Agenda Packet by Gary Herman

AGENDA CITY OF NEWTON

January 17, 2012

AGENDA CITY OF NEWTON NEWTON CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING January 17, 2012 7:00 p.m. Page

Call to Order – Mayor Anne P. Stedman

Opening – Council Member Mary Bess Lawing

Approval of Minutes from the January 3, 2012 Regular Meeting

Consideration of Consent Agenda Items

Tax Releases – December 2011

Sewer Adjustments – January 2012

Consideration of Rural Fire District Budget to be Submitted to County

Acceptance of $1,000 Grant to Newton Police Department from Target

Comments from the Public: (PERSONS WANTING TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS ARE REQUESTED TO SIGN IN WITH THE CITY CLERK PRIOR TO THE MEETING):

Public Hearing

Rezoning Application #2011-04 – Property located at 2223 Indian Trail

Rezoning Application #2011-05 – Property located at 100 SW Blvd.

Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment #2011-05 – Temporary Signs

New Business A.

Closure of City Compost Facility

City Manager’s Report

Questions and Comments From Mayor and Council

10.

Adjournment

PERSONS WANTING TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM MUST SIGN IN WITH THE CITY CLERK PRIOR TO THE MEETING. PERSONS WANTING TO BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MEETING MUST CONTACT THE CITY MANAGER AT LEAST SEVEN WORKING DAYS BEFORE THE MEETING. The City of Newton does not discriminate on the basis of disability in the provision of its services as charged by the City Council of the City of Newton. All meetings are held in accessible facilities. Any person with a disability needing special accommodations should contact Teresa Laffon, ADA Coordinator, at least 48 hours prior to the scheduled meeting.

MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE NEWTON CITY COUNCIL January 3, 2012 – 7:00 P.M. The regular meeting of the Newton City Council was held on Tuesday, January 3, 2012 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. PRESENT:

Mayor Anne P. Stedman, Mayor Pro Tem Bill Lutz, Council Members Wayne Dellinger, Mary Bess Lawing, Tom Rowe, Robert C. Abernethy, Jr., and Wes Weaver

STAFF:

City Manager Todd Clark, City Attorney Larry Pitts, City Clerk Amy S. Falowski, City Department Heads, and members of the Management Team.

ITEM 1:

CALL TO ORDER – Mayor Anne P. Stedman:

Mayor Anne P. Stedman welcomed everyone, and called the meeting to order. ITEM 2:

OPENING – Council Member Tom Rowe

Council Member Tom Rowe provided the invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ITEM 3:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE DECEMBER 13, 2011 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING:

Upon motion duly made by Council Member Mary Bess Lawing, seconded by Council Member Tom Rowe, it was unanimously RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the December 13, 2011 Regular City Council Meeting be – APPROVED. ITEM 4:

CONSIDERATION OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS:

Upon motion duly made by Council Member Mary Bess Lawing, seconded by Council Member Tom Rowe, it was unanimously RESOLVED: That Consent Agenda be – APPROVED.

ITEM 5:

Consideration to Ratify “Piggyback” Awards

Consideration of Annual Fire Department Membership Roster And Department Certification for Year 2012

COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC: (PERSONS WANTING TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS ARE REQUESTED TO SIGN IN WITH THE CITY CLERK PRIOR TO THE MEETING):

Mayor Anne P. Stedman asked if there was anyone present that would like to make any comments concerning non-agenda items. No one appeared.

ITEM 6:

Old Business: A.

Downtown Historic District Update & Public Meeting

Rob Powell, Commercial Development Coordinator, stated that Ms. Ann Swallow of the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) made a presentation to the City Council and interested citizens on October 19, 2010 concerning the possible establishment of a National Register Historic District for the downtown area. Mr. Powell stated that at that meeting, staff was directed by Council to obtain proposals for preparation of a study list application and nomination for National Register District designation. He explained that City Council approved the execution of a contract with Acme Preservation Services for the preparation of a National Register Nomination at the December 8, 2010 Council Meeting. Mr. Powell stated that at a meeting in Raleigh on February 10, 2011, the National Register Advisory Committee (NRAC) approved the addition of the Newton Downtown Historic District to the National Register Study List, making it possible for the City to pursue a formal registration. Mr. Powell explained that the Downtown Newton Historic District National Register draft nomination has been reviewed by the State Historic Preservation Office and that the City’s historian, Acme Preservation Services, completed final map and text revisions during December of 2011. Mr. Powell stated that the Newton Downtown Historic District nomination will be on the agenda of the NRAC at its February 9, 2012 meeting, and that staff anticipates approval at that meeting. He stated that prior to the NRAC meeting, the City must publish a legal notice in a local newspaper and must hold a public information meeting which has been set for 5:30 p.m. on Monday, January 23, 2012 in the Council Chambers. Mr. Powell stated that the meeting will be conducted by Ms. Ann Swallow of the State Historic Preservation Office and by Mr. Clay Griffith of Acme Preservation Services. Mr. Powell explained that the purpose of this public information meeting will be to review the benefits of establishing a National Register historic district, to describe the process for establishing a National Register historic district, to describe the final boundary of the proposed Downtown Newton Historic District, to note the noncontributing properties, and to describe the significance of the “contributing” versus “noncontributing” status. Mr. Powell stated that a brief history of the Downtown Newton Historic District and its architecture will be presented as well. Mr. Powell stated that no action was required by City Council at this time. ITEM 7:

New Business: A.

Recommendation from Recreation Committee Concerning City Pool

Robert Coulter, Parks and Recreation Commission Chairperson, stated that the City Council appropriated $85,250.00 in the FY 2012 budget for the operation of the city swimming pool. This includes $17,400.00 to purchase and install equipment required to meet new standards enforced through the Americans with Disabilities Act. Mr. Coulter stated that after making the decision to operate the pool this fiscal year, members of the City Council asked staff to meet with the Recreation Commission so that they could make a recommendation on whether to permanently close the pool or continue operations. Mr. Coulter explained that the Newton Recreation Commission met on December 12, 2011, and discussed the swimming pool at great length. He stated that the Recreation Commission’s concerns were: (1) whether or not the Department had purchased the required equipment to meet the ADA mandate, (2) whether the City Council will approve funding for the operation of the swimming pool in the FY 2012 Budget, and (3) whether or not the money appropriated could be better spent in the Recreation Department to upgrade existing facilities and/or programs if the 2

City Council chooses not to continue swimming pool operations. Mr. Coulter added that after extensive discussion, the Recreation Commission was not able to make a formal recommendation to City Council concerning the future operation of the pool. Mr. Coulter stated that the Recreation Commission, while a majority of the Commission supports the pool and its continued operation, needs direction from City Council regarding operation of the pool as certain purchases will need to be made by March of this year to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. He stated that these purchases include a new ADA compliant swimmer lift system as well as a new ADA compliant set of steps/ladder or ramp. Mayor Anne Stedman asked if the 1,800 visitors to the pool in 2011 included repeat visitors. Mr. Coulter stated that yes, and that it included day camps, however not as many as in past years due to the late opening of the facility. Council Member Mary Bess Lawing stated that she would like to see the pool opened earlier this year in order for more day camps to be able to enroll. Council Member Wes Weaver asked if there was a big difference between the number of camps from previous years. Recreation Director Sandra Waters stated that yes, there was and that Community Schools was one of the biggest camps that did not come this past year, and that they would need to know by March if the pool would be opened. Ms. Waters also commented that day care attendance is down in general. Council Member Mary Bess Lawing stated that the City of Newton pool is a great pool and that everybody should have the opportunity to use it. City Manager Todd Clark stated that it would cost $68,000 to $70,000 plus $17,400 for ADA upgrades to open and operate the pool this season. Ms. Waters stated that the pool would also need to be caulked at a cost of $2,500. Mayor Stedman asked if there would be any more mandatory regulations in the future. Ms. Waters stated that future needs of the pool include a possible new filtration system drain by 2014 if the current one does not pass inspection, new shower stalls in the next two to three years, and new lounge chairs and umbrellas. Mayor Stedman asked the Council if they would like to discuss the matter of opening the swimming pool. Council Member Mary Bess Lawing stated that she felt like it was a quality of life issue. Council Member Robert C. Abernethy, Jr. stated that it costs $70,000 to open the pool and that in the last census the city had around 14,000 people. At about $5 a person, he didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t feel like that was too steep to give the pool at least one more year. Mayor Stedman asked Council Member Abernethy if he supports the opening of the pool, and he stated that he did. Council Member Bill Lutz stated that the pool is great, but that other recreation programs are bursting at the seams and he would like to see money go toward some of these programs too. Mr. Lutz stated that there are no facilities for some of the ball teams to practice in and he asked Ms. Waters if there are other ways in which the city could serve children with these programs. Ms. Waters stated that yes, all programs are growing. Council Member Mary Bess Lawing asked why, if that many teams need space, the Council is just hearing about it now. She stated that the pool should be opened because it meets a certain need in the city. Council Member Wayne Dellinger stated that he felt like $70,000 was being spent for 800 to 1,000 people as opposed to helping other programs that could use the money. Council Member Abernethy stated that 14,000 people have the opportunity to use the pool, and that it is not about making money. Council Member Wes Weaver asked about a future water park, and stated that he would like to table the matter in order to give staff time to explore other alternatives such as the splash park. Council Member Mary Bess Lawing made a motion to open the pool for the 2012 season. The motion was seconded by Council Member Robert C. Abernethy, Jr. 3

Mayor Stedman asked if there was any more discussion. Council Member Bill Lutz stated that the pool is not going to get any cheaper, but that he thinks it is a great thing for the city to offer. He also stated that he would like to look closely at the other sports programs that are offered by the Recreation Department and see what their needs may be in the coming year. Council Members Mary Bess Lawing and Wayne Dellinger agreed that they would like to see a plan for the future sports programs. It was RESOLVED in a 5-1 vote, with Council Member Wayne Dellinger voting in opposition, That the Newton City Pool be OPENED for the 2012 season. ITEM 8:           

City Manager’s Report:

Burris Road Pump Station gravity line should be finished by the end of February Sewer line project on North College Avenue complete Asplundh is doing tree trimming in South Newton for the next 30 days The city will begin replacing street signs to meet Federal size and reflectivity regulations Leaf collection nearly complete The Water/Sewer study is under way with McGill Red Flag Requirement renovations will be taking place in the Finance Department for the next 4-6 weeks Economic Development will become a function of the Administration Department Planning Director applications are being reviewed and the position will hopefully be filled by the end of February or beginning of March January 24th at 6:30 p.m. is the WPCOG annual meeting at the Crowne Plaza January 11th is the Chamber of Commerce Job Summitt

ITEM 9:

Questions and Comments from Mayor and Council:

There were none ITEM 10:

Adjournment:

There being no further business, upon motion duly made by Council Member Mary Bess Lawing, seconded by Council Member Tom Rowe, it was unanimously RESOLVED: That the meeting be ADJOURNED.

___________________________________ Anne P. Stedman, Mayor __________________________________ Amy S. Falowski, City Clerk

CITY OF NEWTON Inter-office Correspondence

TO: E. Todd Clark, City Manager

DATE: January 5, 2012

RE: Tax Releases – December 2011 FROM: Serina T. Hinson, Finance Director The following tax releases have been received from the Catawba County Tax Collector. The reason for each release is annotated beside the name. Tax Year

Tax Release Number

Name

Reason

2011

MDT Personnel, LLC

Situs Change

2011

Sonic Transport, LLC

Secretary of State shows dissolved in 2010

Should you have any questions or need clarification, please notify. Releases are submitted as required by NCGS § 105-381(b).

Amount of Release $35.29 $22.97

CITY OF NEWTON Inter-office Correspondence

TO: E. Todd Clark, City Manager DATE: January 9, 2012 RE: Sewer Adjustments â&#x20AC;&#x201C; January 17, 2012 FROM: Serina Hinson, Finance Director The following sewer adjustment is recommended for approval. The adjustment is recommended as a result of a water leak at the service address or a pool fill up. Account Number 3000600-014

Name

Service Address

Chad Eric Leatherman

1042 S. Brady Ave.

Adjustment Amount of Period Adjustment Dec 40.22

Backup documentation to support each adjustment is on file in the Finance Department. Should you have questions or require further clarification, please notify.

CITY OF NEWTON REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: January 11, 2012 TO: E. Todd Clark, City Manager FROM: Kevin Yoder, Fire Chief CONSIDERATION OF: Review and Approval of the Rural Fire District budget to be submitted to Catawba County Fire Marshal’s Office for FY 2012-2013 Approved for Council Consideration ______________________________ 1.

The City of Newton Fire Department provides fire protection services to approximately 25 square miles of rural area adjacent to the City of Newton corporate limits. This area is referred to as the Newton Rural Fire District.

The Fire Protection Services within the Newton Rural Fire District are funded through a Rural Fire Tax. The current Rural Fire Tax rate is 7.00 cents per $100 valuation.

We are proposing an increase in the Newton Rural Fire Tax Rate of two (2) cents per $100 of property valuation.

This increase will primarily fund personnel costs. The increase will allow the department to increase the hours of three Part-Time Firefighters to Full-Time Status.

The Fire Marshal’s Office of Catawba County has requested that the Rural Budgets be submitted by the respective Fire Departments and Boards as soon as possible during the new calendar year.

The Budget and associated Rural Fire Tax Increase is consistent with prior budgets presented to Catawba County for each of the past three years.

ACTION SUGGESTED: Review and approve the Rural Fire District budget letter to be submitted to the Catawba County Fire Marshal’s Office for FY 2011-2012.

January 12, 2012 Mark Pettit, Fire/Rescue Manager Catawba County Emergency Services Office P.O. Box 389 Newton, NC 28658

Mark, You will find attached to this letter the budget document you distributed in December for the Newton Rural Fire District. Please note that we are again requesting that the tax rate be increased by two (2) cents per $100 valuation. This rate increase has been requested in at least two previous years for the very same reasons you and I have discussed. I have outlined some of the many needs and justifications in this letter and am willing to discuss this issue at length if you so desire. The increase is primarily due to the need for additional staffing. The Fire Department does not currently meet Nationally Recognized Standards for minimum staffing at the scene of Structural Fires and Alarms. As Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;m sure you are aware, volunteer participation is at an all time low nationwide. We at the Newton Fire Department, like most Fire Departments, have experienced a sharp decline in volunteer response. Numerous attempts have been made to improve the level of response by volunteers. However, the response has only continued to decline. Without additional staffing the department will not meet Nationally Recognized Standards (NFPA). The City of Newton Fire Department serves approximately 25 square miles of rural area. The total area within the city of Newton is a mere 13 square miles. What this tells us is that almost 65% of our total area of 38 square miles is within the rural areas of Catawba County. Currently the Rural Fire Tax only supports approximately 15% of our total budget. Based on area we think you will see that this increase is certainly justified. The City of Newton responded to a total of 188 incidents within the Newton Rural Area. This represents approximately 22% of the total call volume of the Newton Fire Department. In addition, the rural Fire District Tax currently represents only 15% of our total budget. Therefore, based on call volume we think you will see that this increase is certainly justified.

We are requesting the total available fund balance of $8114.00 be forwarded to the City of Newton as well. These funds will purchase Firefighter protective equipment (Turnout Gear). The fund balance will purchase approximately six sets of protective gear. This funding request has been reviewed by the Newton City Manager and Finance Director and will be reviewed in detail by the Newton City council during the customary annual budget review process. I look forward to discussing this yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s annual budget with you and your budget department in great detail. Please let me know if additional information is needed. If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to let me know.

Sincerely,

Kevin L. Yoder Kevin Yoder, Fire Chief City of Newton Fire Department cc. Todd Clark, Newton City Manager Serina Hinson, Newton Finance Director

Catawba County Fire Districts Budget Request ‐ Fiscal Year 2012/13 Newton ‐ Fund 363 Property Tax Collection Rate 98.44% Motor Vehicle Tax Collection Rate 83.52% 2010/11 Actual Tax Rate 0.0700 Budget 335,674 Property Tax Collected 343,896 2011/12 Budget Tax Rate Revenue Ad Valorem Motor Vehicles Ad Valorem ‐ Prior Year Motor Vehicles ‐ Prior Year Fund Balance Total Revenue Expense Operating Budget Capital Budget Total Expense 2012/13 Budget Tax Rate Revenue Ad Valorem Motor Vehicles Ad Valorem ‐ Prior Year (50%) Motor Vehicles ‐ Prior Year (50%) Fund Balance Total Revenue Expense Operating Budget Capital Budget Total Expense

0.0700 315,598 28,541 1,794 1,258 4,125 351,316 351,316 0 351,316 Fire/Rescue Manager Recommendation

Requested Budget 0.0900 403,699 34,474 2,466 2,383 8,114 451,136 443,022 8,114 451,136

Projected Tax Base Motor Vehicles

2012/13

Real Estate Personal Property Public Service Discoveries Total excluding Motor Vehicles At collection rate, 1 cent will produce Population of District Square Miles of District Fund Balance Available (90%)

2011/12 45,862,195

48,643,040

438,267,891 5,204,604 10,834,695 1,355,526 455,662,716

441,455,487 5,034,189 10,720,524 1,347,522 458,557,722

49,379 7,251 25.05 8,114

CITY OF NEWTON REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: January 11, 2012 TO: E. Todd Clark, City Manager FROM: Donald G. Brown II, Police Chief CONSIDERATION OF: Budget Ordinance to recognize grant revenues and authorize expenditure appropriation within the Police Department Budget

Approved for Council Consideration ______________________________ Background: In October of 2011 the Newton Police Department applied for a public safety grant through Target Corporation. The dollar amount requested was $2,000 and the funds requested are for the purchase of “Weather and Alert Radios” to be distributed to all senior citizens on the police department “Senior Citizen List” and for the assisted living facilities within the city limits of Newton. The amount granted to the Police Department is $1,000. The grant will allow the purchase of the weather and alert radios for the individuals on the senior citizen list but not the assisted living facilities. Summary: The above listed grant is for the purpose of purchasing “Weather and Alert Radios.” Requested Action: Adoption of the attached budget ordinance to recognize grant revenues and authorize the expenditure appropriation in the Police Department operating budget.

ORDINANCE 2012-1 CITY OF NEWTON AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011-2012 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Newton has adopted a Budget Ordinance for fiscal year beginning July 1, 2011, and ending June 30, 2012, in accordance with the General Statutes of the State of North Carolina, and WHEREAS, The City Council has authorized the Police Department to apply for a grant from Target through their Law Enforcement Grant Program. The Police Department was notified that it had been awarded a grant in the amount of $1,000. The purpose of this grant is to purchase weather and alert radios to be distributed to all senior citizens on the Police Department “Senior Citizen List”, and WHEREAS, The City Council desires to recognize the grant revenues and authorize the related expenditure appropriation within the police department operating budget. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWTON, NORTH CAROLINA, THAT: THE FOLLOWING SOURCE OF REVENUE AND APPROPRIATION ARE HEREBY APPROVED. Section 1 General Fund Revenues Special Project Contributions/Other Grants

11.0000.3845

$1,000

11.4310.5280

$1,000

Section 2 General Fund Appropriations Crime Prevention/Program Supplies

Adopted this 17th day of January, 2012.

Anne P. Stedman, Mayor _______ Amy S. Falowski, City Clerk

CITY OF NEWTON REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: January 10, 2012 TO: E. Todd Clark, City Manager FROM: Max Sigler, Planner CONSIDERATION OF: Rezoning Application #2011-04

Approved for Council Consideration ______________________________

Property Owner:

Marvelle Price Rezoning Application by Albert Kennedy

Location:

2223 Indian Trail 1 parcel with the area of 2.85 acres located approximately 1400 feet to the Southwest of the intersection of Indian Trail and Smyre Farm Road.

Request:

EM-1, Exclusive Manufacturing Manufacturing District

District

M-1,

General

Summary The Property is located within the Extra Territorial Jurisdiction of the City of Newton. The request is to rezone approximately 2.85 acres from EM-1, Exclusive Manufacturing District, to an M-1, General Manufacturing District. The site is currently undeveloped. Consistency and Conclusion The proposed request is consistent with the 2008 Southeast Area Planâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Future Land Use Map (see attached Future Land Use map). The property for which the applicant is applying for the rezoning is located within the Southeast Industrial District (Attached Economic Development Map). The plan and the associated map document do not differentiate between the Exclusive and General Manufacturing Districts.

M-1 general manufacturing districts. The M-1 districts provide a place for the location of manufacturing and other uses which would be incompatible with general business areas. It is intended to permit in these districts any use which is inherently obnoxious to urban areas because of noise, odors, smoke, light, dust or the use of dangerous material. EM-1 exclusive manufacturing districts. The EM-1 districts are intended to accommodate the exclusive use of land and structures for manufacturing purposes. The districts are established to provide for and maintain manufacturing areas and to prohibit the intrusion of incompatible uses. It is not intended to permit in these districts any use which is inherently obnoxious to urban areas, because of noise, odors, smoke, light, dust or the use of dangerous materials. Please see attached land use list. Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: The area surrounding the site is currently a mix of vacant land and industrial. The parcel adjoining the applicant’s parcel to the North is zoned M-1 and was rezoned in 1994 from an EM-1 classification. The surrounding land is zoned EM-1 and M-1. Please see the attached zoning map. Zoning

Landuse

Subject North

EM-1 Exclusive Manufacturing M-1 General Manufacturing

Vacant Mid-State Contractors Inc.

South East

EM-1 EM-1

Exclusive Manufacturing Exclusive Manufacturing

Vacant Sherrill Furniture Company

West

EM-1

Exclusive Manufacturing

Vacant

Zoning History: 1982

Subject Site Zoned Exclusive Manufacturing

1994

#3-94 – Mid-State Contractors, 2260 Indian Trail. Rezoned from an EM-1 to an M-1 District.

2011

RZ2011-01 – Hmong Christian Life Center. The property at 1175 Smyre Farm Road was rezoned from an EM-1 to an R-20.

Transportation: There will be minimal impact on the surrounding transportation network. Average daily traffic counts for Smyre Farm Road are as follows:

Year of Count:

Smyre Farm Road:

2001 2003 2005 2007 2009

2,000 2,100 2,500 2,500 2,500

Utilities: The site will utilize a well and septic system

Public Notice: Public notice for this rezoning case been performed as follows: Newspaper: published on January 6th and January 13th, 2012 Sign posted on-site: posted December 2nd, 2011 Mailed notices: sent notice to 16 property owners on January 6th, 2012 (Attached)

Recommendation: It is the Newton Planning Commissionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s recommendation that the Newton City Council approve the application as requested as the application was found to be in compliance with the intent and policies the Southeast Area Plan adopted by the City Council in 2008.

Minutes Newton Planning Commission December 14, 2011 Council Chambers City Hall The regular meeting of the Newton Planning Commission was held at 7:00 p.m. on December 14, 2011 in the Council Chambers at City Hall. Members Present: Jim Granny Donnie Setzer Mark Stalnaker Stan Gabriel Ken Simmons Jim Smith Melinda Travis Members Absent: none

Staff Present: Glenn Pattishall, AICP, Planning Director/Asst. City Manager Alex Fulbright, AICP, Assistant Planning Director Max Sigler, Planner Rob Powell, Community Development Coordinator Todd Clark, City Manager

Item 1:

Call to Order

Chairman Simmons called the meeting to order and requested that Mr. Pattishall introduce a new member of the Planning Commission. Mr. Pattishall introduced Mrs. Melinda Travis as an ETJ member of the Planning Commission. Mr. Todd Clark, City Manager requested to speak to the Planning Commission about Glenn Pattishallâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s upcoming retirement. He stated that he appreciated Glennâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s professionalism and service with the City. He explained the process that would be used to select a new planning director. He also took a moment to thank the Planning Commission for all that they do. Mr. Simmons thanked Mr. Clark and presented Mr. Pattishall a card that was signed by all the members of the Planning Commission. Mr. Pattishall expressed his gratitude for the card.

Item 2:

Consideration of Minutes November 22, 2011 Meeting

Chairman Simmons asked for consideration of the minutes of the November 22, 2011 meeting. There being no corrections or additions, Chairman Simmons ruled that the minutes were approved as presented.

Item 3a:

Public Hearing â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Text Amendment 2011-05 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Temporary Signs

Chairman Simmons called to order a Public Hearing as scheduled and advertised, and recognized Mr. Glenn Pattishall to make a presentation to the Planning Commission. Mr. Pattishall stated that at the November 15, 2011 City Council meeting, the Council by consensus directed staff to request that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing on a proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment concerning temporary signs. Mr. Pattishall explained that the Planning Commission took up the matter for a second time in 2011 at its September meeting as a result of the Mayor making a personal appearance and asking the Planning Commission to reconsider the matter, and after considerable discussion directed staff to prepare additional information on the matter for continued discussion at its October meeting. The Commission at its October meeting reviewed the additional information requested and after lengthy deliberation voted in favor of keeping the existing ordinance with no changes. Mr. Pattishall went on to explain that in order for this or any amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to be adopted under the Newton City Code, it must first be considered during a public hearing by the Planning Commission who must make a recommendation on the proposed ordinance and then considered during a public hearing held by Council before it may be adopted by Council. Any deviation from this protocol would result in an invalid ordinance. Mr. Pattishall stated that the proposed ordinance would allow temporary signs, balloons, aerial signs or banners may be erected for a period not to exceed seven (7) days for the purpose of announcing commercial and non-commercial openings, closings, management changes, special events and sales. There shall be no limit to the number or location where such signs may be placed including street rights of way provided such signs do not create a hazard to public safety. Mr. Pattishall then recapped the Planning Commission concerns that were expressed in the past about proposed ordinance, which were that there would be no limits to the number of signs, that the time limit would be difficult to enforce with no permit, and that buy not regulating the number or the location that the proposal would lead to visual clutter. Mr. Simmons asked if there were any questions. Mr. Simmons stated that he did not want signs in his neighborhood and that under the proposal presented that temporary signs could be placed on any street in the City. He commented that the Planning Commission has considered the issue two times already and each time voted unanimously against amending the current ordinance. With no further discussion, Chairman Simmons closed the Public Hearing and asked for a motion. A Motion was made by Mr. Jim Granny, second by Mr. Jim Smith to recommend

that the City Council not approve the proposed changes and that the sign ordinance remain unchanged. There was no discussion on the motion, and the motion carried 7 to 0. Item 3b:

Public Hearing â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Rezoning Application 2011-04 - Albert Kennedy

Chairman Simmons called to order a Public Hearing as scheduled and advertised, and recognized Mr. Sigler who read from his December 7, 2011 memo. He stated that the property was owned by Marvelle Price and is located at 2223 Indian Trail. The property was 2.85 acres, approximately 1400 feet to the Southwest of the intersection of Indian Trail and Smyre Farm Road. The request was to rezone the property from and existing EM-1, Exclusive Manufacturing District to an M-1, General Manufacturing District. He then recommended that the Planning Commission approve the application as requested because the application is in compliance with the intent and policies the Southeast Area Plan adopted by the City Council in 2008. Mr. Smith asked about the applicantâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s intent. Mr. Sigler explained that the applicant has expressed interest in operating a truck repair garage on the site; however, any use allowed in the M-1 General Manufacturing District would be permitted if the request were approved. Mr. Mark Stalnaker asked about what types of the uses would be allowed if the request was approved. Mr. Alex Fulbright listed uses that could be allowed if the request was approved and explained that the asphalt plant adjacent to the site was also zoned M-1. Chairmen Simmons asked Mr. Albert Kennedy, applicant if he would like to speak. Mr. Kennedy approached the commission and explained that he intended to build a 3 bay garage, which could eventually be expanded in the future if need. He went on to explain that the property was great for his needs. Mr. Stalnaker asked about the access to the site. Mr. Kennedy explained that he would use Indian Trail and Wagon Wheel Road to access the property. Mr. Smith asked Mr. Kennedy about what function would the facility serve. Mr. Kennedy explained that he would perform the regular maintenance on his fleet of truck such as changing the oil, replacing brakes, and similar maintenance related task. There was conversation about the asphalt plant and the noise that it produces and that grouping obnoxious uses would be desired if possible as opposed to spreading out the intense manufacturing uses. Mr. Kennedy stated that his garage would be quieter than the asphalt plant.

Mr. Stalnaker asked if the Church that was recently the subject of a nearby zoning request was notified of the public hearing. Mr. Sigler stated that they were notified as required. With no further discussion, Chairman Simmons closed the Public Hearing and asked for a motion. A motion was made by Mr. Granny, second by Mr. Stalnaker to recommend that the City Council approve the request as presented. There was no discussion on the motion, and the motion carried 7 to 0.

Item 3c:

Public Hearing – Rezoning Application 2011-05 - Catawba County

Chairman Simmons called to order a Public Hearing as scheduled and advertised, and recognized Mr. Fulbright. Mr. Fulbright read from his memo dated December 9, 2011. He stated that the property was located at 100 Southwest Blvd and is owned by Catawba County. The property is physically located on Southwest Boulevard at the Southwest corner of the intersection of Southwest Boulevard and Radio Station Road. The applicant Catawba County is requesting to rezone the property from the existing R-20 Single Family Residential District to a PD-O&I Planned Development Office and Institutional District. The property is currently being used for the County Government Center Complex and it will continue to be used as such. Mr. Fulbright explained that the intent of the rezoning was to allow for the County to have more flexibility over what can occur on the site and eliminate the need to amend the current special use permit which was approved in 1977. The original special use permit has been amend several times since. Mr. Jackie Eubanks, County Planning Director explained the site plan to the planning commission and expressed their desire to have a master plan to accommodate their future needs. The planning commission expressed concerns about the adjoining neighborhood and need for a buffer to be maintained. It was explained the site plan shows the extent of development on the site and would have to be amended if there was substantial changes. Mr. Todd Clark, City Manager discussed the site plan and its relation to the City’s Heritage Trail Greenway. He explained that the site plan shows a parking area that would be used to provide parking for users of the greenway. Mr. Stan Gabriel expressed concerns about the traffic along Radio Station Road. Mr. Fulbright responded that while the site plan shows new components that does not mean that the amount of trips generated by the facility would increase at the same rate. It will provide more space for existing activities that are currently occurring. He also explained that staff has expressed concerns about the government center’s driveway on Radio Station Road to the North Carolina Department of Transportation. These discussions were the driving reason that created the driveway at the maintenance facility, which serves the detention facility on the site. He also explained that the topography and the historic stack rock wall near the original driveway on Radio Station Road limits what could be done to improve the situation.

Mr. Eubanks concurred with Mr. Fulbright and stated that looping the access road and connecting it to the newer driveway could improve the situation. He explained that the second driveway on Radio Station Road was created when the Western Piedmont Transit Authority was looking at locating a maintenance facility on the Countyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s property. With no further discussion, Chairman Simmons closed the Public Hearing and asked for a motion. Motion made by Mr. Stalnaker, second by Mr. Granny to recommend that the City Council approve the request as presented with the exception that any major modification to the plan is brought before the Planning Commission and that public hearings are held. There was no discussion on the motion, and the motion carried 7 to 0.

Item 4:

Old Business Presentation of Draft â&#x20AC;&#x201C; B-1 Discussion

Chairman Simmons recognized Mr. Fulbright. Mr. Fulbright reminded the Planning Commission that there would be a public meeting held at the January Planning Commission meeting and that notices would be sent to the residents in the North Rankin Avenue and East 20th Street Area. Item 5:

New Business

None Item 6:

Reports

Mr. Fulbright reviewed the monthly departmental reports for November 2011. Item 7:

Training

Mr. Fulbright spoke to the Planning Commission about the stormwater permit that was recently approved. He reminded the Planning Commission of their duties as the stormwater advisory board and discussed the actions that would be needed to comply with the permit over the next five (5) years. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted,

Alex S. Fulbright/AICP Recording Secretary

CITY OF NEWTON REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: January 11, 2012 TO: E. Todd Clark, City Manager FROM: Alex Fulbright, AICP, Assistant Planning Director CONSIDERATION OF: Rezoning Application #2011-05

Approved for Council Consideration ______________________________

Property Owners:

Catawba County

Applicant:

Catawba County

Location:

100 Southwest Blvd The property is located on Southwest Boulevard at the Southwest corner of the intersection of Southwest Boulevard and Radio Station Road.

Request:

R-20 Single Family Residential District to a PD-O&I Planned Development Office and Institutional District.

Summary The Property is located within the City of Newton. The area requested to be rezoned is approximately 115 acres from R-20, Single Family Residential, to PD-O&I Planned Development Office and Institutional District. Consistency and Conclusion The 1988 Land Development Plan indicates the property as being residential. The current use is allowed as special use in the R-20 District. The request is not a change of use, but changing the zoning to facilitate the development of the Countyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s property without utilizing the special use permit process. See attached land development plan map.

Surrounding Zoning and Land Use:

Subject North South

East West

Zoning

Landuse

R-20 Single Family Residential PD-MX Planned Development Mixed Use

Government Center Complex Court Street Commons

R-20

Assisted Living Facility and Residential

Single Family Residential

B-4 General Business R-20 Single Family Residential R-11 Single Family Residential B-4 General Business R-20 Single Family Residential

Restaurant Residential Residential Bowling, general commercial, & bank offices Residential

R-20

Residential

Single Family Residential

Zoning History: The site has been zoned R-20 Single family residential dating back to 1982. This campus is home to the Government Center, the Justice Center, the Sheriffâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Department, Vehicle Facility Maintenance, childcare homes, and an animal shelter. The original special use permit was granted in 1977 and has been amended over the years to include some of the above uses, most recently the Charter Communications substation on Radio Station Road and an operation and maintenance facility for Piedmont Wagon Transit System. Transportation: Southwest Boulevard is a major arterial. The cross section is five-lane urban thoroughfare. Average daily traffic counts are as follows: Year of Count

Volume

2003 2005 2007 2009

23,000Vehicles per Day 21,000 22,000 19,000

Radio Station road is a collector street. The cross section is two-lane rural with shoulder and swales. Average daily traffic counts are as follows: Year of Count

Volume

2003 2005 2007 2009

4,800 Vehicles per Day 4,700 5,100 4,700

Utilities: City water, sewer, and electric are available to the site.

Public Notice: Public notice for this rezoning case been performed as follows: Newspaper: published on January 6th and January 13th, 2012 (Attached) Sign posted on-site: posted December 2, 2011 Mailed notices: 164 letters sent January 6th, 2012 Comment: A copy of the application, site plan, and supporting information is attached for the City Councilâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s perusal.

Recommendation: It is the Newton Planning Commissionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s recommendation that the Newton City Council approve the application as requested

CITY OF NEWTON REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: January 13, 2012 TO: E. Todd Clark, City Manager FROM: Alex Fulbright, Assistant Planning Director CONSIDERATION OF: Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment 2011 - 05

Approved for Council Consideration ______________________________

Background: In early spring of 2011 the City Manager, at the request of the Mayor, asked that the Planning Commission study the existing ordinance as it relates to temporary signs located within public road right of ways. Planning Commission took the matter up at its June 2011 meeting (see attached memo June 21, 2011). They heard a report from me explaining our Ordinance and giving background to the Planning Commission as to the various portions of the City Code and other regulations enforced by the DOT with regard to signs in the public rights of way. The Planning Commission determined at that meeting to take no action to make any changes to the Zoning Ordinance. The Mayor made an appeal to the Planning Commission at its August 2011 meeting to reconsider its position with regard to the temporary signs. At the subsequent September and October meetings, the Planning Commission took the matter up (see September 22, 2011 memo and October 6, 2011 memo attached). The Planning Commission determined at its October 25th meeting that it would not recommend any changes to the Zoning Ordinance with regard to temporary signs or signs in right of way (see attached minutes October 25, 2011 Planning Commission Meeting). Review: As outlined in the September 22, 2011 memo to the Planning Commission the Mayor had requested that the Planning Commission consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance that would allow an unlimited number of on and off premise signs to be placed anywhere, including city property and street rights of way. This would include residential zoning districts. In

addition, he requested that a time limit for temporary signs be set at seven days; however no permit would be required for these signs. The proposed draft ordinance to be considered by the City Council was considered at the December 14, 2011 Planning Commission Meeting, wherein the Planning Commission voted unanimously to not recommend adoption of the attached ordinance. The Planning Commission indicated that their reasons for not recommending any changes are that there are prohibitions against signs in public rights of way on state maintained roads, that not requiring permits would make it difficult to enforce, and that allowing temporary signs anywhere would create a clutter issue throughout the city and diminish the aesthetic appeal of the city. Recommendation: The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of the proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment (attached) at its December 14, 2011 meeting.

Ordinance 2011-__ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES FOR THE CITY OF NEWTON, NORTH CAROLINA BE IT ORDAINED, BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWTON, NORTH CAROLINA, THAT: Section 1. Section 102-341 “Intent” of Chapter 102 “Zoning” of the Newton City code shall be amended by deleting Section 102-341 in its entirety and inserting a new Section 102-341 to read as follows: Sec. 102-341. Intent. It is the general intent of this article to prohibit permanent signs of commercial or noncommercial nature in districts in which commerce is barred; to limit permanent signs in the commercial districts in relation to the intensity of the use of the district and its surroundings; and to control the number, area and location of permanent signs in other districts and to ensure that all permanent signs and supports are properly secured and located upon buildings, under canopies or roof overhangs or on properties so as to minimize potential danger to the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the city and its planning area. These regulations are designed, among other purposes, to stabilize and protect property values, maintain the visual attractiveness of the city and its environs and promote public safety. Section 2. Subsection 102-348(a)”Signs not requiring permit” of Section 102-348 “Temporary Signs” of Chapter 102 “Zoning’ of the Newton City Code shall be amended by adding a new subsection (a)(4) to read as follows: (4) Temporary signs, balloons, aerial signs or banners may be erected for a period not to exceed seven (7) days for the purpose of announcing commercial and non-commercial openings, closings, management changes, special events and sales. There shall be no limit to the number or location where such signs may be placed including street rights of way provided such signs do not create a hazard to public safety. Section 3. Subsection 102-348 (b) “Signs Requiring Permit” of Section 102-348 ”Temporary Signs” of Chapter 102 “Zoning” of the Newton City Code shall be amended by deleting Subsection 102-348 (b) in its entirety and inserting a new Subsection 102-348 (b) to read as follows: (b) Signs requiring permit. The following temporary signs require a zoning clearance permit:

(1) Temporary signs for the sale of produce, Christmas trees, crafts, seafood or similar items sold on a seasonal or temporary basis shall not exceed 32 square feet in area or six feet in height. Only one such sign per temporary business shall be erected and shall be safely affixed the ground or a permanent structure on the lot. A copy of the peddler’s license for the temporary business shall be included in the permit application and the permit shall be

kept at the business site. Such signs shall be removed within seven days of the termination of sale activities. Such signs shall not be placed in any street right of way. (2) Two temporary off-premises signs directing construction traffic during the construction period of a new business. Such signs may not exceed six square feet in area or three feet in height, shall be limited to one sign per zoning lot with the written permission of the property owner, may not be located in any residential or office district, may be located in required yards and must be removed upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy. (3) Trailer signs. A-frame signs or signs on vehicles or electrified signs shall not be permitted to be used as temporary signs. Section 4. This ordinance shall become effective from and after the date of its adoption. Adopted this the __ day of __________, 2011.

Robert A. Mullinax, Mayor

Amy S. Falowski, City Clerk

67 Yes

Yes

$25

Yes

Banner Elk

Yes

Asheville

* - Temporary sign bond (refundable)

Does your jurisdiction regulate the number of temporary signs that can be placed within your jurisdiction by a business or entity? Does your jurisdiction limit the duration in which a temporary sign can be displayed?

Does your jurisdiction limit the size of temporary signs allowed?

Does your jurisdiction allow temporary signs to be placed within rights-ofways? Does your jurisdiction limit the location in which temporary signs can be placed?

If so what is the fee any?

Does your jurisdiction allow temporary signs? Does your jurisdiction require a permit for temporary signs?

Boone Yes

Yes

Catawba County Yes

Yes/N o

Yes

Yes/N o

Yes

Conover

Yes

Florence Yes

Yes

$25

Yes

Franklin Yes

Yes

$40

Yes

Gates County No

Yes

Hickory

Hillsborough

Yes

$55 + $0/$7 $20 $1 per 5 day

Yes

$28.2 5

Yes

Lake Lure

Yes

Lenoir

Yes

Lincoln County No

Yes

Maiden No

yes

Yes

Mathews

Temporary Signs Survey Summary New Hanover County Yes

Yes

$45

Yes

Newton Yes

Yes

$50*

Yes

Raeford Yes

Yes

Siler City Yes

Yes

Sugar Mountain Yes

Yes

$25

Yes

SummerField Yes

Yes

$50

Yes

Waxhaw Yes

Yes

$11

Yes

Wendell Yes

Yes

$10

Yes

Wilmington Yes

Yes

$30

Yes

Wilsonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Mills Yes

Yes

Whispering Pines

Item 1: Call to Order Chairman Simmons called the meeting to order and requested that Mr. Pattishall introduce a new member of the Planning Commission. Mr. Pattishall introduced Mrs. Melinda Travis as an ETJ member of the Planning Commission. Mr. Todd Clark, City Manager requested to speak to the Planning Commission about Glenn Pattishallâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s upcoming retirement. He stated that he appreciated Glennâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s professionalism and service with the City. He explained the process that would be used to select a new planning director. He also took a moment to thank the Planning Commission for all that they do. Mr. Simmons thanked Mr. Clark and presented Mr. Pattishall a card that was signed by all the members of the Planning Commission. Mr. Pattishall expressed his gratitude for the card. Item 2: Consideration of Minutes November 22, 2011 Meeting

Chairman Simmons asked for consideration of the minutes of the November 22, 2011 meeting. There being no corrections or additions, Chairman Simmons ruled that the minutes were approved as presented.

Item 3a:

Public Hearing â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Text Amendment 2011-05 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Temporary Signs

Item 3b:

Public Hearing â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Rezoning Application 2011-04 - Albert Kennedy

motion. A motion was made by Mr. Granny, second by Mr. Stalnaker to recommend that the City Council approve the request as presented. There was no discussion on the motion, and the motion carried 7 to 0.

Item 3c:

Public Hearing – Rezoning Application 2011-05 - Catawba County

motion. Motion made by Mr. Stalnaker, second by Mr. Granny to recommend that the City Council approve the request as presented with the exception that any major modification to the plan is brought before the Planning Commission and that public hearings are held. There was no discussion on the motion, and the motion carried 7 to 0.

Item 4:

Old Business Presentation of Draft â&#x20AC;&#x201C; B-1 Discussion

New Business

None Item 6:

Reports

Mr. Fulbright reviewed the monthly departmental reports for November 2011. Item 7:

Training

Alex S. Fulbright/AICP Recording Secretary

CITY OF NEWTON REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: January 17, 2012 TO: E. Todd Clark, City Manager FROM: Wilce Martin, Director of Public Works and Utilities CONSIDERATION OF: Closure of the City Compost Facility

Approved for Council Consideration ______________________________ Background: The City of Newton obtained a permit from the State of North Carolina in 2008 to operate a Land Clearing and Inert Debris Landfill (LCID) on 65 acres of land on Boston Road. The cost to construct the landfill that was going to be built for the purpose of accepting debris generated by the city and contractors of the city was estimated at $360,000. Over the next couple of years it was apparent that an LCID was not needed since it became clear that Catawba County would receive clean concrete and asphalt for free at the County Landfill. Consequently, the City obtained a modified permit from the State in 2010 that would allow the City to dispose of leaves collected within Newton. On December 1, 2011 a North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) inspector made a site visit to the compost facility. As a result of this inspection, the City was cited for not having an approved erosion control plan or sufficient measures in place to prevent erosion. The corrective measures required by the inspector were to complete an erosion control plan for the site by December 15, 2011and install silt fencing around the entire two acre site at an estimated cost of $1,120. In addition, the City would have to construct an all-weather access road for fire protection at an estimated cost of $22,970. While construction of a silt pond is not presently required, the staff believes this may be a requirement at a later time. In consideration of these requirements, the City staff contacted DENR to request an extension of time for the purpose of determining whether or not the city wanted to continue the compost operation. DENR agreed to an extension of time to allow the staff to review this matter and discuss it with City Council. Review: The current expense of building an all-weather road and installing silt fencing is estimated to cost $24,090 which is not included within the current budget. With the continued new requirements that are being issued by the Federal Government, staff believes that it is just a matter of time before the city will be required to install a silt pond estimated at a cost of $35,000,

and to also perform testing on the silt pond overflow at an underdetermined cost. The cost of testing is presumed to be costly however since the samples will have to be sent out to a commercial laboratory. If the City decides to close the landfill, DENR will require the City to haul all of the leaves and any other debris on the site to the landfill. The chippings can still be given away or hauled to the landfill. Once the site is cleared and reseeded, DENR will do a final inspection and approve the closure. Staff does not believe the current and future cost of maintaining the landfill is worth the benefit of using the site only for the disposal of leaves. The estimated cost to haul leaves and mulch to the County Landfill is approximately $9,000 per year. This includes the cost for fuel and tipping fees. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council authorize staff to proceed with closure of the City Compost Facility.