November 8, 2004 - 7:00 PM - County Board of Commissioners Meeting Minutes

10 825 Meeting of the Johnston County Board of Commissioners November 8 , 2004 The Johnston County Board of Commissioners met in regular session Monday , November 8 , 2004 , at 7 00 pm in the Commissioners ’ Meeting Room , Johnston County Courthouse Annex , Smithfield , North Carolina The following members were present Present James H Langdon , Jr , Chairman , Cookie Pope , Vice Chairman , Thomas M Moore , Allen L Mims , Jr , Wade M Stewart , Jeffrey P Carver and W Ray Woodall Absent None Also Present Rick J Hester , County Manager , Joyce H Ennis , Clerk to the Board , J Mark Payne , County Attorney , Della H Knight , Deputy Clerk , and April N Byrd , Assistant to Clerk The Chairman called the meeting to order and the following business was transacted Public Comments 1 Request To Look at Long Term Plan for Commercial Industrial Growth Deirdre Jersey , 829 Shadow Lakes Drive , Willow Springs , explained she decided to address the Board when Brad Rupp , who owns property in front of her subdivision recently petitioned the Planning Board for rezoning of his land to Industrial I for a cabinet making business Even though Mr Rupp has withdrawn his rezoning request , the fact remains that the property is already zoned community - business , which she feels could allow businesses not suitable for the residential neighborhood She stated , in her opinion , the County needs to develop a policy guide to map out areas where commercial and industrial growth is appropriate , especially in relation to residential development Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr noted that Mr Rupp’s property began as a farming operation that was rezoned to business when Mr Rupp wanted to go into the landscaping business He questioned whether the property should even remain zoned business since that zoning designation would allow a number of operations that might not be appropriate in a residential neighborhood He agreed that it would probably be a good idea for the county to look at a comprehensive plan for commercial and industrial growth 2 Public Hearing - Proposed Amendments to County Code of Ordinances , Chapter 14 - Land Development Code Advertised 10 26 ; 11 02 04 in The Smithfield Herald Chairman James H Langdon , Jr opened the public hearing and stated that the purpose of the hearing was to discuss proposed amendments to the County Code of Ordinances , Chapter 14 - Land Development Code , regarding traffic impact analysis requirements He opened the floor to anyone who wished to speak on this matter Steven Finn , Planning Director , stated that in June 2003 the County began requiring Traffic Impact Analysis TIA for large subdivisions Since that time , the Planning Board has reviewed 16 TIA submittals , noting that some have inaccuracies and most have been difficult to read and understand The Planning Board formed a subcommittee to research ways to improve the quality of the submittals and to assist Planning staff and the Board The proposed requirements would give more consistency to applicants and a higher level of detail to the TIA Berry Gray , County Planner , commented that in the past , planning staff used different TIA requirements for subdivisions east and west of Interstate 95 Staff has decided to look at the county as a whole TIAs would be required for all residential subdivisions countywide with 100 lots or more , and nonresidential subdivisions with an average daily traffic count of 1000 + vehicles per day or 100 + trips during a peak traffic hour Residential subdivisions under 100 lots would fall under Department of Transportation guidelines In response to a question from Commissioner Wade M Stewart , Mr Gray explained this would be consistent with the standard across the State of 100 lots or 100 vehicles at peak hours , and would better coordinate with the Department of Transportation Mr Gray noted that proposed changes also include contracting with a consultant to assist planning staff in preparing , reviewing , and evaluating the TIAs , much like the procedure for reviewing cell tower site requests , with the developer paying the consultant fees A request for proposals would be sent out to qualified persons , and the consultant would be chosen by a competitive bid process A developer could choose to retain his own consultant , but the County’s consultant would still be required to review the TIA Page826 November 8 , 2004 Continued There being no further comments , the Chairman closed the public hearing Decision to Amend County Code of Ordinances Upon a motion by Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr , seconded by Commissioner W Ray Woodall and carried by unanimous vote , the Board adopted the following amendments to the County Code of Ordinances , Land Use Development Code concerning traffic impact analysis ’ requirements DELETE Section 14 - 226 5 ADD the following Sections Section 14 - 1731 Traffic Impact Analysis TIA Submittal Requirement a Traffic Impact Analysis required in accordance with Johnston County Land Development Code Section 14 - 366 ; the County’s Traffic Consultant fee must be paid in full at the time the Major Subdivision application is submitted , otherwise the application will be considered incomplete Section 14 - 254 a Traffic Impact Analysis TIA 1 Traffic Impact Analysis required in accordance with Johnston County Land Development Code Section 14 - 366 ; the County’s Traffic Consultant fee must be paid in full at the time the Special Use Permit application is submitted , otherwise the application will be considered incomplete Section 14 - 366 Traffic Impact Analysis TIA 1 Purpose Johnston County is committed to maintaining and improving the quality of life for current and future citizens A major factor affecting the quality of life has become traffic congestion along the County’s major thoroughfares and local streets within urbanizing areas By requiring a Traffic Impact Analysis TIA , the County can evaluate the effect proposed development will have on the County’s existing traffic system and enable the County to require specific improvements The intent of this section is to provide developers with a clear policy as to the County’s TIA expectations and to ensure that all developments are treated equally through the establishment of specific guidelines and improvement requirements 2 Requirement Thresholds a Residential subdivision proposing 100 lots units or more b Nonresidential subdivision proposed which generates an average daily traffic count of 1000 + vehicles per day or 100 + trips during peak traffic hour This traffic count must be based on the latest version of the Institute of Transportation Engineers ITE Trip Generation Manual c Any residential or nonresidential development requiring a Special Use Permit or Site Plan approval which generates an average daily traffic count of 1000 + vehicles per day or 100 + trips during peak traffic hour This traffic count must be based on the latest version of the Institute of Transportation Engineers ITE Trip Generation Manual Note # 1 The count is cumulative ; as a proposed development reaches the threshold , a TIA will be required for the entire development As new phases are proposed and once a development has reached the threshold , an additional TIA will be conducted for each additional phase Note # 2 Failure to meet all requirements listed within this section may constitute disapproval of the development request 3 Retention of expert assistance and reimbursement by applicant a The county shall hire a consultant and or expert necessary to assist the county in preparing , reviewing , and evaluating the Traffic Impact Analysis , and at the request of the county may be asked to look at other specific issues b An applicant shall deposit with the county funds sufficient to reimburse the county for all reasonable costs of consultant and expert evaluation and consultation to the county in connection with the performance and review of any analysis The initial deposit shall be established by the county and may be changed within the discretion of the county These funds shall be deposited at the time the subdivision application is submitted and the county will maintain a separate escrow account for all such funds The countys consultants experts shall bill or invoice the county no more frequently than monthly for its services in reviewing the application and performing its duties The applicant shall immediately , upon notification by the county , replenish said escrow account so that it has a balance established by the county and may be changed within the discretion of the county Such additional escrow funds shall be deposited with the county before any further action or consideration is taken on the subdivision application In the event that the amount held in escrow by the county is more than the amount of the actual billing or invoicing at the conclusion of the project , the remaining balance shall be promptly refunded to the applicant All invoices submitted by the applicant shall be itemized and be public records available for inspection c The total amount of the funds needed as set forth above may vary with the scope and complexity of the project , the completeness of the application and other information as may be needed by the county or its consultant expert to complete the necessary review and analysis Additional escrow funds , as reasonably required and requested by the county , shall be paid by the applicant However , notwithstanding any other provisions of this section , if the total amount paid to the consultant exceedsPage827 November 8 , 2004 Continued 7,50000 for a single application , such amount shall be subject to review and approval by the county commissioners at the request of the applicant d The developer may have a TIA conducted by a consultant of his or her choice but will be required to be submitted for review and evaluation by the County’s consultant Any cost associated with the County’s review shall be paid by the developer as described in Section 14 - 366 3 b , c 4 Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines a All Traffic Impact Analyses shall be completed in accordance with the guidelines listed in Section 10 of the Johnston County Design Manual 5 Improvement Requirements a Left Turn Lane , Right Turn Lane , and or Right Turn Taper Based on requirements of the NCDOT Driveway Manual or other NCDOT standards b Additional right - of - way If a subject development falls along a road projected to be widened by NCDOT or an adopted County plan , additional right - of - way along the development’s road frontage shall be dedicated as deemed acceptable by NCDOT c Offsite Improvements If a road segment or intersection is currently performing at Level of Service LOS D or better and is projected to perform at LOS E or F at the time of build - out , improvements must be made to maintain the road segment or intersection at LOS D If a road segment or intersection is currently performing at Level of Service LOS E or F and is projected to continue to perform at LOS E or F at the time of build - out , the TIA shall demonstrate how a LOS D could be achieved and also specify what improvements must be made to ensure that the road segment or intersection is not degraded any further than the current levels d Other Necessary Improvements Additional improvements may be required based on the TIA recommendations related to topographic environmental conditions , sight distance , street offsets , conflicting movements , existing traffic accident counts , circulation , and other potential traffic issues resulting from the proposed development Additionally , the Planning Board may determine that additional improvements are necessary to ensure the safety and welfare of the County’s citizens and travelers 3 Invitation from CAMPO Eddy Davis , Planning and Zoning Manager , informed the Board that the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization CAMPO has extended an invitation to the Town of Clayton and a portion of the County to become members of CAMPO Clayton has accepted the invitation The County portion would consist of the four census tracts adjacent to Wake County , which are the most populated areas of the county Archers Lodge , McGees Crossroads , and Cleveland CAMPO currently includes Wake County , and all of its municipalities Based on recent trends and studies performed by CAMPO , they have extended an invitation to portions of Johnston , as well as Granville , Franklin and Harnett counties Mr Davis noted that Johnston County is currently a member of the Upper Coastal Plain Rural Planning Organization which includes Wilson , Nash and Edgecombe countiesWe joined this RPO , which costs the County approximately 4,000 per year , because all local governments are required by the State to be a member of some planning organization Since CAMPO is only interested in the western portions of the county , we would have to remain in the RPO , even though we have received no benefits to date Mr Davis stated the cost for membership in CAMPO would be approximately 38,000 per year In response to a question from County Manager , Rick Hester , about what this would do for the County , he noted that MPO’s have been around much longer than RPO’s and do have more clout with the Department of Transportation concerning road projects The Planning Staff feels this would be a benefit and recommends the County accept the invitation Ed Johnson , CAMPO representative , briefly provided information on how CAMPO operates and stated he would be glad to answer any questions the Board might have He noted he was not looking for a monetary commitment at this time , just an indication on whether there is interest in joining The County would be notified in early 2005 of the actual membership cost , and it would be later in the spring before a a memorandum of understanding would be presented for signatures The County could back out at any time should they decide to do so Bills for the dues would not be mailed until the fall of 2005 , and would not be due until January or February of 2006 He pointed out CAMPO did look at other areas of Johnston County , however , felt that at this time , they would only extend the invitation to the tracts adjacent to Wake County Board members expressed some concern that Johnston County would have very little influence compared to the Wake County members Mr Johnson agreed , but pointed out the County would be involved in the discussions when decisions are made , and with the Clayton Bypass , CAMPO might be in a position to help with developing the new interchanges Page828 November 8 , 2004 Continued Donna Creech , executive director of Council on Aging and JCATS , questioned whether CAMPO membership would benefit JCATS Mr Johnson stated CAMPO would be willing to talk to Ms Creech to see if they could incorporate questions relevant to Johnston County transportation needs into their transportation survey Following further discussion , Commissioner Allen L Mims , Jr moved the Board accept an invitation to be a member of the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Commissioner Jeffrey P Carver seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote Board Reports and Comments 4 Request for Additional Position - Telecommunicator Jason Barbour , Communications Director , requested the Board approve one additional telecommunicator Mr Barbour noted he withdrew his request for this position in July ; however , it is needed now to both cover for people out sick or on vacation , and to help during peak times so the County does not have to pay overtime Upon a motion by Commissioner Wade M Stewart , seconded by Commissioner Cookie Pope and carried by unanimous vote , the Board approved the following budget amendment for one new telecommunications position for the Communications Department FUND BUDGET LINE ITEM REQUESTED CHANGE CODE CLASSIFICATION EXPENDITURE INCREASE DECREASE 10 52050200 Salaries & Wages 15,00000 FUND BUDGET LINE ITEM REQUESTED CHANGE CODE CLASSIFICATION REVENUE INCREASE DECREASE 10 460033990 Fund Balance 15,00000 5 NCACC Board of Directors Chairman James H Langdon , Jr , who has been elected to the NC General Assembly as a member of the House of Representatives , suggested that Commissioner W Ray Woodall be recommended to fill the remainder of his term on the Board of Directors for the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners Upon a motion by Commissioner Thomas M Moore , seconded by Commissioner Cookie Pope and carried by unanimous vote , the Board agreed to submit a recommendation to the NCACC that Commissioner W Ray Woodall be appointed to fill the unexpired term of James H Langdon , Jr on the Association’s Board of Directors There being no further business , Commissioner Cookie Pope moved the Board adjourn Commissioner Thomas M Moore seconded the motion , which carried by unanimous vote ______________________________ James H Langdon , Jr , Chairman ______________________________ Joyce H Ennis , Clerk to the Board ______________________________ April N Byrd , Assistant to the ClerkPage