July 9, 2002
Agenda
July 9, 2002
Minutes
|
Action Agenda |
MINUTES OF REGULAR
SCHEDULED MEETING
OF THE EMERALD
ISLE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
TUESDAY, JULY 9,
2002 – 7:00 P.M. – TOWN HALL
Mayor Art Schools called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Board members present were Commissioners McElraft, Farmer,
Marks, Messer, Eckhardt. Staff
members present were Town Manager Frank Rush, Town Attorney Derek Taylor, Town
Clerk Carolyn Custy.
a. Minutes of Regular Meeting – June 11, 2002
b. Minutes of Special Meeting – April 29, 2002
c. Minutes of Special Meeting – June 10, 2002
d. Tax Refunds / Releases
e. Resolution Authorizing Final CAMA Grant Application –
Lee Street / Seagull Drive Public Access Walkways
Motion was made by Commissioner Eckhardt to adopt the Consent Agenda as written and approve all items listed. The board voted unanimously with a vote of 5-0.REZONING REQUEST – PROPERTY LOCATED NEAR BOGUE INLET DRIVE AND NC 58 – R-2 TO B-3 (Second Reading)
Background: Mr. Rush commented that this is the second reading of a rezoning request from Mr. William Farrington. Mr. Farrington is requesting the rezoning of approximately 2.0 acres of land on the east side of Bogue Inlet Drive near NC 58 from R-2 (Residential-2) to B-3 (Business-3). This rezoning was approved by a 3-2 vote at the June 11 meeting. Because the rezoning did not receive the required 4-1 super-majority vote on its first reading, the rezoning request has been scheduled for the second reading on July 9. A simple 3-2 majority vote on the second reading would officially approve the rezoning request.
The same supporting materials that were distributed to the Board of Commissioners prior to the June meeting for easy review of the issues associated with this rezoning request has been included. The Board should note that another public hearing on this rezoning request has been scheduled for the July 9 meeting, and should be conducted prior to voting on this matter. After the June 11 meeting, it was learned that staff had not mailed the required notice to adjacent property owners on the other side of Bogue Inlet Drive, as required by law. Staff was directed to re-notify all adjacent property owners, including those notified prior to the June public hearing, about the rezoning request and the second public hearing on July 9.
Town Manager Rush discussed the public notice oversight with Town Attorney Derek Taylor to determine if the Board’s vote on July 9 will still constitute the second reading of the rezoning request. The Town Attorney and Mr. Rush both believe that the Board’s vote on July 9 is the second reading, and only a simple 3-2 majority is required to officially approve the rezoning request.
Commissioner Marks made a motion
to open the Public Hearing and the board voted unanimously with a vote of 5-0.
There were no public comments on this issue.
Commissioner McElraft made a
motion to close the Public Hearing and the board voted unanimously with a vote
of 5-0.
Commissioner McElraft made a
motion to approve rezoning of approximately 2.0 acres of land near Bogue Inlet
Drive and NC 58 – from R-2 to B-3.
Commissioner Farmer indicated there were several reasons why she could not vote for this zoning change. The Planning Board approved a 50 foot buffer between the trees and the buildable portion of this parcel. That buffer has now been reduced to 35 feet plus a 15-foot setback on which a driveway and parking could be placed. She has knowledge of at least one Planning Board member who is unhappy about this change. She was concerned about sometime in the future the 35 feet deep lots that would be remaining may be sold without the buyers being made aware that they are too small to be buildable. There is already a large commercial district on Emerald Drive. Much of it has yet to be developed and of the developed portion, there are a number of vacant storefronts. She questioned if the town needs to be adding more land to the commercial district. Increasing the commercial district goes against what the people said in the 2000 survey that they wanted to see in Emerald Isle. Sixty of the approximately 1,000 respondents wanted to see the commercial district increased; 623 did not. Those responses were totally consistent with the previous survey done in 1990. It is Commissioner Farmer’s belief that this zoning change will encroach on the residential district and she could not support it.
Commissioner Eckhardt’s understanding was that the 50-foot buffer was a 50-foot buffer. Going back to the restrictions that was placed, it mentions the 50 feet as a vegetative buffer that should be left in as near a natural state as possible with no development therein except for the clearing or removal of dead or decayed plants, trees and vegetation. To him this was truly a 50-foot vegetative buffer and that was why he voted for it. He asked that someone explain to him when a vegetative buffer is not a vegetative buffer.
Mr. Rush replied the rezoning request presented to the board at the June meeting did not have those restrictions because that was the recommendations that came from the Planning Board. He presented an alternative scenario, which left the creek and 35 feet directly south of the creek in R-2 zoning. In the Planning Board’s proposal that area would have been in B-3 and left as a vegetative buffer. There was some question as to whether or not that was a legal recommendation from the Planning Board. Although the developer was quite willing to provide them, they were not enforceable and you cannot apply additional conditions to one property in a zoning district that you do not apply to all properties in that zoning district. This would be contract zoning.
What has been presented to the board achieves the same goals that the Planning Board recommendations achieved but in a manner that would not be viewed as Contract Zoning.
Mr. Rush noted that the buffer that remains, the 35 feet width remaining in R-2 zoning, for all practical purposes could not be developed. The parking for commercial uses could not be in that area and it is not wide enough to put a single-family home on that lot. There is essentially nothing that could be done with that area of the property. Commissioner Farmer is correct in her assumption that the 15-foot setback area remaining in R-2 zoning can be used for parking lots or sidewalks or driveways or whatever.
Commissioner Marks asked Mr. Billy Farrington if he was in agreement to the Town Manager’s suggestion that the 35-feet be kept in a natural vegetative state and Mr. Farrington answered that he would.
Commissioner McElraft indicated she had done her own survey and most people thought this area was already commercial. She thinks the results of the survey are very important.
Attorney Derek Taylor cautioned the board that things Mr. Farrington has said he will put in his deed should not enter into their decision at all. Their decision is whether this piece of property, with all possible uses of the property under the new zoning that has come forward, is in conformity with the area, it is good for the town generally and meets with the town’s plan. If thought is given to what he has promised to do, then the board is Contract Zoning. It must be looked at as a whole, not just the deed level.
Mayor Schools called for a vote on Commissioner McElraft’s motion to approve rezoning of approximately 2.0 acres of land near Bogue Inlet Drive and NC 58 – from R-2 to B-3 and the board’s vote was a split vote of 4-1. Voting in favor of the rezoning were Commissioners McElraft, Eckhardt, Marks and Messer. Voting against was Commissioner Farmer. Motion carried.
ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18 – SUBDIVISIONS –
REGARDING FINAL PLAT APPROVAL (Second Reading)
Background:
The second reading of an ordinance amending the subdivision ordinance
regarding final plat approval is scheduled for the July 9 meeting.
The proposed ordinance adjusts the deadline for completing required
subdivision improvements for certain subdivisions and establishes more stringent
criteria for the use of a financial guarantee in lieu of completing required
subdivision improvements. This ordinance amendment was approved by a 3-2 vote at the
June 11 meeting. Because the
ordinance amendment did not receive the required 4-1 super-majority vote on its
first reading, it has been scheduled for the second reading on July 9.
A simple 3-2 majority vote on the second reading would officially approve
the ordinance amendment.
A
copy of the same supporting materials that were distributed to the Board of
Commissioners prior to the June meeting for easy review of the issues associated
with this ordinance amendment. The
Board should note that the attached ordinance amendment has been updated to also
allow the developer to post a cashiers check in lieu of completing required
subdivision improvements, as discussed at the Board’s June 11 meeting.
Commissioner Farmer made a motion
to approve the Ordinance Amending Chapter 18 – Subdivisions – Regarding
Final Plat Approval.
Commissioner McElraft reiterated why she was against approval of this
amendment. She is not against
holding someone’s money or Surety Bond until they get the improvements made. She thinks there are certain circumstances that will prevent
some of the requirements being done. She
thinks one thing that might happen is if the board starts asking people to put
their subdivision lighting in and then they sell it to someone else before the
final decision is made about what that subdivision is going to look like, then
there will be lighting that will have one design to it and a piece of property
that is different.
Commissioner Farmer commented this ordinance change will have no impact
whatsoever on most of the developers and she made it clear that most of the
developers do their subdivisions the right way.
Most get preliminary plat approval and then get to work making the
improvements shown on that preliminary plat. Those improvements are
substantially finished by the time they come back for final plat approval.
The purpose of the two-step approval process is for the Planning Board
and Board of Commissioners to make sure that what was agreed to on the
preliminary plat has actually gone on the ground. Her one concern is for the few who get preliminary plat
approval and then come back to the town for final approval having made few or no
improvements at all. The town is
left with assurances and a Surety Bond. Should
those assurances not be met the town is forced into the position of playing
General Contractor to see that permits are received and the work is done and she
feels town staff have better uses of their time. The town is also put into the position of being the “bad
guy” when people buy lots and come for permits and are told the town in fact
cannot give them permits because the subdivision was incomplete.
For the majority of the developers, there is no need for this ordinance
change.
Mayor Schools called for a vote.
The board’s
vote was a split vote, 3-2 with Commissioners Eckhardt, Farmer and Marks voting
for approval and Commissioners Messer and McElraft voting against.
Motion carried.
ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 19 – ZONING – TO CORRECT
AN ERROR RESTRICTING THE NUMNBER OF STORIES FOR SINGLE-FAMILY AND DUPLEX
RESIDENTIAL USES
Background: Presented for the Board’s consideration is an ordinance amending the zoning ordinance to correct an error restricting the number of stories for single-family and duplex (two-family) residential uses. The attached ordinance would remove the current limit of three stories for single-family and duplex (two-family) residential structures, but would retain the maximum building height limit of forty (40) feet. A public hearing is required prior to adopting this ordinance amendment, and has been scheduled for the July 9 meeting.
This ordinance amendment was originally requested by Curtis Estes, a local building contractor, who is seeking to construct what is considered to be a four-story single-family dwelling according to the Town’s ordinances. When informed that the Town’s ordinance does not allow more than three stories, Mr. Estes requested that the Board consider amending the ordinance. After review of old meeting minutes and discussions with Board members serving on the previous Board, it now appears that it was not the previous Board’s intent to limit single-family and duplex (two-family) residential structures to three stories when the previous Board adopted building height amendments in March and May 2000.
Mr. Rush has reviewed copies of 1) a February 25, 2000 memo from then-Planning Board chairperson Ceil Saunders that references proposed changes for commercial and multi-family, 2) March 14, 2000 Board of Commissioners minutes when the building height in business districts was amended, and 3) May 8, 2000 Board of Commissioners minutes when the building height in other zoning districts was amended. A review of these documents appears to indicate that there was no intent to change the building height limit for single-family and duplex residential structures, nor limit these structures to three stories. The error appears to have been caused by the fact that our ordinances group the building height limits for single-family, duplex (two-family), and multi-family residential structures into the same sections, thus resulting in the same building height limits for single-family, duplex (two-family), and multi-family residential structures. It appears that when the language was amended for multi-family residential structures, they also inadvertently applied to single-family and duplex (two-family) residential structures.
The Board should note that the NC Building Code limits single-family and duplex (two-family) residential structures to three stories. However, the NC Building Code does allow a three-story building on pilings, provided that the piling level is not habitable (pilings plus three stories). A garage or storage area is permissible, but an improved habitable space is not. The Town’s ordinances consider the piling area, whether habitable or not, as a story, and this area would count toward the three story limit, which ultimately restricts a single-family or duplex (two-family) structure to two stories on pilings, or three stories on a slab. If the Board adopts the attached ordinance amendment, it would be permissible to build three stories on pilings (provided the piling level is not habitable) or three stories on a slab.
There is another related issue that should be addressed at some point in time. The Town’s ordinances require additional side and rear yard setbacks if a building is greater than 2 or 3 stories. The existing layout of single-family residential lots in town (many are 75 feet wide) may make it difficult for someone to build a house that is three stories on pilings, and meet the additional side-yard setback. It is my belief that this requirement was also intended to apply to multi-family structures rather than single-family and duplex (two-family) structures. The Planning Board is currently studying this issue, and will likely present a recommendation to the Board in the near future.
Mr. Rush commented that recently a builder came in with a building plan
for something that the town’s ordinance would consider to be 4 stories.
The Building Permit was denied. This
builder has requested that the board consider amending the ordinance.
After that request was made, it was realized that this was simply an
error that occurred at the time the previous board approved an amendment.
The town’s definition of a story is different from the North Carolina
Building Code definition. The
town’s ordinance, as it is now written with the 3-story limitation limits
someone to build a single-family residence or a duplex either 3-stories on a
slab or a piling foundation with 2-stories above that, whereas, the North
Carolina Building Code allows 3-stories on pilings or 3-stories on slab. The ordinance amendment as presented at this meeting simply
removes the limits on the number of stories on the single-family, duplex
residential uses. It maintains the
40-foot height required. There is
still some confusion over how the town applies the North Carolina Building Code
in town zoning ordinances, whether or not you can enclose the ground floor
piling area with 3-stories above this.
Mr. Jimmy Taylor said the NC Building Code definition for story is the
same one in use today and is also consistent with the new Code that will be
effective January 2003. Mr. Taylor
said the town is going to the International Model Code, which is a different
model code than what is being used now, however, the “story” definition is
the same in both codes.
Commissioner McElraft questioned how 4-stories have been allowed in the
past and Mr. Taylor answered by engineering certification for design, however
under the scope of Volume 7 which deals with one or two family and townhouses,
they are clearly limited to no more than 3-stories, whether a certified North
Carolina engineer seals that design or not it is still limited to no more than
3-stories. Volume 7 takes into consideration one-family, duplex and townhouses
only. Mr. Taylor indicated he was
under the impression that if a design professional could certify the design that
it was acceptable however after conferring with the Building Code Consultants at
the Department of Insurance, they corrected him and said the scope was only
2-story and 3-story. Anything over
the 3rd-story, you get into a higher level of fire protection, which
is not recognized, in Volume 7.
Mr. Rush felt that the town should go back and take a look at its
definition of a “story”.
Commissioner Messer asked if there was a conflict between the State
Building Code and town ordinances who was in control and Mr. Taylor answered
that the State Building Code was.
Mr. Curtis Estes, a builder on Emerald Isle commented he thought it was
3- stories with pilings underneath but that appears not to be the case.
Under the current definition of “story” it is 2-story on pilings
whether or not you enclose the bottom or not is considered a story.
Another point is that if you had another story you would have to comply
with additional sideline setbacks. He
views this as a serious issue especially if you are trying to comply with CAMA
setbacks, septic setbacks, natural areas, etc.
Commissioner Farmer implied that the Planning Board is looking at the
additional setback requirement and she thinks this has never been enforced.
Mr. Rush agreed. His guess is the intent of the additional setback requirement
was for multi-family structures. He doubts that it was intended to apply to
single-family and duplexes.
Commissioner Farmer said since the new ordinance language which is
reflecting the way it was suppose to read before there was any change is not
requiring the stories. She is not
convinced that the board needs to table this item.
Mr. Rush suggested talking a look at the definition of “stories” the
town code has and if it is classified the same way as the NC Building Code, then
it doesn’t matter if there is a limit of 3-stories in it because the town
would be considering the stories the same way the State does.
Mr. Taylor clarified for Commissioner Messer that the NC State Building
Code will allow 3-stories above pilings only with a concrete pad underneath the
elevated structure for parking purposes, however if someone would choose to come
in and enclose a storage room or garage area, a permit would be denied because
that would constitute a 4th-story.
A ground floor entry would also have to be considered a story.
An elevator shaft would not be considered a story.
Commissioner Marks made a motion to table this item until next month for further study and the board voted unanimously, with a vote of 5-0
ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 5 – BEACH AND SHORE
REGULATIONS – TO REGULATE BEACH BULLDOZING ACTIVITIES
Background:
The attached ordinance amendment would prohibit future beach bulldozing
activities in Emerald Isle, except in limited situations, most notably when a
structure is imminently threatened. This
ordinance is presented in anticipation of the Emerald Isle beach nourishment
project, which is scheduled to begin construction in November 2002.
After initial discussion at the May 15 and June 11 meetings, a slightly
revised ordinance is now presented for formal consideration.
The attached ordinance includes new language to address concerns raised
by the Board at the June 11 meeting regarding the protection of septic systems.
CAMA
authorizes beach bulldozing through a 3-year minor permit.
This permit authorizes beach bulldozing in areas experiencing erosion,
but structures need not be imminently threatened.
(CAMA regulations are scheduled to change in August 2002, and beach
bulldozing permits will then expire after 30 days.)
As of April 16, there were 156 currently authorized 3-year minor beach
bulldozing permits in Emerald Isle, with the vast majority (123) of these set to
expire on December 31, 2002. With
the beach nourishment project set to begin, there exists the possibility that
oceanfront property owners will seek to bulldoze prior to the nourishment
project, thereby increasing the necessary volume of sand on the berm and/or
decreasing the overall effectiveness of the nourishment project.
The adoption of this ordinance would prevent this from occurring, except
in situations in which the structure is imminently threatened.
The attached ordinance will also prevent the bulldozing of newly placed
nourishment sand after the nourishment project is complete, and will help to
ensure that the nourished beach maintains its design profile.
Although CAMA does permit beach bulldozing, the adoption of this
ordinance would take precedent over the CAMA permit, as it would be more
restrictive than CAMA regulations.
The
July 9 version of the ordinance has been revised based on comments at the June
11 meeting, and now classifies a structure as imminently threatened if the
foundation of the structure is within 20 feet of the toe of the erosion scarp
and / or the septic system is exposed.
The version presented on June 11 would have defined a structure as
imminently threatened if the septic system was within 20 feet of the toe of the
erosion scarp. There was concern
that that provision could have allowed more structures to bulldoze sand, thereby
decreasing the overall effectiveness of the prohibition on beach bulldozing by
classifying many of the existing structures on the oceanfront as “imminently
threatened”.
It
is not certain whether most septic systems on the oceanfront are on the seaward
side of the structure or the road-side of the structure.
The general belief is that most newer structures, and those that were
relocated after the recent hurricanes, have the septic systems on the road-side
of the structure, and in these cases the ‘20 ft. from the foundation’
provision would govern in determining if a structure is “imminently
threatened”. There are some older
structures that may have the septic system on the seaward side of the structure,
and these structures may have their septic systems exposed as a result of
additional beach erosion. In the
event that a storm event or normal erosion exposes a septic system, the owner
would be allowed to bulldoze under the Town’s ordinance. However, the County Environmental Health Division would be
consulted prior to authorizing bulldozing, and they would make one of the
following determinations: 1) if the
exposure is minor, the owner would be allowed to bulldoze and cover the exposed
septic system, 2) if the exposure
is more significant, the owner may be required to relocate the septic system to
another area of the lot, 3) if
there is not sufficient area available, the Environmental Health Division will
explore the feasibility of a smaller septic system or alternative technologies,
4) if no other alternatives are feasible, Environmental Health could
require the owner to ‘pump-and-haul’ on a regular basis,
or 5) as a last resort, they could declare the structure uninhabitable.
Mr. Rush has spoken with Troy Dees, County Environmental Health
Supervisor, and he stated that their policy is to work with the owner in any way
possible to maintain use of the structure.
Mr. Dees could only recall one instance on the oceanfront where a
solution could not be implemented to maintain the habitability of the structure.
The
practical effect of the language in the July 9 version of the ordinance is
essentially identical to that originally proposed in May.
The July 9 language is more restrictive than the language proposed in
June, and should improve the overall effectiveness of the ordinance in
preserving the pre- and post-nourishment beach profile.
WHEREAS, the Town of Emerald
Isle is undertaking a project of ocean beach nourishment to widen the beach
thereby protecting ocean front structures from erosion; and
WHEREAS,
it is in the interest of the public welfare that restrictions be placed on the
pushing of sand on the ocean beaches in order that a fair allocation of the
nourishment sand can be made in the current and future nourishment projects; and
WHEREAS,
to enhance qualification for Federal Emergency Management Act ("FEMA")
benefits in the event of shoreline erosion resulting from natural disasters, it
is prudent for the Town to maintain regulations and restrictions with respect to
the moving of sand along the beach; and
WHEREAS,
beach bulldozing and other movement of sand along the beach, unless carefully
monitored and regulated, can destroy vegetation and other devices designed to
stabilize the beach.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED
by the Board of Commissioners of the Town of Emerald Isle as follows:
1.
Chapter 5 of the Emerald Isle Code of Ordinances is hereby amended by
adding a new section which shall read as follows:
ARTICLE V. BEACH BULLDOZING RESTRICTED
Sec 5-70.
Bulldozing Restrictions. On
the ocean beaches, bulldozing sand, pushing of sand by mechanical means, or
other mechanical change to the topography is prohibited except in the following
situations:
(i)
When such work is performed as a part of a hurricane or erosion
protection project or beach nourishment project sponsored by the Town of Emerald
Isle or any local, state, or federal governmental agency;
(ii)
When such work is performed at the direction of the Town of Emerald Isle
for purpose of beach maintenance;
(iii) When such work is performed by any non-governmental person or entity to protect primary structures (not including walkways to the ocean beach, swimming pools, or accessory use structures), that are imminently threatened as a result of severe erosion of the ocean beaches or the sand dune structure, but only upon receipt of a permit for such work from the local CAMA permitting officer after a finding by such officer that the structure is imminently threatened ("imminently threatened" means that the foundation of the structure is less than 20 feet from the toe of the erosion scarp and / or the septic system is exposed); or
(iv) When
such work is authorized by the issuance of a general waiver of this section by
the Board of Commissioners following a natural disaster.
Sec 5-71.
Penalties. Any person who violates this section shall be subject
to a civil fine of $500.00, and each day that the property is not restored to
its pre-bulldozed condition shall be a separate violation.
Collection and enforcement of this civil penalty shall be in accordance
with Section 1-6 of the Town’s Code of Ordinances.
2. The Town Clerk is authorized to number the section set forth above and insert the same as appropriate in the Town Code.
3.
This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its adoption.
If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any
reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of
competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this ordinance.
DULY ADOPTED THIS _________ day of _____________,
2002 by a vote of
Commissioner(s)___________________________________________
voting for,
Commissioner(s)
_______________________________ voting against and
Commissioner(s)__________________________ absent.
Carolyn K. Custy, Town Clerk
Mayor Schools asked for public comment and none were forthcoming.
The board also had no comment.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONTRACT WITH BENCHMARK, INC. FOR PLANNING AND ZONING SERVICES.
Background: The Board is asked to consider a resolution authorizing a contract with Benchmark, Inc. for planning and zoning services. If approved, Benchmark will assist Town staff, the Planning Board, and the Town Board in the review of major development proposals, and also assist in the preparation of development ordinance amendments.
The contract is based on an hourly rate of $44, with a not to exceed amount of $12,000 for FY 2002-2003. Based on these amounts, Benchmark will provide approximately 22 hours of service per month. Benchmark will work under the direction of the Town Manager, and will assist Planning and Inspections staff with the review of new subdivisions, commercial projects, and multi-family housing developments. As funds permit, Benchmark will also assist in the drafting of development ordinance revisions for consideration by the Planning Board and the Town Board.
Mr. Rush has discussed the need to revise and improve the town’s development review process with Benchmark and Town staff over the past several months, and if Benchmark is added to our team, Mr. Rush envisions implementing several changes in the town’s development review process in the next few months. Potential changes include an earlier application deadline for development proposals (currently 10 days prior to the Planning Board meeting; increase to 14-21 days to allow for more thorough staff review), more thorough staff-level review prior to the Planning Board meeting, a more formalized staff review process that includes Public Works, Fire, and other department representatives on a routine basis, and improved “case summaries” in Planning Board agenda packets to provide a thorough and easy explanation of the issues associated with development proposals.
The addition of Benchmark to our team will also “free up” some of Mrs. Carol Angus’ time in the Planning and Inspections Department, and we are exploring the possibility of transferring some non-building code duties from the building inspectors to Carol in order to “free up” some of the inspectors’ time. There have been concerns recently that building inspections are not being completed in a timely manner, and it is hopeful that these changes, along with other changes being implemented by the Planning and Inspections department, will ensure timely building inspections for our customers.
Mr. Rush also envisions Benchmark assisting with development ordinance revisions over the next fiscal year. Because of Benchmark’s previous involvement in this issue, the first task that he will assign to Benchmark is an amendment to the 8,000 sq. ft. special use permit ordinance that was recently invalidated by the courts. Mr. Rush hopes to have a revised ordinance to present to the Planning Board for consideration in August or September.
The Board is asked to approve the attached resolution authorizing the Benchmark contract, after which a formal contract will be executed with Benchmark. Also attached, for the boards information, a draft contract that will be modified slightly; most notably to extend the deadline for monthly payments to something greater than 14 days.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT WITH BENCHMARK, INC
FOR PLANNING AND ZONING SERVICES
Whereas, the Town desires to augment its staff capabilities for the review of development proposals and the revision of town development ordinances, and
Whereas, Benchmark, Inc. has submitted a proposal to the Town Manager for planning and zoning services, and
Whereas, Benchmark is a reputable and respected firm in the planning and zoning field, and
Whereas, sufficient funds for these services are included in the FY 02-03 budget under consideration by the Board of Commissioners,
DISCUSSION – ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18 – SUBDIVISIONS – REGARDING SKETCH DESIGN PLANS AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS
Background: The Board of Commissioners is scheduled to discuss several proposed amendments to the subdivision ordinance at the July 9 meeting. These ordinance amendments address several separate issues that are summarized below. The proposed amendments are indicated in the attached ordinance with the underline feature (identifying new language) and the strike-through feature (identifying deleted provisions).
The Planning Board and Board of Commissioners discussed the need for amendments to the subdivision ordinance at the January 2002 joint meeting of the two boards. Recognizing the complexity of the subdivision ordinance, a decision was made to divide potential revisions into two categories – the first being a series of relatively minor, quick, and easy-to-accomplish amendments, and the second being a more thorough and comprehensive overhaul of the subdivision ordinance at some future date, perhaps after the Land Use Plan update is completed. The ordinance amendment presented on July 9 represents the completion of the first category (minor, quick, and easy) of subdivision ordinance amendments.
A Planning Board subcommittee chaired by Art Daniel prepared the proposed ordinance amendments. The full Planning Board reviewed the proposed amendments at its June 25 meeting, and unanimously recommends approval. In accordance with the Board’s two step policy for ordinance amendments, this item has been scheduled for discussion at the July Town meeting, with formal consideration anticipated as early as the August regular meeting.
The specific revisions included in the attached ordinance amendment are as follows:
Mr. Rush personally extend his sincere gratitude to Mr. Daniel for his quality work in drafting these ordinance amendments. His assistance is greatly appreciated.
ORDINANCE
AMENDING CHAPTER 18 – SUBDIVISIONS – REGARDING SKETCH DESIGN PLANS AND OTHER
MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS
WHEREAS, the Planning Board and Town Board expressed a desire for several “minor” revisions to the Emerald Isle subdivision ordinance at its joint meeting in January 2002, and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are intended to improve the subdivision review process for both the applicant and the Town’s representatives, and improve the quality of new subdivisions in Emerald Isle, and
WHEREAS, a subcommittee of the Planning Board drafted the proposed amendments herein, and the full Planning Board unanimously recommends approval of the proposed amendments,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Emerald Isle Board of Commissioners that;
1. Chapter 18 – Subdivisions – is hereby amended by replacing the entire existing Chapter 18 with the following ordinance language:
Chapter 18 SUBDIVISIONS*
‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑
*Cross reference(s)‑‑Buildings and building regulations, Ch. 6; planning and development, Ch. 13; streets and sidewalks, Ch. 17; zoning, Ch. 19.
State law reference(s)‑‑Regulation of subdivisions by municipalities, G.S. 160A-371‑‑160A-376.
‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑
Art.
I. In General, §§ 18-1‑‑18-20
Art.
II. Approval of Subdivisions, §§ 18-21‑‑18-40
Art.
III. Approval of Special Developments, §§ 18-41‑‑18-60
Art.
IV. Design Standards, §§ 18-61, 18-62
ARTICLE
I. IN GENERAL
Sec. 18-1. Declaration of purpose.
subdivision of real estate and for the surveying and platting thereof, adopted and prescribed in this chapter and hereby found by the Board of Commissioners to be necessary and appropriate in order:
(1)
To assure that land to be subdivided shall be of such character that it
can be used safely for building purposes without danger to health, or peril from
fire, flood, erosion, or other menace.
(2) To assure that proper provisions shall be made for drainage, water supply, sewerage, and other needed improvements, and that all proposed lots shall be so laid out and of such size as to be in harmony with the development pattern of the neighboring properties.
(3) To provide for dedication of streets and rights-of-ways or easements for vehicular, pedestrian and utility purposes, or to require properly constructed private streets, assuring that provisions are made for the distribution of population and traffic which shall avoid congestion and overcrowding and which shall create conditions essential to public health, safety, and welfare.
(4)
To provide for economical and sufficient streets composing a
convenient
system conforming to the Town’s official street map, if such exists, and shall
be of such width, grade, alignment, and location as to accommodate the
prospective traffic, to facilitate fire protection, and to provide access of
firefighting equipment to buildings, and to conform with existing or planned
streets and with other public facilities.
(5) To save unnecessary expenditure of public funds by studying space and recommending from time to time the purchase of such space for public lands and buildings and by initial proper construction of streets and utilities.
(6) To provide proper land records for the convenience of the public and for better identification and permanent location of real estate boundaries.
(b) The provisions of these regulations are adopted pursuant to authority granted by the General Assembly of the state, particularly article 19 of Chapter 160A of the General Statutes.” (As amended on 12/11/01)
(Code 1983, § 9-6001)
Sec. 18-2. Conformance with subdivision regulations required.
After the effective date of this chapter, no real property, including property developed under the North Carolina Unit Ownership Act, within the town, shall be subdivided and a portion thereof offered for sale, sold or transferred except in conformance with all applicable provisions of this chapter.
(Code 1983, § 9-6002)
Sec. 18-3. Definitions.
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this chapter, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:
Minor subdivision. Division of a tract or parcel of land into not more than four (4) lots, building sites, or other divisions for the purpose of sale, or building development (whether immediate or future), such division of land having all lots abutting an already existing public road and requiring no improvements to the land except for the division referred to herein.
Sawtooth or finger lot. An irregular shaped lot the majority portion of which meets the dimensional requirements for a subdivision lot under the town zoning ordinance, but which has a finger or extension thereon primarily for access to a street or body of water, and with the width of the extension or finger being more narrow than the width of the lot at the required building setback line.
Subdivision. All divisions of a tract or parcel of land into two (2) or more lots, building sites, or other divisions for the purpose of sale, or building development (whether immediate or future) shall include all divisions of land involving the dedication of a new street or a change in existing streets; but the following shall not be included within this definition nor be subject to the regulations of this chapter; provided, however, that any document or plat to be recorded pursuant to such exclusions shall have the notation of "no approval required" and the signature of the planning board chairman, or designee, before filing with the office of the register of deeds:
(1) The combination or recombination of portions of previously platted lots where the total number of lots is not increased and the resultant lots are equal to or exceed the standards of this chapter and the applicable zoning regulations;
(2) The division of land into parcels greater than ten (10) acres where no street right-of-way dedication is involved;
(3) The public acquisition by purchase of strips of land for the widening or opening of streets; and
(4) The division of a tract in single ownership whose entire area is no greater than two (2) acres into not more than three (3) lots, where no street right-of-way dedication is involved and where the resultant lots are equal to or exceed the standard of this chapter and the applicable zoning regulations.
(Code 1983, § 9-6003; Ord. of 9-24-84, § 1; Ord. of 3-11-86(1), § 1)
Cross reference(s)‑‑Definitions and rules of construction generally, § 1-2.
Secs.
18-4‑‑18-20. Reserved.
ARTICLE II. APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISIONS*
‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑
*State law reference(s)‑‑Certain plat approval regulations required for subdivision ordinances, G.S. 160A-373.
‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑
Sec. 18-21. Sketch design plan.
The sketch design plan and site planning sketches shall
be drawn at an approximate scale of one inch to one hundred feet (1”=100’)
and include:
(a)
The name and address of the owner and the subdivider.
(b)
Existing conditions of the site including streets, roads,
right-of-ways, easements, watercourses, wetlands, and structures.
(c)
Approximate location of lot lines, approximate number of lots, and
total tract acreage.
(d)
Proposed rights-of-way, easements, and any sites to be dedicated for
churches or public use.
(e)
Site planning sketches showing:
1.
Slopes in increments of 0-5%, 5-10%, and 10-15% when applicable
(information available from USGS quadrangle maps)
2.
Soils by type; i.e., fine sand, medium grade sand, loamy sand, organic
soils (information available from USDA Soils Survey)
3.
Vegetation by category; i.e., scattered growth, young mixed hardwood,
mature mixed hardwood, coastal marsh, brush.
4.
A composite site planning sketch showing slopes, soils, and vegetation
superimposed over the sketch design plan.
The
Planning Board shall review the sketch design plan for
compliance with the requirements of this Chapter and inform the subdivider about the regulations that govern the proposed development and the procedure the subdivider is to follow in preparing and submitting the preliminary and final plats. The subdivider is to informally explain to the Planning Board the plans for developing the proposed subdivision, including the kind and extent of proposed improvements. The Planning Board is to discuss with the subdivider any suggested changes deemed advisable.
Sec. 18-22. Preliminary plats.
(a)
The submission of a preliminary
plat shall be accompanied by a letter of transmittal describing the proposed
subdivision and a statement that the plat is in compliance with the town
ordinance. The town planning board shall review the preliminary plat to
insure that the subdivision is equal to or exceeds the standards of this chapter
and the applicable zoning regulations. Upon determination that these standards
have been achieved, the planning board shall recommend to the town board of
commissioners that the preliminary subdivision plat be approved.
b)
Approval of a preliminary plat shall constitute
tentative approval of a final subdivision plat. Such approval shall be valid for
a period of one (1) year, with the exception of preliminary plats for
subdivisions located within the NC Coastal Area Management Act Area of
Environmental Concern (AEC), for which such approval shall be valid for a period
of two (2) years. A preliminary
plat shall be drawn at a scale of not less than one hundred (100) feet to the
inch and show the following:
(1) Name. The subdivision name, the names and addresses of the owners and the designer of the subdivision and his qualifications.
(2) Date, etc. Date, approximate north arrow and scale.
(3) Boundaries. The boundary line of the tract to be subdivided drawn accurately to scale and with accurate linear and angular dimensions.
(4) Location map. A map with a scale of not less than one (1) inch equals one thousand (1,000) feet showing the location of the subdivision.
(5)
Contours,
and contour interval,
and finished grades. Contours with a vertical interval of two (2)
feet referenced to sea level datum, except that contours shall not
be required in subdivisions not involving new street right-of-way dedications.
Proposed finished grades along the
perimeter and in the interior shown in a manner that clearly distinguishes
proposed elevations from existing elevations.
(6) Primary dunes. The location of the primary dunes as established by CAMA.
(7) Existing property lines, etc. The location of existing and platted property lines, streets, buildings, watercourses, railroads, bridges, water mains, sewers, culverts, drainpipes, and public utility easements, both on the land to be subdivided and on the land immediately adjoining and any other pertinent characteristics of the land. The names of adjoining subdivisions or the names of record owners of adjoining parcels of unsubdivided land.
(8) Proposed improvements. The names, proposed locations, and approximate dimensions of all proposed improvements. All subdivision plats which will create lots not directly abutting a dedicated and accepted public street shall include proposed improvements for roadway access, either public or private, to each of these lots and such roadways shall conform to the design standards for town streets specified in Section 17-32 of the Emerald Isle Code of Ordinances.
(9) Proposed changes. In all cases, shall be shown in a manner that will distinguish them clearly from the existing characteristics of the land.
(10)
Drainage. The preliminary plat
shall also indicate and show surface water drainage plans and methods. The
preliminary plat shall include a
drawing showing storm water drainage supported by design computations.
The design shall conform to the standards set forth in Chapter 16
(Stormwater Management) of the Emerald Isle Code of Ordinances.
(11)
Utilities. The preliminary plat shall include all
applicable utilities including street lighting.
All utilities shall be underground.
Utility distribution boxes; such as, water meter boxes and transformers,
shall be located where sideyard property lines intersect with street
right-of-way lines (frontyard property lines) and placed at the property corners
in a manner that incompatible types of utility services will not conflict with
each other. (i.e., electric services combined at a common corner of two adjacent
lots and water services combined at another common corner in order to serve two
lots from each location when possible.)
(12)
Sidewalks in commercial subdivisions. The preliminary plat
shall provide for a minimum of a 4-ft. wide sidewalk on the north side of E/W
streets and the east side of N/S streets.
(c) In order to be in compliance with area of environmental concern standards, the preliminary plat shall contain a statement that the subdivision is located either within or without a North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act Area of Environmental Concern and shall show all required AEC data.
(d) In addition to the above, the following information shall be provided:
(1) Profiles. Profiles of all streets showing natural and finished grades drawn to scale of not less than one (1) inch equals forty (40) feet horizontal and one (1) inch equals four (4) feet vertical.
(2) Health department approval. Where public water and/or public sewage is not available for extension to each lot in the subdivision, a written report from the county health department shall be submitted as to the adequacy of the land area, and the suitability as to the soil and topography of the proposed subdivision to accommodate the proposed methods of water supply and sewage disposal.
(3) Required data. The preliminary plat shall be accompanied by a copy of all applications required by agencies other than the town. Applications must contain all pertinent data required to process applications.
(4) Street Access to Subdivided Lots: Except as otherwise provided by this Chapter, every subdivision of property within the jurisdiction of the Town shall include access to each and every lot of the subdivision by way of dedicated and accepted public streets or by establishment of private street systems which are platted and approved pursuant to the requirements of this Chapter. All public or private streets shall meet the design standards for town streets specified in Section 17-32 of the Emerald Isle Code of Ordinances and/or any amendments thereof.
(5) Other information. Other information as deemed necessary.
(e)
The application for preliminary approval of the subdivision plat with the
town planning board shall be accompanied by the fee which may be established
and/or amended, from time to time, by resolution of the town board.
(f)
Approval and conditional approval of a preliminary plat.
(1)
When a preliminary plat is approved, approval shall be so indicated on
three (3) copies of the preliminary plat by the Chairman of the Planning Board.
(2)
When a preliminary plat is granted only a conditional approval, the
reasons for conditional approval and the conditions to be met must be stated in
writing. In lieu of granting
conditional approval of the preliminary plat, the Planning Board may require the
subdivider to resubmit the preliminary plat in a revised format that
incorporates recommended changes.
(3) When a preliminary plat is disapproved by the Planning Board, reasons for such action shall be stated in writing. One copy of the plat with the reasons for disapproval shall be provided to the subdivider and one such copy shall be retained by the Planning Board. The subdivider may make the recommended changes and submit a revised plat to the Planning Board for approval.
(4) Upon approval or conditional approval of a preliminary plat by the Planning Board, three (3) copies of the preliminary plat approved by the Chairman of the Planning Board shall be forwarded to the Board of Commissioners for review and approval. If the Board of Commissioners approves the preliminary plat, one Board of Commissioners approved copy shall be sent to the subdivider, one retained by the town clerk, and one by the planning director. If the preliminary plat is not deemed to be acceptable for approval by the Board of Commissioners, the reasons for non-approval along with two (2) copies of the plat shall be returned to the Planning Board for further consideration and appropriate action.
(Code 1983, § 9-6011)
Sec. 18-22. Final plat.
(a)
Upon approval of the preliminary plat by the town board of commissioners,
the subdivider may proceed with the preparation of the final plat, and the
construction of required improvements in accordance with the approved
preliminary plat and the requirements of this chapter. Prior to approval of the
final plat, the subdivider must complete
the construction of all required improvements, or substantially complete all
required improvements and guarantee completion by posting a letter-of-credit or
cashiers check in accordance with Section 18-22 (b)(3).
(b) The town planning board shall review the final plat to insure that the subdivision is equal to or exceeds the standards of this chapter and the applicable zoning regulations. Upon determination that these standards have been achieved, the planning board shall recommend to the town board of commissioners that the final subdivision plat be approved.
(1) Submitting final plat. After the preliminary plat has been approved, the final subdivision plat, as described in section 18-24, shall be prepared and submitted for final approval within one (1) year after approval of the preliminary plat, with the exception of preliminary plats for subdivisions located within the NC Coastal Area Management Act Area of Environmental Concern (AEC), for which such approval shall be valid for a period of two (2) years. Such owner or subdivider shall submit an original linen, film, or other permanent material tracing, one (1) print on cloth, one (1) sepia, and two (2) blueprint copies of the final plat, properly signed and executed as required for recording in the office of the register of deeds of the county along with the necessary probate and recording fees to the planning board chairman. Upon approval by the town board of commissioners, the planning board chairman, or designee, shall forward the final plat to the register of deeds for recording.
(2) Conformity with preliminary plat. The final plat shall conform with the preliminary plat as approved, and, if desired by the owner or subdivider, it may constitute only that portion of the approved preliminary plat which he proposes to record and develop at the time provided; however that:
a. The planning board shall find that the subdivision is reasonably located with respect to existing roads and utility lines, and
b. Such portion shall conform to all requirements of this chapter.
(3)
Letter-of-credit or cashiers check may be utilized to meet requirements
for final plat approval if improvements are substantially complete.
If the
required improvements and utilities are substantially complete, with only punch
list items remaining, the owner or subdivider shall have the right to provide a
letter-of-credit or cashiers check in an amount equal to 150% of the estimated
cost of the remaining improvements. The letter-of-credit or cashiers check shall
guarantee the construction of required improvements and utilities and shall
satisfy the requirements of this section to secure final plat approval.
The expiration date on the letter-of-credit or cashiers check shall be
established by the town board of commissioners at the time of final plat
approval.
(Code 1983, § 9-6012)
Sec. 18-23. When plat may be recorded.
No plat shall be recorded until the final subdivision plat is approved in accordance with this chapter.
(Code 1983, § 9-6013)
Sec. 18-24. Contents of final plat.
The final plat shall be a reproducible map on linen, film, or other
permanent material and shall have an outside marginal size of twenty-four
(24) inches by thirty-six (36) inches not more than twenty-one (21)
inches by thirty (30) inches nor less than eight and one-half (8 1/2) inches by
eleven (11) inches, including one and one-half (1 1/2) inches for binding on
the left margin and one-half-inch border on each of the other sides. Where the
size of land areas is of a suitable scale, to assure legibility requirements
maps may be placed on two (2) or more sheets with appropriate match lines. It
shall be drawn to the same scale as the preliminary plat, and shall contain the
following:
(1) Boundary, etc. The exact boundary of the tract of land being subdivided, showing clearly the disposition of all portions of the tract into designated tracts, lots, streets, alleys, parks, open spaces, easements, or other classifications, the exact location and width of all existing or recorded streets intersecting the boundary of the tract being subdivided, and the names of adjoining subdivisions or the name of record owners or adjoining parcels of unsubdivided land. All existing characteristics of the land shall be clearly defined from those characteristics that are proposed.
(2) Streets, etc. The lines and names of all streets, alleys, boundary lines, lot lines, building lines, easements, areas devoted to public use, and lot and block numbers.
(3) Title. A note shall appear on the final plat stating the deed reference under which title to the property being subdivided is held.
(4) Lines. Sufficient data to determine readily and reproduce accurately on the ground the location, bearing, and length of every street and alley line, lot line, easement, boundary line, and building line whether straight or curved. This shall include tangent distance, the central angle, the radius, arcs, and chords of all curves. All linear dimensions shall be given in feet and hundredths thereof, and angular dimensions shall be of comparable accuracy within the limits of good surveying practice.
(5) Monuments and control corners. The accurate location, material, and size of all monuments and the designation of specific control corners in conformance with the letter and intent of G.S. 39-32.1, 39-32.2, 39-32.3, 39-32.4, shall be known.
(6) Name of engineer, etc. The title, including the name of the subdivision, the town, the name of the registered engineer or registered surveyor under whose supervision the plat was prepared, the date of the plat, and a north arrow. Indication shall be made as to whether the north index is true, magnetic, or grid.
(7) Ownership of Streets and Right-of-Way:
(a) Certificate of ownership and dedication – For any plat submitted which incorporates public roadways, streets, easements, and other rights-of-way, a certificate of ownership and dedication shall be shown properly completed and signed by the owners and all other interested parties, similar in wording to the following: “The undersigned hereby acknowledge(s) this plat and allotment to be (his, her, their) free act and deed, and hereby dedicate(s) to public use as streets, playgrounds, parks, open spaces, and easements forever all areas so shown or indicated on said plat. Signed ___________.”
(b) Owners’ Association Documents for Maintenance of Private Improvements – For any plat submitted incorporating private roadways, streets, easements, and other rights-of-way, the following documents shall be submitted simultaneously with the final plat in order to provide for ongoing maintenance of private improvements that will not be dedicated to the Town:
1. Documents creating the owners' association. The documents creating the association shall provide for control by the property owners other than the developer at such time as over fifty (50) percent of the lots within the subdivision have been sold.
2. Proposed annual budget for the owners’ association which includes the proposed monthly expenditures and income.
3. A proposed ten-year income and expense budget reflecting the establishment of a sinking fund for capital replacement.
4. A copy of the proposed bylaws of the association, and, when applicable, a declaration of unit ownership meeting the requirements of Chapter 47A or 47C of the General Statutes.
5. If the project is to consist of single-family dwellings, townhouses or structures other than condominiums, a copy of the proposed restrictions, covenants and assessments shall also be provided.
(8) Other uses. All property shown on the plat as dedicated for public use shall be deemed to be dedicated for any other public use authorized by the town Charter or any general, local, or special law pertaining to the town, when such other use is approved by the town board of commissioners as in the public interest.
(9) Form for endorsement. A form for the endorsement of the town board of commissioners shall be similar to the following:
Approved by the Board of Commissioners of the Town of Emerald Isle, North Carolina, effective on the ________ day of ________, 19________.
|
|
Signed ____
Mayor
Town of Emerald Isle
|
(10) Certification. The plat shall show proper certificates of the engineer or surveyor, notary public and the probate clerk as required by state law.
(11) State board compliance. The final plat shall conform in all ways to the state statute (G.S. 47-30) as amended and to the state board of registration for professional engineers and land surveyors "Manual of Practice for Land Surveying."
(12) AEC standards. Area of environmental concern standards certification shall be provided on the final plat by the local permit officer that the subdivision is either within or without a North Carolina Coastal Management Act of 1974 Area of Environmental Concern. The certification shall be similar to the following:
"This subdivision conforms to the standards of the North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act of 1974 and is not located within an Area of Environmental Concern.
|
|
____
Local Permit Officer"
|
"This subdivision conforms to the standards of the North Carolina Coastal Area Management Act of 1974, and portions of the subdivision located within an Area of Environmental Concern is duly noted.
|
|
____
Local Permit Officer"
|
(Code 1983, § 9-6014)
Sec. 18-25. Building permits.
Building permits shall not be issued for structures located in a subdivision unless the final plat is recorded in the office of the county register of deeds.
(Code 1983, § 9-6015)
Cross reference(s)‑‑Building permits generally, § 6-61 et seq.
Sec. 18-26. Suitability of land.
Land subject to flooding, poor drainage, erosion or that is for topographical or other reasons unsuitable for residential use as determined by the town planning board or town board of commissioners, shall not be platted for residential use nor for any other uses that will continue or increase the danger to health, safety or property unless the conditions can be corrected.
(Code 1983, § 9-6016)
Secs.
18-27‑‑18-40. Reserved.
ARTICLE
III. APPROVAL OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENTS
Sec. 18-41. Group housing and other special developments.
(a) Generally. For the purpose of this section, group housing and special developments shall include apartments, condominiums, townhouses and planned unit developments. These terms shall have those definitions set forth in section 19-62.
(b) Procedure for approval. Both preliminary and final plats and other documents required by this ordinance shall be submitted for approval to the planning board and the board of commissioners in the same manner as preliminary and final subdivision plats. The application for preliminary and final approval of the group development shall contain the information and documents required therein and as required in section 18-42 set forth hereafter, in addition to the information required on preliminary and final subdivision plats, except as varied herein. The same procedure for preliminary and final approval of subdivision plats as set forth in sections 18-21, 18-22 and 18-24 shall be applicable to preliminary and final approval of group housing plats, except as varied herein. Once final approval has been given by the board of commissioners, all final plats shall be recorded in the office of the county register of deeds.
(c) Design and construction standards for group housing projects. All group housing projects shall be developed according to the following specifications and standards and those requirements contained in section 18-42, as applicable.
(1) The overall density of each project shall be in conformance with chapter 19.
(2) The minimum lot width which may be subdivided for each individual townhouse shall be sixteen (16) feet, provided that in no case shall the width increase the maximum density allowed in the zoning ordinance.
(3) Each townhouse shall front on a public street or commonly owned street or area.
(4) The minimum width for each townhouse or condominium unit shall be sixteen (16) feet.
(5) Each building on the periphery of a group housing development shall comply with the minimum yard requirements of the zoning ordinance for the district in which the project is located. A screen of dense plant material which will grow at least three (3) feet in width by six (6) feet in height within three (3) years shall be required and constructed in a manner that will be compatible with the design of the project. The screen shall be provided along the perimeter of the project.
(6) Every facade of every residential building within a group housing development shall have a yard space in the shape of an isosceles triangle having as its base a line connecting the extreme ends of the facade and having as its altitude the length of the base line multiplied by a building height factor from the table set forth hereafter. In no case shall the triangle altitude be less than fifteen (15) feet. Each projection from a main facade of twenty-five (25) feet or more shall constitute a new facade and new triangles will be constructed in the same manner as above using a base line connecting the extreme ends of the projection and the extreme ends of the main facade. The yard space thus established for each building according to the methods set forth herein may not overlap the yard space for any other building or extend into any adjacent property or street right-of-way. The triangles may extend across parking lots within the project. In no case shall any part of a building be located closer than twenty (20) feet to any part of another building. The following table is to be used for determining the building height factor to be used in order to determine the required yard space above:
| Stories |
Factors
|
| 1 |
0.3
|
| 2 |
0.4
|
| 3 |
0.5
|
| 4 and 5 |
0.6
|
| 6 and 7 |
0.7
|
| 8 and 9 |
0.8
|
| 10 and above |
0.9
|
The planning board may recommend a variance by allowing a triangle overlap of up to twenty (20) percent of a triangle area. This variance may not allow a triangle to extend beyond the boundaries of the project or into any dedicated public street right-of-way.
(7) For all projects containing more than eight (8) units, all parking lots, drives, streets and roads within the group housing development shall be paved and constructed in accordance with the construction standards for paved subdivision public streets within the town.
(8) Any lighting provided within the group housing project shall be so located or shielded so that no offensive glare will be visible from an adjoining street or property.
(9) Group housing projects containing more than fifty (50) units and utilizing a single access shall have a minimum street or drive width of twenty-eight (28) feet.
(10) All group housing developments containing more than one hundred (100) units may be required to have a minimum of two (2) accesses, each having a minimum width of twenty (20) feet if deemed necessary by the town board due to access, traffic, fire, or safety considerations or similar factors.
(11) Parking shall be prohibited within the access streets or roads.
(12) Parking for each group housing development shall meet the parking requirements in the zoning ordinance. Each space shall contain a minimum of two hundred (200) square feet and be permanently marked by painting or other designation on a paved parking lot. All spaces shall be shown on the site plan. Enclosed garages and carports within the group housing development shall be counted as a part of the parking requirements. If developed in phases, each phase shall contain the required number of parking spaces, and shall be shown on final plats.
(13) Recreational areas shall be provided for all group housing projects containing more than eight (8) dwelling units. A minimum recreation area of two thousand (2,000) square feet, having a minimum width of forty (40) feet or a minimum radius of twenty-six (26) feet shall be provided for the first nine (9) to twenty-five (25) dwelling units within the project. For each dwelling unit over twenty-five (25) units in number, an additional sixty (60) feet per dwelling unit shall be provided. The planning board shall review the spatial distribution and number of recreational areas based upon the spatial arrangement of dwelling units, topography, and other physical features.
Swimming pools and their accessory areas shall not be counted as a part of the recreational area requirement. No part of the required recreation area shall be used for any other purpose. No part of any recreation area shall be located within the undisturbed natural area(s) as designated on the preliminary and final plat and as may be required by ordinances of the town.
(14) Swimming pools, if provided, shall conform to the building setback lines, and shall have a fence having a minimum height of four (4) feet completely enclosing the pool area together with a gate that can be securely closed. All swimming pools shall be reasonably accessible to emergency equipment and vehicles. Any lighting in the pool area shall be shielded in such a manner that no offensive glare will be visible from an adjoining street or property.
(15) Signs identifying the group housing development or located within the group housing development shall be constructed and installed in a manner compatible with the design of the project. Any lighting used in conjunction with signs shall be shielded in such a manner that no offensive glare will be visible from the adjoining street or property.
(16) Adequate space shall be provided within the project area for the collection of garbage and other refuse, and all dumpsters and equipment used for garbage collection shall be screened from public view.
(17) Each building within a group housing development shall be located within three hundred fifty (350) feet of a fire hydrant. All hydrants shall be located adjacent to a paved street, road or parking lot suitable for the transportation of firefighting vehicles and equipment. A suitable and readily accessible drive or passage shall be provided so that firefighting vehicles will have the capability of getting within fifty (50) feet of all dwelling units within the group housing development.
(18) If buildings within the group housing development have standpipes or sprinkler systems, one (1) fire hydrant shall be located within seventy-five (75) feet of each standpipe or sprinkler system.
(19) All hydrants shall be connected to a six-inch, or larger, water main. Easements shall be provided from the hydrant to the street connection along the water main so that the line and hydrant can be maintained by a public agency. A loop system may be required.
(20) In the event a dead-end street, road, drive or parking lot exceeds two hundred (200) feet in length, a paved turnaround for firefighting equipment and vehicles, emergency vehicles, and service vehicles shall be provided having a minimum interior turning radius of twenty-eight (28) feet. This provision may be omitted where such a turnaround is determined by the town board to be neither desirable nor necessary.
(21) The maximum length of group development buildings shall be two hundred fifty-six (256) feet.
(22) Maintenance buildings shall not be connected to any residential buildings, and shall be constructed in such a manner that the same will be compatible with the design of the project.
(23) A screen of dense plant material which will grow to a width of at least three (3) feet and a height of at least six (6) feet within three (3) years from the date of planting shall be provided, or in lieu thereof, a screen fence six (6) feet in height constructed in a manner that is compatible with the design of the project shall be provided along the perimeter of each project.
(24) All group development projects of more than three (3) units shall be designed by a professional engineer or architect.
(d) Additional requirements of preliminary plat. The application for preliminary approval and the preliminary plat as submitted to the planning board and the town board shall contain the following information on one (1) or more sheets, and shall comply with the following requirements:
(1) General information:
a. Name of development;
b. Name of owner and developer;
c. Name of land planner, architect, engineer or surveyor;
d. Scale of map which shall be fifty (50) feet to an inch;
e. Date of preliminary plan.
(2) A vicinity map showing all roads in the general area of the proposed group housing development, and also showing the relationship of the group housing project site to major roads in the area.
(3) The dimensions and bearings of all exterior property lines shall be shown on the preliminary plat.
(4) Land contours with vertical intervals of not more than two (2) feet shall be provided for all projects and shall be shown either on the preliminary plat or on a topographic survey which accompanies the preliminary plat. In the event a topographic survey is submitted with the preliminary plat, it shall be drawn to the same scale as the preliminary plat and shall show land contours with vertical intervals of not more than two (2) feet. Final grades around the perimeter and at significant locations inside the lot(s) shall be shown on the drawings.
(5) The preliminary plat shall show all roads within the group housing project area to include access roads and adjacent roads to the project area.
(6)
The preliminary plat shall include
a drawing showing storm water drainage supported by design computations.
The design shall conform to the standards set forth in Chapter 16
(Stormwater Management) of the Emerald Isle Code of Ordinances. also
indicate and show surface water drainage plans and methods.
(7) The preliminary plat shall show and specifically locate all structures and buildings within the project site to include both present and proposed structures and buildings. The dimensions of the buildings and structures shall be shown in detail.
(8) All recreational and open spaces both existing and proposed shall be indicated in detail, and all structures, uses and buildings both existing and proposed within the recreation and open spaces shall be indicated in detail.
(9) The preliminary plat shall be accompanied by detailed plans of the developer concerning the method of surfacing roads and parking areas.
(10) The preliminary plat shall indicate in detail the location and intensity of area lights in the general plan of the electrical system for the proposed area.
(11) The preliminary plat shall indicate the source of water and the distribution system for the source of water. In the event the water system requires approval by state and/or federal agencies, then plans and specifications approved by the state and federal agencies having jurisdiction over the system must be approved. If the water distribution system requires approval from the county health department, then the approval of the county health department must accompany the preliminary plats.
(12) Sanitary sewage system. If a sewage collection disposal system is used, plans and specifications approved by state and/or federal agencies must be submitted. If the public sewage system is not required and such system comes under the jurisdiction of the county health department, then their approval must accompany the preliminary plats.
(13) The preliminary plats shall indicate bodies of water, marshes, wooded areas, rivers, creeks, and other natural conditions which may affect development within the project site.
(14) The preliminary plat shall indicate all adjoining property owners.
(15) The north arrow and graphic scale shall be shown.
(16) The preliminary plat shall indicate in detail the site data as follows:
a. Total acreage in the project, and natural area and method of calculation;
b. Type of group housing project units to be approved;
c. Number of one-bedroom, two-bedroom, three-bedroom and four-bedroom group housing project units;
d. Maximum project area covered by all structures and improvements;
e. Minimum front, rear and side yards for each unit within the group housing project;
f. Minimum distance between principal buildings;
g. Height of each building;
h. Parking area and parking spaces for the project;
i. If the group housing project proposes townhouses, row houses or other attached single-family dwellings, other than condominiums, the size of each lot shall be indicated. The minimum lot width and side, rear, and front yards of each unit shall be indicated in detail;
j. Isosceles triangles shall be shown for all buildings.
(17) The preliminary plat shall also indicate the height above sea level for the project site, and shall indicate whether or not any of the project area is within the area of environmental concern as defined under the Coastal Area Management Act.
(18) All utilities, including street construction, shall conform to the construction standards of the town. The width and rights-of-way of streets shall meet the minimum standards for streets within the town as contained in section 17-32 of this Code. The dedication of streets to the public use shall not be required, but the streets shall be designed and constructed meeting the minimum standards of the town in the event of future dedication of such streets to the town or the state department of transportation.
(19) The declaration of unit ownership, bylaws, restrictions or covenants shall contain information as to whom shall be responsible for payment of premiums for liability insurance, local taxes, maintenance of recreational facilities, parking lots, streets and drives, and other common areas, assessments, maintenance and repair expenses, and similar costs.
(20) All natural areas, as defined in section 19-376 of the town Code, shall be clearly delineated with dimensions shown, in order to verify the calculations of the reserved areas. All requirements of the "Dunes and Vegetation Protection Ordinance" are applicable.
(Code 1983, § 9-6021)
Sec. 18-42. Planned unit developments.
(a) General description and purpose. Planned unit developments are planned residential developments in which the principal use of land within a development is for both attached and detached single-family dwellings and/or condominiums, townhouses and other multifamily dwellings. A planned unit development is an alternative procedure for development which may be utilized by owners and developers with regard to the development of any parcel of land in those districts where planned unit developments are permitted or special uses. The purposes of a planned unit development are as follows:
(1) To provide for an accumulation of large areas of open space for recreation and preservation of natural amenities;
(2) To provide flexibility in design to take the greatest advantage of natural land, water, trees, and environmental and historical features;
(3) To provide for the creation of compatible neighborhood arrangements that give the home buyer greater choice in selecting his living environment;
(4) To provide sufficient freedom for the developer to submit plans that embody a creative approach to the use of lands and related physical development, as well as utilizing innovative techniques to enhance the visual character of the development;
(5) To provide for the efficient use of land which may result in smaller street and utility networks, better maintenance and upkeep of sewage disposal systems, and reduced development and maintenance costs;
(6) To establish criteria for the inclusion of compatible or associated uses to complement the residential area within the planned unit development;
(7) To simplify the procedures for obtaining approval of proposed development through expeditious review of proposed land use, site layout, public needs, and health and safety factors;
(8) To minimize expenditures of public funds for services and maintenance of streets, roads, central sewage systems, and similar utilities, and to promote the efficient investment of community resources.
(b) Location. Planned developments may be established in those zoning districts in which a planned unit development is shown as a permitted use under the table of permitted and special uses under section 19-82. Single-family dwellings, townhouses, condominiums, multifamily dwellings or combinations thereof may be located within a planned unit development. Provided, that nothing herein shall permit or allow within a residential 1 (R-1) or residential 2 (R-2) zone any uses other than residential single-family detached and two-family dwellings.
(c) Design and construction requirements. The design, construction and development of planned developments shall comply with the design and construction requirements of section 18-41, and other applicable provisions of the subdivision and the zoning ordinances of the town, except as may be modified herein.
(d) Minimum area. Subject to the provisions set forth herein, all planned unit developments shall contain a minimum of ten (10) contiguous acres. Any addition must be at least two (2) acres, contiguous and adjacent to the existing planned unit development, and subject to design standards.
(e) Project density. The overall density of each planned development shall be in conformance to the requirements of the zoning ordinance which would limit the number of residential dwellings to no more than eight (8) units per acre regardless of the minimum lot area required per dwelling or unit herein. Specific density requirements for single-family and multifamily dwellings are as follows:
(1) Single-family dwellings such as cluster homes, patio homes, etc.‑‑Minimum lot area of six thousand two hundred fifty (6,250) square feet for each lot.
(2) Multifamily dwellings‑‑The minimum lot area for the first two (2) units or the first two-family dwelling shall be fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet. Each additional unit above two (2) shall require a minimum lot area of four thousand seven hundred sixty (4,760) square feet per unit.
(f) Open space. Each planned development shall contain open space in the following percentages of the overall area of the planned residential development which shall be computed based upon the number of dwellings per gross acre of planned development as follows:
| Number of Dwelling Units per Gross Acre |
Required Percentage
of Open Space
|
| 3 units or less |
20
|
| 4 to 6 units |
21 to 30
|
| 7 to 8 units |
31 to 45
|
Open space is defined as that land designated on the plat as being for the use, benefit and enjoyment of the residents of the planned unit development. The open space shall be set aside for the use, benefit and enjoyment of all residents of the planned unit development, and shall either be dedicated to the private use of residents of the planned unit development or conveyed to the owner's association or similar resident's association for ownership, use and management. Land which is restricted in any way so as to be for the use, benefit or enjoyment of a select group within the planned unit development shall not qualify as open space.
To qualify as open space, land shall have a minimum width of twenty-four (24) feet excluding street rights-of-way, drives, parking areas or structures other than recreational structures. Street rights-of-way, drives, parking areas, and central water and sewer systems may qualify as open space and be counted towards the percentage of open space required for each development. Provided, that street rights-of-way, drives, parking areas, and water and central sewage systems shall not comprise more than thirty-three and one-third (33 1/3) percent of the required open spaces for each development unless the percentage is varied or waived by the town board upon recommendation by the planning board.
(g) Required natural area. Nothing in this section shall change, modify or repeal the requirements of the dunes and vegetation ordinance with regard to the percentage of each tract or lot which must be retained in its natural state.
(h) Dimension requirements.
(1) Each detached single-family structure shall contain a minimum of seven hundred fifty (750) square feet of heated living space.
(2) Lot width. The minimum lot width for detached single-family dwellings at setback shall be sixty (60) feet.
(3) Peripheral boundary setback. A fifteen-foot setback shall be required along all peripheral boundaries of a planned residential development. A building, whether it is a principal or accessory building, shall not encroach upon this required setback distance.
(4) Side or rear setbacks for single-family detached dwellings. A zero side or rear yard setback, where the side or rear building line is on the side or rear lot line, may be permitted on one (1) side or rear of each lot subject to the following provisions:
a. Any wall constructed on the side or rear lot lines shall be a solid, windowless, doorless wall. If there is an offset of the wall from the lot line, such offset shall be a solid, windowless, doorless wall or be located the applicable setback distance from the side or rear lot line as applicable as required by the zoning ordinance for the zoning district in which the property is located.
b. The minimum building separation for the side or rear yard opposite the zero rear lot line shall be either a minimum building separation of fifteen (15) feet from the side of the adjacent dwelling if then constructed, or a minimum fifteen-foot building setback line form the adjoining side or rear lot line, whichever is greater. This fifteen-foot area shall be subject to all the requirements and conditions of the zoning ordinance normally applied to side or rear yards for buildings within the zoning district in which the property is located.
c. A five-foot maintenance easement with a maximum eave encroachment easement of two (2) feet within the maintenance easement shall be established in the deed restrictions and covenants of the adjoining lot and shall assure ready access to the lot line wall at reasonable periods of the day for normal maintenance.
d. Preliminary and final site development plans shall indicate the proposed location and configuration of dwellings, driveways and parking arrangements for each lot. In addition, a draft of proposed encroachment and maintenance easement shall be submitted for review and approval.
e. All remaining yards shall have a minimum fifteen-foot building setback.
(i) Water supply and sewage service. Central water supply and central sewer service connection shall be required for all units, and the same shall be approved, constructed, completed and maintained in accordance with the requirements of the county health department and the state.
(j) Primary vehicular access. Primary vehicular access to the planned residential development shall be from a public street.
(k) Building height. Maximum height of all buildings shall not exceed the limitations for the district in which the planned residential development is located.
(l) Preliminary and final review procedures and approvals. The procedure for both preliminary and final approval by the planning board and the board of commissioners as described in sections 18-21, 18-22, 18-24, and 18-41 shall also be applicable to planned unit developments. The preliminary and final plats and documents shall meet the requirements of this chapter as applicable and, in addition thereto, the following additional information and documents shall be submitted to the town planning board and town board of commissioners simultaneously with the final plat:
(1) Documents creating the homeowners' association. The documents creating the homeowners' association shall provide for control by the property owners other than developer at such time as over fifty (50) percent of the dwelling units within the project have been sold.
(2) A proposed annual budget for the association which includes the proposed monthly expenditures and income.
(3) A proposed ten-year income and expense budget reflecting the establishment of a sinking fund for capital replacement.
(4) A copy of the proposed declaration of unit ownership and the proposed bylaws meeting the requirements of chapter 47A of the General Statutes, in the event condominiums are involved in the planned unit development.
(5) If the proposed planned unit development is to consist of townhouses, rowhouses, or other attached single-family dwellings other than condominiums, a copy of the proposed restrictions, covenants and easements shall be provided. The proposed annual budget for the homeowners' association shall also be included.
(Ord. of 7-9-85(1), § 1; Ord. of 4-10-90, § 1; Ord. of 4-12-94(2), § 1)
Sec. 18-43. Commercial and business condominiums.
Condominiums and townhouses designed, developed and constructed primarily for business and/or commercial use shall be subject to the following requirements in addition to any other terms and conditions set forth herein and in the zoning ordinance:
(1) Procedure for approval. The procedure for preliminary and final approval by the planning board and the board of commissioners as detailed in section 18-41 shall be applicable to business and commercial condominiums. The preliminary application and preliminary plats shall meet the requirements of section 18-41, as applicable, and in addition thereto the following additional information and documents shall be submitted to the planning board and board of commissioners prior to final approval for approval by the planning board and board of commissioners, and such information and documents shall be submitted simultaneously with the final plats:
a. Documents creating the condominium owners' association. The documents creating the association shall provide for control by the property owners other than the developer at such time as over fifty (50) percent of the condominium units within the project have been sold.
b. Proposed annual budget for the association including monthly assessments. The proposed monthly assessments shall be in such amounts as to ensure success of the association.
c. A proposed ten-year income and expense budget reflecting the establishment of a sinking fund for capital replacement.
d. A copy of the proposed declaration of unit ownership and proposed bylaws meeting the requirements of chapter 47A of the General Statutes.
e. If the project is to consist of townhouses or other structures other than condominiums, a copy of the proposed restrictions, covenants and assessments shall also be provided.
Once final approval has been given by the board of commissioners, all final plats shall be recorded in the office of the county register of deeds.
(2) Design and construction standards. All business and commercial condominiums shall be developed according to the following specifications and standards:
a. There shall be no minimum lot area or lot width.
b. Each condominium unit or townhouse shall front on a public street that conforms to the standards for public streets in Section 17-32 of the Emerald Isle Code of Ordinances.
c. Each building on the perimeter of the business condominium development shall comply with the minimum yard requirements of the zoning ordinance for the district in which the property is located. There shall be no individual unit setbacks required of buildings on individual lots. All buildings with the exception of the end units may have zero side yard setbacks and may be attached to a unit on two (2) or more sides.
d. All parking lots, drives, streets and roads within the project shall be paved and constructed in accordance with the construction standards for paved subdivision public streets within the town.
e. Lighting provided within the condominium project shall be so located or shielded so that no offensive glare shall be visible from adjoining streets or properties.
f. Parking for each condominium or townhouse development shall meet the parking requirements in the zoning ordinance. The required parking spaces may be developed on any portion of the project site except for access streets or roads on which parking shall be prohibited. Off-street parking spaces shall not be required to be located on each individual lot or adjoining each individual condominium unit, but the off-street parking spaces may be located in other areas within the project and shall be shown on the site plan.
g. A screen of dense plant material which will grow at least three (3) feet in width by six (6) feet in height within three (3) years shall be required, or a screen fence a minimum of six (6) feet in height and constructed in a manner that will be compatible with the design of the project shall be provided where the project abuts a residential lot.
h. Driveways connecting to an access road shall have a minimum width of fourteen (14) feet for one-way travel and twenty-four (24) feet for two-way travel. The on-site traffic circulation plan shall be functional and shall provide access by emergency vehicles to all portions of the proposed development.
i. All areas of the project other than the streets and the condominium units which are to serve as common areas for one (1) or more units shall be shown and designated as such on the preliminary and final plats, and the declaration of condominium and/or covenants and restrictions shall describe each common area and indicate the uses of the common areas and the method of maintenance of the same.
j. There shall only be permitted one (1) freestanding sign for the entire business condominium project regardless of the length of street frontage or the multiplicity of street frontages within the project. The maximum sign area shall be based on one (1) square foot of sign area per linear frontage of the business condominium site frontage of the longest abutting public street or primary street serving the project. Maximum height of the freestanding sign shall be twenty (20) feet. Nothing herein shall prevent the placement of signs on the individual condominium units by the owners thereof which shall meet the terms and conditions for signs as contained in article VII of the zoning ordinance.
k. Adequate space shall be provided within the project areas for the collection of garbage, trash and other refuse, and all dumpsters and equipment used for garbage collection shall be screened from public view.
l. Each building within the project shall be located within three hundred (300) feet of a fire hydrant. All hydrants shall be located adjacent to a paved street, road or parking lot suitable for the transportation of firefighting vehicles and equipment. A suitable and readily accessible drive or passage shall be provided so that firefighting vehicles will have the capability of getting within fifty (50) feet of all units within the project.
m. If buildings have standpipes and sprinkler systems, one (1) hydrant shall be located within seventy-five (75) feet of each standpipe and sprinkler system connection.
n. The exterior walls of unattached buildings shall be located no closer than a distance equal to the height of the taller building.
o. Any courtyard created by the placement of buildings shall have at least twenty-five (25) percent of its perimeter open for access by emergency vehicles.
p. All hydrants shall be connected to a six-inch or larger water main.
q. If a dead-end street, road, drive or parking lot exceeds two hundred (200) feet in length, a paved turnaround for firefighting equipment and vehicles, emergency vehicles, and service vehicles shall be provided having a minimum interior turning radius of twenty-eight (28) feet. This provision may be omitted where such a turnaround is determined by the town board to be neither desirable nor necessary.
(Ord. of 5-7-84(1), § 1)
Sec. 18-44. Minor subdivisions.
(a) Minor subdivisions shall be subject to the following requirements in addition to any other applicable terms and conditions set forth in this chapter and in the zoning ordinance.
(b) The procedure for approval for minor subdivisions shall be as follows: Both preliminary and final plats and other documents required by this chapter shall be submitted for approval to the planning board and the board of commissioners in the same manner as preliminary and final subdivision plats. The application for preliminary and final approval of the minor subdivision shall contain the information and documents required on preliminary and final subdivision plats. The same procedure for preliminary and final approval of subdivision plats as set forth in sections 18-21, 18-22 and 18-24 shall be applicable to preliminary and final approval of minor subdivisions, except that the planning board may approve the preliminary and final plats simultaneously; and, except that after approval of the preliminary and final plats of the minor subdivision by the planning board, the board of commissioners may approve the preliminary and final plats of the minor subdivision simultaneously.
(Ord. of 9-24-84, § 2)
Secs.
18-45‑‑18-60. Reserved.
ARTICLE
IV. DESIGN STANDARDS
Sec. 18-61. Generally.
All proposed subdivisions shall be in conformity with a plan for the most advantageous development of the entire neighboring area and shall bear a sensible relationship to the existing or amended plans of the town.
(1)
Use of Public and Private Streets. The
use of private streets is specifically authorized in residential subdivisions,
group housing developments and other special developments, and planned unit
developments that are authorized in accordance with this chapter.
All other subdivisions authorized in accordance with this chapter shall
utilize public streets for access to subdivided lots.
(2)
“Relations of proposed streets to
adjoining street systems. The
proposed street system shall extend existing and projected streets at not less
than the required minimum width. Where
in the opinion of the Planning Board or Board of Commissioners it is desirable
to provide for street access to adjoining property, proposed streets shall be
extended by dedication to the boundary of such property.
The Planning Board or Board of Commissioners may require that a
subdivision locate proposed streets, public or private, to intersect with other
streets or roadways in a place and manner that will minimize traffic congestion
and risk to the public safety. The
Board of Commissioners may limit the number of and control the traffic from all
outlets of subdivisions onto other streets for the purpose of protecting the
public safety while providing for reasonably convenient subdivision access to
the street system.
(3) Street names. Proposed streets which are obviously in alignment with others already existing shall bear the names of existing streets. In no case shall the name of proposed streets duplicate or be phonetically similar to existing street names, irrespective of the addition of a prefix, suffix, or word such as Street, Avenue, Boulevard, Drive, Place, or Court. In no case shall the total number of letters, including the spaces, exceed fifteen (15).
(4) Street construction. All dedicated public streets and approved private streets shall be constructed to the specifications of the town as specified in Section 17-32.
(5)
Intersections. Street
intersections shall be as nearly at right angles as possible, and no
intersection shall be at an angle less than seventy-five (75)degrees.
No more than two (2) streets shall intersect at one point.
(6) Drainage. All watercourses not located within a street right-of-way shall have an adequate easement to allow for maintenance.
a. An easement over a drainage pipe shall be a minimum width of fifteen (15) feet.
b. An easement for an open ditch shall be a minimum width of twenty (20) feet, plus the width of the ditch.
(7) Fire hydrants. Fire hydrants shall be within five hundred (500) feet of each proposed lot as measured along a paved street. All hydrants shall be three-outlet-base-valve type located on a six-inch or larger water main. The fire hydrant plan shall be reviewed by the fire chief.
(8) Access. Within all proposed subdivisions, group housing and special developments, and all other developments subject to the terms of this chapter, a minimum public access width of ten (10) feet shall be provided from each street right-of-way to the high- water mark of both the Atlantic Ocean and Bogue Sound at both the east and west boundaries and center in each of the town's fifty-four (54) blocks starting at the western limits of Indian Beach and proceeding in a westerly direction to Bogue Inlet. Provided, the board of commissioners may eliminate, vary or change the location or width of any of the public accesses within a block following consideration by the town planning board based upon topography, good land use planning, or similar consideration.
(9) Minimum lot width. All lots within the proposed subdivision shall meet the required minimum lot width at the front building line. Additionally, every portion of a sawtooth or finger lot shall have a minimum width of at least thirty (30) feet. No portion of any subdivision lot shall have a minimum width of less than thirty (30) feet.
(Code 1983, § 9-6031; Ord. of 4-9-85(4), § 1; Ord. of 3-11-86(1), § 2; Ord. of 3-10-92(2))
Sec. 18-62. When local improvements may be installed.
No local improvements or utilities, including water, sewer, storm drains,
paving, curb and gutter, shall be constructed until the preliminary plat and
completed detailed plans for such improvements have been examined, analyzed, and
approved by the Planning Board and the Board of Commissioners. board
of commissioners.
Detailed plans of proposed improvements shall be submitted with the
preliminary plat and shall include plan views, profiles, typical sections, cross
sections, standard specifications, and construction details.
Design of streets and utilities shall be combined into one plan set when
possible.
(Code 1983, § 9-6032)
2.
The Town Clerk is authorized to number the section set forth above and
insert the same as appropriate in the Town Code.
DULY ADOPTED THIS _________ day of _____________, 2002 by a vote of
Commissioner(s)___________________________________________ voting for,
Commissioner(s) _______________________________ voting against and Commissioner(s)__________________________ absent.
Carolyn K. Custy, Town Clerk, CMC
Mr. Art Daniel went over the ordinance as drafted above. He was very involved with its drafting.
Commissioner McElraft asked about underground utilities and remarked that sometimes they cannot be put underground because of the location. Mr. Daniel said he would ask that they show cause why the utilities cannot be put underground. They prefer to put them above ground.
Commissioner Farmer suggested Mr. Daniel look into this further and he agreed to do so.
Commissioner McElraft asked about the two lot subdivison at Coast Guard Road and Highway 58, if the sidewalks and roads are in before they can get their final plat, there is no way for those new owners to develop that in any way they would get a permit to do so because there are already sidewalks in. Mr. Daniel said this was a good question and sidewalks have always been a step-child in a subdivision development. At the instance given, there is a rolled curb there and the curb does not have to be cut in order to have a driveway. If there is a sidewalk there it is subject to damage when they roll the dump truck in to do whatever they are going to do. It would have a tendency to break up the sidewalk. His personal preference is that the sidewalks be installed later on when the property has actually been developed. Mr. Daniel also made note that walkways have not been defined as they need to be with restrictions so that if a development is in a planning stage for completion in 5 years, you do not wind up with a portion developed in one place with sidewalks, another one down the road with a sidewalk, and yet another one further down with a sidewalk that does not serve any purpose because they are not connected and will not be until the entire development is completed.
Attorney Taylor said he had no problem with the ordinance. It brings everything into conformity with the other ordinances.
Commissioner Farmer implied that there would be a potentially conditionally approved preliminary plat going before the Board of Commissioners for approval and those conditions should be met before it appears on the Board of Commissioners’ agenda. Mayor Schools agreed and suggested rewording this section. Mr. Daniel said that the wording should be changed to say that "the subdivider or proposer needs to complete those conditions before it comes to the town board for approval". Commissioner Farmer said she has no problem with the Planning Board conditionally approving it, she just doesn’t think the town board should be given a conditional plat for their approval before those conditions have been met.
Mr. Daniel said Mr. Rush and he could redraft some language that would cover Commissioner Farmer’s concerns.
Mr. McEnaney asked that on page 56(d), could additional places of worship
be inserted? after the word church? A
suggestion was to made to add “and other places of worship”.
Attorney Taylor said he has no problem with this and it brings it into
port along with other ordinances he has seen.
An initial sketch design helps the communication process from an early
stand point. The town would start bonding with the subdividers in an early
phase. Mr. Taylor congratulated Mr.
Daniel as this ordinance has been well thought out.
DISCUSSION – ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 19 – ZONING – TO ALLOW DOG GROOMING AS A SPECIAL USE IN THE B-2 AND B-3 ZONES
Background: The Board of Commissioners is scheduled to discuss an ordinance amending Chapter 19 – Zoning – to allow dog grooming as a special use in the B-2 (Business-2) and B-3 (Business-3) zones. This ordinance amendment was requested by a citizen who hopes to open a dog grooming business in Emerald Isle in the coming months.
Dog grooming operations are currently not authorized as either a permitted or special use in any zoning district in the Town of Emerald Isle. The attached ordinance would allow dog grooming operations in the B-2 and B-3 zones if the applicant complies with seven additional conditions. The most notable of these conditions are a prohibition on any overnight boarding activities, a prohibition on the storage of dogs outdoors, and a requirement to remove excrement from designated outdoor dog walking areas on the premises on a daily basis. The owners / employees of the dog grooming operation, and its customers, must also comply with the Town’s animal ordinances, including leash laws, and the removal of excrement from public and private property.
The concept of the attached ordinance, and designation of this use as a special use with conditions was developed by Carol Angus, Planning and Inspections Director, and approved by the Planning Board by a 4-1 vote at its June 25 meeting. Some of the language has been revised in the proposed ordinance slightly; however, the substance is the same. In accordance with the Board’s two step policy for ordinance amendments, this item for discussion at the July Town meeting, with a public hearing and formal consideration anticipated as early as the August regular meeting.
ORDINANCE
AMENDING CHAPTER 19 TO
ALLOW DOG GROOMING AS A SPECIAL USE IN B-2 AND B-3 ZONES
Whereas, the Emerald Isle zoning ordinance, as it is currently written, does not allow dog grooming operations as a permitted or special use in any zoning district, and
Whereas, a citizen has requested an ordinance amendment to allow dog grooming in Emerald Isle, and
Whereas, the allowance of dog grooming as a special use, requiring the applicant to meet certain conditions, should eliminate and / or reduce any potential noise, appearance, and nuisance impacts on neighboring properties, and
Whereas, the Planning Board has recommended the proposed ordinance
amendment, by a 4-1 vote,
“All special use applications and special use permits for ‘dog grooming operations’ shall comply with the following conditions:
3. The Town Clerk is authorized to number the section set forth above and insert the same as appropriate in the Town Code.
4. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
DULY ADOPTED THIS _________ day of _____________, 2002 by a vote of
Commissioner(s)___________________________________________ voting for,
Commissioner(s) _______________________________ voting against and Commissioner(s)__________________________ absent.
Carolyn K. Custy, Town Clerk, CMC
John McEnaney, a resident, asked about noise.
The ordinance does not speak about noise issues, i.e. dogs barking, etc.
Mr. Rush answered that our Animal Ordinance does require people to
control their dogs and barking issues. Citations
have been issued, on occasions, to people who could not control such an
instance.
Commissioner Farmer questioned how the Special Use Permit works. Mr. Rush said Special Use Permits are something that he would
like to see staff work on sometime in the future as to renewals.
Town Attorney Taylor said a lot of the Special Permits were designed to
deal with Itinerant Merchants when they were first established.
He suggested that the Itinerant Merchants be segregated out and deal with
them in their own area of the Code and not try to globally create Special Use
Permits with 24 month periods and clean this whole section up. Now that there is
an inexpensive alternative for cleaning up the language of the ordinances
compared to his doing it, he would think this would be one of the areas that
should be addressed with Benchmark. Commissioner
Farmer’s point that a Special Use Permit, under the current ordinances, a 24
month period of time is what you have.
Commissioner Farmer said she knows there is a Nuisance Ordinance and she
supports having dog grooming but asked what sort of recourse does the town have
if it in fact becomes a problem with surrounding businesses?
It is obvious that the Planning Board looked at noise because the
requirements in the Animal Ordinance but she wonders if there shouldn’t be
something in there about noise in this instance because that might occur.
Mr. Rush said if the conditions are not complied with, the Special Use
Permit could be revoked. The noise
issue is addressed in the general ordinance and he does not know if that would
be grounds for revoking their Special Use Permit.
It may be desired to add some language to the Special Use Permit
Ordinance to consider noise.
Attorney Taylor commented his general rule is “Clarity is preferred”
so if there is an issue with noise, it can be as specific as is desired.
At this point, the Animal Ordinance has been referred to but he cannot
read the Animal Ordinance at this point, but in terms of noise and whether it is
in the animal control area, the town could go after an establishment instead of
the owner. If all of those things
pan out, one pointing to the other in his opinion would allow the cancellation
of the Special Use Permit, if not meeting one of the uses in the Special Use
Permit to be under the control of the Animal Ordinance.
Attorney Taylor, for clarification of what he has just implied, said he
thinks the town is OK with this, but if noise is a big issue, make is clear in
the Special Use Conditions.
Even though Commissioner Farmer supports this, she would be more
Attorney Taylor said it could be done by specifically specifying certain
criteria the board would like to be use for the purpose of what is noise and
what is not or the board can point to the ordinance more specifically, the ones
that are already in existence in the Animal Control, if you want to talk about
nuisance dogs that are barking. There
several ways to approach it and the alternatives can be reviewed.
Mayor Schools asked about ordinances that say it is too load if someone
can hear it inside their house at a certain distance?
Attorney Taylor said there are ordinances of that nature.
He has found sometimes that they are OK and other times he has found some
people to be more sensitive to sound than others.
He has seen an ordinance drafted that “if I can hear it in my living
room with the TV on”. A cat
purring in the living room next door is irritating to some people but to others
it is not. He did say decimal levels and readings have been used in
nuisances for noise levels in bars in the past. Attorney Taylor suggested that
It
be given an opportunity to hash out the best way to approach this issue.
Mrs. Beverly Beasley, who has a business at Elon College, N.C. is the
person who requested this approval. She
has a home in Emerald Isle on 13th Street (Timbertrail) and she is
planning to move here the first of the year.
She has a dog grooming shop now. She
has 7 to 14 dogs per day in a residential district in Elon (the ordinance being
considered is for commercial only) and she has never received a complaint.
The dogs get excited only when their owners come to pick them up.
Most dogs put out side on a lot are going to bark and bark.
She will work about 3 days per week doing 5 small breed dogs a day.
They will be inside in air conditioning.
They will be walked outside, one at a time, and then returned to the
inside and she will clean up after them. She
reiterated she has never had a problem and has been in this for 7 years.
Should the dogs get unruly, she would call the owners to come get
them.Mrs. Beasley assured the board it would not be loud at all.
There were no more questions for Mrs. Beasley regarding this application.
Mr. Rush commented he would work on some language to address the noise
concerns.
Mayor Schools suggested this be placed on next months agenda.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONTRACT WITH BARRY JOHNSON CONSULTING SERVICES
Background: The Board is asked to consider a resolution authorizing a contract with Barry Johnson Consulting Services for disaster management (FEMA coordination) and debris contractor monitoring in the event that Emerald Isle is impacted by a hurricane this season. If approved, the contract will only be activated if Emerald Isle is declared a federal disaster area by the President, and will be paid on a time and materials basis at specified hourly rates.
Copies of the two proposals (one for disaster management and one for debris contractor monitoring) from Barry Johnson are attached at the end of these Minutes. Attached also is a memo from Mitsy Overman, Assistant Town Manager / Finance Officer to Mr. Rush regarding Mr. Johnson’s proposals. The Town has enjoyed a productive relationship with Mr. Johnson after previous storms, and he has helped the Town to maximize its FEMA reimbursements. Expenses for disaster management services are reimbursed to the Town by FEMA via a percentage administrative reimbursement (calculated based on actual reimbursement expenses). Expenses for debris contractor monitoring are a fully reimbursable expense, and FEMA strongly encourages the use of monitoring services to keep debris contractors honest. FEMA has experienced numerous instances of over-billing by debris contractors over the years, and now encourages local governments to pay outside vendors to monitor disaster contractor performance, despite the additional cost incurred.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT WITH BARRY JOHNSON CONSULTING SERVICES
FOR DISASTER MANAGEMENT AND MONITORING SERVICES
Whereas, the Town has utilized the services of Barry Johnson Consulting Services in the aftermath of previous hurricanes, and
Whereas, Barry Johnson Consulting Services has provided valuable FEMA disaster claims management services to the Town, resulting in the maximization of FEMA reimbursements, and
Whereas, FEMA encourages local governments to hire debris contractor monitors to insure that disaster debris contractors are forthright in their reporting and billing for services, and
Whereas, Barry Johnson Consulting Services has submitted a proposal for both disaster management services (coordination of the FEMA reimbursement process) and debris contractor monitoring, and
Whereas, these expenses are reimbursable by FEMA,
Assistant Town Manager/Finance Officer Misty Overman introduced the two
Debris/Monitoring Proposals for Barry Johnson.
Mr. Johnson monitors debris removal from storms, paying particular
attention to making sure that contractors do not charge for a whole truck load
when it only has one-half load. This
is a tremendously helpful in dealing with FEMA for reimbursements. If there is
no storm, the service is not used.
Attorney Taylor indicated he has not yet looked at these particular
Contracts but if the board would like to approve this subject to Town Attorney
approval, it would give him a few days to look it over.
He doubted he would add much language except standard extreme language,
which most contracts don’t have.
Mrs. Overman indicated she would put the restriction about the funding
before Mr. Johnson executes the Contract.
APPOINTMENT OF NEW PLANNING BOARD MEMBER AND BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENT ALTERNATE MEMBER
The Board of Commissioners is being asked to fill a vacancy on the Planning Board at the July 9 meeting in order to field a complete Planning Board for their scheduled July 22 meeting. The new Planning Board member will replace George McLaughlin, and serve out the remainder of his term, which expires in March 2003. Mayor Schools previously distributed copies of the letters of interest / resumes submitted prior to the June 30 deadline.
There is also one vacancy on the Board of Adjustment (alternate position), and if an acceptable nomineeis identified, the Board should also appoint someone to this position, which has been vacant for several months.
Commissioner Farmer made a motion to appoint Richard Brauns
to the vacancy on the Planning Board. The
board voted unanimously with a vote of 5-0.
Commissioner
Eckhardt made a motion to appoint Kathie Koren to the Board of Adjustment,
Alternate II. The board voted unanimously with a vote of 5-0.
COMMENTS FROM TOWN CLERK, TOWN ATTORNEY AND TOWN MANAGER
There were no comments from the Town Clerk or the Town Attorney.
Town Manager Frank Rush reminded everyone of the Joint Meeting with the
Planning Board to discuss the Dunes and Vegetation Ordinance on July 15, 2002 at
9:00 A.M. The board agreed with
this date and time.
Commissioner Farmer commented there would be a public input meeting after
this sometime in the evening. This
is really an opportunity for the Commissioners to be educated on the thought
process behind the Dunes and Vegetation changes.
Mr. Rush said a Training Session is set for Monday, July 29, 2002 at 9:00
A.M. The Institute of Government David Owens will be in attendance to provide a
short course on Planning and Development issues.
There will also be a representative from Benchmark as well.
This is an open public meeting and anyone is welcome to attend if they
are interested.
Mr. Rush reminded the board that the approved interim budget expires on
July 31, 2002 and a Special Meeting will be set up on July 29, 2002 at 8:30 A.M.
to approve the FY 2002-2003 Budget prior to the Institute of Government training
session. Unfortunately, there is no
indication on what the House is going to do
with the budget. The Governor’s
budget and the Senate’s version of the Budget do include the opportunity to
enact the ½ cents sales tax a year early.
If the House comes through with that, hopefully that information will be
received by July 29. It is Mr.
Rush’s understanding that all Emerald Isle Budget issues were resolved except
for the ½ cent sales tax.
Commissioner Farmer asked about what Carteret County has done about their
Hazard Mitigation Plan? Mr. Rush
replied he believed the County had passed their Plan but he is not entirely
certain. There is also a Bill
pending in the General Assembly to extend the deadline for the Hazard Mitigation
Plan. Mr. Rush hopes that will be
approved prior to August 1st, which is the current deadline.
If this deadline is extended he suggested that the Hazard Mitigation Plan
be reviewed again and conform to their new deadline of August 1, 2003.
If the House does not act on that, it was Mr. Rush’s recommendation to
use the Hazard Mitigation Plan presented in June and amend that at some future
date.
The Town was turned down for the CAMA grant for park development at Coast
Guard storm water site. The town
does own the property and would like to make that available for public use as
quickly as possible. Alesia Sanderson, Parks & Recreation Director has been
asked to revamp a plan for minimal improvements to that site to make it open to
the public and to provide water access.
Commissioner Farmer said she has heard of a number of people who are
willing to help with that. She also said she talked to Bill Holman and he said
he would send her a draft of a concept for Alesia to work with and he did want
to remind the town that approval has to be obtained from them for whatever is
done.
COMMENTS FROM BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND MAYOR
Commissioner Eckhardt asked about a run down for Citations regarding the
Solid Waste Ordinance enforcement. Mr.
Rush noted that for the majority of the locations that Commissioner Eckhardt had
discussed with him, citations had already been issued.
Since beginning aggressive enforcement of the ordinance back in April, 22
warning letters have been issued, 85 warning citations, 40 actual citations
where there is a Civil Penalty involved for a total of 147.
There are several properties that have more than one violation noted.
The staff is trying to provide warnings whenever possible but certainly
where there is a definite violation, a citation is issued.
There were 27 Citations written over the weekend.
Commissioner Eckhardt noted that two weeks ago he was optimistic that
progress was being made but for the last two weekends, he has been less
optimistic. He felt that “we need to do all we can now and not treat this
summer as last summer was treated as a learning experience”.
The town needs to do whatever it can.
If it goes beyond enforcement, rental properties could be treated
differently and if there is a need to go back to look at that.
He feels ground is being lost on this issue.
Mr. Rush commented aggressive enforcement is being done, there are people
out there on Monday mornings identifying situations and issuing Citations. Mr.
Rush contacted several large Real Estate offices several weeks ago and they
talked about several issues. He
felt they are making a good effort to educate their renters about the town’s
policy. Unfortunately, it is set in
some peoples mind that they are here on vacation and he does not feel those
people will ever be convinced no matter what you do.
Some have paid the Citations and turned around gotten another one and has
probably paid that one also. Mr.
Rush is at a loss at this time as how to solve the problem. It will probably be
helpful to sit down with Real Estate Companies again at the end of the summer
and discuss this issue again.
Commissioner McElraft said she has found trash cans turned over empty and
people have set trash on top of it. Maybe the agencies need to go by their
properties and make sure the trash is in the cans where it should be. She complimented the staff on doing a fine job.
Mrs. Nancy Eckhardt, 4304 Ocean Drive, commented the problem is there are
not enough cans. She doesn’t care
how many they have, they have to have enough to have room to put the trash in.
Mr. Rush said most of the tickets being written are for overflowing
trash. Copies of the Ordinance is
being sent and highlighted that they have to have enough containers there and
trying to educate them. One of the
issues that has come up is that the ordinance language says you have to have
enough containers to handle your trash. The
ordinance also says that we provide a guideline of 30 gallons per bedroom.
He has taken several calls from people who have said I have 30 gallons
per bedroom and it is still overflowing and asked what is wanted of them to do
about that. The response is that
you still have to have enough containers to deal with it.
Town staff is trying very hard to enforce the ordinance.
Anne Erikson, 9304 Ocean Drive, has to look at garbage on the streets
everyday on Ocean Drive. There are
not enough cans. You cannot blame
the tourist because if the cans are not there what are they going to do with the
garbage. She would publicly like to
commend Emerald Isle Realty because they have conformed.
The rest of them have not.
Mr. Rush commented he thinks Emerald Isle Realty has done a good job in
trying to comply with the ordinance however several citations issued this
weekend were Emerald Isle Realty customers.
It is not that one company is doing a better job than others.
He does not know if an ideal solution is ever going to be achieved unless
the racks and cans are removed from the streets as well.
This is his personal observation.
Commissioner Eckhardt corrected Mr. Rush in that he is the first one that
has done anything. It has not been
done before and he is the first one that has really tackled the job so it is new
ground. Commissioner Eckhardt
thanked Mr. Rush.
Commissioner Farmer commented this is the one subject she gets the most
phone calls and most e-mails on. People
are mad.
Mrs. Overman said, when you are sitting there taking a picture, the
people are dumping the garbage on the ground and waving at you the whole time.
Commissioner Marks commented on dogs not on leashes on the beach and in
the water. She talked to several
persons this past weekend. The
first person she talked to and informed them about the Leash Law, that person
turned around and pointed to the leash on the ground and said it is right there. After being informed, that person complied but the next one
did not. She has had people ask her
if when the Beach Patrol is out doing their patrol of the beach, if they cannot
stop and talk to the people and tell them about the Leash Law if they see a dog
not on a leash.
Mr. Rush said the Beach Patrol have issued several warnings trying to
educate people about the Leash Law. He
is not sure if they have actually issued any Citations yet.
He knows that the Police Department have also issued some Citations but
he does not have the numbers in front of him.
The Fire Chief and Beach Patrol personnel will be reminded this is part
of their job when patrolling the beach.
Commissioner Marks also suggested that the Police Department be reminded
to issue warnings or whatever, that there is to be No Parking in the Fire Lane
in front of Food Lion. It makes it
very hazardous for ambulances and the Fire Department vehicles to get in there.
It is a real hazard for your children coming out of the store who get
away from parents to run out in front of vehicles.
For the most part, these are young healthy people who are too lazy to
park their car while handicapped people are being asked to park in a handicapped
space and walk 100 plus feet to Food Lion and they do it.
Mayor Schools thanked Mike Stanley for his part in performing the 4th
of July display and read a letter of Commendation.
ADJOURN
Commissioner Farmer made a motion to adjourn and the board
voted unanimously with a vote of 5-0.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Carolyn K. Custy, CMC