County Commissioners - Regular Meeting

20th, 2026 Carter County Board of Commissioners meeting. Commissioner Clark, will you lead us in a pledge of allegiance? Yes, sir. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. County manager, can you lead us in the invocation?

I'd be happy to. Thank you. Let us pray. Dear heavenly father, thank you so much for all of your blessings, for your healing, for your strength, for your wisdom. Thank you for allowing us to live in this beautiful place that we all call home. Please be with our elected leaders tonight and those that are in the audience. Bring us wisdom and discernment tonight. Help us to make good decisions for our community. In Jesus name we pray. Amen.

Amen. In accordance with the state government ethics act, it is a duty of every board member to avoid both conflicts of interest and the appearance of conflict. Does any board member have any known conflict of interest or the appearance of conflict with respect to any matter coming before the board this evening? If so, please identify the conflict and refrain from any undue participation in a particular matter involved. Mr. Mr. Chairman, I would like to uh when it's time for the item that is currently now, item number eight, um to excuse myself due to reasons of appearance of a conflict. Is there a motion to excuse Vice Chairman Mansfield on item number eight?

Motion by Commissioner Clark, seconded by Commissioner Moore. All in favor? You're excused. You want say about the cell phones and devices real quick? If everybody will silence your cell phone and uh iPads and all that stuff. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion to amend the agenda as presented. Um after reading the booklet and looking at the much discussion there was on item number seven. I would like to move it to item number nine. Move item number eight up to number seven and item number nine up to number eight.

All right. Is there a motion to approve the agenda as amended? We need we need a second to that motion. Second. Seconded by commissioner vote on that first. Waldruff. All in favor? All right. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion to approve the amended agenda. All right. Is there a second? Second. Seconded by Commissioner Clark. All in favor? That passes. I'll make a motion to adopt the uh consent agenda item number four.

All right. All in favor of the consent agenda. There's a second. Seconded by Commissioner Walden. All in favor. All right. Next, we will have the recognition of the Jamie Hicks Long Employee of the Month for January, February, and March, Mr. Nick Wilson.

Okay. Thank you, commissioners. And um so good evening everyone. Tonight, we're here to recognize the recipients of the Jamie Hicks Long uh employee of the month award for the first quarter of 2026. Uh this award honors employees who go above and beyond and their jobs and make a real difference in Carter County serves our in our community. Each month, the departments nominee nominate employees who show strong dedication, leadership, and commitment to public service. Tonight, we're proud to recognize three employees whose work supports their teams, their departments, and the residents of Carter County. So, we're going to first start with our January honore, Carol Lynn Bulock, uh, income maintenance supervisor for DSS. Carol Lynn supervises teams that determine eligibility for public assistance programs. It's a complicated job that requires a strong understanding of state policies while also helping people in our community who need support. With more than 30 years of service at DSS, Carolyn is someone who the department can always rely on. She's also she is known for as a problem solver who does not give up on when a policy question is difficult. She will research the issue and even contact the state when needed to make sure she gets the right answer. Her knowledge helps her team feel confident in her work and she is always looking for ways to keep the office organized and running smoothly. Caroline often reminds her team that we are eligibility workers, not ineligibility workers. The idea guides the way she approaches her jobs. She works hard to make sure clients receive their benefits they qualify for and she treats everyone with fairness and compassion. Her leadership is especially important during the LEAP rush. Uh this program helps families pay their heating bills throughout the month throughout the winter months. When the number of applications increases, Carolyn jumps in to help process them so her team does not get too overwhelmed and her family and their families can receive help quickly. Beyond her daily

work, Caroline is also known as the heart of the office. She makes sure her co-workers feel appreciated by celebrating birthdays, leaving encouraging notes, decorating their workspace, and sometimes bringing in treats. She cares about her team and works hard to make sure every client receives the help that they need. So, for her leadership, dedication, and compassion, we are proud to recognize Carolyn Bulock as the January Janu Jamie Hicks Long Employee OF THE MONTH. JUST HANG UP THERE.

All right. So, next we're going to rec recognize our February honore, Eddie Lewis, our county fire marshall with emergency services. Eddie has served our community since 2000 and has more than 40 years of experience in the fire service. Whether he's working in the office or responding to an emergency, Eddie is known for staying calm and make making thoughtful decisions. He's a strong he has a strong ability to look at difficult situations and find practical solutions. At the same time, he manages many responsibilities and keeps track of the details that help the department stay organized and effective. and he's also committed to mentoring new firefighters and staff members. He takes the time to share his experience and knowledge to help others grow into competent professionals. His leadership strengthens the department and helps ensure that Carter County continues to provide excellent emergency services. Throughout his career, Eddie has received several commendations for his service. He has also played an important role in a countywide emergency preparedness efforts. As county fire marshal, Eddie's work also ref affects residents throughout the county. He leads fire investigations and often assists municipalities when they need help determining the cause of a fire. He also works with the public to teach fire prevention and help residents protect their homes and families. Recently, Eddie served as our interim emergency services director, providing a steady leadership during a time of transition for the department. His co-workers describe him as dependable, approachable, and always willing to help others succeed. So, for his dedication and leadership in protecting our community, we're proud to recognize Eddie Lewis as the February employee of the month. CONGRATULATIONS. All right. Finally, we're going to recognize our March honore, uh, Jason Brim. He's a facility maintenance supervisor with our general services department. Jason has recently promoted

to his leadership role where he oversees the daily maintenance of our county buildings and coordinates repair projects to keep our facility safe and working properly. His background in construction has made him an important member of our team. One recent project Jason led was the renovation of the new veteran services office. Jason is Jason and his team installed a new service counter and reception area, updated the workspace, and improved the HVAC system to increase air flow in the building. They completed all the work on a tight schedule so the veteran sta services staff could move into their new location on time. Jason is known for being dependable and willing to step up when needed. Recently, he stayed after hours to help test the backup generator at generator at the 911 dispatch center and help helped solve a power line issue at the courthouse. His skills also helped save tax dollars. Um, when the health department needed custom barn doors, they were available for purchase, Jason designed and built them himself so they would fit the space perfectly. From repairing the drop box at the Down East Library to fixing ceilings at the Superior Court Judges Chambers, Jason consistently delivers high quality work. We often receive compliments of about his craft craftsmanship and his professional attitude. So for this dedication and important work he does for the county, we're proud to recognize Jason for the March employee of the month. Thank you all very much.

Thank you, Jason. Congratulations.

Keep Thomas right back there. Okay, next we have public comment and there's several people have signed up here and they want to speak about certain issues that we have actually on the agenda item. So, if you'll wait to speak to those when that item comes up. Uh, the fire ordinance is one and then the reszoning on Highway 24 and then the other reasonzoning. So, is there anyone that would like to speak on general topics not pertaining to those three?

Yes, ma'am. Gracie Bender. No. Come on. Give your name and address and you have three minutes to address the board.

Do your best. Okay. Thank you. My name is Gracie Bender and I'm the executive director at the History Museum of Carter County, also covered under Carter County um historical society. And so the two things that I wanted to mention and first I do want to say thank you for allowing me to speak tonight on behalf of those two organizations. We do share a common purpose with you. Preserving the story of Carter County. At the museum we work to collect and protect and share our county's history and your leadership ensures the quality of life that makes those stories possible. We are truly grateful for your past support. First, I respectfully ask for your consideration of our safety and security grant. I know um Mr. Chadwick, you had said, you know, as long as it doesn't involve money, but I was hoping to come with a green pen tonight, but anyway. Okay. So, um, but I do respectfully request that that the money that we've requested for the security and safety, um, for the history museum of Carter County that is in your grant process that I hope my speaking to it tonight underscores its importance and our doors and windows greatly um, urgently need repair to protect the Carter County collection that's entrusted to us. And I can give you more information later if you need um, with questions or whatever. Second, as part of the America 250 planning committee, which thank you very much. Last January, you made uh Carter County Historical Society and the History Museum of Carter County the uh chair for that committee. So, we are have been planning for the last year a 250th celebration, countywide celebration for Carter County. And as part of that planning committee alongside, it's not just me, the Bowford Historical Association, the Daughters of the American Revolution,

Fort Hancock Chapter, North Carolina Maritime Museum, Carter County Library, and the Carter at News Times. We You still got

I got a minute. Okay. We ask that you consider supporting our Momento Boat Project. We're requesting $3,000 to provide the first 300 children and adults with small wooden boats to assemble and decorate at the countywide celebration which is held on June 20th which will be held on June 20th, 2026 at the Crystal Coast Civic Center from 12 to 6. We have invited all municipalities to participate and we hope each town will join us. Every community has a story and every story matters. So, thank you for your time and for all you do, and I'm happy to take any questions or meet with you at a different time. Thank you,

Mr. Jerry Height, did you want to speak on something other than the reasonzoning? Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, ladies and gentlemen. I All the little kids have left. I was born and raised in Carter County 88 plus years ago. I have been coming to this courthouse, the Department of Transportation in Newport, the Department of Transportation in Yubert, and I finally realized it ain't a damn soul care. So I went to the Department of Transportation in Greenville about our road that I helped build 1961 north of Barnesfield where Henry's Tackle Shop, Cartic Craraven Electric, and Hankinson Corp. Hankinson and Henry Tackle Shop went from Highway Commercial over in R15M and extended their business out since then. in this very house here several months ago. Y'all approved a business in another R15M and I'm tickled to death. The young man had a lot of people working and what he said was, "We go out early in the morning with our landscaping equipment and we come back late in the evening." Well, that was true. They were speeding. They slowed down after they left the meeting, but somewhere along the line, y'all approved it. And now they have dump trucks in and out all day long, five days a week, tad them and triacle dump trucks where someone is digging mud

out of the river and dumping it on their property on the same road that I have been trying to get the state to fix for 61 years. 61 years ago it road system was a lot different third class road it had to have marl on it bars construction kinson he put the marl on Mr. Barnes's road that road from the highway to the sound is over 7500 ft Mr. Barn married RJ Reynolds daughter plenty of money 3/4 of a mile on the north a half a mile on the south side of 24 and a half a mile on the north side of 24. Went to Greenville, knocked on the door, the lady let me in. I explained her the situation and I was telling her again because every now and then I repeat myself. You know how it is. Make sure everybody gets everything. And then in came a big fella. He had arms, shoulders like that. I'm gonna call him Santa Claus because I forgot what his name was. But so help me Christ in less than two weeks after telling him the problem here was the state dump trucks, a motorgrader and a roller. That road had been on 61 years. I get a little bit more time. That road had been on the system for 61 years and they did nothing. Newport did nothing because they answer somewhere else. It was Greenville at the time. Now there's two engineers taking the place of Santa Claus and kiss them. They come in and they put 400 ton of crush granite at $50 a ton. Then they came by and they

started repaving all these roads. There's nine of them, but they did not pave our last 110 yards. Repaving only. No new roads. 61 years. They want to put $1.2 billion dollar down there so you can go to the Outer Banks. Oceans washing away every day. And they want to spend that much of money. And they don't even have the money. They got to borrow it from somebody else. I know. Well, that that's the state uh that's the department of transportation. We don't have a whole lot to do with that. The county doesn't the county doesn't own any road.

Y'all tell me every time for the last 60 years, but somewhere somebody with all is said and done, this is the last time I'm coming to vow hopefully to get the letter to the governor. I know the governor ain't going to look at it, but his secretary will. And I believe she will be nice enough to pass it on to the DOT in Raleigh. All right, good luck with that. I'm sure that they will do something,

but you know, it's downright insulting across the street. I helped build one road in the early 60s, one on the south side and one on the north side. Do you know a convicted murderer got his road paved? It is a matter of record in Carter County jailhouse where Mr. Merrill murdered a man and they paved his road. You were three law abiding citizen. I know it uh un it's unfortunate we don't have anything to do with that but your three minutes is up so we're gonna have to move along to the next item. Thank you for coming back. No more.

Okay. Next on the agenda is public hearing for the proposed amendment to chapter 6 or fire presention and chapter 14 solid waste of the Clark County code of ordinances regarding outdoor burning regulations hours and proximity requirements. Mr. Eddie Lewis, our fire marshal.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and uh honorable commissioners for your time. Um I'll start out with the u burning uh North Carolina Administrative Code. Um it talks about all the rules and regulations but it does not affect the authority of any local government to regulate open burning through its fire codes or other ordinances. And in that North Carolina uh administrative code nuisance means causing physical irritation ex exasperation a documented medical condition visible impairment or evidence of s or ash on property or structure other than the property on which the burning is done. in the in the rural areas of Carter County, uh we're seeing an influx of building and development, um which is a good thing and primarily up the 24 corridor. And if you're in the county's jurisdiction, uh in North Carolina, you can burn within 100 ft of your property without a permit as long as you're burning vegetative materials that generated on your property. this ordinance, all we're asking is that if you burn within 100 ft of someone else's property that you get the permission. And um one case we had where we've been to the same uh area 13 times in the last two years, two and a half years, and they have the ability to burn, but the uh there's medical condition next door. they didn't have permission and were, you know, we sent a kid to the UNCC Chapel Hill Hospital. There's some folks here tonight that may want to speak on that, but all we're asking and basically in the ordinance is that if you burn within 100 ft of someone else's dwelling that you just simply give the permission and Mr. Joe Marlet with solid waste is here if you'd like to. He enforces our he's a great help for us in the solid waste and the burning thing. We just need a tool in the tool box for the u for the ones that we just had to keep

going over and over. We need some help in that respect. All right. Well, we'll go into a public hearing and we'll hear from Joe. Is there a motion to go into public hearing? So move. Motion by Commissioner Wald, second by Commissioner Quinn. All in favor?

All right. We are now in public hearing. Is there anybody here that would like to speak on this matter? Mr. Marlet, come on down. Hey, thank you. Uh, my name is, uh, Joe Marlet. I'm a deputy with Carter County Sheriff's Office. I respond mainly to solid waste issues and illegal burning. U, our issue we have is we don't currently have an ordinance uh, in place that we can enforce other than burning solid waste. And that's what we have proposed. pretty pretty simple deal. Uh it's it's necessary when we have situations where we respond out there 12 times and don't have anything that we can enforce as far as general statute or a uh county ordinance. Uh what we have done is been off of the NCAC administrative code, but most deputies that respond out there to it, they're looking for a general statute or they're looking for a county ordinance to enforce. And that's why we're asking you guys for uh to put in place a county ordinance that we can enforce. It's not something that we're going out there to hunt down people. Uh it's a tool that we need on our tool belt and in case we have a situation like this which became a nuisance to some folks out here. Uh we have something that we can do something with. Uh we always try to start out with warnings and try to educate folks and uh we're we're mainly out there just to uh resolve issues. This is what we need.

Thank you. Any questions? What would the uh penalty be if someone was cited for that? I would have to refer to our county uh attorney, county manager as how they would write it up. I think it would just be written as a fine initially. So this is not something that's going to be jail time. So and then they repeat offender does it the fine increase substantially? Typically like other things it would go up each time it was written. Would there still be a warning prior to the fine being issued? That would be the officer discretion and I think Joe's usually really good about that.

We always try to do a warning. When you go out there 12 and 13 times and you tell these people you can't do it, they get a permit through the uh who's who's the permits? The forest service. For service. Well, the forest service everything goes online. So, they can go and get a free permit. When there comes a problem, the forest service is not there to enforce anything. Uh I wrote a warning on this last deal and it has shut everything down. But not many folks is going to go out there and dig through NCAC and find out what you can write a warning on. We need a more clear-cut thing in our county ordinance. This only applies to a man burning within 100 ft of his neighbor's dwelling.

That's correct. And at that point, they would need to have uh permission from each one of those neighbors. So if he can burn on his property and he's over 100t away from his neighbor, he don't need any permission. That's correct. So, if you're on a halfacre lot and you're building on you're building on the back side of your lot, you typically should not be 100 ft from the structure behind you in the subdivision or to the other house on either side of you. If you're within that correct if you're out of the 100 ft zone, you're good.

Well, I mean, mo most halfacre lots are 100 by 200 roughly. That may be a little less than half. And it all it all depends on how that that parcel is. If it's a narrow and a long stretch, then it might be in violation. The 100 100 ft is the rule.

The long stretch, you could get at the back and still be okay. But but you wouldn't be able to be next to them or up close to your house because you'd be close to their house. An example would be a 100 foot wide parcel that goes uh uh 2500 feet. Uh you're not and you've got houses down both sides on both sides of you. It's a it's a tremendous danger when you're burning and you got winds and you're burning uh 25 30 feet away from a two two neighborhoods. What happens if they give us

as long as it's 100 feet, I think I'm good. But I mean, I'm just I don't I don't think if you got a lot 2500 feet long and you're burning the back of your lot, nobody's going to more than likely have built all the way back there. Most of the houses are That's right. And in this case, we looked for a spot there, but uh it didn't meet it didn't meet it.

And Deputy Marlet, this what you've got on paper for their consideration tonight mimics the North Carolina Fire Code. So, the North Carolina Administrative Code, it doesn't go any further. It doesn't It basically is is putting into cotification here what is already a rule in the state. The problem is when we send deputies out, they need something that's in one of our ordinances in order to feel comfortable most of the time to write a warning or to write a fine. So, we're not making up a new rule. The rule's been there. We're trying to give a tool to our deputies so they understand that this is a rule that applies to Carter. It always did, but it helps us if we have an ordinance.

Does that make sense? As far as the permission from property owners, is is it going to be a written form or is it just simply verbal permission? I believe we've we've put I think we put written in there. I I believe that proposed does say written. Okay. And and again 100 ft away from actual residence, not just property. My concern is with farmers needing to burn off their their fields on a regular basis. Would that necessarily become an issue? I don't think that's an issue at all. Good. Thank you.

But it is the residents, not the property. It says I believe it says occupied occupied residence. Any more questions of Joe? Is there anyone else that would like to speak? Thank you. One at a time. Come on up and state your name and address and you have three minutes.

Uh good evening commissioners. My name is Chris Williams. I live at 114 Breakwater Drive in Newport. Um um I come here to speak about what the fire marshall and and deputy Marlet have spoken about as well. A a nearby property owner has been burning materials at all hours of the night, often producing heavy smoke that enter surrounding homes through the windows and their hoax systems. This has disrupted sleep, affected families with children who have health conditions, and in some cases caused minor property damage. This is not a one-time issue. There have been over a dozen calls to fire and law enforcement and the behavior has continued despite direct instruction to stop. These this dozen calls have resulted in dozens of lost manh hours for our emergency services with no resolution. This isn't about telling someone what they can do on their property. It's about one's person's actions directly how they directly interfere with neighboring properties, their air, their health, and their ability to use their own homes. Property rights should not extend to pushing smoke into someone else's windows at two 2 in the morning. Right now, there's no clear enforceable standard that prevents this and that leaves neighbors stuck in a cycle of complaints and it puts fire and law enforcement in a position where they can resolve can show up but they can't resolve. I'm asking the board to consider the simple ordinance of prohibiting the open burning within 100 ft of another residence without the permission of that property owner with reasonable exceptions for using a grill fire pit and things of that nature. Um this approach creates a clear and measurable boundary pre presvents ongoing disputes between neighbors supports enforcement with a simple standard and still respects property rights by allowing flexibility with permission. It doesn't ban burning. It sets a boundary where your actions begin to affect someone else's home. Neighbors in the area strongly support this ordinance and

local uh fire personnel have already been as um I believe so is local uh fire. Keep going. Keep going. Okay. Um I believe this is a practical practical solution to a real and ongoing problem. It pro protects residents without overreaching and it gives your public safety teams the clarity they need. I respectfully ask you to consider this ordinance so situ like situations like this don't continue resolved in our community. Thank you for your time. Thank you Williams. Anyone else?

I'm sorry you got to wait too quick. I'm sorry. Was where which side of Breakwater you live on? The the west side or the east side? West side. So you back up to a lot in Barnesfield. back up to Brent Landing. Yeah. Okay. Between Yeah. So that that's the And that's within 100 feet of your house. That's the fire that's being on. Yes, sir. Good evening. My name is Kristen Williams. I also live at 114 Breakwater. I guess I could ask you that question.

We um we're representing not only our residents but multiple residences um within our development. Um, as a person who lives and works in Carterette County, um, I want you to just think for a minute about your house. When you go home, it's your sanctuary. It's your safe space. There's been multiple times where I've come home and had two different neighbors come out from the other side of the street to say that they called 911 because they thought our house was on fire when in fact there was burning behind our home and it looked like our backyard was on fire. The fires have um exceeded the trees um that were behind our home. For the 13 times that law enforcement, fire departments have been called, there are 20 or more times that nobody was called, where it has been tried to be resolved on our own by talking to people. Um, obviously with law enforcement talking to them, fire talking to them, things were not resolved. There needs to be some clear and concise tool where there's something that can be done. Um, we've called when we've seen fires at 2 3 in the morning above our six-foot fence. Um, and when we call, they have um a scanner. They call out, they throw something on the fire, whether they were burning things that were part of um solid waste and nonveitative. They cover it. They would run and hide. Um so that one person that was there would be like, "Oh, the fire's out. Things are fine." Everyone would go and everyone that lives in the neighborhood is stuck living with this over and over

again. So think of your own home. Think of wanting to feel safe, wanting to feel like your belongings are not going to go up in flames when you're not home or if you choose to be out of town for a day. Um, think about can you sit outside in your backyard without things flying over and landing in your yard with ash coating people's cars that come to visit. Um, I don't think that this type of tool for law enforcement and fire marshals is anything that is excessive. Um, I think it's something that is easy where you can help people that are trying to do the right thing do the right thing and people that aren't doing the right thing and trying to avoid doing the right thing have some sort of accountability. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone else? Let's speak. While he's taking the podium, if I can offer some additional information about what happens, I just wanted to let you know that it is a class three misdemeanor if you do a violation, which if you've had nothing, no prior record, is usually a fine up to $200. If it's a repeated thing, people can get community service. And if it continues, you can be sentenced to up to 20 days in jail. I just wanted to say that because earlier I said you don't go to jail. Plus court cost. I'm sure it is. It's almost always plus court cost. Nothing's $200. $200.

So yeah, but you can eventually be sent to jail if you keep doing it. So I misspoke earlier. Sorry. Go ahead, sir.

Yes. Good evening. My name is Kurt Faf. I also live in the Brickwater subdivision at 11 116. So, I'm I'm the Williams' neighbor right next door. And I don't want to pile on to what's already been discussed by Chris and Kristen. Um, I can say and one other topic that we didn't really address to was the hours of burning. From what I understand, even from the forestry department, if you are currently burning or clearing land, you can only burn from 8 in the morning to about 5 at night. and to testify. Uh there were many a times in the middle of the night we've gone to bed with a fire, no kidding, 50 feet tall bonfire, prevailing winds coming out our house. Not only do you feel a prisoner from the smoke, it's also, you know, hazardous to a healthy person's um health, but someone with asthma or COPD, it's life-threatening. But to the point of burning at night when we've called the sheriff's department and the fire department, uh, going to bed with prevailing woods towards your home, wondering whether those flames, especially in the dry conditions that we're experiencing now, whether you'll be enveloped in your sleep, in your own home, burned alive. So consider that 100 ft. I'd almost say that's even too close. And for folks, I know you're concerned about people's uh rights to burn. there's also a right to live um and actually have clean air. And I would say in the subdivision, especially we it was called rural I wouldn't say rural 24 anymore. It's getting quite built up. There's many subdivisions. We live uh in breakwater subdivision uh in between our homes and and Somerset Plantation is that BR landing road, the repeat offender. And I just want to thank Eddie Lewis and Officer Marlet. They've been great. I know they have been burning solid waste. They burned a home has burned on that property and they've been burning that piece. They finally cleared that out due to the due to the good work of these gentlemen. But um I can say it is going to bed in fear wondering if if

your property is going to be burned while you sleep. I give you back a minute. So thank you for your time. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to speak? Is there a motion to go out of public hearing? You come back up the pod real quick. Comment back up. I'm probably more than three minutes. You you we're your answer questions. You're on the clock. Long as they're answers to the questions. You can talk as long as you want.

What you got? So, I have some some major concerns that that I think all three speakers reference, but that they're doing illegal burning, and it sounds like to me they're putting it out before somebody gets there and trying to expose it. Is there not something we can do to lock them up for that? Two of those times they were burning solid waste, which was a violation of county ordinance. The other times they were burning green materials and we know what green materials do. They smoke up everything. Um I think it got to a point to where it was more of a I'mma get my neighbors back. I think that's what it was aggravate. Yes.

Well, there's there's other things going on west of that road. All the waste is and they're burning off stuff to get the metal and um that that's producing possibly a poisonous gas. That's right. I currently have the owner of the property in court for solid waste violation. Okay. That was my was my only real question. I just want to make sure that was happening. But the other times that we responded out there uh uh has not been burning solid waste. It's been burning uh Yeah. Like I said, my concern was with the illegal activity that was happening that we do have the authority making sure we're doing something. That's right. Okay, that was my only question.

I I have one additional question. They did talk about the time. The time is already addressed. The time is addressed in here as uh from uh 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. Okay. They're allowed to continue a fire, but they're not able to start a new fire at that time. I think it's supposed to be extinguished by that time. Okay. That would be tough to do on a construction when you're clearing land. Yeah, but this this is within 100 ft of a structure. If you're clearing a new subdivision, there's no structures there. I think you're allowed to It actually chairman, it actually reads you're not allowed to add material. Yeah, you're not allowed to add material and add fuel to the fire, but you don't have to put it out.

But you don't have to put it out. Material is within 100t of a residence. You ought not to. Yeah. And it depends if you're looking at the forestry stuff or or cuz they just uh I think that's what their forestry stuff shows. But forestry is not coming out and enforcing it.

I think there's probably one one of those for Carter County and maybe Carter in Craraven and they issued the permits. Uh the the the fire marshall's office don't even issue the permits. They get it through forestry, but they're not coming out enforcing their administrative code. And most deputies that roll up there never even seen administrative code. You know, they're looking for general statute or they're looking for county ordinance because that's what they're trained in at BL. That I didn't know anything about NCAC code until I went to work with Marine Patrol. So, uh, we can enforce it. It's just we'd rather have our county ordinance to do that. It's got a little bit more teeth when we go to court.

Understood. Okay. All right. If there's nothing further, is there a motion to go out of public hearing? Motion by Commissioner Moore, seconded by Commissioner Walbert. All in favor? We are now out of public hearing. Chair for clarification. That's a written permission from anybody who's 100 ft from that fire

in a occupied dwelling. They can't have a barn. A barn doesn't apply or out building. It has to be within 100 feet of their occupied dwell within 100 ft of any building in the vicinity vicinity of any residential or business. So um or any public or private school property. No, I was just concerned about multiple neighbors. I mean, so you don't have to have permission just from, for instance, you have two different neighbors here tonight. If that's what that structure fires within 100 ft of both their residents, they need to have permission from all the residents within 100 feet. That's right.

Okay. That's what I just want to make sure that's the way that it reads because I wasn't clear when I read it that any building. Yeah, but any building is not specifying how many permissions. I'm trying to make sure that all are any anyone It has to have the written permission. I mean, it says you have to have written permission, but it could be perceived as I just have to get permission from one neighbor to agree. I want to make sure anybody's within that 100 foot radius would have to have written permission. Can that be clarified more specifically in that? Yes. Anybody within that 100t, you'd have to give written permission.

Well, I'd like clarification on 100 from a building. man could have a barn to the river's property, but his house could be up here. I mean, I don't think that barn that it's not occupied. No, unless unless maybe it has livestock in it or something. It doesn't count if it's on your property. Is the definition pertain 378? It says building shall mean any structure. Speaking of that, Joe, come on to the podium again here. Building shall mean any structure enclosed and isolated by exterior walls constructed or used for residents, business, industry, or other public or private purposes or accessory there too, whether stationary or mobile.

That could be a barn. Let me let me clarify. uh within 100 ft of any building in the vicinity of any residential or business area consisting of five or more residents. Does that clear up? Got to be like a neighborhood with five or more residents. It's the same thing we have for discharging a firearm within 400 ft of a res.

That's right. uh five or more residents, businesses, farm buildings, or accommodation thereof, or within a 100 ft of any public or private school property or public park except when the building or property are in the same parcel or owned by the same person or sign written permission of all adjacent property owners. Is that correct? Basically puts anything you're burning a subdivision. That's right. This protects if you got five or more. And the same thing we did, we kind I think we kind of mirrored the uh the shooting ordinance, discharge of firearms. We just didn't put into 400 ft there. We put 100 ft.

Well, what if you got a man on Highway 70 there in Betty and he's burning in his backyard and his neighbor is within 100 ft. The ordinance wouldn't apply to him. Is there five or more well in a residence? Well, there'd be houses. There may only be three right in the road, then it may be a space. I think it ought to apply to Well, you kind of got to use a little bit of common sense there, too. I mean, if you're going to go to court, uh I I wouldn't want to take a whole strip of road down there. I would want to take like a subdivision is what I would be looking at because you're looking at the whole purpose of this thing is is not to catch multiple houses on

I said subdivision, but like Country Club Road or somewhere like that. I know it's not our ETJ. It's Yeah, that's an ETJ. wouldn't we wouldn't be responding but you've got five or more houses. That's right. It's not a specified sub. That's right. I just use that for So there is written there and there's time on there and there's the five five or more. Any more questions?

Yeah. So every time we answer a question I think we end up with another question with more. So we got a few maybe one, how do we arrive at at five houses? What was the impetus for for five houses? And my second part to that is so say you got three houses and the man in the middle lights off his neighbor to the right. But so none of this applies to burning down his house because there's not two more houses in the immediate vicinity. I mean, should it should it be rewarded to where I mean, if you're going to have an ordinance to protect these homeowners? I mean, I don't want to make things more restrictive for property owners by any means, but uh you you're following what I'm

think I think we generated the five because we mirrored the uh the shooting ordinance and we we just basically went off of that is what we did. We said five. That's that's a sensible fair uh neighborhood size. And I think that's why we went there. And if they're within 100 ft, then that would be illegal. So 100 feet's not I mean 100 feet is pretty close.

It's it's pretty close. It's pretty close. And the the strip that we we we've been dealing with uh it's been 18 yards took a rangefinders and 18 yards 6 foot six foot high fire. Uh you're 18 yards from one house. But then those houses kind of like uh Canon's Gate and and Bogue Watch, those houses are pretty close together. So if you got one, you're going to knight the other one. They're going to night the other. They're not going to meet it anywhere in there. Yeah. Back front. I don't care where you burn lot. They're ineligible. We pass this.

So not to not to keep beating it to death, but does that configuration make any difference? Does it have to be a cluster of five? Can it be five houses down the street or I mean is is that a consideration? It doesn't on our shooting ordinance. Okay. Why wouldn't you just build this this ordinance if you have two people? Yeah. Well, I guess that's where I was going. So, what I want to ask is have it just have it where it affects everybody, not five houses. All right. Vice Chairman Mansfield, is there any commissioner up here that has any opposition to this what we're talking about at all? I think it should apply to all residents within

I would like to fine-tune the ordinance and pass it on the consent agenda next month, but I would like it to address the things that everybody's talking about. I'd let under five. And if it's more than one and you're burning within 100 foot of somebody's house, you've got to have written permission because just because they have five houses together doesn't save the next person. So any one residence that someone is living in within 100 feet, they can't burn their neighbors or a business, right? And then address make sure we just fine-tune and specify that, right? If it's more than one residence within 100 feet that it spells it out more clearly. There's got to be written permission from every okay person within that 100 foot zone.

The comment I'm I was going to make is this is an ordinance change. So this is a um a more structured vote anyway. Tonight is just the public hearing. Okay. This is just to put it out there so people can think about this and talk about this. We're not going to vote on this anyway until next month. And I would recommend that you put it on regular agenda just in case. Well, I just gave you general cons. That's one of the because it is an order, right? And then if it doesn't pass unanimously next month, it has to come back on the agenda a third time so that it will pass by a majority. So, but that's because it's

I thought you were looking for a vote. Okay. I'm sorry. I just want any unintended consequences or to leave anything fall through the cracks. Fix it. Let's fix it. Right. Yeah, we can fix it and we can give we Deputy Marlet works really hard for us. We need No, he does. He does a good job. Keep up on those buzz work. I I agree. I I agree with what you were saying. We was we were being generous with the five. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It needs to be 100 foot from any residence. I I agree 100%. Because if Mr. Williams lives by him and the Williams don't have the neighbor, it does the smoke is going to affect them just as much as if there's five houses or not. Right. So that was my my point. And we and we do have some documentation from uh from them with uh some health issues with one of the children.

I don't think that matters. I mean, I think it's a nuisance just like they all three pointed out.

Before you go, Joe, I want you to be thinking about something. We have a similar issue with noise or like people in South River, they play their music loud and by time it takes 20 some minutes for the deputy get down there, they cut the music down. Soon as the deputy gets back to Buffer, they raise the music back up. And they're doing it to antagonize the neighbor. There need you need to be thinking about when you respond so many times. And there's something called, I think, the peaceful enjoyment of your own property. I know we have the no noise from 11:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., but there's got to be a common sense rule where we're continuous noise close to a man's house.

I'm working on a uh complaint right now that it's been a long ongoing issue in that area. Yeah. And uh went out there last week. Uh, I'm going be well talking with our county attorney and we need to be looking at that because we're burning a lot of gas going back and forth without any resolutions. I spent uh probably two hours on the phone and two hours at his residence last week. So,

appreciation. We'll be back next month to vote on this and have it cleaned up and I think it'll looks like it's going to go well. Okay. Next on the agenda is a public hearing. on a proposal to reszone 0.23 acre partial from R20 low moderate density residential to B1 conditional use general business conditional zoning property located at 922 highway 24 in Newport North Carolina. Mr. Ben Warren, you have the floor.

All right. Thank you, chairman. So for your consideration this evening, we do have reasoning case 2025-0000002. Uh the applicant for this case is Matt Johnson on behalf of Sound Services LLC. The property is located at 922 Highway 24 in Newport and it's formally identified as parcel number 6346255 828700 and consists of approximately 23 acres in size. This property is currently zoned R20 and the applicant is requesting B1 conditional zoning. The conditional zoning was actually requested by staff and the reason for that was the um the parcel itself does not meet the minimum lot size for B1. And so we asked as a condition of the resoning that if this is approved that it would be recombined with the adjoining parcel which the applicant owns as well. And that parcel as well does not be the minimum lot size. So if the reasoning is approved, they're combined, then it would be a conforming lot. Uh this lot also falls within the future land use designation of limited transition. Just to give you an orientation to the site, the north side of Highway 24. Uh the property in the direct vicinity, we have some single family residential, we have a Dollar General, the Dutch Treat Mobile Home Community, and the Carolina Heating and Cooling. And looking at some of the surrounding zoning directly adjacent to the property, we already have the existing B1 and then the R20 encompassing those residential areas. In comparing the two zoning districts, the R20 district is intended for low to moderate uh single family residential with a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet and the proposed B1 conditional zoning uh is intended for general business. Uh this is a conditional zoning. So it establishes a new zoning district, but uh the minimum lot size would be 20,000 square feet with no

utilities down to 10,000 square feet with public water and sewer available. And as I mentioned, the only condition that was provided by the applicant was that if the lot is approved, it would be recombined with his existing adjacent lot. And looking at the future landings map again this falls within the limited transition area and looking at the consistency uh this is in consistent consistent with policy 2.5 number one and 2.5 number two inciting urban development along our primary corridor. This item did go to the planning commission uh back in February. Um and at that that time the planning commission voted 4-1 to recommend approval. The one descending vote was one of the planning commission members had concerns about the number of driveway access points on the highway 24. They had asked if the applicant could potentially do away with one of the driveway access points if this was approved. At the time the applicant indicated they weren't exactly sure how the property would be used in the future and so it was too preliminary to commit to eliminating one of those driveway access points. And so that is concludes this presentation and I'll be happy to answer any questions the board may have.

Well, driveways are uh those permits are granted by the DOT, not by the planning commission. Yes, sir. That's correct. What are those uh businesses to the left of the red box? Is that a mini storage or is that a What is that? That is the applicant adjacent property that's owned by the Sound Services LLC. Okay. And what's the next piece here with the cars? Is that boat trailers or is that a storage facility? So, we have some storage and then directly behind that is the mobile home park. Okay. All right. Any questions for Ben before we go into a public hearing? Is there a motion to go into public hearing? So moved. Motion by Commissioner Quinn.

Seconded by Commissioner Moore. All in favor? We are now in public hearing. Is there anyone here that would like to speak on this matter? Yes, sir. If you'll come to the podium, state your name and address and you have three minutes. Thank you, commissioners. My name is Matt Johnson, uh 2919 Dogwood Lane, Morehead City, North Carolina. Um I'm here on behalf of Sound Services LLC to respectfully request the resoning of the parcel. Um a little bit of a brief history. Sound services purchased the adjoining parcel to the west many years ago, which is a small mini storage. Um and have continued to operate that as a mini storage through ownership. Um, a time later, the adjoining property, which is the subject property here, became available as a residential property. Being that it was adjoining their existing um, piece of land, they took advantage of the opportunity to acquire that residential property. Um, so it's the same owners. So, you've got one parcel of B1 being operated, then a second parcel um, adjoining which is residential. The intent has always been to try to recombine these properties. when they acquired the property, um the subject property, there was an existing tenant in the property and they did not want to disrupt the tenant had been in the property for quite some time. They did not want to disrupt that person. Um that person since has has passed on. Um they've looked at the different opportunities for the parcel. Um the property's in in pretty bad shape and uh really financially doesn't make a lot of sense to rehabilitate that particular property. Two things about the property. It's zoned R20, but it's a small parcel, so it's really not even compliant for the R20 rebuild um or or permitting necessarily. Um the it's also not compliant for a B1 use. So, it just makes sense to um to combine it with the neighboring property. There is not a

plan in place um necessarily on what to do. This was first step to try to resone the parcel to be compliant. um because they didn't want to do a recombination and then they would have a split zone situation. So, being that the residential use was, you know, in bad shape and the commercial use is existing and and currently in in shape, it was their decision to um try to resone to the B1 and then do the recombination as requested by staff. um they don't have a plan in place now, but certainly if it was reszoned, it's a small parcel, so it's going to be, you know, subject to any, you know, B1 building codes, permitting, um and certainly any vegetative buffers between that property and and the uh adjoining R20 parcel.

That's it. Thank you. Is there anyone else? Is there a motion to close public hearing? Motion by Commissioner Walder. Seconded by Commissioner Shen. All in favor?

We're now at a public hearing. Is there a motion on the floor? Uh chairman, I'd like to make a motion. I move to approve the zoning request for uh 922 highway 2044. Further identify as parcel 634602 5558 287 0. This request is to resone approximately 23 acres from R20 low to moderate density residential to B1 CZ general business conditional zoning. Motion by Commissioner Clark. Is there a second?

Second. Seconded by Commissioner Walder. All in favor? Motion carries. Uh Ben, would you like to read the plan consistency uh statement? I guess we need a motion to approve the plan consistency statement. Does he have to read it first? Read it first, then we'll get Go for it, Ben. All right. The board of commissioners find and determine that reszoning case 0000002 is consistent with policies 2.5 number one and 2.5 number two and the overall goals and objectives of the Campbell land use plan. All right. Is there a motion to approve the plan of consensity? Motion by Commissioner Clark.

Seconded by Commissioner Quinn. All in favor? All right. All right. Ben, don't go nowhere. We got another one coming. Uh, next is a public hearing on a proposal to reszone a partial 630-502-76325700 from RA Rural Agricultural to R10 conditional use high density residential for approximately 42.037 acres located at 4001 Highway 24 in Newport. Take it away, Ben. All right. Thank you, chairman.

So, this resorting case, our applicant is John Armadams Company Incorporated, and they submitted an application on behalf of property owners Daniel and Elaine Kirk. Property is located at 4001 Highway 24 in Newport and is formally identified as parcel number 6305 0276 325700. Consists of approximately 42.037 37 acres. I could never get one.

The current zoning is RA, Rural Agricultural, and the applicant has requested the property be reszoned to R10 conditional zoning. This property falls within the limited transition land use area. Just looking at the site orientation, uh directly to the east of the proposed resoning track, we have the Boat Watch subdivision. Uh to the west and south, we have Canons Gate. And directly adjacent on that Northeast corner we have the ST wound asphalt plant and across from the property across Highway 24 is primarily forest land. What is the development? Is that Canon's Gate below it at the bottom of the screen?

Yes sir. Cangate is on the the west and wraps around to the south. Bug watch is that way on the right.

Okay. When you look at the surrounding zoning, uh the Bogwatch is the R10 conditional use and the Canisgate is the RRCU, which essentially was a flexible PUD um zoning designation that dates back to the the 1990s. So, we no longer have that in place anymore, but it was designed as a flexible PUD due to the nature of the intended uses and flexibility in the lot configuration, lot sizes. So looking at the comparison of the zoning districts, the existing RA zoning districts primarily intended for agricultural and forestry and really low density type uses. It has a minimum lot size of 50,000 square feet. Uh the proposed district is the R10 conditional zoning and with conditional zoning establishes a new sight specific zoning district. It corresponds to the R10 zoning district, but it in no way affects the base R10 zoning district. It has a set of unique binding conditions that are tailored to the property and it also contains a sight specific development plan that is unique to this individual property. I know a question was raised about whether conditional zoning is essentially a form of spot zoning because it does create a essentially a new zoning district that is specific to this one parcel. Um, and you look at that generally it is essentially a form of spot zoning but it's considered appropriate or legal if the reszoning conditions themselves or the re the reszoning conditions are similar in nature to um other properties within the area and if the proposed conditions are in harmony with the general area and so in just a minute I'll kind of get to how what's being requested relates to the surrounding area but just to look at the conditions

that are proposed along with this. When this application first came before the planning commission back in I believe it was January, uh there were a number of concerns that were raised by some of the members of the audience as well as the planning commission. And so the applicant um requested for a tableabling of the case till February. And during that time, the applicant did modify some of the conditions. And so what you see here, the proposed minimum lot size right now is 6,000 square feet. that was 5,000 when it originally came before the planning commission and was increased to 6,000. Uh the side setback requirement is being requested to be five feet. The minimum lot width is 45 ft. Originally that was 42 feet and the maximum number of lots is 70 lots and the original proposal was 78 lots. Uh the applicant is also proposing a five- foot buffer along the site access road and proposing a nature trail and waterfront open space area with a gazebo and I'll show you in just a moment in the original proposal that was not included and so this was added when they brought it back to the planning commission in February as well. And so looking at the conditions that the applicants proposed and how that compares to existing development in that area, kind of addressing that spot zoning issue. Um with the proposed zoning, we have 70 lots and a density of 1.7 units an acre. And looking at the surrounding area, we have Bo Watch and Canis Gate directly adjacent to existing residential communities. And so comparing this against what we have there, Canon's Gate is 525 lots, 1.83 units an acre and Vogue watts, 287 lots, 1.4 units, 1.46 units an acre. The applicant is proposing 6,000 square foot minimum lot size. Canon Gate Canon's Gate has lots down to 4,350 square feet and Bogwatch 4,50T

and the minimum lot width of 45 ft. Canon Gate down to 40t and Bogwatch 49 ft. So what's being proposed here is consistent and similar in nature to what's already existing on both sides of the proposed um resoning site. And looking at the site plan that's been submitted as part of the reasonzoning. Um again a couple things to point out here. As I mentioned the number of lots decreased from 78 to 70. But one thing as it relates to land use plan is looking at the environmentally sensitive areas. And you can see along the south side of the property and on the east side of the property, there's significant uh environmentally sensitive areas, flood plane areas, and some wetland areas. And so what is being proposed is basically taking the the lots and consolidating those in more the center of the property to avoid any impacts to those environmentally sensitive areas. on the south side. Um you can see that kind of dog leg with a a circle at the end. And that is the proposed nature trail and the open space area where the the gazebo would be located as well. And that is a requirement of the subdivision ordinance that for waterfront communities that provide some type of community amenity. And so what the applicant is proposing is that open space area with a gazebo. And as I mentioned, the applicant right now is proposing to stay completely out of those environmentally sensitive areas on the property. And looking at the future land use plan, uh this is the limited transition area. And this gets a little bit uh tricky as well. Uh the proposed resoning is consistent with policies 2.5 number one and 2.5 number two as it refers to development of an urban nature being within the limited transition areas. Um however, there is another section of the future land use plan that speaks to

minimum lot sizes um within the limited transition area. And essentially what it says is that um the limited transition would have a density of no more than three units per acre with lot sizes as small as 10,000 square feet. And so the applicant is proposing lots in the 6,000 square foot range. And so one thing that we we did is we went back to look at both Canes Gate and Bogue Watch to see if this language was in the land use plan at the time these uh developments were approved and how that was addressed at the time. And what we found was Canisgate originally started in the 1990s. uh kind of changed names a couple of times and the last approval we found was around 2005 with some modifications to the overall plan and Bokew watch was approved since 2000 and we were able to go back as far as 2000 looking at land use plans and this exact language existed as of 2000. We don't know how far back beyond that it went but as of 2000 the minimum lot size requirement was in place. So we we tried looking at old uh minutes and records to determine how the board looked at it at the time to address that minimum lot size issue. And we're uncertain whether it was looking at overall density as opposed to the minimum lot size and that was kind of how it was approved or if the board at the time found that it was not consistent with the land use plan but it still met the intent of land use plan. And the land use plan is essentially a um is essentially a guide. It's not something that has to be followed. But if you go against the land use plan, then you need to have reasons why it makes sense to do so. And what we found in this case was with both Canes Gate and Bogue Watch, they were well below the required density. The lot sizes just didn't meet the 10,000 square feet. So we're assuming that was what happened was that the board at the time probably found that it was inconsistent

with the land use plan, but it met the intent of the land use plan and that's probably how they were approved. So we have a similar situation with this case. So this case also as I mentioned went to the planning commission starting in February and came or January and came back in February. At the time it came back before the planning commission. They felt like all the issues they had raised to the applicant had been addressed and so the planning commission made a unanimous recommendation for approval and I'll be happy to answer any questions the board may have on this case.

Okay. There any questions for Ben before we go into a public hearing? Point of Carol clarification. Vice Chairman Mansfield recused himself from the last. Is he automatically brought back or do we had to vote on that? Yeah, he's automatically brought back because I believe it. Yeah. Your motion was just to recuse him for that one item. Okay. Is there a motion to go in the public hearing? Motion by Commissioner Walder.

Seconded by Commissioner Moore. All in favor? We We're now in public hearing. We have a couple people signed up. Bill Behan maybe and then we'll followed by Pam and then we'll open the floor up to anyone else. My name is Bill Bian, just a little different pronunciation. uh residing at 519 Sanders Lane, Newport. Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman, and commissioners for this opportunity to comment. I'm here expressing opposition to the zoning change. Uh USDA's agricultural census shows that from 1997 to 2022, 75 million acres of US far farmland were lost. This is an 8% decline in land use for farming and represents an area the size of Georgia and Alabama combined. The loss over that period was even more pronounced in North Carolina. We experienced an 11% reduction in farmland. Of course, the vast majority of our nation's homes were built on what was once farm property and conversion will continue, including here in Carter County. That's for sure. Most of us live on land that was once farmed. But given farmland's finite nature and its importance to society, future conversion should occur strategically and very cautiously. Some a land parcels make better candidates for conversion than others. As evidenced by GIS photos, the parcel before you has been farmed very responsibly. Substantial setback has been left including significant tree lines providing buffer to sensitive waters and

cover for nesting water fowl and other wildlife. All of course are important elements for hunting and fishing. The parcel in its current state creates a well balanced and historical connection to the Sykes branch streams which bordered the parcel on two sides. This balance of a land and wetlands helps protect the water quality of those streams. Sykes branch water is classified by DEEQ as shellfish harvesting water, but it's fragile water. But it is fragile water and already on the impaired waters list. As you know, homeowners often apply their own lawn chemicals and always without training while farm operators must pass lensure exams to apply restricted use pesticides. The rapid advancement of precision farming equipment technology, the widespread adoption of best management practices by farmers, and the financial incentive to not overuse expensive chemicals make farmers very good wetland neighbors. The Card County land use plan contains numerous statements emphasizing the importance of protecting sensitive coastal waters, particularly shellfish waters. There is little more you could do to protect that water than keeping this parcel as it is with its buffers and responsible use. Eggland retention and water quality protection combined with congestion and public infrastructure concerns leads me to respectively request a no vote. Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

What happened to our light that was up there? Mr. high. It got away from me there because I was looking for the light and it kept right on talking. I don't I don't know where the light is. Is it? Okay. It's just underneath. Okay. It's just not up on podium. Next, we have uh Pam B Curker.

Good evening, commissioners. Um I was here um for the reasonzoning um meeting a couple months ago and spoke um with regards to um not approving this resoning of agriculture high density. I'm a resident of Vogue watch but I've been a resident of this county off and on for 36 years and I bought a horse and raised a horse in your county. Uh Mr. Chadwick, um I grew up in Wilmington. I vacationed here with my family. I've seen the development uh that's happened in this county. Uh I raised three K children here and uh we came here to retire, my husband and I, and we built our home in Bogue Watch. And due to our knowledge, we used a local builder, a responsible builder that knew how to build in our area. I endure hurricanes in Wilmington. I did here with a newborn baby in the early 2000s. Uh, and my husband stayed in our house in Vogue Watch in Florence. And we saw the difference between responsible building and development because we had the knowledge to pick the good builder that had lived here his whole life and raised a family here and knew about what needed to be built here. And then we saw the large company that came from outside of our county and built homes and forced 25 residents or more, I don't know the exact number to be displaced for over a year and a half out of our neighborhood because of irresponsible building. And I have a great concern not for where I live and the impact to that that specific 42 acres, but the impact to the people that aren't as familiar with me as I was and my husband of who to pick to build our home and how to manage. We

managed the subcontractors that built and the the needed um assets like the proper HO um HVAC and the electrical and all of that. And that's a concern I have because I've read a lot about this developer that wants to build that that 42 acres and it's alarming. And I'm a 60some year old woman. If I can look it up and and see the nationwide lawsuits, specifically storm water issues in South Carolina that go along with what happened in our neighborhood. And we have uh and I thank Mr. Quinn for his efforts. We have from our developer a storm water permit that we have has never been approved. And though we've taken over our neighborhood two years ago, we have refused to take that permit and it's still in litigation today um because of that. And it's alarming that these builders come in, they're not vested in our county. They don't even operate a a an office here. They're in Wilmington. They're in Greenville. in Wally and they um we have to make sure that they're taking care of our residents and specifically with that um it's not of the uh the custom um building that happened in Canonate and in Bogue Watch. Uh it's you know if we want to call it low housing I don't think that exists in this county anymore but it's not at the same price point. It's not of the same quality that our homes are and alarming to me as just a resident of this county. Um, and I think we need to take a long hard look at that and we have some legislation that's coming down. It hasn't hit yet and I'm concerned because we weren't able to go after the developer. Okay.

Uh, with regard to that. So, thank you. We appreciate it. Yep. Your time's up. Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to speak? Yes, sir. if you'll come to the podium and then that gentleman if you'll state your name and address and uh three minutes.

Yes, sir. My name is Grayson Morgan. I'm the entitlements manager with Dr. Wharton out of Wilmington. Uh I am the uh representative behind this application. Um I want to just point out a couple things. Thank you, Mr. Warren, for the presentation. Um I'm going to reiterate just a couple of those things, but I don't want to waste too much time. Um originally when we came to the planning board, uh we were proposing 78 lots. We bumped that down to 70. Um, as Mr. Warren mentioned, uh, we were tabled at the planning board. Um, so we were able to go back and revise our plan, uh, to be a little bit more in line with what the planning board kind of wanted to see out of our community. So, we went from 78 lots to 70, which is what we're showing now. Um, our minimum square foot for a lot size was 5,040. Uh, we've bumped that up to 6,000. We also bumped up the lot width from 42 to 45 uh for the minimum lot width. Um we did keep the 5 foot side set back uh that we originally proposed. Uh that's part of our conditions. Um and then we also added the active open space area that Mr. Warren uh talked about um down on the the uh the dog leg with the loop and the gazebo. Um we also provided the aqua wheelserve letter and the west carterette water will serve letter. when we came back um to to show that we had both of those. Um that being said, uh our average lot size is 6,675 square feet. Um so we are we are above the minimum that we've proposed. Um the largest lot size is 9,482 square feet. So we are close to that 10,000 that the R10 would uh typically require. Um and our density is less than two units per acre. I believe it's 1.7 about 1.7 units per acre which is in line with the Canonskate community next door and the Bogatch community on the other side. Um there were several comments uh that were included as in the agenda tonight from the public. I just want to mention

a few of those. Um there were some comments about traffic on Highway 24. Um NC DOT is requiring that we uh install a right turn lane, a 300 foot right turn lane into our site. Um so that is a requirement that DOT has already mentioned for us. Um so that would be a a traffic measure um that we're required to build um as part of this site. Um there were several comments about storm water and environmental impacts. We currently don't have any wetland impacts on our site. Um there was a previous map that was on the screen that showed the wetlands kind of on the outer boundaries of our site. We're not impacting any of those wetlands. There's also a wetland area that's up near the St. Wooten. um uh site adjacent to our property. We're not impacting that wetland either. Um and then for storm water, uh this site does drain to SA shellfish waters. Uh that's a pretty stringent storm water permit that we have to go through. Um and that is something that we will do, you know, after we get through the resoning process. Um the state will have to review all of our calculations. We're required to do infiltration basins for the site rather than a a wet pond. Um so that way the water stays on the site. So, thank you for this time. I'll be more than happy to answer any questions.

I got a couple of questions. Yes, sir. Up on the highway 24 where the red line comes out and around. Whose property is that right there? This one right here? Yes. I believe I'm not sure who that one is. Oh, just you're going to put a 300T turning lane in. Is it going to be in front of that property or come this way? Okay. So, that'll be in front of someone else's property. Will be in front of Yes, sir. and we'll have to work with them on driveway relocation and anything else. Kenneth Allen, okay. Where is uh your recreation area going to be? It's right down here.

That's going to be a gazebo and people going to have access to the creek that uh they won't have direct access to the creek. It'll be more of a visual access. Um, so we wanted to avoid the wetland impacts that are all down here. Um, this is a low coastal wetland areas down here. Um, so we wanted to avoid those impacts. So what we did was we put a a loop trail and a gazebo that people can kind of come over. They can sit and look out over the water. We'll probably clear out a little bit of brush so people have a visual. Okay. All right. Any questions?

All right. Is there anyone else who would like to speak? Yes, sir. your name and address. Good evening, commissioners. Um, thank you for your opportunity to present to you. My name is Alex Dale. I'm an attorney representing Canon's Gate at Bogwatch Homeowners Association, and I'm here to speak in opposition of the resoning request. I sent a letter back on uh March 11th um to the county for your review. Um I'd ask that that be added to the record and I hand it to Mr. Wilson. They have copies of

Thank you. Um so again, we just ask that to be part of the record. Um what's really happening here is is you're being asked to allow a new development to dump waste onto the property of a neighboring development. um condition conditional zoning took the place of conditional use permits and so really this development is moving down the path to do exactly that and and I would submit to you I was glad to hear um a representative from Dr. Horton here did not hear from the applicant but did hear Mr. Warren, this um application is not compliant with your ordinance. Your ordinance specifically 3202.1 requires all existing easements required for the zoning district request to be shown. That is not shown in the materials. There is no easement shown to how the wastewater is going to be shipped off the property um and deposited somewhere else. The reason it's not shown there is it doesn't exist. Um and so for that reason alone, the application should be denied. Um, you also are supposed to consider the adverse impacts of surrounding areas. 3202.3 of your ordinance. The emphasis is supposed to be on the impact of surrounding areas. We submit this. This application does not do that. Again, conditional zoning. You put conditions on the applicant. We don't see any conditions being put on this applicant. That's not what conditional zoning is for. It's not to strip away every requirement in the standard zoning district. It's supposed to be for the benefit of the county for certain conditions that are agreed upon. Um and so uh we we believe if you look at this there there's a 40% reduction in minimum lot area. I appreciate Mr. Warren look at the history but we have to look at your ordinance when you're considering this application. Look at the ordinance as it exists today and and it's a 40% reduction in lot area 44% reduction in width side setback is 50% reduction. Um it is simply gutting what R10 is supposed to be and um submit to you

that's not a proper use of uh conditional reasoning. Uh their wastewater issues are aspirational at best. No permit, no certificate of public convenience and necessity, no real property right. Um we we believe again it does not meet the ordinance. It does not qualify for conditional zoning. Um so we would ask you to deny the request. Um, but if you choose to move forward with it, we believe you can put a condition on the applicant that they have to resolve the wastewater issue, they have to get a certificate of public uh convenience and necessity, that they have to get a permit, you could put those conditions on them. So, we would ask you to deny it. But if you're not going to deny it, make them show that this actually works. Put the conditions on them. That's what conditional zoning is for. And so, we would ask you to do that if you are not inclined to deny the request. But we would ask that you deny the request because it does not meet the requirements of your ordinance. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone else would like to speak? Any questions of Ben or the uh gentleman from Warden Smith mentioned about the sewer capacity that the reasoning doesn't have anything to do with the sewer capacity that will serve letter or those requirements would be handled by the state right or they wouldn't they wouldn't get any service to that.

Yes sir. Generally on the a reasonzoning we request a letter of intent to serve and documentation such as that. A lot of times we don't require the permitting on the front end because the applicant doesn't even know if the reasoning is going to be approved. So we hate for them to go through the full state peritting process only to come back and have a reasoning denied. And so the the planning commission specifically asked for the letters of intent to serve and applicant brought both of those back to the planning commission. They have provided that and they would had to uh adhere to all state uh environmental DEQ all the storm water all those all those rules. Yes sir. This is

if if the reasoning was granted there's a litany of environmental and uh DOT and camel rules that would apply on this property. Yes sir. This is just the first step in the process. Okay. So I have an additional question. I mean talking about waste water. I mean right now I mean I mean that doesn't have anything to do with this for the 70 lot subdivision. They could be doing 77 tanks far as I mean I doubt they are and I doubt get approved. I know what they're attempting to do but if that doesn't happen then that subdivision wouldn't go in. Correct.

That's correct. Okay. And then he he uh attorney spoke there just a minute ago from Warden Smith had a different you still stand with your opinion which one that were consistent with the zoning what's been done in the past and the ordinance was the same back then as it is today. Yes. Um, however, as I mentioned in the the presentation, I would if this is something either approval or denial, I would recommend that the board address the minimum lot size issue um as part of their motion and consistency statement.

I mean, I don't I mean, the oldest structures in this county and most of them are right here in the city we're sitting in tonight. Some of them are over city and they're all on our R5000 square foot lots. Um, and I don't know why the county went away from R5000 other than a lot of the counties serve by sepic, you can't have it on R5000. But with the standards that DEQ puts on developers today and the cost of everything, you that's why there is no affordable housing here because to meet all the hoops and they're going to jump through, you can't afford to build it and it even makes sense. So, I mean that that's they're they're asking for a smaller lot size because the price of that property justifies in order to do it and meet all the requirements at DEQ to get it permitted, they've got to get that many lots to sell many houses at that price point. And there I agree with the speaker earlier who opposed it. I don't know what affordable housing is anymore, but that is workforce housing and we have a shortage of that. I mean, so I I I understand they're upset, but if somebody made the same reasonable request they're asking of us, they wouldn't live here today because those two other neighborhoods would have never been uh approved.

That was my last part was a statement. I don't expect response. Is there any other questions of Ben or the attorney or may not It's kind of like, you know, Canon's Gate, they built what they have there. Bogwatch built what they have. This is very similar. I guess you're in the general ballpark. They're a little bigger on some lots uh than one of the developments and a little smaller than the other. I personally would like to see a little bit larger or wider lot. I think the 45 is pretty narrow.

Smallest ones are 40 feet. I I understand and I don't like that either, but uh I do understand that it to have housing and and workforce housing that we desperately need, you're going to need a smaller lot size and and to be able to get the return on the investment for somebody to come here and do that. So, I mean it the reasonzoning is just a uh blessing to move forward. There's a litany of state permits to go through and and probably a year or two of getting them. So, it's u we'll entertain a motion either way.

Motion to go out of public hearing. Motion to go out of public hearing by Vice Chairman Vansfield, seconded by Commissioner Clark. All in favor? All right. Any discussion?

A motion. Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion. Make a motion to approve resing request for parcel 6302763 25700. approximately 42.03 acres located at 401 highway 24 Newport. Request seeks to change reszoning from R8 rural agricultural to R10CZ high density residential condition zoning. There's a motion by Commissioner Shen on the floor. Is there a second? Second.

Seconded by Commissioner Clark. Is there any discussion? I do have one point, Ben. He mentioned about requiring on conditional use putting extra requirements about the sewer and the other things. Have we done that to any other development that you can think of? You said earlier they do that later after Jun. I mean, that's what I'm saying. We put we've never put conditions on somebody. They're going to have to meet those state rules in order to be granted the permit. Yes, sir. That's correct. Whether it be storm water or sewer capacity or anything? Yes, sir.

So, I mean, that's not something we've done. I just wanted to clarify that. All right. There's a motion and a second. Any discussion? All in favor? I. All opposed? Motion carries. Ben, will you read the plan of consistency?

Yes, sir. For the statement of consistency, the board of commissioners find and determined that reszoning case 000073 is inconsistent with the minimum lot size specified in the CMA future land use plan for the limited transition area. However, the proposed resoning meets the plan's overall intent regarding density and environmental protection and the re the board of commissioners find that resoning case 000073 is reasonable and in the public interest because the reasoning as proposed includes sight specific conditions that are consistent with adjacent land uses and in harmony with the surrounding area. Is there a motion to approve the plan of consistency?

Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion that the board of commissioners finds and determines that the reszoning case of 000073 is consistent with the minimum lot size specified in the camera future land use plan for trans for limited transition areas. However, the proposed reason zoning does meet the overall intent of the density requirement and it provides the environmental protection that is provided required by the state. Motion by vice chairman Mansfield. Is there a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Clark. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carries.

Next, we have the manager's report.

Thank you, chairman and commissioners. I have a few things to share with everyone. Um, first of all, household hazardous waste collection event is this Saturday, April 25th from 8 to 8 am to 100 p.m. And that is at the Carter County Health Department parking lot. In addition, as April continues, remember if you have latex paint that needs to be recycled, you can still bring that to two of our solid waste sites. Look on our uh website. Right now we already have 505 gallons and those are donated to Habitat for Humanity once they are remixed. Also, we have something coming up on Thursday, May 7th from 8:30 to 12 that we are encouraging the public to sign up for the post disaster simulation training. This is an exercise that is hosted in partnership with Trillium Health Resources and Emergency Services and it's intended to strengthen our community preparedness and help ensure a more coordinated and informed response during disaster recovery. Our healthy aging expo will be Friday, May 8th at the Leyon Man Junior Enrichment Center, also known as our senior center. And that's from 9 to 11:00 a.m. on Friday, May 8th. and it is held in recognition of Older Americans Month. We encourage you to participate in that. On Saturday, May 2nd, the Port Team will host a safe summer cookout from 12:00 p.m. to 400 pm in the health department parking lot. This event focuses on overdose awareness and will include free food, familyfriendly activities, and overdose prevention resources. And on Saturday, May 9th, animal control will host a rabies vaccination clinic in the health department parking lot from 8:00

am to 11 p.m. The clinic will be a drive-thru clinic and is open for county residents to bring their pets, cats, dogs, and ferrets that are four months old or older. And that is Saturday, May 9th from 8 to 11th. And that's all I have unless you guys have questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, we have appointments. First one is Adult Home Community Advisory Board, Mr. Mark Davis. Reappoint to a three-year term. All in favor of Mr. Davis. All right. Next is the Carter County Area Transportation Systems Advisory Board. Franklin Reams, appointment to a general public seat for a two-year term expiring 42028. And Chris Plum, appointment to a local government seat for a two-year term expiring 42028. All in favor of Mr. Remes and Miss Plum. Next is the equalization and review board, Miss Vanessa Justice, reappointment to alternate seat for a one-year term ending 42027. All in favor of Miss Justice. Next is the Nursing Home Advisory Board. Mark Davis reappointment to a three-year term ending 51529 and Gurnie Miselle Jr. reappointment to a three-year term ending 5:15 2029. All in favor of Mr. Miselle and Mr. Davis. Next is the town of Bowfort Board of Adjustments. Uh Bruce Shelton reappointment to a regular ETJ seat three-year term ending on 42029 and James Bumpus appointment to a regular ETJ seat with a three-year term expiring 42029. All in favor of Mr. Shelton and Mr. office. Uh, Town of Newport zoning board of adjustments ETJ seat. Mr. Clark Whitlo Jr. reappointment to a three-year term expiring 42029. All in favor, Mr. Whit.

Zoning board of adjustment. Sean Burke, reappointment to a three-year term expiring 515 2029. All in favor, Mr. Burke. And that does it for the appointments. having to share a computer up here because mine's on the brink. So, I need a IT guy here. Next is uh Commissioner comment. We'll start with Commissioner Clark. I will u I will allow I will skip my comments tonight. Let all share my time. Excellent comment. Next is Commissioner Shin.

I'm gonna be not quite that brief. Can I just uh congratulate our employees of the the quarter, Miss Bullet, Mr. Lewis, but anyway, and uh uh Mr. Brim, thank you for your service. Thank you for your dedication to the town, the county, and service to the community. And I'll leave it at that, sir. Thank you, Commissioner Shin, Vice Chairman Mansfield. I'm gonna stick with the theme for tonight. I'm going to reiterate what Commissioner Shin said. I'm follow Commissioner Con. Excellent. Commissioner Boulder.

Uh good evening and I appreciate Gracie Bender coming and speaking on the 250th uh celebration that will occur on the 20th of June. Please, they are looking for volunteers and um attendees. So, let's celebrate our county. Let's celebrate our country on the 20th of June at the uh Crystal Coast Civic Center. And congratulations to the employees of the month. I appreciate all their work and their access to the community. Thank you, Commissioner Wald. Commissioner Moore.

Mr. Chairman, I don't really have anything other than I do want to congratulate our employees for Virginia Hicks award Carol Eddie Lewis and Jason Bren. Job well done. It's a great job. Thank you, Commissioner Moore. Commissioner Quinn.

Yes, sir. And I'll be equally as brief just again to reiterate the praise for our employees of the month. U they're they're the backbone of county government. We s we sit up here and we talk about infrastructure. We talk about budget. We talk about policy. None of it would be possible uh without the men and women that come every day um show up every day to serve our community. And so when we recognize these individuals is we're doing more than just handing out a plaque. You know, we're actually recognizing our the values of our community. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Uh I agree Mr. Brim and uh Carolyn Bolock and Eddie Lewis, excellent job. They're just examples of our all the fine employees we got. I know Eddie uh is the fire marshal here and he's he's worn many hats while we had some vacancies, the emergency service personnel and just Eddie does a great job. He's been with us a long time and and and the others as well. So certainly want to thank them and uh all our all our county employees and we are moving in the right direction for our county employees. I think things are getting better as growth comes to our county. We're trying to manage the growth and uh have things like parks and recreation areas and and many things that we have to have that people that come to this area want to be able to enjoy. And it takes all of it takes money. My predecessor said money is the answer. What's the problem? Yeah, but uh and a lot of times that is true when you think about it, but it's uh

we we could not could not do it without our county employees. So, if there's nothing further will come forward the board, I'll entertain a motion to Mr. Chairman, can I make one comment? We'll let go ahead. Commissioner Shen, just like to recognize Newport's newly appointed mayor, Miss Brenda Harris. Thank you for coming. Congratulations.

Yeah. Well, that reminds me. I'll take a little bit more time. Please recognize Dennis. Uh we recently went to a retirement ceremony for Newport Mayor Dennis Barber. It was a packed house over at the uh Community College Culinary Center. Dennis a fine fine man. Uh served his country many years in the Coast Guard. Uh later worked with the sheriff's office and then became mayor of Newport. And uh just an outstanding job. You have some big shoes to fill. Dennis was certainly a friend of all of us up here and in Carter County and Newport's a better place because of Dennis. So, thank you for joining us tonight. If there's nothing further, come before the board. We got a motion by

Vice Chairman Mansfield, seconded by Commissioner Shen. All in favor? We're ajourned. Thank you.