Loading...
01-03-2023 Meeting Minutes BOC January 3, 2023 1 PERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS JANUARY 3, 2023 MEMBERS PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT Gordon Powell Katherine M. Cathey, County Manager C. Derrick Sims Brenda B. Reaves, Clerk to the Board Kyle W. Puryear S. Ellis Hankins, County Attorney Charlie Palmer Jason Thomas The Board of Commissioners for the County of Person, North Carolina, met in regular session on Tuesday, January 3, 2023 at 7:00pm in the Person County Office Building Auditorium located at 304 S. Morgan Street, Roxboro, NC. Chairman Powell called the meeting to order and offered an invocation. Vice Chairman Sims led the group in the Pledge of Allegiance. DISCUSSION/ADJUSTMENT/APPROVAL OF AGENDA: A motion was made by Commissioner Palmer and carried 5-0 to approve the agenda. RECOGNITION: DUKE ENERGY FOUNDATION GRANT AWARD TO PERSON COUNTY: Tanya Evans, Duke Energy District Manager presented a Duke Energy Foundation Grant Award to Person County Emergency Management in the amount of $50,000. Ms. Evans noted Duke Energy was proud of its history of working together with emergency management partners throughout the state. In recognition of that, Ms. Evans said Duke Energy announced a grant program awarding $750K across 24 organizations throughout the state to support their emergency management resilience and efforts. Thom Schwalenberg, Emergency Manager and Director of Emergency Services said the Department of Emergency Services, through the Office of Emergency Management (OEM), is responsible for the response to and mitigation of any hazardous material emergencies, to include, but not limited to, spills, accidents, illegal dumping, and other releases or threatened releases of hazardous materials requiring control that are a threat or potential threat to public safety. The Office of Emergency Management is also responsible for collaborating with and supporting all public safety agencies in the County to prepare, prevent, respond to, mitigate and recover from large-scale incidents. The impetus for this project was based on two events; one actual and one exercise. The actual event was a fuel leak at a gas station facility in Roxboro that happened in the fall 2022. Multiple public safety agencies responded to the incident in an attempt to control the fuel from getting into the January 3, 2023 2 sewer drainage system and a nearby tributary. The after-action report from that incident identified a need for a more consolidated response to large-scale incidents of these types where a product release has occurred. Additionally, an exercise that was conducted in November of 2021 at Hyco Lake with a fictional recreational vehicle leaking 80 gallons of gasoline into the lake also identified a similar need. Mr. Schwalenberg stated the award from Duke Energy Foundation will be used for the purchase an Incident Support Vehicle that can be used to support all public safety agencies in Person County. The vehicle can be used to support incident command and control functions for large-scale incidents. It will also be equipped to support basic hazardous material control supplies, mitigation supplies, and provider safety monitoring equipment, hazard identification equipment, and plume modeling capability. These capabilities would allow OEM to assist first responders with initial scene operations and, if needed, support regional response teams when they arrive on scene. This is a collaborative project spearheaded by the Department of Emergency Services but being done with tremendous support from Person County Fire Marshal’s Office, Roxboro/Person County Rescue Squad and Roxboro Fire Department. These entities will help in the design and equipping of the vehicle and have agreed to help respond with the vehicle if requested. Mr. Schwalenberg noted he was very grateful to the Duke Energy Foundation for their financial support of this project and for the great working relationship shared from an emergency preparedness and prevention perspective. This relationship benefits all the citizens and visitors of Person County. PUBLIC HEARING: PETITION SUP-01-23 – A REQUEST BY PERSON COUNTY GOVERNMENT, PROPERTY OWNER OF ±281.5-ACRES (SUBJECT PROPERTY), LOCATED AT TAX MAP AND PARCEL NO. A76 15, TO APPROVE SPECIAL USE PERMIT SUP-01-23 IN AN R (RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT FOR A PASSIVE RECREATIONAL PARK USE: A motion was made by Vice Chairman Sims and carried 5-0 to open the duly advertised public hearing for Petition SUP-01-23, a request by Person County Government, property owner of +281.5-acres (subject property), located at Tax Map and Parcel No. A76 15, to approve a Special Use Permit in an R (Residential) Zoning District for a passive recreational park use. The public hearing set to hear a request by Person County Government, property owner of +281.5-acres (subject property), located at Tax Map and Parcel No. A76 15, to approve a Special Use Permit in an R (Residential) Zoning District for a passive recreational park use required a quasi-judicial zoning decision whereby witnesses are to be sworn in and subject to cross examination, no ex parte communication and requires findings of fact. January 3, 2023 3 County Attorney, Ellis Hankins said the clerk published the notice of public hearing that is required by law. Mr. Hankins pointed out this was not the usual up or down legislative rezoning; this is a special use permit application and the Person County Ordinance and state laws say that this is called a quasi-judicial hearing which simply means anyone and everyone who wishes to speak can do that and testify after being sworn in. He said the Board is required by the ordinance and state law to hear all the evidence, including live testimony and the documents available with the application and other information including the information and documents that will be submitted by the witnesses probably. He said the Board is required to make a decision based on and only on that evidence in the record. Mr. Hankins said there is now before you in the agenda and agenda packet, an agenda abstract probably from the Planning Director and he will talk with you, he was sure, about the four criteria at the end of this proceeding. He added the Board will have to take the four criteria into consideration and make a decision about whether the evidence that has been offered, as part of the record, allows the finding for each of those criteria to be satisfied. If the Board sees one way or the other, Mr. Hankins said, however the Board votes at the end of the proceeding, the staff will work on a written order to reflect the action of the Board and then present that written order for approval as the law requires. Mr. Hankins stated that was the process and he was happy to answer questions. Chairman Powell administered the Oath of Sworn Testimony to the following individuals who would offer testimony during the public hearing: Chris Bowley, John Hill, Andy Oakley, Barry Allen, Patricia “PJ” Gentry, Carole Pastore, Janna Kisner, Tom Brown, and Al Pastore. Mr. Hankins said the subject of this session is in fact owned by Person County but the Board still has a duty to be impartial and do everything as he said in his previous comments without bias, as the Board would for any other special use permit application for any other property. Planning & Zoning Director Chris Bowley shared the following presentation for SUP-01-23. January 3, 2023 4 Mr. Bowley stated it was a 281.5-acre tract located in the southeast portion of Person County. He noted the SUP application is required to use the site as a passive recreational park based on the zoning district. January 3, 2023 5 January 3, 2023 6 January 3, 2023 7 January 3, 2023 8 Mr. Bowley said the Subject Property is located directly west of and adjacent to property located at 5845 Moores Mill Road (Tilley Property). The site is generally located approximately 1,500 linear feet (LF) west of Moores Mill Road, ±2,000 LF north of Onie Burton Road (Tax Map and Parcel No. A76 15 and Parcel Identification No. 0921-03-20-8848.000), and adjacent to the Flat River. Access to the site would be provided through the Tilley Property within an easement from Moores Mills Road. The zoning designation of R (Residential), a rural land use category for the Subject Property is compatible with the rural future land use designation for the site. Mr. Bowley said if the site was built under the currently zoning designation of 281-acres with residential land use designation would yield 562 homes; that is on the gross, which means you apply the density across the entire parent tract. On the net, which is what would really be developed, Mr. Bowley, less out roads and storm water areas, amenities, so forth, you would end up with 422 homes. He said with a rural category that has a 1-unit per acre limitation but assumes no rezoning on the property, which would have 281 homes on the gross, and the net would be 211 homes, losing 70 units. He noted the trip generation externally generated from a project such as the 211 unit property, you are looking at .99 external trips for a single family home which is the equivalent of 211 new trips onto Moores Mill Road whereas a park generates .11 trip per acre, which is 31 additional new trips on the Moores Mill Road. Mr. Bowley said the low impact use is a passive recreational park meaning it is not active; this means it does not have large playgrounds, its respectful of the existing natural land and situe, it doesn’t clear or grade the property, it doesn’t add curbing, gutter or a lot of paved parking areas, etc. Mr. Bowley said it also makes the site accessible to the entire community used by hikers, bird watchers, environmental groups, trail runners, all-inclusive of handicap residents with limited recreational opportunities, etc. It proposes a minimal impact on land and maximum environmental preservation. January 3, 2023 9 Mr. Bowley told the Board the Findings of Fact are the factors the Board should consider in making a decision on whether to approve this SUP. January 3, 2023 10 January 3, 2023 11 Chairman Powell said at one point, we did talk about a graveyard on that property and asked Mr. Bowley if he remembered that and if that was all cleared. Mr. John Hill, Director of the Recreation, Arts and Parks Department said there was a graveyard on the property. Mr. Hankins asked Mr. Hill to include an explanation of in his testimony. Speaking in favor of the request by Person County Government, property owner of +281.5-acres (subject property), located at Tax Map and Parcel No. A76 15, to approve a Special Use Permit in an R (Residential) Zoning District for a passive recreational park use were the following: Mr. Barry Allen of 4391 Moore’s Mill Road, Rougemont affirmed his name and stated he prepared very brief remarks but supplemented with written testimony which the Clerk has enough for each of you. Mr. Allen stated he strongly supports the development of the park on the County Farm property. He said he does not fully support the Special Use Permit Application, as written. For full disclosure, Mr. Allen stated he met with Director John Hill, at his invitation, last Wednesday and was shown the preliminary site plan for the park. The application was not yet available. Mr. Allen said his comments do not pertain to what is in the Application but to what is not in it. He noted important findings of fact are missing from each of the four categories enumerated in the County’s Planning Ordinance. Mr. Allen gave the Board facts for each category. Category 1. Health and Safety: Drinking water protection and water quality are not mentioned or discussed in the application, but the rational for developing the park is to comply with the IAIA by reducing nutrient influx into the Falls Lake. Traffic impacts of the park on Moores Mill Road are not discussed, but this was an important concern of citizens at the public meetings. Measures for assuring safety and security or providing utilities for the park are not mentioned. The easement for future quarry access road, which could cut the park in two, is not shown on the site plan as is required by the Planning Ordinance. Category 2. Meets all Requirements: A deed restriction or protective covenant, to run with the land, will be required by the Planning Ordinance as a condition for a storm water permit. Even better, a commitment to see a Conservation Easement would meet this requirement. Mr. Allen said he provided information in the supplement material about that. The cemetery on the County property must be included in the plan to comply with North Carolina statutes. Mr. Allen said he has provided the statutes. January 3, 2023 12 Category 3: Effects on adjoining or abutting property: Mr. Allen said they have been told that nighttime lighting and noisy activities will not be allowed, but this should be confirmed in the application. At the 17 May 2021 commissioners’ meeting, staff proposed that watercraft would launch from the park. This would make property owners along the river unwitting abutters to activities originating in the park. Although we have been told that this will not happen, that should be stated in the application. Fences and a gate are not shown or described in the application, though they have been promised. Category 4: Harmony and Conformity: More than 18 months ago, a group of property owners on the Flat River requested that staff collaborate with us to assure that the park will be developed in harmony with the environment and with the use and enjoyment of our properties, while assuring that the recreational needs of the county citizens and visitors are met. This collaboration is needed and should be formalized. In conclusion, Mr. Allen said he hoped these comments will help the Board in your deliberations. In written remarks, Mr. Allen provided to Ms. Reaves, (to distribute to the Board) each fact is accompanied by actions in support of the park. These actions are not part of my oral testimony since they are technically evidence, not facts. Mr. Allen said he was happy to answer questions and provide more information. He thanked the Board for their attention. Ms. Patricia “PJ” Gentry of 541 Byrd Creek Lane, Hurdle Mills said Mr. Allen had some very good points which I think can probably be (she said she was not an expert, here) added to the determination of the final outcome; the quantities of the details that may be missing from the site application. Mr. Hankins interjected an answer to her question and perhaps Mr. Allen, is that the Board can impose any conditions to the special use permit if the Board votes to approve this permit; any conditions that the Board sees fit to impose. Ms. Gentry said he has some good points that are probably missing so that is very helpful. Ms. Gentry spoke in support of the County Farm, an asset that has been on the County books for many, many years, 30+ years and what she calls a non-performing asset, as it is not doing anything for the County, not costing the County money, but not generating money either. Ms. Gentry said it was originally acquired by the County to protect water and resources. Unfortunately, the Board, back in the day that purchased the land, did not also purchase access. So there has been no monitoring, no access without permission of other surrounding landowners to get to it. She said she spent hours with staff walking the property and it was unmonitored, unsafe and all kinds of activities going on back there that we don’t know about, and the County is on the hook for that, ultimately. She said to convert this asset into something usable that will be monitored by the county, by staff, is a very good thing for the health and safety of the area and the citizens that are around it. Ms. Gentry January 3, 2023 13 stated she was very much in support of it. She noted by doing so with an asset that we don’t have to go out and purchase an asset to meet the requirements of five years from the Division of Water Quality of over a half-million dollars that the County would have to pay for the stormwater mitigation if we didn’t have this land. Ms. Gentry said this was a real plus for Person County that we don’t have to go out and acquire something else to do this; it doesn’t require the purchase of the land, it meets the storm water regulations, provides mountain biking trails, nature conservation. It does repair and protect the riparian buffers of the waterways, it keeps those protected. Ms. Gentry said we do provide fencing, although it apparently is not clear enough on the site plan, but like you said, that can be added. Ms. Gentry said she mentioned a couple, three, four weeks ago, last year that naming the park is kinda important for some of the people that live in the area and had proposed a Burton/Tilley Park naming honoring the legacy of the families that has settled and worked that land for generations and would be a good thing for the County to do. Ms. Gentry stated she was hoping once the Board gets all the finding of facts in front of them, the Board would make certain conditions to move forward and get this asset working for the County in a positive way. She thanked the Board. Ms. Carole Pastore of 110 Green Mile Road, Rougemont stated she had questions and not sure if she was for or against the park. She said one of her questions is the stormwater fees will fund the development of the park, what fees will be imposed to maintain the Park? Will it be an additional tax burden on the county residents? Mr. Hankins responded and suggested that outside this hearing, she might want to contact County staff to discuss those matters noting the Board does not have a back/forth discussion. Ms. Pastore thanked Mr. Hankins noting she came in with her tax information and that was her question. She added an additional concern that if there were trails, would there be restrooms and who will maintain that? Ms. Pastore thanked the Board. Ms. Janna Kisner of 200 Semora Road, Roxboro stated she was representing the Person County Friends of the Parks. She said the Friends of the Parks were eager to begin volunteer work to prepare the trails, promote and support the opening of this new County Farm Park as soon as possible. She said it has been a long-time coming since it was originally approved in 2021 and the Friends of the Parks hopes that this Board will approve the remaining items needed to clear the path for this project to move forward. Ms. Kisner thanked the Board for its support of this new park to this point as it will be such a new asset as other people have pointed out tonight in their other remarks. Ms. Kisner said 2023 has been officially designated the North Carolina Year of the Trail with the goal of boosting awareness of trails as well as trail use across the state of North Carolina. Officials chose the year 2023 because it will be the 50th anniversary of the 1973 North Carolina Trail System Act. She added this would be a great year to get this project completed and opened to the public and to promote and celebrate that statewide momentum of the North Carolina Year of the Trail. Ms. Kisner urged the Board’s approval of it and stated agreement with all the other remarks that have been made in support of the asset of this park. January 3, 2023 14 Speaking in opposition to the request by Person County Government, property owner of +281.5-acres (subject property), located at Tax Map and Parcel No. A76 15, to approve a Special Use Permit in an R (Residential) Zoning District for a passive recreational park use were the following: Mr. Tom Brown of 648 Cedar Laurel Lane, Rougemont stated he had been to a couple of the previous meetings about this planned park and he had a couple of questions. Mr. Brown said he was a finance professional so his questions were basically on finances for this operation. He said the woman just mentioned she had some financial concerns and he noted he has spoken with a number of people on the Board and others involved asking these questions and have yet to get an answer. Something such as how is it going to be funded; what is the annual costs; will taxes increase? Mr. Brown said that is obviously a concern just as a taxpayer in general. He said those that he has asked, including John and some other members, Ms. Gentry, they just didn’t know. Mr. Brown said he understood the money has been earmarked to build this park and that is fine; three to five years from now someone is going to have to pay for the upkeep and if that is the taxpayers, then that is something that needs to be considered. Mr. Brown said he has asked a number of people in this room and no one has the answers yet. He said Ms. Gentry made a nice statement, she said “it doesn’t cost us anything” right now he added and that’s about to change. Mr. Brown said it’s gonna cost a lot of money to upkeep that park. He said he lives across from the Flat River and has yet to see anybody out there noting he has been out there eight years. He stated he has never seen anybody on that property, never caused any damage; what he does see yes, there is a lot of wildlife. Is he opposed to the park in general, not really noting his concern was the financial aspect and that is something he thinks the Board should consider. He posed if the county has all this extra money laying around that is going to maintain this park, is there a better use for it? Mr. Brown said one thing that was mentioned was the traffic coming in and out of the park; the rate of speed on that road, outside that park is in excess of 50mph and on a tight corner with already a number of accidents this past year. How many more will there be because of it? He said that has not been addressed at all (any other traffic concerns). One final thing Mr. Brown asked if this was next to your house, would you want it put in? Mr. Brown thanked the Board. Mr. Al Pastore of 110 Green Mile Road, Rougemont said he lives not on the river, but really, really close (one property away). Mr. Pastore stated his concerns were twofold and that is watercraft and people pulling over on what is called on, what you call, the greenway on either side of the river. He asked if there was anything to prevent them from having campfires, and that sort of thing? Mr. Pastore said he did not expect an answer from the Board but just bringing this up. The other thing is water safety; he asked if a provision been made for people falling over; it’s a very rocky area, hitting rocks floating down the river. He asked has there been something put together for emergency services that can get to the river? Other than that, Mr. Pastore said the park is a great idea but was concerned. He asked if people are going to be coming up the river? Are people going to be able to hunt along the river in canoes that come from the park? He said those were his concerns and he hopes to get some information somewhere along the way. Mr. Pastore thanked the Board. January 3, 2023 15 Mr. Hankins said he thought there were going to be other witnesses from staff and questioned if that was the time for that. Clerk to the Board said if that was the desire from the Board, then the answer is yes. Chairman Powell asked staff to proceed. Mr. Hill said he would talk on a number of different things that he heard tonight. He said he took notes on what he had heard were concerns. Mr. Hill said first and foremost a site plan, which is a preliminary plan to get a special use permit; it is not a construction document. Mr. Hill said when moving further into this process, the engineering firm will actually devise a construction document so that we can do things, like, go out to bid, and show specifics of what is detailed into that site. Having said that, Mr. Hill stated they will have to have a number of public meetings and they have a contract with the architecture firm to conduct a couple more public meetings so that all information gathered from the public can be put into the design in the complete construction document. Just to let you know, Mr. Hill said as we are talking about this application, you will see somethings in the application that are required, but if it’s not in the application, it is not required, for example, the fencing. Mr. Hill said the fencing is another contractual obligation that we have in the closing. So there are things that are contractual obligated in the closing and there are some things that are obligated in the actual site plan. Mr. Hankins asked Mr. Hill to go into a little more detail about what he just said. Mr. Hankins said it was his recollection that the county entered into an agreement with the abutting property owner and under that agreement, Mr. Tilley, conveyed to the County the access easement across his property to the County owned property, is that correct? Mr. Hill responded that is correct. Mr. Hankins stated that in that agreement, were there some provisions to which Mr. Hill said there were, noting one of the conditions was (he said he did not have that in front of him) fencing, barriers, signage, ways to keep people out, the riparian buffer, so on and so forth. Mr. Hill said it was a stack rail fence that was on the perimeter of the park; Mr. Hankins asked Mr. Hill for the entire perimeter of the park to which Mr. Hill said it was not the water section of the park where we would actually be doing more environmental harm putting up a fence near the river than just leaving it natural and using the money that we are going to get for the riparian buffer to take care of that project. Mr. Hill said there are obligations that we have contractually from the purchase that are not required to be in the special use permit application. Mr. Hankins said all those provisions in that agreement are binding contractual obligations to which Mr. Hill said correct. Based on this storm water program, Mr. Hill said we are obligated to other things that are not specifically in this application, as well. For example, the trail system is an educational trail system and we didn’t specifically put on the site plan that this particular overlook is educational or whatever. On the site plan, it is just an overlook or a shelter. Mr. Hill said if we were to get specific in it, we haven’t studied the eco system in there long enough to know what exactly we are educating people on, if that makes any sense. Mr. Hill said that is why it is not a construction document, it is preliminary. January 3, 2023 16 Mr. Hill said he had a few notes that he wanted to talk about from the facts of finding. He said let me just go down the line, here. Before he got started also, he said he had a letter or an email correspondence from Michelle Wells who is the Executive Director of the North Carolina Recreation & Parks Association. He said he did not know if she would be considered an expert, but he would think being the executive of this association, that she knows what she is talking about. Mr. Hill said he would like to give this to Brenda (is that who takes this evidence)? Mr. Hankins stated that was permissible and wondered if Mr. Hill would like to, without reading the entire message, just give the gist of it. Mr. Hill said, so basically she touches on what parks, in general, do for communities, and a lot of that touches on the four facts of findings, so for example: parks and green spaces enhance the well-being of the residents, promoting physical activity, mental health, and of course their physical health and that touches on #1. Also #1, Mr. Hill stated crime was a big concern, everybody is talking about crime and we don’t want parks to bring crime into our back yard so on and so forth; he said he did not blame them, he did not want it either. Mr. Hill said she also speaks on that, on how there was numbers of studies out there, right now, and he said he has three studies for the Board to submit as evidence, one from the Indy Weekly, one from National Studies and then one from NC State University on how creating green spaces and parks in communities reduces the amount of crime in that particular community. He added it gives specific reasons why it reduces the crime with the main reason why is because you have good people using parks and they will tell on the bad people, long and short. Mr. Hill said she speaks on that particular point and also mentions, in here, where we are talking about finding of fact #3 where it talks about hurting the property values of the adjoining properties, and of course, I have three or four studies, in here that I want to submit as evidence that show that building a park and green space near communities or near a house actually increases the value of your property and it enhances the marketability of your property if you are wanting to sell it. Mr. Hill said he would leave this letter because it is some of the things that she touches on, not to mention, the other stuff, like how it helps your entire community and how it helps the communities around you with clean air, clean water; this is a stormwater nutrient load project, what this project is all about. Also, Mr. Hill stated he had a letter here from one of our Recreation Advisory Board members, Stephen Vaughan, who is also a member of the Friends of the Parks and he is talking specifically as a police officer; in this particular, where he works in Durham where parks have actually helped prevent crime, in some circumstances. The idea behind that is, just like all of your other parks in Person County, you have good people using your parks. Typically bad people don’t want to hang out where good people are because they get told on or they call John Hill or the law enforcement, so on and so forth. Since we started this project, Mr. Hill said there has been some crime reduction so when we first assessed this particular property, the group that was with me, I pointed out every one of the things that were taking place on the property illegally; Mr. Hill said he loved to hunt, but you have to hunt on your own property or you got to hunt on property that you are allowed to hunt on. He said they pointed out illegal hunting blinds, we pointed out alcohol being used and possibly other substances on that particular property. Since then, General Services has had a conversation with Wildlife, posted the property to make sure the hunting blinds have been January 3, 2023 17 taken away from there, and also, his staff have been communicating with the Wildlife Resource Commission to make sure that before we do any preliminary work that they got on the property to survey the property and make sure that stuff was not happening. So, that in itself, we have started pushing out people that were doing what they weren’t supposed to been doing. Mr. Hill stated he also wanted to touch on emergencies as the gentleman had a question about the emergency action plan. He said of course, they were in talks with the Timberlake Fire Department and we will be having many conversations with the Sheriff’s Department, Highway Patrol, DOT and working on an actual protocol for emergencies. As a matter of fact, Jason, the Chief with the Timberlake Fire Department is ready to go with a plan. Mr. Hill said they do plan on having some type of hub, or something on the inside of this park so that they have actual equipment sitting in there, and be ready for an emergency, whenever the need. But of course, that will be in the construction document. A discussion about the traffic, Mr. Hill said the traffic was a very hot topic because everybody was talking about how traffic and how loaded up that road is during the day, every afternoon. Mr. Hill said he lived in Timberlake for 18 years and knows that road as well. He added he would let the engineer talk a little bit further on that particular thing. Mr. Hill said he had actually had a conversation just recently with DOT and already talking about the process of how once there is a park, if there is a park, that we can put processes in place to help slow down the traffic. He said he did get a comment from a rep in DOT that said there is a difference between concentrated traffic and intermittent traffic. For example, Mr. Hill said drive time is concentrated traffic, at 8:00am or 6:00am or whenever you going to work and of course, 5:00pm or 6:00pm when you coming back (that’s concentrated). Mr. Hill said park use, when you have a park that is passive, you will not have a concentrated group showing up there all at one time. For example, Mr. Hill said a concentrated use would be the Sportsplex at 6:00pm, that is a concentrated use. You will get 500 people showing up at 6:00pm to make that game. When you go mountain biking or hiking, you will only have one or two people in your car so you only have a car, or you may have a friend following you in a car so your load is very light and not making that much effect on the traffic volume. The other concern that was heard, not tonight, but in the other public meetings was to address was not so much the load but the speed on Moores Mill Road. Mr. Hill said right now Parks and Recreation does not have a park so we have nobody in that community right now advocating with DOT or law enforcement, or whatever, to talk about alleviating that speed issue. When Parks and Recreation does finally have a park, if they have a park, that is when we will have deeper conversations with law enforcement, with DOT to put protocols in place, i.e. signage, traffic stops, so on and so forth, to take care of that speed issue. He said it was not a volume issue, but a speed issue. He noted the comment was made during one of his DOT conversations that if you have speed issues on a road and you have a park entrance that you getting ready to enhance, or getting ready to put signage up for that park entrance, typically the person coming into the park is not going 65mph as they are the ones that are getting ready to stop, so of course, they are going to help the January 3, 2023 18 situation by slowing traffic up on that particular road. Mr. Hill said that was not a scientific thing, that was him having a conversation with DOT. Mr. Hill said this plan is also; we have to think about the facts of finding, the public health thing noting it is in your master plan, your Comprehensive Master Plan for the County and also in the Comprehensive Master Plan for the Health Department that we do need more opportunity for exercise, health and wellness and recreation; this is a big opportunity and of course, he said he hasn’t met a situation yet where putting a park or a health or wellness amenity in a community has hindered the safety of that particular community. He said if anyone can tell him of one in Person County where it has hindered the safety, then he’s been here a long time and hasn’t seen it yet, so all it does is enhance the overall health. Mr. Hill asked if anyone had any questions for him. Commissioner Puryear asked Mr. Hill to address if there is going to be any outdoor lighting to which Mr. Hill stated there would not be any outdoor lighting. Mr. Hill said this is a passive park, just like a state park or a national park. Mr. Hill said when your gate closes, they want you to get the hint and you gotta be out. He added the signage will say, you have to be out, it will be a sunrise to sundown park. Mr. Hill said in his experiences with lighting for park areas, the more lighting you have, specific types of parks, passive parks, lighting brings crime. He said when you have lighting, you have more crime, as you have a hangout now because this thing is down the road at Moores Mill. When you have lighting in urban or inner-city park, for example, the Huck Sansbury, you are reducing crime, if that makes any sense. He said they go by the standards in talking to other parks’ professionals. Mr. Hill said criminals don’t want to cross the gate and go a mile into a dense wooded area that they cannot see in by foot. When the gates close and lights are off, they will get the picture. Another part of that, too, is also, is we still have to have a conversation with Wildfire and also the Sheriff’s Department. He said the lighting situation at the front gate will also depend on what they want as well. If they say, we are hearing there are problems down here, can you put us a light, so on and so forth, so when we pull up, it comes on or when somebody else pulls up, it might be a motion light; something to communicate with the Sheriff’s Department about. At this time, Mr. Hill said no. With this being a passive park, Commissioner Puryear asked Mr. Hill will any permits be issued for any concentrated events at the park that will conflict with the harmony of the community or traffic flow. Mr. Hill said community events, if there was a community event, it would be Parks and Recreation doing the event and would be something like very periodic, i.e., like Mayo Park 5K trail races every now and then, or the school, the RCS or the high school may want to do a cross country event on there; that would be the only types of events. At this time, Mr. Hill said they do not have a rental agreement nor a permit agreement or contract that the public can come in and actually rent. At this time, Mr. Hill said that was not in their plans. Commissioner Puryear said that was not the intent of the park to which Mr. Hill that was not the intent of the part; it is a passive park. January 3, 2023 19 Vice Chairman Sims asked Mr. Hill about a couple things he touched on, one thing in particular he liked was that the posting that property would prevent illegal hunting and gives the game warden, Wildlife Resources Officers, the ability to go in and enforce that posting; the other thing that was mentioned was water safety noting his understanding that we would not allow, (of course, you can’t control because there is no fence), access to the river from that property as far as your trails and things of that nature. Vice Chairman Sims said the water safety was mentioned and not allow someone to take their canoes on that property and carry it down to the river, is that correct? Mr. Hill stated that was correct. At this time, Mr. Hill said you can see on the site plan, a 50ft. riparian buffer, with one of the #1 projects that we are trying to accomplish with the storm water program under the URNBA, and have increased that to 100ft. He noted we are only required 50ft. by Falls but we actually made it 100ft so we will have a primary and then we will have a secondary educational in some type of buffer there, but we don’t plan at this time, to start advertising canoe and kayak access. Mr. Hill said the plan has totally morphed, if you can say, from water to mountain biking and hiking so that is more our concentration at this time. Vice Chairman Sims said you can’t control people that put kayaks on the river and paddle up but can control any parking of boats, and the water using access to the park; something to address with that to which Mr. Hill confirmed. Vice Chairman Sims mentioned Commissioner Puryear mentioned about the lights noting the landowner that the County got the access to easement but if he wanted to put up lights on his property, obviously he has that right to which Mr. Hill said that is correct. Vice Chairman Sims said that would not be the County. Mr. Hill noted he has had a number of conversations with the landowner, Mr. Tilley and said we would work with Mr. Tilley any way we can. Vice Chairman Sims said someone mentioned earlier about a cemetery on the land and asked Mr. Hill if that was taken care of to which Mr. Hill said the plan, which is not seen on the site plan, is working with the Register of Deeds, and of course working with our GIS Sallie to clean up that cemetery and make that part of the trail system so that could be a historical part of the trail system, similar to what is at Mayo noting there is a cemetery on that particular trail system as well. Mr. Hill said that was our plan, our intentions and obligated by law to take care of that since it is on our property. Vice Chairman Sims said the other question that was brought up was an easement of a future quarry access road and asked Mr. Hill if that was a possibility at all or what are we looking at there? Mr. Hill said they have done some research on that and reached out to Martin Marietta and they said they do indeed have a legal access across that property but other conversations with other attorneys say that is not the case. Mr. Hill said we haven’t gone down the road long enough to really dig into that issue as we haven’t heard from Martin Marietta whether they will exercise anything or not and was sure, if they do, they will have to give us some kind of really long notice and go through some type of process with the Department of Environment & Natural Resources. In a worst case scenario, Mr. Hill says they do plan to move forward, he would assume they would have to go through special use permit process, like this because that easement goes through a park which goes through a residential section; he said he did not know how that works. Second part, Mr. Hill said the community may be upset about that so Martin Marietta may have to deal with that. Third thing Mr. Hill wanted to mention January 3, 2023 20 is also in the agreement with Martin Marietta; if they were to exercise that agreement, they have to give the landowner full access to that easement, and that easement has to be paved within one year to DOT specification. Mr. Hill reiterated giving access for us to utilize it. He said that was way down the road and he did not anticipate, in his professional opinion, would have to do that, but never say never. But that is where we are with that Mr. Hill said. Vice Chairman Sims said he would hope not, that was a big deal to which Mr. Hill agreed noting the community would have a lot to say about that. Mr. Hankins posed some hypothetical questions to Mr. Hills about that easement that may or may not exist. Mr. Hankins asked hypothetically if this park is approved, developed and comes into operation and if Martin Marietta, a possible holder of an easement goes through the process and receives from the state a permit to operate the quarry, and then seeks to make sure of an easement partly across this county park property, would it be your intention, if you are still a county employee to work with that company to try to negotiate the least harmful path for such an easement so that it would have minimal impact on park operations and on the abutting property? Mr. Hill stated absolutely and that was one of the first contingencies we talked about in this project, first and foremost, if the company actually did want to come here, they want to be good stewards of the community and our plan would be to talk with that company and on the best plan to put that road in, like you said with minimal impact. Of course, on the other side of the ticket, Mr. Hill said we have a card in our pocket because this is a storm water program with the URNBA and DENR may have issue if they are not willing to work with us to put that easement in a manner that is good for the environment and for the people. Vice Chairman Sims stated one more question to bring up and mentioned from gentleman out here today about the financial responsibility down the road; he asked Mr. Hill what was the thoughts on that knowing we have grant money and things of that nature; what is the thoughts on what it will cost down the road for us to maintain that park as far as your planning five years, six years down the road, whatever? Mr. Hill stated he was actually will be submitting a budget number since we are in the budget process. He said he intention was that dealing with maintenance will probably, not wanting quote this close in the game, or this far out in the game but if you need to add additional part-time staff, you are looking at about $15,000 per year for one; this is a passive park, one of those pack it in, pack it out trash kind of a deals. Mr. Hill said they wanted to try to keep it like that natural national park, state park feel to it so he thinks their maintenance will be fairly minimal. He said they will do trash pickup everyday but of course, they won’t pick up the entire Moores Mill Road and specifically the right-of-way in and out the park. He said maintaining trails is not that expensive, with the biggest expense maybe the bathrooms, eventually, if that comes to fruition, if we put running water or electricity down there. Mr. Hill said he didn’t want to come up with that number, like here, but would be minimal. He said he would not be like maintaining the Sportsplex where you are cutting grass every day or you are fertilizing every day. He said the idea was to keep it as natural as possible and that is based on the IAIA program. January 3, 2023 21 Mr. Hankins said he wanted to draw his attention to the first finding of fact criterion for public health or safety; he said one of the witnesses asked about restroom facilities and asked Mr. Hill to address the likely solution to that issue, please. Mr. Hill asked if the question will there be a restroom noting at this time the first phase you will probably gonna see a porta-john for a restroom facility; the second phase will be down the road, and it all depends too. Mr. Hill stated he would like to have a restroom facility there supporting the parking lot and the facility. Mr. Hill said he was proposing in our Parks & Recreation Trust Fund Grant this coming March/April deadline for a restroom facility to be put down there and already started to get cost figures to run electricity and started talk with environmental health about what it would take to put a restroom there, so on and so forth. Mr. Hankins stated, still on the first finding of fact, public safety, one of the witnesses asked about public safety and potential county liability along the waterfront and asked Mr. Hill to comment about what steps the county would likely take. Mr. Hill said they would be working with Timberlake Volunteer Fire Department and of course, our emergency services to come up with some type of protocol for an emergency that would take place on County property. Having said that, Mr. Hill said he was not saying there is not going to be an emergency and gave Mayo as an example, with a large shoreline; he said they deal with water access, deal with a lot of situations where people are utilizing water, but we don’t create an attractive nuisances is their big thing. For example, Mr. Hill said if we are saying, stay off the riparian buffer, this is an eco system here, utilize the observation decks to take a look at the water, then we are trying to prevent them from getting into the water. He added if they mention using a boat, Mr. Hill said the closest access from a trail to the nearest parking area to the water is almost half-mile/quarter-mile. Mr. Hill said you would have to pick up your kayak and if you are determined enough to walk quarter-mile with your kayak and go across the riparian buffer, which we will enhance, he couldn’t do anything for situations like that. That would be similar to a situation where someone would go down to Moores Mill Bridge noting he did not see any difference in liability between this park, emergency wise and Mayo Park. Following up, Mr. Hankins asked if it was fair to say that the staff has abundant experience with those potential waterfront public safety issues and potential County liability issues and learned lessons and engages in best practices to which Mr. Hill said that was correct as they do engage in best practices. Commissioner Palmer stated he knows the area well, and that the water gets really high there during wet-weather seasons noting he has seen it probably 10ft. over the banks before; he asked as it would be a 100 ft. buffer from the river to keep hikers out of the water to which Mr. Hill affirmed. Number two, Commissioner Palmer said we can’t control what happens on the other side of the river to which Mr. Hill responded correct. With no further questions, Mr. Hill thanked the Board. Mr. Andy Oakley said he used to work for the City of Roxboro and now works for Thomas and Hutton who are the Landscape Architect Engineers working on this project for the County. Mr. Oakley said you have heard a lot of testimony and a lot of people in favor January 3, 2023 22 of this project and really don’t have anything to add to Mr. Hill’s testimony unless the Board has any questions for him. Mr. Oakley said the Planning Director has noted the two special conditions that he intended to meet all permit and environmental requirements including North Carolina Department of Transportation and Environmental Health. He added this was just one-step in a process. He asked the Board if they had any technical questions about the project itself. Mr. Hankins commented about procedures while the Board was still in the public hearing noting the Board, if wished, could close the public hearing and proceed to make a decision on the matter or the Board may, if wished, continue the public hearing to a future meeting, if, for example, the Board were to ask the staff to review the materials that have been submitted, and in particularly suggestions for other conditions and ask staff to speak again at the continued public hearing and inform the Board whether in response to the comments and materials submitted, the staff may wish to recommend additional conditions. He said it was up to the Board on how to proceed. Chairman Powell said he wasn’t sure if that would come after the closing of the public hearing. Mr. Hankins said if the Board were to do the second option, he suggested the Board to continue the hearing and then have staff testify again as part of the public hearing. Chairman Powell said a continuation is probably good and did not think any of the Board are opposed to this project noting he keeps hearing some of the same concerns as noted in the public meetings prior to this and still don’t have any answers to those questions so that would be his suggestion to continue the public hearing with the question information back to the Board so to make a decision. He added this park would not maintain itself, not control what is going on in there; the County will have to do that; traffic control, sure, but how? Chairman Powell said the Board needed specifics and needs directions on how to move forward with this and just at this point, does not have it. Again, Chairman Powell said he was not opposed to the park itself but if they were going to do it, he wanted to do it right because it is a County liability so the Board was left holding the bag, so to speak with some of the issues aren’t addressed and something does happen down there, we might have thoughts on how we will maintain it, thoughts on how we are going to control from law enforcement side, traffic side, whatever it may be or restroom facilities, all these things are hypothetical and unanswered. He said that would be his recommendation, not knowing about the rest of the Board. Vice Chairman Sims stated he had questions. Was there a timeline or anything of that nature that will affect any grants or any money coming in, any deadline to look at as far as how soon we need to meet again to talk about this? Mr. Hankins said probably a question for Mr. Hill. Mr. Hill stated their first application review is going to be in March for the Parks & Recreation Trust Fund Grant so he was hoping to have the application in place with all of the cost estimates, so on and so forth, that would include things like restrooms, parking areas, traffic signage, all of those things. Then, on top of that, Mr. Hill said they recently received $100,000 with Piedmont Conservation Council and I will have to figure out what their timeline is for starting that particular project as well, and that is for the riparian buffer. He added if we don’t hit that mark, then our opportunity for that grant which is in the amount of close to $400K, then we are looking at next year, pushing it back. Mr. Hankins asked January 3, 2023 23 Mr. Hill if the Board were to decide this at the next meeting on February 17th, correction, January 17th, to which Mr. Hill said it would have to be. Commissioner Puryear questioned what improvements and staff recommendations and direction was this Board asking if the Board delayed the public hearing; what are we asking the applicant to take a more in-depth view of, i.e., such as a traffic study or an environmental study, questions, that may take more than two weeks to come up with answers. Commissioner Puryear said he could only speak for himself and respected Chairman Powell’s opinion as well. Commissioner Puryear stated Mr. Hill and all the witnesses answered all the direct questions as they were presented to them. If the direction of this Board to continue this public hearing, Commissioner Puryear asked what direction are we asking the staff to do and two weeks is a very limited timeframe, especially with the great opportunities are in front of us as well. Mr. Hankins said the Board, as he said, may do whatever the Board wishes, act now or continue the hearing if the Board wants to do that until the next meeting. He said at least one of the witnesses did recommend some things and he put it in writing that could be construed as suggestions for additional conditions. Mr. Hankins questioned whether the Board wishes the staff to review those suggestions and report back to the Board in a continued public hearing noting they do not have to do that. Commissioner Puryear asked Mr. Hankins if he was referring to Mr. Allen’s comments to which Mr. Hankins affirmed. Commissioner Puryear asked Mr. Hill if his staff and the applicant’s staff be able to address these facts of opinion that were presented by one of the witnesses tonight by the time of the Board’s next meeting takes place on January 17th to which Mr. Hill said he has not had the chance to look at it and asked if he could take a look, which Commissioner Puryear affirmed. Mr. Hill said he would have time to do a detailed report but he felt he has addressed these as discussing the traffic impact issue and started that ball rolling with the DOT. Mr. Hill said they do not have a park there yet so there was no reason to even have a conversation with law enforcement yet to coordinate some type of protocol schedules or advocate for them to do traffic control for the park. He said those are protocols that typically take place during the development of a park and that is one of those imponderables that you don’t know how to fix it until you are dealing directly with it. Mr. Hill said the Board could do a traffic study all day long noting he has done traffic studies in town, specifically for the rec center, etc., looked at Depot Street, looked at others, those things are only telling you what the counts are so if a traffic study was done, it’s just going to tell me how many people go down that road. Mr. Hill said he and Andy actually talked about this this past week about the traffic study. Mr. Oakley said this project would not require any kind of traffic study from DOT; the volume of traffic is so low, they consider it almost negligible. The average daily traffic on Moores Mill Road is over 2,000 cars a day and this park would generate probably less than 40, so DOT will only be involved in reviewing the driveway permit and it is not even considered to be a commercial driveway from DOT’s perspective. January 3, 2023 24 Vice Chairman Sim stated his concern was that he did not want to see the County lose the opportunity for $400K for this project and time was important here. He asked how in-depth would they go into the findings trying to get answers and all of sudden the timeline; he does not want to lose the money or the opportunity, so, anyway. Mr. Hill said they also addressed the adjacent zoning, the Martin Marietta and we also talked about the cemetery, the plans to turning the cemetery into part of the history of Person County and part of that trail system. Mr. Hill said they discussed the lights and the noise as Person County already has a noise ordinance but we discussed the lights with no plan for a lighting system until after they talk to law enforcement; he did not anticipate they will have lights even after they talk to law enforcement unless they actually want them. If they do want them, then we have a conversation with the landowner. Mr. Hill said they talked about the effect of the financial of the devalue of property, #3 of the adjoining and abutting properties, and has given the Board some studies that going ahead and illustrating how it will enhance the property value. Also, creating a riparian buffer project and enhancing that riparian buffer will actually help the property owners on the other side of the river as well, as the river will be enhanced as well. Mr. Hill said fences were addressed as well as a contractual obligation based on the purchase. Regarding the collaboration, Mr. Hill said they were going to have two more public meetings that the engineering firms will conduct for public information and take the information already talked about through two public meetings and make sure consistent with what we are hearing. Mr. Hill said looking at the site plan, in his professional opinion they have addressed concerns above and beyond even in their preliminary non-specific site plan addressed those. Mr. Hill said in the purchase agreement, that has been addressed as well. Vice Chairman Sims stated agreement with Commissioner Puryear to proceed and go ahead and have a vote. Mr. Hankins stated the proper motion would be to close the public hearing. A motion was made by Commissioner Puryear and carried 5-0 to close the public hearing for Petition SUP-01-23, a request by Person County Government, property owner of +281.5-acres (subject property), located at Tax Map and Parcel No. A76 15, to approve a Special Use Permit in an R (Residential) Zoning District for a passive recreational park use. January 3, 2023 25 CONSIDERATION TO GRANT OR DENY REQUEST BY PERSON COUNTY GOVERNMENT, PROPERTY OWNER OF ±281.5-ACRES (SUBJECT PROPERTY), LOCATED AT TAX MAP AND PARCEL NO. A76 15, TO APPROVE SPECIAL USE PERMIT SUP-01-23 IN AN R (RESIDENTIAL) ZONING DISTRICT FOR A PASSIVE RECREATIONAL PARK USE: A motion was made by Commissioner Puryear and carried 5-0 to approve Special Use Permit (SUP-01-23) for the County Farm site for a passive recreational park use, with the following conditions: 1. The applicant obtains all required permits from the County Environmental Health Department, Planning & Zoning Department, and Inspections Department. 2. The applicant obtains required permits from the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality and any other agency to achieve construction, operations, and maintenance of the Subject Property.” INFORMAL COMMENTS: There were no comments from the public. DISCUSSION/ADJUSTMENT/APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA: A motion was made by Commissioner Puryear and carried 5-0 to approve the Consent Agenda with the following items: A. Approval of Minutes of December 5, 2022, B. Budget Amendment #12, and C. Grant Opportunity for Feasibility Study of paved trails and pedestrian connectivity in Person County January 3, 2023 26 NEW BUSINESS: MRF EXPANSION FEASIBILITY STUDY PRESENTATION: Amanda Everett, Person Industries (PI) Director introduced Mr. Matt Todd and Ms. Sherry Yarkosky with Resource Recycling Systems (RRS) and Mr. Jeff Marxreiter with Tina Bernard Designs to present, discuss, and answer questions regarding the MRF Feasibility Study and building addition for PI/Person County Recycling Center (PCRC) merger. Ms. Everett said the MRF Feasibility Study was performed due to the outdated machinery at PCRC, for a more effective business model for MRF, as well as to improve recycling flow. Relative to the merger of PI/PCRC, Ms. Everett stated the facility lease of the current Person Industries location at 601 N. Madison Blvd., Roxboro will expire May 25, 2025. Not including the building purchase price, Ms. Everett noted close to $1,000,000 of updates and repairs are needed to outfit the current location for safety, ADA, and to provide adequate services. Merging the two locations creates the ability to utilize staff more efficiently as well as provide additional production and recycling based jobs for adults with disabilities. Mr. Todd of RRS shared the following slides of the presentation with the Board: January 3, 2023 27 January 3, 2023 28 Ms. Yarkosky with RRS described the project background, the technical evaluation, technical requirements and the cost estimates. January 3, 2023 29 Ms. Yarkosky updated the estimated costs to $1.3M with the addition of a truck scales and conveyor. January 3, 2023 30 January 3, 2023 31 January 3, 2023 32 Mr. Marxreiter of Tina Bernard Designs provided a brief description of the schematic design integrating 20,000 sq. ft. to the current design of the Recycling Center facility. January 3, 2023 33 January 3, 2023 34 Chairman Powell noted the value of the vocational services to the community’s citizens with special needs. He asked the presenters if there was a way to make this service more self-sustainable to which Mr. Todd said that was a myth and recycling was more of a service, a utility from which recycling materials can be sorted and sold as a commodity. January 3, 2023 35 PROPOSAL FOR PERSON COUNTY FIRE PREVENTION AND PROTECTION ORDINANCE: Adam Morris, Person County Fire Marshal presented a proposal to the Board for a Person County Fire Prevention and Protection Ordinance. He said the proposed Fire Prevention and Protection Ordinance outlines the duties of the Fire Marshal’s Office as well as explains procedures for enforcement of fire codes, inspection frequency, civil penalties, false fire alarms, open burning, permits, Knox Boxes and response to hazardous materials incidents. Mr. Morris introduced the proposed ordinance for discussion and input from the Board. He noted the County Attorney, the County Manager and the Office of the State Fire Marshal have reviewed the proposed ordinance. Mr. Morris stated the only documentation on file with the Office of the State Fire Marshal is a letter, dated August 12, 1992, which lists the frequency of various types of inspections. The County also has in place a False Fire Alarm Ordinance and a Resolution Authorizing the Fire Marshal to Implement a Local Burn Ban, both of which are included in the proposed new Fire Prevention and Protection Ordinance and if adopted, would be recommended to be repealed. Following approval by the Board of Commissioners, the new ordinance would be submitted to the North Carolina Building Code Council for approval in March 2023. County Attorney Ellis Hankins stated the draft ordinance was before the Board for review, consideration at this time or at a future meeting; he said a public hearing was not required for approval of this ordinance however, the Board may schedule a public hearing if so desired. A motion was made by Commissioner Puryear and carried 5-0 to call a public hearing to be scheduled and advertised for the Board’s February 6, 2023 meeting to hear public comments related to the proposed Fire Prevention and Protection Ordinance. 2023 COMMISSIONER COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS: Chairman Powell presented the 2023 Commissioner Committee Assignments for approval. January 3, 2023 36 Person County Board of Commissioners 2023 COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS Chairman Gordon Powell Airport Commission Board of Health Economic Development Commission Research Triangle Regional Partnership Vaya Health Regional Board Vice Chairman Derrick Sims COG Board Environmental Issues Advisory Committee Fire Chief’s Association Region K Workforce Development Board UDO Steering Committee Commissioner Kyle Puryear Board of Equalization and Review Home & Community Care Block Grant Adv. Committee Juvenile Crime Prevention Council Library Board Local Emergency Planning Committee Person County Senior Center Advisory Council Commissioner Charlie Palmer Community Services Block Grant Advisory Council Extension Advisory Committee Person Area Transportation System Board Recreation Advisory Board Commissioner Jason Thomas Animal Services Advisory Committee Person County Partnership for Children Kerr Tar RPO – TAC Social Services Board Upper Neuse River Basin Association Presented for approval on January 3, 2023 A motion was made by Commissioner Puryear and carried 5-0 to accept Chairman Powell’s recommendation for the 2023 Commissioner Committee Assignments, as presented. January 3, 2023 37 APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMITTEES: Clerk to the Board Brenda B. Reaves presented to the Board interested citizen and agency applications for consideration for appointment to boards and committees in response to an ad published in the local newspaper and on the county website. Ms. Reaves requested the Board to nominate for appointment as deemed appropriate. Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee 1-Year Initial Term; 3-Year Reappointment: 2 positions available – no applications Agricultural Advisory Board A new advisory board established by the Board’s adoption of the Farmland Preservation Ordinance on Oct. 17, 2022. The county solicited for interested individuals for the broadest possible representation of the geographical regions of Person County and to represent, to the extent possible, all segments of agricultural production existing within the county. For consideration per the ordinance requirements, the applicants are to be a Person County citizen or a landowner. 2-Year Term: 2 positions for county residents or landowners 3-Year: 2 positions for county residents or landowners 4-Year Term: 3 positions for county residents or landowners Applications for consideration for a staggered 2/3/4-year terms included: Cal Berryhill; farm operator, field crops, tobacco, cattle Norman Boyette (does not qualify per the ordinance as a Person Co. citizen and/or landowner) Roy S. Carver, III: farm operator, tobacco, beef cattle production, hay production and sales Fred Fox, Jr.; part-time cattle and hog farmer Hunter Thomas; farm operator, tobacco, hog, field crops Bruce Whitfield; farm operator, firewood, hay and field crops A motion was made by Commissioner Puryear and carried 5-0 to appoint Cal Berryhill to the Agricultural Advisory Board for a 4-year term. A motion was made by Vice Chairman Sims and carried 5-0 to appoint Hunter Thomas to the Agricultural Advisory Board for a 4-year term. A motion was made by Commissioner Puryear and carried 5-0 to appoint Fred Fox, Jr. to the Agricultural Advisory Board for a 4-year term. A motion was made by Chairman Powell and carried 5-0 to appoint Roy S. Carver, III to the Agricultural Advisory Board for a 3-year term. A motion was made by Commissioner Thomas and carried 5-0 to appoint Bruce Whitfield to the Agricultural Advisory Board for a 3-year term. January 3, 2023 38 Airport Commission 3-Year Term: 1 citizen at-large position available; Dusty Wall requested reappointment 1 position for a licensed pilot that flies at least monthly, holds current FAA pilot and flight medical certificates (light sports pilot and student FAA licenses do not qualify): Steven Watkins requested reappointment A motion was made by Chairman Powell and carried 5-0 to reappoint Dusty Wall as the citizen at-large representative and Steven Watkins as the licensed pilot representative to the Airport Commission, each for a 3-year term. Board of Adjustment 3-Year Term: 1 position for a citizen at-large Cynthia Lynch requested reappointment A motion was made by Commissioner Puryear and carried 5-0 to reappoint Cynthia Lynch to the Board of Adjustment for a 3-year term. Environmental Issues Advisory Committee 3-Year Term: 1 position for a citizen residing in each of the following townships: Cunningham: Stephen Evans requested appointment Holloway: No applications Mt. Tirzah: David Thomas requested appointment A motion was made by Commissioner Thomas and carried 5-0 to appoint Stephen Evans as the Cunningham Township representative on the Environmental Issues Advisory Committee for a 3-year term. A motion was made by Commissioner Puryear and carried 5-0 to appoint David Thomas as the Mt. Tirzah Township representative on the Environmental Issues Advisory Committee for a 3-year term. Industrial Facilities and Pollution Control Financing Authority 6-Year Term: 7 positions available – no applications January 3, 2023 39 Juvenile Crime Prevention Council 1-Year Initial Term: 2-Year Reappointment 2 positions available for a citizen under the age of 21(one may be a member of the public representing the interests of families of at-risk juveniles): no applications, 2-Year Term: 1 position available for a Juvenile Defense Attorney: no applications, 1 position for a substance abuse professional: Martha Pickett requested reappointment 1 position for County Manager’s designee: Katherine Cathey requested reappointment And, up to 5 citizens-at-large positions: no applications A motion was made by Commissioner Puryear and carried 5-0 to reappoint Martha Picket as the substance abuse professional representative and Katherine Cathey, County Manager to the Juvenile Crime Prevention Council, each for a 2-year term. Kerr Tar Regional Council of Government Board 1 citizen-at-large alternate position representing private sector business – no applications Nursing Home Advisory Committee 1-Year Initial Term: 3-Year Reappointment; 4 positions available – no applications Opioid Settlement Advisory Committee A new advisory committee established by the Board on October 3, 2022 to discuss opioid related health concerns impacting the residents of Person County and to advise the Board on options to expend the funds to remedy opioid impacts as well as to plan and host an annual meeting open to the public to receive input on the proposed uses of the settlement funds and to encourage collaboration between local governments. Representatives from following community agencies request appointment: Emergency Services: Thomas E. Schwalenberg, EMS Director Sheriff’s Office: Benjamin Massey, Narcotics Sergeant Person Co. Schools: Jenna Regan, Sr. Exec. Director of Student Support & Secondary Education Roxboro Police Dept.: Chief David Hess Health Dept.: Janet O. Clayton, Public Health Director Mental Health: Elliot Clark, Vaya Community Relations Regional Director Person Memorial Hospital: Kasey Sharp OQuinn, Director of Pharmacy Dept. of Social Services: Carlton Paylor, Social Services Director 2 citizens-at-large with lived experience (personal or family member): no applications 1 substance use treatment provider representative: no applications 1 employer/business leader representative: no applications 1 representative from a community group working on opioid-related concerns: no applications January 3, 2023 40 A motion was made by Vice Chairman Sims and carried 5-0 to appoint the following to the Opioid Settlement Advisory Committee or an unspecified term: Thomas Schwalenberg, Emergency Services representative Benjamin Massey, Sheriff’s Office representative Jenna Regan, Person County Schools District representative Chief David Hess, Roxboro Police Department representative Janet Clayton, Health Department representative Elliot Clark, Mental Health representative Kasey Sharp OQuinn, Person Memorial Hospital representative Carlton Paylor, Social Services representative PATS Transportation Advisory Board 3-Year Term: 1 position available for an occupational affiliation representative for a medical related service and 1 citizen-at-large position: no applications Clerk to the Board noted an application was received from Mr. Froncello Bumpass however his term was valid to December 31, 2023 noting no need to reappoint at this time. Commissioner Thomas requested to recuse himself from the vote for appointments for the Tourism Development Authority and the Workforce Development Board to which the remaining commissioners consented. Tourism Development Authority 3-Year Term: 1 position for a representative of a hotel/motel/B&B/lodging Claudia Berryhill, DVM requests reappointment 1-Year Term: 1 position available for a citizen at-large Autumn Gentry requested appointment Allison Thomas requested appointment A motion was made by Chairman Powell and carried 4-0 to appoint Claudia Berryhill (hotel/motel/B&B, lodging representative) for a 3-year term to the Tourism Development Authority. A motion was made by Commissioner Puryear and carried 4-0 to appoint Autumn Gentry, citizen at-large, for a 1-year term to the Tourism Development Authority. Workforce Development Board 1-Year Initial Term/2-Year Reappointment 1 position for a member or an officer of organized labor: no applications 1 position for a business/industry representative: Allison Thomas requested appointment January 3, 2023 41 A motion was made by Commissioner Puryear and carried 4-0 to appoint Allison Thomas to the Workforce Development Board for an initial 1-year term as a business and industry representative. UTILITY EASEMENT REQUEST FROM CITY OF ROXBORO: General Services Director Ray Foushee stated the Roxboro western sewer project crosses Highway 57 at the County’s Senior Center property. The proposed sewer line crosses under Hwy 57 and follows the property line between the Senior Center and TKTK Associates property, goes around the former Pepsi property, and eventually on to Leasburg Road. Just as it crosses Hwy 57, the sewer line will be just inside the Senior Center property, but as it proceeds down the property line, it will be mostly on TKTK Associates property. For Board consideration, and if the easement agreement is approved, Chairman Powell, Clerk Reaves, and a Notary will need to sign the necessary documents, including the Permanent Utility Easement as presented. A motion was made by Commissioner Puryear and carried 5-0 to approve Utility Easement Request from the City of Roxboro, as presented. January 3, 2023 42 January 3, 2023 43 January 3, 2023 44 January 3, 2023 45 COURTHOUSE WIRELESS EXPANSION (WAVE) PROJECT: Ray Foushee, General Services Director presented the Courthouse Wireless Expansion (WAVE) Project noting Network Services was embarking on another transformational technology deployment to dramatically expand AOC’s wireless capabilities statewide, known also as the WAVE project. Mr. Foushee stated where WIFI was only available in the courtrooms currently, WAVE would expand that service to all Judicial office space within the courthouse campus covering the Clerk of Court offices, District Attorney Offices, the Guardian ad Litem offices, Magistrate and any other judicial office space, and allow staff much more mobility. Mr. Foushee noted this expansion of WIFI would not cover large common areas or county office space through this initiative. In the case of Person County’s Courthouse, most areas of the courthouse will be included except the Probation areas on the ground and 1st floor. Although the cost of the actual equipment will be covered by the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts (NCAOC), individual counties are responsible for the installation of the necessary communication cabling. However, the NCAOC is willing to manage the contract with a vendor for the installation if the Board approves the project and County will reimburse the NCAOC for actual expenses once the project is complete. In Person County, the estimated installation cost for the courthouse was $32,900 however; a $5,000 contingency was requested for increased costs or for unforeseen challenges with the older facility. This brings the request up to $37,900. The Finance Director recommended the use of Undesignated Contingency as the source of funds for this expenditure. Upon approval, the Finance Director will amend the budget as follows:  LINE ITEM # LINE ITEM DESCRIPTIONS  EXPENDITURE  BUDGET  1009910‐499100 Undesignated Contingency (37,900)  1004260‐435400 Gen Svcs‐Special Bldg Projects 37,900  Clerk of Court Deborah Barker was present in the audience, for questions; she told the Board that the future of the courts includes e-court and paperless filings and the WAVE initiative was a step closer. Ms. Barker thanked the Board for its consideration and requested approval of the funds for this project. A motion was made by Commissioner Palmer and carried 5-0 to approve the use of Undesignated Contingency up to $37,900 as the source of funds for reimbursement to the NCAOC after successful installation of the cabling and equipment related to the Courthouse Wireless Expansion (WAVE) project. January 3, 2023 46 CHAIRMAN’S REPORT: Chairman Powell had no report. MANAGER’S REPORT: County Manager, Katherine Cathey reported the following:  Commissioner Thomas’ orientation has taken place over the last few weeks with conclusion with the Essentials of Government course next week.  Expressed her appreciation of the Board and those serving on boards and committees noting the importance of participating to assure a quorum to conduct business.  She recognized Person County’s Emergency Services Director, Thomas Schwalenberg to share a few comments. Mr. Schwalenberg recalled the weekend of December 23rd, Person County experienced dangerously frigid temperatures as part of an arctic cold front that impacted the entire nation. Nighttime temperatures dropped into the single digits as a storm front moved through the area which was further impacted by high winds causing power disruptions due to downed trees on power lines. Prior to the storm moving in, staff from Person County and the City of Roxboro met and Prior to the storm moving in, staff from Person County and the City of Roxboro met and developed a plan to open two warming centers for citizens, if needed. A plan was to open two warming centers that would stay open for 36 hours during the coldest parts of the storm and then be reevaluated based on citizen need. A message was sent out to our first responder community to see if they had capacity to open their buildings up as warming centers. Roxboro/Person County Rescue Squad and Hurdle Mills Volunteer Fire Department answered the call and agreed to open their buildings and staff them over this very cold holiday weekend. Ceffo Volunteer Fire Department brought hot food to the two warming centers in case citizens needed a meal. Other volunteer fire departments did offer to open their buildings if the power outages lasted longer than anticipated and citizens needed refuge. Mr. Schwalenberg reported two individuals did come to the warming center at Roxboro/Person County Rescue Squad that needed additional assistance besides a warming center. One person heated their home by a kerosene heater and had run out of kerosene and did not have the means to purchase more. A member of Person County Emergency Medical Services went and purchased a container and filled it with kerosene for the individual so they would be able to heat their home for the night. This person, having expended all their kerosene, showed up the next night and a member of the Rescue Squad paid to put them up in a hotel for the night. Another individual, that is homeless, showed up at Roxboro Fire Station #2 on that Friday looking for shelter from the cold. The Captain at that station, and his crew, assessed the situation and decided to pay to put him up in a local hotel for the night. On the way to the hotel they stopped and bought him a hot meal. A member of Person County Emergency Services then voluntarily covered the cost for his hotel room on Saturday and Sunday and brought him food and other provisions. On Christmas Day they January 3, 2023 47 took him a hot meal and spent some time with him so he would not be alone on Christmas. They even allowed him to use their cellular phone so he could contact his family in California and let them know he was safe. A member of Roxboro/Person County Rescue then paid for an additional three nights at the hotel for this man while behind the scenes Emergency Services worked to identify services for this homeless individual. Eventually, the gentleman was linked together with Freedom House, Person County Social Services and the Mobile Crisis Team to address his needs to the best of their abilities. Mr. Schwalenberg quoted Mother Teresa “None of us, including me, ever do great things. But we can do small things, with great love, and together we can do something wonderful.” He added that on Christmas weekend we saw people come together to help those less fortunate. Many of these were public safety first responders stepping in to care for their community as that is what they are called to do. These individuals are not looking to be recognized by name but the Manager and I felt it was important tonight to tell you their story. COMMISSIONER REPORT/COMMENTS: Vice Chairman Sims asked the County Manager to update the board on the status of the broadband grants from the state. County Manager Katherine Cathey noted that all counties with broadband providers awarded a grant are await the state to finalize the agreement. Vice Chairman Sims also asked for an update on the zoning permits. Commissioner Palmer had to report. Commissioner Thomas thanked the County Manager for her time and help guiding him through the orientation process. He challenged his fellow commissioners to visit the recycling center to see the facility and the plan noting Person Industries is an important asset to the community. Commissioner Puryear request an update from the County Manager on the Inspections’ process. January 3, 2023 48 ADJOURNMENT: A motion was made by Commissioner Puryear and carried 5-0 to adjourn the meeting at 9:47pm. _____________________________ ______________________________ Brenda B. Reaves Gordon Powell Clerk to the Board Chairman