210 and Old Fairground Road SR 1309 in Pleasant Grove Township from Agricultural Residential AR to Community Business CB Tax ID 13D04005A Owner Applicant Thomas Creech and Donald Creech Planning Director Berry Gray stated this was a petition to rezone 391 acres located at the northwest corner of the intersection of NC 210 and Old Fairground Road SR 1309 in Pleasant Grove Township from Agricultural Residential AR to Community Business CB Mr Gray noted the surrounding uses included some residential properties , community business located to the southeast , and a convenience store on the corner of NC 210 and Old Fairground Road Mr Gray commented that the adjacent residential subdivision does have covenants limiting commercial uses ; however , this lot was left out of those covenants ; therefore , do not apply Ted Altman , of Johnson Properties in Angier , representing Thomas and Donald Creech , stated the request was to rezone to Community Business in order to facilitate real estate or insurance type professional offices Mr Gray reported the Planning Board recommended approval of Case 07 - 37 from Agricultural Residential AR to Community Business CB There being no further comments , the Chairman recessed the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 37 Decision on Rezoning Case 07 - 37 Case 07 - 37 Petition to rezone 391 acres located at the northwest corner of the intersection of NC 210 and Old Fairground Road SR 1309 in Pleasant Grove Township from Agricultural Residential AR to Community Business CB Tax ID 13D04005A Owner Applicant Thomas Creech and Donald Creech Commissioner W Ray Woodall moved the Board approve rezoning case 07 - 37 , to rezone 391 acres located at the northwest corner of the intersection of NC 210 and Old Fairground Road SR 1309 in Pleasant Grove Township from Agricultural Residential AR to Community Business CB Commissioner Wade M Stewart seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote The Chairman reopened the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 38 Case 07 - 38 Petition to rezone a 1 acre tract from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB located at 5842 NC 42 West , which is approximately ¼ of a mile from the intersection with Cleveland Road SR 1010 in Cleveland Township Tax ID 06G05038A Applicant George Venters Owners George B Mast and Gayle F Mast Chairman Cookie Pope abstained from any discussion on Case 07 - 38 Planning Director Berry Gray stated this was a petition to rezone a one acre tract from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB located at 5842 NC 42 West , which is approximately one - fourth of a mile from the intersection with Cleveland Road SR 1010 in Cleveland Township Mr Gray stated the property was located just east of the site in the previous rezoning case 07 - 34 Mr Gray noted Owners George and Gayle Mast also owned the adjacent property which is currently zoned General Business Applicant George Venters , 709 Yarmouth Road , Raleigh , stated at the present time , there is no specific development planned The owners , George and Gayle Mast , would like to rezone the property to General Business in connection with their adjacent property Mr Gray reported the Planning Board recommended approval of Case 07 - 38 from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB There being no further comments , the Chairman closed the Rezoning Hearing for Case 07 - 38 Decision on Rezoning Case 07 - 38 Case 07 - 38 Petition to rezone a 1 acre tract from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB located at 5842 NC 42 West , which is approximately ¼ of a mile from the intersection withPage1522 December 3 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued Cleveland Road SR 1010 in Cleveland Township Tax ID 06G05038A Applicant George Venters Owners George B Mast and Gayle F Mast Commissioner Tony Braswell moved the Board approve rezoning case 07 - 38 , to rezone a one acre tract from Agricultural Residential AR to General Business GB located at 5842 NC 42 West , which is approximately ¼ of a mile from the intersection with Cleveland Road SR 1010 in Cleveland Township Commissioner Jeffrey P Carver seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote 3 Public Hearing Land Development Code – Sec 14 - 633 b Board of Adjustment Chairman Cookie Pope opened the public hearing and stated this hearing was to consider public comment on the possible amendment to the County Code of Ordinances – Section 14 - 633 b Board of Adjustment Planning Director Berry Gray reviewed the amendment with the Board and stated there has been no Planning Board representation on the Board of Adjustment for at least six years Therefore , the Planning Board has requested that the Commissioners remove the requirement for Planning Board representation from the Code Mr Gray pointed out a staff concern that the Board of Adjustment does hear appeals of decisions by the Planning Board ; therefore , it could be seen as a conflict of interest for a Planning Board member to sit on the Board of Adjustment Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr recalled the representation changed years ago when the conflict of interest issue had been a concern by the Board and the Commissioners voted to remove Mr John Suggs from the Planning Board and appoint him to the Board of Adjustment In response to a question from Commissioner DeVan Barbour , Mr Gray reported no additional positions are needed , and the action would just remove the requirement of Planning Board representation There being no further comments , the Chairman closed the public hearing Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr moved the Board adopt the amendment to the County Code of Ordinances – Section14 - 633 b as presented Commissioner Wade M Stewart seconded the motion which carried by unanimous vote Sec 14 - 633 Board of adjustment a Establishment of the board ; qualifications A board of adjustment consisting of five members and two alternate members is established The five members and two alternates shall reside within the county and shall be appointed by the board of commissioners Each alternate member shall sit as a regular member on any matter in the absence of a regular member Members shall serve without compensation b Tenure Members of the board of adjustment shall be appointed to serve terms of three years , and until their respective successors have been appointed and qualified The terms of the original members may be staggered so that all terms do not expire simultaneously Vacancies shall be filled for the unexpired term only The board of commissioners shall appoint one regular member of the planning board to serve as an alternate member If this person loses status as a planning board member , their appointment to the board of adjustment will also be terminated at the same date as their planning board membership 4 Rural Planning Organization – Amended Memorandum of Understanding Planning Director Berry Gray reminded the Board that Johnston County elected to withdraw from the Upper Coastal Plain Council of Governments Rural Planning Organization RPO along with Nash and Edgecombe Counties and form their own RPO Since that time , Wilson County has also indicated they will join with Johnston , Nash , and Edgecombe Counties Mr Gray stated the revised Memorandum of Understanding would basically change the lead planning agency from the Upper Coastal Plain Council of Governments to Nash County Other changes would include an adjustment to the Technical Advisory Committee membership as follows • One Commissioner representing the County of Johnston ; and • One elected official from the RPO member municipality with the largest population in Johnston County that is not a member of an MPO ; and • Two at large elected officials from two different RPO member municipalities therein Page2523 December 3 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued Mr Gray stated Smithfield would represent the municipality with the largest population in Johnston County and a decision by the Board would be needed at a later date regarding the two different municipalities therein Staff is requesting a decision on the approval of the amended Memorandum of Understanding County Manager Rick Hester stated staff could communicate with the Mayors and see if there is any interest as to which other municipalities would like to participate A rotation could be established so that every interested municipality could participate each year Commissioner Tony Braswell stated participation had been an issue with the former RPO and he hoped whichever municipalities were selected would actively participate Decision – Amended Memorandum of Understanding for the RPO Upon a motion by Commissioner Tony Braswell , seconded by Commissioner DeVan Barbour and carried by unanimous vote , the Board accepted the amended Memorandum of Understanding as presented Motion and Vote to Appoint Commissioner Tony Braswell to represent County of Johnston After further discussion , Commissioner DeVan Barbour moved the Board appoint Commissioner Tony Braswell as the Commissioner representing the County of Johnston and for Commissioner Braswell and County Manager Rick Hester to report back to the Board with a recommendation as to the other two participating municipalities Commissioner W Ray Woodall seconded the motion which carried by unanimous vote AMENDED MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR COOPERATIVE , COMPREHENSIVE AND CONTINUING TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A RURAL PLANNING ORGANIZATION FOR The County of Edgecombe and the participating municipalities therein ; the County of Johnston and the participating municipality therein ; the County of Nash and the participating municipalities therein ; the County of Wilson and the participating municipality therein ; and the North Carolina Department of Transportation NCDOT hereinafter collectively , “ the Parties ” WITNESSETH Whereas , on October 7 , 2002 , the Parties entered into a Memorandum of Understanding which created the Upper Coastal Plain Rural Planning Organization hereinafter , “ RPO ” ; and , Whereas , the RPO provides rural areas the opportunity to work in partnership with the NCDOT toward development of sound , short and long - range transportation planning for rural areas ; and , Whereas , the Parties have agreed to amend the original Memorandum of Understanding Now , therefore , the following Amended Memorandum of Understanding is made on this the _____ day of______________________ , 2007 Section 1 It is hereby agreed , that the County of Edgecombe and the participating municipalities therein ; the County of Johnston and the participating municipality therein ; the County of Nash and the participating municipalities therein ; the County of Wilson and the participating municipality therein ; and the NCDOT intend to establish and participate in a RPO created for the general purposes and responsibilities outlined in the following 1 Develop long - range local and regional multi - modal transportation plans in cooperation with the area Metropolitan Planning Organizations MPOs and the NCDOT 2 Provide a forum for public participation in the rural transportation planning process 3 Develop and prioritize suggestions for transportation projects that the RPO believes should be included in the State Transportation Improvement Program STIP 4 Provide transportation - related information to local governments and other interested organizations and persons Section 2 It is hereby further agreed that transportation plans and programs and land use policies and programs for the RPO will be coordinated by Nash County , an agency selected on behalf of participating local governments and the NCDOT , to be the administrative entity and to serve as the lead local planning agency for coordinating transportation planning in the four county planning area The RPO hereby authorizes Nash County to be the recipient of any funds appropriated to the RPO by NCDOT pursuant to North Carolina General Statute 136 - 213 c Section 3 Establishment of Transportation Advisory Committee TAC A TAC is hereby established with the responsibility for serving as a forum for cooperative transportation planning decision making for the RPO The TAC shall have the responsibility for keeping the local elected governing boards informed of the status and requirements of the transportation planning process ; to assist in the dissemination and clarification of the decisions , inclinations , and policies of the local elected governing boards and the NCDOT ; and to help ensure meaningful public participation in the rural transportation planning process 1 The TAC will be responsible for carrying out the following A Establishment of goals , priorities , and objectives for the rural transportation planning process B Endorsement and review of changes to adopted transportation plans within the RPO C Endorsement , review , and approval of a Planning Work Program PWP for transportation planning which defines work tasks and responsibilities for the various agencies participating in the RPO Page3524 December 3 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued D Endorsement , review , and approval of transportation improvement projects that support and enhance both regional and local transportation in the four county RPO 2 The membership of the TAC shall consist of the following A Edgecombe County • One Commissioner representing the County of Edgecombe ; and • One elected official from the RPO member municipality with the largest population in Edgecombe County that is not a member of an MPO ; and • Two at large elected officials from two different RPO member municipalities therein B Johnston County • One Commissioner representing the County of Johnston ; and • One elected official from the RPO member municipality with the largest population in Johnston County that is not a member of an MPO ; and • Two at large elected officials from two different RPO member municipalities therein C Nash County • One Commissioner representing the County of Nash ; and • One elected official from the RPO member municipality with the largest population in Nash County that is not a member of an MPO ; and • Two at large elected officials from two different RPO member municipalities therein D Wilson County • One Commissioner representing the County of Wilson ; and • One elected official from the RPO member municipality with the largest population in Wilson County that is not a member of an MPO ; and • Two at large elected officials from two different RPO member municipalities therein E One member from the North Carolina Board of Transportation representing Division 4 3 The Commissioner representing each county on the TAC shall be elected every year by the Board of County Commissioners of each County in regular session In addition , prior to December 31 of each year the county commissioners from each county shall determine the two at large municipalities The municipal member representing each of the three municipalities on the TAC shall be elected each year by the governing body of the municipality in regular session All terms of appointment to the TAC shall be for one year Reappointment is possible One alternate may be designated for each member providing they meet the same criteria as the original appointee 4 An RPO TAC membership roster will be compiled and updated at least annually , listing each attendee and alternate , if applicable , for each member county or municipality The membership of a county or municipality member who fails to send the appointee or alternate to two consecutive RPO meetings will be designated as a vacant seat and will not count towards quorum Attendance at future meetings will reinstate the member 5 A quorum is required for the transaction of all business , including conducting meetings or hearings , participating in deliberations , or voting upon or otherwise transacting the public business A quorum consists of 51 of the members of the TAC , plus as many additional members as may be required to ensure that 51 of possible votes are present The TAC will meet as often as it is deemed necessary , appropriate and advisable On the basis of majority vote of its membership , the TAC may elect a member of the committee to act as chairperson with the responsibility for coordination of the committees activities 6 Nash County will provide staff to the TAC Section 4 Establishment of Technical Coordinating Committee TCC A TCC shall be established with the responsibility of general review , guidance , and coordination of the transportation planning process for the RPO and the responsibility for making recommendations to the respective local , state , and federal governmental agencies and the TAC regarding any necessary actions relating to the continuing transportation process 1 The TCC shall be responsible for development , review , and recommendation for approval of the PWP for the RPO , the STIP requests , and revisions to the STIP 2 Membership of the TCC shall include technical representatives from all local and state governmental agencies directly related to and concerned with the transportation planning process for the RPO planning area Initially , the membership shall include , but may not be limited to , the following A The Manager , Assistant Manager , Planner , Clerk , or Engineer from each of the four counties of the RPO planning area , or his her designated staff representative B The Chief Administrative Official , City Planner , City Engineer , or City Clerk from each member municipality in the RPO planning area , or his her designated staff representative C Division Engineer serving Highway Division 4 , NCDOT , or his her designated staff representative D Manager , Transportation Planning Branch , NCDOT , or his her designated staff representative 3 Membership of the TCC may be altered on the basis of a majority vote of its membership and approval of the TAC of the RPO One alternate may be designated for each member providing they meet the same criteria as the original appointee Membership may be further defined in the duly adopted bylaws An RPO TCC membership roster will be compiled and updated at least annually , listing each attendee and alternate , if applicable , for each member - county or municipality The membership of a county or municipality member who fails to send the appointee or alternate to two consecutive RPO meetings will be designated as a vacant seat and will not county towards quorum Attendance at future meetings will reinstate the member Page4525 December 3 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued 4 A quorum is required for the transaction of all business , including conducting meetings or hearings , participating in deliberations , or voting upon or otherwise transacting the public business A quorum consists of 51 of the members of the TCC , plus as many additional members as required to ensure that 51 of possible votes are present The TCC shall meet when it is deemed necessary , appropriate and advisable The TCC will be staffed by Nash County The TCC shall by majority vote of the membership elect one member to serve as a Chairman with the responsibility for coordinating the committees activities Membership of the TCC may be altered on the basis of a majority vote of its membership and approval of the TAC of the RPO Section 5 It is further agreed that all participating agencies will assist in the rural transportation planning process by providing planning assistance where possible , data , and inventories in accordance with the approved PWP Section 6 Each county and its RPO member jurisdictions shall have the support of the RPO staff in developing local transportation projects and priorities Each member agrees to coordinate its transportation plans with those of other RPO members Additionally , by consensus , the RPO may identify projects of a regional nature for development and presentation to NCDOT for consideration Section 7 Parties to this Memorandum of Understanding may terminate their participation in the continuing transportation planning process by giving 90 days written notice to the other parties to the date of termination Section 8 Municipalities desiring to join the RPO following the signing of this Memorandum of Understanding must do so no later than 90 days after the date given below in Section 10 , by submitting a fully - executed Municipal Statement of Adoption Any municipality desiring to join the RPO after the initial 90 - day period must notify the lead planning agency and the other members of the RPO in writing of its intent to join , and provide each with a copy of a fully - executed st Municipal Statement of Adoption New memberships will become effective on July 1 of each year Section 9 This Amended Memorandum of Understanding supersedes and replaces any prior memorandum s of understanding between the Parties regarding the RPO Section 10 In witness whereof , the Parties have been authorized by appropriate and proper resolutions , and or legislative authority to sign this Amended Memorandum of Understanding , this the _____________ day of ______________________ , 2007 5 Manager Reports and Comments A ETJ Extension Requests for Towns of Kenly and Selma County Manager Rick Hester informed the Board he had received letters from the Towns of Kenly and Selma indicating they are working on either updating a land use plan or are undertaking strategic planning processes Mr Hester noted this was a requirement the Board had requested the Towns to address at the November 5 , 2007 meeting It was the unanimous consensus of the Board to consider the extension of the ETJ boundaries for Kenly and Selma at the January 7 , 2008 6 00 pm meeting B Additional Community Meetings It was the unanimous consensus of the Board to schedule two more community meetings for the purposes of discussing land use planning and related issues in Johnston County The Board will consider dates for the two additional meetings at the January 7 , 2008 6 00 pm meeting Locations for the meetings in the Clayton and Four Oaks areas will be announced C Request for Proposals – Comprehensive Land Use Planning County Manager Rick Hester requested the Board’s permission to seek outside consulting services to assist with comprehensive land use planning efforts Mr Hester stated if the Board approved the request , staff would seek proposals from two or three different firms and bring a recommendation back to the Board before entering into an agreement for services It was the unanimous consensus of the Board to allow Mr Hester to seek proposals and bring a recommendation back to the Board at a later date Commissioner Jeffrey P Carver instructed staff to make sure the proposals would be precise and specific to Johnston County 6 Board Reports and Comments A Possible Cost Sharing Program for Road Improvements Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr initiated a discussion concerning earlier comments made during the meeting by Mr Lanny Clifton regarding cost sharing for road improvements It was noted such a proposal would be a similar arrangement the County currently has in place for cost sharing of water and wastewater improvement projects Page5526 December 3 , 2007 – 6 00 pm Continued The Commissioners briefly discussed the pros and cons of such an arrangement for road improvements and noted it should be discussed further at an upcoming planning session in February B Board Planning Session in February Chairman Cookie Pope instructed staff to review possible dates for a planning session in February th County Manager Rick Hester noted the Boar