2026-09-14 - Board of Commissioners

It's iffy. >> Good evening everyone. It is time to call the September 14th meeting into order. I want to thank everyone who's in the audience and all those who are participating online for being here

today. So please rise and join me for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge of allegiance 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. >> Thank you. >> Elizabeth, can you call the role, please? >> Mayor Harker, >> here. >> Mayor Proim Gillican >> here. Commissioner Spiegler >> here. >>

Commissioner Matthews >> here. >> Commissioner Cooper >> here. >> Commissioner Leicolo >> here. >> Okay. I need to make a minor adjustment to the agenda that's in front of you. Under the quasi

judicial proceeding number two, case number 26-23. The applicant has asked us if we could table that to November the 9th. With that change, can I get a motion to approve the amended agenda? So move.

>> We've got a motion on the floor. All in favor say I. I. >> I. So, what that means for those in the audience who are here to have any kind of um hearing about case number 26-23 that has been tabled

to November the 9th. So, we have some items on consent. We've got a fairly lengthy agenda. I typically read all of them, but there's nine of them and we can read them ourselves. So, the items of

consent, if there's any questions about any of the items from the board, I'll just ask for a motion to approve these nine items of consent. So move. >> Got a motion to approve the items of consent.

Any questions? All in favor say I. >> I. >> Thank you. Now we're going to move on to the presentation and Bowford Housing Authority is going to present their FY2025 budget and we've got Mr. Zeb who is

the executive director of the housing authority. Welcome. >> Thank you so much. Good evening mayor and members of the board of commissioners. I appreciate the opportunity to present this year's audit

and give sort of an annual update. Tonight, I'll walk you through the 2025 audit, explain where the authority stands today, and highlight some of the steps we've taken to get there since uh I came in

late 2025. After the presentation, if you all have any questions, I'll be happy to dodge them. I mean, answer them. Uh so let me begin with the positive. Our auditors gave the authority the highest

opinion available. It is a unmodified or clean opinion. Do I have There we go. Boom. There it is. Um as I stated is the highest opinion available. Um as at the same time this year's audit uh prepared

by Henderson and Palleteer identified one material weakness which I'm sure you all noticed in our interc internal controls over cash dispersements. I want to start by saying that I joined the

authority in 2025 and was not the managing executive during this period but I take full responsibility for correcting it. I'll explain what happened and what has changed but first the numbers. The

full figures are in the audit, but in round numbers, here is where we ended 2025. Our total net position increased by $45,000, ending the year at just under $2 million compared to roughly 1.9 million

in 2024. That's based on our liquid and real assets as valued in the 2018 appraisal. Our net investment in capital assets decreased by 56,000 to roughly 1.2 million as our annual depreciation of about

96 outpaced our capital additions of about 40,000. Our unrestricted net position increased by about $100,000 to about 760,000. Our total operating re revenues rose to just about a million dollars up

about 25 uh to roughly 980,000 in 24. This is driven primarily uh by $34,000 in federal grants. Our total operating expenses rose just to just over one $1.3 million, up about 50,000 from roughly 980

with an increase in administrative uh cost, tenant services, and utilities offset. Our capital grant contributions decreased by $40,000 from roughly 48,000 at the end of 2024. And this year's capital

capital spend was directed towards residential HVAC and office equipment. The authority ended the year with roughly $545,000 in cash and $465,000 in investments. Those were a lot of numbers. Any

questions so far? Great. The audit's material uh material weakness centers on a $15,000 payment funded through HUD oper through the HUD operating subsidy. It was for legitimate RAD related or rental

assistance demonstrated uh related um expenses. The audit does not question whether the work was legitimate. The issue was procedural. a member of the board executed a transaction directly rather than

rooting it through staff, thus bypassing the internal controls that would normally identify lobbying paid with HUD subsidies as an unallowable cost under federal cost principles. Our new procurement

policy closes that gap. Staff now initiates and processes dispersements with board authority author authorization, but the board members do not ex execute payments directly ever. The $15,000 expense

has not been repaid in cash. Instead, it has been reclassified as an allowable non-federally funded source expense. HUD has reviewed the audit and to date has required no further response from the

authority. Separately, the audit flagged our financial officer's fidelity bond. A HUD memorandum 2023-06 requires coverage equal to 10% of the annual budget, which would have been about $88,000 for

fiscal year 2025. But the bond on file at the time of the audit was only $50,000 in violation of general statute 159-29. That issue has been resolved. Both the finance administrator and myself are now

each bonded at $100,000, well above the requirement. And so the the authority is therefore fully covered and in total compliance. The audit also identified a budget to actual variance. Administrative

expenses exceeded the budget by $96,000 and $68,000 of res revenue was anticipated but didn't materialize. All I can say to that is the budget was adopted in 2024. I arrived in November 2025. So I

don't know how they projected that number. That said, our new procurement um uh policy and our finance policy um are written in such a way that we have clearer ways to better track revenue projections

and variances so that we can identify gaps like this well before a year end from now on. Regarding the board's response to the audit, the board held a robust discussion of the findings, directed staff

to continue uh the policy rewrite already underway, and at a special meeting on August 15th approved the capital needs upgrades that were so direly um needed. I'll describe that when we get to the RAD

conversion. So since I arrived in 2025, one of the first things we did was we made some some major changes to how the authority operates. We changed how our staffing was structured. Prior

responsibility was held in the executive director's office and the executive director's office only. Today it is now responsibility for the authority is now distributed among the appropriate staff

rather than concentrated on one or two people. The authority now has professionals dedicated to the property management, occupancy, facilities maintenance, finance and resident services. Distributing

these duties across departments ensures that every part of the authority receives the attention it deserves. It also frees the board and my office to focus on guiding the agency in a transparent and

compliant manner. Second, over the past year, we completed a three-part agencywide assessment. We began with Inspire, HUD's national standards for physical inspection and real estate to establish a

baseline for the condition of our portfolio. The assessment found that 10 years of deferred capital improvements had left our properties in serious need of repair and modernization. A point I'll

return to shortly. When we completed we then completed a financial assessment that went beyond the audit that you're looking at and took an in-depth review of our electronic line of credit funds held

by HUD. Finally, we undertook the painstaking work of reddrafting all of the authorities governing policies, including our lease, our admission and continued occupancy policy, procurement policy, and

financial policies to align them with generally accepted accounting principles, the code of federal regulations, and current best practices. The procurement rewrite directly addresses the audit

finding I described a moment ago. On governance, our current bylaws provide for five appointed commissioner seats plus one resident commissioner, a total of six, the structure the structure reflected

in the audit. We're now drafting for board approval a bylaw amendment that expands the board to seven members so that a tiebreaking vote is always available. I believe this combination of swift board

action and diligent staff effort has strengthened the AY's management and better prepared us to meet tomorrow's challenges. while fulfilling today's responsibility. But this work would not be complete

without our tenants because the housing we're discussing tonight is their home. That's why my administration chartered the authorities's first ever resident council this year. It gives the residents a

direct voice in how tenant services are delivered, how staff receives and responds to feedback, and how the recapitalization effort I'll describe below takes shape. I'm going backwards. I'm sorry. >>

All right. In HUD's term, a RAD conversion is active. Lobbying, planning, and work on a master development plan and a financial plan took place during the fiscal year of 2025. That is what the audit's

subsequent events note means when it says the conversion occurred during the fiscal year. However, we remain far from financial closing. Negotiations with our partners with our partner Pinrose are

ongoing and proceeding slowly. We are working through the terms of a master development plan with the goal of creating a lasting sustainable partnership that can deliver more affordable housing in

Bowford for years to come. Much of the remaining work involves legal negotiations to ensure that both public and private interests are properly protected before we bring a proposal to the board.

Alongside those negotiations, we have pursued federal and state affordable housing funds this year to help move the effort forward. In fact, I appreciate you all putting me towards the front of your

agenda because as soon as you let me go, I'm on my way to Washington DC to do just that. >> Okay. The scale of our capital needs becomes clear when we compare the depreciation with what we have

actually invested in modernization in the portfolio. You'll see in the audit that roughly $96,000 of depreciation is forecast versus an actual $40,000 in capital spending in 2025. To correct this, we

have a four-part strategy. First, we're going to cond we have begun conducting housekeeping inspections that allow us to assess the portfolio's condition on an ongoing basis rather than relying on an

annual snapshot. What that means is every single month we're in every one of our units. Number two, we're modernizing our unit turns. The standard turnaround time for public housing unit is 14 days.

Our average is 53 days. That's not because we're slow. That's because we have a lot of work to do. Rather than simply patching and painting, we're bringing these these units back to genuine livable

conditions. Our long-term goal is to demolish and dispose of many of these units, but people call them home today. And so, we owe them the dignity of decent, safe, and sanitary housing now, not

someday. We're also upgrading our infrastructure and we're taking a proactive approach to plan capital improvements using our capital fund program grant. The approach the board approved at its special

meeting meeting on August 15th. The results are tangible. We're beginning to renovate units for for residents with accessibility needs, strengthening housekeeping standards to address hoarding and

mold, and rebuilding kitchens, bathrooms, flooring and electrical systems and appliance and units that had gone untouched for years. I'm pleased to bring before you before and after photos so that the

board can see what the work looks like on the ground. Thank you again for the opportunity to present this year's audit and update you on the agency. And thank you, Major Harker, for specifically

asking your questions before the meeting. It helped me organize uh what has been fixed and what is underway and what remains ahead for the board. With our restructured staffing, agencywide

assessments, rewritten policies, and new resident council, I believe the authority is far better positioned than it was a year ago to meet tomorrow's challenges while continuing to serve today's

residents. I'm glad to answer any questions you all may have. Thank you for that great presentation, Mr. Huff. Does the board have any questions, >> Mr. Cooper? >> Great presentation. Thanks. Uh,

could you answer this question? Um, if a resident have a relative or close relative like a son or a daughter who uh was recently released from jail, >> are they not allowed to live with that parent?

That's a great question, Commissioner Cooper. Uh, according to according to HUD statute, we have a fair uh we have a fair amount of leniency uh as far as uh previously justice involved individuals.

Our current policy and and our occupancy policy is that an individual who has a fel a violent felony uh is not allowed to live in our properties for three years. Uh, however, I do have the discretion

to amend that in special mitigating circumstances. So, if uh someone has a question, tell them to give me a call. I'd love to talk to him. >> Thank you. >> Absolutely. >> Commissioner Matthews. >> Um,

just a couple. First of all, thank you for the for the presentation and I think it's I think it's vital that the town uh and the BHA have a close association and I really do appreciate you coming and

making this presentation this evening. Um just a a couple of questions in moving forward with the plans for the for the PHA >> um and the renovations that would be done there. >> How is the financing

coming along for that? Is is it in place? Do you need additional funding from the general assembly? Um, where are you with that planning? >> We're uh, as as I made mentioned in the in the

presentation, we're in the middle of negotiations and so we haven't put together our finance plan in solid in a solid way yet. What we are doing is proactively going after general assembly dollars,

talking to the governor's office, looking at appropriations that have been made, and certainly talking to our representatives at DC so that we can shape policy uh in our favor so that we can bring

more of those dollars to leverage in in the public landscape uh so that so that we have something to to bring to the table uh along with our private partners. And if if that funding comes up short, um

then will the board be in a position to look at different options for the current housing situation within Bowford that's under the BHA and perhaps making um decisions that would result in additional

funds being available for the renovations that are needed. >> Yeah. Uh we while while the general appetite is not to take on uh debt, >> right? What what the conversion allows us to do is it gives us

the ability uh to to take on debt. But before we ever considered that, I'd come back and ask you for uh money uh Dexter. So >> specifically Dexter. >> Specifically Dexter. I I did make that very

clear. Specifically Dexter. >> Thank you. Um we we'll have some discussions on on the value of the property and perhaps some some shifting around that could be done there to generate some revenue. But

>> Sure. Um, one final question that's a little bit um, in depth and that is the current in the current audit report you identified the value of the property the current value of the property um, as

net of appreciation. Um, and you and I were discussing before the meeting that is based upon the appreciation of the property at what date? 2018 was the date of our last appraisal >> and that's the

reason that value is is much lower than it would be valued at today. >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. I appreciate it. Commissioner Matthews, >> any further questions or

comments for Mr. Huff, Commissioner Gillicanin, >> thank you so much for the presentation. I used to be on this board, so I'm super proud of what you've done. So, thank you for that. And I'm very

excited to see that there's a resident council now. Maybe some point I would love to ask you some questions about that um to the side, but I just want to understand are the 100 units that are

currently on the ground still the ones that are being prioritized uh with the financial plan that you're putting together? >> Absolutely. In fact, federal quota regulation demands it. So, we we

wouldn't be able to do anything if we didn't protect those 100 units. >> Okay. Thank you. Any further questions or comment? Well, I will thank you for taking the time to sit down and speak with me. I

I look forward to the board increasing the number of minutes, I mean members, excuse me, so that we can not have that tied situation, but also be able to put some people on board um that's going to

help move the housing authority forward, which has always been a big passion of mine. And I know based on the um audit, your name is not in it. Of course, a lot of things came before you, but it

sounds like you have taken this audit and you're making those corrections so that when we see this again next year, we're not going to see any of these discretions that are in here. Um, and look

forward to you continuing to remodel those units. You know, home is a very personal thing. We don't want to let maintenance go by in hopes of doing something that is so far off in the future. But

definitely look forward to the rad conversion and having more conversations about that and positively moving forward. Those 100 units are the priority and it sounds like you've made it that. >> Unless

there's anything else, I'm going to let you catch a plane to DC. Um, good luck. Good luck hunting and uh we'll continue to have this conversation. My door is always open. I told you if you needed to

make a trip, if I need to make a trip with you, I'll be more than happy to. >> You're coming with me next time. You know, I lead with the honey. Next time we're bringing the >> strengthen numbers. But

thank you so much, Mr. Huff. >> Thanks so much, guys. >> Travel safely. >> Okay, now we're going to move on to public hearing. The first one is case number 26-15. That's the reasoning of 309 Pollock

Street from R8 to TCA. Uh because I have a direct financial interest in this property, I would like to ask the board for a motion to recuse me uh from this discussion. And this will be led by Mayor

Prom Gilligan. >> So move. >> Got a motion to recuse me. Don't forget to bring me back when this is all done, by the way. >> All in favor? >> All in favor? >> I I >> All right. Gabble's yours. >> >>

Okay. Can I get a motion to open the public hearing for case number 26-15 reasonzoning request for 309 Pollock? >> So move. >> All in favor? >> I I >> Any nays? >> Okay. So our planning director

Charlie Roachchi is going to make the presentation to us tonight. And I'd like to note that the applicant, Mr. Taylor, is here. So, we're going to have Charlie give that presentation. We'll have an

opportunity to ask him any questions and then if you would like to ask questions of the applicant, we can do that after the questions for Charlie. So, take it away. >> All right. Thank you, Mayor Prom

Gillicanin. Um, before you tonight is case number 2615, 309 Pollock Street, uh, reszoning from R8 to TCA. So, start with a little bit of background on the property. Um the applicant uh Mr. Jack Taylor

is here tonight and he'll be up after me to answer any questions. But uh 309 Pollock Street is currently a vacant parcel zoned R8. It is.25 acres uh 10,890 square ft approximately and it is currently

uh in the future land use plan shown as traditional neighborhood residential. A reszoning to TCA would require a Cameland use map amendment to compact multifamily neighborhood. Uh this lot is also

55.28 ft in width which makes this property currently non-conforming R8. So more on this property. Um, again, it is vacant. And in August of 2022, a lot down the street at 312 Pollock Street uh was

reszoned from RA to TCA. You could actually see it out the window right there. Um, and a uh reszoning and future land use map amendment could be consistent with the adjacent zoning in the existing

land use pattern uh on Pollock Street. And just a reminder on the land use plan, uh, general statute 160D 604D requires that the proposed amendment be presented to the planning board and they shall

advise and comment on a change to the future land use map um, and whether it is consistent with um, that map change. So, uh, again, this property is currently under the traditional neighborhood

residential. On your screen now, you'll see a survey of the property. Um, this is the southern property shown on this map. And you may also notice in that text, it's requesting a change to CSMU. That

is incorrect. It is TCA per the zoning application. And here you'll have a table of the zoning standards between the R8 and the TCA uh zoning districts. The minimum lot size in R8 is 8,000 square ft

with a minimum lot width of 60 ft with front setbacks at 25 ft, side at 8 feet, rear at 25, and building height 35. Uh with TCA you will have a minimum lot size of 2,700 square ft per dwelling unit.

Minimum lot width of 80 ft with the same setbacks of 25 at the front, eight at the sides and 25 at the rear with a 35 ft building height. The key difference is the primary use in R8 is single family

residential as the permitted use. Whereas in a TCA that would be a special use with duplexes, uh, town homes and multifamily being the permitted use in TCA. On your screen now, you'll see the vicinity

map. Uh the hashed property is the one in question and the surrounding uses. Uh you will see the lots with single family currently as the use represented with the S. Uh vacant lots are shown with the

V and then nearby multif family properties are shown with the M uh adjacent to Cedar Street. And then on the next screen, you will also see the zoning map showing the R8 zoning for the property with

the adjacent uh CSMU to the north. On that as well, you will also see the 312 Pollock TCA on the uh bottom right hand corner on the corner of Broad and Pollock. This ma next map is showing you the uh

future land use map currently uh as traditional neighborhood residential. Again, if you were to approve the resoning tonight, you would also need to approve the update to the future land use map uh to

compact uh residential multif family. And then these are just descriptions from our future land use map on um what those uh future land use designations cover. So for the traditional neighborhood

residential which it's currently under, your typical uses will be primarily single family detached with a mix of other highly uh compatible residential uses scattered throughout including duplexes,

accessory dwellings, garage apartments, and occasional larger homes that have been converted to discrete multif family. Uh with the update to the KMA future land use map, you would be moving to

compact multifamily neighborhood. In this area, you will typically see uses of higher density uh attached residential units such as apartments, condominiums, town homes, patio homes with duplexes also

appropriate as long as they can be provided with high enough densities to meet the context and be appropriate. And then there are some uh street views of the property. It's down the road here. Um I

will also note I had mentioned before that the planning board does review this application ahead of uh you to provide a recommendation. At the July 20th planning board meeting, the board voted 22,

resulting in no recommendation to be forwarded to the board of commissioners tonight. Uh so that determination means that it may not be consistent with the Buffer comprehensive and camel land use plan

and that it may um not be reasonable or in the public interest, but that does not bind your decision tonight is a recommendation from the planning board. Thank you. >> Thank you. And uh again, your

request tonight is to consider this resoning request as well as the KMA uh future land use update. >> And I am available for any questions. >> Yes. Any questions for Mr. Roach? >> Yes, Commissioner.

>> I have a question regarding the future land use map. If you would pull that back up. So, the Cedar Street mixeduse property uh to the north of it is not zoned appropriately as if we were to reszone

or if we were to change the future land use map for this current property. The Cedar Street mixed use is not uh in that same uh type of like traditional neighborhood. It's traditional neighborhood

residential, but it would need to be more of a what was the term that you put in here? Um >> it is um compact multif family neighborhood >> family, right? So would that would that get in the way of of

re reszoning of this for for that property that Cedar Street mixed use property not be in that compact multif family as well or does that just because it was zoned that way when the town went ahead

and created Cedar Street mixed use but it was never changed. >> Right. So I think you run into an issue here. The future land use map was adopted in 2023 and for those parcels that uh became uh

duplexes or mixed use within that period, it did not make that conversion over to compact. You see the same on this map >> uh with the corner of Pollock and Broad as well. Um which would also have to

be addressed in a future land use change. >> But >> for that reason, I don't see it as prohibitive. >> But not this evening. That doesn't have to be addressed this. Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you.

Several questions. Um, if it was a 22 uh vote on the planning board, why are we seeing this? I was under the impression that when a 22 vote in terms of the planning board, it's a no vote and it stays

there with the board. So why are we seeing? >> So they are not required to send a recommendation or they're not required to vote something forward to you. They're providing a recommendation for you to

make the final decision on. So unless they had asked for more information or decided to table that vote, it was going to come to you no matter what that vote was in the planning board meeting. Um, I

had uh staff to to look into it but was not able to get a definitive answer on some things that uh in my going about on street and talking to the residents. In fact, a few years ago, I had spoken to

uh one of the residents and she indicated to me that when the present town houses was put up uh the board, but was not able to find that uh in writing that there would be no other condos or town

houses uh uh put up. I I did research and found a former uh planning board member who did recall that being said that there would be no other uh town houses placed on there. That being said is that I

I think it takes away from the neighborhood because if you could bring the picture back up of the neighborhood itself, >> the actual photographs. >> Yeah, that Yes. I mean, we're looking at a

residential one-story type housing and now we're going to flop a a town townhouse on top of all of that on within that neighborhood. I I just don't think it's fair to the people of that neighborhood.

We turned down a couple of years ago where that the housing authority came to us, wanted to you take their administration building and take it up a couple of stories. We said then that it was just not

appropriate. It was not suitable for the neighborhood. So, I'm I'm in conflict of wanting to turn around and open that Pandora box to allow uh a townhouse condominium use on on this property because

it's going to if we open that box, we are not going to be able to close it. and we don't want to be part of any other town that allows for for that type of of use. And I know that towns is always

having to uh address and change their zoning ordinance. I just think both need to put their brakes on and stop developers from all constantly want to come in and change rules that we have set on the

books for residential town houses, etc. and come in and change it so that they can build something something on a lot. I have no problem if they wanted to come in and put some nice residential homes

on that lot, but to throw up two to three story or twotory uh a condominium, I just have I have issue with it. The residents have issue with it. Uh I was as of today spoke with residents and they

informed me that they received no notification one of this meeting, two that that was going to the condos may possibly be uh placed on the lots in this area. Um I I just don't want that Pandora box to

be open. I don't want us to be anything like and most people reference uh Myrtle Beach and that definitely is not what I want and I definitely assured that most of the residents in this area who have

moved here probably have the same conviction that they don't want that to be seen as their town where that developers just come in and come in front of us and ask for for uh for a change. I think we

need to put the brakes on it. We have these on the books. people have spent at our present zoning have spent years and now we have a new board that is working on our camera and other things that uh

that I just think that we just need to to bring it all to a to a stop. If a person want to build a TCA, find an area within our town that is a TCA. Now, I know right across the street from that is a

lot that is in a TCA and I'm going to have issue with that. >> Um, so I'm not going to speak to whether it's reasonable for the neighborhood. That is ultimately your decision. I I do want to address

the point of neighbors receiving notification. We did follow notice procedures for this resoning. So, each of the adjacent property owners did receive a letter in the mail. >> Did you send them a

letter or did you put the sign out on the property? >> We did both. The sign is out there currently for the reasonzoning referencing tonight's meeting. And we did send letters to each of the adjacent

property owners twice actually because this was tabled the first. Right. Correct. Okay. Well, I was informed that they didn't receive any notification. I'm just going on on what I was informed of that

they did not receive any notification pertaining to this and they pretty adamant that they're not in favor of uh of this this move going on in terms of placing the town houses uh within their their

neighborhood. And I I would have to agree with them. I would love for the neighborhood to stay quaint as it is. And if somebody wanted to come along there and build uh a residential, that's that's

fine. but to start throwing up all these these town houses in the midst of a of a neighborhood. >> Could you please define adjacent property owner and what that meant for the notice so that we

understand exactly which properties were noticed and that also might help Commissioner Cooper and understand in who he was talking to and what they may have or may >> have not missed. There was a

property within 100 square feet of this parcel. So that's on either side of the property lines as well as across the street. >> I will add to that um sometimes when those letters get sent out, they

get sent to the property owner whether the property owner is on site or not. Um, and I know this because one time when we were supposed to get a letter, it got sent to the previous owner who lived in

Raleigh. It was kind of like a weird time thing, but you know, the letter would not have arrived in Bowford. So, sometimes there's also unfortunately those weird scenarios. I'm not saying that's what

happened here, but that can happen, >> right? Those things do happen and we do notice it in the newspaper as well for that reason. So it did run in the newspaper twice as well >> in the Carter Times.

>> Say in the Carter Red Times. >> In the Carter News Times. Yes, sir. >> Commissioner Matthews. >> No, I was just going to say just to add to that, I did uh I've received um one neighbor that that

contacted me actually is in favor um of the uh of the resoning and she obviously received notice that she is a neighbor. She lives on the on the block. >> Yes. >> So the question Yeah. The concern for

me is when I look at this is we do have Cedar Street mixeduse right on the corner there. The adjacent lot uh next to it which is vacant is also street Cedar Street mixeduse. So that could be multif

family there by right. So you could have uh multif family property there. And then we have um this property which is R8 which then wants to be TCA which could act as a buffer to the next property

which then would be R8. So I don't think it's out of character for that particular area as you do have TCA across the street. You have TCA uh and then you have Cedar Street mixed use uh to the north.

This is kind of a high density area up by Cedar Street. We do have high traffic. Um, you know, the area has been vacant for a while. Um, I I don't see development being detrimental to the community at

that area there. Um, in my opinion, >> so we're saying that since it's been vacant for a while, we need to move forward so that we can get a tax base out of it. I just can you pull up um I think two

presentation before. Yeah. No, go back. Go back there. That's what I don't want that compact multi- family thing. I mean, that may be nice if you have an entire block of that, but that's not what it's

going to be presently out here. That's that's I it it's just not it's just not I'm just not feeling that. I don't I don't think that and and the one lady who may but I have two who said no that that

is not what they would like to see on their block and I would have to agree with them that I would not like to see that on their block and if we open that box that is what possibly could happen

because I could see probably realtors coming knocking on their Lord and making them a proposition of buying their house. And then maybe for some reason or another they may take it because they have

lost that family atmosphere that they had on that block to now these town houses that's going to be popping up. And I I just got a problem with that happening here on Pollock Street. Commissioner

Matthews. >> Um, a question on that. In in other areas within Bowford, how many areas do we have where we have a similar transition where you go from from the mixuse um and TCA and then R8, which

seems to me to be a transition, but um can you can you point out other areas where there's a you know kind of a similar transition? I think if you're moving through the historic district towards Cedar

Street, you can see that as you move closer to toward uh Cedar Street just >> in the general growth. Um and then the transition areas maybe off of Live Oak to the more residential neighborhoods behind

them as well as a place to consider. Um >> it's not it's not point being it's not really an unusual transition to see that type of of step >> right it does exist in town >> but there is there is no

transition in the historic district of that type of housing there is none >> whether or not is is available whatever but right at the present there is none >> um there is TCA in the historic district.

>> That's fine. If it's in the historic district, but there's there's none to make a statement like >> there is none built. There is none built. >> We do have TCA in the historic district as >> that's

we may have. >> Okay. I'm just >> I'm not dis Yeah, I'm not I'm not disagreeing with you, >> but that transition that um Commissioner Dexter is talking about is not that. >> Okay. Can we hear from

Commissioner Stigler? Um, thank you Charlie for the presentation. That was very helpful. Um, can you go back to I guess the picture of the property? >> Yeah, thank you. So to the right of the

property, we have is it TCA or is it Cedar Street mixed Use? I'm sorry, I got >> the existing structure that duplex is in Cedar Street mixed use >> and then there's another vacant parcel where that

white van is parked which is also Cedar Street mixed use. >> Okay. And then this property is R8. >> And this property is currently R8. The property to the left >> is also R8. >> R8. So we have to the

right a different zoning. So whatever this parcel is that we're talking about, whether it's R8 or TCA, you're going to have two different types of zoning next to each other. >> That's correct. >> So

it doesn't matter what we do, we have two different types of zoning. But if we change it to TCA, then you will have the same situation where to the left you have a different type of zoning than this

property. And that is, as Commissioner Cooper is saying, a big difference because you could have a one-story house directly next to a three-story condo, which could also occur right here with the next

two properties on over. I think though while we have transition zones in town, this one is currently zoned R8. It is not zoned a transition zone. >> So in our future land use plan, we are actually not

saying in our land use plan, unless we change it, we are currently zoning it as not a transition zone. We we have it zoned as R8. >> That's correct. So while yes, we have transition zones in town,

this one was not identified, at least in the way that our Lanny's plan is right now, which was adopted in 2023, like you said. >> That's correct. So I am uncomfortable with changing the zoning because

we are getting a lot of requests to do just one parcel at a time to change zoning one parcel at a time. And while that might not seem like a big deal, oh it's just one parcel, it's just one one little

tiny part of the town. When you start doing it all over town, you're taking away from what the land use plan. And if we want to go back and look at the land use plan as a whole and say, "Okay, maybe

we need to update it, I'm fine with that. But I don't think doing it on a case by case parcel by parcel basis is setting a good precedent for our town because we have the land use plan for a reason.

It has been vetted by many people throughout town, the board of commissioners, the planning board, many, many focus groups. and now we're just going back and saying, "Well, let's just take each parcel

individually and decide, oh, this seems good. Let's do it right now." And that that makes me uncomfortable. Um, I think in this case specifically, I would have to agree with Commissioner Cooper. I

think it starts to change the character of this historic part of downtown where all of a sudden you could have some really tall houses next to some really short houses. Um, I think that what

Commissioner Cooper is trying to say is this character of this neighborhood right now is more onestory family homes. I don't know, maybe 10, 20 years from now, this whole thing will be condominiums.

That is possible, but right now that's not what we have in this neighborhood. And that's actually not what our camel our future can cam land use plan is planning for at this time. Um, and so I just

I'm concerned that if we reszone this property, then the next property over, then we say the same story a year from now. Oh, it's just one property. You know, we'll just put up one more condo here,

but don't worry, it won't change the neighborhood. Well, what's to stop it from snowballing and then every single house goes into the TCA? Now, if we want to go back as a community and say, you know,

maybe Pollock Street should be TCA, maybe this is a good place to have a lot higher density and it's the one street in downtown that we want to be really high density in condos. So, that's a different

conversation than just doing it without the planning ahead of time. Um, at least in my opinion, that's how I'm looking at this case. Um, so Charlie, I don't think I really have any questions for you,

but thank you for for standing there and listening and um appreciate your uh putting these slides together for us. It's very helpful. >> And um again, the applicant is in the audience tonight if you'd

like to ask them questions. >> Any questions for the applicant? >> Okay. Anyone from the public that would like to speak on this matter? Um, raise your hand. Let's see how many people we have. One,

two. Okay. Ma'am, if you'll come up and state your name and address and make your comment. Thank you. I'm Kathy Meredith. I live at 315 Pollock. And if you go back in the photos, I'm in one of the

high town houses at the end of Cedar and Pollock. So that is my home. See that beige one right there? That's my house. I've been living there six years. It's been vacant and the house across the

street has been torn down because it was disrepair after the hurricane. So that has been vacant. And I'm under the understanding that across the street has already been approved for two double town

houses. I've talked to the builder. They're going to start any minute. He told me that. So why wouldn't we want that area to look cohesive? Right now it's vacant lots. All the houses along there are

rentals. Those little houses across the It doesn't show right here. um across the street are all rentals, BRBOs. So, it's not super residential. So, um I I can only see that it would improve the looks

of our neighborhood. Right now, it's terrible. We have that terrible hotel across the street at the corner. Um it's just vacant, unckempt. The grass is this tall there right now. So, I would do

anything I could to improve the looks of my home. I've lived there six years. Those are our homes. They are not VRBOs. We live there full-time. Did I address that? Is that what you wanted to know for

me? >> And yeah, we are here to listen to anything you have to say on the matter. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. We have our second speaker. Anyone else from the public like to speak on this

case? Okay, seeing no one, can I get a motion to close the >> I'd like to address uh one other issue on that. I um not all of the homes along there or or rentals or Airbnb. In fact, there is a new

there is a house down there now that is being renovated by >> to my understanding, they're not going to tear it down. Okay, let's let's keep the conversation. >> But what I'm saying is that >> focused

>> there there's there's still life on that street >> and I just think that if we go to that route of condos, some people eventually and and and the two individuals that I know that the houses that

they are in belongs to them. So, we're going to close the public hearing now and then we will go on to further deliberation. >> Okay. Can I get a motion to close the public hearing? >> Public public

hearing. >> Okay. Thank you. All in favor? >> I >> I All oppose. >> Okay. The public hearing is officially closed. Now, what is the pleasure of the board? Will we like further deliberation or is there

going to be a motion? What we would need to be voting on is the resoning request and then the um future land use map amendment. Can that be in one motion? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. >> Any further

deliberation? Um area would you think to that the adoption of the future land use map would need to be done first before the um the zoning change? >> You you can do the resoning first. It's okay to do

them really in any order, but I think you need to I probably have a vote on the resoning first to see if it carries because that'll dictate the map amendment. >> Okay. >> Okay. John, are you thinking

of making a motion because I'll just make my comment right before >> I I think you should make your comment. Okay, I'm going to go ahead and u make a few uh make a comment based on some notes I've

taken here that I totally understand maintaining the character of neighborhoods, but we went in and we added the Cedar Strick Street mixed use district and I think putting a higher density development

near that is not a bad thing. We want residents to be able to walk and take advantage of that Cedar Street district. It's a totally different district that we never really planned for until the past

several years when uh the public and the commissioners and the planning department and others came up with this idea. So things are changing and I I really respect your um opinion, Commissioner um

Melvin, but I also am um of the opinion that the R8 is already non-conforming. And I try to imagine what could be built there if an something was built there. And it could be really skinny and really

tall. I mean, if I were to buy that property, I'd probably put something skinny and tall there. So, I think the look, you know, it's hard to really comment on that versus what could be put there for

an R8. I imagine that the lot next to it will be a joined with this lot, even though that's not directly pertaining to this boat. um if those lots were joined then for TCA it would be totally

conforming and they can meet all of the rules and the regs and the setbacks and the planning guidelines. So even though it's not called a traditional zone, it is traditional in character I mean excuse

me transitional in character in that area. um considering especially considering the SE Cedar Street mixeduse district. Um also we got to think about accessory dwelling units are allowed in R8 and

with TCA there's some amount of control that we can have over what goes there. Um so those are those are my points on this. So, any further comments or a motion? >> Well, I I would agree. I think

trying to continue a neighborhood in that location that's been empty and because it's been R8 and non-conforming, probably difficult to build on that property. I think you have to look at this kind of

long term and not be obtrusive to development in that area. And, you know, like you said, you could still have a three-story home versus a three-story uh TCA. is kind of the same same look but maybe

even worse as a R aid. Um so you know allowing the community to prosper at that at that junction and we are kind of a budding like you said that seed to street mixed use where there's high density. We

want walkability. We want the ability to have I mean you actually could even have on that property to the north you could have an office in that property to the north. So, we're looking at a higher

density property in an area that we're deeming highdensity ced district mixed use, I think having an adjacent TCA is not out of the character for the area. Um, so, you know, I think looking longterm,

I think could be a benefit to allow the community to develop there and to help help fuel what we'd like to see, which is the C district mixuse district prosper. Um, so you know, if we want to be

obtrusive and not allow additional housing in our community, that's one thing. Or allow TCA, that's one thing. But I think having housing, having more people, having walkability, I think that if

you're going to have it anywhere, the highest density area in our community is downtown. Boilbert is is the historic district. And so if we're going to put density, I think we need to put density in

our downtowns. So that's my opinion. I I'll just everything that has been that you that you have said, Mayor Bro, Tim, what you have said is very consistent with my my feelings on the particular area

and the transition that we would have there. It just it makes sense if we're going to going to have um the zoning that we're looking at and changing this to. It just makes sense to me to have the

transition there. It just it fits. So, I'm in favor of it. What's the pleasure of the board? >> John's not make it. I'll make it. Well, like I said, I was going to first adopt the uh move to adopt the

resolution amending the future land use map and the reasonzoning uh uh from um I guess the future land use map from compact multif family neighborhood to that uh for that future land use map change

and then if I can make a motion for that first that I'd like to do that. >> Yes sir, you can do that first. >> Okay. The motion is to uh reclassify that um on the future land use map as compact multif

family neighborhood. >> Okay, we have a motion on the floor. Any further discussion? All in favor? I >> I >> I all against >> And then I guess the next motion is for 160D. Correct. >> Yes, sir. >> Um

I move that the board adopt the following statement. Plan of consistency reasonable pursuant to the North Carolina J statute general statutes 160D- 605. The board finds that the following um its

adoption this evening of the amendment to the future land use map reclassifying 309 Pollock Street as compact multif family neighborhood. The reasoning of 309 Pollock Street from R8 to TCA is

consistent with the town of Bford comprehensive and CMA land use plan as amended. >> Okay, we have a motion on the floor. Any further conversation? All in favor? >> I >> I. >> All against. >> Nay. >>

Okay. >> Motion passes. >> All right. Now that we've passed those motions, we should bring Mayor Harker back into the meeting. >> Can I get a a motion for Mayor Harker to return? >> So move. All in

favor? >> I. >> All against. >> Motion passes. >> Yes, she's making eye contact. >> It was very relaxing back there. It's great to be back. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Mayor Pro Tim, for handling

that. Great job. >> No problem. >> Now, we're going to move on to the next public hearing, which is case number 26-21, the reasonzoning of 214 Elm Street from R8 to RS5. And can I get a motion to open

the floor for public hearing? >> So, move. >> Got a motion on the floor. Any further questions? All in favor say I. I >> all oppose have the same right. All right. Thank you, Michelle. >> Good

evening. Dive right in. The subject property of this resoning or zoning map amendment is 214 Elm Street, which can be found at the southeast corner of Broad Street and Elm Street. The property is not

within the special flood hazard area in the currently effective or future prelim future preliminary flood maps. Jerry Cox is the owner and applicant for this reasonzoning. This site is within the

residential medium district medium density district R8. The neighboring properties are also this current R8 or RS5, which is the requested zoning district. The future land use classification for this

property and surrounding area is traditional neighborhood residential. It's a widespread district which covers many neighborhoods across town. This covers R8 and RS5 zoned properties. So, no amendment

is needed to our future land use map to grant this reszoning. Um, I've provided screenshots on here as well as full pages in the agenda packet of the applicable dimensional standards for development

and the permitted and special uses on the current and requested zoning districts. The setbacks are shorter in RS5, but that's also the only zoning district in town which requires imperous coverage

limitation of 50%. And RS5 allows fewer permitted and special uses. A a potential subdivision plan is provided in the agenda packet as a representation of the possible lots that could be derived

following an RS5 resoning. But as we know, resonings do not review or approve future development or subdivisions. The proposed subdivision would be statutoily exempt from subdivision review by boards.

So, it's provided as a reference, but if the reasonzoning is approved, this subdivision would not come back before this board for approval. The planning board reviewed this resoning request during

their August 17th meeting and recommended unanimously that the request for approval um unanimously recommended the request identifying that the amend amendment to the zoning map is in accordance with

the lane use plan and reasonable and in the public interest because it's in keeping with the character of the nearby neighborhood. uh our general statutes guide notification processes for public

hearings um which are reflected in our ordinance and I'll just identify that for the record. On August 28th, 17 days prior to tonight's public hearing, a sign was posted on the subject property and

letters were sent to uh property owners of record for parcels abuing the subject property, including those across the street. An ad for tonight's public hearings ran in the newspaper on September 2nd

and 9th. uh which are 12 and five days prior respectively. I offer to answer any questions for the board at this time. >> Thank you, Michelle. We'll get questions from the board. Is the applicant here

as well? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Clarification. >> Okay. Yes. I just want to clarify I do not believe it was unanimous by the planning board. I believe it was a 4 to2 vote. >> I resent my unanimous. I don't

recall. >> Okay. For the record, Mr. Rashi pulled that information today and it was 4 to2 from the plan. >> Okay. All right. So, any questions for Michelle? >> Okay. All right. Seeing that there is

none, um, is Mr. Cox, the applicant here. Do you wish to make any comments? You're more than welcome. You're good to go. All right. Fantastic. This is a public hearing for uh, case number 2621. I'm

going to open the floor to the public. Does anybody wish to make a comment on this case? Seeing that there is none, can I get a motion to close the floor to public hearing? >> So, >> got a motion on

the floor. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> All oppose have the same right. >> All right. So, now that we are moving through this pretty quickly, I'm going to take the time for the board to

deliberate their decision as to how you would like to move forward with this. You have some options on the board. One would be to adopt the zoning map amendment as presented. Either deny the zoning

map amendment or take uh table the decision pending additional information. So what is the pleasure of the board? >> Yes, >> I have a few points I'd like to make make on this one. Um, we're not

looking at a uh future land use map change, which I think is nice. And I'm glad that the properties, if they are subdivided, would be subject to more rigorous storm water um standards. I did a little

exercise kind of projecting into the future and looking at the lots if they were subdivided and they would be about.18.18 and.19 acres. So I averaged all the lots in the neighborhood across the street

and behind the lots and it comes out to an average lot size of 0.16 with a standard error of 02. So basically uh statistically between.14 and8 and so those two uh8 peaker acre pieces um of the three

divided pieces would be within that range and then 0.19 would be even larger. So, I just wanted to understand if that would be fitting with the rest of the neighborhood. Um, and it is. >> Okay. >>

Very. >> Yes. Commissioner Speedler, >> can you pull up the again the map or the zoning map? >> Yeah, that one. Thank you. Um, so it is true that there is the green um, zoning to the left, but again,

I'm going to say that, you know, all of the this neighborhood, the yellow part is R8. So again, I'm uncomfortable changing the zoning just for one uh parcel in this zoning district. Um, I think we

have zoning for a reason and yes, it can be changed, but to continue to have these requests be brought to us and have to continue to change our zoning every time somebody wants to do something a

little bit different than what's on our zoning map. I think, you know, we are opening ourselves up to this becoming the norm instead of just the exception. So I pretty much think, you know, very

similar that most of this is um zoned R8. So that's what I think it it should remain. >> Okay. Any further comments or questions for Michelle? >> Okay. >> You want to flash the U? >> Michelle, are

many of the lots adjacent to that? Are they they're R8, but are they non-comp are they non-conforming R8s as well on that street? >> I haven't looked into that, so I can't say one way or the other. >>

Okay. >> Okay. Yes, >> I did a as a part of my little exercise that I did, I um looked at the property properties just on side of that road within the same zoning district and breaking those up into

three. It still equals the same average acreage as the rest of the R8. So, I still think it's within character, although it will be a different color on the map. Let's say further questions or

deliberation. What is the pleasure of the board? Can you flash our options, please? >> Once again, your >> I have to I would have to go along and it seemed like we're pretty much on the same page. And

once again uh as I stated in the previous uh case is that the developers are going to continue to come at us one one lot at a time and that's just to me it's just I don't think it's in in uh both of

best interest as well as the residents of of both of that. It's almost like you're peacemealing something and I wouldn't want for people to think that we can that they can peace meal us one lie at a

time. And I just take a little offense to that that regardless of and I take Commissioner Gillicanin in terms of how she calculated some things and and came up with one point was 1.5 1.2 two >> uh8 >>

oh point okay so I don't want to go any further that that that's just I I just can't I just can't >> okay >> just peace milling and peace milling has never been anything good for uh for even for a

company uh for a town anything of of peace milling something and getting a and getting a good result out of it. >> Okay, noted. Commissioner Gilligan, >> so conversion of RS5 here is functionally

going to look very similar to R8. You might not even be able to tell the difference and that's the reason I'm advocating for this. It's to me it's even easier decision than Polloc Street. Um TCA might

look a bit different compared to the rest of the street, but RS5 is not going to look that much different um >> functionally on the ground. >> And I'd also say we've had that happen in downtown Bover.

If you look at Ant Street between Fulford and Elm, there's a large parcel there in the past, 20 maybe 15 years ago now that was converted to RS5. that was a large lot and there's a thriving community

there of homes uh on that that section um that even move up into to uh to Elm Street there. So I think you know taking a parcel that you know at this point the owner wishes to change and turn into

homes single family homes I don't think is out of the um character for that community. Um I think it would be beneficial to the community at that level. on on for building housing in our downtown. So,

>> okay. So, what is the um pleasure of the board? We've deliberated this a little bit. We've got some varying opinions, but what is the pleasure of the board? >> Um I make a motion to adopt the

zoning map amendment as presented and to reszone uh 214 Elm Street from R8 to RS5. Okay, we've got a motion on the floor. Any further questions? All in favor say I. >> I. >> All oppose say nay. >>

Okay, the motion carries three to two. Thank you, Michelle. I don't think you go too far, Michelle. Okay, now we're going to move on to the quasi judicial proceedings. This is case number 26-22. This

is a special use permit for 1323 Front Street Accessory Drilling Unit. So, can I get a motion to open the floor for evidentiary hearing on this case? >> So, moved. >> Got a motion on the floor. All in

favor say I. >> I. I. >> Thank you. Now, this hearing is a quasi judicial hearing, which means it is conducted similarly to a court proceeding. State law establishes specific procedures and standards

that the board of commissioners must follow in making its decision. The board must base this decision upon competent material in a substantial evidence presented during this hearing. A quasi judicial

decision is constrained by the standards contained in the town's land development ordinance and must be based on the facts presented in the record. All applications for special use permit must comply

with the land development ordinance for the town of Bowford and whether the special use is appropriate in the proposed location. If you are speaking tonight, please focus your comments on facts,

evidence, ordinance standards rather than personal preference or opinion. The board of commissioners shall hear relevant information from parties withstanding as set forth in the North Carolina

General Statute 160D-406 and 160D402. Individuals who are not parties withstanding may still be permitted to provide competent material and substantial evidence at the discretion of the board provided

that the information is relative and not repetitive. Parties may appear in person through an attorney or through authorized representatives. Parties may present evidence, call witnesses, ask questions

permitted under the procedure and make legal argument. The board of commissioners acting through the mayor must subpoena witnesses and compel the production of evidence. For certain topics, the board

may hear expert opinion testimony. Individuals providing expert testimony must establish their qualifications and explain the factual basis for their opinion. So, at this time, I would like to invite

the participants that are going to be in this case to come up to be either sworn or affirm. We're going to start with the staff, the applicant, any witnesses, and anybody who wants to be considered a

party withstanding. We can do it all together. Do you swear or affirm that the evidence you shall give to the board in this action shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So,

help you go. >> Thank you. Now, at this time, I would like to ask if any board members have to disclose if they've had any exparte communications in this case, any conflict of interest in this case,

or any bias or other reasons that would prevent them from a fair impartial consideration of this matter. Seeing that there is none, we'll move forward. At this time, I will invite staff to go ahead

and present the case to the board. Good evening. >> Good evening. >> The subject property of this special use permit is 1323 Front Street on the north side of Front Street. The structure is in within

the AE8 special flood hazard area and currently effective and future preliminary flood maps. AER Commercial Properties LLC is the property owner and the applicant is Blue Green Construction who is

also the contractor building the house there. The property is within the R8 district which allows for accessory dwelling units as special uses. Abudding properties are also R8 but nearby properties

include RS5 and R8A which also allow ADUs as special uses. The future land use classification for this property and surrounding area is traditional neighborhood residential. It's a widespread district

which includes many neighborhoods across town. It identifies that single family homes with accessory dwelling dwelling units are typical uses in this classification. This accessory dwelling unit is

proposed as part of a house that's under construction. The contractor initially proposed a single family home with ADU during submission of the building permit application. staff advised that a SUP is

required for an ADU as defined in the LDO as quote accessory dwelling units structures are commonly understood to be separate separate additional living unit or structure including kitchen, sleeping

and bathroom facilities attached to or detached from the primary residential unit on a single family lot. They shall be subordinate in size, location, and appearance to the primary residential unit

and may or may not have separate means of ingress or egress. End quote. Rather than wait several months for SUP review and potential approval, staff recommended that the ADU could be removed from the

building plans to proceed with construction of the single family home while they seek their special use permit. That anticipated area in the currently permitted plans is just shown as a large bonus

room in the second floor over the garage which is attached by an elevated hallway. If the special use permit is granted, they would request to modify their building permits to add that additional

scope in the area within the structure. If not, they have a bonus room. The planning board reviewed this request at their August 17th meeting and recommended approval of this special use permit as

presented. Uh evidentiary hearing notice and um was provided uh 17 days prior to the hearing. A sign was posted on on the property and letters were sent to the property owners of record for parcels

abuing the subject property including those across the street which are the same property owner they own across the street. An ad for tonight's public hearings ran in the newspaper on September 2nd

and 9th, 12 and 5 days prior, respectively. Section 20 uh requires that for a special use permit to be approved. All the LDO standards must be met as well as our required findings. And because this is

within a residential zone, subsection 3 uh applies as well. compatibility standards for special uses in residential zones. Um, I provided a breakdown for decision points tonight. I defer to AR on any

uh wording for motions that need to be adjusted. Um, so it includes the kind of grand idea and then what needs to get addressed for each of those. I request to enter evidence exhibits A through H

found in the agenda packet and my presentation. and I can answer any questions the board has for staff prior to the applicant's presentation. >> Okay, we accept your evidence as presented. >> Thank

you. >> Any questions? Are you ready? Okay. All right. Do we have any questions for Michelle? No questions. >> They're all shy today. Unless there's any further questions for Michelle, I'm going to

turn this over to the applicant and give him an opportunity to speak. >> Good evening, madame mayor and board. Uh it's a pleasure to present to you this evening. Uh my name is Bruce Brzzman. I'm the

owner of Blue Green Construction. We're the builder for this project and I'm here on behalf of the owner of 1323 Front Street and I'm requesting approval of a special use permit for an uh accessory

dwelling unit ADU. The lot is approximately 9,400 square ft about a quarter acre uh at which uh site construction is underway for a single family residence. Approved plans include a primary structure

with a footprint of slightly over 2,225 square ft and a 794 square ft attached garage. Our request is an addition to the existing building permit. The special use permit application does not propose

an increase to the approved building footprint. Set pack setbacks remain unchanged. There will be no increase in the building height, no modification to the exterior, appearance, and architectural

design, which have all been reviewed and approved through the building permit process. What you as a board will decide tonight is whether our proposed finishes are acceptable in the buildout of the

second level of the garage structure. Under the current permit, the area in question is presently designated as storage, but with your approval, it would include a bedroom, a three-piece bathroom, and

a kitchenet. It is these proposed finishes that create the characteristics of an ADU. Under section 20E, I will now address the required findings. Finding 1A, the proposed use is allowable for special

use within the R8 zoning district. Both land development ordinance identifies an accessory dwelling unit as a uh as a special use and this is permitted within the R8 residential district. Finding 2B.

The application is complete and provides the information necessary for review. All required application materials, plans, and supporting documentation have been submitted for review to the town staff

and board. Finding three C. The proposed use conforms with applicable planning and zoning. The proposed use remains a single family residence which conforms with Bowrit's planning and development

objectives in an R8 district. The need for this ADU approval is incidental to the design and layout of the overall project. The additional living area is designed as overflow accommodations to the

principal structure, yet it meets all of the town's requirements for a standalone unit. Finding 4D traffic circulation and access are adequate. Access to the property will include a circular driveway

off Front Street. The garage and ADU are accessible from an existing alley extending from Gerald Street and now terminating at the far property boundary. This provides access for residents, guests,

and if necessary, emergency services. No modification to the existing access or traffic circulation patterns is needed. Finding 5E. The proposed use will not substantially injure adjoining property

values. Interior, excuse me, interior completion details should have no adverse effects to the adjoining properties. The overall project reflects the nature and architectural integrity of the

surrounding neighborhood and homes. Full development of the property is likely to enhance surrounding home values. Finding 6F, the proposed use is compatible with surrounding development. There are

multiple examples of similar construction configurations where a lot contains both a main residence and a separate garage structure. Ours is perhaps unique, featuring an elevated skywalk connecting

the two buildings. Both the garage and the primary residential structures utilize the same architectural character and design elements. The garage mirrors the main structure, reflecting a reduced and

proportional representation of the main structure. The enclosed elevated skywalk serves the purpose of expanding usable outdoor living space as well as provides direct connection between the two

structures including the proposed ADU and weatherprotected access to and from the garage. The result is a cohesive residential development rather than separate unrelated dwelling structures. Finding

seven G. The proposed use will not endanger public health and safety. Construction will comply with all applicable North Carolina building codes, building code requirements, and town regulations. The

proposed ADU does not create any adverse conditions detrimental to public health and safety. The improved and extended alley provides emergency access to the garage and the ADU as well as better

access to adjacent properties if needed. In conclusion, this application only requests approval for the buildout I have described. We desire to include a bedroom, bathroom, and kitchenet to overflow

accommodations. We are not creating a separate structure for short-term rentals as the design and layout does not create detached accommodations. We believe the scope of work as defined comply

complies with the applicable requirements of section 20 of the Bowfort land development ordinance and we respectfully request that the board approve the requested special use permit. Thank you for

your time and consideration. If I can answer questions, I am glad to do that. and David uh Celich is is here. He's the project manager for that project. He and I hopefully can answer any questions you

might have. >> Thank Thank you, Dr. Doctor. Mr. Rossman, do we have any questions? Commissioner Matthews, >> the um the rear rear access that you uh that you spoke of, is that just an extension of the

access to the homes that are to the left, I guess, facing your home? >> Yes, that's correct. My understanding is as homes were developed, uh, my understanding from the neighbors is they continue to

add on. It was it was partway into the back of this lot already, maybe halfway, but it's been extended to the full back so that we can ask access the garage. And >> so that's an access that is owned

by who? >> Pardon? >> Who owns the access? >> Um, yeah, that came up in the burrow. Okay. the town. >> Okay. And that that would be your access to the garage. You would come in in the back to access

the garage. >> Is that correct? >> Yes. >> Okay. And are any improvements planned for the access at all? like is the access able to and we've imagined the town fire marshall or so forth have been

consulted and there's no issues with uh fire trucks or any uh emergency vehicles accessing and being able to have ingress egress uh through to the property from that um alley. >> I I will say one

issue that was there preliminarily was there was a power pole right in the middle of the back that's been moved to to the corner toward the west. Uh so that's that's not an issue. >> Michelle, can you

speak to that? >> Uh before any application goes to the planning board or board of commissioners, we do run it through a technical review committee which includes all of our town departments. So the

fire marshall um and fire chief had a chance to look at this and provided no comment. So they they had the opportunity to make comment and didn't. So we assume that they were okay with the project. >>

Okay. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Any further questions for Michelle? >> Just Yes. >> Just a followup. So the the access road that is extended would be extended by the developer. >> Yes. >> Stop me. Stop

me when I'm wrong. >> Correct. Yeah. It's basically that is uh my understanding is talking from a historian at the last meeting he he indicated that that every um a lot of alleys basically that have

not been developed but are still on the books are there and that this is one of them and we're just extending it. This alley officially goes the whole way through to see you. >> And if that's the

town's that's the town's access. So does that meets all the town >> it's not it's town owned but it's not townmaintained. >> That's my understanding. >> Yeah the ship >> there are others like that in

the community especially on that area that are just accesses and are are grass or um >> they're not paved. They're just accesses. >> Thank you. and and Ary might be able to uh include information on

that, but it does run through the the ride of way. The alley does run through from from Gerald to C view, so they have access to it. They've never taken advantage of it as a vacant lot. Um but they've

got, you know, access to it. And so it sounds like they would be providing the paving um to reach from Gerald to the subject property. Now, the the other homes, you can tell, have already paved um and

and kind of solidified their access there. So, you can see the town's not doing the paving in that alleyway. Um it's the property owners, I think, that are doing that. >> So, Michelle, would that

alley it would continue all the way to C view or it can't because there's a structure there? >> Can you go back to where you just were? >> Yes. So if you continue, >> my understanding is the alleyway

is on the books. >> There may be a structure in it before it gets to C view. >> So theoretically it would continue all the way to C view, but from looking at this map it probably is not able to

because there's a structure there. >> Correct. >> So you would only be able to access it from Gerald, you wouldn't be able to access it from C view. >> It seems that way. Yes. >> Commissioner Piccolo,

did you have any further comments? Okay. All right. All right. So, any further comments for the applicants representatives? Okay. Now, there was a few other people that stood up. There was anybody who

was being sworn in as a witness or a person with standing. Yes. >> Please state your name for the record and your address. >> I'm Blake Flowers and I'm at 1315 Front Street. >> Okay. >> Mayor, if I

can jump in. We need to establish whether this gentleman is attempting to be a party withstanding or if he is just going to testify as a witness. So those are two questions. Are you testifying as a

witness that's not being called by the applicant or the town or a party withstanding? Someone who is directly affected by this property. >> I'm not directly affected by the ADU being passed or not.

I'm here speaking about the alleyway. It's currently, as you said, there's a structure there. And I have been asked by other neighbors, there's four of us. They're out of town, the other three, to

simply state the only access for the garage would be through Gerald Street, which >> we're going to allow this. Hold on. >> I I think I would consider this gentleman as a witness, mayor, and let

proceed if that's your uh decision. >> I would like to hear what you have to say. So proceed. Yes, sir. >> Um me and the other neighbors would like to see the alley fully reach from Gerald to C view.

>> Mhm. And really because it's closer to C view and there would be less um issue with grading the gravel and constant upkeep and traffic going by our places when they could just hook in through C

view but there's a few obstructions in the way. So, I don't know what can be done about that. If that's something the town attorney can look into, my neighbors have suggested that being an option to

shift the alley slightly temporarily or or something because there is a shed partially in the way and a few pallets of bricks obstructing the access. So, we're going to take your comments under

consideration in this particular case. I'm not sure exactly how it's going to impact the outcome of it, but if you would like to go ahead and send a letter or an email to the town manager, we can

discuss that separately. >> I have that from my neighbor. He sent to Miss Lewis. He would like it to be on record. >> All right. >> If I can approach. >> Well, are we going to submit this into

evidence? This letter? Um, >> probably not at this point. >> I think this is a separate >> Yes, ma'am. >> issue. It's pretty much separate from this particular case. I understand your concerns and it

feels like it's connected, >> right? >> But it I feel the best way to handle that is let us handle this off topic from this particular case. Okay. >> And if you've already sent this email to our town

clerk, >> has it been sent to her already or >> as I believe so? Yes. >> You believe so? Okay. Can we get with you after this so we can make sure that the communication has received by the proper

people and we can take a look at this? >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. >> All righty. Any other witnesses? Party withstanding. >> Yes, sir. Come and qualify yourself. >> You're

going to have to come up here, Mr. Wade. And what is your connection to this case? >> I am an adjoining property owner along with my brother Brady. We own the property to the east and to the north. >>

Yes, sir. >> And first time in my life, he and I agree that we do not have an objection uh to to this um proposal. We we I think it's sort of standard in in the area for people to have these kind of

units and we don't have any problem at all with it. There has been some issue regarding property lines and stuff long before this this property owner got the property. We would like to make sure that

all the setbacks were double checked and the height was verified but we have no problem whatsoever with uh what they proposed. >> Okay. All righty. And can you state your address for the record,

please? Well, in the 1950s when my brother and I grew up there, >> okay, >> it it was 1326. Somewhere along the line, somebody's changed it to 1325 Front Street. >> You know, that happened to me. But

my my address though is 1017 front, but my brother and I are owners of the of the U uh property in 1325 or 6, whatever you want to choose. >> Okay. Well, thank you, Mr. Wade. Appreciate your time. >>

All right. >> Thank you. >> Yes, ma'am. >> All righty. Um, unless there's any other witnesses, I'm going to take this opportunity unless the staff has any further questions of the applicant or the

town. I' like to get a motion to close the evidentiary hearing. >> So move. >> Got a motion on the floor. All in favor say I. >> I. >> All oppose have the same right. All right. So we're going to have

your finding of facts. That'll be one of the things that we'll address first, whether you felt the applicant has met all seven findings of fact that has been presented to you today. And if you pass

that, then we'll go on to the zoning request or the special permit request, I'm sorry. So, what's the pleasure of the board? U make a motion to grant the special use permit as presented um as the uh

they requirements of facts A through G. >> Okay. >> Compatibility standards. >> It's okay to couple those together. >> Yes, ma'am. >> All right. I like that. It's very efficient. >> All right. So,

we've got a motion on the floor to approve the finding effects and the special use permit. Any further questions? All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> All oppose have the same right. Say n. Did I say

something out of line, Elizabeth? >> No, ma'am. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All righty. We are making good time. Just for those who have actually tuned in and are following online, I just want to remind

everybody the second item under the quasi judicial proceeding has been tabled to November the 9th. That's uh case number 2623. Now, we're going to move on to public comment. Have we had anybody sign

up for public comment? >> Yes, ma'am. I have three individuals. The first one is Robert Harper. >> Mr. Harper. >> Is he in the other room? Maybe >> he might have left. >> Okay. All righty. We can come

back to him if he shows up. >> Second one is Suzanne Lee. Hi. Hello. My name is Suzanne Lee and I own 206 Ocean Street. Um, I attended the uh UDO meeting that was the joint meeting between the board

uh BOC and the planning committee to get up to speed on what was going on with the land development ordinance. And so it was a really insightful meeting. I'm I'm really glad you had them together. Um

and uh there was a lot of information presented. I'm going to send separate comments um about some of that. But one of the things that really struck me was the last speaker who was the consultant uh

commented on SB 382 which prohibits Bowford from um I guess it's called downzoning um and the percent of land that that can can be built on. And I just was um very concerned about that because our

water comes from groundwater that is from land that is not covered by concrete or pavement. Um our our uh wellwater here in Bowford. I think there's five wells. And so I wondered um how the new UDO

would incentivize owners to protect our drinking water and if that's something that is part of this discussion going forward and and that's that's really was my main comment. >> Thank you. As we still

are working through the process of the UDO, our drinking water is a good priority for us to maintain. Uh we have a system in which we like you said is groundwater. We get it from an aquifer and we do

test it but we do want to make sure that our drinking water is safe and the town does put out a report annually that shows that testing and sounds like you're familiar with that. But definitely we

would make sure that's a priority because it's very important to us as well as everybody else in town. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Lee. Who else do we have? >> Bucky Oliver. >> Mr. Oliver.

Great to see you back, young man. >> Oh, I'm sure. >> Greeting. Greetings, friends. >> Greetings. >> I am strongly in favor of planning. I would even say I'm generationally so. Uh therefore, I'm very

much in favor of the UDO project. However, I deeply respect the difficulty that you as commissioners now have in assuring that no taking occurs. especially subtle, perhaps unnoticed ordinances

affecting the less wealthy whose principal assets is their generational home. This is why I take the rare opportunity to speak tonight. I have deep concerns with the consultants in delivering a draft

filled with easily discovered internal contradictions and recommendations that continue to violate the state law that the lady before me just spoke of. I'm not confident that the article five and

article six as drafted can survive review or rewrite especially by the original authors. I'm aware of a number of preliminary reviews, including my own, which I'm willing to provide, that that

identify those internal contradictions. again reference the violation of existing state law prohibiting down zoning and include takings and leave many matters to commissioners which alone is at the

discretion of the commissioners which I believe is unsupported by 160D. Frankly, I'm at a loss to explain the consultant submitt, especially its quality considering the fees paid. Therefore, I'm here

tonight to challenge you to two things. one to identify provisions that not only violate state law 382, but also takings in violation of federal and North Carolina law, basic property rights for

perhaps a thousand Bowford property owners. And secondly, I hope that you assess the financial impact of the property value demon, including the resulting impact on future town and county revenues.

Failing your reflection, legal and other challenges are threatened, and I've heard of them. Thank you again for the courtesy. It's nice to see you tonight. >> Thank you, Mr. Oliver. >> That ends the

public comment. We have a few more items on our agenda. How is the board doing? Okay, looks like you want to carry through. We've got old business. This is a petition for annexation both for crossing

certificate of sufficiency and Miss Lewis is going to present. >> Thank you, Mayor Board. Tonight, I'll be presenting the results of my investigation regarding four petitions for voluntary annexation

for properties located at 374, 388, 404, and 550 Highway 101. On June 29th, Tai Water Associates submitted four petitions for voluntary annexation. At your August 10th regular meeting, the board

adopted a resolution directing me as the town clerk to investigate the sufficiency of those petitions. Since that time, I've re reviewed the petitions, ownership information, boundary information, and

other documentation associated with the annexation request. And tonight, I'm reporting those findings back to you. Before I get into my findings, I want to clarify the scope of what is before the

board as part of the annexation process. Consideration of this voluntary annexation request does not constitute approval approval of a reasonzoning, approval of a specific development or project, or

approval of water or sewer capacity. It also does not approve any future development permits or applications. The board did receive a presentation from the applicant at your June 22nd work session

regarding a potential development concept for this area. That presentation is separate from the annexation request before you tonight. Any future development of these properties would still be subject

to the town's applicable review and approval processes. These are the four parcels that make up the annexation request as reflected on the survey and supporting documentation. The combined annexation

area is approximately 16.78 acres. The properties are located along Highway 101 and are contiguous to the town's existing primary corporate limits. As part of my review, I also gathered some

information regarding potential impacts associated with annexation. From an emergency services standpoint, there is no immediate impact anticipated as the properties develop in the future. However,

there is the potential for increased emergency service call volume based on the properties as they exist today. The estimated town property tax revenue would be approximately $1,693.93 annually. I

also requested an estimate of potential future water and sewer demand. Based on the potential uses being considered, the applicant estimates demand at approximately 24,750 gallons per day. I do want

to emphasize that this is an estimate provided by the applicant for the four parcels. A former water a formal water and sewer application request has not been submitted or approved by the town, but we

do anticipate that application to be submitted in the coming months. This is the survey map associated with the petitions. The shaded areas represent the four tracks proposed for annexation. As shown

on the map, the combined area is approximately 16.78 acres. Based on my investigation, I have determined that the petitions are sufficient. The petitions contain an adequate boundary description of

the area proposed for annexation as reflected on the survey map. The area is contiguous to the town of Orier's primary corporate limits as defined by general statute 16A-31. The petitions also contain

the required property owner signatures and ownership information. Based on those findings, I have prepared the certificate of sufficiency included with your meeting materials. With the sufficiency

investigation complete, the next step in the process is for the board to set the required public hearing. Staff recommends that the public hearing be scheduled for October 12th at your regular

meeting. At that meeting, the applicant or its representatives will have an opportunity to speak, as will property owners and residents of Bowfort. Following the public hearing, the board will then be

asked to consider whether to approve or deny the annexation request. The request to action tonight is not approval of the annexation itself rather than to set the public hearing date for October 12th.

>> Okay. Thank you, Miss Lewis. Do we have any questions about the annexation petition? >> I I do. Um 24,750 gallons. Are we going to be able to handle that capacity? >> Yes, sir. And I have Sam Bale

in the audience that can speak to that, but um I did confirm that we have that capacity at the at the moment. >> Um Elizabeth, can you clarify? That would be just the water sewer request for the

parcels that are annexed, but the whole project is much larger than that. >> Yes, ma'am. That's correct. >> So, >> and I do not have an estimate on the whole project at this point. I am um sort of

surprised that we didn't get a water sewer request. I know you don't legally don't have to, but I was sort of surprised we didn't get that at the same time as the annexation request. >> Do you know

which well they're going to be coming out of? Is that number seven? Sam. >> Well, that's pump number seven. So, >> Oh, pump number seven. >> Yeah, that >> good afternoon. Good evening, uh mayor and

board of commissioners. Um so based on the uh estimated data given to us by the developers consultant um just did ran a you know preliminary um estimate based on the data um how it would would could

potentially affect our system and on the wastewater treatment system represents about 1.65% 65% of the total wastewater treatment plant capacity which would take it from about uh 61.2% to 62.9% of

total capacity. Um also we have to look at the um flow path to the wastewater treatment plant which includes pump station number nine. Um that pump station has been operating in a in an incapacitated

state for the past uh year or more. Um it's undergoing its repairs now. So believe once the repairs are completed that that pump station should be able to handle the additional flow. Um and um I

actually just got a report from Donovan today that the um additional pump came in today, so it should be fixed within the next few days. >> Okay. >> Um happy to answer any other questions you have.

And I do have a brief summary of the uh report that I that I did if you'd like to see it. >> Sure. >> >> And if you have any other questions about the the system or uh anything at all, please let me

know. >> Sam, what is the capacity of pump station 9? What would that be? What would be the the max if this were were to be developed further? So based on our based on our current numbers, um the

available capacity is only 14,300 gallons per day, but we believe that data is based on the uh the pump working harder than it should be. Longer run times associated with the failing pump. Um, so once

we have some better numbers, we believe that number would go up um, based on the repairs that we're doing now. >> So the new part will be able to add to that float. >> Yes. In essence, yes, sir. >>

But how much do you know? It's estimated. >> I don't know how much exactly. No. But back to uh Commissioner Spiegel's question too. This is only talking about the four pieces of property that are

being annexed, not the whole entire property in itself. >> Yes, ma'am. That's how I understood the uh engineers um answer to the question. >> Okay. All right. Any further questions? And once again,

this is not about the board approving this um annexation today. about moving it forward so the public can have an opportunity to weigh in on this. And we're asking to set the public hearing for

October the 12th of 2026. >> And our advertisement will be paper sun. >> It'll be advertised in the Carter County News Times as well as posted on our website and sent to the Sunshine list in

accordance with >> sanctions. any affected people within the surrounding area, will they be notified? I mean, it's a big piece of property and I don't know who's around there, but >> not in this

particular case. >> Okay. Very good. Just want to make sure all the bases are covered. All right. So, what's the pleasure of the board? >> I make a motion that we move forward with the public hearing

at our next regular meeting for petition for annexation for Buffer Crossing. >> Okay. We have a motion on the floor. Any further questions? All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> All right. Thank you so

much. Now, we're going to move on to new business. We've got the Crystal Coast Lady Doc Rebuild. We've got uh Matt and Mark. >> Just you. Oh, Mark's not here. >> Oh, Mark's here. >> Oh, is he? There

he goes. >> As the rooms clearing, I wanted to take an opportunity if you'd let me to thank Mr. Sambell. >> Oh, I was going to do that. >> Will you please? Because he may be leaving after his comments

today. >> Well, all right. Well, I was hoping you were going to stay through the commissioner comments, but we'll let you go home early for good behavior. >> You >> Thank you. Well, Sam, for me

personally, it's been u a pleasure watching you grow up across the street from me. You were probably no higher than this Das when we first met, a little tiny fella. Uh but being able to be part of our

community, going off and coming back and serving within your community bought me great pride when we first hired you back. So, it was great. and that we have your sister Sarah on board and I know that

you and your family are making moves that are going to be for your best benefit and trying something new and this is what I understand is going to be your last meeting with us. >> So, I just want to

say thank you uh for coming back home. You know, you're welcome anytime and uh wish you and your family the best of luck on your journey as you expand your horizons and just don't forget about Buffer

because we are not going to forget about you. >> Yeah. Okay. Anybody wish to say anything? >> Thank you Sam. >> Thank you Sam. Appreciate everybody. >> And here's Mark. >> Okay. Safe travel, Sam. >>

Thank you, Sam. Um, >> mayor, commissioners, we're just we'd like to get clarification on the handrail system. Okay. at the um Crystal Coast Lady Docks so I can continue on construction. >> So you can

build something, right? >> Absolutely. >> I get you. >> We actually have several um items. We proposed a what has been permitted by CAM and what was proposed is a standard rail just like you have

everywhere downtown that we put up in front of the commercial docks. >> Not everywhere, just right there. Um, and in recent events, I was asked just to wait for ordering to get a approval from the

board on what you guys would like to see up there. >> Okay. >> Um, anything you wish to add before we start asking everybody what is it that you would like to see there? Well, the board had originally

set a plan moving forward as to what it looks like, and it seems like there's been some communication back and forth about safety of the um area surrounding the Crystal Coast Lady Dock rebuild. Um

does anybody wish to add anything to this because staff is looking for directions on how to proceed? Um, I will say that so this dock, the Crystal Coast Lady dock is what is used by George Aswad and

he did send um an email to the commissioners today. He apologized he couldn't be here in person. He had an illness otherwise he would have come and made a public comment. Um, but >> I believe his

daughter's here. >> Hey, uh, thank you for being here. Um, so I know all of the commissioners have already read this email. Um but for the public, um George did express that, um and I can just

actually read part of it, that they strongly believe that three or four railings would be much safer than only two railings and that that would include no more than 6 to8 inches of open space between

them. And I think what's important for the public to understand, and George continues on, because this dock for the Crystal Coast Lady and the Pirate uh ship extends out over the water, children could

potentially slip between widely spaced railings and fall into the water. And he continues, "In the past, we have installed vinyl safety netting along the inside of the railings to provide an

additional barrier. Although the netting may not be the most aesthetically pleasing option, it has helped make the area significantly safer, especially for young children. Um, so I think what's

important to understand here is the railing system that was instal installed in front of the commercial operator's dock. It has two railings. Um, it is not directly adjacent to the water, nor does it

go out over the water as this dock does that we are in question about today. And so knowing that thousands of children and older people and middle-aged people go on this dock, um I agree with George

that safety is the utmost important. You can't really see this dock from Front Street anyways. Um so I do not agree that it needs to look the same as the railings on Front Street. I think safety is uh

the top concern. That's my top concern. And I would agree that the opening should be no more than uh 6 to8 in between the railings of all the railings. Um there's many examples of this type of railing

system both here in Bowfort, in Morehead, in many places uh around the state where there's water. And so I just could not live with myself if a child fell overboard and drowned in the water getting on

a um vacation on a tourist boat. So that's um why this uh matter is coming to the board of commissioners so that we can decide how Mark can move forward uh with this railing and thank you Mark for all

the work and the patience you've given us so far. >> Yes ma'am. >> Any comments or questions? that comment and and I know we on the front street end uh even even then we discussed about possible

another rail in the crosset for safety factor but overall we went with just the two but in this instances where that uh it's more closer to the water and as commissioner speaker has stated uh not only

children but senior seniors and any adult could slip on those docks and and fall into the to the water. So, I I would love to maybe go along with what Mr. George is requesting is that we put a a third

rail there, a third rail across there, uh just for I mean just for safety. I mean, it just I don't think it could do any harm. >> Okay. Any further comments or questions? I have a comment more just

you know the um the original decision was made for this on July 13th >> um and and there's been quite a delay and you know I just wanted to kind of talk more about just process for the board regarding

all this because it's not directed any member of staff or or or or town uh or the even the manager but I just want to make sure that that we that we did vote on this and the design was ADA compliant

and met all the standards. ers and I think the the public works looked at it, the manager looked at it and we had that two rail configuration that the town um that we approved at that meeting um and

the staff did their job. Um my concern is just how the board makes decisions and how the decisions get carried out. So I just want to kind of just touch on that as a as a board. Um you know once we

vote that decision belongs to the body and then the execution should be the manager. Um and that's true for every member including those who voted and anybody who wasn't present. Um a decision from

this board binds all of us and attendance is in a condition being bound by it and absence doesn't create a separate authority to revisit that between these meetings. Nobody of nobody here should uh

individually redirect the staff on something that the body has already decided. um this body, this board acting together, we shouldn't be able to change a decision. We should just be able to change a

decision as a body, not as an individual. And we have these clear tools for that, right? I mean, if there's a problem, we should have a motion to consider. We can basically place the item as today we

place it on the future agenda. Um you know, and that's where it belongs. Uh from all five of us in public when everybody where everybody can see. Um not, you know, at the docks or not downtown. Um,

so, you know, I'd support every colleague being able to use those tools to basically come back and make these decisions, right? Um, but what I do want to ask is that we don't put the manager or the

public staff uh or staff in a position where they have to decide whether they have to follow um the board vote or an individual member on the board. Um, I don't think it's a fair thing to ask of them.

Um, and it delays the work, you know, that we've already voted on and we approved. I mean, we need to support our staff and not create confusion in our town. So, you know, and Matt, you know, I'd like

to, you know, ask if there was a problem or if there was a technical or safety question that was raised on this project to bring it to the board so we can answer it together as a board. Um, we were

not aware of the sa any safety issues and I wasn't aware of any safety issues in the past and when we approved this and mayor uh um commissioner Cooper made the motion to approve it um we did not have

that in front of us or have any information that this was a safety issue. So, you know, I'm not against safety. I think if if it's you know now that we've brought this up I think it it becomes kind of

an issue where if we deny or or don't uh you know do something about this that it can be looked on or frowned upon as a as a as a council. So um you know I'm not aware of any particular major

incidents nothing as I've I've seen has been brought up that there was a major safety issue there. So, was there anything, Matt, I just want to ask, was there any specific safety issues that that were

identified that were not brought before the town? >> Um, the issue that began with this construction started the week prior to July 4th and Mr. Aswad and his operations team brought it to our

attention that there was some potential underpinning issues and safety. Uh, we want to say thank you to them for doing that. Public works was on site. We immediately moved the boat with the assistance

of our team at F3 so that there would be continuous or uninterrupted access for Crystal Coast Lady uh during the major holiday weekend. And it was at that point that I believe Mr. Eekes and Mr. Bell

started to work on process to get it rolling and then when this board approved it um in July as an emergency repair, I believe that's when Mark picked the ball up and and began to take it. I think

where we are today is just a difference of uh there's a minimum standard then there's obviously escalation that we can take and we had been in communication with all of our commercial vendors the

Azwads as well and there were some repairs made there that were if you will temporary or less than permanent repairs and that I think the Azwads took additional measures to make sure that their

complete area was safe and so at this point uh what we're looking at on the two rail system. It does meet the North Carolina building codes and our inspector was on site. If we were to add a third or

a fourth railing, it would be um no problem at all to do. We just wanted to make sure that that's what the council wanted and then we'll go ahead and make those repairs. Yeah, I think when when we did

vote on it, it was the issue was uh that the building of those the impact was not as close as the boats are, the commercial boats are now in terms of the water. So, we went with with that is that if

someone was to slip and fall, they're going to probably just fall on the on the deck. But with Mr. as well his boat. It'll be a little bit more extensive than just falling on a deck. It could be

person falling within the waters. And that's I mean, why would we want to on a on a piece of lumber? What would the what would the what would the cost be for to add maybe just one more railing on

that? >> If you had one one horizontal railing to the Crystal Coast Lady dot, it would be approximately $750. you add two, it'd be $1,500. >> So, we have not added it. We have not >> we have not done

the work on it yet at all. >> We have not done construction. >> We paused construction um because we wanted to make sure >> what we wanted to do is do the construction one time and do it exceptionally

well. And so, we were gaining some more feedback so that we didn't go in and have to undo or redo something. And um on the system that's currently on, if you will, the the seaw wall, um there's an

area that we removed and replaced at the commercial docks. And then I believe it was the same meeting we offered up to extend it an additional 150 ft, which would take it from Perry Barrow's um corner

hut kiosk down to the Crystal Coast Lady because there's currently nothing there. And so we felt that putting that two- rail system there would be really helpful. Um but again it's just it's

preference here for the board. We want to do what this group would like to have us do and it's no problem at all. >> So we just halted we did all the underpinning and we did the piling installation

and we got the deck surface currently in construction today. It's just whether or not the design changes vertical and once we have that clarification tonight we'll order materials tomorrow. So with it

that extra railing will that eliminate the need for the netting that they have put up there >> if the openings are less than 68 or okay >> uh no bigger than 68 in. >> So that would eliminate the need

for the having that net there. Okay. >> And just to kind of comment about the netting. I was speaking with our building inspector that could potentially be a entanglement hazard if your child did fall

off. >> Yep. >> And that went with them. Um probably wouldn't be the best idea. >> Good. >> Oh yeah. be all entangled. >> The child will be all entangling. Yes, sir. Definitely a hazard. >> We got

Commissioner Spiegel. >> Uh, yes. Um, I just wanted to say, John, I appreciate your concerns about how we make decisions as a board. I think the process is really important. Um, and I think you're

referring to me because I was not at that July meeting. But what I would like to ask everybody that was here at that meeting when you voted, did you take the time to reach out to the enduser, in this

case George Aswad, to make sure that the solution, the proposed solution was what would work for the end user? I think that's really important. >> The question was asked in the it's related minutes. I

think Paul asked the question in the minutes to Matt and and he answered that. >> John, I'm asking if you specifically reached out to him. >> I did not, but the manager is in charge of that. Okay. I

So, I don't think it's right to point fingers or blame any at anybody in this process. We're all doing the best that we can. This is a hard job up here and yes, we can do better, but I think we all

need to work together to make sure that we're continuing to to better that process. My point was just to make sure we're supporting staff and we're supporting, you know, our our workers and we and we

have a clear, you know, guideline as far as when orders and when the board makes a decision that those orders are carried out and the manager executes those orders. And so I think m, you know, mudding

muddling the waters there and trying to getting in the middle of that I think kind of gives an unclear message and then kind of creates confusion. So, I think that's been a concern I've had uh of this

board uh as kind of as we've kind of moved through the month, you know, the months or the past year that we need to have clear, concise decision- making and then execution. And I think that really

would kind of help I think maybe help the town and help the >> I agree. I think our job is to support Matt as much as we possibly can. And I I very much appreciate Matt you saying that we want to do

this right the first time. So, I think we're all on board. We want to do this right the first time. >> Which circles us back here. Although we may not have had that information at the time. I mean,

I've sat in this chair and have made decisions based on information at hand today and things have changed maybe one or two months or a year from now where you would have to either make a change or a

decision. But to John's point, you do it as a board. Um, and I think that's where we're going to be heading at today. So, we've got some new information about safety concern. um we're going to

hopefully address that and give the staff clear direction on how to implement that so that um we can make sure that those individuals that are boarding on the Crystal Coast Lady or anywhere else is

going to be safe from falling into the water. So with that being said, do we have clear direction from this board to provide either an additional railing? I would like for us to even give the option

to the uh staff to implement this decision and make those um calls because we I'm not out there measuring as of what it looks like. But if you need to make some changes, I think we need to be able to

give them that latitude in order to do so. So they don't have to come back here and say, well, you know, we're off by a quarter of an inch. >> So I would recommend that additional railings be added so

that none of the gaps are larger than 6 to 8 in. Okay. So, let's be specific. We're just doing this at the Crystal Coast Lady Duck, >> which is >> that's the item that we're discussing right now. >>

That's what we're currently discussing. I think our next comment will be about a opening, which is hinging me from continuing to handrail down the seaw wall, which is another >> but not part of this

agenda item, right? >> Part of this discussion, though. >> All right. So, we've got a motion on the floor. Any further questions? Well, I don't do we know how many horizontal railings you're going to

have to purchase. If it's 6 to 8 in, >> as I stated, I think it's around 22 boards. It would be around 750 ft. $750 for one additional railing. That would make your gap 7 in between each board and six

inches on the bottom. If you did four, it' be four and a half inches in between everyone. >> Thank you. So the motion on the floor to accommodate that to to accomplish that you would add one railing

>> at seven in. Yes, sir. >> Exactly. >> With a total of three. >> That would be a total of three. >> Okay. And is that compliance for safety as well as far as you know there's a certain amount of

distance where there's concern if a child or something would like get their head caught or something like that between the boards. There's something like a 4-in sphere test that's done to basically

determine that and make sure that that that you're not creating a hazard by creating a you know actually adding additional boarding that the spacing is proper and is safe. So, I just want to make sure

that if we're doing this that we're doing this right and making sure that we're not going to create another set of hazards. >> Yeah, >> I can I can live with a kid getting his head stuck. I can't live

with a kid falling in the water and potentially drowning. I can live with them getting their head stuck in there and a child more than likely would probably do that cuz they playing around. But

falling that water, I would not be able to go to sleep the next day of hearing that something happened to a kid falling there because we wanted to make it look presentable as the rest of the docks.

No. Uh-uh. >> No, but I think it's I think it's reasonable to to look into exactly what Commissioner I'm sorry, Commissioner Leiclo is asking. you know, are we creating something that would be a

violation of of current building codes by placing that that particular spacing and it perhaps causing an issue? >> I don't think you can fit a child's head through 6 to8 in. Didn't we look at that

together? >> Um I I'll ask Jeremy in the morning just to verify. >> Just just ver Yeah. >> So far what he what we have discussed he didn't raise any concerns with the seven in. >> Thank you. >> Okay.

Or anybody's head going through it. I mean, that's not a question that comes up in a meeting, but um >> don't only thing that is required that was not a was a tow kick, which is 4 in, but that's on

the very bottom. That's required for ADA compliance. >> Um but if y'all vote to add the additional rail and that passes, I'll ask before we move forward with that from him. >> Okay. >> We appreciate

everything. I I know we you know uh you guys are doing an excellent job, but I'm looking at the safety as well as Commissioner Spiegel on the safety issue that we need to address with that railing. >>

All right. So, we do have a motion on the floor. Any further questions about the motion? You have a question, sir? >> Can I get in the weeds? Just to be clear. >> Sure. Um the the vertical uprightes

for supporting the handrails are they to project above or they to be flush. >> The existing ones down on the commercial docks are projected above 4 in. >> Do you have a recommendation? >> I do not. >>

Okay. It would be nice to tie it back in with what's already there, I would think, and do it the same way. And it kind of ties it all together. >> If it's flush and flush, I you guys can work it out.

>> So, can we add that to the motion or do we need to >> commissioner speed? >> That's whether it's going to be flush or not. >> Do we have a I'm happy to add that to the motion if that's what the

board wants. Well, it's your motion. We'll decide whether we want it or not by voting on it or not. Okay. >> Yes, we can add that they are raised similar to the design we already have. >> Okay. Any

more weed questions? All right. So, now we've got a clean >> there might be a better way better way to phrase that. >> Granular >> granular questions. All right. So, now we've got a clarified motion.

Any further questions to the details of this motion? All right. going to call for the question. All in favor say I. I. >> All oppose have the same right. All right, Mark, you've got some marching

orders. Don't go anywhere because you're up there next. >> So, the next excuse me, the next one is about the the opening in the seaw wall on the existing commercial docks that we just completed. Or do

we put one? Do we not? In order to I I'd need to know this answer because of the spacing of the existing uprights for the handrails. I would have to take two of them out, reconfigure those, cut and

create the opening and then start the new handrail pattern moving forward from the east side of Perry Barrow's uh kiosk >> to the east at Crystal Coast Lady Docks. >> Have any recommendations? >> No,

ma'am. >> I was figuring you' say that. So again, you're you've stopped construction because of the request about the curb cut. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. >> So, and on this one, if that's okay, >> um we

met with the commercial operators prior to installation, had 100% concurrence with the design, and after final installation, um one of the gentlemen indicated that he wanted that opening back. So, um,

we would normally hold that line, but, um, we had worked through this multiple times and worked through the ADA compliance to just make sure it's flush. So, um, we can gladly do it. It's just going to

take a redesign on the east end. It would cause um, a little bit of delay. We'll we'll work with um Perry on it, but we'll have to chisel the concrete out, readjust the opening, and I believe I sent a

note out um at the end of last week that our inspector indicated with the width of the opening needs to be a minimum of 48 in, which we can gladly make so that it will remain ADA compliant. And then

we'll also um take the the wall down to make a mated surface from the sidewalk to the deck that can't have any greater than a quarter inch adjustment. And we can do all those things. >> So originally

the operator was fine with it and then something changed his mind to want to now put that opening back. >> Yes, sir. The operator said to us verbally when we were walking through the design prior to

getting approval that he felt it would be bene beneficial because it would move the consumers from congregating in front of his kiosk, moving them down and allowing them to make their way through the

central opening on the commercial dock. But I believe in the reality now um he's concerned about their ability to get in and out there is is what he'd verbalized. >> So So I don't fault him. I do

think in talking to the commercial operators down there and this is no fault of anybody's there were no commercial operators in the middle of the dock and so there has been a increase of foot traffic

because we have additional commercial operators there which is great that's what we want but it has changed also the number of pedestrians and it has impeded um the way that everybody gets on and

that's really nobody's fault yes we can say he didn't he did say something at first and now he's changed his mind but now that we've seen the way that the pedestrians flow. It does not make sense the

way it's set up now. So, I don't think we should fault him. >> So, no, I I don't fault him for asking at all. My concern is just precedent. I mean, there's a modification to the town docks and

infrastructure. It's going to be at the town expense on town property and this is by one commercial tenant. But if we approve this thing without a policy in place, like what are we going to tell the

next operator that's in the middle that says they want a curb cut? I mean, and they will. they we will definitely have more people come back and say we'd like this modification or we want this or we

want that but we don't have a policy in place for this. >> I would agree in the long term we should not be going down there at their beck and call but this is what the first 6 months of this new

operation and we knew that there was going to be um that we're going to have to work through this. It is not set up the way it should be but it is less than a year after um we have taken over

management. So, I think it's just a learning process for everybody at this point. But I agree, we should not be going down there every time they want us to, you know, go change a light bulb or

something. >> I understand the u the other commercial operators are comfortable with the with the one opening. >> They are not correct. >> They are not. >> So, you've got all the operators that are

saying >> that is correct. I've I've also heard complaints and I think I wouldn't fault anybody with it. I think it's the theorizing things. It gets installed and then a condition changes and then

everybody changes their mind and said, "Well, I wanted that the whole time." Well, you know, it it's okay to change your mind once you see how conditions change. Um, but I do think things uh played

out differently on the ground when that other commercial user came in. And I've seen people kind of they get like stuck around that commercial user kiosk and can't get over to Perry's. And I just

imagine like if something happened, they need if they had two ways to get out, it would probably be safer and the foot traffic would be um it would flow better. >> Yeah. One of One of the largest

concerns I have is making a a change this quick. I mean, we've talked about uh allowing the operations down there to move forward for a period of time. I realize you're you seeing obviously I'm not

questioning you're seeing perhaps an issue um with that. But at the same time, if we're going to build and then rebuild and have the expense of that, I get I start getting concerned about, you know,

how much money we're going to end up spending moving peace meal through the work that's going to need to be done down there, especially if we don't gain some additional funding, which I'm still very

hopeful that we can, but I just I have concerns about as we move having to make so many changes moving along and the cost of doing that. I mean, it just it just raises flags for me. >> Agreed. I think

this one though is especially important that we add this extra entrance. If you go down there and watch the pedestrian traffic, it does not work the way it is right now. So, if we have a list of

things we want done and a list of things that really need to get done, I think this is at the top of the list. So, agreed. We don't need to be spending. We need to have a long-term vision of of how

we're going to use this space. >> Yeah. I'm I'm much more comfortable allowing this to exist for a while and developing what we may need to do in the future and the expenses that um that we'll incur

and doing it making those decisions then versus moving along and making decisions as we go which is going to be even more costly. So, with this particular request, so that the board can have all the

information, have you put a cost to this uh if you were to upgrade the uh entrance there at the commercial dock? >> Approximately $500 material um just to rework a few things and then continue to

handrail down. >> Okay. >> Most of the concrete work would be in house labor, cutting and grinding time. >> All right. >> I'm not adding that value to it. I'm just >> So, you're working for free is

what I'm hearing? >> No, ma'am. No, I don't think so. So, in other words, it's pretty lowcost effort at this point in time. It's not super expensive. >> Yes, ma'am. >> In the overall scheme of things.

>> Okay. >> This this item may be 500 bucks, but if we're going to make these decisions as we move along, peace meal, I'm telling you, it's going to build up, >> right? And like I said, another if

another operator comes in and asks, what what do we say to the next operator? >> We just keep allowing another $500 plus labor for another item, another $500. you know, we kind of settled on this. I

think to me, like I said, I think we need to have a capital improvements plan and and items that we want specific that are in the most need for the docks. Um, I don't know if this is a need uh per se.

I think there are other things that we put off there that need renovation and re being redone. Um, and like I said, I think it's just going to open Pandora's box. >> Pandora box. >> There was there's

another point here. I think that's important is the safety on the actual dock itself. So, we did calculations based on total number of persons, total number of weight load, and then um I'm not putting

Miss Bell on the spot, but her team is hearing conversations about consistency. And so, we recently had our fire marshal, assistant chief reinspect the area now that there's been additions. There are

some safety concerns that we've asked F3 that they're working through. um placement of items, um the tenting things. There's just everybody wants to have items on that space, but um it's a shared

space, so it's a limited square footage, and there's going to need to be some compromise for the up to 10 vendors that are utilized in that area. So, I think that working through the consistency of

dock boxes, tents, tables is a conversation that BWolf is tackling and and that's important. And um we definitely have F3 who is fielding a majority of those questions and calls today. So we need to

make sure that whatever we do whether we make another opening which would be helpful or keep the opening for a period of time the passageway needs to be cleared on the actual deck surface due to the

number of guests that are using it. So that's an immediate that that is the highest order and then the opening I think is probably connected right to it. Yeah, and I would agree with Matt. Safety is

really important there. And so I think that's why this opening is a priority. As uh Commissioner Gillikin said, it allows people to exit a lot more quickly and so you'll actually have less people on

that dock because they won't have to go all the way around to get um to board the boat. So I think this is a this is a major safety issue to add this opening. All right. So we do have a motion on the

floor. Don't we did you put No. No. Okay. We don't have a motion. That was All right. So, what is the pleasure of the board when it comes down to this additional entrance? >> Uh, I make a motion that

we add an additional entrance by Perry Barrow's booth on the commercial operators dock uh with the specifications that Mark, I believe, has shown that comply with this the town ordinances. M. Yes,

ma'am. >> All right. So, now we have a motion on the floor. What is the pleasure of the board? Any questions outside of that? >> Going to call for the question. All in favor say I. >> I. >> All oppose

have the same right. >> None. >> We've got two nos, three yes. The motion carries. >> Thank you. >> All right. So, now we're going to move on to the consideration of windail shading at commercial

dock. So this is a very similar conversation that has been brought to our attention that >> um so am am I your Vanna White on your display? Very well then. >> Thank you. >> U so in the past um in the

previous configuration on the commercial dock area um Mr. barrel head had vertical 4x4 wooden posts and some sunscreen material. And he told us that I believe that they had purchased it from Amazon.

But um it's a sun shaded system that was installed on the previous um setup. And so we tried to find options and we tried to find designs. And we were in a conversation that we believe that based on

what our inspections team has identified that if it's based out of wood that the verticals need to be 8 by8 to be code compliant which we thought was very heavy. Um not visually appealing. And the

only other option would be a reduction in the size of the that wooden vertical if the operator were to take the sun shades down and put them up every single day, which we didn't think was a very

practical solution. Um so public works has taken it upon themselves to make this very unique um display model that shows that they've created a bracket system with a welded slip tube design and that a

vertical post that would meet the windshar per market designed them and ran it through SAM and then we took it to our inspections team and this is an approved concept that would thus bolt to the

existing rail system. The pole would be removable. The pole would be either quick pinned or bolted through that during a natural disaster, a heavy wind event, pre and postseason, if you want to pass

that around. Um, it would be a design that would have a vertical structure and then the wind shading or the sun shading would be strung between those. Um, this specifically right now is a request on

the east end. We haven't had any other vendors to my knowledge yet ask for it, but um my opinion is if we put it on one end, it's probably going to navigate its way during the for the whole length of

the commercial dock. So, we designed a process that could be um expanded if you determine this is something that you wanted us to do. I believe right now they're using small portable style >> popup

style tent tops. We have a life. >> This your design, Mark. >> This your design? >> Yes, sir. >> The patent pending. >> Yes, we we have a life-size one at the shop as well. >> Whatever. Um I guess my

question is um so there is a a small number of BWF members who are also looking into some research on you know standardizing I think shades and signage um because that's also a discussion how

standardized do we want it down there so I guess the question for this board is um do we want to make that decision tonight would we like the BWF to weigh in Mark really appreciate your ingenuity and

um I know that the thousands of visitors that come down to our docks also appreciate it. So that's sort of my question is do we do we want to move forward or do we want to have um a conversation with

the bewolf knowing that this season is coming to a close soon? It is September. We don't get as many visitors down at the docks um towards the end of the year. It's quite obvious that um this is a

learning curve for us because we never been in the ownership of a dock. So it it is going to be a learning process of what works, what don't work. Um I have to go along with the be with committee that

let them see also what they may come up in terms of uh shaded areas whether to have it or not have it or try to maybe find something else that would be presentable. Our season is coming to an end. I

was downtown the other day, but I quite still surprised the number of people who still walk in the town of uh at during the town even in the evening. So, >> Michel, >> so straightforward. I mean, this

is a capital improvement to fund 14 yet it's not in the fund budget. So, that's my biggest concern. We are basically just not following our budget here and not following, you know, the our roadmap to

what we want. And if we are going to have a budget and we are going to have capital improvements, let's list out the things that we need in our capital improvements. And if this is one of them, then

we can vote on it and we can kind of implement it. We have costs and so forth associated. I just find it difficult to approve something or move something forward without having any idea about costs. I

don't know if the sun shade is going to need some type of camera permit as as well as it may provide shade over the the the you know the public waters or public uh area. So, I mean, it just I can't

move forward on this without having information or actually putting it into the into a capital improvement fund budget. >> We make amendments all the time. >> That's fine. That's that's your priority.

>> Make amendments all the time or we get a request where may come in and do a budget amendment. You guys know something? >> Charlie and I were we we've been working on a series of camera permits.

Okay. >> No secrets between us. >> I believe this project would require a camera permit for development within the Coastal Shorelines AEC. >> Okay. >> I feel very similar to the last one. I am very

comfortable not moving forward at at this point. um you know, let's identify our needs. Let's move forward with a budget to do it. Um repairs that need to be made, give those docks a little time in in

that area to to operate um and and come back. I see no reason to to move forward at this point. >> So, there was shade there previously. So, are we saying in the interim we're going to remove the

shade that was there? It's >> you can answer. >> I don't think he's saying please answer. Just say >> it. It's already gone. >> It's gone. It's gone. >> They're just using temporary. >> I guess what I

mean is so but it was there before and so we are taking away a service that was provided last year. So I just want everybody to be clear. >> I would just say we're not obligated to provide that

service. I mean we've redesigned the dock. We spent all that money on the dock that was removed for performing the construction on the dock and so forth, but that was not part of the project and I

don't think we're obligated to put that back currently. They may >> but the thing is the commercial operators can't put it back themselves either. So now the choice is just there's no shade for the

visitors and it's really hot here in the summertime. So, we're creating an unpleasant experience for the visitors. And if we say, "Well, it's just for a month." That's fine. But I think we need to be

careful to say, "Well, we're not going to think about the visitors." Because >> that does reflect on the town. >> That's not my statement at all. >> Um, I do care about the visitors. Our visitors are

very important to the downtown. Our visitors go out to the beaches. They go out into Shackleford. And they are even without shade when they're at those places as well. Um, I think we're not just not

obligated to provide that to our commercial oper operators at this moment. >> So, I will say that I worked on those docks for 10 years for commercial operators. And it is a lot different sitting there

waiting for a boat than when you're out on the boat or when you're out on the beach. It is really hot on that dock. Much more so than when you're out on the water because there's a breeze. Um, you can

move around. So, it's not set up perfectly. We all know that. But I do think we need to be cognizant of and it is getting hotter here as well. So to I think it's worth a conversation at least by the

bewolf committee. I agree John. Um we can answer those questions for you. But I think you know if I were to suggest something I would say let the bewolf continue the research in this area and bring it

back to this board for us to discuss. >> I didn't know we were shutting down any any activities yet um of bewolf. So there is a small group that's formed to discuss this but we are waiting for the

feedback um from this board before we discuss any further. >> Okay. But it doesn't it doesn't keep as long as BWolf is in place which they still are they they could take this up. So >> correct they

are we already have a small group form to take this up when this committee says that that's okay to move forward with. Yeah, I think there was some shade there before and we're not allowing them to

put that shade back in the same way it was because of code and so now they're having to use these tiny umbrellas. I I really do think the shade issue is of importance. When they get on the boat and

they get on Shackleford, they can like cool off if they're overheating. They can go in the water. Um they have ways to cool off. It is quite hot there and um I'm sure the commercial folks if we asked

them to put up shade they would love to but do we want them to? Probably not because they're not all going to be code compliant and then they're all going to put a mish mash of things up there. >>

Right. My point is not that we shouldn't have shade there. That's not my point. My point is that if we're going to expend funds towards that, it should be within the budget or fund 14 should be voted

upon and then it can be moved moved forward. Um, if they want to talk about it and put together all the information, I have no problem with that. Um, but I'm not willing to move forward on

installation and spending money or anything like that for it at this moment because I think we need to have that within our budget. That's my point. >> So, John, would you support We have a BUFF

meeting on Thursday. Would you support us discussing this at the BWF meeting and having a small group move move forward with research on it? I >> I've never restricted BWF to speaking about anything.

I think BWolf can take up items. I mean, I think there's items that BWF uh should be talking about that are in the the the uh the document that was created for BWolf that probably need to be addressed

as well. Um such as even, you know, the mooring fields and so forth. So, those are all these items that are in there that we need to talk about um and complete for that period of time that Bewolf has

been established. And I think it those things also need to be addressed as well. But I have no problem with Bewolf exploring other options or items for the for the docs. I I have no problem at all. >>

So, could we move forward with this one um and put it on our BWF agenda for Thursday and then bring it back to this board at an appropriate time? >> Yeah. You you're the you're the director of the

BWOF. You can put anything you like on the agenda. >> Well, okay. Well, you're right. And I think that could be a good topic for them to come up with, but also too when you have this discussion, also

make sure that we will start to put these things in a capital improvement plan. I know that we're not going to necessarily try to capitalize on it even though the season is coming to a close. It's

really hot out there still right now, but uh be able to put this into some value so that when this comes back to this board, you'll have good financial information. is part of a capital budget. Uh,

and you know what to expect. I mean, we've all sat here and talked about how we don't want to arbitrarily spend money. We want to make a plan for it. And sometimes that requires time and a lot of

information. And this is not going to be any exception to the rule. So hopefully, you know, BWolf will take this on as an assignment to come back with some information. There's no decision being made.

It's just going to be allformational. And then when it comes back to this board, we can make the final decision from there. How's that? >> Got one more comment. Okay, we got one more. >> I think it's

important that BWF starts with the engineered model there. I don't think that they should go in another direction. I mean, there's already been a prototype that has been commented on by our planning

department. And so I think we should start with that and have BWolf integrate that into part of the research and not change the design of what Mark has come up with if it's going to work. >> And it

may be a lower cost method of working. I'm not quite sure how much you charge, but uh that could be part of the cost analysis, KMA, all the things. And I think you're going to take that back to the

committee to have them thoroughly bet this. >> Right. Well, and the plan is for this small group of bewolf to work directly with Mark because he is the expert and can help guide them uh in this that

>> I don't think Mark wants that. Can we have them uh go through um so that we don't tie up his time because Mark has got a job to do. So, let's find a better way to communicate that. >> So, we will

make sure we're working with the town staff as appropriate. >> Let's Yeah, let's go through Matt and let Mark go ahead and still design stuff so he doesn't get tied up in these meetings. >> Mr. could

you see that Mr. Gia is available for our Thursday meeting because I think it's helpful to have the code off the code compliance officer present. The building inspector, please. >> Okay. All right.

So, Mark, I think we're going to I don't necessarily require a motion necessarily. We're going to move on to the next topic, but we'll get back with you with a final decision on that one. >> Very

good. >> All righty. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mark. I appreciate it. So, now we're going to move on to manager's report. Uh we I think everybody here would agree that the improvements that Mark

made at um RJ Park are tremendous. That new wall is in and done. So Mark, thank you for making that uh successful as well. Uh I do have a written report. I sent an email out to the board so you'd have

it electronically in case you need to send it to someone else. But here's a written copy of this month's manager report. I'll just highlight some of those areas for those of you tuning in at home. Uh

we want to address the fact that camping roads widening project is now complete. Therriped and it came in under overall budget. The town has invested in two new digital speed sign speed limit signs

that have been ordered and will be installed upon receipt. So I want to thank everyone um in that camp and carway area for their patience as uh we've worked really hard and thank you to our vendor for

getting that project done before school began. We go from one project to another as we're working through our list and so we wanted to provide an NC DOT live oak and 101 uh project update. This

information is currently available on our social media outlets as well as the town's website under news. But today uh the Department of Transportation began more construction at that intersection of

101 and Live Oak. And so u there will be disruption between today and the middle of November and then that entire area should be closed down from the middle of November until June of 2027 or late May

of 2027 is the report from the department of transportation. So that intersection will be under major reconstruction from mid November till late May 2027. The current schedule calls for NC 101, Live

Oak Street, and the roundabout to reopen in late May, and staff will continue to coordinate with DOT and communicate those traffic impacts to all residents, businesses, and visitors as the project

progresses. I also want to indicate that our assistant town manager, community engagement director, and public information specialist were working cohesively today to make sure that the um property

owners in those areas where the bypassed or detourred traffic will more than likely go are working on not just your standard social media postings and visual signage, but we're also working on direct

mail pieces to those impacted individuals because we know that the ages of the communities and potential styles of how information is shared in addition to communication with the Carter at news time.

So, we're also working on direct mail. Want to take a moment to thank our staff for the ultra successful Rock the Docks series in the summer which was on our Thursday nights. And we also want to bring

attention to the fact that the first Friday which occurred in early September on the 4th went very very smoothly. Uh we also have generated additional sponsorship dollars. So, thank you to Jen

Wellbborne and her hard work on those areas and for our returning and new sponsors. And again, a shameless plug for public works for the construction of the stage. Not only did they find that the

stage is beneficial, thank you to the community foundation for its generous donation, but public works got creative and c and made two additional outward wings that come off the stage. Not only helped

with the performers that are on that area, but created two more sponsorship sales opportunities. And so we've really had a great success in that. So we would encourage anyone else locally to come out

to the first Friday in October or the first Friday in November which will round out the end of the 2026 season and then we will kick off 2027 with an April and May first Friday as well. Um so there's

back to the docks a really unique piece went out. So, thank you to F3 Marina um for working with a local vendor to provide a video that teaches boers practical information about how to enter Bowford's

waterways and use the town docks. If you haven't seen that piece, it's really well done. Um public safety, we wanted to recognize two of our own. So, police lieutenant and police lieutenant Bedsole

were recognized most recently in our employee spotlights. We also want to draw attention to between today and Friday, September 18th, we're still accepting applications for parks and recreation

advisory board. And we had a sombrance 25th uh memorial remembrance for the 911 um ceremony on Friday, September 11th. So, thank you to the fire department, our Carter County Emergency Services, and

all of our team members and visitors that attended there. Uh we wanted to also let you know that as we finish up the back side of this that our porch talks with Mayor Sharon Harker have taken off. Um

some of them are seeing over 20 20ome thousand views. U and it's really important and I'll be the first to her left to thank her for that initiative because it's providing a form an informal platform

for community organizations and local leaders to be recognized for their work, their current initiatives and their future projects. It's very telling to have that open dialogue. So, mayor, thank you

for putting that together and we're building off of that. We're pushing with our Bowfort minutes providing short form, less than 60-second, upbeat opportunities to share what else is going on within

the community. So, I believe we shot over a dozen of those recently. So, we are working all the way through the end of the year. So, we applaud um our communications team who's reaching plus or minus

a million people per month now with all the activities that we're pushing out. So, looking ahead for my office and our team, we're going to do our very best to communicate and manage that NC DOT

project of 101 and live oak. We're continuing our USDA infrastructure. Want to let you know that our um contract for asphalt paving should begin the middle of this month and should run through the

middle of December. So you will see asphalt coming to Bowfort. So that is an early Christmas present for those of you who have been waiting for a couple of years. Uh we're also supporting our

additional dock and waterfront operations. We're looking forward to Thursday's meeting. Um we were still trying to advance our parks and recreations initiatives. So I believe in this this agenda alone

you saw a handful of special events and we're now teetering at 60 events annually that are flowing through the community engagement office. Uh and tonight we for me it's a difficult one to see that

Sam Bell is moving um and he has done a tremendous job for the town over the last seven years. His position is proving to be a difficult one to fill. So if you know of anyone that is either mid-career

or even recently retired that wants to potentially give back to a community, we are still actively recruiting for a full-time engineer uh as well as additional uh positions. So, with all that

happening, I'll answer any questions that the board may have and appreciate all that you're doing to support our activity and meeting our goals for 2627. >> And you want to know when he gets a chance

to sleep, right? Any questions for Matt? Okay. All right. So, now we're going to move on to the mayor and commissioner's comments. We're going to start with Commissioner L Piccolo. >> Uh, thank you,

mayor. Um, I appreciate all the work the town did tonight. Um, putting together the meeting. I also want to say uh to Sandell um you know he definitely will be missed. He uh he was a a great addition

to the town um as our engineer. Um his family also uh played a big part in our town and our community and they definitely will be missed. So u good luck to him. Um also I didn't get a chance the last

meeting to say to Kyle Garner uh to good luck on retirement. Um Kyle was very instrumental and really um helpful to me when I first came to the planning board. Um spent a lot of time with Kyle. Um

learning and uh you know absorbing as much as I could and obviously Kyle's put decades of work into this town is uh his heart has gone to this town and I know he's not leaving and uh once again Kyle

also will be missed. Um, and I guess I I just want to clarify like items that I I've asked for tonight. Um, regarding the docks, I just want to be clear what I'm about and what I'm just hesitant

about. I I want the town um docks to succeed. Um, and that's exactly why um I want their capital decisions to be made in the budget um where we can all see them and we can all really just rank them

against each other instead of just making haphazard decisions. Um there's a lot of things ahead of us. You know, the restrooms need renovations and they remain undone. Um, they serve all the transient

boers in town who generate a lot of our slip revenue. Um, we have docks that need repairs. We have a general fund that we basically advance substantial money to fund 14 um to stand this enterprise up

front. It was hundreds of thousands of dollars. Um, money I believe that should be kind of even repaid back to the town so that the town can use it to help build out the town um boardwalk and so

forth. our boardwalk is really deteriorating. Um, I think it's in great need of repair. Um, and the town really needs funding to carry this out as well as other hopefully other items that we can get

from the from the state and so forth. Um, so I guess ahead of budget season with Matt, I'd like to ask a few things. One is basically um that capital um uh plan or that capital improvement plan so

that we have items listed for our docks and we know exactly what we need and how we can weigh them against each other. And also even a deferred maintenance plan plan and and even repair list for the

downtown docks so know we know what we're [snorts and clears throat] up against and what we're trading against when we basically make decisions like tonight uh asking for monies for for certain

projects and so forth. Um, and also, as I said before, I kind of want a policy. I I feel like, you know, we don't have a policy on operator requested modifications to the town docks and

infrastructure. And I think that would be helpful going forward because I think that's going to become an issue. Um, if we don't confront it now, we will in the future as I think operators will start

to see that we're willing to do things for them and spend money on their operations or or enhancing operations for them. And if we don't have a policy in place, I think we're going to get in trouble.

So that's all I have. Thank you. >> Thank you, Commissioner Cooper. >> I I have nothing. >> Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Gilligan. I want to recognize the passing of two very special people since our

last meeting. And that is um Miss Sunonny Newton, >> wonderful southern lady, um as former mayor Rhett Newton's mother. And I think most of us in the room probably knew her. Just a ray of light and

sunshine. And I just appreciate all of her contributions to the community, mentoring a number of people, um school teacher, contributing her time and money to many town projects. So, um, she's just

remembered very fondly. And also Cheryl Young, who uh, her husband was John Young and he was with the town's public works for a long time. And Cheryl was also a lovely person. And I love driving by

her yard and seeing the wild wildlife areas and the pollinator gardens that she created. She was just um, a wonderful lady. So, I just wanted to recognize those two beautiful ladies. And I'm so glad

that they lived their lives in our community. And that's all I have. >> Thank you, Commissioner Spiegel. Uh, I just want to thank everybody for being here tonight and everybody online. It's been a

long meeting, so thank you for participating with us. And that's all I got tonight. >> Okay. Appreciate it. Commissioner Matthews, >> Commissioner Le Piccolo hit on the the subject that I was going to

mention as well, but I'm going go ahead and mention it. And that is BWolf has done a done a great job, no doubt the period of time that they've um they've been organized. F3 is in place. Um Matt has

done a tremendous job I think with trying to manage the docks and F3 and BWolf uh making decisions. But I think honestly we're coming close to a point where some decisions are going to need to be made

um by this group uh in moving forward and to make sure that we're moving forward as strategically and as efficiently as we can. Um I know we have you we have already approved or the prior commission

approved BWolf and the transition of BWolf at some point. uh to a smaller group that was thought to be more efficient at some point and would be needed. I think the roles that are out there now need

to be defined so far as BWolf is concerned, F3 is concerned, Matt's role um with the town docks so that we are operating the way we need to operate those docks and you know it's been a transition no

doubt but I think we're we're nearing that point that either as an agenda item with the work session something um so that we can consider all of those involved with the docks and make sure that we're

we're moving as efficiently as we can. I think all of us want the docks to operate. All of us want the docks to work and we still have a lot of work to be done down there without a doubt. Um but I

would encourage that um we look at agenda item to bring all that forth and have that discussion and make some decisions moving forward. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Uh, just want to thank

everyone who's in attendance. My husband is still here, so he doesn't have to ask me about what's going on tonight. So, that's going to be one less conversation we will have. And, uh, going to let you

go home and cook dinner. Um, and I want to thank everybody else who's hung in there online. And just to the points that were being made on both my left and right with Commissioner Le Piccolo and

Commissioner Dexter, just wanted to also point out the BWolf committee was commissioned by myself. It was not a board commission one. And as though I value their work, they also probably knew that

there was going to be a time where this transition was going to have to take place. And it's a conversation that I think that we'll be having sooner versus later. But um still there is some little

work that they could still be doing. And I I agree with you that at some point in time is going to have to turn over to the people that they have actually put in the place to do the job. And um but I

will have that conversation with them in the near future. Uh also too, the North Carolina Mayor's Association is going to be with us two days this week. I'll be attending that conference. So it's

going to be great to have uh some community leaders come in. They'll be uh here celebrating with us. Um also want to thank the Buffer Garden Club for inviting us to their kickoff meeting. It's been a

club that I've been wanting to join. As soon as I retire, I want to become a member and hopefully grow plants and if they can teach me how to do that, but that's going to be a really good thing. This

organization has done a lot of great work throughout our community and I don't take what they do very lightly. So, uh, they've been organized and seems to be one of the few organizations that grow in

members. So, they're doing something right. They're doing something right for Buffford and making us, uh, beautiful and attractive for our citizens. And I want to thank them for all the great work

that they do. We have been in this meeting for quite some time. This is probably a short meeting by in comparison to where we have been. But um I've been told that our next workshop doesn't have a lot

of things on the agenda. There's probably one thing that may be considered. So I want to know if the board would like to consider maybe postponing the or not having the September 28th work session

because we're doing a lot of work here tonight. And um >> I would definitely like to make a motion to postpone that. All right. Postpone or cancel? >> Well, it's cancelled. Cancel. Let's cancel that

meeting. Uh very little business. We're doing a lot of it tonight. Um and that will free up the calendar for certain people, including myself. But now we've got a motion on the board to go ahead and

cancel the 28th meeting uh September. All in favor say I. >> I. I. >> All oppose say nay. You've got one nay. Did you say no? >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> I didn't say no. >> Oh, all right. I'm sorry. Would

the Just to clarify, so our next meeting would be October 12th. >> The next meeting would be October 12th, Board of Commissioners meeting. All right. Thank you very much. All right. So, we still have

a small amount of business and I need my husband to go home and cook me something great to eat. Thank you, honey. So, can I get a motion to go into close session pursuant to the North Carolina General

Statute 143-3181 AMB? All in favor say I. >> I. Mayor, the um one of the matters in close session is a specific case. the town is involved in. It's Laura Holland and Southgate Management versus Town

of Bowford. And the motion and the record need to reflect that case. If we could add that to the motion. >> So moved. >> I didn't make Okay. >> You did say so. >> I did. Yeah, I did say so moved,

didn't I? Yeah. Well, I add >> what the attorney said. Thank you, Commissioner. >> Okay. All in favor say I. I. Go to the bathroom. Come back.